DEBITO.ORG
Arudou Debito/Dave Aldwinckle's Home Page

New ebooks by ARUDOU Debito

  • Book IN APPROPRIATE: A novel of culture, kidnapping, and revenge in modern Japan
  • Japan Times: LDP & rightists still clinging to anti NJ PR Suffrage, even though it’s not an issue in this election

    Posted by Dr. ARUDOU, Debito on July 5th, 2010

    Handbook for Newcomers, Migrants, and Immigrants to Japan\Foreign Residents and Naturalized Citizens Association forming NGO\「ジャパニーズ・オンリー 小樽入浴拒否問題と人種差別」(明石書店)JAPANESE ONLY:  The Otaru Hot Springs Case and Racial Discrimination in Japansourstrawberriesavatardebitopodcastthumb
    UPDATES ON TWITTER: arudoudebito
    DEBITO.ORG PODCASTS now on iTunes, subscribe free

    Hi Blog.  We haven’t talked too much about the upcoming July election (mainly because it’s not that big a deal, what compared with the seiken koutai election last August) for the Upper House, but here’s a little article that is germane to Debito.org:  The LDP and other rightists are still playing up the NJ PR Suffrage Issue, even though it’s not even a platform plank in this election (the DPJ Manifesto does not mention it this time) in a rather lame (and xenophobic) attempt to gather votes.  Nothing quite like bashing a small, disenfranchised minority to make yourself look powerful and worthy of governance.  Excerpt follows.  Arudou Debito in Sapporo

    ///////////////////////////////////////////////

    Japan Times Saturday, July 3, 2010, courtesy of JK

    CHUBU CONNECTION
    Foreigner suffrage, separate surnames stir passions in poll runup

    Whether to grant permanent foreign residents voting rights for local-level elections and allow married couples to keep their respective surnames have become contentious issues ahead of the July 11 Upper House election.

    The ruling Democratic Party of Japan, which advocates the introduction of foreigner suffrage and separate surnames for married couples if desired, faces strong opposition from conservatives in the Liberal Democratic Party and small parties, including its own ruling bloc partner.

    Aichi Prefecture voters, however, are puzzled by the conservatives’ fervor because the topics have yet to stir national debate…

    The LDP and small conservative parties set out to oppose the ideas in their platforms, vying with the DPJ, which has liberal views on these issues. Some homemakers, who used to be the last to become involved in politics, now speak to people at the weekly rally of Inoue’s group held at Kanayama Station in Nagoya.

    “The pride of this country that has been built up by the Yamato (Japanese) race must be passed down to our children, otherwise there will be no future for the country,” said Masahito Fujikawa, 49, an LDP-backed candidate in the Aichi electoral district.

    Rest at http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20100703cc.html

    18 Responses to “Japan Times: LDP & rightists still clinging to anti NJ PR Suffrage, even though it’s not an issue in this election”

    1. Jerry Says:

      Well, obviously they want to make it (and the DPJ’s liberal stance on it) an issue. How successful they will be in their efforts is really the question isn’t it?

    2. Kimpatsu Says:

      The pride of this country that has been built up by the Yamato (Japanese) race must be passed down to our children, otherwise there will be no future for the country,” said Masahito Fujikawa..
      “The pride of Germany that has been built up by the white (Aryan) race must be passed down to our children, otherwise there will be no future for the country,” said an Austrian housepainter, one A. Schiklegruber…

    3. Andrew Smallacombe Says:

      Can Fujikawa provide an exact date for the formation of the Yamato race?

    4. jon Says:

      @ Kimpatsu, is that an actual quote from Adolf? From Mein Kampf? Source please.

    5. Justin Says:

      Shouldn’t they be happy about married couples keeping their own surnames? Less muddling of the purity of Japanese names that way, don’t ya know.

    6. Alex Says:

      If they would allow us to have dual citizenship I would have no problem whatsoever with the naturalization requirement…

    7. snowman Says:

      Kimpatsu. LOL! Made me burst out laughing!

      Totally agree with Alex, allow dual nationality now like most senshinkoku. But you can’t see it happening anytime in the near future can you?

    8. Kaz Says:

      It is inevitable that Japan will be more of a multicultural society in the future. To ignore the realities, to stand in the way of social evolution, progress & social justice can only be described as “時代の遅れ”.

      If the above views are able to garner support, it will only serve to drag the society backwards… Any Democratic country depends on the ability of it’s people to discriminate between the right and the wrong, or else it is just a theoritical concept.

    9. Andrew Smallacombe Says:

      I saw one of their candidates on NHK last night, a certain Ms. Eki. She was on about putting the family first, and a return to family values, and how that is why they oppose separate surnames and foreign suffrage.
      How they make that leap in logic was not explained.

    10. Mark Hunter Says:

      Kimpatsu….precisely! Well done!

    11. Matt Says:

      “If they would allow us to have dual citizenship I would have no problem whatsoever with the naturalization requirement”

      Ideas like, Japan will lose its identity, foreigners will take over parts of Japan, criminals will have rights, took center stage with the just the suffrage argument. Can you imagine the hate that would emerge with something like dual citizenship? The dual citizenship idea has no chance in this country.

    12. John (Yokohama) Says:

      What about an actual law against racism in Japan?… the fact that there is such a stink about possible local suffrage for PR’s when it is not even on the table means that the idea of some real progress on the base issue here seems so far out in the future to be fantasy.

    13. Kimpatsu Says:

      @Jon:
      No, it was not a quote, it was a parody.
      TX to everyone else who laughed.

    14. jim Says:

      to tell you the truth, i really never expected the DPJ to seriously to ever consider in there so-called manifesto the possiblility of giving PR the right to vote. All talk and no action means nothing as far as im concerned. It was all lip service, and/or fantasy to think that this thing will be passed in the near future. There first needs to be a change of the old guard at the top and a mindset and cultural change for that to happen. So I Think in about 2040 that may happen, but not 2010.

    15. Graham Says:

      If, in their happy minds, married couples being able to have different surnames is a change major enough that would destroy the fundamental values of Japan, then having hopes for ANY changes seems impossible.

    16. Laura Says:

      Ah, the Kanayama crowd again. I remember them from last year when I was going to a local driving school. The invective was much more serious than what they’re spouting now. The cranky old man screamed at my daughter and I (she was 1 at the time) that we were polluting the Yamato race. Guess they kept that gem in their arsenal. You can only hope that cooler heads will prevail and that most will write this off as what it is, old people afraid of change. They will die eventually.

    17. John (Yokohama) Says:

      http://www.japantoday.com/category/politics/view/japan-split-over-maiden-names-and-foreign-suffrage

      “Japan split over maiden names, foreign suffrage
      Friday 09th July, 06:09 AM JST

      TOKYO —
      Happily for Yoko Sakamoto, she didn’t have to argue with her husband—also a Sakamoto—about whose last name they would use when they got married.

      Not that the 47-year old civil rights activist would have had much of an option: In Japan, the law requires only one surname per family—customarily the man’s.

      “One’s last name is a key part of one’s self-identity,” Sakamoto said. “It’s wrong that any of us by law have to change surnames that we’ve used all our lives, and it is always the women who put up with the burden.”

      The Democratic Party of Japan, which swept to power last year, planned to give women the freedom to choose their married name—a move supported by those who say the tradition undermines their independence and can interfere with their career. But the party has run into opposition from their conservative rivals who are making it a campaign issue in Sunday’s key upper house elections.

      The Democrats promised a progressive agenda when they formed a government, ending 55 years of nearly unbroken conservative rule. The party began working on two bills: one that would allow married couples to keep separate surnames and another that would permit Korean permanent residents in the country to vote in local elections.

      But preparations for both bills have stalled.

      Conservative politicians accuse the Democrats of pushing a radical agenda that would wreck Japanese family traditions and even weaken its national security by granting the vote to hundreds of thousands of ethnic Koreans and Taiwanese—without Japanese citizenship—and possibly other nationals too.

      Such changes “would destroy the country,” warned Sadakazu Tanigaki, leader of the former ruling Liberal Democratic Party, which despite its name is conservative.

      While the debate over possible tax increases to tackle Japan’s burgeoning deficit has dominated the campaign for this weekend’s election, these secondary issues could also sway some voters.

      And a poor showing at the polls could make it hard for the Democrats to move ahead on either bill.

      Japan is the only Group of Eight nation that requires married couples to have the same family name. Asian neighbors such as China and South Korea also allow married women to have different surnames than their husbands.

      A growing number of Japanese women, including those who have advanced in corporate and academic ranks, want the same right. Many already use their maiden names as aliases at work.

      “The Democrats’ rule could be our tiny window of opportunity,” said Sakamoto, co-leader of the activist group mNet, which supports changes to Japan’s civil code. “The question is whether we can tolerate diversity and create a society that equally treats people with different lifestyles and nationality, including married couples with different surnames and foreign residents.”

      But that window may already be closing.

      Strong opposition from the ruling party’s tiny coalition partner, the People’s New Party, has stalled moves to submit the bills in parliament and the Democrats have quietly removed them from their list of campaign promises. The smaller party claims that allowing women to retain their maiden names could undermine family unity and even cause more divorces.

      “I don’t understand the mentality of couples who marry to be together but prefer separate surnames,” said Shizuka Kamei, leader of the People’s New Party. “Do we want to see door signs showing various surnames written on them at each home?”

      Justice Minister Keiko Chiba, however, said recently she still plans to submit the already-drafted maiden names bill for parliamentary debate later this year.

      The current system “often one-sidedly imposes burdens on women, inconveniences their social activities, or causes the loss of their identity,” Chiba said. “I must say it poses a problem with the fundamental equality of men and women.”

      Only in rare cases in Japan a couple uses the wife’s surname, particularly if she is an only child and there is pressure to carry on the family name, or if it benefits them financially.

      Last August, the U.N. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women urged Tokyo “take immediate action to amend the Civil Code” and drop the one-surname requirement, calling the provision “discriminatory.”

      Akiko Orita has been married for more than 10 years, but because she did not change her name at marriage, she is classified in town hall records as “unregistered wife” of her husband, Yusuke Doi, who also supports the cause.

      “I don’t want to have to change my name,” said the 35-year-old assistant professor at Keio University. “Everyone should have a right to choose.”

      The Democrats have also sought to give the right to vote in local elections to 420,000 mostly Korean permanent residents in Japan and some Taiwanese. Most are descendants of wartime slave laborers who were forcibly brought to the country during the 1910-45 Japanese colonization of the Korean peninsula.

      Despite being born in Japan, living here for decades and paying taxes, many such ethnic Koreans, known as “zainichi Korean,” chose not to take Japanese citizenship to retain their sense of ethnic identity or as a form of protest at Japan having stripped their families of their nationality after World War II.

      This disqualifies them from voting.

      Democratic leaders say the proposed reform is intended to redress the suffering historically inflicted on the Koreans. Officials are still debating whether to include another 490,000 foreign permanent residents, mostly Chinese but also Brazilians, Filipinos and Peruvians, in the bill.

      The bill has yet to be drafted but it has already stirred up fears among some Japanese that it might influence local votes to undermine Japan’s national interest and security. Some say Koreans and Chinese residents may move en masse to constituencies overseeing disputed areas to influence decisions in a way that would weaken Japanese claims to several small islands between Japan and South Korea or China.

      Right-wing activists and conservative lawmakers have repeatedly rallied in Tokyo against any moves to grant foreign residents suffrage, saying only those who have obtained nationality should be allowed to vote.

      Government and media surveys show that the public is divided over both issues.

      “Many Japanese may not be quite ready for a change,” said Takao Toshikawa, an independent political analyst. “But a failure to pass the bills could mean the Democrats would lose voters, particularly young women” who have supported some of the party’s more liberal policies.

      Chieko Kotani, a 48-year-old homemaker, said she opposes a foreign suffrage bill because “the Chinese might take over” disputed small islands, but supports the legal use of maiden names, which she wished had been the law when she got married 15 years ago.

      “I would have kept my maiden name, Kobayashi, which I still prefer,” she said.”

    18. Glenn Says:

      John, thanks for posting.

      “Such changes “would destroy the country,” warned Sadakazu Tanigaki, leader of the former ruling Liberal Democratic Party, which despite its name is conservative.”

      Seems the LDP want to keep their monopoly on destroying the country. ;-)

    Leave a Reply