Recently, we shared a video essay by Osamu Ajioka on YouTube discussing the changes among constitutional revision advocates, written before Prime Minister Kishida announced his resignation and withdrawal from the LDP presidential election. Although the essay was penned in June, it provides a broad perspective on the situation as of September, tied to the LDP leadership election, beyond surface-level political maneuvering.
The most pressing issue in the LDP presidential election should be, from a conservative perspective, how to rebuild the party’s reputation tarnished by bribery scandals. On a larger scale, it should center on the reformation of the power structures of postwar conservative politics and presenting a vision for the future of conservatism.
Postwar Japanese politics, especially conservative politics dominated by the LDP, has long been sustained by money, vested interests, and electoral dominance achieved through pork-barrel politics. This open secret reflects a system where funds and collusion with central bureaucrats take precedence over policy and ideals. Veteran lawmakers and faction bosses, referred to as “elders,” have traditionally supported junior lawmakers, creating a political culture based on obligations and human connections.
In the realm of politics, phrases like “policy-driven politics” or “cost-free elections focused on competing policies” are often repeated. The very repetition of such statements is evidence that the reality is far from this ideal. If candidates were to compete on tangible strategies or visions to dismantle the current structure of conservative politics, it would catch not only conservatives’ attention but also the interest of a broader audience.
After all, this remains an unfulfilled dream shared by many: lawmakers who genuinely work for the good of the entire nation, making sacrifices themselves rather than imposing them on others. However, the historical internal structure of the LDP prevents such progress. Politics rooted in vested interests and financial power continues to dominate, leaving the real reforms untouched. This makes the question “Who will lead the LDP?” less relevant than “How can the LDP be removed entirely from power?”
Leaving the rotten foundations of conservative politics untouched, what kind of house do they hope to build on top? Discussions seem limited to superficial matters like addressing bribery scandals, but these are mere attempts to swat away flies born from the rot. The underlying decay remains unaddressed.
Moreover, many of these ‘flies’ hold votes within the LDP, and candidates, out of fear of offending major factions like Abe and Aso factions, have not proposed re-investigating the organizational collusion with the Unification Church during the Abe administration. Not a single candidate! How can we expect meaningful change from such an election?
None of the candidates have presented bold visions capable of overturning entrenched conservative political norms. Instead, they fall back on constitutional revision, a topic that barely captures public interest according to polls. This escape highlights the bankruptcy of fresh ideas within the LDP, as noted in Mikami’s essay.
Candidates unwilling or unable to tackle core issues of financial corruption instead shift focus to constitutional amendments and defense policies. This merely masks the deeper structural problems. The rot continues, scandals resurface, and the cycle repeats. Building a new house atop such a decayed foundation ensures inevitable collapse.
Frankly, starting from possessing an army, air-to-air refueling, de facto aircraft carriers, collective self-defense, and now preemptive strikes on other countries — what remains that the government cannot do without revising the constitution? Perhaps the only thing left is restricting the rights and freedoms of its citizens.
Article 9 has already been rendered toothless during the Abe administration. What remains is only the spirit of pacifism and reluctance toward military engagement, serving as the last vestige of opposition to war policy. Removing even this would be driven by nationalist ideologies, which few citizens actively desire.
The 2024 presidential race began with nine candidates but has been narrowed down to Shinjiro Koizumi, Shigeru Ishiba, and Sanae Takaichi. Koizumi and Ishiba are linked to Suga’s faction, while Taro Kono and Yoko Kamikawa, associated with Aso’s faction, are seen as minor players. A showdown between Koizumi and Ishiba could destabilize Aso’s influence, potentially forcing him into retirement.
In response, Aso is reportedly rallying his faction to support Takaichi, abandoning his original allies. Such a coalition, devoid of principles, demonstrates the lengths some are willing to go to maintain their grip on power. A government formed under these circumstances is unlikely to address corruption or structural reform.
Sanae Takaichi openly aligns herself with right-wing politics, drawing concern from various quarters. Unlike Abe, whose administration skillfully downplayed its far-right tendencies, Takaichi might struggle to maintain a favorable image for the LDP, especially in its current unsteady position. If she rises to power, it could reflect poorly on the party.
Ironically, Takaichi’s rise now, despite her alignment with nationalist policies, could be seen as a silver lining for the left. Her administration might face severe backlash, potentially weakening the LDP further. Ideally, she would emerge as a figurehead during a period of LDP decline.
It’s worth noting that Takaichi supports fiscal expansion, which is rare in today’s LDP. Some of her backers even advocate for Modern Monetary Theory (MMT). While such policies might gain traction initially, the administration’s nationalist tendencies could overshadow any economic successes.
As for Shinjiro Koizumi, his push for policies like “free firing of employees by companies” reeks of political theater. It’s reminiscent of his father’s privatization strategies, treating labor unions as scapegoats. If his approach fails this time, it might be his political undoing.
Since the Abe era, the conservative approach of sustaining power through financial and vested interests remains unchanged. The key question is not who leads the LDP but how corporate donations can be effectively banned, and more importantly, how the LDP itself can be dismantled. After all, the LDP presidential race is merely about choosing a party leader, not the nation’s prime minister.