The Case of Reiwa Shinsengumi
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Volume 18 | Issue 10 | Number 1 | Article ID 5395 | May 15, 2020 The Asia-Pacific Journal | Japan Focus Is There Left Populism in Japan? The Case of Reiwa Shinsengumi Axel Klein1 Abstract: The rather heterogeneous state of When Reiwa Shinsengumi2 (RSG) entered the populism research on Japan and the potentially political arena in April 2019, it appeared as a populist quality of the new political party Reiwa social activists’ movement poised to add yet Shinsengumi are the two key points addressed another player to Japan’s fluid and fragmented in this paper. Based on a summary of dominant opposition camp. With growing publicity and concepts of populism and the pertinentmedia coverage, however, RSG was converted research on Japan I argue for an ideational into yet another piece of Japan’s heterogeneous approach to make Japan more accessible to populism mosaic, albeit with the qualifier “left comparative efforts. Using Reiwa Shinsengumi populism” attached to it. Obviously, it was as an example, I conclude that there is little RSG’s founder and leader Yamamoto Tarō, at populism to be found and suggest that future the time an independent Upper House member, research needs to look for explanations why whose campaign style and rhetoric seemed to Japan is apparently different in this respect justify this categorization, at least for some from other mature liberal democracies. political observers (Minami 2019, Yamaguchi 2019, Takaku 2019, Asahi 02 Sept. 2019). Keywords: Populism, Reiwa Shinsengumi, ideational approach The potentially populist quality of RSG and the rather heterogeneous state of populism research on Japan are the two key points addressed in this paper. Based on a summary of Introduction dominant concepts of populism and the pertinent research on Japan I argue for an Anyone interested in populism in Japan will ideational approach, meaning a definition of quickly realize that the academic discourse on populism as a small set of specific ideological the topic is as enlightening as it is confusing. elements (see below), which is best suited to The relatively few scholars who are active in make the case of Japan accessible to this field have produced a conceptually and comparative efforts of the political science empirically diverse body of literature. In some community. This seems all the more prudent of it the sheer existence of populism isgiven the increasing attention paid to the contested as are its key components and phenomenon, the more recent proliferation of consequently its definition. The phenomena scholarship on populism and the potential for labelled as Japanese manifestations of populism theoretical and methodological insights that include a very diverse group of political actors comparisons with other mature liberal that make it difficult to see a commondemocracies hold. conceptual ground. One finding most scholars agree upon, however, is that the case of Japan Based on this argument I use the case of RSG is almost non-existent in comparative efforts of to discuss whether this new political party does the international political science community. indeed constitute (left) populism. In order to 1 18 | 10 | 1 APJ | JF answer this question I analyze threekept Japan’s economy the “most protected and representative texts of the movement: (1) its least globalized in the developed world” mission statement and party platform, (2) a (Buruma 2018), and responsive policies that campaign speech by party leader Yamamoto, “put national interest first in immigration and and (3) a town-hall meeting featuringtrade” (Lind 2018: 69). Clearly, the appraisal of Yamamoto in Gifu prefecture. I find that these authors is based on an understanding of although there is some overlap between RSG’s populism derived from the experience of other texts and elements of the ideational definition industrialized countries. of populism, key components are missing, rendering the label “(left) populism” for RSG Why is it that other scholars do find populism inept. in Japan? Their studies reflect in one way or another two concepts of populism that the international political science community has been discussing for at least three decades. The Studies on Populism in Japan “political strategic approach” argues that “populism is best defined as a political strategy In 2015, Petter Lindgren began histhrough which a personalistic leader seeks or comprehensive review of populism studies on exercises government power based on direct, Japan by stating that the “literature onunmediated, uninstitutionalized support from Japanese populism is, comparatively speaking, large numbers of mostly unorganized 3 small.” (2015: 579) The few journal articles on followers.” (cf. Weyland 2001: 14) On the other this subject published since 2015 all agree or hand, the “ideational approach” (cf. Mudde, assert like Yoshida Tōru that despite “rapidly Rovira Kaltwasser 2017: 5) defines populism as growing literature on populism in advanced a “thin-centered ideology that considers society democracies, Japan is often overlooked” (2019: to be ultimately separated into two 1). And indeed, although there also have been homogeneous and antagonistic camps, the some monographs published in Japanese since ‘pure people’ versus ‘the corrupt elite’, and 4 Ōtake Hideo’s pioneering work (2003), the last which argues that politics should be an almost 20 years of research on Japanese expression of the volonté générale (general populism have hardly been incorporated into will) of the people.” comparative studies by the international political science community. The standard One major difference to Buruma, Lind and literature on this topic discusses democracies others seems to be that some scholars who in Europe, North America and Latin America, identify populism in Japan apply mainstream but Japan (as well as the other two East Asian definitions in a partial way, meaning that the democracies, for that matter) seems to be off existence of single elements of those the academic map (Rovira Kaltwasser, Taggart definitional concepts is considered sufficient to et al. 2017: 1-18). label political actors as populists. For example, Ōtake Hideo (2003: 122-123) used a one- Why is that? “Nothing to see here!” is what Ian dimensional concept that allowed him to Buruma (2018), Jennifer Lind (2018) and others include such diverse politicians as Koizumi argue.5 In their analyses, there is no populism Jun’ichirō, Ozawa Ichirō, Doi Takako, Kan to speak of in Japan. According to these Naoto, Tanaka Makiko, and also Ishihara authors, the country’s apparent immunity is Shintarō in this category. According to Ōtake mostly a function of its relatively egalitarian (2003: 123) populists share one key society, its lack of elites that “have betrayed” characteristic: they criticize "(selfish) elites" for the ordinary people, a government that has damaging the democratically legitimate 2 18 | 10 | 1 APJ | JF interests of "the (virtuous) people". Looking neoliberalism” (2014: 77). While the through this definitional lens, Ōtake later put neoliberalism label refers among other things forward his concept of “interest-led populism” to austerity policies, “likening government to (2006) of which former Prime Minister Tanaka private business” (2014: 82) and Hashimoto’s Kakuei was a typical representative.“signature policy, unifying Osaka City and Interestingly, some of the policies pushed by Osaka Prefecture” (2014: 78), the argument for these “interest-led populists” are the same calling him “populist” is partly built around discussed by Buruma and Lind as protections behavioral traits like Hashimoto’s “flamboyant against populism. Based on his definition, political performance skills and ability to Ōtake also identified a form of populism which connect with ordinary people”, “political evolved out of a criticism of “interest-led theatre”, “intensive use of personal interaction, populism” and has been referred to associal media, and television messaging” and “neoliberal populism”. Koizumi Jun’ichirō “aggressive rhetoric” used to ”berate (Prime Minister 2001-06) was the first national individuals” (2014: 81-83). Weathers also politician to be labelled a “neoliberal populist” points to a part of Hashimoto’s ideological self- by political scientists and journalists. On the justification, stating that in “classic populist local level, governors like Koike Yuriko (Tokyo) fashion” the former governor argued he was and Hashimoto Tōru (Osaka) were placed in elected by a majority providing him with “a this category. strong mandate from the voters” (2014: 83) and therefore a legitimate basis for all of his Hashimoto also features prominently in studies political projects and decisions. that apply a concept of populism which is built around “strategic” aspects and “political style” Hieda, Zenkyo and Nishikawa (2019) make a (seiji sutairu) (Mizushima 2016: 6). In these point by keeping the two basic concepts of studies, key definitional characteristics of populism explicitly separate. The authors state populists may well be summarized asthat the ideational approach has been prominent, polarizing, and performative, all of developed and almost exclusively applied to which need to be understood against the European parliamentary systems, but not to backdrop of standard political rhetoric and presidential [electoral] systems such as those behavior in Japan. Hashimoto was credited with that can be found in Latin America, nor to giving birth to “theatrical populism” (Arima elections for governors on the prefectural level 2017) because of