What do you think about the Japanese idea "bad politicians must resign"?

[michiru]

In Japan prime ministers often resign because people think this is the way they take their "responsibilities".
Do you think this is no good to japan?
Political talks are sensitive but would you tell me your idea?

[Reckoner]

They just become scapegoats. Politics in Japan are corrupt. Not that the US is much better.

[Tri-ring]

It's a little more complicated than just good and/or bad.
First of all most of them are not corrupt, at least not as much as American counterparts.
The reason why is because Japanese politicians does not have as much influence as American counter-parts. Here in Japan bureaucrats have much more power and they decide the outcome of most of the direction this nation heads for the next decade.
Why does this happen?
Simple, bureaucrats are the only ones who knows the details to every plan so they can ambush any party does not agree with them. Another point is due to extreme sectionalism. They defend vigorously to maintain their sphere of influence but have no interest outside their realm so even though an idea maybe ideal for the nation as a whole they will resist and try to remove it if they think it is a threat to their immediate concern of interest. What makes it worse is that these bureaucrats creates various public service corporation for themselves to further control and maintain their power. They also syphon tax money to these public service corporation making the situation worse.
Politicians are suppose to keep these "public servants" control under a short leash but have failed to do so since they can't make heads or tail of the present situation of this nation and are under the mercy of them.
So are the bureaucrats corrupt?
Here is the nut shell, not always since they are motivated by their own set of goals which is mandated through their very narrow perceived view towards an issue mandated by sectionalism.
Sectionalism is not really a problem that concerns just Japan but plagues the modern global society as a whole if you consider profit pursuing private companies and nations as a whole are of the same in nature.

The only remedy that comes to my mind is cross exchange so people do not become attached to a single group and see the society as a whole.

[synaesthetic]

Bad politicians deserve to die in a hotel fire.

An AIDS hotel.

During bees week.

[RandySyler]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

They just become scapegoats. Politics in Japan are corrupt. Not that the US is much better.

Politics are power. Power is corrupt. It is only natural that after a given amount of time, every political power becomes corrupt, requiring something called a revolution.

[Nightbat®]

bad politicians should be locked up

Looking at how much they make, how much responsibility they have and how much responsibility they take

Those guys walk away and get a very wellpaying job at one of the companies who's asses they saved by using the taxpayers money

If you, or I, or most of us here f'up that much at our jobs we're in welfare for the rest of our lives

[skeptism]

Bad according to whom? 'Bad' is such an ambiguous term and a person's perspective determines what they consider to be 'bad' or 'good'. If you mean Japan has their corrupt politicians who harm in any way, shape, or form the majority of the Japanese people under their influence then yes, I agree with them.

[JuGG]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

Bad politicians deserve to die in a hotel fire.

An AIDS hotel.

During bees week.

That's certainly a scary thing to say but it made me laugh and I can't help but agree (to some extent ); politicians who abuse their position or fail their country cause so much pain and so many problems for their country that they should be met with a heavy hand.
But what is an AIDS hotel and when was bees week again?

[Asuras]

Originally Posted by synaesthetic

Bad politicians deserve to die in a hotel fire.

An AIDS hotel.

During bees week.

A little much...? >.>

Bad politicians are well, bad, yes, but it certainly doesn't mean they need to die.

[solomon]

Originally Posted by Tri-ring

It's a little more complicated than just good and/or bad.
First of all most of them are not corrupt, at least not as much as American counterparts.
The reason why is because Japanese politicians does not have as much influence as American counter-parts. Here in Japan bureaucrats have much more power and they decide the outcome of most of the direction this nation heads for the next decade.
Why does this happen?
Simple, bureaucrats are the only ones who knows the details to every plan so they can ambush any party does not agree with them. Another point is due to extreme sectionalism. They defend vigorously to maintain their sphere of influence but have no interest outside their realm so even though an idea maybe ideal for the nation as a whole they will resist and try to remove it if they think it is a threat to their immediate concern of interest. What makes it worse is that these bureaucrats creates various public service corporation for themselves to further control and maintain their power. They also syphon tax money to these public service corporation making the situation worse.
Politicians are suppose to keep these "public servants" control under a short leash but have failed to do so since they can't make heads or tail of the present situation of this nation and are under the mercy of them.
So are the bureaucrats corrupt?
Here is the nut shell, not always since they are motivated by their own set of goals which is mandated through their very narrow perceived view towards an issue mandated by sectionalism.
Sectionalism is not really a problem that concerns just Japan but plagues the modern global society as a whole if you consider profit pursuing private companies and nations as a whole are of the same in nature.

The only remedy that comes to my mind is cross exchange so people do not become attached to a single group and see the society as a whole.

Some questions;

Who are these all powerful "bureaucrats" exactly?

Is sectionalism really much bigger of a problem in Japan than in Western countries? I know that big parties like the LDP and the Democratic Party have different sections, but due to the quite homogenous nature of the country I didn't think it'd be as fractured as Western governments.

What is an example of these large public corporations?


Short sightedness and parochialism is an unfortunate by-product of many modern democracies I am afraid.

[Asuras]

I may be mistaken, but I don't think there's a single government out there that's more divided than the American Republicans and Democrats.

Sectionalism is much worse here in America.

[Irenicus]

Originally Posted by solomon

Who are these all powerful "bureaucrats" exactly?

Japan's bureaucracy regularly recruits from the best and brightest or at least the most prestigious of her college graduates.

Think of the whole thing as the modern version of a Confucian civil service examination. Journalists are particularly fond of using the term "Mandarins" regarding these men.

The politicians are weak because of the nature of Japan's parliamentary democracy. Long story short, when the ministry posts are considered spoils for politicians to split between themselves with little regard for real expertise, and when that process happens all too regularly (I mean, look at the number of prime ministers they have, and more than one prime minister shuffles his cabinet at least once during his tenure) it means that the bureaucrats "under" them became the real caretakers of the governing business. They know the business; they run the day-to-day government; they "advice" the ministers; they even prepare the questions that the opposition asks during the Diet sessions.

Now when you really think about it, if minister posts are spoils, and the ministers themselves effectively redundant. What is really lost when you force them to take the blame and resign? Not much, really.

DPJ, when it came to power in 2009, promised to change this situation. They haven't made much headway. How could they? It's not like the DPJ members are new blood.

Is sectionalism really much bigger of a problem in Japan than in Western countries? I know that big parties like the LDP and the Democratic Party have different sections, but due to the quite homogenous nature of the country I didn't think it'd be as fractured as Western governments.

His sectionalism refers more to the relatively strict separation between the ministries than in terms of regionalism like the United States. The central government is indeed comparatively much stronger; but it's the split within the central government that he speaks of. Bureaucrats' careers are ministry-based, they climb each ministry independently of their peers in neighboring ministries. Their interests and loyalty are very much based on the good of their ministries, and few are willing to sacrifice their ministries' interest for the sake of the nation as a whole.

One would not necessarily call them evil or corrupt so much as narrowminded and narrow-interested; hence, sectionalism.

Of course, the politicians are sectionalized in a different way, closer to the Americans' constituencies' regionalism. Factional competition within LDP when it was in power was intense because every politician wants to bring home his share of the pork. Dams, airports, and shinkansen lines for everyone~!

[Kaze]

Imho, if you are a blatantly corrupt politician, you should be removed from office, BANNED from anything politically related, and your immediate family as well (i.e: Sons / Daughters)

[NoemiChan]

Not only RESIGN but to FACE TRIAL as well...!!!!

[Master_Yoma]

Well it a good idea to make every politician to resign there all bad not one of them do any thing good

[Knightrunner]

You guys should turn me into a politician by electing me for office I know I can do a better job than the current once right now since I don't belong to any party.

I feel sorry for the once used as scapegoats or being used for there pretty face.

To keep on track: I think depending on the terrible decisions they make they should resigned and give up some of there salary. Court should happen too.

[ZephyrLeanne]

Well, I agree with Irenicus (#12), though the post is way too long to quote.

Point is this.
In EVERY country which practices a parliamentary democracy, the perm-sec is the real boss of the ministry/department. Followed by the Prime Minister/Premier (whichever applies), whose "own" ministry (e.g. "Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet in Australia and NZ, and the Cabinet Offices of Japan, Singapore and the UK.

These cabinet offices hold a status of being "primus inter pares" and can override the perm-sec, but rarely anyway. And the cabinet offices, under the control of the PM can then control the Minister/Secretary.

Therefore, the mandarins, who are rightly placed in charge due to their skill and ability (as compared to winning a "popularity contest" called an election).

It then can be seen that the Minister is merely the ministry figurehead, akin to the President in a parliamentary democracy (in other words, not US/France/China/Taiwan). So, if the minister gets sacked (and rightly so most times), nothing changes, since almost policy deicisions belong to the PM anyway (unless the PM is delegative in personal style).

And yes, it's true, however odd, that "Questions to the minister/PM" are written by the perm-sec's staff.

In fact, I wouldn't mind a pure meritocratic techocracy, and pushing Parliament aside, with its only role to act as the new chamber of sober second thought, with members nominated by the public, and take on their role in purely advisory capacity - not full-time, in other words.

To put it simply, the ministry can put forth a bill that concerns the ministry, and submit it to the Parliament (which would take the form of the House of Lords, but WITHOUT party lines [bye-bye, Lord Mandelson, Lord Tebbit, etc.]) The members (nominated by the public to represent various vocations, similar to the Vocational Panels in the Seanad Éireann (Irish Senate) and universities if required.

The members then look at the bill on its merits, without any party whip, but the only concern is of national interests. It would also fulfil the Catholic encyclical where Pope Pius XI states that:

the Marxist concept of class conflict should be replaced with a vision of social order based on the cooperation and interdependence of society's various vocational groups.

It would keep the evangelicals' mouth taped, as well as anyone on the Right, and eliminate party politicking, which is clearly not looking good.

[Tri-ring]

One of the biggest problem within Japanese centralized bureaucracy is that bureaucrats are turning the coin of "Civil Control" to their own advantage.
In essence bureaucrats cannot call the shots since they are, like the military, under civilian control and only elected official can make the final decision on which way to head, but in order to make that delicate decision you first need to comprehend the entire situation since you only have limited amount in budget.
Now the minister asks what is essential and what is not, bureaucrats having all the information simply answers everything is essential and adds if we need to cut something minister you decide but the consequences lies all on your shoulders and we will not nor need not take any responsibility since we are merely servants and hide all the excess funds funneled to "public service corporations" that promise seats as "advisers" and/or "director" after retirement from the ministry.
In other words they are securing their retirement plan with the sacrifice of commoners.

One point, I am not saying all public service corporations are useless some banks are essential to promote development like Japan Export Development Bank but the majority are useless.

[Vexx]

This happens in any human organized activity... at some point the sub-authority nodes within shift their Prime Directive from "for the good of the whole" to "protecting my little kingdom and bit of turf".

As for the resignation protocol... that's just the modern version of "apologize and throw yourself on the sword" in Japan.

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Tri-ring

... we will not nor need not take any responsibility since we are merely servants and hide all the excess funds funneled to "public service corporations" that promise seats as "advisers" and/or "director" after retirement from the ministry.

Descent from heaven, anyone? If there's going to be blatant corruption, I guess they might as well give it a poetic name.