ｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐｐ

Japanese Political Thought as Seen from Prime Minister’s
Speech : Koizumi’s Singularity
Monika REINEM▍ Introduction
When taking office as the Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi was very often introduced
and characterised in media as being the maverick in the Japanese politics Besides hinting at some minor things like his hairstylethis term was meant to express Koizumi's

ideas on the political situation in Japan as well as his not very common behaviour as a Japanese politician Now after more than four years in office it is interesting to take acloser look at his and his team's political ideas and way of thinking This encouraged me
to study more about and do a research on the political thought of Japanese prime ministers
over the whole post war period
There is an impressive long term research on Japanese political thought done by a groupof scientists led currently by Ikuo Kabashima⑴ which concentrates on Japanese voters' behaviour their perception of political parties and actual policies of the Japanese politicalparties (明るい選挙推進協会調査) According to Kabashima Japanese voters have an accurate understanding of the ideological differences of the political parties and their positionon the conservative (保守)Жreform (革新) scale Compared to 1960s and 1970s where theopposition between these two was clearly distinguishable (concerning defence policy/attitude towards the old system and welfare/participation/equality questions) by the 1990s astrong trend towards de ideologisation (脱イデオロギー化 using Murakami's term see Murakami 1984) had taken place (see Kabashima et. al. 1996) Further influenced by the realignment of the political parties (starting with Japan New Party in 1992) party loyalty
was weakening and the distribution of voters' ideologies became more sharpened at thecentre Finally it is pointed out that the decision of which party to support is not influenced by voters' geographical profiles or economic situation (in contrast to American orEuropean societies) but is purely political decision (see also Abe et. al 1997)
Conceptually very interesting is Hideo Otake's liberalist social democratic cleavage According to Otake

there is more essential ideological opposition than the usual Japaneseconservative Ж reformist scale As foreign and defence policies after the WW2 caused vehement argumentations the extreme right and extreme left confrontation emerged leaving
no space to the more moderate (in the centre) liberalist and social democratic thought tohave any influence At the same time concerning economic policy the central moderatethought (mixing both liberal and social democratic thought) had the strongest influence(Otake 1996) Now by 1990s with the end of the Cold war and the so called 1955 system

the traditional policy cleavage disappeared but there were no other major complex ofideas or principles to replace it There was some initiative to show the neo liberal reform
policies as the new dimension for confrontation but it didn't quite work out that way because of structural difficulties inherent in Japanese society and economic system (Otake
1999)
Another important object to analyse is election pledge As Yutaka Shinada points out
election pledges reveal the most urgent problems at the time and serve as a bridge between
179

Reinem：Japanese Political Thought as Seen from Prime Minister's Speech

the voters and each politician (Shinada 2000) He analyses the pledges of three elections in
the 1990s (in 1990 1993 and 1996) Two main trends in election rhetoric appearedИЙrhetoric emphasising the profit of the local area and secondly dealing with problems that Japan faces in general The first was more common among the LDP politicians and the second
among the politicians of the opposition Now the elections in 1993 brought a new topicИЙ
political reform whereas in the 1996 elections reform in general became the most important issue The election pledges did not show any conservative reform cleavage concerning
welfare issues
My intention here is to analyse the political thought of the government especially of theleader of the country and not that of the political parties of Japan the electorate or individual politicians This topic however has been mostly ignored as can be seen for example from the IPSA database⑵ It is undeserved I think as prime minister/the governmentis one main actor and source of political thought The way of thinking on the side of theelectorate has to be (ideally) reflected in the way of thinking on the side of the government but is that so in Japan ? This question indicates the gap I try to fill with my research
I decided to conduct an analysis on the prime minister's policy speeches Speech is very
interesting to analyse specially for two reasons First it has to express the views or plansof the speaker on one hand but still be different from a concrete policy plan in using more
illustrative and literary expressions in order to appeal the audience Second I chose thepolicy speeches because they are general and particular at the same time They are generalbecause the prime minister touches all the issues he considers important They are particular since the prime minister is expected to explain his plans in details to a certain extent
for the following session of the diet It is known that the prime minister speeches are written by a team lead by deputy chief cabinet secretary⑶ and the process takes usually two
weeks or longer However the prime ministers (at least) revise the drafts of the speeches
and mostly write parts of their speeches by themselves In any case the final touch is added by the prime minister himself But even if the extent of how much the prime minister
personally contributes to his speech differs among the prime ministers there is no reason
to consider it as a problem in this research It is for the reason that in this research I am
not interested in prime minister's views as a person but in his views as an office In otherwords the object here is to study the political thought of the government and not that of
the individual politicians (including prime minister) nor political parties electorate etc
At the same time the very fact that it is not the prime minister alone who writes the
speeches minimises the effects of personality and leadership styles Seen from this perspective the policy speech as a collective work constitutes even better objective for analysis than a prime minister's casual comments (to media for example) that may express
more his personal views In a word my aim is to analyse the political thought on the sideof government (as opposed to electorate and political parties) and for thatthe policy

speeches of prime ministers are very good material as they are ⑴ group work ⑵ very
carefully compiled and ⑶ touch all the questions that the government/prime minister considers important
There is some research done on political language or the relationship between politics andwords However this tends to concentrate on one or a couple of words (e g Ishida 1989)
and is more in essayistic style (see also Maruyama 1961 and Tsuzuki Tsutomu 2004)
The term political thought

if translated into Old Greek is political ideology

But asthe term ideology is not neutral but has too many different associations and connota180

研究ノートtions I am trying to avoid using it Further the meanings of the main ideological terms
differ in space and time

What is considered liberal in the U S

can mean socialist in

Europe ; or what is reformist in Japan can translate into conservative in FinlandThe

same goes for timeИЙthere is a difference of how the same terms were/are understood in
the era of Burke or Mill and in modern societies In addition to that in the modern societies new major topics have emerged that cannot be classified using the traditional ideological terms For example political participation or corruption and political ethics etc

1.

Methodology

For the reasons mentioned I decided totake the starting point for the analysis fromthe minimal unit of analysis the word
Otherwise if I would code the speeches basedon the traditional ideological terms there
would be the possibility of excluding and ignoring some important topics that are noteasily classified by these terms
As the first step of the analysis I used a
specialJapaneselanguageprogram
KHCoder to get the frequency of the wordsof the prime ministers' speeches including
all the policy speeches in the Parliament of
all the prime ministers of the National DiethistoryThis is to say starting from
Katayama Ashida and Yoshida's second
term (as Yoshida served his first term as thePrime Minister of Imperial Diet of Japan)
and concluding with Koizumi's nine policy
speeches held by now all together 151 speeches by 25 prime ministers This first step
serves as a general basis against which tocompare each and every prime minister'sword frequencies (see table 1) or further
groups of prime ministers' word frequencies
As the number of speeches and the length of
the speeches of each prime minister differ I
also calculated the percentage points of eachentry Although the total means all the
speeches of the 25 prime ministers and thepercentages of the total I will use the word
average in the following explanation (whencomparing each prime minister against the
total) for the sake of briefness
As the second step I conducted a principal
component analysis (PCA) and multidimensional scaling (MDS) using SPSS PCA is used
to detect the structure in the relationships between variables to classify variables MDS
is used to uncover the underlying structure ofdata to detect the meaningful dimensions to
explain the similarities and differences (Euclidean distances) between the investigatedobjects i e between the prime ministers intheir rhetoric in this research (see the details
for using of these methods in SPSS Statistical
Algorithms)
I also conducted hierarchical cluster analysis (the dendrogram) taking both prime ministers
and words (top 200 of each prime
minister) as cases⑷The data provided for the analysis includes
all the speeches of all the prime ministers(from Katayama to Koizumi) calculated inpercentage points ( total ) ; and the margin
difference of each of the prime ministers
from the total also of course in percentages In this way the prime ministers who
have held many speeches contribute to thegeneral total more than the prime ministers
with less or shorter speeches This method isjustified as it is clear that a prime minister
like Nakasone (in office for almost 5 years)
has influenced the political thought much
more than for example Hata (in office noteven 2 months)

181

Reinem：Japanese Political Thought as Seen from Prime Minister's Speech

Table 1
Total
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32

する
ない
経済
国民
我国
ある
社会
国際
政府
世界
関係
問題
改革
平和
なる
努力
政治
協力
安定
考える
推進
日本
できる
生活
発展
実現
対策
進める
さらに
今後
図る
必要

Example of the data of simple frequencies

Nakasone
13923
3201
2404
2398
2212
1956
1807
1537
1464
1311
1311
1238
1216
1176
1137
1107
1096
1046
939
898
872
869
798
753
745
736
734
730
717
694
685
672

2.

6 32％
1 45％
1 09％
1 09％
1 00％
0 89％
0 82％
0 70％
0 66％
0 59％
0 59％
0 56％
0 55％
0 53％
0 52％
0 50％
0 50％
0 47％
0 43％
0 41％
0 40％
0 39％
0 36％
0 34％
0 34％
0 33％
0 33％
0 33％
0 33％
0 31％
0 31％
0 30％

する
我国
ない
経済
改革
社会
ある
国民
世界
国際
図る
関係
協力
努力
日本
政府
平和
さらに
推進
政治
安定
なる
問題
考える
発展
進める
対策
一層
実現
教育
制度
基本

Miyazawa
1479
266
251
240
235
218
213
209
195
191
163
160
141
140
134
130
123
122
120
116
115
110
104
95
94
91
87
87
85
84
83
82

6 57％
1 18％
1 11％
1 07％
1 04％
0 97％
0 95％
0 93％
0 87％
0 85％
0 72％
0 71％
0 63％
0 62％
0 60％
0 58％
0 55％
0 54％
0 53％
0 52％
0 51％
0 49％
0 46％
0 42％
0 42％
0 40％
0 39％
0 39％
0 38％
0 37％
0 37％
0 36％

Results

The results of the principal component
analysis showed that all of the speeches ofthe 25 prime ministers over the time span ofalmost 60 years were similar ; that is theanalysis gave only one combination of variables i.e. only one principal component
182

する
我国
ない
経済
社会
政治
世界
国民
国際
平和
ある
生活
問題
努力
実現
協力
地域
図る
関係
なる
改革
環境
今後
向ける
できる
確保
重要
取組む
整備
推進
秩序
大国

Koizumi
547
133
122
105
93
90
81
79
78
72
72
70
58
57
57
55
54
54
53
50
49
48
45
43
43
41
38
36
34
34
33
32

6 09％
1 48％
1 36％
1 17％
1 03％
1 00％
0 90％
0 88％
0 87％
0 80％
0 80％
0 78％
0 65％
0 63％
0 63％
0 61％
0 60％
0 60％
0 59％
0 56％
0 55％
0 53％
0 50％
0 48％
0 48％
0 46％
0 42％
0 40％
0 38％
0 38％
0 37％
0 36％

する
改革
ない
国民
社会
経済
進める
日本
ある
できる
なる
実現
支援
国際
我国
取組む
制度
関係
推進
企業
国
構造
地域
世界
行う
安全
目指す
民間
向ける
分野
問題
整備

1581
310
214
179
178
161
147
126
115
112
109
106
98
96
95
92
90
90
87
85
83
82
82
82
81
80
80
79
77
76
75
69

7 82％
1 53％
1 06％
0 89％
0 88％
0 80％
0 73％
0 62％
0 57％
0 55％
0 54％
0 52％
0 49％
0 48％
0 47％
0 46％
0 45％
0 45％
0 43％
0 42％
0 41％
0 41％
0 41％
0 41％
0 40％
0 40％
0 40％
0 39％
0 38％
0 38％
0 37％
0 34％

This result can be explained by the fact that
all the speeches generally touch the same subjects economy defence foreign relations
etc Further I conducted a multidimensional
scaling analysis Compared to PCA multidimensional scaling gives more readily interpretable solutions of lower dimensionalityand does not depend on the assumption of alinear relationship between variables
The multidimensional scaling showed very
interesting results (see figure 1) It is possible to recognize that the positions of theprime ministers are defined in terms of time

研究ノートin the horizontal scale⑸ Ashida and Katayama appear at the left end going on to Tanaka and Miki on the relative centre and reaching to Mori and Koizumi at the right end
As a whole it is possible to identify fourgroups First group are the seven prime ministers from late 1940s to early 1970sИЙTetsu Katayama Shigeru Yoshida Ichiro Hatoyama Tanzan Ishibashi Nobusuke Kishi
Hayato Ikeda and Eisaku Sato The second
group is smaller consists of three prime ministers Takeo Miki Takeo Fukuda and Masayoshi Ohira whereas Ohira and Fukuda appear closer to each other than to Miki The
third group is the largest one with nine personsИЙYasuhiro Nakasone Noboru Takeshita Toshiki Kaifu Kiichi Miyazawa Morihiro Hosokawa Tsutomu Hata Tomiichi Murayama Ryutaro Hashimoto and YoshiroMori However there are three groups possible to identify within the third group namely that of Nakasone and Takeshita as one
Hosokawa Murayama and Miyazawa as second and that of Mori and Hashimoto as
third

Finally Junichiro Koizumi builds up a
fourth group with Sosuke Uno Hitoshi Ashida Kakuei Tanaka Zenko Suzuki and Keizo
Obuchi look like lonely players in this figure
It must be further pointed out that generally the first speech of a prime minister differs
quite remarkably from the following speechesof that person Therefore it is sensible not
to take too much pain for explaining the logic
behind Ashida's position being separate from
Katayama and others in the first group ; or
why Uno seems to be the soul mate of Koizumi Beside Ashida and Uno also Ishibashi
and Hata had time for only one speech
Turning now to the differences of the vocabulary of the groups the key word for the
first group (Katayama through Sato) may be
determined as the people (国民) Relative
to the average 25 total (all of the 25 prime
ministers ' data combined ) all the sevenprime ministers use the word 国民 more often
than any other group (from Kishi's 16％ toHatoyama's 78％ and Ishibashi's 98％) On
the other hand the second and third group
and also Koizumi use the word less frequently
183

Reinem：Japanese Political Thought as Seen from Prime Minister's Speechthan the average (see Figure 2) Other characteristics of that post war group include thefrequent usage of such words as parliament(国会)the state (国家)
democracy (民主主義) cabinet (内閣) which are relatively less frequent in the case of other prime
ministers Further only showing as characteristics in the first group are such words as
industry ( 産 業 )production ( 生 産 )trade (貿易) or construction (建設)Instead of reform (改革) these prime
ministers use improvement (改善) or just
don't touch on this topic (See below figure 7
for 改革) Other remarkably less frequently
used words are for example society (社会)
environment (環境)
local areas (地域)
A bit surprisingly words like problem (問題as well as 課題)
positive/active (積極)
propel (推進) can (できる) tackle (取り組む) also new (新しい) and wealth(豊か) or century (世紀) and era (時代)are used less frequently by the first group ofprime ministers Although this period right184

after the Second World War seems today as
an era of enormous problems needing positive actions to build up a new wealth obviously at that time more fundamental issues
like those of the Constitution (thus the overwhelming frequency of governance related
words) and economy were the first priority
It is further interesting to note in relationof this group of prime ministers that rather
sensitive topics like peace (平和)
freedom (自由) our country Japan (我が国)
the United States (米)are divided someprime ministers are using them more often
than the average and some again less than average So for example Kishi stands out using peace
freedom and our country notably more frequently ( 26 ; 18 and 17％
respectively) together with Ikeda (in the cases of freedom 21％ and our country 25％) and Sato (in the case of peace16％)
On the other hand Katayama is using thosewords much less often than the average
namely ‑ 21 for peace‑ 16 for freedom

研究ノートand ‑ 51 for our country ; Ishibashi is similar with using peace ‑ 37％ freedom ‑ 20
％ from the average and Yoshida for ourcountry with ‑ 16％ from the average
Taken together the first group of prime
ministers who held office right after the Second World War can be characterised as concentrating fundamental political issues as indicated by words like the people
government
the state ; and economic issues
with industry
trade
construction andproduction being used far above the average As the politicians of that time faced thiskind of basic problems of state building they
were in most cases not eager to use big concepts like freedom
peace or wealthand new era However as some remarkable exceptions indicate these issues were very sensitive so the questions of freedom relations with the US etc were to be handled
delicately The most suitable for a keyword
for this group is 国民 ( the people ) as incontrast with the other prime ministers inlater years these seven prime ministers used
this word more frequently as the average
The second group of prime ministersИЙMiki Fukuda and OhiraИЙrepresents the eraof the aftermath of the oil shock inflationand severe economic slump namely the second half of the 1970s The keyword representing this group's rhetoric would be friendship (友好) as no other prime minister has
used it as frequently as the three of the second group Other words that are characteristic for this group are relations (関係) stability (安定) and cooperation (協力) mutuality (相互) One way to explain thistrend of concentrating on issues like friendship and Japanese mutual relations and cooperation with the world countries is that
there is always a need to distract people's attention from the first priority difficulties as
the economic situation of that period might
have been The only terms concerning economy that this group uses more frequently than
the average is business conditions (景気)and depression (不況) If seeing this termin its context in the speeches it becomes
clear that very often these terms are boundwith international issues drawing attention
to the fact that the depression is not only Japanese problem but a predicament of thewhole industrialized nations' family From
this perspective it is also natural to concentrate of terms like cooperation and mutuality
etc. to support a kind of positive feeling in
the audience combined with an emphasis on
responsibility as a member of this family ofnations
As a contrast to the first group (Katayama
through Sato) these prime ministers don't
use the term the people (国民) too often(see Figure 1 above) Miki with 13％ below
the average Fukuda ‑ 19％ and Ohira ‑ 28％
As becomes apparent from the figure 4
Suzuki and Nakasone appear very close to thethree prime ministers of the second group
However since the positions and division of
the 25 prime ministers as indicated on the
figure 1 are not based only on keywords but
the whole vocabulary used we have to keep
in mind the more general picture Suzuki's
position is right between the second and thirdgroup The similarities with Miki Fukuda
and Ohira became apparent However he differs remarkably from them with his frequent
use of such words as our country (我が国)
administration (行政) budget (予算) andeffort (努力) which are his special characteristic words (he uses them more frequent
than the average by a large margin) But also
words like peace (平和) and most interestingly society (社会) and do (する) whichbrings him closer to the third group of Nakasone through Mori
The differences between Suzuki and thethird group become clear from the following
paragraph with the discussion of the characteristics of the third group
The third and biggest group is composed ofnine prime ministers through 1980s and 1990
s Actually as noted above it is possible toseparate these prime ministers into three subgroups first Nakasone and Takeshita sec185

Reinem：Japanese Political Thought as Seen from Prime Minister's Speech

ond a group of three Miyazawa Hosokawa
and Murayama and finally third Hashimotoand Mori Hata and Kaifu although close to
the whole group stand rather apart from allof the three subgroups
As hinted above already the keyword forthe third group is society (社会) (see Figure5) as all of the nine prime ministers use thismore than the average Other words more
frequently used include reform (改革) local area (地域) problem issue (課題) (seeFigure 6) This group stands in sharp contrast with the first group of prime ministers(serving late forties through early seventies)
As we can see on the figure 2 the third groupis using the word people (国民) the keyword for the first group the least frequent ;the same goes for words like government(政府) and other politics and economy related
vocabulary Also words like new (新た) andwealth (豊か) which were somewhat surprisingly missing from the list of most frequently used of the first group are constant186

ly appearing in the speeches of the thirdgroup prime ministers On the other handwords like society and reform are theleast used by the first group Therefore inthis context we might as well say the opposite of the people is society
When taking a closer look on the divisions
inside the third group the three subgroups
there appear some interesting differences
First in addition to the words society andreformNakasone and Takeshita use theworld (世界) more frequent than the average while Miyazawa Murayama Hosokawa
group is divided over the issue and Hashimoto Mori use the word less than the averagealmost the same extent The same goes forwords cooperation (協力) and Japan (日本) (with Mori and Hashimoto disagreeing
over the Japan ) Also more frequent thanothers Nakasone and Takeshita both are using the vocative everybody (皆様) more often than others
The second subgroupИЙMiyazawa Hoso-

研究ノートkawa and MurayamaИЙare using politics(政治) surprisingly often ( 5 ; 78 ; 45％ respectively) while the other subgroups are using it less than the average However Hata
and Kaifu are both using it frequently ( 72
and 30％ respectively) being thus similar
to Miyazawa's subgroup These three prime
ministers use also the words lifestyle (生活) (with a little reservation in the case of
Murayama) and local area (地域) more frequent than others Quite interestingly however they are divided over reform with
Miyazawa using it even less than average
Further and maybe even more insightful is
to note the words the three all together refuse to repeat Of course these include thekey words of previous big groups like thepeoplegovernment
the state etc. butthey also include such words like welfare(福祉) stability (安定) security (安全)democracy (民主主義) And this so regardless of whether one is the representative of
the conservative LDP the social democratic DSPJ or something new like the JNP
The third subgroupИЙHashimoto and MoriИЙmost strongly uses the keywords society and reform
but also includes suchcharacteristics as all my power (全力) andstructure (構造) which are not frequently
used last four years or so Among the words
that they both don't use too often are interestingly enough words connected to international affairs like international (国際)the world/global (世界)peace (平和)187

Reinem：Japanese Political Thought as Seen from Prime Minister's Speech

our country (我が国) the US (米国) etc.
In the case of Mori we can add relations(関係)
JapanЁthe US (日米)cooperation (協力) etc.

3.

Koizumi

I am going on discussing Koizumi's vocabulary i e his ideas and policies as appearing
in his policy speeches keeping in the background the wider framework from Katayama
to Mori which was explained above
As can be seen from the figure on the main
characteristics of the third group (figure 6)
Koizumi appears not too separate from thatgroup (Nakasone through Mori) At the sametime the results of the multidimensional
scaling indicated (see Figure 1 above) Koizumi stands distinctly apart from that group
The main reason behind this is Koizumi's sig188

nificantly frequent usage of the verb do (する)⑹ Combined with his second most frequent wordИЙ reform he does not really
fit to any group ; particularly he seems rather opposite to the second group of Miki
Fukuda and Ohira Closest to him stands
Uno not only with the way Uno uses the
keywords of do and reform but also theway neither of them uses government (政府)parliament (国会)
effort (努力)peace (平和) stability (安定) lifestyle(生活)
relations (関係)
policy (政策)measures (施策) etc However as pointed
out earlier one should not draw wide range
inferences from the position of a prime minister (the similarities and differences in relation to the other prime ministers) if he only
had one speech in the parliament Not only
the fact that one speech can be considered
statistically not relevant enough but alsothat the first speech of a newly appointed
prime minister tends to be notably different
from his following speeches⑺ And Uno is oneof the few who had just one speech delivered

研究ノートin front of the parliament⑻Going back to the figure 1 the category axis shows almost perfectly the way the prime
ministers are using the word do ИЙthoseabove the axis use it more than the averageand those below use it less frequently To say
almost perfectly means that there are exceptions ; most notably the case of Hata
who uses the word 51 less frequent than the
average while positioning above the axis But
also the cases of Ikeda and Suzuki who despite using the word more frequent than the
average are positioned below the category
axis
Until now I have not paid much attention
to the usage of verbs but in the case of
Koizumi it cannot be avoided as is apparent already from his keyword being a verb
Other verbs he uses often are all very active
strong and positive words such as advance(進める) aim (目指す) can (できる) andtackle (取り組む) In most cases the oppo-

site end i.e. the prime ministers using thesewords least frequent among all are those of
the first group plus Ashida ; to a certain extent and especially so in the case of do (aspointed out earlier) also those of the second
group Therefore it seems that with the time
the trend has grown to use positive active
verbs to add strength and intensity to the
speech The one case that do not suit to thistrend is that of do (する) which suggestthat it is suitable for picking it as a keyword
for characterization of different prime ministers
On the other hand as Koizumi's case as
well as the results of component matrix ofthe top 200 words analysis show the opposite to do is not be (ある) or not evenbecome (なる) but think (考える)189

Reinem：Japanese Political Thought as Seen from Prime Minister's Speech

4.

Political thought and policy
agendasIn my more detailed research⑼ on Miyazawa and Koizumi the two most prominentlines of today's political thought appeared
clearly namely the liberal (Koizumi) andsocial democratic⑽ (Miyazawa) The firstlays emphasis on small government cuts in
expenditures promoting private sector etc.⑾The second supports rather big government
humanitarian and social agendas but at thesame time concentrates also on international
relations mainly from the perspective of thesoft issues like poverty human rights etc
Koizumi and Miyazawa are good cases forrepresenting each of the discourses However
the developments in the real political arena in190

the post war Japan have not showed any
clear trends in respect of these two rather opposite currents of political thought
The speedy growth to a high level of economic performance in the post war Japan has
always been considered as the consequence ofthe liberal international market forces
Therefore it is difficult to underestimate thegeneral understanding and approval of liberal
democratic ideology In this context it is interesting to take a closer look at the development of the opposite social democratic agenda in the speeches as well as in the policies
implemented
In the early years after the war i.e. in thedays of the first group of prime ministers aslabelled in this paper the pension and healthinsurance systems were to be built up At
first some special institutions were established like the veterans' pension system in1953 and right after that public employees'
pension schemes ; thirdly the employees' pen-

研究ノートsion insurance system in 1954⑿ (Schmidt and
Watanuki 1993) After the establishment of
the Liberal Democratic Party (the LDP) andthe Japan Socialist Party (the JSP) the expansion of the pension and health insurance
systems to the whole population were proposed By the 1970s the institutional build
up of the social welfare system was considered to be completed as the children's allowances free medical care for the aged indexation to inflation etc. had been introduced That of course also meant that the expenditure on social security and welfare had
been increasing remarkably
If now going back again to the policy
speeches the results of the analysis showedthat social security and welfare were not apriority topic of the prime ministers of thefirst group The first priority was given to
economic questions and building up the political institutions Katayama and Yoshida but
also Ashida did not even mention the issue of
welfare and social security while Hatoyama
mentioned the need to improve medical caresystems and public aid in order to prevent social unrest (so not as a value in its own
right) Only later Sato and most famously
Ikeda with his
Income doubling plan
touched to issue of social welfare directly
However among all of the 25 prime ministers the word welfare (福祉) have beenused most (even if only 2％ more frequent
than the average) by Ishibashi and Tanaka
Now the second group that of Miki Fukuda and Ohira is most interesting and important to consider since the economic conditions sharply worsened in 1970 s On one
hand it might be argued that during a periodof low economic growth the welfare budget isgraded down to the minimum in order not tolay an additional burden on the economy On
the other hand during depression the need
for welfare spending is acute so again it ispolitically very difficult to reduce the welfare
budgetAt that time the term Japanese style welfare society was coined which meant thatthe welfare and social security demands
would be met not only by the government
but shared also with private firms community and the family However this term wasstill used years later for example by Nakasone during the period of the bubble economy Therefore this term does not directlytranslate to the economic policy agenda It
has its connotation also with promoting national feeling and supporting the positive
characteristics of Japanese society as having
strong community and family ties as Nakasone's speeches indicate For the same token
the characteristics of the three prime ministers of the second group were mostly tied tointernational issues of friendship relations
mutuality etc
Further it is important to look at a social
democratic government in its title namelythat of Murayama It became apparent earlier that this group of prime ministers(Miyazawa Murayama and Hosokawa) use
words like welfare (福祉)stability (安定)security (安全)democracy (民主主義) less frequently than the average regardless of the party affiliation On the figure 1
above Murayama stands closest to Miyazawa in his rhetoric As pointed out above
Miyazawa as opposed to Koizumi can be characterised as being close to the social democratic thought However in an exclusive interview with Miyazawa he denied any sympathy with social democratic agenda concerning economic policies He stressed the importance of free market and free trade⒀ Further Murayama's most frequently used word
is actually reform (改革)Therefore it is impossible to draw any divisive line between the conservative LDP
and social democratic JSP or DSPJ in regard of the welfare policy At the same time
it is not very clearly possible to draw the line
even considering the economic situation
Thus there must be something still different
and more hidden from the ordinary discourseof ideological study for example personalleadership style educational background or191

Reinem：Japanese Political Thought as Seen from Prime Minister's Speech

the relationship with the bureaucracy thatmake one or another prime minister seem tolean towards liberal or social democratic
agenda5.

Koizumi and other strong advo
cators of reform policies

Koizumi's keywords as the analysis indicated are reform and do Generally heis conspicuous with using strongly active
verbs as argued above In an attempt togroup similar prime ministers in these termswith Koizumi we are facing the reformists
like Nakasone but also Murayama Hosokawa Hata and Mori ; and do persons Kaifu Tanaka and Nakasone The question ofwhat might be the common indicator ofprime ministers like Koizumi and Murayama
is actually not too difficult to answer All ofthese prime ministers lack strong ties withthe bureaucracy They are politician types
who were elected to the House of Representatives or the House of Councillors very early
without or too little prior experience in thebureaucracy Alternatively they had been active in private sector before getting involvedin politics
It is further interesting to note that thenon LDP prime ministers like Murayama
Hosokawa and Hata are advocates of reform
policies however they are sharply different
from the others in terms of using the word
do (する) Their most frequently used word
is reform (or almost most frequent in thecase of Hosokawa) and their least frequently
used word is do The figures by Hosokawa
are 49％ above the average for reform
while 50％ below the average for do ; thefigures by Hata are ＋1 03％ and − 51％ respectively ; and by Murayama ＋ 57％ and− 78％ respectively It may be thus concluded that while these prime ministers see theneed to reform the long lasted LDP politics ;192

and as non LDP leaders this would be their
mission if taken from the point of view ofthe electorate However they lack a certain
assertiveness and courage to appeal strongly
to the audience of their speeches
Now the other prime ministers like Nakasone and Tanaka are more similar to Koizumi
as they are assertive and active in their styleof speech
In the 1980s the wide spread way of thinking in the United States and Great Britain as
well as in Nakasone's Japan advocated small
government privatization deregulation andas such can be characterised as liberal (laissez faire) ideology In Japan this agenda
was commonly called somewhat misleadingly as Otake points out (Otake 1993) administrative reform This was reflected in Nakasone's Minkatsu (民活) policy (that is inviting private capital into public work projects)
and deregulating land use The opinion towards land use issue was divided in the Ministry of Construction The so called deregulators emphasised increasing available landfor building through market incentives anddemanded deregulation in land use The regulators comprised the mainstream officials
in the ministry in charge of the land use policy from the late 1960s They had establishedthe system of publicising land prices and argued for the absorption of windfall profits(the return to the public of any increase in
the value of real estate arising from government action (開発利益の社会還元) (ibid )The prime minister's direct instructions
were decisive in that deregulation to become
the official policy (however the opposition in
the ministry slowed down the deregulation
policy progress)
Largely the same developments can be observed in Nakasone's Minkatsu policies By
the latter half of the 1980s the participantsof the Minkatsu included not just the real estate and construction industries but also themainstream business community Nakasone
advocated giant projects like the TransTokyo Bay Highway or the Akashi Straits

研究ノートBridge to be handled under the Minkatsu
agenda However the Ministry of Construction and the LDP construction zoku insisted
that a semi public Public Road Corporation
would be made the nucleus
On the background of these examples ofNakasone's policies it becomes evident why
he was using positive assertive vocabulary(being the do faction) with the keywords
reform (also the words like international
the worldcooperation etc) As his
career in the bureaucracy was very short⒁and as a prime minister went often against
the bureaucracy he could not afford to befeeble and soft spoken (even if the results of
his policies did not quite match the liberalprinciples⒂ he was advocating)
The same way neither Koizumi nor Tanaka
has (had) very strong and long establishedties with the bureaucracy Instead they
serve as strong politician type prime ministers By contrast the leaders with strong bureaucratic background (like Fukuda or Miyazawa for example) tend to be technically proficient often issue oriented and relatively
passive in leadership style⒃6.

Conclusion

The principal component analysis of theprime minister's policy speeches of almost 60
years in the Japanese parliament showed thatthe rhetoric of the 25 prime ministers havebeen too similar to mark any trends or deviations as the analysis gave only one combination of variables i.e. only one principal component This result can be explained by thefact that all the speeches generally touch thesame subjects economy defence foreign relations etc. I further conducted a multidimensional scaling analysis that helped to groupthe prime ministers mostly into four groups
First group comprises of seven prime minis-

ters from late 1940s to early 1970sИЙTetsu
Katayama Shigeru Yoshida Ichiro Hatoyama Tanzan Ishibashi Nobusuke Kishi Hayato Ikeda and Eisaku Sato This group can becharacterised by using words like people (国民) parliament (国会) the state (国家)
democracy (民主主義) and cabinet (内閣)
more than the average of the 25 prime ministers They also use distinctively more frequently the vocabulary of economic affairs
like industry (産業)
production (生産)
trade (貿易) or construction (建設) As
this was the period of state building after theSecond World War the issues of the government and economy were the first priorities
As the politicians of that time faced thiskind of basic problems of state building they
were in most cases not eager to use big concepts like freedom
peace or wealthand new era However as some remarkable exceptions indicated these issues werevery sensitive so the questions of freedom
relations with the US etc were to be handled
delicately The most suitable for a keyword
for this group is 国民 ( the people ) as incontrast with the other prime ministers inlater years these seven prime ministers used
this word more frequently as the average
The second group is smaller consists ofthree prime ministers Takeo Miki Takeo
Fukuda and Masayoshi Ohira The keyword
representing this group's rhetoric would befriendship (友好) as no other prime minister has used it as frequently as the three ofthe second group Other words that are characteristic for this group are relations (関係) stability (安定) and cooperation (協力) mutuality (相互) The only terms concerning economy that this group uses more
frequently than the average is business conditions (景気) and depression (不況) The
context shows that very often these terms
are bound with international issues drawing
attention to the fact that the depression is
not only Japanese problem but a predicamentof the whole industrialized nations' family
From this perspective it is also natural to193

Reinem：Japanese Political Thought as Seen from Prime Minister's Speech

concentrate of terms like cooperation mutuality etc. to support a kind of positive feelingin the audience combined with an emphasis
on responsibility as a member of this familyof nations
The third group is the largest one with nine
persons Yasuhiro Nakasone Noboru Takeshita Toshiki Kaifu Kiichi Miyazawa Morihiro Hosokawa Tsutomu Hata Tomiichi Murayama Ryutaro Hashimoto and YoshiroMori The keyword for the third group is society (社会) as all of the nine prime ministers use this more than average Other words
more frequently used include reform (改革) local area (地域) problem issue (課題) It is possible to separate these prime
ministers into three subgroups first Nakasone and Takeshita second a group of
three Miyazawa Hosokawa and Murayama
and finally third Hashimoto and Mori
Finally Junichiro Koizumi builds up a
fourth group with Sosuke Uno ; whereas Hitoshi Ashida Kakuei Tanaka Zenko Suzuki
and Keizo Obuchi are different enough fromall of the groups However it is not possible
to make far reaching conclusions on this statistical finding as Uno had only one speech
for the analysis The characteristics of
Koizumi is his significantly frequent usage ofthe verb do (する) combined with his second most frequent word reform (改革) He
seems rather opposite to the second group of
Miki Fukuda and Ohira Beside do theverbs Koizumi uses often are all very active
strong and positive words such as advance(進める) aim (目指す) can (できる) andtackle (取り組む) The analysis indicatesthat with the time the trend to use assertive
verbs has grown to add strength and intensity to the speech On the other hand as
Koizumi's case as well as the results of component matrix of the top 200 words analysis
show the opposite to do is not be (ある)or not even become (なる) but think (考える)My attempt to draw any divisive line between the conservative LDP and social
194

democratic JSP or DSPJ did not bare any
fruit Conspicuously the group of Miyazawa Murayama and Hosokawa use words likewelfare (福祉) stability (安定) security (安全) democracy (民主主義) less frequently than the average regardless of theparty affiliation At the same time it was
not possible either to draw the line when considering the economic situation
In an attempt to group similar prime ministers with Koizumi the reformists like Nakasone but also Murayama Hosokawa Hata
and Mori appear ; and do persons Kaifu
Tanaka and Nakasone They are all politician types who were elected to the House ofRepresentatives or the House of Councillors
very early without prior experience in thebureaucracy Alternatively they had been active in private sector before getting involvedin politics The non LDP prime ministers like
Murayama Hosokawa and Hata were advocates of reform policies however they were
sharply different from the others in terms of
not using the word do (する) Thus theseprime ministers saw the need to reform thelong lasted LDP politics ; and as non LDP
leaders this would be their mission if takenfrom the point of view of the electorate
However they lack a certain assertivenessand courage to appeal strongly to the audience of their speeches
Taken together the political thought on
the side of the prime minister/the government is not very easily projected to the traditional left right or conservative social democratic (or liberal as Otake uses) confrontation This is obviously due to the characteristics of the Japanese economic and social
structures (as Otake pointed out) especially
due to the fact that most of the prime ministers are affiliated with the same politicalparty The non LDP prime ministers were advocators of reform which in itself is not thedetermining factor for left right division
Thus even if the Japanese electorate is conscious about this kind of division (locating
the LDP to the right and the JSP/DSPJ and研究ノートCommunists to the left ; further being able
to locate their own personal opinion in thesame framework) as Kabashima et al. show
this is not reflected in the political thoughtof the prime ministers as seen from their policy speeches
Finally as apparent from the first figure
already Koizumi seems rather distant fromthe other prime ministers in his rhetoric So
the hopes (or fears ?) of those who called him
maverick four years ago have been fulfilled at least in terms of his speeches[注]⑴ Ichiro Miyake Joji Watanuki have led
the research in the past See also Miyake
1985 and 2001 and Watanuki 1977 1986 or
1991⑵ According to the IPSA database recent
work has been concentrated on either special topics like war defeat hate etc. or
one special speech For the former see e.g.
Corcoran's
Presidential
Concession
Speeches : the Rhetoric of DefeatorNorthcutt's An analysis of Bush's War
Speech ; for the latter see e.g. Pitney's
President Clinton ' s 1993 Inaugural Address or Sung Jiang Zemin's Eight point
Speech and Cross Strait Relations in the
Post Deng Era In any case most of thisresearch concentrates on the United States
and the US presidential speeches and I
have not been able to find anything similar
done on Japanese post war prime ministers⑶ As I was able to confirm while interviewing former Prime Minister Kiichi Miyazawa(April 16 2004) and former deputy chiefcabinet secretary Shinzo Abe (April 11
2005)⑷ For analysing speeches I have previously
used also a Japanese language dictionary 日
本語語彙体系 to group similar words andsynonyms into categories For example
democracy (民主主義) imperialism (帝国主義)
ideology ( イ デ オ ロ ギ ー ) etc.
would count as one category and not threedifferent entries For the same token synonyms like 制度，仕組み，体系，体制，シス

テム，etc. would constitute one category
However as generalizations always blurthe concrete I decided to go back to thebasic unit the word⑸ It is of course known that the MDS do
not pick one component to be the axis It
rather measures the distances between theobjects and as a method includes rotating of the axes ; so instead of looking at
the axes we have look at the map as whole
to see the similarities and differences (thatis the distances) of the objects⑹ By now the question may have risen
about the meaning of for example the 5％
or 1％ (etc) at the figures and explanations We have to keep in mind hereby that
we cannot compare these numbers in absolute terms If we take the average at 6 3％
(as in the case of する) it would be 50％ of
the distribution Increasing it by 0 5％ (to6 8) would include 76％ of the distribution ; increasing it further 0 5％ (to 7 3)
would include 92％ of the distribution as
calculated using cumulative distributionfunction (CDF) That shows that the first
0 5％ increases the distribution more (by 26％) than the latter 0 5％ (only by 16％)
Thus the weight of 0 5％ or 1％ etc differs depending on its distance from the average ; which means that we cannot talkabout the meaning of e.g. 1％ in absoluteterms but only relatively
Further I also analysed the distribution
and kurtosis of single words We can saythat the curve for する is rather peaked(with kurtosis excess being 1 3％) (however with the average at 6 3％ Koizumi withhis 7 8 percentage points locates himself
quite to the extreme) ; at the same time
the curve for 改革 for example is very low
with the kurtosis being −1 15％ A further
analysis still needed to see all the implications from these calculations⑺ It might be rather interesting to analyse
separately all the first speeches of the 25
prime ministers as it can be argued thatthese first speeches might show more of
the prime minister's own way of thinking
and less that of the bureaucracy ; also as
the newly appointed prime minister has not

195Reinem：Japanese Political Thought as Seen from Prime Minister's Speech

yet lost his enthusiasm (that apparently
usually happens after a while of difficulties
or failures) the first speeches can also
show the true intent and scope of planned
policies of that prime minister However
this task stands out of the limits of thispaper⑻ I conducted a further analysis that excluded the first speeches of all the prime
ministers Doing so I naturally excluded
also those prime ministers who had only
one speech The results deserve more detailed analysis but stated simply here : ⑴the first group includes Tanaka ; at thesame time seems even more distant fromother groups especially from the second
group ; ⑵ the second group stays together
as it was ; ⑶ the third group is not possible to divide into 3 subgroups any more It
has a stronger nucleus of Nakasone Kaifu
Hashimoto and Mori ; whereas Miyazawa
Murayama Hosokawa group gets more dispersed between Takeshita and Obuchi ; ⑷Koizumi is still a lonely player In this article however I still included all the prime
ministers as it is only my personal opinion(based on reading the speeches) that thefirst speeches tend to differ from the following speeches and it does not rely on any particular research and so I have no academically justified reason to exclude thesespeeches⑼
Japanese Political Ideology : Content
Analysis of the Speeches of Prime Minister
K Miyazawa and Prime Minister J Koizumi (2004)⑽ Concerning the word social
there canbe certain distrust or uneasiness in using
this word The Soviet Union's experimentwith socialism left a dark shadow over thesocialist discourse In many parts of theword the mere name of social democracy
may raise objections to the line of thought
because of its connotations with socialism
However it can be argued that the basic
question of whether state policy should
support the (small number of) strong individuals guaranteeing the equality of thestarting position or it should support (asgreat a number as possible of) the weaker

196

groups seeking a kind of sensible equalityof the result has it roots much deeper inthe history The cleavage between therights and liberties of an individual on one
hand and the greatest happiness for thegreatest number on the other had emerged
half a century before Marx was even born
Therefore one way to support the social
democratic and welfare state agenda is totrace it back to the utilitarian thought ofBentham and James Mill
⑾ There may be a general impression that
Koizumi (especially in his early days as
Prime Minister) emphasised a lot on personal freedoms and liberties However the
analysis on the policy speeches did not indicate that trend⑿ However most of the labour force was
not still covered with these schemes sinceas late as 1955 25％ of the labour force
was self employed and another 31％ consisted of unpaid family workers Only by
the end of the 1980s unpaid family workers comprised 9％ of the labour force andthe self employed had shrunk to 15 ％(Allinson 1993)⒀ And yet at the same time in his view
the state ' s ( government ' s ) task is tomake people happy
which ultimately
still represents a kind of wall to wall approach of giving everybody something⒁ And he won a seat in the House of Representatives at a very early age (being 28 in
1947)⒂ As is the case with Minkatsu since small
government principle was seen as its cornerstone but actually it resulted in raising
the expectations towards big government⒃ The distinction between these two types
is indicated by Calder (see Calder 1982) He
is actually concentrating on the brokerageskills of the prime ministers comparing
Fukuda and Tanaka ( By
brokerage
Calder means the act of meditating between private sector groups or individuals
desiring direct material benefits or regulatory actions conferring such benefits on
the one hand and governmental bodies perceived capable of providing such serviceson the other ; in other words it is the me-

研究ノートdiating role of politicians in pork barrel
politics ) Therefore Calder says Fukuda
succeeded despite his diffident low key
and often passive approach waiting forprivate groups to come to him or his representatives to solve the issue Fukuda has
been able to concentrate in his intra party
activities on policy definition in the fashion of the classic eighteenth and nineteenth century British statesmen (ibid p11) Tanaka on the other hand has been
forced by his lowly origins to aggressively sell on i.e to place others in his debt
by seeking to do them favours His brokerage has consisted not so much of passively
mediating among contending positions orformulating abstract policy as in giving
and demanding favours
Two key elements decide the success as a
broker First an independent power baseusually financial that provides initial resources to facilitate brokerage Second institutionalised connections with key partsof the existing power structure that allows
them to influence that structure when necessary The greater their financial backing
and the stronger their bureaucratic connections the more influential brokers havebeen in national decision making This
could serve as a hint to understand the way
Koizumi's policies have developed as they
have
[References]
Abe Yasuyuki Yuichiro Kanazawa and Ikuo
Kabashima (1997) Modeling Party Support of Japanese Voters in the Early 1996
University of Tsukuba Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences
Allinson Gary D (1993) Citizenship Fragmentation and the Negotiated Polity in
Political Dynamics in Contemporary Japan Gary D Allinson and Yasunori Sone
( eds ) Ithaca and London : Cornell
University Press┄
Calder Kent E (1982) Kanryo vs. Shomin :Contrasting Dynamics of Conservative
Leadership in Postwar Japan in Political
Leadership in Contemporary Japan Terry Edward MacDougall (ed ) Michigan

Papers in Japanese Studies No 1 The
University of Michigan
Corcoran Paul E (1994) Presidential Concession Speeches : the Rhetoric of Defeat in Political Communication 11 ⑵Apr June 94
Ishida Takeshi (1989) Nihon no Seiji to Kotoba : Jiyu to Fukushi (日本の政治と言葉「自由」と「福祉」) Tokyo : Tokyo
Daigaku Shuppankai
Ishida Takeshi (1989) Nihon no Seiji to Kotoba : Heiwa to Kokka (日本の政治と言葉「平和」と「国家」) Tokyo : Tokyo
Daigaku Shuppankai
Kabashima Ikuo and Yoshihiko Takenaka(1996) Gendai Nihonjin no Ideorogi (現代日本人のイデオロギー) Tokyo : Tokyo
Daigaku Shuppankai
Maruyama Masao (1961) Nihon no Shisho(日本の思想) Tokyo : Iwanami Shoten
Miyake Ichiro (1985) Seito Shiji no Bunseki(政党支持の分析) Tokyo : Sobunsha
Miyake Ichiro Yoshitaka Nishizawa Masaru
Kono (2001) 55 nen Taisei ka no Seiji to
KeizaiИЙJiji Yoronchosa Deta no Bunseki (55 年体制下の政治と経済ИЙ時事世論調 査 デ ー タ の 分 析 ) Tokyo : Bokutakusha
Murakami Yasusuke ( 1984 ) Shinchukan
Taishu no Jidai ( 新 中 間 大 衆 の 時 代 )Tokyo : Chuo Koronsha
Northcutt Susan Stoudinger ( 1993 ) An
Analysis of Bush's War Speech in International Social Science Review 67 ⑶Summer 92
Otake Hideo (1993) The Rise and Retreat ofa Neoliberal Reform : Controversies OverLand Use Policy in Political Dynamics inContemporary Japan Gary D Allinson
and Yasunori Sone (eds ) Ithaca andLondon : Cornell University Press
Otake Hideo (1996) Sengo Nihon no Ideorogi
Tairitsu (戦後日本のイデオロギー対立)
Tokyo : San'ichi Shobo
Otake Hideo (1999) Nihon Seiji no Tairitsujiku (日本政治の対立軸) Tokyo : Chuo
Koron Shinsha
Pitney John J Jr (1998) President Clinton's 1993 Inaugural Address in Presidential
Studies Quarterly 27 ⑴ Winter 97

197

Reinem：Japanese Political Thought as Seen from Prime Minister's Speech

Schmidt KarlHeinz and Joji Watanuki(1993) Social Security and Welfare in Japan and West Germany in The Politics ofEconomic Change in Postwar Japan andWest Germany Haruhiro Fukui Peter H
Merkl Hubertus Muller
Groeling andAkio Watanabe (edsχ) London : St Martin's Press
Shinada Yutaka (2000) 90 Nendai Nihon no
Senkyo Koyaku (90 年代日本の選挙公約) in
Henka wo Do Setumei Suruka : Seiji hen(変化をどう説明するか：政治篇) Norihito
Mizuguchi Tetsuya Kitahara Ikuo Kume(eds ) Tokyo : Bokutakusha
SPSS Statistical Algorithms Second Edition(1991)
Sung Kuo cheng ( 1996 ) Jiang Zemin ' s

198

Eight point Speech and Cross Strait Relations in the Post Deng Era in Issues
and Studies 31 ⑺ July 95
Tsuzuki Tsutomu (2004) Seijika no Nihongo : Zurasu・Bokasu・ Kawasu (政治家の日本語：ずらす・ぼかす・かわす) Tokyo :Heibonsha
Watanuki Joji (1977) Politics in Postwar Japanese Society Tokyo : University ofTokyo Press
Watanuki Joji (1986) Nihonjin no Senkyo
Koudo (日本人の選挙行動) Tokyo : Tokyo
Daigaku Shuppankai
Watanuki Joji (1991) Social structure andvoting behavior in Japan in Scott Flanagan et al. (eds) The Japanese Voter New
Haven Conn : Yale University Press