First, we have to prevent the negative effects of this being imposed on ordinary people. Second, we have to change the character of the Japanese economy, from one depending on foreign demand to one based on internal domestic demand. Third, we have to be clear that the financial crisis we are currently witnessing has been the result of excessive deregulation. With the economic situation shaky, the opposition Democratic Party of Japan, led by Ichiro Ozawa, looks set to win.
The fact that Ozawa used to be secretary general of the LDP before joining the DPJ has strengthened this perception among voters who are increasingly cynical about the main parties. When asked who would be a better prime minister, Ozawa or Aso, Ozawa narrowly won. But a majority of the respondents also said that neither of them is appropriate. Although the Communists are unlikely to win power anytime soon, under the leadership of Kazuo Shii, they seem set to make impressive gains in All communism loving people should ask for political asylum on North Korea or Cuba and after living there some years come and tells if they are allowed to what they think of communism if they still love it.
An internal market based economy on Japan is only possible to a degree Japan being a nation poor on natural resources , no economy in the world can exist parallel to the USA economy if you don't trade with the USA , you trade with a nation that does trade with the USA. Remember that Communism was strong in Japan both before and especially after WW2. A lot of it was directed at the Zaibatsu style running of the economy, and a lot of it was fashionable intelligensia idealism imported from Europe. There were large protests against government corruption and for worker's rights in tearly days of the American Occupation I say American rather than allied because it was an American show from start to finish.
Indeed, the Communists were great admirers of MacArthur and Co. Also, remember that Communism doesn't neccessarily imply becoming like North Korea or Cuba or the PRC for that matter , but rather they may see themselves as a viable distinctive alternative to the current political parties. I doubt that they are personally, but they may represent legitimate concerns and points of view on Japan's future.
I guess what I am saying is - they all seem to be idealists, but they should not be totally dismissed out of hand simply because they are 'Communist'. Unfortunately, there are few Americans who can discuss communism logically and not emotionally. It appears that most are as brainwashed as North Koreans. Communism should not be condemned out of hand because of the excesses of Stalinism, Maoism or Kimism. Similarly, capitalism should not be condemned out of hand because of the excesses of the Bush administration. The danger of condemning all communism is the assumption that anyone who opposes communism, Park, Marcos, Diem, Pinochet, to name but a few, is good and justifies support.
Let's listen to the communists and hear what they have to say. A true democrat should think, to quote Evelyn Beatrice Hall, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. In Japan the JCP provides a most useful function. They oppose the LDP and often they are the ones who uncover corruption. We're run by Madison Avenue.
- Capitalism From Within by David L. Howell - Paperback - University of California Press.
- The Markets: Private Economy and Capitalism in North Korea? - Beyond Parallel.
- European Landscape Dynamics?
- Black Notice (Scarpetta 10).
- Companion to Historiography (Routledge Companion Encyclopedias)?
We're run by television. And, as long as we accept those things and don't revolt, we'll have to go along with the stream to the eventual avalanche. We're at the mercy of the advertiser. And, of course, there are certain things we need, but a lot of the stuff that is bought is not needed. We all live in a little village. Your village may be different from other people's villages, but we are all prisoners.
The Japanese Communist Party is part of this development. The significance of this, of course, flies right past the typical brainwashed American nationalist. One significant thing is that these Communist parties, in rejecting the Soviet and Chinese models as successful failures, embraced a earlier democratic model of socialism the one that should have happened in Russian but didn't.
The other is that they became social democratic in nature--reformist rather than revolutionary. It is genuinely for the rights of working people and far less prone to compromise. As a significant opposition party it will help keep the LDP and Democratic Party in check and more or less honest. I do not see the CP as ever becoming the ruling party or even being part of a ruling Democratic Party led coalition, less capitalism takes a radical plunge.
You could add Chiang Kai-shek to that list. I can certainly sympathize with people's fears due to job insecurity where the social safety net has frayed. Our governments often do seem beholden to corporations, through forms of institutionalized bribery. The little guy just can't compete.
Yet to hark back to this book may not offer much of a guide to how to make the present more equitable:. The book, detailing the tyrannical management practices and inhuman living conditions on the ships and the struggle of the workers to unite in their defense,. They are more dangerous, lower-paying and more degrading. And when I struggle to think how we can really make a big difference in the development of the poorest countries, the key always seems to be manufacturing. The problem is that for those with minimal education, and that includes those in developed countries with no more than a high school diploma as well as citizens of third world countries with less, factory work is probably a good job.
In this day and age, however, corporations can send those jobs off-shore in a sort of a race to the bottom. And they can find people to fill them wherever they go regardless of conditions. There are simply many more people in the world than there are jobs which provide more than a subsistence living. Communism in itself doesn't offer any way around this because few people would desire a return to autarky.
If the world financial situation gets worse, however, we may see a return to some form of protectionism. Democracies will be the first to go simply because politicians cannot expect to be reelected by voters who are unemployed. Sure, Linux, er I mean communism seems like a really good idea at first, until you see how many holes bugs and errors it contains, once you have it up running.
Switched back to Windows in a matter of weeks. I think the first lesson that needs to be learned is that the opposite of communism is not democracy. You hear that parroted all the time and it's hilarious to anyone with more than half a brain. JCP are no Maoists, for example. Distribution of power can make or break just about any institution.
Communism, democracy, capitalism - need to be flexible for adaptation, similarly civilization. The latter holding more value than all. What "works" once for some is not always the answer for all always. A decent thermometer is usually how much people love their neighbors. They need to change the name from Japan Communist Party to Japan Socialist Party for the bourgeois leftists on the universities or to Japan Labourist Party for ties with the unions.
The US under bush moved rapidly toward a communist state, ala China, by essentially nationalizing the finance industry and now the auto industry. Crony capitalism failed, say hello to something quite old and something red. Chairman Mao would be proud of bush.
Capitalism From Within: Economy, Society, and the State in a Japanese Fishery
The US government is the only thing keeping the economy alive right now, and still the bush depression may hit soon. In Japan, clearly the current government is a complete failure. If the JCP is the only option for change, then I am not surprised its gaining ground now.
I think these recent "converts" are people who think the Japanese government has failed them. After years of having it easy they don't know how to look after themselves and so they turn to the people who they think will look after them. Once the economy improves again however these people will vanish like the morning mist. Communism is a system in which the government owns society's economic assets.
Democracy is a means to select leaders and to hold those leaders accountable. One can have an elected communist government. Communism was envisioned as the solution to some of the problems the Japanese are now confronting. Ironically, it took hold in many pre-industrial countries where the government built up the industry it owned. That meant its control was much more comprehensive.
North Korea: development of national capitalism
By contrast, what the Japanese are looking for is to reorient their economy away from export-led growth to one focused on the domestic market and the welfare of Japanese workers. As China abandoned state socialism and followed the Japanese model, it too developed rapidly. Yet both countries are now confronting the down side of dependence on global marketplace, really the American consumer, to fuel their growth. Once demand drops, factory inventories pile up and lay-offs follow.
The primary difference between communist systems is the level at which planning done. Bureaucrats in Moscow allocated goods for the entire country. By contrast in countries where communist governments came to power via prevailing in a civil war China, Vietnam , planning was decentralized and each province was responsible for setting and fulfilling its own production targets.
The reason is obvious: in the event part of the "liberated" area went back into enemy hands the rest could still function. But this is state socialism, not want the Japanese are interested in adopting. Rather they are looking for greater worker protection from the insecurities of the capitalist market economy. I'm not sure anyone knows how to achieve that in an age where capital is mobile while labor is not. For the sake of political maturity it may be far better for Japan to try to walk the middle ground for a while.
It's about time the endless chain of right wing domination of the LDP is broken, but do they really need to go extreme left as the answer? Communism has failed, simply because the people in power will always put their own interests above the common good and thus every nation that dabbled with communism instantly turned totalitarian. Let's try to take some baby steps towards a more social policy first before taking to the streets waving your communist mangas. Communism is fine until you get all the statues and posters on every wall and free space.
Then you have all the trinkets and books you must buy. New communist wool hats and jackets. Nobody is forced to buy anything. The problem is that the quality of what's available is poor. Factories are tasked with making a certain number of something and the customers are a captive base. There's no incentive to improve the product since there's no competition in the marketplace. I really don't think the Japanese want to go down this path Pretty much all governments are the same. The difference is the illusion of freedom it gives its people. I have walked pass the Communist parties office at night from Harajuku to Shinjuku.
It looked normal to me. I also had a lot of drinks that night. Heh, this guy is also the best whiner I've ever heard, surpassing even those whiners Kan and Ozawa. And that makes it a lot more attractive than capitalism's "greed is good"-style pride in its inequities. But a nice shade of pink would be nicer than the red. I would even be willing to try a darker pink. Communism is State Capitalism, the state owns every thing yet still exploits the workers. The Japanese Communist party can never achieve that or power because of the collectiveness of the Japanese culture.
The Japanese Communist party needs to forget Marxism which could never work in Japan and adopt Humanism as their ideal. Humanism as a non-exploitive idealism would fit into Japanese culture better than socialism or communism. A Humanist party would be welcomed by the Japanese people who already hold all the values of humanism and its pyramid of needs. The true values looked for by "Communist" reformers who were against exploitation where never in communism and had the Humanist ideal been know to them, they would have adopted that instead of communism.
The Japanese "Communist Party" flies under a false flag and needs to change if it aims to help Japan into a new brave future. Put Hello Kitty on a communist banner and sell it to the people. Bow down to your new fearless leader Hello Kitty! Not sure where this article is getting its information. The Communist Party is losing seats in every election, and will most likely hold none after the next election. It's been irrelevant for decades, and will be extinct in a matter of months. The Japanese in fact incorporated an aspect of communism into their corporate capitalist economy: presumptive job security.
Such a provision can only exist when the work requires few skills. Now job security is gone and that causes serious social disruption. This is explored in the movie Tokyo Sonata , in which a Tokyo salary man loses his job after the position is outsourced but is too ashamed to tell his family. It's done well on the festival circuit; it may not have sold too many tickets in Japanese theaters.
The utopian concept of equality for the mankind never worked. Great Soviet States and ChiCom proved that. Your life from birth to grave is looked after. Nobody has much but all are supposedly equal except people on the bureaucratic ladder of benefits. I had the opportunity to observe the tail-end of communism in China. What's immediately apparent is that the system offers no social mobility.
Once you get your job assignment, your future is set. Though officially unemployment didn't exist, the waiting for work period could drag on for over a year. If you turned down what was offered, the waiting period began anew and there was no guarantee the next placement would be better. What constituted a good job really had nothing to do with the nature of the work but what came with it. State-owned factories had the best housing and other benefits for their employees.
Collectives, usually light industry, offered much less. They were disproportionately staffed by women who, the logic went, could marry a man with a better job. But a man would face poor marital prospects if he were employed by a collective. Because there was a shortage of everything, people spent inordinate amounts of time making friends who could provide access to this or that. A whole vocabulary developed in conjunction with socialism that has now fallen into disuse. Were people unhappy? Not really. They had a lot of time to spend with their families and those relations could be quite close like Elian Gonzalez and his father.
Some may have genuinely appreciated the security the system provided them. The long-term effect is stifling, however, and such a system can never be in the forefront of innovation. I really can't see it taking root in Japan, or any other post-industrial society for that matter. Free-market capitalism is failing. Meanwhile, free-market capitalism is still failing.
Capitalism is not perfect, but what is perfect in life! It has done more good to more people and advanced civilization than any pie in the sky ideals. So in the mean time keep on dreaming how great communism is if it were not for the guns. Communism makes the grand assumtion that the goverment knows what is best for the people. But to do that government would have to be nearly infallible and in responce to that let me offer a quote "There has never been a perfect government, because men have passions and if they did not have passions, there would be no need for government.
The unpaid debt will lead to bankruptcy of banks, which will have to be nationalised, and the State will have to take the road which will eventually lead to communism. In other countries like India, the large number of political parties makes it impossible to reach a concensus on the most basic things. Everytime something needs to be voted on, numerous backdoor deals and short lived alliances have to be made, and this reduces transparency and accountability to the constituents.
China's economic miracle for the last 30 years was not all due to the opening up of market economy, it was mainly due to the concensus based decision making which resulted in very effective policies that could be consistently applied over decades. Even in the US with 2 parties, you see a lot of going back and forth between policies, and wasting time. However, now that China is a market economy, it must follow the rules of international economics, and the crutches from the old days, such as state owned entities and heavy government subsidies and protecions, must be reduced or eliminated.
If Japan were to have any chance of repairing its political system, the various parties need to find common ground in the main policies. Communism is just too far out of left field to go along with any other parties. Should Shii san ever get his political party into a position of power watch out, because his 'communism' simply-is-not.
Several points to be aware of here: Communism in fact evolves out of Socialism just as the latter emerges out of Capitalism. To hold onto a system of politics and economics that is capitalist when it has exhausted itself is to see powerful nations turn to war. The problem with the JCP is that even while it distances itself from Stalinism, it is precisely the same.
As Trotsky died pointing out, a nationalist socialism is not possible, neither theoretically as Marx and his supporters theorised it, not practically as Trotsky saw himself in historical events of the time. The only kind of socialist system that works is one that is international. This is the understanding of successive 'Internationals' International Socialist conferences. It is the understanding of the 4th International.
Note though this is not the 'reality' depicted by those writers deluded by the fantasy of everlasting capitalism who wish for us all to believe to depart from capitalism is to step back into a tyranny of dictatorship in the image of Stalin and Mao. Ishii and his brand of communism offers no hope, no break away from the move toward nationalism over these past few years, and in fact he is echoing the call by Western leaders to answer the 'problem' of globalism by returning to protectionism itself.
The end result of a world full of nations turning inwards is ultimately military action on a grand scale, because nation states and capitalism although the first derives from the needs of the last, is ultimately a contradiction. History makes it very clear, that the only way to solve the contradiction is to bust up the status quo. In other words, a world war. Never forget that World War 1 was preceded directly before hand by a long and deep recession across the larger part of the industrialized world, and that the Great Depression directly preceded World War 2.
There is a reason that nation states go to war, that reason is resources! When resources are few conflict erupts between nations. Global trade like the Internet is a natural progression, the need to unite to share resources is the reason International Socialism is actually inevitable. The trick is to stay alive long enough to see this system finally give us all a world we can live in. We do not want to suffer a new world war, and that as I have posted here many times in the past is, gloomy git that I am, is the very likely outcome of where we are heading.
To avoid history repeating itself yet again of course calls for a revolution, but that call cannot ever be made from those who actually own means by which most people live, that too would be a contradiction, actually an impossibility. I think for communists that was self-evident; rather it was a matter that the government could provide it better. That being "economic security. In Southeast Asia, both British and French colonists transformed the agrarian landscape into plantation agriculture and incorporated their colonies into the global economy. But when the Depression hit a lot of farmers, who often took out loans which were repaid after harvest, went belly up and were left far worse off than before the foreigners showed up on the scene.
Communism's appeal in such a situation was deeply rooted in nationalism. The problem was that Marxism is very dogmatic and applied in pre-capitalist societies when it was conceived as a post-capitalist utopia. Thus, for example, when it time to "hunt down capitalists" a farmer with two pigs might be made the village capitalist because everyone else had only one. And thereafter he was going to be made to pay for his sins by doing all sorts of uncompensated work. By contrast land reform in Taiwan, seen as necessary to diminish the appeal of communism, was carried out in a much more non-judgmental manner.
The Japanese are certainly not interested in such sweeping redistribution schemes, simply more economic security. The same issues have come up elsewhere in communities where outsourcing has resulted in a lot of pink slips. It may not look all that bad to someone unemployed, lacking health insurance, and in danger of losing their home.
I'd prepare just in case; communism may be coming to a neighborhood near you soon! Unfettered free-market capitalism took the United States, both government and citizen, heavily into debt. And it pulled the economies of Japan and China, both dependent on exports to the US, down as well. It's unclear what is going to replace all of this and revive global prosperity. But it's unlikely the American appetite for Asian-manufactured goods will again approach previous levels.
A lot of that purchasing power owed to cheap credit which is a thing of the past. Betzee, free-market capitalism isn't what took the U. And did I understand your post right, that communism could work if adequately funded? Well hey, what wouldn't?!? It isn't so much a matter of funding, really, as it is conscience. And between the two, capitalism-with-a-conscience would be the much better system than communism-with-a-conscience.
I'm still waiting to see the wealthy who praise communism and champion its leaders move to a communist country and donate their wealth to the citizenry. You see, that's another problem with communism: Nobody wants to pay for it. They always want someone else to pay for it. Junius Spencer Morgand and his raw cotton business. Summary and a proposal. Makiko Yamada. Musashi University. In fact, big business is so strong that every American feels its influence in everyday life. Also big business itself knows quite well its behavior is observed by public. However, there is no agreement on a definition or concept of Corporate social responsibilities.
No one argues that management does not have a direct responsibility to stockholders, or that the corporation is not interested in profits. Debate arises over priorities of obligation to stockholders, workers, and consumers. Should a corporation concern itself with things such as racial problems, unemployment, city problems slum or urban ugliness , pollution of water and air, cultural deserts, political life and so on?
For example, Milton Freedman argues that the single task of managers is to employ the capital of their stockholders in the most profitable manner for the benefit of stockholders and not in the service of some public interest; his main point of view is based on the classical allocation theory that price and marginal cost will tend to be roughly equal, rewards to the factors of production will relate to their respective marginal contribution to production, and resources will be used in the most efficient manner.
For him, retaining the competitive market system. On the other hand, G. Galbraith points out that the assumption of classical price theory has lost most of its validity in mid-twentieth century since the modern American capitalist system depends on and revolves around the operations of a relatively few large corporations.
That is to say, competition within the system of corporate concentrates produces results quite different from the balanced economy expounded by Adam Smith. However, if we look at historical movements of corporate social responsibilities in U. Eventually, we recognize that any of these arguments on the above discusses only about one aspect of the corporate social responsibility and gives us no definite answer.
But if we consider the corporate organization as an open system and also the society as a total open system including a production subsystem, political subsystem, and so on, we will possibly get better explanations on the debate and why American corporations have been extending their range of social responsibilities in a historical process of the growth of the American industry. In this paper, I will discuss why using the open system theory approach can be useful for analysing historical movements of the corporate social responsibility and show an applicability of the theory by analysing three cases in each different phase of the American business history.
Junjiro Amakawa. Kwansei Gakuin University. Higginson , G. Burnap , Orville Dewey, R. Emerson, Theodore Parker, W. Channing , James Martineau and B.
The Markets: Private Economy and Capitalism in North Korea?
The businessmen whose biographies were inserted, such as Joseph Peabody, Amos and Abbott Lawrences , and the statesmen Who were referred to, such as Daniel Webster, are also all Unitarians. Moreover, this national characteristics were emphasized from the geographical and social standpoints. The North Korean economy is still theoretically run under a centrally-controlled and state-planned system.
However, on-the-ground conditions show a reality that is quite different. Information from various sources, including internal in-country and external out-of-country data, demonstrates that the North Korean economy is increasingly penetrated by private market activity. In and , Beyond Parallel launched a pioneering and original data collection project on markets in North Korea to study the changes happening in the country.
The original interactive map below provides a broad overview of the data collected for this project. Interactive: Each yellow dot on the map represents the geographical location of a market. Click on each dot to gain specific information about the market including its name, size in square meters , and the estimated number of stalls it contains. Click the left mouse button on the map using the arrow or hand symbol to drag the map around to a different location. The street map view and satellite image layer may be toggled on and off in the top left corner.
Various layers of province and county data may be toggled on or off by selecting options on the main menu to the right. This Beyond Parallel study captures the true size and omnipresence of markets in North Korea today. There are black markets that also operate outside of state control, but they have not been included in this dataset. This data includes: the geographical location of the general markets, 3 their physical footprint, approximate number of vendor stalls, 4 and the estimated rents generated for the regime through market activity.
This information was collected and calculated through satellite imagery analysis and field interviews, and was further refined through cross-referencing with North Korean defector testimony and secondary source materials. Future posts on Beyond Parallel will explore various dimensions of this data in greater detail including regional analysis of the markets. Experts disagree about the exact origins of the process of marketization in North Korea, but they agree that the collapse of external support from the Soviet Union and the famine of the s was a significant driver for and accelerator of the process.
- Key Findings;
- Cancer of the Ovary (Contemporary Issues in Cancer Imaging)!
- Princeton University Library Catalog.
- Shop now and earn 2 points per $1!
- Electric Light: Poems!
- Heaven On Earth;
For decades under the centrally-planned North Korean economy, the regime used a public distribution system PDS to provide people with food and basic necessities across all regions. However, after a devastating country-wide famine in the s and the dissolution of external support from the Soviet Union, the PDS system collapsed and the North Korean people turned to trading and bartering goods in informal black markets to survive. Informal markets gave way to regularized, state-sponsored markets over time.
Since and , the regime has tacitly allowed the operation of some markets with formal and informal taxation of vendors. Thriving trade on the border between North Korea and China also supported the growth of these markets, particularly in earlier years when smuggling was highly profitable for goods that were hard to produce or acquire inside the country.
The process of marketization over the last 20 years has been full of fits and starts and is arguably far from complete. There have been other times when space for private economic activity expanded because the regime loosened regulatory controls to relieve pressure caused by severe social, political, and economic mismanagement. The government has also from time to time cracked down on the markets using the state security and police apparatus to repress market activity or enforce policies designed to stifle their growth.
A microsurvey conducted by Beyond Parallel of North Koreans in the country suggests through anecdotal evidence that the general public reacts negatively to any attempts by the government to suppress the market. Markets have improved the quality of life of North Korean people and are now an important stabilizing force for determining the cost of food and goods inside the country. When one combines these attitudes and the ubiquitous growth of cell phone connectivity on an internal network and the growth of private transportation networks inside of the country, it may be possible to eventually imagine the growth of a nascent civil society.
In particular, if market exchanges help build social networks outside of government control, or if interaction with foreign actors and other North Koreans at the local level helps foster social capital, one might be able to point to the early trappings of civil society in North Korea. Most of the qualitative studies that attempt to explore these issues are only available in the Korean language and draw primarily from the testimony of North Korean defectors and traders in the China-North Korea border region.
Related Capitalism From Within: Economy, Society, and the State in a Japanese Fishery
Copyright 2019 - All Right Reserved