Campaign Money

In Japan, political kingpin Ichiro Ozawa is mired in controversy because his party might've been funded by undisclosed sources with vested interests.

Meanwhile back in the US, the Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court has allowed for this, this, this, this, this, and this. In case you don't want to click on the links, anonymous foreign, domestic, corporate, private, and crooked money sources have been funding attack ads nationally.

It might be time for some of this.

Maybe a constitutional amendment is too far. But so is Citizens United.

Which country is practicing American democracy better?

Democracy and Japan

I decided to play with format for this post, hope you enjoy.

What is American democracy and how do we promote it?

Be more specific.

How have American concepts of democracy affected Japanese democracy?

In a number of ways.

Care to name a few?

Yeah. First is the constitution. After World War II, the US occupied Japan and used this power to reshape Japanese government in its image. Militarism in pre-WWII Japan had damaged hopes at a more traditional parliamentary democracy, so the US took it upon itself build one after.

Is that all?

Nope, we also wrote Article 9 of their Constitution which banned Japan from developing aggressive military capabilities. Although the exact meaning is contested, the gist is that they can't build armed forces unnecessary for defense. No war allowed.

That can't be all that bad.

Beyond the restriction on Japanese freedom of action, the clause has also hindered relations with countries like Indonesia, and, to a lesser extent, the European Union, because the constitution is often interpreted as banning arms exports which many allies would love to get from Japan. Obviously, there are always exceptions when Japan wants to export arms to just the US. Japan's domestic military industrial base would also like to make some money, so they don't always like the ban. Interestingly, the ban has traditionally been popular in Japan, because it led to the three non-nuclear principles which prohibit Japanese nuclear activity of all kinds. Of course, the US still secretly visits Japanese ports with nuclear-armed ships. The Japanese public generally likes the pacifist sentiment. It might have something to do with WWII.

Does this have to connect with English class?

But of course.

How does it?

In Poisonwood Bible, our current book, there is an election. After months of missionary preaching and services, the Congolese village chief finally puts Christianity to a vote. The villagers are asked to democratically decide whether Christianity could be practiced in the village. Christianity looses. Immediately, the preacher declares the process blasphemous and rejects the results. Another example of American democracy internationally.

Bring it all together.

In both cases, we see America telling and forcing a foreign people to adopt democracy in America's image. Yet, rather than allow for the foreign people to have votes and control their own policies, we go by the outcome that suits us most, and, when that outcome isn't the will of the people, we do what we wanted to. Want a nuclear-free country? We'll base missiles in your harbor. Want a Christianity-free village? Elections over Jesus are blasphemous, the show will go on.

So what?

Maybe we shouldn't write ourselves into constitutions. Maybe we shouldn't force ourselves into spiritual lives. Maybe democracy is letting people do what they want to do, not forcing them to do what we want them to want to do.

African Aid and Japan

In English class the other day we talked about how the media represents Africa through language and what that says about our perceptions of the continent, and what is emphasized in the way we give aid to Africa. The context for this discussion is our reading of Poisonwood Bible.

We found that American news sources tend to focus on images of instability, disease, corruption, and a lack of opportunity. This fits nicely with US goals of using aid to decrease each of those problems in Africa. Our rhetoric matches our priorities.

Japan also has a deep history of aid in Africa. Although we won't approach that history from the same angle as explained above (representations-> policy), I thought it would be interesting to investigate what types of aid Japan gives and how, how that reflects on American/Japanese cultural differences and priorities framed in terms of national interest. As I say that I realize I don't have time tonight to write a doctoral thesis. Might as well give it a (brief) try.

The main forms of aid Japan gives to Africa are monetary and economic. To avoid funky economic/aid terminology, that simply needs to be understood as money targeted at infrastructure development to stimulate economic growth. Japan ideologically bases this model on Post-WWII policies in Japan that allowed the country to recover from devastation by focusing on rebuilding systems like transportation to attract private investment, instead of trying to build businesses in a vacuum. This by itself reflects a fundamental cultural difference between Japan and the US, in that Japan is able to empathize with African countries on the level of development, and offer perhaps more targeted and effective aid as a consequence. The focus on economic development also showcases a belief, which may emanate from the post WWII experience, that economic help is the best kind of help. Along the lines of the Maimonides quote, give a country infrastructure to develop its own economy, and it will translate into sustainable prosperity, instead of aid-driven booms.

More significantly, an economic focus shows that Japan is seeking economic gains from cooperation with Africa. Japanese policymakers recognize that Africa is a vital emerging market and want to get inroads by helping to bring the market into existence. Japan isn't the largest donor of aid to Africa, but the amount is still substantial, and, along the lines of China, Japan leverages it to an economic end.

The analysis above also explains why Japan provides food aid to countries when it's necessary. Japan views relief and direct aid policies as last ditch efforts to prevent backsliding. Food aid isn't the primary strategy, but when price spikes threaten to unravel years of progress, Japan will do what is necessary to maintain it's strategic advantage.

Countries give aid according to domestic cultural and international narratives. A country that believes it has a responsibility to provide global public goods by stemming endemic diseases like hunger, lack of education, corruption, and, of course, disease is more likely to use forms of foreign aid that directly address these problems, while a country that developed from devastation into the world's third biggest economy and views itself as an economic rather than military power is likely to attempt to share and further an economic narrative by growing emerging markets, and seeking to reap the benefits of that growth.

Myths and Japan

In English class, which will provide topics for some posts, we're reading Barbara Kingsolver's Poisonwood Bible. I would recommend it as a good read (at least through page 124). For a full plot summary, click here. The book tells the story of an American family led by a missionary father who goes to the Congo (prior to independence) in the 1960's. There they encounter an Africa strangely closed to their missionary manner of imposing openness, and not eager to be Christian. While reading the book, we've talked about myths that we have about the cultures we interact with, and how they influence our interactions. In this case, priorly held assumptions about Africans as backwards, incapable, and pliable lead to the mission's failure. I thought it would be instructive to contrast this to America's colonial experience with Japan.

The US pried Japan open. Japan had evicted Westerners after some exposure to early industrial ideas from Dutch missionaries, but as Western presence expanded, Japan evicted all Westerners except for a Dutch enclave at Nagasaki. This period of self-imposed isolation lasted until 1853, when Commodore Perry came and forced Japan to join the global economy. For a good recounting of these events, see this. If you have access to more databases than I do, you might find this interesting.

The question of myth in the Japanese context is very different than American myths in Africa. Because the US simply opened (versus settled) Japan, myth creation simply wasn't as necessary. Yes, there was probably racism towards the Japanese like there was towards most minority groups during that time period, but the government didn't need to create an image of the Japanese as needy, backwards, or inferior to support their mission. As long as the public was aware the Japanese market held great economic potential, an economic mission was justified. If, for the growing empire, the means justify the ends, then so do the myths.