Forum - View topic

The continuing battle against anime and expression.

-This is not actually the Japanese government's doing. It's all actually the work of "certain groups" behind the scenes who you apparently can't name but you know that they're American

ikillchicken wrote:

-This is not actually the Japanese government's doing. It's all actually the work of "certain groups" behind the scenes who you apparently can't name but you know that they're American

Probably some group led by George Bush. Still seems he's trying to get anime banned.

Are you seriously suggesting that there should be no Regulation of content in Media and it should be available to people of any age?

American beliefs like universal freedom of speech are just that "American beliefs" and should hold no sway on other countries like Japan. You talk about the US constitution like it is some kind of sacred document, but people outside of the US in countries such as Japan couldn't care less about it.

Article 21:
Freedom of assembly and association as well as speech, press and all other forms of expression are guaranteed. 2) No censorship shall be maintained, nor shall the secrecy of any means of communication be violated.

As you yourself said DPJ is losing representation because people aren't voting for it. This alone should be enough to show the people of Japan support the current government and the youth ordinance bill.

What right do you have to complain about another countries laws especially when there are supported by said countries people.

I hate to inform you of this but the people of Japan don't want children to be reading child porn and that is something you're going to have to live with.

So if I understand you correctly:
-There is a movement in Japan that seeks to ban (not control, not censor, ban outright) anime and manga.
-This essentially means that they seek to outright make the very medium of animation or sequential art illegal. Doesn't matter how conservative or inoffensive it is. If it's animation they want it gone.
-This is not actually the Japanese government's doing. It's all actually the work of "certain groups" behind the scenes who you apparently can't name but you know that they're American
-Their goal is to indirectly weaken liberty worldwide because they are unable to directly do so in America. Apparently, doing this will eventually let them attack it in America somehow. (Or if not, I guess they just really really hate liberty and so if they're stuck with it in America they'll at least make sure Japan doesn't have any).
-Your only actual source to support any of this is a couple paragraphs on Sankakucomplex that don't even actually say any of this. No mention of foreign influence. No mention of any sort of outright ban.

The Tea Party (as the political arm of a growing Dominionist movement in the U.S.)

3) Yes I couldn't have been more vague in identifying who or what is responsible for the behind the scenes work or the "certain groups" I've indicated.
So I will do that but probably only scratches the surface of the possibilites of different entities maybe responsible for the claims I've made. And it's possible the ones listed have little or no involvement in the political agendas I've described

Past

Quote:

3) Yes I couldn't have been more vague in identifying who or what is responsible for the behind the scenes work or the "certain groups" I've indicated. So I will do that but probably only scratches the surface of the possibilites of different entities maybe responsible for the claims I've made. And it's possible the ones listed have little or no involvement in the political agendas I've described

That doesn't make any sense. You basically said nothing
Just because it's on the internet doesn't mean it's true.

I don't like the Youth Protection Ordinance, but I don't think that it's a grave danger. Even if it is, being as I doubt that more than a thimbleful of member here can vote in Japanese elections or otherwise participate in Japanese politics, there's little for us to do but hand-wringing, which leaves one susceptible to melodramatic exaggerations.

I'm certainly inclined to think that all media should be available without formal legal restriction. Individuals can probably far better and more efficiently regulate content by their own choices than a government.

Well, for one, the Japanese constitution, which I admit was written by Brigadier General Courtney Whitney's staff during the occupation, has its own free speech provision in the form of article 21.
I don't know just how the Japanese government and courts have construed this section, but on its surface, it's a strong affirmation of freedom of expression, so it undercuts both Past and you.

I think that this confuses the politics of the situation some, although the facts of it seem to make any case ambiguous. The Youth Protection Ordinance was enacted in Tōkyō and only applies there, although it has potentially wider effect because of Tōkyō's size and importance, so its part in national politics is uncertain. The DPJ is also the party currently in government, whereas Governor Ishihara is part of the long-ruling LDP, but his majority was rather diminished in his last election and the DPJ is the largest part in Tōkyō's assembly. Even if the ordinance is a matter of national prominence, the DPJ's loss of support is probably mostly a result of their being in government when a lot of bad things that were to a significant extent beyond their control happened. They'll probably lose plenty of seats when the next election comes, which will be no later than 2013, but they could fall very far and only see their 119-seat lead in the House of Representatives diminished to a narrow one, not lost. Losing in the House of Councillors is likelier, but given the asymmetry of Japanese bicameralism, not lethal.

I would think that a capacity for thought and the absence of any coercive restrictions upon it should confer enough of a right, well really a power, to express anything. What isn't guaranteed is agreement or exemption from criticism. I don't think that we should refrain from criticizing a bad idea or objectionable policy just because it happens somewhere else. Some tempering of passion and attention to context is probably sensible, but not complete silence.

It probably is true that the Japanese people, more particularly Japanese parents, do not want their children to get and read pornography, which is something that that they probably lack the independent means to get and that parents are not required to buy. I would think that an ordinance banning something that they're already not doing can't be better than superfluous. Also, be wary of using, "the X people," because even in a society that is arguably uncommonly homogenous, "the people," is usually too internally diverse and erratic a group for the term to be meaningful.

I don't think that you're really wrong about Past's post or the severity of the situation being exaggerated, but the spirit of your post seemed wrong. I object not to your disparaging Past's claims so much as the form of your post, which seems more in the spirit of, "shut up, you're not allowed to talk about this," than, "you're wrong."

It's old but it's amazing how it's relevant to current events.

I mean all that law effectively said as far as I'm aware is that pornographic content can only be purchased by adults, it worries me more that such a law wasn't already in Tokyo in the first place.

This is primarily because people as individuals will all have different beliefs as to what is or isn't appropriate, that is why there needs to be a government and laws in place to regulate behaviour by a set of standards agreed upon by society.