120,000 protest against security bills outside Diet

Awake !

Japan NO Longer has full USA protection... not under this or any other future administration. The "die" was cast when the USA in effect stated all Asian nations as with Europe must defend their own territories and hence their nation.

That is REALITY check no. 1.

Rhetoric and Action does NOT match. BUT interestingly... what was not or is NOT said and what action was not or is NOT taken makes much more "sense" and reveals the actual scenario and the reality.

That applies to ALL nations.

In that light, the Japanese Constitution as well as the military stance must not only be reviewed but also changed with times. The USA Constitution had its share of changes within the last 200 years. It is 70 years since Japan had this current Constitution. (Sadly most Japanese as well as foreigners have not read and understand the contents of the Japanese Constitution as many have read and seem to understand the US Constitution.)

This is the TIME to really read and make sense of the Japanese Constitution in TODAY's REALITY. (That is why these demonstrations are often needed in an idealistic society like Japan.)

And today's reality is what Mr. Abe has to deal with, not idealism or past history.

What say you after reading the Japanese Constitution.

As these comments are essentially a type of drive-by discourse I don't expect a serious answer to my question (that's if the editors here allow it be posted) but if Japan has to rely on someone else to provide the bulk of its real defense, i.e. the USA, then shouldn't those who are protesting the Japanese Governments ability to be more proactive in providing its OWN defense be in favor of US bases in Japan? It seems that the left in Japan wants it both way, which is not surprising when we talk about the modern leftist. They want the US out of Japan and the Japanese Government to still be hamstrung by the pacifist constitutions...which was written by US military officers. Sort of like asking someone to put their heads on the chopping block and trust that no one will drop the axe. It's either the US stays or Japan starts to act like a modern state and provide its own defense.

YuriOtani China and Russia would with justification begin to worry about a Japanese attack. Then add in if America would be part of the attack. No Japan needs to keep article #9 and keep the Self Defense Force. Japan needs to keep the peace.

You are so off base with your nationalistic and biased ideas about the U.S. Think about it America can and will always be able to defend herself against aggression twith or without allies the question is can Japan defend themselves alone? No!! America doesn't need Japan to fight its wars but more so needs Japan as a staging ground to deploy and protect its interest sooner or later the need for bases will be obsolete. Lastly China military is growing strong and if the U.S. Bases were not in Japan today Okinawa would be claimed by the Chinese just like other islands that the Chinese and Russians have take from Japan without firing a single shot. So quit your propaganda ideologies about the U.S. Wanting Japan to fight its wars we can fight our own battles and have the means to end the game! Many here can post and say they don't want their children fighting US Beatles but if Japan was attacked these same people would want American spilled blood to protect their souls. Americans we fight if we need to protect our country we don't switch its either you are in or out we can go alone!

@nigelboy

Sigh. More ridiculous 'conspiracy' garbage

There's a good truism to the effect that, "we usually accuse others of what we are guilty of ourselves".

In in the Establishment's interest to downplay the numbers, it's in the protestors interest to exaggerate them.

The police serve the establish. It's one of the first principles of policing, "all back the established character".

No, that's not "conspiracy theory", dearie.

Anyways, as I said. LIkely more than 30,000. Likely less than 120,000.

Good analysis. It's like a weather reporter stating it could drizzle or be prepared of flooding.

Have a cookie. LOL.

Good. I've stated my case on why I disagree with your "claim".

Good for you. Have a cookie.

Anyways, as I said. LIkely more than 30,000. Likely less than 120,000.

I only claimed a likelihood, not proof.

Good. I've stated my case on why I disagree with your "claim".

No, the real paymasters are much higher up the Establishment's food chain than that.

Sigh. More ridiculous 'conspiracy' garbage from the alleged 'very top' to the 機動隊 (bottom of the barrel) police officers. With so many people involved in this 'conspiracy', I'm quite sure it would be revealed soon.

No, the real paymasters are much higher up the Establishment's food chain than that.

But I suspect you know this and were just being facetious.

Can't disprove something when you haven't proved anything.

I only claimed a likelihood, not proof.

Police the world over have a habit of manipulating protest numbers according to however it might benefit them, or their paymasters.

Then you need to explain how this 'under reporting' or 'over reporting' or any number manipulation benefits MPD and their paymasters which is Tokyo Metropolitan Government.

@nigelboy

Police the world over have a habit of manipulating protest numbers according to however it might benefit them, or their paymasters.

Do you want a good example? Try some the union organized protests in NYC a few years ago. They too were massive but not even reported in the press.

It's politics as normal.

I've simply provided a likelihood. Face it, you've done nothing to disprove it.

Can't disprove something when you haven't proved anything. Sorry. Your 'likelihood' theory is simply shows your bias.

Face it. You've provided absolutely nothing to prove your conspiracy theory between the METROPOLITAN Police Department and the current Abe Cabinet.

I've simply provided a likelihood. Face it, you've done nothing to disprove it.

See it cuts both ways.

Sorry to offend your bias.

You said it - they get a budget. And for the year they have that budget they have to live within it.

Nope. That's not the performance I'm talking about.

Face it. You've provided absolutely nothing to prove your conspiracy theory between the METROPOLITAN Police Department and the current Abe Cabinet.

And to add, it's not only the NHK that's reporting the number by METROPOLITAN Police so let's dispense the BS there shall we?

Not the police department. Not the Fire department, either. These divisions get their allocated budget based on performance.

You said it - they get a budget. And for the year they have that budget they have to live within it.

No need to underestimate. You've provided nothing I want to agree with as it goes ageing my bias

^fixed that for you.

Not likely. They have to live within the budget they have for a given year.

Not the police department. Not the Fire department, either. These divisions get their allocated budget based on performance.

My two points still stand. The police most likely underestimated. The organizers most likely overestimated.

No need to underestimate. You've provided nothing.

Based on the budget proposals requested by each divisions of both central and Municipal governments, they want every excuse in the book to INCREASE it, PERIOD!!

Not likely. They have to live within the budget they have for a given year.

By the way, adding "period" just looks stupid when you're wrong.

First and foremost, I remember I capitalized "MUNICIPAL" which apparently flew right past you

I saw you capitalized. It doesn't change what I said whatsoever though, so I ignored it.

My two points still stand. The police most likely underestimated. The organizers most likely overestimated.

Ideally it would be that way. But Japan is all about letting things slide if it means saving money.

???

Based on the budget proposals requested by each divisions of both central and Municipal governments, they want every excuse in the book to INCREASE it, PERIOD!!

And? And theoretically there is no vested interest in NHK pushing the party line, yet it's an open 'secret' that they do.

????

First and foremost, I remember I capitalized "MUNICIPAL" which apparently flew right past you. In addition, in regards to NHK, do you recall them broadcasting the "Comfort Women" mock trial in which the panel judges found them guilty??

The police, first and foremost, don't want to be criticized for being understaffed when $hit hits the fan.

Ideally it would be that way. But Japan is all about letting things slide if it means saving money.

Again, no vested interest by the METROPOLITAN Police Department to underestimate nor overestimate.

And? And theoretically there is no vested interest in NHK pushing the party line, yet it's an open 'secret' that they do.

The police are going to push whatever the government tells them to.

already gave two reasons. You just don't like them because it goes against your bias.

Let's review.

The police want to under-exaggerate so they don't have to provide as much resources, costing more money

The police, first and foremost, don't want to be criticized for being understaffed when $hit hits the fan.

There is likely pressure from the government on the police as well to estimate the numbers as low as possible.

Again, no vested interest by the METROPOLITAN Police Department to underestimate nor overestimate.

I already gave two reasons. You just don't like them because it goes against your bias.

The police want to under-exaggerate so they don't have to provide as much resources, costing more money. There is likely pressure from the government on the police as well to estimate the numbers as low as possible.

Again, no vested interest by the METROPOLITAN Police Department to underestimate nor overestimate.

Except that it was only 30K

Well, it was likely somewhere in between 30k and 120k. The organizers want to over-exaggerate so it looks like there were more people. The police want to under-exaggerate so they don't have to provide as much resources, costing more money. There is likely pressure from the government on the police as well to estimate the numbers as low as possible.

Keep up the pressure guys

Except that it was only 30K and nowhere to be seen on weekdays. Remind these folks to show up when the lawmakers are there. Better yet, show up in the polls.

120,000 protest against security bills outside Diet

Keep up the pressure guys

Basically they are saying that the communist party and the union is bloating the numbers by announcing the full amount in number that they have listed and not the number that actually showed up.

Desparate time calls for desparate measures.

http://blog-imgs-81.fc2.com/f/x/y/fxya/20150830225853d37.jpg

Ah Kazuaki Shimazaki, Kensuke Ueda invokes a political soap opera by any other nam, Kensuke Ueda poses a constitutional halfway house to ultimately provoke debate.

So can they interpret or can they not?

Well that is a question tsubject to Supreme Court ruling....

However, there is a possibility that the Supreme Court will step into this issue if an appropriate case arose following the forthcoming national security statutes

120,000 is a falsely reported number by Asahi, Tokyo, Mainichi and other media as propaganda. The Dept of Police has reported the number is ca. 30,000.

@itsonlyrocknrollAUG. 31, 2015 - 11:56PM JST

Kensuke Ueda outlines the context for the recent reinterpretation of Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, which until now outlawed war as a means of settling disputes. He suggests the manner in which the changes were pushed through is worrying for Japanese constitutionalism.

http://constitution-unit.com/2014/08/28/reinterpreting-article-9-of-the-constitution-of-japan/

Good catch - it's interesting. But the guy seems to be talking out both sides of his mouth. He doesn't claim that Abe's interpretation is outside the text (I agree). He also concedes that "the executive can interpret texts of the Constitution, and interpretation is subject to change over time" but then reverses himself to say "if the government wants to change long established interpretations such as that of Article 9, shouldn’t this trigger a formal procedure for constitutional revision?"

So can they interpret or can they not?

Here is an article reporting the probable cause of difference in participants.

http://www.excite.co.jp/News/economy_clm/20150901/Itmedia_business_20150901016.html

Basically they are saying that the communist party and the union is bloating the numbers by announcing the full amount in number that they have listed and not the number that actually showed up.

Prime minister Abe has betrayed the trust of the Japanese voters and has tried to pass laws which violate the Constitution, the supreme laws of Japan. He behaves no different from a dictator like Kim Jong Un of N. Korea, Bashar al-Assad of Syria, Joseph Stalin of Soviet Union.

He should resign. If not, Japanese voters should vote most of his party, LDP members out of office in the next elections so that the opposition members have enough votes to repeal the security laws.

If Abe can turn the Japanese Self Defense Force into the Japanese Imperial Military capable of attacking then other countries would have legitimate concerns. We have the third largest Navy and the Harpoons can be replaced by Tomahawks a first strike weapon. So what would happen is China and Russia would with justification begin to worry about a Japanese attack. Then add in if America would be part of the attack. No Japan needs to keep article #9 and keep the Self Defense Force. Japan needs to keep the peace. America needs to fight its own wars.

I've read that certain right-wing elements in Japan are saying that these protest are orchestrated by Chinese spies.... Hmm, more security bills coming soon?

Best be seated whilst reading this .....Also on the 20th of August the US department of defense outlined it's Asia-Pacific Maritime Security Strategy......But first....

Japan plans largest ever defense budget to counter China's reach......Defense ministry requests £27bn amid concern over Beijing’s construction of artificial bases in the South China Sea and claims to Senkaku islands......

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/aug/31/japan-plans-largest-ever-defence-budget-to-counter-chinas-reach

@nigelboy I think nobody is objecting to what the capabilities of the police are (reg this event). I heard modern computer programs are even able now to do the counting. I'm sure they did some good estimates. But I do not believe a single second, that they gave those figures to the news. Rather they will phone upwards and than receive order what figure they should give to the news. I read that they even closed all the exits except one of the nearest subway station, which is a way of crowd control yes, to keep the numbers down. Plus parking their big buses and erecting barriers in such a way that the protesters have less space and thus the crowd looks smaller.

More conspiracy garbage. Metropolitan Police Agency has no vested interested in over reporting or under reporting any numbers. If police were able to block off exit/entrance and erect barriers, it's a clear sign that the numbers were manageable and hence, they were able to limit the space.

Please take time and read - Reinterpreting Article 9 of the Constitution of Japan - Kensuke Ueda defines the complexities to the issues and why the element of confusion can lead to decisions that are unconstitutional. The process is just the beginning, we are not even tickling the legal definition yet .

Kensuke Ueda outlines the context for the recent reinterpretation of Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, which until now outlawed war as a means of settling disputes. He suggests the manner in which the changes were pushed through is worrying for Japanese constitutionalism.

http://constitution-unit.com/2014/08/28/reinterpreting-article-9-of-the-constitution-of-japan/

Do folks understand that Article 9 was intended to protect the rest of the world from Japan, not protect Japanese citizens - why would you want to keep such a law is beyond me.

Let's just remember, the Article 9 changes were agreed in Washington ahead of being passed through the Diet.

Japan's constitution is subordinate to the security treaty with the USA, inc and the USA, inc wants Japanese's military to go fight and die for it in USA, inc lead wars.

Can someone calculate the %of the protesters according to the total population (126 million) of Japan. To compare with % of people do not show up..!??? Waste of time turning up to protest.!

Yet another very heated discussion. It is good that there are so many.

The article is as usual, by Associated Press, and they have their slant. However, the event needs to be put into perspective.

The demonstration was a much needed one for Japan. It awakened at least those that do pay attention to the news of the value if not the need for everyone in Japan to become aware of the true nature of the constitution and the reality of having to survive, to live through the changing times.

This confrontation of idealism and reality was needed not only for Japan, but the whole world to see. Even one of the most advanced and respected nation as Japan has become, does have need to reflect on what it is to live in reality.

It appears that most of the participants desire and dream of peace and non-violence and of not participating in any wars. They do not realize that wars do not necessarily start because by changing the interpretation of the constitution, that Japan will "initiate" war. Wars can be brought on by others upon Japan.

In the current environment and world scenario, with the level weapons available, self-defense AFTER being attacked no longer makes sense. The devastation when attacked in such a small territory that Japan is, there will be little left to resist, regardless of technology and armament superiority.

In fact, because of the lack of the ability for the military to take action, the northern islands are occupied by Russia and the southern islands are occupied and threatened by Chin and S. Korea. And S. Korea was "supposedly" Japan's ally along with the USA. In the past when international relationship was NOT politically correct, any occupation was a cause for war. That is exactly what is happening with the Middle East and in Ukraine.

Japan as it stands, by law, is incapable of responding. People forget that the constitution as with laws were and are made by people. No matter how idealistic it may be or how honorable and respectful it may be to keep to the letter of each word in the laws and constitution, if it is not realistic and practical, it may not be worth dying for. (One must remember that Japanese constitution is nothing like the Constitution of the USA. Japanese Constitution is more "legalistic" when compared to that of the USA.)

Japan has a long a tradition of dying for a cause or for an ideal (as with the 47 Samurais and others that commit seppuku) and it may be honorable and respectful, but they all just died. On the contrary the Kamikaze pilots died fighting.for their country and their loved ones.

The key is that one has the opportunity to defend and fight for survival. Just crying out for NO wars or for Peace does not assure survival.

This confrontation if reasonably and rationally considered and evaluated realistically was a very good happening for Japan.

In Japan, where people generally don’t express political views in public, such rallies have largely diminished since the often violent university student protests in the early 1960s. Anti-nuclear protests after the 2011 Fukushima disaster also petered out.

===================================================================

But this time. females could join demonstration, Not like snobbish ZenGakuRen of AntiAnpo Demo.

I'm just glad to see people getting involved in the democratic process.

cleo

We been through this at the start of August, you need to re-read history since Kishi had never been indicted. Abe knows he will not get passed the house of representatives meaning it will get shot down before it ever starts so he is going for second best he would be more than happy if it passes to see what the citizens wants, not the house of representatives does not want. When the US shoved the present constitution into Japan's face they made sure it will not get revised placing the 2/3 clause when thing are always decided through majority. This exactly what POTUS Wilson proclaimed at the Paris Peace conference when Japan forwarded the Racial Equality Proposal which gained a majority vote which basically pushed back freedom of various colonies at least 50 years.

Tell me do you want to see another 9/11 where citizen goes into panic mode and gives an unanimous carte blanche for a fictious hunt for WMD?

That is exactly what is going to happen if Japan doesn't prepare itself and false flag operations had been carried out throughout history.

The citizenry are not unhappy with Article 9 and any flexibility it may contain, they are unhappy with the way Abe is twisting it to try and make it mean something it was obviously never meant to mean. And tearing holes in the constitutional process as he does so.

"Intent" is what you want it to mean. Especially with Article 9, where you can read a pacifist spirit, or an attempt to sneak in as big a hole for future use as possible through such things as the Ashida Amendment.

There's also the question of how relevant 70 year old, made in a completely different environment intent is.

In such cases, the actual verbiage should be dominant and quite frankly crying about holes in the process is just people hoping Article 9 was more restrictive than it is.

since the citizenry is so unhappy with this flexibility, it is their right to amend it to something else ... through procedures of course

The citizenry are not unhappy with Article 9 and any flexibility it may contain, they are unhappy with the way Abe is twisting it to try and make it mean something it was obviously never meant to mean. And tearing holes in the constitutional process as he does so.

The only reason Abe has not called for a referendum is not because he believes he will fail but he knows he will not gain the 2/3 vote within the house of representatives

In other words, because he knows he will fail. That's the whole point of the need for a ⅔ vote, to prevent some dumb botchan offspring of a war criminal from riding roughshod over the Constitution.

If Abe thinks the only reason the majority of the population are against his policy is that it hasn't been 'explained' to them properly, then he is demonstrably failing in his job to do the necessary explaining. If it's so important, then he needs to go the extra mile to make sure people do understand and agree. My impression is that people object precisely because they have listened to the 'explanation' and they don't like it one bit.

cleoAUG. 31, 2015 - 05:29PM JST

Trample on the constitution? Really?

Read what I wrote. He did not. The new interpretation is well within the Allowable region. If you need an explanation why, check my many other posts in related articles, and if you wish to object, please use the actual text of Article 9 to demonstrate why it is permissible to conduct individual but not collective self defense.

There's nowt wrong with the present Article 9.

I agree. It is very flexible :-)

However, since the citizenry is so unhappy with this flexibility, it is their right to amend it to something else ... through procedures of course.

What I want to know is how these people will react when war or even a minor conflict comes banging on their door steps?

Will they say everything should be sorted out through diplomatic channels while seeing SDF personnel get slaughtered saying we are lucky it not OUR Children that are getting killed?

Or will they start a hysteric stampede stating it is the government's fault and the government needs to do something giving the cabinet a carte blanche?

I really do not want it to go either way and ask for a referendum to revise article 9 after a grace period in which both side can provide information on the pros and cons so the populous can make an informed decision on this matter. The only reason Abe has not called for a referendum is not because he believes he will fail but he knows he will not gain the 2/3 vote within the house of representatives so to get the show on the go in the first place.

If both sides are actually believing that they will win in the referendum then they should be an all partisan call for one because the present constitution is completely out of sync with the real world.

@nigelboy I think nobody is objecting to what the capabilities of the police are (reg this event). I heard modern computer programs are even able now to do the counting. I'm sure they did some good estimates. But I do not believe a single second, that they gave those figures to the news. Rather they will phone upwards and than receive order what figure they should give to the news. I read that they even closed all the exits except one of the nearest subway station, which is a way of crowd control yes, to keep the numbers down. Plus parking their big buses and erecting barriers in such a way that the protesters have less space and thus the crowd looks smaller.

Abe is doing what an elected representative has to do at times

Trample on the constitution? Really?

Prepare a new Article 9 that's more restrictive than the current one. When the next election comes, vote out the present representatives and vote in new ones that would air this new constitution and then go through the amendment process and perhaps understand why Abe chose to just find another reading of the existing text.

There's nowt wrong with the present Article 9. We all know why Abe chose to 'reinterpret' the constitution. There's a reason the constitution is made difficult to change.

@rainyday AUG. 31, 2015 - 04:17PM JST

I was referring to the Japanese situation and not the hypothetical US one.

Well, you started analogizing, but all right, back to Japan.

This exists because the constitution is the highest law of the land and administrations shouldn't be able to change it on a whim without some sort of democratic mandate to do so.

That's nice theory, but as you seem to agree, given Japan's sensibilities, this is not a practical option. Thus, the practical options are really down to 1) This, 2) Doing Nothing or 3) Other options which may preserve the interpretation of Art 9, but at a very high price such as increasing the SDF's capability at significant expense until it can go it alone, or volunteering to become a Chinese protectorate instead of a US one.

Let's not keep writing about options, which by your concession, don't really exist. Face the unpleasant options that do exist, head on.

The argument you seem to be pursuing is that we should just ignore that and allow Abe to unilaterally announce that the constitution means whatever he dictates it to mean because.....China.

First, I did not quite allow Abe to announce it is "whatever he dictates it to mean". Rather, I argue that the Constitution verbiage does permit his interpretation, and really no less than it did the old interpretation (the old interpretation is in fact IMO particulary indefensible). In this case, as the elected representative of the people, it is his duty to take advantage of the interpretation if that's what's best for the international environment facing Japan (as you tacitly agree may be the case).

You can support democracy or you can support what Abe is doing, but you cannot support both.

I don't agree with the dichotomy. Abe is doing what an elected representative has to do at times - burn some of his votes and political capital to push those things that are unpopular but need doing. That's one whole reason why we don't handle everything by direct democracy.

Further, the population does have options if they are really determined. Prepare a new Article 9 that's more restrictive than the current one. When the next election comes, vote out the present representatives and vote in new ones that would air this new constitution and then go through the amendment process and perhaps understand why Abe chose to just find another reading of the existing text. And if you can't assemble sufficient popularity for this, perhaps it isn't such a bad idea after all.

If I had my way I would cancel 安保 move all US troops out of the far east ( save US tax payers money) and let the Japanese defend themselves or if they choose not defend. It's time for Japan to stand on it's own two feet. Going to happen someday anyway.

At least you should be intellectually honest and admit this rather than slide sideways into bureaucratic talk of "resolved according to the constitution's own mechanism for amending itself".

I was referring to the Japanese situation and not the hypothetical US one.

This isn't bureacratic sideways talk, the Japanese constitution has a mechanism for amending itself - you need any amendment to be passed by 2/3 majorities in both houses of the Diet (if I recall correctly) and approval in a referendum. This exists because the constitution is the highest law of the land and administrations shouldn't be able to change it on a whim without some sort of democratic mandate to do so.

The argument you seem to be pursuing is that we should just ignore that and allow Abe to unilaterally announce that the constitution means whatever he dictates it to mean because.....China. I recognize that Japan exists in a world with bad neighbors and that popular opinion isn't always aligned with what policy makers might reasonably want (as I said earlier, I have nothing against the concept of collective self defence per se) but I do not see how this situation, which has existed for 70 years, suddenly warrants Japan abandoning its democratic institutions and turning its form of governance into one that more closely resembles a form of benign dictatorship. You can support democracy or you can support what Abe is doing, but you cannot support both.

@beams

@ warispeace

Such a simplistic and quite arrogant point of view. How about the law allowing Japanese SDF members being able to assist soldiers of other countries when they are in combat i.e. protecting and saving lives.

It simplistic and arrogant to think that those with wealth and power will put others in harms way to protect what they have and say it is for the greater good? Were you raised in disneyland?

Why don't you take a look at this video of Abe using childish props to try and confuse the public and then try to make an informed comment. Or maybe this and a bedtime fantasy story is all it takes to make you a believer.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4UxxpOz07E

Better have a talk with voiceofokinawa, he's hell-bent on severing the relationship.

@turbotsat AUG. 31, 2015 - 02:53PM JST

If "Its this or 200 ICBMs", then you're toast. What return capability has Japan got vs. owners of ICBMs?

None, it depends on the US' "extended deterrence." What overchan is saying is either Japan does whatever it takes to keep the US as an ally or she'll have to go it alone, which will not just mean 200 ICBMs, but also a much more robust "self-defence force" as a whole.

overchan: We need to defend ourselves. Its this or 200 ICBMs

If "Its this or 200 ICBMs", then you're toast. What return capability has Japan got vs. owners of ICBMs?

Now the government says they are sorry for people's misunderstanding over the bills. The fact that the government has to say something about the protests by itself is quite an achievement for the protesters. I have to hand it to them. Now ruling party politicians will really be spooked if their approval ratings start sagging big time after recent uptick.

We need to defend ourselves. Its this or 200 ICBMs

Is the AP inflating attendance numbers again?

@rainydayAUG. 31, 2015 - 12:21PM JST

I see you are not denying this is probably how the mother got her kid to the protest area at all.

So, when a mother passes on her beliefs and opinions to her children

In fact, at this point, it is already brainwashing. Even potty training is a form of brainwashing.

menace to balanced development, possibly bordering on child abuse?

OK, which proposition sounds more likely to you: 1) As a result of being persuaded to join this protest at a young age, the kid is more interested in comprehensively studying all sides of this issue.

2) The kid is less interested in comprehensively studying all sides of this issue.

If history is any indication, 2 is much more likely to be correct. Education of issues at an age where comprehensive understanding and critical thinking is possible can be potentially interesting and will lead them to explore the issue further. Education of issues before then is brainwashing and lessens interest.

Thus, education of young children should be limited as far as possible to objective knowledge, abilities and techniques, thus expanding his possibilities rather than narrowing them. Moral education should be limited as far as possible to stuff they need to get right now (such as not stealing and peeing in the toilet rather than the floor), or at the very least where there is only one real significant "right" (and you have to be careful because sometimes "right" isn't as absolute people think it is).

At the very least, it doesn't cover this issue, on either side. I'll be almost as annoyed if a mother on the other side took her kid to their protest. I'm too intellectually dishonest to say I did not say "almost" because they are kind of on my side, however, it is also "almost" because if we must brainwash, let it be in the direction of "Even if you can't do very much, you should help your friends in a jam however you can" (which is probably how collective self defence will be simplified to kid level) rather than "Don't help them", which is an undeniable consequence of denying collective self-defence.

But really, it is too early either way and both are gross simplifications. I object to both.

@rainyday AUG. 31, 2015 - 12:49PM JST

I propose that it be resolved according to the constitution's own mechanism for amending itself. If the executive branch of government can unilaterally change the substance of the constitution merely through a resolution of the cabinet with no hope of judicial oversight then you have an executive which is completely free of constitutional constraints. This is exactly how dictatorships operate. Even if you support collective self defence this should be deeply concerning.

According to your scenario (which I accept b/c it corresponds with reality), it is impossible to amend the constitution. If we accept this, then you are de facto saying the Executive is to do nothing and let people get murdered or take alternative harsh measures which may preserve the present interpretation of the 2nd Amendment but likely at a cost to the other rights and freedoms US citizens enjoy.

At least you should be intellectually honest and admit this rather than slide sideways into bureaucratic talk of "resolved according to the constitution's own mechanism for amending itself".

Further, I did not say "without judidicial oversight". They still have to stay within the interpretable zone, for one thing (which is why they will probably not do it your way of "No guns", but more like my way - using the text). For another thing, it is not like the citizenry has no options on this score. They still have the Legislature, and all they need to do, if the reinterpretation is really that unpopular, is to band together and push a Constitutional amendment of their own through which seals off the reinterpretation. Suggesting Constitutional amendments aren't only the prerogative of the executive.

@StrangerlandAUG. 31, 2015 - 12:43PM JST

Your entire argument is based on assumptions. You need to back these up with proof, as I don't take any of your assumptions as a given, or as any kind of evidence whatsoever.

Since I'm not even in Japan, it'll be hard to prepare and deliver tests to confirm that our 30,000 or whatever protesters are as ignorant as I suspect they are. On the other hand, the antithesis of my argument is that they do have a high level of understanding in these affairs, and I see no evidence on your part for it. In fact, what evidence there is is on my side, starting with those ridiculously simple protest boards, plain common experience (or do you wish to tell me the average woman around you just spouts off about my 4 topics like pros?), and the level of drivel that comes out even from the "pros" in Japan (see my posts in other threads).

Teaching children to protest that which is wrong is entirely good parenting.

That may not be the worst education in the world. However, you seem to be tacitly conceding by omission that a parent should let a child develop his own views rather than just pushing one onto him.

Unfortunately, in a protest, the two are integral. Protests have a purpose, and you can't take your kid to a protest without him getting some idea of what it is about. Even if his mother doesn't tell him a thing, he will still hear the chants and read the very simplistic slogan boards. Since his mother is there ... he'll automatically indoctrinate himself that whatever his mother is protesting against is bad, without ever having the chance to understand all the pros and cons and reach his own decision. That's the menace.

Learning to protest what's wrong is good but it is not more important than being given the opportunity to determine objectively right and wrong or learning to see all sides of an issue. A parent presenting his view too early hinders (or destroys) that.

Quite a Utopian view, Nigel. No political pressure whatsoever (that we'll ever discover).

Nope. It's using common sense which is lacking in this thread. Why on earth does the Metropolitan Police Agency need to under report?

SenseNotSoCommon: "Abe seeks to censor the rest of the media, too. Welcome to China."

Exactly! Good to see these people out there, but you notice that in the article it says Japan has not seen such a large protest since people went out to protest nuclear power after Fukushima? How'd that turn out? It'll be the same here -- turn a blind eye and keep doing what you want Abe will just not listen, and in this case won't even admit there is opposition.

How do you propose this problem be resolved?

I propose that it be resolved according to the constitution's own mechanism for amending itself. If the executive branch of government can unilaterally change the substance of the constitution merely through a resolution of the cabinet with no hope of judicial oversight then you have an executive which is completely free of constitutional constraints. This is exactly how dictatorships operate. Even if you support collective self defence this should be deeply concerning.

How many housewives do you honestly see have at least a passing, amateur interest in 1) foreign militaries, 2) the SDF, 3) national security policy and 4) law at the same time? Or even one of these? Without a routine interest in these matters, how likely do you think it is anyone can come up with an intelligent and comprehensive view on this issue?

Your entire argument is based on assumptions. You need to back these up with proof, as I don't take any of your assumptions as a given, or as any kind of evidence whatsoever.

Further, the very act of bringing their children is incorrect. If the kid is so small he can't be left alone, he is way too young to understand the issues involved. Since he has no idea what is involved, he has his default feelings, and very few kids really like being in as crowded a place as a protest.

Teaching children to protest that which is wrong is entirely good parenting. It's teaching them to stand up for what they believe in, to not be brainwashed, to not just accept authority as being factual. The children will not understand the message, but they don't need to, they can come up with their own messages as they get older. What's important is teaching them not to be complacent.

120,000 hardcore members. Can you dig it?

120,000 protesters out of 24 million in Tokyo, that's like a dust spec on Abe's shoulder, just swoosh and its gone.

@rainydayAUG. 31, 2015 - 11:12AM JST

If this were the US, Abes actions would be the equivalent of Obama deciding he wanted to take away everybodys guns but having the problem of the 2nd amendment to deal with. Instead of amending the constitution (which for political reasons he couldnt do) if he followed the Abe script he would simply have his cabinet pass a decree declaring that the 2nd amendment, despite its plain wording, actually allows the government to confiscate everybodys guns (in the US the Supreme Court would intervene to prevent this in real life, but in Japan the judiciary has refused to perform its proper function in relation to constitutional guarantees for a very long time which is why Abe has been able to get away with it).

Let's reverse this thought. Suppose that crime in the US gets a lot worse than it is now, and murders due to guns held by civilians (by which not meaning criminal gangs) shoots up by an order of magnitude. Despite this, the opposition to amending the 2nd amendment is still so strong it is not a practical choice - as in your scenario.

After a lot of thought, Obama's staff analyzes the wording of the 2nd Amendment:

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

And decides that by emphasizing the well-regulated militia part, it is possible to read the article in such a way that people can't keep arms in their home, but in a central location, to be taken out by community organized militiamen on patrols of at least 2-4 to supplement the police. Managed by the people, but collectively rather than individually. Further, pistols and other concealable weapons are not very useful in such a militia, so now it is shotguns,rifles and PDWs altered to semiauto.

This is of course a different interpretation from any that went before, but the verbiage does allow for it. This did not prevent the US citizenry from screaming about the infringements to their rights...

So, should the Supreme Court strike down this decision. The verbiage does allow for it but it has never been done before, so there is some legal basis to shoot it down. On the other hand, since amending the Constitution is de facto not a choice, to strike it down is equivalent to accepting the present state.

How do you propose this problem be resolved?

I wonder how many of those protesters have read the controversial defense bill and understood what is written in there? For my part, I haven't.

Further, the very act of bringing their children is incorrect. If the kid is so small he can't be left alone, he is way too young to understand the issues involved. Since he has no idea what is involved, he has his default feelings, and very few kids really like being in as crowded a place as a protest. To get him to go, his mother presumably gave him a ridiculously simplified brainwashing, "If we don't do this, you'll have to go to war. War is horrible. You don't want that, don't you?"

In such a fashion, the kid is blocked from developing his own opinion independently. That's why I consider those mother both ignorant and frankly, a menace to the balanced development of their children.

So, when a mother passes on her beliefs and opinions to her children, and the content of such views is different from yours, it constitutes brainwashing and a menace to balanced development, possibly bordering on child abuse? I guess all parents (or only mothers?) should clear their opinions with you first before talking to their children about anything?

@ warispeace

Rather we should focus on Abe's cynical use of rhetoric about national security or protecting America to justify changing the law so that mostly young people from the lower classes would be sent into battle to protect the interests of the global corporate elite.

Such a simplistic and quite arrogant point of view. How about the law allowing Japanese SDF members being able to assist soldiers of other countries when they are in combat i.e. protecting and saving lives.

I have lost total confidence in Japan & it's future, but at least this is a small glimmer of hope.

@StrangerlandAUG. 31, 2015 - 09:16AM JST

Ridiculous comment. Just because they don't hold the same opinion as you doesn't mean that they don't understand the issue.

How many housewives do you honestly see have at least a passing, amateur interest in 1) foreign militaries, 2) the SDF, 3) national security policy and 4) law at the same time? Or even one of these? Without a routine interest in these matters, how likely do you think it is anyone can come up with an intelligent and comprehensive view on this issue?

Further, the very act of bringing their children is incorrect. If the kid is so small he can't be left alone, he is way too young to understand the issues involved. Since he has no idea what is involved, he has his default feelings, and very few kids really like being in as crowded a place as a protest. To get him to go, his mother presumably gave him a ridiculously simplified brainwashing, "If we don't do this, you'll have to go to war. War is horrible. You don't want that, don't you?"

In such a fashion, the kid is blocked from developing his own opinion independently. That's why I consider those mother both ignorant and frankly, a menace to the balanced development of their children.

That's incredibly impressive for Japan, never thought the day would come where we'd see such a massive turnout, I may have to go join the next one!

I'm glad that the Japanese media isn't covering this event at all, as everyone who was there or are aware of it will know and hopefully the turnout next time will triple

Saturday 500 Pro, and Sunday 120,000 anti. The people have spoken!

Why do we need war anyway? America has been pushing this agenda for Japan to send their citizens to oppress other nations and Japan should not waste its efforts on agression we have too many internal issues of our own.

I think a lot of people are missing the big picture here, which isnt actually about defence policy or Article 9. If Japan wants to engage in collective self defence I dont have a problem with that per se. What I do have a problem with is that instead of following the proper channel of amending the constitution to make that happen (which would require a referendum that Abe knows he would lose since the country is massively opposed to this) he has decided to simply announce that the constitution means whatever he wants it to mean.

This is fundamentally undemocratic and counter to the principle of the rule of law. It is how dictatorships are run. This is why almost every constitutional law scholar the government consulted on this have flatly said that this is unconstitutional, and also why the Bar association has come out so strongly against it.

If this were the US, Abes actions would be the equivalent of Obama deciding he wanted to take away everybodys guns but having the problem of the 2nd amendment to deal with. Instead of amending the constitution (which for political reasons he couldnt do) if he followed the Abe script he would simply have his cabinet pass a decree declaring that the 2nd amendment, despite its plain wording, actually allows the government to confiscate everybodys guns (in the US the Supreme Court would intervene to prevent this in real life, but in Japan the judiciary has refused to perform its proper function in relation to constitutional guarantees for a very long time which is why Abe has been able to get away with it).

The way Abe is running rough-shod over the constitution should be of much greater concern to everyone than it actually is. You might agree with him on collective self defence, but if he (or future PMs) are allowed to do this then pretty much all constitutional guarantees are going to be under threat.

Article 9 is fantastic, I wish my country had it and regardless of circumstances it does allow for defence just not offence. If Russia, the USA, and China had this they wouldn't know what to do with themselves.

Very impressive turnout! Japanese lost on nuclear restarts, and are about to lose on Article 9, I hope the protests keep building larger and larger!

There is nothing worse than a democratically elected government that wont listen to the wishes of the voters who put them there. Seems once they are "in" they can do whatever they choose. Doesn't Abe realise that its not only the Japanese people who don't want to see Japanese troops on foreign soil. Can you imagine some civil war in any east Asian country and Japanese troops are sent in as support for an international effort?

Wanted to go and support the demo but thought my presence there may have been misinterpreted. Didn't want folk saying its Japanese business and not mine. If you get my drift?

I see no point other than to be objective

Quite a Utopian view, Nigel. No political pressure whatsoever (that we'll ever discover).

On the theme of information control, those who thumbed down (which I fully support and encourage as your democratic right) this:

Fortunately, coverage does exist online, currently at 2nd place in NHK's access rankings. Let's hope it makes No. 1 and stays there!

will be dismayed (just as our Dear Leader undoubtedly is) that the story enjoyed top access ranking yesterday, on NHK online despite which, we're told, it didn't make this morning's NHK breakfast news. Or the Gomiuri, for that matter.

Will it make the history books?

As it stands with the present pacifist constitution, Japan is not involved in any conflicts, correct their services have been used in the past, re fuelling missions, and engineers re building missions but that doesn't make them a target. Once they take up arms to support the US or anyone else for that matter, they open Japan up to be a target also for extremist and any other fanatical group that believes in their own twisted ideologies. These extremist don't care who dies in their cause, The bombing in Bangkok, Thailand,is pretty close, China,Malaya the Philippines also with their extremist, and has been reported that the person arrested in Bangkok was a foreigner, although it wasn't stated what nationality. So I support the actions of these protesters,this bill before parliament is wrong and should be thrown out. Concentration should be focussed on Japans security, to make sure that religious extremist don't start targeting the cities here in Japan. This isn't a selfish view because I have children here, its because I too am a pacifist. War doesn't solve anything,history has proven that time and again, dialogue, for however long is a more effective method. But then politicians are only supporters of the giant corporate war machine. Finally if you think my opinion is a load of c*#p, just give thought to all those families caught up in the present middle eastern conflict, those who have been, killed,raped,whole families destroyed and for what, another religious cause hasn't history had enough of those.

@igloobuyer

but does everyone understand what is actually being changed and why?

Yes. But perhaps the more important question you should be asking yourself (if you are a supporter of collective self defence) is when and how the government might be able to accomplish what you want constitutionally.

Thank you for your gracious reply. So the local 警視長 was totally objective with his 30,000 figure?

I see no point other than to be objective. Their job is to control the crowds and to maintain civility.

Everyone is on the same 'let's protest against changing Article 9' bandwagon, but does everyone understand what is actually being changed and why? I think many people are simplifying it down to the misinformed idea that somehow changing article 9 will let to a militaristic Japan and that Japan will 'lose' its peaceful image, which simply not the case.

It's really such a non-issue and there are far more important issues to protest about than this.

Nigelboy,

Thank you for your gracious reply. So the local 警視長 was totally objective with his 30,000 figure?

Dear dear dear. Someone getting their news from NHK. Both the NHK and a certain poster here are simply the mouthpiece of the Abe-led government.

instead of demontrating, show your frustration by voting these people out of office. because right now, it's too late. abe, and his ilk, are already in power and with his supermajority, he doesn't need to listen to what the public is currently saying. AND, he knows that in three years time, many of you will have forgotten all about this and moved on.

Mea culpa, Nigelboy. Allow me to retract

Not a problem.

I do reserve the right to take the police estimate with a truckload of salt. Did the cops give an estimate for the choreographed pro-Abe demonstration (organisers' estimate 500) on Saturday?

I wouldn't for it is their job to estimate how many and to allocate the necessary personnel (機動隊員) for crowd control.

Mea culpa, Nigelboy. Allow me to retract. The 余り者 is me in this instance. Hat tip to Cleo.

I do reserve the right to take the police estimate with a truckload of salt. Did the cops give an estimate for the choreographed pro-Abe demonstration (organisers' estimate 500) on Saturday?

Best understand 余る

Yes indeed. ３万人余 is a a little over 30,000, not 30,000 too many.

Police 'estimates' are always much lower than demonstrator 'estimates'.

More like 30K.

We all thought Nigelboy's Japanese was much better than that.

主催者の発表でおよそ１２万人、警視庁の調べで３万人余りが集まり

The organisers announced that 120,000 people, estimated by police as 30,000 too many, had assembled.

Best understand 余る to avoid being 余り者, old boy.

it is highly questionable their understanding of the issues actually exceed that is written on those cards

Ridiculous comment. Just because they don't hold the same opinion as you doesn't mean that they don't understand the issue.

The only thing that can be gleaned for sure, is that by not holding the same opinion as you, they are more intelligent than you.

I can understand the mothers' feelings. They don't want their kids to grow up and get deployed to a war zone. They'd rather keep the status quo and let other people do it.

Tell those mothers to keep their kids out of this. Especially since it was supposedly raining.

Give them a break! It's only a slogan on a protest sign. It's not suppose to be a long anti-war diatribe.

Unfortunately, it is highly questionable their understanding of the issues actually exceed that is written on those cards, which as you tacitly concede is very simplistic.

Now is the time for an opposition party to emerge.

Come on guys. Someone stand up and speak against Abe!

I didn't know you had it in you Japanese folk. Too bad the protest is not really worth it. All Abe is trying to do is participate as a member of the international community a bit more and possibly allow greater self-defense, AND get rid of a law that was forced on Japan by the US.

...and here I thought Obama the Great had removed the US from Iraq, and the US, under his most enlightened leadership was so wonderful?

His leadership is wonderful. I've never said that the US isn't in Iraq though - I've said they shouldn't be.

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20150830/k10010209801000.html

More like 30K.

does Mr.Abe has ears for public?

Just contempt, it seems.

On Sunday, around 120,000 protesters filled the streets outside the Diet building to rally against new security legislation likely to become law in September.

Good on them. About time the citizens of Japan finally let their voices be heard, rather than simply allowing the LDP to lead them dowm the primrose path.

does Mr.Abe has ears for public?

Alo, I'm afraid Abe only listens to one "voice" -- that of his deceased grand dad, who was 100% behind a militaristic Japan.

does Mr.Abe has ears for public?

Strangerland:

" And how long until America is attacked in Iraq by ISIS, and the government uses this as an excuse to rush to their support? "

...and here I thought Obama the Great had removed the US from Iraq, and the US, under his most enlightened leadership was so wonderful?

What is up with these mixed messages?

I watched the first 20 minutes of NHK news (Japanese language) this morning at 7.00 and there was no mention of protest marches.

Sinister.

Fortunately, coverage does exist online, currently at 2nd place in NHK's access rankings. Let's hope it makes No. 1 and stays there!

http://www3.nhk.or.jp/news/html/20150830/k10010209801000.html

if the bills pass japan wont go to iraq or anything like that it only if an ALLY is being attacked

And how long until America is attacked in Iraq by ISIS, and the government uses this as an excuse to rush to their support?

Since there is no real Abenomics, Abe will do what other politicians do to divert people's attention from the promises he made; foment security fears about China, North Korea, and any other potential military threat to Japan. Fear is the greatest tool of control politicians have, after all, if we had nothing to fear, we wouldn't really need them, would we?

Japan has had no security issues in the past, even during the days of large Asian conflicts like the Korean and Vietnam wars, and Japan will not have any such fears in the future if things remain as they do. But if Abe changes the constitution, and creates an offensive force, Chinese politicians will then have a tool to use against their own people, and give them an object of fear/hate greater than economic problems, corruption, and the plague of other problems Chinese politicians are trying to deal with.

Worse yet, if Japan and China greatly expand their militaries, and increase military readiness, there is a greater potential for accidents and misunderstandings. Added to all of this is that neither Japan nor China have the money to waste on expanding their militaries, and the cost of this expansion is going to weigh heavily on the people.

How would the US economy hold up without perpetual war, though?

Quite well, actually. America's adventures in the Middle East have been a net loss. America has spent more money on welfare than defense since the end of the Vietnam war, and is spending less now than it has since before anybody us were born.

hero77 but their is no war, and if the bills pass japan wont go to iraq or anything like that it only if an ALLY is being attacked

ISIS is a war

120,000 people, that's a big statement in Japan. Impressive.

The US wants Japan as a tool in its forever wars. I say NO to Abe and NO to the American government. Japan needs to retain its pacifist constitution, remember the lessons of the past and STAY OUT OF AMERICA'S WARS!

@AlexNoaburg

polticians should have to send their to the frontlines whenever war is authorized

I'd broaden that to include the undertaker (RIP Edwin Starr), executives in the military-industrial-academic complex, and share holders in private companies that profit from wars. How would the US economy hold up without perpetual war, though?

Predictably, the Yomiuri online has zero coverage of this event.

Abe seeks to censor the rest of the media, too. Welcome to China.

but their is no war, and if the bills pass japan wont go to iraq or anything like that it only if an ALLY is being attacked, the site is filled with Americans(i think) so i expect them to support this

polticians should have to send their to the frontlines whenever war is authorized

I watched the first 20 minutes of NHK news (Japanese language) this morning at 7.00 and there was no mention of protest marches. The bears in Hokkaido segment that was shown was interesting, though. Is it true that the Ministry of Misinformation is having new facilities built for NHK?

@The slogans on the posters seem awfully naive. Sure, everybody is against war... so what?

Give them a break! It's only a slogan on a protest sign. It's not suppose to be a long anti-war diatribe.

Rather we should focus on Abe's cynical use of rhetoric about national security or protecting America to justify changing the law so that mostly young people from the lower classes would be sent into battle to protect the interests of the global corporate elite.

I am no friend of Abe, but I wonder how many of these protesters have thought about the issues here. The slogans on the posters seem awfully naive. Sure, everybody is against war... so what?

Mothers holding their children’s hands

I can understand the mothers' feelings. They don't want their kids to grow up and get deployed to a war zone. They'd rather keep the status quo and let other people do it.