Japanese Politics and the Rashomon Effect

Although Kurosawa was quite the "out of the box" thinker, I'm almost certain that he would not have considered that one of his masterpieces would remain open to so much interpretation even on the political level.

I find that Rashomon can be used as a framework with various sub-frameworks in the analysis of Japanese politics. For one, the psychological overtone of Rashomon can be used to analyze Japan's political development and its transition from the Meji restoration period to the current post world war II politics. According to the commoner in the Rashomon storyline, that human nature is about survival, selfishness, and the pursuit of interests, which was his reason for the different eyewitness accounts that became the major driving point of the story plot.

How is this commoner's wisdom relevant to the discussion of Japanese politics and its development? The reason that truth is subjective, is that the means through which is recalled or perceived is always dependent on a person's interest. Just as the truth can be twisted here and there to suit the eyewitnesses interests, politics is just as susceptible to change in accordance to the nation's values which ultimately dictate interests.

I'll try to illuminate. Prior to Japan's modernization during the restoration period, the value system was one that emphasized group cohesiveness - for the good of the group ideology - and a national goal of "catching up with the western powers". These values and sentiments affected Japan's interests when it came to policy making. Policies then were made to accommodate such sentiments. This brought about the introduction of western ideologies such as social Darwinism - the ideology that might is right - and technologies that aimed at promoting Japan's position in its race for power and competition against the west. The reason these alien infusions were resisted very little, was due to the afore mentioned value system or interest, in layman's terms, " We should suck it up since its good for national progress ". Also, policy making was dramatically changed with the introduction of the bureaucratic system of governance since it emphasized efficient and rational decision making that is free of human sentiments. This caused alot of internal friction because rural groups started feeling left out and sacrificed for the sake of development. Furthermore, it was bureaucratic thinking that made it so easy for Tojo to declare war against the west without consideration of the implications or consequences that would follow. Following so far? bear in mind that national and political interests have played a major role so far in decision making.

After Japan's defeat in 1945, Occupation forces introduced their own form of liberal politics in the form of the occupational constitution that stipulated the importance of human rights. This event in turn caused a shift in the value system which will eventually affect the interest of leaders, thereby affecting policy making. Postwar national value dropped the whole idea of ultra national ideologies for more practical concerns, such as competing with the west in the economic front rather than the military front. Japan's politics today is the result of that shift in interests. The introduction of democracy and loyalty to one's own group is another reason that Japan is experiencing divided politics in this day and age. We have socialists group that are content with the peaceful conditions that Japan is in now, and then we have conservatives that are interested in restoring Japan to its former glory as a military power. The reason that is vital for observers like us, is because it gives us the ability to analyze the decision making of parties with their own view of what a true Japan should function like by first examining the interest of these respective parties.

Back to the movie, like I said earlier we can use Rashomon to interpret Japanese politics using Rashomon's different levels of interpretation as frameworks. The most popular framework would be using Rashomon's unfolding story as an allegory for the events that lead to Japan's defeat in 1945. Now we have the Samurai and his wife, representing Japan's values and Japan herself respectively - since Japan is in essence married to its values. Lets say the Samurai represents Japan's traditional ultra-national and group cohesiveness values. In the progression of the story, the bandit is introduced as a rapist and a threat to the Samurai's sense of honor, so we shall call the bandit, The West - because he represents the freedom that he enjoys in the wild as a bandit or "democracy". Now, the wife is torn between two men, and this causes conflict and violence, likewise, the introduction of western concepts and ideologies to Japan has brought it its share of internal conflict. The end result of the conflict both in the Samurai's case and Japan would be defeat, with the bandit or the west still standing.

Means to an End

- A Relation based on Similarities and Differences -

In our everyday lives, we instinctively compare things in order to aid the decision making process. I cannot for the life of me remember how many hours I've spent comparing dresses at a store till I finally chose one that was deemed most pleasing based on a comparative fashion criteria that takes into account all of sorts of things such as current clothing trends, comfort, pricing, etc. Coke and Pepsi? Apples and Oranges? Tomaeto and Tomato? How do we differentiate and understand these constructs without a comparative analysis?

Comparative analysis may very well work for the mundane and trivial things in our everyday life, but is it scientific enough to be used in the field of politics? well according to Todd Landman, author of Issues and Methods of Comparative politics, comparative politics can be scientific despite certain imperfection in the approach brought about purely by potential human error when making the analysis. I am still however in agreement with one of the premises in Landman's publication. Comparative politics fulfills the need to understand the complex and multi-faceted world of politics, its various machinations, and its relevance to the larger world.

Landman accurately outlines the four main objectives of comparative politics - these objectives are reinforced in other comparative studies as well - as follows. Contextual descriptions allow scientists to describe and identify other countries. The process of classification, is essentially the means through which empirical evidence is organized, thereby simplifying the complex world of politics. Hypothesis testing function of comparative politics is the process of eliminating other explanations of about particular events, actors, structures, etc. in order to arrive at a more generalized theory. and lastly, the function of prediction, that is born from comparison and generalizations, works by foreseeing certain political outcomes, events, or trends based on gathered comparative data.

Now, i am no political scientist, but I can definitely find uses for comparative politics even if it is used crudely, of all the functions of comparative politics, I personally find comparative politics' function of prediction most intriguing. Instead of using countries, let me use the two dominant political parties in the United States, that is the Democratic party and Republican party as an example. Forgive me for being crude, but based on my understanding, US politics for the past several years have focused on either the national economy or national security. Based on the ruling party, policy making is usually centered around the previously mentioned issues. With this, we can roughly predict in the foreseeable future which political party would be most popular with citizens regardless of political affiliation. George W. Bush Jr.'s administration was marked by the 9/11 attack and the threat to national security that dictator's like Saddam Hussein posed. His policies on stringent national security and an increase in military budget were widely supported during that time. Now, even before the election of Barack Obama as the next U.S president, it was roughly predicted by many. The Democrats practice would I believe is called Democratic capitalism and focuses greatly on the US economy. With promises of an economically stronger state especially during a time when the US economy is fragile and is now in recession, it was easy to see which political party would eventually win the race.

- A Foggy Future -

Japan is by all means a nation with a rich culture and history, a strong and collective sense of nation, and has for years inspired the intrigue of many people. But what would inspire a political scientist's intrigue in the Japanese polity? According to J.A.A Stockwin, Japan has undergone many transformation in a short amount of time that its political system has failed to adapt. For years, the ruling political party in Japan has been the Liberal Democratic Party or the LDP, despite Japan's attempts to reform its political system through the reforming of electoral system and such, it has still failed to do so as seen by the LDP's monopoly of political power. Despite the discontentment of the people with the LDP, things are still unchanged. Thus there is a division that is subtle, yet deep.

There is no harm in attempting to use comparative politics to better understand Japanese politics, but according to Stockwin, it would be quite inadequate to analyze Japan's political situation using the current norms based on international orthodoxies, simply because Japan is uniquely unique. Japan is now in a transitional phase attempting to shed itself from the old, although political scientists wish to predict what sort of system will take over, it will prove quite difficult especially with the above mentioned conditions. In this transitional phase, Japan is still facing unresolved issues before it can change. Stockwin outlined six "crises" - he did not wish to use the word, however due to a lack of a better word it was unavoidable - that are currently tying Japan down and may be linked to its divided politics.

The crisis of political power, is the issue of not having a stable and flexible political party system that would replace the LDP, and halt its monopoly on political power. There is the crises of bureaucracy, which encompasses the criticizing of the bureaucracy for mishandling important economic issues and the rising of corruption scandals. The crises of Political Apathy and lack of confidence in government, which illustrates the decline in voting turnout due to contingent circumstances in political transition. The crises of Economic management entails that the maturation of Japan's economy has led to a number of problems such as the deployment of industries overseas in order to cut costs, Japan's indebtedness which has led to the collapse of a number of financial institutions, and finally an increase in unemployment rate. The crises of popular satisfaction with life chances resulted in Japan's lagging standard of living with regards to components like homes and personal freedom despite it being the second largest economy in the world. The final hurdle would be the crises of constitution and world role. Will Japan play the role of the peaceful negotiator as dictated by its constitution article of peace, or will it play the role of a military power as it once was? The revision of the constitution is nonetheless a more pressing issue for Japan, as it may have national and international ramifications.


Concerning the prediction of what sort of system will likely replace the old, in my opinion is largely dependant on how Japan will deal with the above mentioned issues. The manner through which it is resolved is of great importance in understanding Japan's polity and predicting political trends that may arise. Therein lies the need to study Japanese politics, in an attempt of unfogging the future.