Debito’s SNA column 74: “Life under a mad king”. Subtitle: Everyone is learning what happens when the world’s most powerful man goes crazy (April 7, 2025)

mytest

Books, eBooks, and more from Debito Arudou, Ph.D. (click on icon):
Guidebookcover.jpgjapaneseonlyebookcovertextHandbook for Newcomers, Migrants, and Immigrants to Japan「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)sourstrawberriesavatardebitopodcastthumbFodorsJapan2014cover
UPDATES ON TWITTER: arudoudebito
DEBITO.ORG PODCASTS on iTunes, subscribe free
“LIKE” US on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/debitoorg
https://www.facebook.com/embeddedrcsmJapan
http://www.facebook.com/handbookimmigrants
https://www.facebook.com/JapaneseOnlyTheBook
https://www.facebook.com/BookInAppropriate
If you like what you read and discuss on Debito.org, please consider helping us stop hackers and defray maintenance costs with a little donation via my webhoster:
Donate towards my web hosting bill!
All donations go towards website costs only. Thanks for your support!

Hi Blog.  This month’s column is my latest report from the ground.  One of my methods has aways been writing things as I see them, based upon collecting information both from open source media and from experiences I’m having.  And what I’m seeing is happening under famous curse of, “May you live living in interesting times.”  As I’ve written before, American democracy is in flux, and it’s getting worse every day.  I think there’s a psychological aspect to it, as in the psychology of one man with this much power behind him.  More than any person in history, I think we can say.  And here’s what happens to a society when “the cheese has slid off his cracker”, and what history has to say about “mad kings” in the past.  Debito Arudou, Ph.D.

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

Letter from America:  Life under a mad king

Subtitle: Everyone is learning what happens when the world’s most powerful man goes crazy

By Debito Arudou. Shingetsu News Agency Visible Minorities Column 74, April 7, 2026

Courtesy https://shingetsunewsagency.com/2026/04/07/visible-minorities-life-under-a-mad-king/ 

The world is living under a rogue regime — or rather, a rogue individual — who is wielding unprecedented power.

Think about it: Donald Trump is Commander-in-Chief over the world’s mightiest military in history, and deployed it worldwide far beyond the empires of yore (Roman, Persian, Ottoman, British, Russian, Chinese…). He also has his finger on the button of the second-largest (if not the world’s best-maintained) arsenal of nuclear weapons. He also presides over the world’s largest economy, the world’s reserve trading currency, and the world’s largest global market capitalization in its stock markets.

One would think that the United States, as the world’s steward of the world’s postwar order and the most powerful economic and security agreements, would have a chief executive’s steady hand on the tiller.

But as you know, it’s been more a hand in the till. Trump and his minions have made billions peddling their influence in international negotiations in ways never seen before. Everything that happens in that world is transactional and self-profiteering. And with Trump’s mastery of media manipulation and “flooding the zone with shit,” with at least four media networks piping out supportive propaganda, every action by this rogue regime is supported by at least a quarter of the polled American public, no matter the contradictions, lies or hardships.

After than a decade of unrelenting control over the American mind space, a new normal has settled. This column is a letter about daily life in America under a crazy king, speaking as a professional political scientist who for professional reasons cannot look away.

THE BELLY OF THE BEAST

Having lived for about three decades outside of the United States, I’ve never been so naive to see America as an unremitting force for good. After all, every country has its dark times. But given its hegemonic powers, dark times in America were also projected overseas.

Yet America rarely brought its malfeasance home for Americans to experience. And the majority of Americans have never even left the country to see how the world perceives them. Until recently, fewer than half even had a passport.

So domestic America was in fact an oasis from itself, something to be feared only if you were outside the rich countries and designated a target in the “War on Terror.” As comedian Bassem Youssef noted (paraphrasing one of his routines), “Moving to America, I now have the comfort of being in the belly of the beast. Before, when I was living in the Middle East, I worried about getting bombed by America. Here, I can stop worrying. And go shop at CostCo.”

But now, fear of America has been domesticated. It’s not just war crimes against overseas civilians and their infrastructure in proxy skirmishes or wars of choice. The American military is now being used against Americans.

ICE thugs with a budget as big as Canada’s entire military roam America’s streets and airports abducting, beating, even killing people with impunity. Concentration camps are popping up nationwide, where families and children rot and die without due process. Boats get blown up offshore without justification or oversight — and it’s only a matter of time before those missile attacks happen in US territorial waters if not within US territory itself. The National Guard is being geared up to roam American polling stations, seize ballot boxes, and even count the votes.

Thus the beast no longer has a belly where Americans can take refuge. The “War on Terror” now extends to the “radical leftists” and “domestic terrorists” behind any political or legal decision that goes against Trump’s whims. Even the Democratic Party is being labeled a “domestic extremist organization.”

It’s gone beyond invective and into pocketbook penalties and surveillance. Entire US states are being denied federal funding for not acquiescing to brutal federal policies, or even because they voted Democrat last time. People are being detained and having property confiscated based upon the political content in their mobile phones. A plurality of people fear their private conversations are being listened to by the tech oligarchs (if not an emerging AI sentience) that control Alexa, Siri, and Google Assistant. The thought police are here, and we invited them in.

THE VIEW FROM THE GROUND

This has affected me professionally. As a political scientist at the university level, I teach hundreds of students each semester, mostly introductory classes to non-majors. Their fear is palpable. Many students don’t have the mental software to deal with this. Many say they wake up every morning afraid to look at their phones. They try to tune it out but can’t, and unfortunately my classes need them to plug in to current events to see how a civil society functions.

Even in casual conversations with non-students, when people find out I teach political science, they invariably ask me what’s happening in DC. (I now know how medical doctors feel when they’re asked for casual diagnoses, as in, “I feel pain right here. What’s it mean?”)

I try to allay their fears. In pre-Trump “normal” times, I would talk about governing institutions (as opposed to political theory), and how people can navigate systems and enfranchise themselves and their communities if they learn the system.

Unfortunately, the fixed stars of political structures I could rely on aren’t there anymore.

The American Constitution, Bill of Rights, and even laws (including the full disclosure of the Epstein Files) are violated daily. “Checks and Balances” are largely gone. Congress is abdicating most of its oversight role, even shutting down for extended periods to delay debates that might anger Dear Leader. The Supreme Court hands down convoluted rulings (many without explanation via their “shadow docket”) working backwards from politicized conclusions to give the Executive Branch even more power. Even faith in the electoral process, to offer a regular and peaceful transition of power, has diminished to the point where we wonder if there will be a fair election in November — or even one at all.

As a political scientist, I look upon these works, and despair.

THE “MORNING AFTER,” EVERY MORNING

I too wake every morning with fear. What immature, cruel, or even batshit crazy thing was just said by a leader with no guardrails? What people will find themselves being purged for guilt by association with the “evils” of “diversity,” or just because they were bureaucrats doing their jobs? What’s the next politically motivated Department of Justice prosecution as an example to us all?

Or what thing will be taken away because Dear Leader was displeased? What media outlet be taken over or comedy show cancelled because Trump can’t brook criticism or satire? What tribute or trophy will be presented him to ensure corporate mergers or FIFA games proceed without interference? What new attack somewhere in the world will cost blood, treasure, fuel prices, and financial futures?

All the institutions I thought I could rely on are being corrupted or enshittified.

Point is, it’s hard to teach American politics with any sense of science anymore. The federal system is not functioning with any predictability beyond the whims of one man’s unchecked power. The only paradigm that makes sense is the study of how empires decline and fall, and how arbitrary life is under an autocracy where the king has gone crazy.

Of course, everything I’ve said so far has been said elsewhere. By now most of it gets dismissed as “Oh Dear punditry,” i.e., where we columnists sound alarms yet nothing happens, so we shrug, sigh “Oh dear”, and await the next development.

But the new insight I can offer as a columnist is what’s missing in the debate: A psychological analysis behind the power.

This is a systemic blind spot. Thanks to us shunting off our elderly to run out the clock in old folks’ homes, the public knows surprisingly little about dementia. We haven’t had have a public face to raise awareness of this disease like we’ve had for, say, Lou Gehrig and ALS, Magic Johnson and AIDS, Michael J. Fox and Parkinson’s Disease, or Selena Gomez and Lupus.

As a result, we are giving a mentally diminished Trump a legitimacy he no longer deserves.

DEMENTIA AND DISABILITY

Dementia doesn’t mean people necessarily stop making sense; they can be fully articulate and pass basic cognitive tests. But their lack of impulse control, increasing paranoia, shifts in lucidity from day-to-day (or even hour-to-hour; look up “sundowning”), and inability to take in new information to make informed decisions in changing conditions, is insufficiently studied or being debated about.

Old people “going mad” or “senile” is not just something necessarily seen in people who are “slow” or “easily distracted.” Americans think of “Sleepy Joe” Biden’s inarticulate and distracted performance in the 2024 presidential debate as evidence of an old man’s inability to hold office anymore. So they voted his party out.

But surely senescent monomaniacs can still be industrious and full of energy as well?

Look at the energy of kings and dictators throughout history, and you’ll see how they went mad over time, yet remained in power because they were lucid and proactive enough to use their power to purge any disobedience. If you let them.

The Americans keep letting him. The world rightfully looks at the United States in fear and anger at all the pain the “mad king” is inflicting on them. Especially since the American system enabled him to take power not once, but twice. And now it cannot be just passed off as a fluke or a bug in the system. It’s a bug in the brain.

As clinical psychologist Dr. Mary L. Trump sagely notes, her uncle is “the world’s most dangerous man” with “Narcissistic Personality Disorder” coupled with “cognitive and psychological decline.”

And yet we cannot remove him as mentally unfit because we can’t collectively see him as having a disease.

Biden’s enablers kept him in office for his full term. No doubt they’ll try to do the same for Trump too. All we can do, history shows with all the other mad kings, is let nature take its course.

As Bassem Youssef also noted, “Now you know what it’s like to live under a leader in the Middle East. Come talk to us and we’ll teach you how to deal with it.”

It’s America’s turn now to realize that even the most robust democracy is susceptible to charismatic leaders going crazy. How much worse must it get before the mad king falls from power? Even as a political scientist, I can’t predict that. Oh dear.

ENDS
======================
Do you like what you read on Debito.org?  Want to help keep the archive active and support Debito.org’s activities?  Please consider donating a little something.  More details here. Or if you prefer something less complicated, just click on an advertisement below.

“Internationalisation in Name Only: What Japan’s ALT System Reveals About Structural Limits in Education Reform”. Book summary of “More Than an Assistant”, by Nathaniel Reed (Amazon KDP, Global Classroom Author, 2026)

mytest

Books, eBooks, and more from Debito Arudou, Ph.D. (click on icon):
Guidebookcover.jpgjapaneseonlyebookcovertextHandbook for Newcomers, Migrants, and Immigrants to Japan「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)sourstrawberriesavatardebitopodcastthumbFodorsJapan2014cover
UPDATES ON TWITTER: arudoudebito
DEBITO.ORG PODCASTS on iTunes, subscribe free
“LIKE” US on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/debitoorg
https://www.facebook.com/embeddedrcsmJapan
http://www.facebook.com/handbookimmigrants
https://www.facebook.com/JapaneseOnlyTheBook
https://www.facebook.com/BookInAppropriate
If you like what you read and discuss on Debito.org, please consider helping us stop hackers and defray maintenance costs with a little donation via my webhoster:
Donate towards my web hosting bill!
All donations go towards website costs only. Thanks for your support!

Hi Blog.  What follows is a summary of book I endorsed with a blurb on the back cover:

“A conscientious and incisive work by a scholar tracing Japan’s long struggle to reconcile openness and insularity in education policy.  More Than an Assistant illuminates how the Assistant Language Teacher framework evolved as part of Japan’s soft power approach to internationalisation — teaching global awareness while maintaining rigid boundaries at home.  A must-read for anyone seeking to understand how Japan’s education system mirrors its broader tensions with globalization.”

Recommended reading.  Debito Arudou, Ph.D.

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

Internationalisation in Name Only: What Japan’s ALT System Reveals About Structural Limits in Education Reform
Book summary of More than an Assistant: ALTs, Inclusion, and the Future of Educational Roles in Japan, by Nathanael Reed
By Nathaniel Reed, Special to Debito.org, March 25, 2026

For decades, Japan has presented itself as an increasingly international society, and its education system has been one of the most visible sites of that effort. Tens of thousands of non-Japanese educators have been recruited into public schools to support English language learning, often framed as part of a broader commitment to global engagement. On paper, this appears progressive. In practice, it reveals a more constrained and carefully bounded model of internationalisation.

The Assistant Language Teacher (ALT) system is frequently described as a success story of exchange and cooperation. After nearly two decades working in and around Japanese public schools, I have come to see it less as a model of integration and more as a case study in how internationalisation can be implemented without altering underlying institutional structures. The issue is not simply how ALTs are treated, but how their role is defined and limited from the outset.

At the centre of this is the designation “assistant.” ALTs are not recognised as teachers, regardless of qualifications or experience, and are positioned outside the formal professional hierarchy. This is not merely a matter of terminology. In Japan, full teaching status is tied to licensure systems that are, in practice, closely linked to nationality and long-term institutional integration. While there are technical pathways for non-Japanese individuals to obtain teaching credentials, these are limited in scope and rarely align with the roles created for international hires. The system therefore recruits international staff into positions that are structurally excluded from advancement.

This is where the discussion moves beyond workplace experience and into institutional design. The ALT role does not sit on a pathway toward professional recognition; it is designed to remain adjacent to it. By maintaining the assistant designation, the system avoids the legal and administrative implications of recognising foreign educators as full participants, while still benefiting from their presence in classrooms.

The commonly cited phrase “ESID” (Every Situation Is Different) reflects how this structure is experienced on the ground. ALT roles vary widely between schools: some are actively involved in lesson planning and delivery, while others are confined to peripheral tasks. This variability is often explained as a cultural or logistical reality. In practice, it is a predictable outcome of decentralised governance. Local Boards of Education retain significant control over implementation, and there is limited national standardisation in training, evaluation, or role definition. Flexibility, in this context, becomes a mechanism through which inconsistency is normalised.

What is often overlooked is that this ambiguity operates within clear boundaries. ALTs may be given informal responsibility, but not formal authority. They may be relied upon in practice, but are not institutionally recognised. The system allows for variation in what ALTs do, but not in what they are.

This distinction matters because it shapes how internationalisation itself is understood. In many contexts, internationalisation implies structural change: the integration of international staff into existing professional frameworks, with corresponding rights, responsibilities, and career pathways. In Japan, the term often operates differently. It refers less to integration than to the visible presence of international elements within existing structures. The system appears globalised, while its underlying design remains largely unchanged.

Legal and administrative frameworks reinforce this stability. Public school teaching positions are embedded within a broader system of civil service employment, certification, and registration that is not easily reconfigured. Expanding full professional inclusion for international educators would require changes not only to hiring practices, but to licensure systems, employment categories, and, more broadly, how membership within institutional structures is defined. These are not incremental adjustments; they are structural questions.

The result is a model of internationalisation that is both functional and limited. The ALT system works in the sense that it delivers visible international presence and supports aspects of language education. At the same time, it maintains clear boundaries around authority, recognition, and long-term integration.

Japan is not alone in facing tensions between international recruitment and institutional inclusion. However, the scale and longevity of the ALT system make these dynamics particularly visible. After nearly forty years, its core features remain largely intact, suggesting that what appears as flexibility or ambiguity may in fact be a stable and deliberate configuration.

This raises a broader question. If internationalisation does not lead to structural inclusion, what is it intended to achieve?

These issues are explored in greater detail in More Than an Assistant: ALTs, Inclusion, and the Future of Educational Roles in Japan, which uses the ALT system to examine how education systems define roles, distribute authority, and maintain continuity even where inconsistencies are widely recognised.

More information about the book is available here: https://a.co/d/0cDB7dsG

(Photos courtesy of Debito)

======================
Do you like what you read on Debito.org?  Want to help keep the archive active and support Debito.org’s activities?  Please consider donating a little something.  More details here. Or if you prefer something less complicated, just click on an advertisement below.

Japan Times, “What you need to know about Japan’s new joint custody system: Advocates say that the changes will allow both parents to remain involved in the raising of their children”, March 24, 2026. On landmark legislation that came into effect on April 1, about 25 years too late for our generation of parents

mytest

Books, eBooks, and more from Debito Arudou, Ph.D. (click on icon):
Guidebookcover.jpgjapaneseonlyebookcovertextHandbook for Newcomers, Migrants, and Immigrants to Japan「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)sourstrawberriesavatardebitopodcastthumbFodorsJapan2014cover
UPDATES ON TWITTER: arudoudebito
DEBITO.ORG PODCASTS on iTunes, subscribe free
“LIKE” US on Facebook at http://www.facebook.com/debitoorg
https://www.facebook.com/embeddedrcsmJapan
http://www.facebook.com/handbookimmigrants
https://www.facebook.com/JapaneseOnlyTheBook
https://www.facebook.com/BookInAppropriate
If you like what you read and discuss on Debito.org, please consider helping us stop hackers and defray maintenance costs with a little donation via my webhoster:
Donate towards my web hosting bill!
All donations go towards website costs only. Thanks for your support!

Hi Blog.  An important law was just effected this month — both parents are now allowed access to their kids after a divorce.  It’s in my view good news, even if it comes a good 25 years too late for our generation of parents who lost their kids in a Japanese divorce.  May future generations never know what we all went through in our day, and may there be less misery inflicted on children just because the parents couldn’t work it out.  Debito Arudou, Ph.D.

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

What you need to know about Japan’s new joint custody system
Advocates say that the changes will allow both parents to remain involved in the raising of their children

BY JESSICA SPEED. Japan Times, Mar 24, 2026
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2026/03/24/japan/society/explainer-joint-custody/

Joint custody for divorced parents will be allowed from April 1 in Japan — one of the few jurisdictions in the world where custody has been granted to only one parent — in one of the biggest reforms to the country’s family law in decades.

For the first time ever, revisions to the Civil Code and related laws will allow parents to choose between sole custody or joint custody following a divorce. The Justice Ministry says the reform is aimed at placing “the best interests of the child” at the center of post-divorce arrangements.

Until now, sole custody was the only option a divorced couple had, in contrast with many Western countries where joint custody is commonplace. The system has long drawn criticism from foreign organizations — particularly in cases involving international marriages and cross-border custody disputes — because it robs the noncustodial parent from having any legal authority over major life decisions for the child.

Advocates say that the changes will allow both parents to remain involved in the raising of their children. However, critics warn that it could expose abuse victims to continued control by their former spouses and effectively cut off their only route of escape.

Others say it places too much power in the hands of the family court, which decides whether or not to grant joint custody if the divorcing parents can’t come to an agreement on their own.

Other revisions to legislation include allowing trial visitation periods and having clearer procedures for the seizing of assets for a parent’s nonpayment of child support.

Here’s what you need to know about the changes that take effect from April 1:

What is going to change and how is joint custody decided?

Under Japan’s current system, only one parent can hold parental authority after a divorce. The mother was granted custody for 85% of divorce cases in 2020, according to the latest available data from the health ministry.

However, from April, divorcing couples can decide whether parental authority will be shared by both parents or held by one parent alone. If they cannot come to an agreement, or if the divorce is decided in the family court, a judge will determine whether joint or sole custody is in the child’s best interests.

The amendment does not create a general presumption in favor of either arrangement.

The court is expected to decide on a case-by-case basis, based on the child’s welfare, the relationship between each parent and the child, and the relationship between the parents, among other factors.

Disagreement between parents over custody does not automatically rule out the possibility of joint custody. But in high-conflict divorce cases, the court may still award sole custody if it finds that the parents would have difficulty exercising parental authority together.

What kind of authority would joint custody entail?

In principle, a child’s major life decisions — such as where they live, what school they go to, what major medical procedures they undergo, and what assets they hold — are to be made with both parents’ consent.

If parents cannot agree on a specific issue, the family court can designate one parent to decide on the matter alone.

The law also allows one parent to act independently on matters described as “daily decisions related to custody and education.”

These include things such as food, routine vaccinations and extracurricular activities, as well as participation in ordinary school events, part-time jobs for high schoolers, as well as short sightseeing trips.

One parent may still make major decisions alone in urgent circumstances. These include moving to escape domestic violence or abuse, giving the go-ahead for emergency medical treatments, and deciding on schools when enrollment deadlines are approaching.

Additionally, the joint exercise of parental authority does not necessarily mean both parents’ signatures or seals are always required in consent forms. One parent may often act as the only signee, with the other parent’s consent being implied.

If one parent seeks consultation on a matter requiring joint decision-making and the other parent does not respond within a “reasonable period,” that silence may in some circumstances be treated as implicit consent.

Under what circumstances would sole custody be granted?

The family court cannot grant joint custody if there is a risk that a parent will harm the child physically or mentally, or if domestic violence or other circumstances make joint decision-making difficult.

Courts will consider whether there is violence or a risk of violence between parents, rather than requiring proof of past physical abuse, such as a doctor’s note.

The Justice Ministry says this is not limited to evidence of physical violence. Emotional, financial and sexual abuse may also be relevant, although this may be trickier to prove, critics have warned.

For the court to judge whether there is a risk of physical violence, physical evidence from a third party, such as a doctor’s note, will not be required.

Can divorced couples switch to joint custody after sole custody has been granted?

Yes. Parents who divorced before the law takes effect will also be able to apply to change an existing sole custody arrangement after April 1.

The family court will decide whether to change the arrangement based on the child’s best interests. The ministry says this process also applies to custody agreements reached under improper circumstances, including domestic violence.

Upon applying for the change, the court can see as part of its assessment whether a parent has fulfilled their responsibilities, such as paying child support and whether they have complied with their duty to respect and cooperate with the other parent.

Examples of conduct that may violate this obligation include violence toward the other parent, refusing to allow the child to meet with the other parent despite set agreements, and overinterference in the other parent’s parenting of the child.

What are the pros and cons of the new system?

Supporters of the reform say allowing joint custody could help children maintain meaningful relationships with both parents after divorce.

But opponents warn the new framework could make it harder for victims of domestic violence to sever ties with abusive former partners, potentially forcing sustained interaction long after a relationship has ended.

Yet the reality of divorce rarely falls neatly into either camp.

Steve H., an English teacher in Yamagata Prefecture who asked for his surname to be redacted, said the current system can leave a noncustodial parent powerless even when a child’s welfare is at stake.

He pointed to an example involving his daughter, who lives with her mother, who had a broken baby tooth that had decayed. Her mother refused to have it treated, he said, even though his daughter was clearly embarrassed by it.

Joint custody, he said, would have allowed him to have her get treatment.

For him, that case showed how sole custody can leave one parent watching from the sidelines even over basic issues such as a child’s medical care.

However, there is also another side to consider.

He said his son, who lives with him, doesn’t have a good relationship with his mother and “wants absolutely nothing to do with her.” He fears joint custody could give her more access.

“No joint custody means my son and I are free right now,” he said.

The Justice Ministry has stressed that the revised law is not meant to force cooperation where cooperation is impossible, particularly in cases involving domestic violence.

Still, much will depend on how the family court interprets the legal provisions.

The amendments allow joint custody, but leave judges with broad discretion in determining what arrangements serve the child’s best interests. As a result, the reform’s real impact may depend less on the wording of the law itself, and more on how the court applies it in practice.

That uncertainty is compounded by the broader context of divorce in Japan. Unlike in many Western countries, divorce still carries social stigma, and couples who reach that point are often doing so after relationships have already severely broken down.

Whether the new system will encourage greater parental cooperation — or simply create new arenas for conflict — may only become clear once the family court begins applying the revised laws to real-life cases.

ENDS
======================
Do you like what you read on Debito.org?  Want to help keep the archive active and support Debito.org’s activities?  Please consider donating a little something.  More details here. Or if you prefer something less complicated, just click on an advertisement below.