‘Make Japan Great Again' movement gains momentum as right-wing party rallies against immigration, gender policies
And now ... populist Trump-styled conservatism.
Rightâ€'wing firebrands like Javier Milei in Argenitna and Giorgia Meloni of Italy have made strong careers railing against 'elitism,' 'globalism' and immigration. It's part of a movement capitalising on widespread frustration with left-wing politics.
In all cases, mainstream parties were accused of virtueâ€'signalling by championing diversity and climate goals at the expense of working-class costs.
And now, a growing cohort in Japan is following suit.
On Sunday, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba's coalition lost its upperâ€'house majority, but out of that redux emerged Sanseito, the 'Japanese first' party.
Founded just five years ago, it surged from just two seats to 15 in one election, marking a massive shift in the political tendencies of the nation's 124 million citizens.
Sanseito's playbook mirrors the arcs of Trump's 'Make America Great Again,' Germany's AfD and Nigel Farage's Reform UK.
They call for tighter immigration controls, a pushback to 'globalism,' a rollback of 'radical' gender policies, and skepticism toward decarbonisation, vaccines, and pesticides.
Leader Sohei Kamiya, a 47-year-old former teacher and supermarket manager, pledges to 'bring power back to the people' and squeeze out what his party believes to be a deeply corrupt political system.
It's a line that has worked exceptionally well throughout history, especially when targeting audiences disillusioned with mainstream parties.
While the party is picking up speed, public polling paints a slightly different picture.
Immigrants in the island nation rank low on voters' worry lists. Inflation and employment prospects are more widely accepted as the biggest issues facing Japan.
The nation's immigration intake is tiny by developed-nation standards, but it hasn't stopped Sanseito from mining the all-too-familiar vein.
'Too many newcomers equals crime, rising housing costs, dangerous driving — and, critically, suppressed wages,' Kamiya says.
'It's fine if they visit as tourists, but if you take in more and more foreigners, saying they're cheap labour, then Japanese people's wages won't rise.
'We are not exclusionary. We have never called to drive out foreigners.'
Online fact-checkers have flagged claims propagated by the group's supporters, including ones accusing foreigners of racking up 'almost $3 billion of unpaid medical bills annually' or a doubling of Chinese welfare recipients in just half a decade.
Fact-checkers aside, it is clear there is a mounting exhaustion amongst the population, which has for decades endured a rigorous and demanding working culture based on sacrifice, only to feel as if their nation and their own future prospects are moving backwards.
Japan's disillusioned wageâ€'earners are fed up with stagnation, employment opportunities and rising costs. Many believe mainstream leftâ€'leaning parties prioritise gender agendas, climate policies or openâ€'borders moral posturing at the expense of ordinary households.
'They put into words what I had been thinking about but couldn't put into words for many years. When foreigners go to university, the Japanese government provides subsidies to them, but when we were going to university, everyone had huge debts,' a 44â€'yearâ€'old IT worker, locked into a precarious shortâ€'term contract, told AFP reporters.
Just like in the US, analysts from the Japan Institute of Law and Information Systems warn of Russian bot networks fuelling 'largeâ€'scale information manipulation,' aided by AIâ€'powered language translation.
Sanseito's campaign included proâ€'Russia interviews via Russian state media. Kamiya, however, claimed he's no Moscow puppet and publicly denounced the war in Ukraine.
'Russia's military invasion (of Ukraine) was of course bad, but there are forces in the United States that drove Russia into doing that,' he said.
But as Sanseito gained momentum, Ishiba's ruling LDP party quickly pivoted.
It declared a mission of 'zero illegal foreign nationals' and promised tighter residency enforcement.
Eight NGOs, backed by over 1,000 groups, protested that move, warning it strayed too close to xenophobia and that the argument that 'foreigners are prioritised' is totally unfounded'.
There has also been a significant resistance movement against the party, with demonstrators taking part in a 'protest rave against racism' ahead of the upper house election over the weekend.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
2 hours ago
- ABC News
Superannuation at risk, economists say
Annie Guest: Millions of Australians in or approaching retirement are potentially exposed to enormous financial insecurity. It's connected to the global bond market. That's where governments, corporations and financial institutions trade debt securities, primarily bonds. Our business correspondent David Taylor joined me earlier for more. David, what's at the heart of the concerns for millions of Australians in or approaching retirement? David Taylor: Annie, I'll try to make this simple. Many Australians rely on superannuation nest eggs for their retirement income. Now, those nest eggs are made up of shares and bonds and things like that. Now, superannuation funds are heavily invested when it comes to shares in US shares. Australian share market is big, but not quite big enough to produce the sort of returns they want. Now, that's good news because Wall Street's consistently flirting with all time highs. So, you know, that boosts superannuation balances big time. But Annie, there are concerns that Wall Street now is vulnerable to a lasting correction or a big drop, a lasting drop in stock prices. Annie Guest: David, what's the basis for those concerns? David Taylor: Well, Australians are not the only ones invested in US stocks and bonds. The Japanese are too. And a problem may come, Annie, if Japanese bonds become an attractive place for both Japanese and Chinese and other investors to put their money in. Now, what I mean by that is investors are chasing returns. So, if the share market in the US on Wall Street is doing well, you get high returns. Go over to the bond market in Japan. If the interest rate on those bonds starts to rise, well, people go, maybe I should be investing in the Japanese bond market. And so, money is transferred from the United States and Wall Street into the Japanese bond market where they can get, where they can own a relatively safe security with higher returns. As AMP's head of investment strategy, Shane Oliver, explains. Shane Oliver: Well, the basic concern is that the Japanese government lost its majority in the upper house elections on the weekend. That is leading to political uncertainty in Japan. It's unsure as to how long the Prime Minister will remain. That, in turn, is adding to risks that there will be some sort of fiscal easing and further expansion in Japanese government debt. And if that occurs, it will mean higher bond yields than we've already got in Japan, which of course will suck money out of the US and elsewhere back into Japan as investors unwind their so-called carry trades. And carry trades are basically situations where investors borrow very cheaply in Japan, put that money into places like the US, pick up a higher level of yield. But whenever there's uncertainty about the global economy or there's rising yields in Japan, then that money can flow back to Japan. And we're seeing a bit of that at present. David Taylor: So is AMP concerned about a large volume of money in the event that money does end up moving from the United States to Japan? Shane Oliver: Look, to be honest with you, we're not overly concerned about it, but it's certainly something we're monitoring. Annie Guest: That's the AMP's Shane Oliver there. And the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia, or ASFA, represents many superannuation funds. What's it had to say about this worry? David Taylor: Annie, it might not surprise you that it's not concerned. It says it's not concerned. It expects that $450 billion US dollars will be directed to US assets over the next decade. It says that superannuation giants are well-placed to deal with the market volatility if it eventuates in any case. Annie Guest: That's business correspondent David Taylor.
News.com.au
4 hours ago
- News.com.au
Barnaby Joyce warns future generations facing China ‘threat'
Nationals maverick Barnaby Joyce says Australia's approach to defence is 'putting the future of your children and grandchildren at threat' amid fears over China's military build-up and aggression toward Taiwan. The warning comes as Talisman Sabre, Australia's biggest war-games, reaches its tail end. Some 35,000 troops from 19 of the country's allies are taking part in the military exercises — drills Taiwan is pushing to be part of in the future. Mr Joyce, a former deputy prime minister, said on Monday Australia's 'strategic ambiguity' on Taiwan must be 'backed up with incredible strength'. 'There's not multiple rules-based orders in the world — there's one,' he told Seven's Sunrise, citing French President Emmanuel Macron. 'If a country wants to be outside that by just taking the South China Sea, by what we've seen with journalists in Hong Kong just (being) taken off the street, with tennis players who disappear if they say the wrong thing. 'We've had a massive build-up of (China's) armed capacity, including their nuclear capacity, and no real explanation as to why and (Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong) brought that to our attention lately.' Mr Joyce went on to say the 'Australian people really haven't grasped exactly what's before us'. 'We need to become as strong as possible as quickly as possible,' he said. 'We really are putting the future of your children and grandchildren at threat. 'China does not believe in a democratic world order. 'They believe in an alternate order that does not include democracy and ultimately … where we lie in that, if we don't get this right, is as a vassal state. 'You will be dominated by economically, socially in your media, by a totalitarian regime.' Adding that Australia is 'not as strong as we should be at the moment', Mr Joyce said the answer was working with allies to bolster collective defence. Bringing Taiwan into the fold would mean Australia needs to 'look like you are strong enough to back yourself in'.
ABC News
8 hours ago
- ABC News
The US and China will go head-to-head in the battle to bring about artificial general intelligence
Artificial intelligence is no longer just a race among a group of over-valued American tech companies and over-yachted billionaires. It's still that, but it's now also part of the great contest between the US and China. That means it's less about profits and return on investment, and more about geopolitics — national machismo, security and defence. It also means the coming transition from AI to AGI or artificial general intelligence — where machines theoretically surpass human intelligence — will be brought forward and will be much more significant for the world. It will be as momentous as the discovery of nuclear fission in 1938, which led to the development of nuclear weapons and the United States's first atom bomb test in July 1945, followed a month later by the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and then four years later by the Soviet Union's first test, followed by 30 years of Cold War. It's not clear which of the US or China will get to AGI first, but the loser won't be four years behind and won't be relying on slow pre-Internet espionage as the Soviets had to. But it looks like the US is playing catch-up: last week China's Unitree Robotics began selling a humanoid robot with artificial intelligence, including voice and image recognition, for just US$5,900, the first in what's expected to be a flood of well-priced AI machines for both the home and workplace (this one doesn't look like it can do the dishes yet, but it won't be long). US President Donald Trump recently launched "AI Action Day". The plan that he presented started with these words: "The United States is in a race to achieve global dominance in artificial intelligence (AI)." Note: dominance, not leadership, and not US companies, but "the United States". Next sentence: "Whoever has the largest AI ecosystem will set global AI standards and reap broad economic and military benefits." Note: "military". Yes, AGI will transform warfare, as nuclear weapons did 80 years ago. The Chinese government had much the same idea as Trump exactly eight years ago. Its AI plan was released on July 20, 2017, with the following ambition: "By 2030, China's AI theories, technologies, and applications should achieve world-leading levels, making China the world's primary AI innovation centre". Meanwhile, in the US, a company called Nvidia had just discovered that the chips it was making for video games could work nicely for artificial intelligence. In July 2017, at the same time as the Chinese government was launching its AI strategy, Nvidia and the Chinese equivalent of Google, Baidu, announced a partnership in which Baidu would use Nvidia's chips for AI, and the American company would get access to the Chinese market. On that day in 2017, Nvidia was worth a pretty handy $US100 billion ($152 billion); today it's worth $US4.2 trillion and is the world's most valuable company, after a three-year frenzy that has seen its share price increase 14-fold. The Nvidia-Baidu partnership doesn't seem to have been formally terminated, but it petered out a couple of years ago, around the same time as the US non-profit outfit OpenAI launched ChatGPT, kicking off the next era of AI. Since then, the US government under Joe Biden has been mainly concerned with regulating AI, partly prompted by the "Statement on AI Risk", published on May 30, 2023, by hundreds of AI experts, who declared: "Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war." But now, with Donald Trump, it's no more regulation — none (not that those worried AI experts in 2023 stopped what they were doing or even slowed the development of AI at breakneck speed, as if the need for regulations and the "risk of extinction" didn't exist). The first part of the Trump administration's AI plan involves "removing red tape and onerous regulation". The second part instructs the National Institute of Standards and Technology to "eliminate references to misinformation, diversity, equity, and inclusion, and climate change", and as he signed the executive order on stage at the Mellon Auditorium, Trump said they would be removing "woke Marxist lunacy in the AI models. Once and for all, we are getting rid of woke. OK?" You've got to get your priorities in the right order: deregulation comes before de-woking, but only just. What the US plan does NOT involve is government money, but there is plenty of that available in Silicon Valley and on Wall Street, so no need for the government to abandon tax cuts for the billionaires. Estimates of how much has been spent developing AI by the big US tech companies range from $US800 billion to $US1 trillion, and there is no sign of that slowing. If anything, it's speeding up as the companies approach the much more profitable (they think) singularity of AGI. The Chinese government, meanwhile, is estimated to have spent about $US150 billion developing its AI industry. It was done more cheaply because they were able to use open-source software from the US, a lot of it from OpenAI. No espionage required. Earlier this year, a Chinese company named DeepSeek galvanised the AI world and the US government by releasing an AI model called R1, which is as good as the American ones, much cheaper, and open source. Another Chinese company, Moonshot AI, has released another, better, open-source model called Kimi K2, capable of autonomously doing complex tasks, prompting some commentators to call it another DeepSeek moment, and a significant step towards AGI. But now, as standard AI starts to infiltrate every corner of life and become an explicit source of geopolitical competition between America and China, the question on the minds of everyone involved in the industry is, when will AGI happen? And when (not if) it does happen, what will that mean? For the first question, I asked ChatGPT. It replied: "My best evidence-based guess — based on current trends, expert forecasts, and technical bottlenecks — is that a true AGI tipping point could plausibly occur sometime between 2030 and 2040, but not before 2027, and quite possibly not until 2050 or later." So, between five and 15 years — not long. What will it mean? Plenty, both good and not good. Human-level cognition and autonomy in machines will be profoundly disruptive to humanity. The risks are obvious: the elimination of white-collar jobs leading to high levels of permanent unemployment, collapse of aggregate demand, along with inflation and interest rates, more effective cyber-attacks, autonomous weapons, more sophisticated propaganda and surveillance. And then there's that thing they were warning about in May 2023 — extinction. If the machines are smarter and better-informed than us, can we control them? What if they do to us what we did to the Neanderthals? The benefits are potentially enormous as well: better, more personalised healthcare, an exponential acceleration in science and research, improved productivity, less mundane work, and more leisure. That's why the Productivity Commission's overview for its "five pillars" report in preparation for the productivity roundtable in two weeks says its recommendations will "aim to give people and businesses the confidence and certainty they need to safely adopt powerful new AI tools," although it doesn't specifically talk about AGI. The 25 great and good at the roundtable will probably talk about that for half an hour before getting back to arguing about tax and human industrial relations. Alan Kohler is a finance presenter and columnist on ABC News, and he also writes for Intelligent Investor.
