free forum make a forum for free message boards free forum hosting free phpbb forum phpbb create free forum

abhatia · Joined: 26 Jan 2011 Posts: 37

Japan learned from the Western powers how NOT to empower people and created the ideal constitution for an imperial power.

Free Forum

lizzieyang · Joined: 26 Jan 2011 Posts: 14

It is difficult for me to agree that the Japanese Constitution was created for its people. Japan did make sure the representatives were checked in political processes and did its best to balance the power out. Still, it seems like no common people were actually involved in creating, revising, and reviewing the Constitution at all. "The only group to review the draft constitution was the privy council, whose twelve members nearly all belonged to the oligarchic inner circle and who conducted their deliberations in such elaborate secrecy that they turned in their documents at the end of each meeting," say in the reading.
Japan tried to recruit many young elites from the society in order to make a strong government. However, the tactic seems very deceitful. Only the rich people in the society could receive expensive education, which naturally led them into the political arena. High civil officials were considered superior to the regular commoners.
Commoners were satisfied with the Constitution because they maintained pride in the fact that Japan became the first Asian country to adopt a constitution. Also, they had strong belief in that emperor is still above the constitution that he has utmost power to rule everyone. That was not true. Emperors and Peerage had symbolic roles in the nation. Most responsibility was under the prime minister. Creating a constitution might have been a great start for Japan at the time. However, the division between the imperialism and democracy, yet, seems extremely vague that "people" are not represented very well.

theshaver · Joined: 15 Feb 2012 Posts: 5

YES: Japan's influence from authoritarian governments becomes evident in the constitution written by the emperor and 12 members of an exclusive committee. The constitution was an attempt to unify the country, eliminate dissent and create a common goal: to serve the all-mighty emperor. The newly constructed Imperial Diet was made up of members who represented the top 1 percent of Japan who "paid over fifteen yen in direct national taxes." The elite few who created the new constitution made sure to stray away from anything democratic as to eliminate dissidence and individualism among the lower classes. Like Lizzie said before, I agree that Japan's creation of a constitution was to instill a false sense of democracy among the people and create unity in the country.

Yqi2013 · Joined: 14 Feb 2012 Posts: 21

For a long time in Japanese history, education was an exclusive privilege for samurai class. Only ten years before the promulgation of the constitution, schools for noble families were established. It was reasonable for the Meiji leadership to think that people were not "enlightened" enough to hold political views because the ordinary people were not given opportunities to be educated. Thus the decision-making processes were basically controlled by a small group of people called the cabinet. The members of the cabinet were appointed instead of elected, so the ordinary people had no say in who they wanted as their leaders whatsoever. Although later on civil service examination was adopted, still, it was unlikely for an ordinary Japanese to enter the government jobs that required plenty of education and skills.

Things were changed a little after the establishment of the Meiji constitution. Ordinary people were given suffrage of electing members of the Diet, but the people with low income were not allow to vote. It may sound like democratic, but in fact the ballots were closely supervised and controlled by oligarchs. The leadership group still had the ultimate control in choosing their members.

mkim2013 · Joined: 14 Feb 2012 Posts: 9

From the beginning of the bureaucratic state part of reading, the reading mentions about how Japan had strictly restricted the people who are going to be part of. The reading says, "other leaders were at work shaping a new bireaucratic state structure, designed to be managed by "men of talent" (55). Here, we can see that Japan not only tried to empower those in lower classes but also excluded the females. Moreover, Japan also describes "their" people as "people were not yet "enlightended" enough for political responsibility and that those who sought to represent them were often either irresposible extremists or ambitious opportunists" (55). This is irony how Japan had previously described its neighbor countries like Korea, China and taiwan to be "not enlightened". Also, it was added that their ideal was to be ran by "wise and able" officials, who are apparently those who are in high hierarchy appointed by the prime minister.
Japan's effort in not to empower the people were also visible when the government had no trouble finding the office seekers, since every officials were appointed from the "former samurai" classes who were proved to be "inept, corrupt, or incompetent. It is somehow very irony how their ideal was to be ran by the wise and able people but in reality those who are actually running are those who are incompetent.

rpulak2012 · Joined: 03 Dec 2011 Posts: 9

Looking at the text and the constitution, we can see quite clearly the repressive measures put in place by the government. There are laws that protect people from abuse, sure, but there is also a lot that is set up to form an imperial government. The House of Peers, a parliament formed of the Emperor's own family was created to "check the 'rash impulses' of popularly elected officials. The Emperor also had the right to disband the elected parliament at any time. Only people who paid very high taxes were allowed in the parliment to begin with. I quote from only one section of the reading on page 61, there are many more instances of such treatment. Raised taxes in small villages (p59) and the vast increase in imperial land (Over 600,000% increase according to p56, no that is not a typo) show the gain in imperial power and its power over the people, and by extrapolation the lack of empowerment to the people.

jgottesdiener2013@csw.org · Joined: 14 Feb 2012 Posts: 4

Yes Japan just learned to copy what they saw around them and from places in the west. When forming a new government Japan didnt know where to start so they looked to other parts of the world and were largely influenced by the west.

Vsylva2012 · Joined: 14 Feb 2012 Posts: 6

I agree with the statement. To quote the reading; "During the 1880s, the central government also extended control over local communities. In the decade and a half after the restoration, towns and village assemblies raised local taxes, and town mayors or village chiefs were publicly elected by a local albeit highly restricted electorate.... Beginning in 1884, this local autonomy was gradually stripped away in the name of administrative centralization and convenience."
Japan was using the other imperial nations as an example for how to become a world power by using their people. If a countries people are controlled, they can be easily accessible for military or tax needs. By taking away the autonomous powers of the communities, imperial Japan in effect created a more unified and "bendable" country. The new constitution proposed that all citizens are expected to fight in the military and pay taxes as according to the overall government rather than their "local" government. With a system like this, there would be less opposition to the whims of the main government since the "Dymios" were stripped of their autonomous power and congealed together. This way, should there be any protest to the government, it would be unorganized and small with no community to back it up.

squashie · Joined: 07 Sep 2011 Posts: 22

Like the earlier reading said, Japan wanted to be respected the Westerners and seen as family and in doing that Japan adopted some things from them that weren't necessarily made for Japan and its ideals. I think adopting a constitution was somewhat solidifying that transition. Japan didn't necessarily need to get rid of its imperial ways but they definitely had to modernize it a bit to not seem like an outcast amongst the two other nations.

wlotas2013 · Joined: 14 Nov 2011 Posts: 20

Yes, the Meiji Constitution doesn't introduce new forms of power to the people, it only reaffirms any rights they had prior in text. In order to circumvent any disagreement with the new abilities being provided to the Diet, the constitution must make it appear as if the people gain SOMETHING. A similar concept applies to the Emperor. The Emperor basically receives the same treatment as the people: a subtle denial of power. Although the Emperor has "supreme power" over Japan, he can't do ANYTHING without authorization from the Diet. The people are not empowered, they are oblivious.

wlotas2013 · Joined: 14 Nov 2011 Posts: 20

Yes, the Meiji Constitution doesn't introduce new forms of power to the people, it only reaffirms any rights they had prior in text. In order to circumvent any disagreement with the new abilities being provided to the Diet, the constitution must make it appear as if the people gain SOMETHING. A similar concept applies to the Emperor. The Emperor basically receives the same treatment as the people: a subtle denial of power. Although the Emperor has "supreme power" over Japan, he can't do ANYTHING without authorization from the Diet. The people are not empowered, they are oblivious.

Free Forum