After cancelling Halloween, Tokyo’s Shibuya neighborhood cancels New Year’s Eve too

Looks like the pencil necks at local government offices have taken a page straight out of Footloose, but instead of banning dancing, they’re banning fun altogether.

It’s just another example of governments trying to micromanage people’s lives under the guise of “public safety.” What’s next, shutting down birthday parties because they’re “too risky”?

When the government acts like a killjoy parent, treating adults like irresponsible kids, it sends a message: they think we’re not capable of making our own decisions. This is a slippery slope straight out of the pages of 1984, and if they keep it up, we’ll end up in a world where joy, celebration, and even freedom are considered “dangerous.”

MOFA: Make Orwell Fiction Again.

Shibuya can be more and more suitable for elderly care houses (老人ホーム)

No great loss. Shibuya has more pedestrian crosswalks than it has tourist attractions. Come to think of it, Shibuya's pedestrian crosswalks are its only real tourist attractions.

And somehow New York City's Times Square pulls it off every year.

Wouldn't it be easier and more lucrative to simply ban people from expressing happiness in Shibuya, with on-the-spot fines for anyone who does. Smiling: Y10,000. Laughing: Y20,000. Dancing, humming, singing or hugging: Y30,000.

I see a fundamental difference here. Halloween is a lame, stupid excuse for a holiday and modern Japan only celebrates it because of their obsession with Things American (they probably think the US invented Halloween).

New Year, though, has been A Thing in Japan since forever, so this just feels like City Hall being lazy.

One word: stupid.

All of the downvotes on suggest there a lot of Govern Me Harder, Daddy Government types here, who seem quite excited by the prospect of their world turning into a place where fun is banned, joy is forbidden, and every moment is policed.

How about instead of creating a generation that’ll grow up knowing only restrictions and fear, we instead focus on fostering strong, happy communities?

I’ll take my pleasure and wallet somewhere else.

Anti social and unlawful to ban New Year Eve.

I heard Shibuya is getting trashier and trashier.

Looks like the pencil necks at local government offices have taken a page straight out of Footloose, but instead of banning dancing, they’re banning fun altogether.

Really? where in the article it says they will go to other wards to enforce the cancellation? there is a huge difference between not hosting an event and to forbid that event anywhere.

It’s just another example of governments trying to micromanage people’s lives under the guise of “public safety.” What’s next, shutting down birthday parties because they’re “too risky”?

Not even close, since the article clearly mentions how representatives of the shopping districts are on board with the decision. This is a case where the locals found out the celebration involved too many expenses, risks and troubles and that they can survive without it anyway, so they are no longer interested in holding it.

And somehow New York City's Times Square pulls it off every year.

And good for NYC, but that is not an argument to force any other place to do the same if the locals are not interested.

All of the downvotes on suggest there a lot of Govern Me Harder, Daddy Government types here,

You mean the people that think the local government should impose the New Year Party on the locals just for the sake of being famous about it even when the locals disagree?

Wallace

Its becoming very clear to me that there are certain types in power who want what they want and if they have the power they use it to achieve their aims whether it’s unpopular with the public or not.

And they wonder why japan has so few babies

It's events like this where young people meet

You mean the people that think the local government should impose the New Year Party on the locals just for the sake of being famous about it even when the locals disagree

Well, I am absolutely SHOCKED you here cheering on government overreach, excited to take any and all orders from long as Big Pharma, Big Government, and every other big power that tells you it’s "for your own good."

News flash: Many of us think the government shouldn’t micromanage every little piece of life, and we definitely don’t need their permission to enjoy a holiday. Stop pretending your “concern” for the locals is anything more than an excuse for control.

Now back to the "Health" section you go, thank you.

After cancelling Halloween, Tokyo’s Shibuya neighborhood cancels New Year’s Eve too

Why stop there?

Why not cancel Christmas and Valentine's day too?

Hell, cancel the summer festivals and any celebrations of any kind as well?

Might as well put up signs that say no talking or laughing, ever.

Why not cancel Christmas and Valentine's day too?

Yes, this has nothing to do with Japan and are actual working days, not holidays.

Well, I am absolutely SHOCKED you here cheering on government overreach

Again, the article clearly demonstrate this claim you make is false, the government is not acting against the wishes of the people that put it in power but instead according to what they are saying must be done. That you disagree with what the people in Shibuya want to do does not magically make their wishes disappear or the government acting against their interests, it just mean you disagree with the locals and want to impose your will on them.

Now back to the "Health" section you go, thank you.

So when your argument is demonstrated as wrong your reply is to try to force people to stop commenting?

Sorry but that is not something you can do, it is even against the rules of the site to try to force others to stop commenting.

Why not cancel Christmas and Valentine's day too?

Do you think there is no longer any New Year's Eve celebration just because Shibuya don't want to host it? because if not this comment makes absolutely no sense. Is Shibuya even hosting any event on Christmas or Valentine's day? because if not then all three events just became equal.

How does the decision of the people in Shibuya affects what people want to do elsewhere?

They need to change ASAP their promoție narative from "Cool Japan" to "Tsumaranai Japan". That is more proper and truthful.

The nanny state led by unless dinosaurs, does what it does best. Micro managing the happiness of its citizens like all adults are babies and irresponsible children.

Shibuya prefers an orderly peaceful passing of the new year. No beer guzzling foreigners standing on top of cars and shouting it appears.

Everyone go home and watch more Japanese New Year’s TV.

In the Halloween comments section, someone had a very good point about how much authority should be given to these individual kus. When you impinge on individual and basic freedoms guaranteed virtually everywhere else in the country, it's already gone too far.

Freedom to gather, and to move, and less essential freedoms like having a can in public are not up to Shibuya-ku.

Again, the article clearly demonstrate this claim you make is false, the government is not acting against the wishes of the people that put it in power but instead according to what they are saying must be done

Oh, how awesome - because nothing says “government of the people” like canceling every holiday celebration that brings a little joy to the community. If you actually believe that this decision the ward council has made is purely because “the people want it,” I’ve got some prime oceanfront property to sell you.

Let's be really honest here. Cancelling New Year’s isn’t about the wishes of Shibuya’s locals; it’s about bureaucrats flexing their power under the guise of “safety” while spoon-feeding you whatever they want.

But sure, keep on believing that everything the government does is for the people’s good, as if they’re just humble servants of the public. Meanwhile, they keep seizing control bit by bit, while folks like you applaud them for “keeping you safe.”

I guess they noticed that the cancelation of Halloween was such a hit and brought a lot of publicity for Shibuya so they decided to go on canceling other things as well.

This is disappointing, more disappointing than Halloween because it is Japanese culture. Its also one day and one day only, rather than Halloween which is kind of like the day and the weekend before as well. Disney Japan get something like two months out of Halloween. Anything that keeps the cash registers filled.

fwiw, my inaka son went all the way to Shibuya this year for Halloween. He said the main area was 100% cops but there were people gathering elsewhere. He said he saw three fights, one of which was a Japanese vs. foreigner three on three with others filming them on their phones. Apparently one of the Japanese guys shouted "I am a Japanese yankii!" in English, but this may not had the desired effect in striking fear into his opponents.

Oh, how awesome - because nothing says “government of the people” like canceling every holiday celebration that brings a little joy to the community.

As long as that is what the people of the location want to do this is precisely what the government of the people would have to do. And again, they are not cancelling any holiday as you repeatedly and mistakenly claim, they are just cancelling an event they are not interested in holding. You trying to force that event on them is what is completely unacceptable.

If you actually believe that this decision the ward council has made is purely because “the people want it,” I’ve got some prime oceanfront property to sell you.

So, bring the many reports about the representatives of the shopping districts saying the local government is acting against their wishes.

You can't? well that is because this imaginary argument you are trying to make is not real, the local people are on board of this decision, the one that disagree is you, but since you can't force them to obey your personal preferences (as you are also unable to force people to stop commenting here) you try to make the argument that the people of Shibuya are against this, without any evidence to support this.

Let's be really honest here. Cancelling New Year’s isn’t about the wishes of Shibuya’s locals

Because you say so? sorry but the article that contradicts you explicitly is a much more reliable source of information, and once again Shibuya is not cancelling New Year's Eve, they just not interested in holding an event then.

I can believe without problem the article when it says this is what the people want, it is much more reliable than nameless people on the internet baselessly claiming this is some imposition from the government just because these anonymous people don't agree with the locals.

As long as that is what the people of the location want to do this is precisely what the government of the people would have to do

It's not up to them. If they want to declare themselves a republic, they can do that and make all the rules they want. Until then they uphold the freedoms afforded to everyone in Japan.

an executive committee made up of Shibuya Ward legislators and representatives of the shopping districts near the Shibuya Scramble

A collection of bureaucratic and propertied interests wanting to gentrify the area. Just look at the mayor holding up their nagging little posters and deploying excessive police presence.

Remove all it's character and life and reduce it to marketable equity.

It is not only Shibuya, but other places have seen crackdowns on their once vibrant nightlife scenes.

RIP Shibuya.

No great loss. Shibuya has more pedestrian crosswalks than it has tourist attractions. Come to think of it, Shibuya's pedestrian crosswalks are its only real tourist attractions.

You're probably just a tourist from another country or prefecture, I'm not a big fan of Shibuya's obnoxious, loud crowds too but that place is another level.

If you're referring to Hachiko area, do you think the place got big for its zebra crossings?

You got those everywhere in Tokyo. Go venture in the alleys and hundreds of multi floor entertainment buildings, there is something for everyone.

As long as that is what the people of the location want to do this is precisely what the government of the people would have to do. And again, they are not cancelling any holiday as you repeatedly and mistakenly claim, they are just cancelling an event they are not interested in holding. You trying to force that event on them is what is completely unacceptable.

Yes yes, because governments always just “do what the people want,” right? That’s a fairy tale. If you think bureaucrats canceling celebrations are just “acting for the people,” I actually have some prime oceanfront property for you in Shibuya.

The reality is these officials decided what’s “best” without even blinking at the community’s traditions or the value that they carry for people. Canceling New Year’s celebrations isn’t just “not being interested” - it’s stripping away the social fabric and shutting down what makes communities thrive. But keep believing that everything is done in the “people’s interest” while they take away more and more from everyday life.

Meanwhile, actual real people are left wondering why their voices get silenced as officials cancel anything remotely fun.

I can believe without problem the article when it says this is what the people want, it is much more reliable than nameless people on the internet baselessly claiming this is some imposition from the government just because these anonymous people don't agree with the locals.

Cool. Meanwhile, anyone with a shred of common sense can see this for what it is: one more way to squash the community spirit. But hey, if you’re happy swallowing whatever the government says without a second thought, please don’t let us disturb you, loyal subject.

I'm sure the businesses around Shibuya are overjoyed. They won't have to serve those pesky customers!

It's not up to them. If they want to declare themselves a republic, they can do that and make all the rules they want. Until then they uphold the freedoms afforded to everyone in Japan.

Yes it is, as easily proved as they are going to do it without anybody expecting the will of visitors to be imposed onto them because of a terrible misunderstood of what means "freedoms". There is nothing new with ordinances that forbid things in certain locations, opting not to host an event even if you really really want them to do it makes perfect sense, you can't force the locals to make an event in the same way nobody can force you to hold a party in your house.

It is not only Shibuya, but other places have seen crackdowns on their once vibrant nightlife scenes.

If the places decide it is not worthy (because visitors cause too much problem for the benefits they could bring) what is wrong with that? it makes less sense to blame the hosts than the visitors.

Yes yes, because governments always just “do what the people want,” right? That’s a fairy tale.

No part of the argument is that the government always do what the people want, just that in this case this is what is happening, your argument on the other hand is that no matter the situation the government never ever does what the people want, which is obviously irrational.

This article clearly and explicitly says the locals are behind the measure, you say the writer is lying, So what evidence do you have that the writer lied when it says "an executive committee made up of Shibuya Ward legislators and representatives of the shopping districts near the Shibuya Scramble have now said that the resumption has been postponed to 2025"

No evidence? then the article is simply much more reliable and it is invalid to simply claim it is lying.

The reality is these officials decided what’s “best” without even blinking at the community’s traditions 

You have presented zero evidence of this being the case, officials decided nothing, the local community is the one that decided not to hold the event even if you would really want to impose it on them because of personal preferences, that is not a valid reason to do it.

So, unless you can prove your claim that the writer of the article is lying it is perfectly correct to assume this is not the case and the local community agrees in suspending the event.

I'm sure the businesses around Shibuya are overjoyed. They won't have to serve those pesky customers!

Why not? Business can hold their own events without any problem, and profit as much as they always do, maybe even more now with less people in the street drinking without paying anything to them.

Why do you think this decision was made with full cooperation of the representatives of the shopping districts?

Yes it is, as easily proved as they are going to do it without anybody expecting the will of visitors to be imposed onto them because of a terrible misunderstood of what means "freedoms".

Pretty sure I know what freedom means... Look up Article 21 of the Japanese constitution. A People's Republic of Shibuya would have to come up with their own constitution before enacting restrictions on basic freedom of movement and gathering. It's not event - and therefore they can't "cancel" it.

>

Yes it is, as easily proved as they are going to do it without anybody expecting the will of visitors to be imposed onto them because of a terrible misunderstood of what means "freedoms".

Ah, the classic - twisting freedom to justify government overreach. So, your idea of freedom is what, exactly? Letting bureaucrats cancel public events and celebrations whenever they feel like it, without anyone daring to question it?

And as for “imposing the will of visitors,” please. Local economies thrive on tourism, community events, and the vibrancy that celebrations bring.

But hey, if you’re content with empty streets and a lackluster community, just keep cheering on the government for taking away anything remotely enjoyable “for your own good.”

Pretty sure I know what freedom means

You seem to think it means the possibility to impose your will on the locals about an event they are not interested in holding. No need of any new constitution, they are simply choosing not to accommodate your preferences. You are completely free to accuse the local government of Shibuya of not making this event that you supposedly can impose on them, why don't you do it?

Ah, the classic - twisting freedom to justify government overreach

You still have brought no evidence whatsoever that the article is lying, without that you can't argue the government is doing something against the will of the locals, and if the locals do not want to hold an event then there is no overreaching in the government just respecting those wishes and suspending that event.

What is the point on repeating this claim that the article is lying and the government is acting against their wishes? implicitly you are accepting this is completely incorrect when you can't

But hey, if you’re content with empty streets and a lackluster community

The locals are, apparently they think is better (easier, more profitable, less problematic) than the alternative, so why would they need to do something they consider worse just because you want them to?

You seem to think it means the possibility to impose your will on the locals about an event they are not interested in holding.

Again - it's not an event and it isn't up to them anymore than it's up to me or you. They are bound by the Japanese Constitution. It isn't "their house", it isn't "their rules".

Again - it's not an event and it isn't up to them anymore than it's up to me or you. 

Yes it is,

"the world-famous Shibuya Scramble intersection in front of Shibuya Station would be shut down on the night of December 31 and turned into an official street party venue"

This is what is being suspended. So it is completely their house, their rules. You want to make a reservation in a bar or restaurant in Shibuya that is open at New Year's Eve? you can still do it without any problem, go and celebrate without problem. You want to drink on the street instead? then no, a perfectly legal ordinance of the local government does not allow it. The locals choose not to hold this official steet party venue so there is no exception expected for this date.

Again, you are completely free to go to the police to accuse the government of Shibuya of acting against the constitution according to your understanding, but looking at how nobody is doing this it seems obvious there is nothing unconstitutional going on with the measure.

When the average age of the country is like 60, this is to be expected. No loud noises at night and next - stay the heck off Shibuya's lawns.

Your house analogy is all wrong because a ward is not a house. Their house is their house and they can enforce whatever policies they like in their house. Not so for a public place in a country that upholds basic freedoms of movement and assembly.

They can cancel an official event if they want but they can't dictate rights of movement and assembly with police enforcers and hecklers.

Don't know why you're so passionate about restricting freedoms.

Your house analogy is all wrong because a ward is not a house.

Not it is not, there are rules that wards are allowed to put in place the same as rules you can put in your own house. You are as justified to impose your will over those rules and a visitor can impose his own will over the rules you put in your own house. The streets being a public place have no relevance on the valid ordinances the local government can put in them.

They can cancel an official event if they want but they can't dictate rights of movement and assembly with police enforcers and hecklers.

At least now you can understand they are suspending an official event correcting your previously mistaken concept. Next is just to understand that this mean they will not suspend the ordinance that forbids people from drinking on the street, you are still free to walk those streets and go into a bar to drink if you want.

Once again, how do you explain that if this ordinance is so clearly against the constitution nobody is challenging it? do you believe it is just you (and not a single lawyer in all Tokyo) that notice this happening?

Don't know why you're so passionate about restricting freedoms.

You mean the freedom of the locals to hold or not a public event? because the one trying to restrict that freedom is you by imposing your personal preference over what the locals want.

You are as justified to impose your will over those rules and a visitor can impose his own will over the rules you put in your own house.

No - there's a difference between private and public property. You seem to think that Shibuya and its residents are entitled to a separate fiefdom that can act outside of Tokyo's constitution - it can't.

At least now you can understand they are suspending an official event correcting your previously mistaken concept.

I think you misunderstand. Just because it was declared an official event in 2016 does not mean that it was always just an official event. Groups of people exercised their right to assembly in Shibuya to mark an occasion such as Halloween or New Year's Eve long before then - though perhaps if you haven't been in Tokyo for long you wouldn't know that so just FYI.

Once again, how do you explain that if this ordinance is so clearly against the constitution nobody is challenging it? do you believe it is just you (and not a single lawyer in all Tokyo) that notice this happening?

Just because it has gone unchallenged does not mean it is okay, legal, or within the spirit of a free and open democratic country.

You mean the freedom of the locals to hold or not a public event? because the one trying to restrict that freedom is you by imposing your personal preference over what the locals want.

Again, they are not hosting the event - Fine. They do not get to restrict basic freedoms guaranteed under thr constitution. Implying that I or anyone else exercising their rights are the ones imposing our rules on Shibuya is absurd.

JayToday  01:43 pm JST

Yes it is, as easily proved as they are going to do it without anybody expecting the will of visitors to be imposed onto them because of a terrible misunderstood of what means "freedoms".

Ah, the classic - twisting freedom to justify government overreach. So, your idea of freedom is what, exactly? Letting bureaucrats cancel public events and celebrations whenever they feel like it, without anyone daring to question it?

And as for “imposing the will of visitors,” please. Local economies thrive on tourism, community events, and the vibrancy that celebrations bring.

But hey, if you’re content with empty streets and a lackluster community, just keep cheering on the government for taking away anything remotely enjoyable “for your own good.”

'While there was talk of restarting the celebration this year, an executive committee made up of Shibuya Ward legislators and representatives of the shopping districts near the Shibuya Scramble have now said that the resumption has been postponed to 2025, meaning that there will be no official New Year’s Eve countdown party in Shibuya this year.'

The businesses and residents in Shibuya Ward pay taxes then vote for the their ward's leaders. If they wanted all these things happening, they wouldn't have voted for them. If you don't live there and pay taxes, you're not entitled to anything. Go gather where you live. You have that freedom.

Go gather where you live. You have that freedom.

Actually he has the freedom to gather where ever he wants as guaranteed by the Constitution. This isn't North Korea. Whether or not he pays residence tax to Shibuya ward has no bearing on constitutional rights.

CommodoreFlagToday  02:29 pm JST

Your house analogy is all wrong because a ward is not a house. Their house is their house and they can enforce whatever policies they like in their house. Not so for a public place in a country that upholds basic freedoms of movement and assembly.

They can cancel an official event if they want but they can't dictate rights of movement and assembly with police enforcers and hecklers.

Don't know why you're so passionate about restricting freedoms.

You have the freedom to gather in your area, another ward, or go to a private establishment for a party. You have lot's of freedom but here you are focusing on one ward because you're one of those self entitled who doesn't live there, pay taxes, nor vote yet insist you should have the right. You're not rambling about freedom but selfish self entitlement.

You're not rambling about freedom but selfish self entitlement.

Look up Article 21 of the Japanese Constitution.

You still have brought no evidence whatsoever that the article is lying, without that you can't argue the government is doing something against the will of the locals, and if the locals do not want to hold an event then there is no overreaching in the government just respecting those wishes and suspending that event.

Oh, so now we need “evidence” to question government actions, do we? Let me guess-unless it’s printed in big, bold letters in your Brought To You By Pfizer news outlet, it can’t be true, right?

Here’s the real question: why are you so eager to trust everything the government spoon-feeds you? It’s actually quite alarming how you assume officials always act in our best interests, never pushing their own agendas or making executive decisions without consulting the people. You think the government is just innocently “respecting the locals’ wishes”? Cancelling events is an easy way for them to flex power and control the narrative, and pretending that’s what “everyone wants” is just the cherry on top. Open your eyes - this isn’t about respecting wishes; it’s about quieting the crowd.

'While there was talk of restarting the celebration this year, an executive committee made up of Shibuya Ward legislators and representatives of the shopping districts near the Shibuya Scramble have now said that the resumption has been postponed to 2025, meaning that there will be no official New Year’s Eve countdown party in Shibuya this year.'

Cool, so a handful of legislators and a few business reps have made a “decision” for an entire community, and we’re supposed to believe this represents the will of all taxpaying residents, were that point even a relevant one.

Well, thank you Miles for pointing out that this wasn’t even a community-wide choice, just the usual suspects in government and their handpicked insiders calling the shots. Isn’t it convenient how “the people” are always represented by a tiny group with their own agendas? Real democracy would mean asking the residents of Shibuya and the people who stimulate its economy what they want instead of letting a small committee of pen-pushers speak for everyone.

But sure, keep believing that a handful of officials and business interests somehow represent the spirit of the entire community.

No - there's a difference between private and public property.

It does not matter, wards can have ordinances that apply also to public property, for example you can't just smoke anywhere (specially in public spaces) no matter how much this interfere with your misunderstood freedoms.

 You seem to think that Shibuya and its residents are entitled to a separate fiefdom that can act outside of Tokyo's constitution - it can't.

No, the only one thinking this is necessary is you, for rational people it is clear ordinances that forbid things even on public spaces in no way oppose the constitution (much less the imaginary Tokyo's constitution).

I think you misunderstand. Just because it was declared an official event in 2016 does not mean that it was always just an official event.

No misunderstanding, Shibuya has now an ordinance that forbids drinking in public, this can be suspended if an official event is held, the city decided not to do this for New Year's Eve, so the ordinance remains in place.

Just because it has gone unchallenged does not mean it is okay

But precisely because it is unconceivable that thousands over thousands of people with deep knowledge of the law and constitution have failed to recognize such an obvious way to refute it (according to you) is why it is so easy to see how invalid your argument is. Is like saying that injecting clorox would clear viral infections, and expecting people to believe no doctor has ever thought of that.

Again, they are not hosting the event

Therefore the eve becomes like every other night in Shibuya, where it is not allowed to drink on the street.

Implying that I or anyone else exercising their rights are the ones imposing our rules on Shibuya is absurd

It is when your rights infringe on the rights of the locals, which is exactly what you want to do.

Actually he has the freedom to gather where ever he wants as guaranteed by the Constitution

For the purpose of drinking and have fun? not at all. Do you think for example that you can bring a few hundred friends and gather blocking a highway? the entrance to the emergency services of a hospital? at the door of a business? anybody with even a tiny amount of common sense would easily understand imposing your "freedoms" over the rights of others is not a protected thing in the constitution, specially not in the Tokyo's constitution.

But sure, keep believing that a handful of officials and business interests somehow represent the spirit of the entire community.

Very good points, Jay. As Shibuya has had a vibrant nightlife for many years now, there most certainly are people who moved there for the social experience. Their views are being completely ignored by "community" organizers.

Oh, so now we need “evidence” to question government actions, do we?

Of course you do when your are accusing the writer of the article of lying. A proper news outlet that takes responsibility for whatever article it publishes clearly says the locals are the ones deciding this, not the government acting against their wishes.

You say the writer is lying, you need to prove it.

Here’s the real question: why are you so eager to trust everything the government spoon-feeds you?

The government is not the one claiming the locals agree with the measure, a stablished news outlet, where people put their name and career on the line are the ones that make this claim, there is nothing wrong with having more trust from this source than from some nameless people on the internet that say everything they don't agree with is a lie, and produce zero evidence for this.

Cool, so a handful of legislators and a few business reps have made a “decision” for an entire community, and we’re supposed to believe this represents the will of all taxpaying residents, were that point even a relevant one.

Of course, because the alternative is believing anonymous people on the internet that offer zero evidence of the contrary. Plenty of evidence of the locals being on board the decision, zero evidence they disagree. This is not exactly a difficult decision.

Well, thank you Miles for pointing out that this wasn’t even a community-wide choice

Where is this supposedly done? nothing in the comments point out to this being the case.

Very good points, Jay. As Shibuya has had a vibrant nightlife for many years now, there most certainly are people who moved there for the social experience. Their views are being completely ignored by "community" organizers.

For this argument to hold any weight you would need to prove these theoretical people that move to the place they have fun at night exist in any significant number. Just claiming they "must exist" does nothing to prove it, much less to prove they disagree with the measure or that they represent a significant portion of the locals.

Do you have evidence to prove this claim?

Good for Shibuya. Their ward, their rules.

People can still party till they drop in any of the thousands of establishments in and around Tokyo. Having thousands partying on the street generates basically no revenue - it actually costs the taxpayers and ratepayers a fortune to police and clean up.

Time for other business savvy Wards/cities to step in and organize an official event. They could take in millions of ¥ for their local businesses and such, if done right.

It does not matter, wards can have ordinances that apply also to public property, for example you can't just smoke anywhere (specially in public spaces) no matter how much this interfere with your misunderstood freedoms.

Smoking is a separate issue covered by laws. If Shibuya residents want to change the law - then they have to go through the process. They can't suddenly whip up a hysteria and say "No, you can't come here or drink here because we say so". That's not how a democratic country works.

No, the only one thinking this is necessary is you, for rational people it is clear ordinances that forbid things even on public spaces in no way oppose the constitution (much less the imaginary Tokyo's constitution).

I'm saying what our rights and you want to make up rules here and there for separate fiefdoms within a country.

No misunderstanding, Shibuya has now an ordinance that forbids drinking in public, this can be suspended if an official event is held, the city decided not to do this for New Year's Eve, so the ordinance remains in place.

This is not how Shibuya operated pre-2016. We were able to celebrate an occasion by going to Shibuya whenever we wanted and having a can of alcohol on the street if we so chose. You're acting as though this "ordinance" was always in practice but it was not. Again this may be new information to you so i won't hold it against you.

But precisely because it is unconceivable that thousands over thousands of people with deep knowledge of the law and constitution have failed to recognize such an obvious way to refute it (according to you) is why it is so easy to see how invalid your argument is. 

I have no doubt that with time, this will be overturned as a gross infringement on individual rights. However, it is as I have said above a recent implementation.

Therefore the eve becomes like every other night in Shibuya, where it is not allowed to drink on the street.

My argument is that it's not up to them. They can have their police and hecklers enforce this but it is unconstitutional. Precedent from pre-covid years show this also.

It is when your rights infringe on the rights of the locals, which is exactly what you want to do.

The rights of the locals are the same as my rights. No more, no less. They also have the right to movement and the right to drink in public in any other ward. Neither you nor I can stop them - that would infringe on their rights.

For the purpose of drinking and have fun? not at all. Do you think for example that you can bring a few hundred friends and gather blocking a highway? the entrance to the emergency services of a hospital? at the door of a business? anybody with even a tiny amount of common sense would easily understand imposing your "freedoms" over the rights of others is not a protected thing in the constitution, specially not in the Tokyo's constitution.

This is a straw man argument and another flawed analogy and reminiscent of arguments used by actual police states. Blocking emergency services or a highway is a crime. Completely difference to meeting people and making friends in Shibuya.

I don't think your argument is with me, it's with a free and open democracy operating under a constitution of rights. So if you have a problem with that - or if Shibuya-ku residents have a problem with it - they should follow the legal process, act as part of Japan, and pass laws.

Do you have evidence to prove this claim?

A quick google search shows that many people are interested in moving to Shibuya solely due to the nightlife. This is surely obvious.. It is one of the reasons why many young people move to big cities.

Time for other business savvy Wards/cities to step in and organize an official event

The same was said for Halloween, nobody seems interested, apparently street drinking is not such a profitable thing for the locals.

Smoking is a separate issue covered by laws

And ordinances, both are still things that limit the freedoms you seem to think are absolute, thus proving this is not the case.

I'm saying what our rights and you want to make up rules here and there for separate fiefdoms within a country.

And apparently not even one expert in the law thinks the same, which clearly indicate wards are well inside their rights to have ordinances regulating things even on public spaces, no separate fiefdoms necessary.

This is not how Shibuya operated pre-2016

But it is how it operates now, validly according to apparently everybody that has any expertise in the topic. Without a time machine this is the situation people have to deal with.

My argument is that it's not up to them

An argument no legal expert shares, so it has no merit, no value. You can go an tell them they are against the constitution, unless you prove it with actual legal arguments it is not going to amount to anything.

I have no doubt that with time, this will be overturned as a gross infringement on individual rights

What you believe will happen in the future has no relevance on the validity of ordinances right now.

The rights of the locals are the same as my rights. No more, no less.

And you have the right to vote so your representatives put ordinances forbidding street drinking at night the same as the people in Shibuya do. Exactly the same, neither them nor you have the right to impose a personal preference on the other as you claim.

This is a straw man argument and another flawed analogy and reminiscent of arguments used by actual police states. 

This is not a strawman argument, you claim that all and every kind of gathering is protected by law, I offered obvious examples where this is not the case so it becomes obvious how invalid this argument is. This is completely different from modifying your argument to refute it, it is still the same an invalid generalization that is obviously not protected.

You on the other hand uses the fallacy of the slippery slope, where valid, rational arguments are misrepresented as if they inevitably led to exaggerated consequences. "Keep quiet in the hospital!!! this is what lead to absolute censorship" just a step short of Godwin's law.

I don't think your argument is with me, it's with a free and open democracy operating under a constitution of rights.

It is with you, nobody else is making the false equivalence between having local ordinances about things in the public way and contradicting the constitution, that is all you.

A quick google search shows that many people are interested in moving to Shibuya solely due to the nightlife.

A quick google search gave me no such results, does this count then as evidence that the claim is false?

For this argument to hold any weight you would need to prove these theoretical people that move to the place they have fun at night exist in any significant number. Just claiming they "must exist" does nothing to prove it, much less to prove they disagree with the measure or that they represent a significant portion of the locals.

Are you seriously asking for 'proof' that people move to places where they can actually enjoy life? Just look around any city - people flock to vibrant neighborhoods because they want the freedom to live and have fun without Big Brother breathing down their necks.

If you need 'evidence' that people don’t want their lives micromanaged, then a logical person might suggest you might be slightly out of touch with the locals these policies actually impact. Instead of demanding pointless statistics, why not question why the government feels so entitled to restrict personal freedoms in the first place?

Are you seriously asking for 'proof' that people move to places where they can actually enjoy life?

In significative numbers yes, after all this is what would be necessary to support the argument that they are getting ignored, most people move to places where they enjoy life the rest of the day and not only when drinking. Lots of people can enjoy life precisely because they can go back to a peaceful house after going out instead of dealing with the problems of a place like Shibuya.

Now, your argument is not that the ordinances are unjustified because maybe one or two people can be living there and like the official celebration, for your argument to hold any weight you need to prove these people are a majority, do you have this evidence or again you are just assuming something you believe must be true just because you believe it and that the author of the article is lying because you disagree with it?

If you need 'evidence' that people don’t want their lives micromanaged

The locals are not getting micromanaged by their government, the government is simply doing what the locals want, after all there is zero need for the locals to be street drinking if they can just enter any business where they serve alcohol, or buy something from the convini and walk a few steps to their houses to drink, they live there after all.

You're actually saying the government is just 'doing what the locals want'? Where’s your evidence that locals actually asked for more rules telling them how and where they’re allowed to enjoy their own neighborhood? And why assume that everyone just wants to sit at home to have a drink? If anything, it sounds like the government is pushing its own agenda, claiming it's for "the people", and unsurprisingly, you're swallowing it all with that spoonful of Big Pharma sugar.

And ordinances, both are still things that limit the freedoms you seem to think are absolute, thus proving this is not the case.

This "ordinance" was something they came up with out of nowhere and is not in keeping with the Constitution. As I said, it did not exist pre-covid years and your argument that "it is exists now" does not address the point that it is not in keeping with the spirit of a free and open democracy. As for your argument that no legal experts share this opinion, plenty do. Look to the covid years - a state of emergency is required to even begin to start encroaching on individual freedoms.

This is not a strawman argument

With respect, it is. You're making these analogies to obvious criminal actions that cause harm - not lawful gatherings covered by the Constitution. A hospital is also not equivalent to Shibuya ward...

It is with you, nobody else is making the false equivalence between having local ordinances about things in the public way and contradicting the constitution, that is all you.

I have yet to see any points made on how these conjured up ordinances are fully compatible with a constitution that guarantees free movement and assembly. You can't just make up rules that infringe on people's rights.

A quick google search gave me no such results, does this count then as evidence that the claim is false?

I guess people might also move to Shibuya for a bit of peace and quiet - but I can't find anything on google about that for some reason...

You're actually saying the government is just 'doing what the locals want'? Where’s your evidence that locals actually asked for more rules telling them how and where they’re allowed to enjoy their own neighborhood?

As I already clarified this is just your mistaken interpretation, the locals see no problem in banning night street drinking and they (in the form of their representatives) support this measure.

You keep claiming this is not true and that the writer of the article is lying, but you have yet to support this accusation with any evidence. Without this evidence the only logical option is to accept that what is being reported is true even if you personally don't agree with what the locals want in their ward.

And why assume that everyone just wants to sit at home to have a drink?

Nobody assumes that, there are countless bars, restaurants, cafes, where people can celebrate without problem, the one that assumes everybody wants to drink on the street is you, again without proving it.

They should create a big event in Harajuku area, near the big park and make everybody happy. Then you don't have to stop traffic, the park is wide open area, there are plenty of exit routes in case something happens, and they can finally have some Fireworks like in any other city in the world.

Japan is the only country in the world who doesn't offers a good nice entertaining fireworks show for New Year.

This "ordinance" was something they came up with out of nowhere and is not in keeping with the Constitution.

According to whom? obviously you can't expect an appeal to your own authority to be an argument, if this was true there would be countless lawyers, politicians, etc. saying this, yet nobody is doing it. It is not believable that you found out such a blatant transgression of the constitution when the actual experts didn't even notice.

As I said, it did not exist pre-covid years and your argument that "it is exists now" does not address the point that it is not in keeping with the spirit of a free and open democracy

The problem is that you are not supporting the point except on your own personal opinion, that is not an argument if anything this is accepting you don't have basis for this opinion, so you repeat it.

With respect, it is. 

Of course not, your literal argument was that "he has the freedom to gather where ever he wants" the examples provided prove this is not the case. The examples prove the argument is obviously wrong, I never passed those examples as your argument, therefore no strawman. Study better your fallacies using them wrong refutes your own points.

I have yet to see any points made on how these conjured up ordinances are fully compatible with a constitution that guarantees free movement and assembly.

You mean the full acceptance of the legal community of the country? are you still trying to say you are more qualified than everybody in the whole country and you found out that ordinances are anticonstitutional because every professional in Japan is incompetent and could not do this? Obviously this is not even remotely credible.

I guess people might also move to Shibuya for a bit of peace and quiet - but I can't find anything on google about that for some reason...

Good, that means that claims about what google searches give as a results are not proof of things being true. Your claim is therefore still baseless.

They should create a big event in Harajuku area, near the big park and make everybody happy. Then you don't have to stop traffic, the park is wide open area, there are plenty of exit routes in case something happens, and they can finally have some Fireworks like in any other city in the world.

But that is the whole point, people don't want to go to a big park or open area, they want the crowded streets, brilliant illumination, etc. etc.

According to whom? 

I've cited Article 21 of the Constitution time and time again. How is what Shibuya-ku is doing compatible with a stated right to movement and assembly? It isn't. And you have so far provided no evidence that both are compatible.

Of course not, your literal argument was that "he has the freedom to gather where ever he wants" the examples provided prove this is not the case. The examples prove the argument is obviously wrong, I never passed those examples as your argument, therefore no strawman. Study better your fallacies using them wrong refutes your own points.

You are not debating in good faith. You're taking a valid point about real social freedoms and extrapolating them onto criminal acts. Nobody is making an argument for the freedom to stop ambulances... That would not be in the spirit of a free and open democracy. The fallacy here is not in my argument..

Good, that means that claims about what google searches give as a results are not proof of things being true. Your claim is therefore still baseless.

This is not one of your better arguments.

You keep claiming this is not true and that the writer of the article is lying, but you have yet to support this accusation with any evidence. Without this evidence the only logical option is to accept that what is being reported is true even if you personally don't agree with what the locals want in their ward.

If you’re going to accuse me of saying the writer is lying, you’d better back it up with some solid evidence that I actually wrote that.

Back on topic: unfortunately, your logic is flawed - simply not like the idea of questioning the narrative doesn’t actually account for anything.

And where’s your evidence that the locals actually want this? If you don't have any, it might be time to reconsider who’s just blindly accepting information without looking deeper.

Make sense. Better be safe than sorry.

Not even close, since the article clearly mentions how representatives of the shopping districts are on board with the decision. This is a case where the locals found out the celebration involved too many expenses, risks and troubles and that they can survive without it anyway, so they are no longer interested in holding it.

Yes the article mentions the first thing. The rest is just your interpretation, where once again you try to impose your opinion on the people of Shibuya. This is what the article says:

While there was talk of restarting the celebration this year, an executive committee made up of Shibuya Ward legislators and representatives of the shopping districts near the Shibuya Scramble have now said that the resumption has been postponed to 2025, meaning that there will be no official New Year’s Eve countdown party in Shibuya this year.

The part about being on board can be read in many different ways. All 100% agreement. But it could also mean that the representatives of the shopping districts would like it to resume. Since there is without a doubt a lot of many to be made by nearby shops and restaurants. It could also mean that the legislators would like to have it, but not the representatives. All it says is that all of them are ok with no official event for 2024. But resumption has been postponed to 25. So the "no longer interested in holding it" is actually simply wrong. Not interested in holding it in 2024, but interested in 25 it says. (Of coures nobody will be surprised if in 25 it's postponed again. Or cancelled. But that's not what this article says, despite your unfounded and wrong claims.

Nowhere does it say it's because "locals have found out the celebration involved to many expenses....". either. That's you attributing things to the people of Shibuya. What is said is that with the drinking ban in place, having an official street party with drinking would kind of be... counter-productive? weird?

What's happening here is pretty clear to everybody, except you it seems. Hasebe wants Shibuya to move away from it's youth center image, from its party vibe, let those go to Shinjuku or Ikebukuro, try to be the new Ginza, high class, brand shops, restaurant with Michelin stars. That's ok if he wants, but let's not pretend it's all driven by hordes of "locals" demanding no Halloween, no street drinking at night, no official New year party. All points towards this being driven by the mayor. Now if that's the right way to go or not, is just opinion.

JayToday  03:15 pm JST

*'While there was talk of restarting the celebration this year, an executive committee made up of Shibuya Ward legislators and representatives of the shopping districts near the Shibuya Scramble have now said that the resumption has been postponed to 2025, meaning that there will be no official New Year’s Eve countdown party in Shibuya this year.'*

Cool, so a handful of legislators and a few business reps have made a “decision” for an entire community, and we’re supposed to believe this represents the will of all taxpaying residents, were that point even a relevant one.

*Well, thank you Miles for pointing out that this wasn’t even a community-wide choice, just the usual suspects in government and their handpicked insiders calling the shots. Isn’t it convenient how “the people” are always represented by a tiny group with their own agendas? Real democracy would mean asking the residents of Shibuya and the people who stimulate its economy what they want instead of letting a small committee of pen-pushers speak for everyone.*

But sure, keep believing that a handful of officials and business interests somehow represent the spirit of the entire community.

The mayor and his administration were reelected. The businesses and residents support their decision. If they didn't and if there was such an uproar, they wouldn't have been. Show me a group of residents and businesses who have publicly opposed the decision to stop the Halloween fiasco.