From the article of 'Petrel'
No.734 / Jury 18, 1999

Please send us your opinion and the impression about this article without reservation.

Beginning of the Constitutional Amendment for the Worse

In response to the legalization of the flag "Hinomaru" and the anthem "Kimigayo"
Formation of the Parliamentary Exploration Committee for the Constitution


------------
The House of Representatives approved the establishment of the ConstitutionExploration Committee by the unified effort of "Jijiko" (coalition ofLiberal Democratic Party, Liberal Party and Komeito Party). For severalyears of perspective, they will establish the Constitution ExplorationCommittee within the Diet and discuss the issue of constitutional amendment. The political intent of the three-party coalition of "Jijiko" is to reformthe Article 9 of the Constitution from the pacifism-oriented constitutionbeing put into effect after the Second World War, into the nationalisticone. The coalition of "Jijiko" provides the most opportune time for theachievement of their political intent. The reactionary factions becameaggressive in pursuing their long-pending political ambitions. The suddenlyemerged extremely villainous political figure, Nonaka, boss of thereactionary faction in the leading Liberal Democratic Party, has shoutingout that the political issues we face in this century should be resolved inthis century. They are strengthening their tactics.
------------

The inevitable scheme for the wrong constitutional amendment

The leading Liberal Democratic Party emphasized the rationale that it isnatural to seek ways to improve the constitution at any given times incorresponding to the ever-changing international situations and the valuesthe Japanese people develop.

But is it true? The constitution governs thefoundation of a nation. If that foundation needs to be subjected toconstant examination for validity, how we can respect such a constitution?
We cannot regard it our respective constitution at all.

The constitution does not deal with any specific situations and issues, but does definegeneral and fundamental national policies. Therefore, the constitutionshall not be subjected to constant examinations, but shall be examined onlyat a critical national upheaval that threatens the foundation of our nation.
History has proved that principle.

The "Jijiko" coalition also has attempted to change the national foundationof Japan. This is the major reason why they strongly advocate theconstitutional amendment. They are just deceptive and misleading in theirattempts.

We have never attempted to question and examine the foundations of theImperial Constitution for several decades until we made amendment twice,before and after World War II, in responding to the democratization of ournation. It is quite a different matter how those people in government andin power interpreted, utilized and activated the constitution. It isbecause of the continued existence of the reactionary constitutionalparliamentary monarchy before the war, that they didn't even attempt toamend the constitution before the war. The fundamental constitutionalamendment after the war was possible because they tried to adopt the"democratic" system while keeping the outer structure of the constitutionalparliamentary monarchy.

Therefore it is totally irrational to try to amend the constitution withoutany fundamental changes of our nation. The constitution shall be thesupreme law that is described in general and abstract terms, and manysubordinate, specific and individual laws support the constitution. Thereshall be no necessity and inevitability to attempt to amend the constitutionas long as these subordinate laws and regulations can deal with theever-changing situations.

In this respect, "the inclusion of the right to environment" and "creation ofthe public information disclosure laws" and other arguments displayed by thecoalition of Liberal Democratic Party and Komeito Party do not address thefundamental constitutional issues.

"The fundamental human rights" laws (or other provisions in the constitution)
can deal with these specific matters at any circumstances.

Therefore, those who bring about the issues of environmental rights and thepublic information disclosure laws for the basis for the constitutionalamendment are trying to keep their hidden and ill-willed agenda, and have novalid reasons for the constitutional amendment.

What drives the coalition of the "Jijiko" to attempt the constitutionalamendment is their acknowledgment of the critical changes being taken placein the nation. They understand and believe that our nation is transformingfrom the peace-oriented nation, as has been stated symbolically in thePreamble to the Constitution and the Article 9 of the Constitution, to "agreat nation with political power" that also means a nation with strongmilitary power and imperialistic rule. It is their belief that theprobability of such a political transformation of our nation can be expectedto some extent. As a way to accommodate the transformation of our nation,they have been extensively advocating the constitutional amendment.

The die is cast practically. The voice calling for the constitutionalamendment, has become ever stronger among the people in power, is to resultthe establishment of the Constitution Exploration Committee. Japan has beenchanging and we have reached a point that the changes taking place in ournation have been inevitable.

The "new" nation we are referring to shall not be that of peace-orientednation, but shall be a nation with political strength, military might,supremacy and imperial rules. It is rational for the coalition of "Jijiko"to intensify their attack on Article 9 of the Constitution.

Is it worth to preserve the Constitution of Japan?

Both the Japanese Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party stronglysupport the protection of the current constitution.

Putting aside our considerations to each specific articles and clauses ofthe Constitution, how workers can ever contribute in preserving the currentConstitution?

The current constitution of Japan reflects the capitalism that openlypromotes the possession of private ownership of properties, and guaranteesthe governance of capital. The true capitalistic nature of the currentconstitution has been kept hidden under many pacifistic- anddemocratic-oriented decorative euphemism and vain expressions.

In deed, the constitution states the basic human rights and democraticrights. But these rights are guaranteed within the provision of thecapitalistic structures, provided that these rights do not contradict andoppose the rules of the capitalistic governance.

The pacifism defined in the constitution became materialized under the veryspecial situation in which the Imperialistic Japan was defeated in the war.
Once Japan reestablishes its own monopolistic capital controls andstrengthen the capitalistic "self-reliance" of our nation, the pacifism willfade away quickly. Consequently, the acceleration of transformation of ournation from pacifism into militarism will become ever stronger.

If the pacifism in Japan has been preserved by the militaristic andimperialistic policy of the United States and exists within the boundariesas has been shown in the Security Pact between Japan and the United Statesof America, we can see utmost stupidity of the Japanese Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party who have earnestly tried to preserve such a thing.

Both the Social Democratic Party and the Japanese Communist Party membersreduced to the "petite bourgeois" could have enjoyed carefree speaking aboutthe constitutional amendment. Of course, from time to time, the KomeitoParty and the Liberal Democratic Party members also paid big lip services tothe constitutional amendment. Now their nature becomes apparent. They have not been awared that it was just the way to accommodate and assimilate thecapitalism forged in our nation after the war.

In addition, the current constitution defines our nation as a "diluted" formof the constitutional parliamentary monarchy created after the war, andplaced the definition of the emperor and the imperial system at the openingchapter of the constitution. This is a sort of declaration that Japan isgoverned by monarchy. We just wonder how the Japanese Communist Party cansupport this form of constitution.

Do they defend only the "peaceful and democratic" resolutions and try todefeat the monarchic and other "reactionary" statements from theconstitution?

But they are absurd and opportunistic. The issue here is to identify theclass-oriented, historical nature of the fundamental character of theconstitution. Based on this basic recognition of the constitution, theworking classes chose their own standing for the constitutional issues.

At the parliamentary debate on the issue of the legalization of the RisingSun flag and the anthem "Kimigayo", Keiji Kokuta of Japanese Communist Partyand Nonaka exchanged arguments that could hardly be called a "debate."Kokuta argued that the anthem "Kimigayo," that praises the Emperor who wasresponsible for the war, does not reflect the sovereignty of the Japanesepeople. Nonaka high-handedly rebutted by saying, "The Japanese CommunistParty denies the imperial system, yet recognizes the current constitutionthat defines the symbolic emperor." His definitive statement caused theargument to a complete halt.

Kokuta was defeated by Nonaka and left the scene as a defeatist. As long asKokuta respects current constitution, he should also accept the symbolicmonarchy by the Emperor. Otherwise, his statement may not hold water atall. The symbolic monarchy by the Emperor is part of the capitalismestablished after the war. It is part and parcel of the constitution formedafter the war.

The defeat of the opportunist against the ruling Liberal Democratic Partyfurther strengthened the justification of the stance held by the majorpolitical party.

Constitutional issues and working classes

The reactionary faction members within the Liberal Democratic Party agreethat the constitution should be amended at any appropriate time because itis not the absolute form of Buddhist Scriptures of "Fuma no Taiten" thatshall never be altered in any way under any circumstances. They should beresponsible for their own words. They should not grumble even when theworking people try to amend the constitution or approve a fundamentallydifferent form of constitution in future.

Of course, the working people express the unanimous support for theunderstanding that the constitution is not the untouchable "Fuma no Taiten."In this fundamental respect, we have been more critical about theconstitution than the Liberal Democratic Party members. Rather, werecognize the need for the abolition of the current constitution andadoption of a new from of constitution based on fundamentally differentprinciples. Though we don't care how they refer to such a constitution.

We would like to ask the members of the Liberal Democratic Party if they cankeep on making irresponsible remarks such as, the constitution would neverbe worn out like the "Fuma no Taiten". Do they mind if the foundation ofthe constitution be replaced with the principle of socialism?

We support the amendment of the constitution within the perspective of theadvancement of the nation's history, the liberation of the working people,but not in the form of receding in history, shrinking of pacifism andreduction of the working people's rights.

First of all, we need to do away with the reactionary, irrational andout-of-date, antiquated imperial (monarchic) establishments.

The anachronistic, grotesque and reactionary nature of the imperial systemhas been openly displayed through the legalization issue of the flag"Hinomaru" and the anthem "Kimigayo."When princesses and royal family members get married to commoners, they usea discriminatory reference to them as "minkan" that means "private common."Because of this discriminatory tradition, the Emperor didn't attend thefuneral service for his father-in-law who was a commoner. The imperialsystem has become a mysterious, grotesque and inhuman establishment.

The imperial system is nothing but a senseless, harmful worthless andanachronistic institution that only harms the working people.

What does the following quoted sentence of the Article 1 of the Constitutionmean? It reads, "The Emperor shall be the symbol of the State and the unityof the people, deriving his position from the will of the people with whomresides sovereign power."The constitution does not deserve the integrity as the solemn constitutionof a sovereign nation because of the irrational Article 1 that cannot beexplained in rational manner by anybody else.

The ruling Liberal Democratic Party leaders respond by saying that theconstitution needs to be changed in order to cope with the changing world,and the constitution is not the imposition of the United States but our own.
We respect their arguments. Then we would like to ask them that, first ofall, they should revise the Article 1 in order to conform to the changingworld. The revision of the Article 1 is primary issue in agenda. We alsowould agree with them to discuss the issue. But can they be that muchdetermined, rational and wise?

Even the ruling party members may not deny that it was MacArthur's decisionthat preserved the symbolic imperial system. Without his support, theimperial system was to perish like a pile of eggs being crumbled under theturmoil after the war. Widely spread voice raised against the Emperor forhis supreme commanding responsibility for the war filled not only Japan butalso anywhere else in the world. The overall air of Japan was filled withthe negative thought that the Emperor was to be executed and be abolished.
We questioned the continued existence of the imperial system in thatchanging period of time.

MacArthur deserves the respect from the members of the reactionary factionsin Japan. They should thank him for the preservation of the monarchicsystem being represented by the "symbolic imperial system" which remainsconfused because of the irrational combination of monarchic system anddemocratic principles.

If they stick to their principle against the imposition of the UnitedStates, they can do away with the imperial system being imposed by theUnited States. Then, we can understand them to some extent.

Do they defend themselves by saying that because of the imposition by theUnited States, the imperial system deformed as "symbolic imperial system"?
Or do they intend to say if there was no pressure from the United States,the imperial system might have been preserved without any changes as beforethe war? Are they trying to make excuses by saying that it is because ofthe United States' imposition that imperial system (constitutionalparliamentary monarchy) has been democratized to some extent? It is all upto them if they develop any sort of arguments about the imperial system.
But we do not think they are wise enough.

The more they try to defend themselves by making any excuses, the more theywould expose their reactionary nature of their party to an expandingaudiences in Japan, and help to strengthen the determination of the workingpeople in our attempt of sweeping away the imperial system.

I will teach them a true lesson in history. If they attempted to preservethe traditional imperial system after the war resulted in defeat, not onlythe symbolic imperial system but also the imperial system (the nationalconstitution being conceived by the reactionary people) were to be destroyedcompletely. The overall situation was that much negative against theimperial system. The majority of the working people in Japan expressed deepanger. How the Emperor could escape the grave responsibility for theseveral million of war-dead, while his subordinate Tojo was punished for his commanding responsibilities?

MacArthur preserved the imperial system through the democratization of thesystem. In this respect, the reactionary people might have indebted him agreat deal. But they are trying to return evil for good, by arguing thatthe United States imposed constitution should be amended. We wonder whythey can't see the grave consequences of their standing.

If they don't want the imposed constitution, they should change it. But atthe same time, they need to solve the issues of the imperial system. Theiractions do not hold water. Go ahead and appeal to the public that theimposed constitution should be abolished. At the same time, they need toappeal for the abolition of the anachronistic and ridiculous imperialsystem. The working people would regard the imperial system as the pivotalissue for the constitutional amendment.

It is apparent that the constitutional parliamentary monarchy titled more todemocratic system after the war. But the system still retains the essentialfactors of constitutional parliamentary monarchy, like the imperial systemremains as the imperial system no matter what. The system keeps theunpleasant "imperial system" and the one of which monopolistic capital and reactionaries attempt to take advantage in controlling the working people and causesproblems for us.

Is there any rationale in preserving the system? It is crystal clear thatthe working people benefit nothing from it. Only those capitalists and reactionaries needthis anachronistic and ridiculous system for their own advantages.

The working people are all for the amendment of the constitution that wascreated for the capitalists and promotes the possession of privateproperties. It also keeps the totally out of date and meaningless traditionof the imperialism.

We will give them our clear warning that we will definitely challenge theleading Liberal Democratic Party and the coalition of "Jijiko" for their anyreactionary attempts of reversing the constitution and the history of ournation.

(Translated by Yasuhiro Yano)