Talk:Liberal Democratic Party (Japan)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Japan, a project to improve all Japan-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Japan-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Japan To-do:

Contents

[edit] Organized when?

I bet LDP was organized in 1955. Do you have reliabe source that attests the priministers were from LDP since 1948? Taku 20:42 Jan 2, 2003 (UTC)

Sorry my mistake. I am translating a book about history of Japan. You are right ... I will fix it. In fact, since 1948, the rulers were from Jiyuto or Minshuto which have merged in 1955. Thanks Takusan for your correction :-) If I have time I will right more on politics of Japan. -- Youssefsan

I am just wondering so the book about history of Japan has a misconception? --Taku

No. I had read "conservatives" and I thought it was eaqual to LDP -- Youssefsan

Liberal Democrat Party is also a name used by Liberal Democrats (UK) and various other countries.

Thanks. -- Youssefsan

The page was moved to reflect the fact that the title is a proper name. Eclecticology 20:52 Feb 13, 2003 (UTC)

Koizumi is not a member of Hashimoto faction but was of Mori faction (not written), or this "Koizumi" is another.

[edit] Faction split to form party?

Under factions, would it be useful to list factions that split to form new political parties?

This article needs to be updated to mention the recent People's New Party split. Yodakii 05:01, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Koizumi member of 2 factions?

Heisei Kenkyukai (Hashimoto Faction), .. It is now led by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi in the lower house and Aoki Mikio in the upper house. ... Seiwa Seisaku Kenkyukai (Mori Faction), led by Mori Yoshiro. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi is a member of this faction.

Is Koizumi really a leader of one faction and a member of another? Can someone clear this up? I can't read Japanese well enough to find out.

Koizumi Junichiro is former leader of Seiwa Seisaku Kenkyukai. He is not member of Heisei Kenkyukai. Sh 06:07, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Conservative/Moderate?

Someone added that the LDP was a moderate party. Electionworld.org, Worldstatesmen.org, and also the Japanese Consulate General of LA have confirmed that the LDP is a conservative party, and the most conservative party. New Komeito has quite a moderatly radical agenda. I am re-editing.

The LDP is a big tent. You have LDP leaders as diverse as Kono Yohei and Aso Taro. But 90% of LDP leaders are conservative compared to the opposition in Japan. The LDP is not an extreme right wing party, nor is it a particularly moderate right-wing party. It is very plainly, very simply, "conservative." Any attempt to modify that descriptor is just acceptance of one side or another's political posturing. ALC Washington 00:33, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Factions

The "Factions" section needs to be updated. I don't know enough to do much about now. Also, should the new members be included in a seperate faction? Some are already calling it "Koizumi Children". --Yodakii 14:28, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] CIA Influence?

"From the 1950s through the 1970s, the American Central Intelligence Agency spent millions of dollars attempting to influence elections in Japan to favor the LDP against more leftist, Soviet backed parties, such as the Socialists and the Communists, although this was not revealed until the mid-1990s when The New York Times exposed it."

Sources? That's a pretty heavy accusation to be throwing around. I'm not saying I doubt it (the actions are actually quite in character with certain CIA operations of the period, IMO), but there does need to be a verifiable source for the information. Maybe the NY Times article(s) relating to this should be cited?

Whoops, forgot to sign that. Anyway, I found a source from the JPRI. I'll add it to the article. Moonsword 00:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Yup It's True! [1]

see below too


LATE PREMIER YOSHIDA REPORTEDLY KNEW OF CIA-LDP PAYMENTS. 249 words 18 October 1994 BBC Monitoring Service: Asia-Pacific English (c) 1994 The British Broadcasting Corporation _F Kyodo News Service, Tokyo, in English 0459 gmt 15 Oct 94

Excerpts from report (for a previous report, see FE/2127 E/4 [10])

Washington, 14th October: The late Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Yoshida knew of secret manoeuvres by the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to procure military material from Japan in the early 1950s, according to a US professor's research made available Friday [14th October].

The CIA launched the manoeuvres in 1951 to procure tungsten, a material to reinforce steel for military use during the 1950-53 Korean War and other purposes in the intensified Cold War, said the study by the late Howard Schonberger, a professor at the University of Maine. The late Kay Sugahara, a Japanese-American businessman, and the late Yoshio Kodama, a Japanese ultrarightist, were involved in Project "W" (W for wolfram, another name for tungsten), the research said...

Sugahara, also an official of the US Office of Strategic Services, the predecessor of the CIA, procured tungsten from Japan through Kodama and paid 2.8m US dollars to the rightist, the manuscript said...Then Bank of Japan Governor Hisato Ichimada, now deceased, also knew about development of the project, the research said...

Former CIA Director William Colby denied Friday [14th October] both Project "W" and earlier media reports that the CIA formed a "special group" in 1958 to study the feasibility of financially assisting the LDP.

(c) BBC Monitoring Summary of World Broadcasts.

Document bbcfe00020011105dqai000nn

The good news is that the Japanese are happy about the end result--Caligvla 21:58, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] History

The history section completely misses the partys many connections to organised crime (yakuza). Especially Yoshio Kodama, the main power behind the formation of the party. Also Ryoichi Sasakawa.

Maybe I should do this myself. But I sense I wouldn't get away with adding such things without good sources. --Apoc2400 10:12, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Policy Affairs Research Council

According to various sources (eg. Stockwin) the head of the LDP Policy Affairs Research Council is one of the most senior figures of the LDP. However I have found it hard to find out anything about this council except for the fact its head is important. Can anyone give more information?129.12.200.49 22:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

The Policy Affairs Research Council (PARC) is an LDP organ, not an organ of the government. It serves multiple functions. Primarily, it coordinates the research of the powerful bureaucracy and the government leaders over proposed laws or regulations. Before a bill is even written the PARC issues recommendations on what the bill should look like, what it will cost, the best way to manage it, how the various factions will look at it, etc. The head of PARC is thus extremely influential in that his committee can make or break a bill by the way they analyze it and the manner in which they choose to present it to the party members. For more information I recommend Gerald R. Curtis' "Logic of Japanese Politics". Wtlegis 07:31, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fact Check

Something's funny with this sentence, from the Structure section: To make the system more democratic, Prime Minister Miki Takeo introduced a "primary" system in 1978, which opened the balloting to some 1.5 million LDP members. Takeo Fukuda was Prime Minister in 1978, not Miki, who resigned two years earlier. Could someone clarify/correct this? -David Schaich 00:52, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I've replaced Miki Takeo with Takeo Fukuda. -David Schaich 01:43, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Term Limit on LDP Presidency

"At the apex of the LDP's formal organization is the president (japanese: sosai), who can serve two three-year terms (The presidential term was increased to three years from two years in 2002)." I think it will be quite useful to add a reference here. As in the LDP constitution it only mentioned that " The President shall be elected by vote according to the Rules for the Election of President of the Party, which shall be stipulated separately." (http://www.jimin.jp/jimin/english/e-Rule/e-Ru-ch2.html) but it seems The Rules aren't on the site. Can anyone give some help here?

[edit] What are the political positions of this party?

Here we have a lengthy article about one of the world's major political parties, yet we learn next to nothing about its political positions, except for repetitive use of the term "conservative".

  • What is its position regarding the Israeli-Palestine conflict?
  • What is its position regarding a stronger role of the military in Japan?
  • What is its position regarding immigration and minorities in Japanese society?
  • What is its position regarding progressive taxation?
  • What is its position regarding unions/ minimum wage laws/ social welfare?
  • What is its position regarding consumer protection laws/environmental regulations?
  • What is its position regarding global warming?
  • What is its position regarding censorship/right to free speech?
  • What is its position regarding punishment vs. reformation of criminals?
  • What is its position regarding abortion/contraception/sex education?
  • What is its position regarding same sex marriage?
  • What is its position regarding the low birth rate in Japan?

What use is an article about a political party without basic information like this? After all, a political party is nothing but a shorthand for a bundle of political positions. AxelBoldt 01:00, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. What I hate about political party articles on wiki is that it gives USELESS information and not the important material.

-G —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.117.158.83 (talk) 21:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Name

I mostly agree with the above post, and also ask this question: I always assumed, based off the name, that the Liberal Democrats were liberal. Why would they use this name if they are conservative? Brutannica 21:28, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

This happens in more countries, for two reasons (that I know of... I'm not much into politics, there may be more). Firstly, conservative doesn't mean the same everywhere in the world. In America conservative may have anti-liberal an undemocratic connotations, but in other parts of the world this may mean entirely different things. Secondly, sometimes a party gradually changes, keeping a technically outdated name. For example the Dutch VVD (People's party for Freedom and Democracy) fits a bit in both patterns. It is / used to be a conservative party in the European sense in that it supported a liberal market, while defending democracy, the welfare state, personal freedom, etc. But in recent years a strong right-wing faction in the party developed whose main priority appears to be turning the Netherlands in a police state. This faction appears to have lost the power struggle for now and the pro-freedom faction continues to set most of the party policy, but if it hadn't the party's name would not have been very appropriate anymore. Shinobu 16:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Which one is it? The article says the two parties that formed the LDP were conservative. Brutannica 23:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
We need to be careful about making political value judgments on Wikipedia, especially in this type of article. The LDP formed as a pro-business anti-Socialist organization by a merger of the above mentioned Democratic and Liberal Parties after the war in 1955 (The '55 System), and with the United States' blessing. The LDP was liberal in the classical Western sense in that is supported, and still supports, trade liberalization (to a degree, arguments over trade protectionism notwithstanding), voting rights, free markets, individual rights, etc. It is Democratic in that it does not advocate ending elections or reducing the franchise (maybe not a necessary statement to make, but you never know). "Conservative" and "Liberal" do not mean "anti-freedom" and "pro-freedom" any more in the United States than they do elsewhere. You have to analyze the meaning in light of the local context. If you use the classical Western European context of "liberal" and not current ideologically-driven contextual meanings then the name makes sense. Wtlegis 07:31, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

Could you please add more references to the article? Use <ref> and {{cite news}}, {{cite web}} and family. Shinobu 16:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neutrality of Platform Section

There are quite a few things that bothered me about the "Platform" section in this article. The section carries a very negative tone with respect to the party.

To begin with, the section mentions that one single author has likened the LDP to a communist party, without providing any explanation whatsoever as to what it is about the party that makes it communist, or why Japan seems to be a "working communism" under the party. Not only that, but this appears to be the opinion of a single author and not a general point of view of the party, let alone a neutral one.

Next, the article states "The party is the most right-wing and conservative party in Japan, and is still the most popular.", as if the party is popular in spite of its conservatism. This kind of tone gives the impression that conservatism is by its very nature unpopular and wrong, and while I personally don't follow conservative ideology, I don't think that wikipedia should be advocating against it.

The section goes on to state "Nevertheless, because of its status as the ruling party, it is marred by various special interests pushing for government patronage. The LDP has also been troubled by financial scandals.", yet it provides no proof or basis for this so-called patronage and these scandals.

Finally, it states "The Democratic Party of Japan is their major opposition and is gaining control over the conflict. The DPJ is putting an end to the anti-terrorism refueling mission." It would probably be nitpicking to call this paragraph out for NPOV, but there are other problems with it so I might as well throw it in there anyway. What exactly does this mission entail? How is the DPJ putting an end to the mission? Are they even putting an end to it, or is this just party rhetoric, stating that they are trying to put an end to it? The paragraph gives the impression that the DPJ is somehow wresting control of Japan's armed forces from the governing party, which I find hard to believe.

I'd also like to add that the section says absolutely nothing about the party's actual platform except that it is conservative (duh) and that it advocates this refuelling mission. This section definitely needs more information, and it needs to be presented in a more neutral tone than it is now.

Uniqueuponhim (talk) 11:31, 19 March 2008 (UTC)