'Japanese First': The deep roots of the rising far right

https://www.france24.com/en/asia-pacific/20250723-japanese-first-the-deep-roots-of-the-rising-far-right

by rntn • 12 months ago

16 26 12 months ago

france24.com

arresin• 12 months ago

Isn’t it ok for the Japanese to be Japanese first?

chrisg232• 12 months ago

No. It impinges on the right of Western collective of ideamakers to tell them what to do and how to run their country.

The article is from French media sources for example. France, as a part of that collective, is exerting their collectively given self right to tell the world how wrong Japan is for practicing democracy and getting the "wrong" results.

SlightlyLeftPad• 12 months ago

Yeah it is interesting though from a sociological perspective that there seems to be a worldwide pullback from globalism. Did Brexit or Trump kick this off?

chrisg232• 12 months ago

It's my sense that globalism kicked off this trend of anti-globalism.

If it benefitted more people, or more accurately if it benefitted people in a more equitable way instead of concentrating the gains in the hand of the wealthy and powerful, globally, then maybe there would be less of a pullback.

I'm not arguing for or against globalism, it has many benefits and drawbacks, but the undercurrent of opposition has existed long before Trump of Brexit, as seen for example in the various GX (G8, G20, etc) protests that took place around the world in the 2000's and 2010's, preceding the Trumpers and Brexit.

I agree the sentiment has picked up in recent years, accelerated since Covid, and that politicians are doing what politicians do, trying to get elected.

lazyeye7• 12 months ago

For alot of people globalism = elitism. It provides a sort of camouflage behind which elites can organise things in a way which best suits them whilst at the same time proclaiming how virtuous they are.

bamboozled8• 12 months ago

I doubt you read the article but here:

In one of Sanseito’s proposed policies, she said, the party would explicitly prohibit foreigners from having voting or civic rights, and it would not allow naturalised citizens to be able to hold public office until they had been naturalised for three generations.

Are you asking why it’s wrong to strip non-ethnically Japanese to be stripped of civic rights ?

To your questions: No, because there are lot of wonderful people who are non ethnically Japanese who live in Japan, contribute like everyone else who are accused of being parasites for no reason but political gain only. It’s Trumpism.

yongjik• 12 months ago

No. And we had a World War to prove that.

And before anyone says "That's not what Japanese First means!", this is exactly what this particular party means when they say Japanese First.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanseit%C5%8D#Historical_issue...

The party calls the Pacific War the "Greater East Asia War" and claims that it was "not a war of aggression." It also claims that its purpose was to liberate Asian countries from the West. Regarding the Battle of Okinawa, it believes that the Japanese military "fought to protect Okinawa". It also denies the existence of comfort women and the Nanjing Massacre.

bawana3• 12 months ago

Globalism destroys national identity, a convenient source of self esteem. If anything, globalism favors the corporate mentality of dehumanizing people as it seeks to maximize profit by exporting services to the least expensive provider. This precept of Ricardo that has been extolled by billionaires like Buffett has been twisted into 'let the people who can provide the most output for the least input' prevail. Using this mentality, we will soon return to child labor and slavery. The significant intangible of nationalism is that it puts a floor under this race to the bottom and provides a foundation deeply rooted in our evolution for humans to coexist within a homogeneous pool - a shared culture - a set of behaviors that have a low cognitive burden, are easily maintained and transmitted.

Under globalization, we have confusing alternatives that require constant cognitive function to evaluate and maintain. As we seek conformity and agreement, we tend to a homogeneous gruel and the rich diversity of the world becomes an average gray standard.

bamboozled8• 12 months ago

Yeah right, no one has ever been exploited under isolationism. It was all so much better when it was a bunch of little countries having little economies and hardly any trade between them.

This comments section is a cesspool.

lazyeye7• 12 months ago

There is probably a middle ground between globalism and isolationism that might work best. We can talk about this without people trying to shut down the conversation with inflammatory labels like "cesspool".

kelseyfrog• 12 months ago

Furthermore, markets have no responsibility to national identity. If national identity is sub-optimal, the market will route around it like damage.

In the end, markets rule all, and if folks have to trade gruel, self-esteem, child labor protections, we'll be told that we live like kings and queens compared to 15th century peasants.

Hammershaft• 12 months ago

This precept of Ricardo that has been extolled by billionaires like Buffett has been twisted into 'let the people who can provide the most output for the least input' prevail.

What you're describing are literally the productivity gains that have brought people out of abject poverty.

bawana3• 12 months ago

I disagree-there are so many other factors that reduced 'poverty'. Technological and scientific advances had more to do with it than division of labor.

'Japanese First': The deep roots of the rising far right

Related Stories