Talk:Liberal Democratic Party (Japan)

message: Under factions, would it be useful to list factions that split to form new political parties?
This article needs to be updated to mention the recent People's New Party split. Yodakii 05:01, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faction split to form party? 

message: Heisei Kenkyukai (Hashimoto Faction), .. It is now led by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi in the lower house and Aoki Mikio in the upper house.
...
Seiwa Seisaku Kenkyukai (Mori Faction), led by Mori Yoshiro. Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi is a member of this faction. 
Is Koizumi really a leader of one faction and a member of another? Can someone clear this up? I can't read Japanese well enough to find out.
:Koizumi Junichiro is former leader of Seiwa Seisaku Kenkyukai. He is not member of Heisei Kenkyukai. Sh 06:07, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Koizumi member of 2 factions? 

message: Someone added that the LDP was a moderate party. Electionworld.org, Worldstatesmen.org, and also the Japanese Consulate General of LA have confirmed that the LDP is a conservative party, and the most conservative party. New Komeito has quite a moderatly radical agenda. I am re-editing.
:The LDP is a big tent. You have LDP leaders as diverse as Kono Yohei and Aso Taro. But 90% of LDP leaders are conservative compared to the opposition in Japan. The LDP is not an extreme right wing party, nor is it a particularly moderate right-wing party. It is very plainly, very simply, "conservative." Any attempt to modify that descriptor is just acceptance of one side or another's political posturing. ALC Washington 00:33, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I partly agree, partly disagree. The definition and/or how "conservative" is re-coined anywhere may have quite different nuances, in relation with the region's history: what is to be conserved or restored, see Japan ruling MPs call Nanjing massacre fabrication, 2007, Reuters, alertnet.org, and also note how broad the width of spectrum of ideas a group can hold without disintegrating, depending on the political culture and climate. --Makesdark (talk) 07:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conservative/Moderate? 

message: The "Factions" section needs to be updated. I don't know enough to do much about now. Also, should the new members be included in a seperate faction? Some are already calling it "Koizumi Children". --Yodakii 14:28, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Factions 

message: "From the 1950s through the 1970s, the American Central Intelligence Agency spent millions of dollars attempting to influence elections in Japan to favor the LDP against more leftist, Soviet backed parties, such as the Socialists and the Communists, although this was not revealed until the mid-1990s when The New York Times exposed it."
Sources?  That's a pretty heavy accusation to be throwing around.  I'm not saying I doubt it (the actions are actually quite in character with certain CIA operations of the period, IMO), but there does need to be a verifiable source for the information.  Maybe the NY Times article(s) relating to this should be cited?
Whoops, forgot to sign that.  Anyway, I found a source from the JPRI.  I'll add it to the article.  Moonsword 00:47, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  CIA Influence? 

message: The history section completely misses the partys many connections to organised crime (yakuza). Especially Yoshio Kodama, the main power behind the formation of the party. Also Ryoichi Sasakawa.
Maybe I should do this myself. But I sense I wouldn't get away with adding such things without good sources. --Apoc2400 10:12, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: According to various sources (eg. Stockwin) the head of the LDP Policy Affairs Research Council is one of the most senior figures of the LDP. However I have found it hard to find out anything about this council except for the fact its head is important. Can anyone give more information?129.12.200.49 22:39, 25 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Policy Affairs Research Council (PARC) is an LDP organ, not an organ of the government. It serves multiple functions. Primarily, it coordinates the research of the powerful bureaucracy and the government leaders over proposed laws or regulations. Before a bill is even written the PARC issues recommendations on what the bill should look like, what it will cost, the best way to manage it, how the various factions will look at it, etc. The head of PARC is thus extremely influential in that his committee can make or break a bill by the way they analyze it and the manner in which they choose to present it to the party members.  For more information I recommend Gerald R. Curtis' "Logic of Japanese Politics". Wtlegis 07:31, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Policy Affairs Research Council 

message: Something's funny with this sentence, from the Structure section: To make the system more democratic, Prime Minister Miki Takeo introduced a "primary" system in 1978, which opened the balloting to some 1.5 million LDP members.  Takeo Fukuda was Prime Minister in 1978, not Miki, who resigned two years earlier.  Could someone clarify/correct this?  -David Schaich 00:52, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've replaced Miki Takeo with Takeo Fukuda.  -David Schaich 01:43, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fact Check 

message: Here we have a lengthy article about one of the world's major political parties, yet we learn next to nothing about its political positions, except for repetitive use of the term "conservative". 
* What is its position regarding the Israeli-Palestine conflict?
* What is its position regarding a stronger role of the military in Japan?
* What is its position regarding immigration and minorities in Japanese society?
* What is its position regarding progressive taxation?
* What is its position regarding unions/ minimum wage laws/ social welfare?
* What is its position regarding consumer protection laws/environmental regulations?
* What is its position regarding global warming?
* What is its position regarding censorship/right to free speech?
* What is its position regarding punishment vs. reformation of criminals?
* What is its position regarding abortion/contraception/sex education?
* What is its position regarding same sex marriage?
* What is its position regarding the low birth rate in Japan?
What use is an article about a political party without basic information like this? After all, a political party is nothing but a shorthand for a bundle of political positions. AxelBoldt 01:00, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. What I hate about political party articles on wiki is that it gives USELESS information and not the important material.
-G  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.117.158.83 (talk) 21:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: About half of your questions are irrelevant to Japanese politics and culture.  In particular, Japan has very few stakes in the Middle East beyond SDF working for the coalition in Iraq.  Homosexuality is still a touchy subject in Japan post-occupation.  Almost all political parties refuse to talk about immigration because the Japanese have more severe race issues than you fathom.  More importantly, though, your questions are framed in a liberal American mindset, so even if they were relevant to Japan, they come across as being out of touch with the actual issues of Japan.  Of all these, I think the ones actually relevant to LDP's position are the role of the SDF and maybe the low birth rate (though I think the question there should be about care for the elderly).
While you present an honest concern, research the political issues of this country before you present your argument.  Not every "Western" country is like the United States.  Brokenwit (talk) 06:44, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

text: Yes, he has an honest concern, and a good point here.--Makesdark (talk) 11:30, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  What are the political positions of this party? 

message: I mostly agree with the above post, and also ask this question: I always assumed, based off the name, that the Liberal Democrats were liberal. Why would they use this name if they are conservative? Brutannica 21:28, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This happens in more countries, for two reasons (that I know of... I'm not much into politics, there may be more). Firstly, conservative doesn't mean the same everywhere in the world. In America conservative may have anti-liberal an undemocratic connotations, but in other parts of the world this may mean entirely different things. Secondly, sometimes a party gradually changes, keeping a technically outdated name. For example the Dutch VVD (People's party for Freedom and Democracy) fits a bit in both patterns. It is / used to be a conservative party in the European sense in that it supported a liberal market, while defending democracy, the welfare state, personal freedom, etc. But in recent years a strong right-wing faction in the party developed whose main priority appears to be turning the Netherlands in a police state. This faction appears to have lost the power struggle for now and the pro-freedom faction continues to set most of the party policy, but if it hadn't the party's name would not have been very appropriate anymore. Shinobu 16:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Which one is it? The article says the two parties that formed the LDP were conservative. Brutannica 23:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We need to be careful about making political value judgments on Wikipedia, especially in this type of article. The LDP formed as a pro-business anti-Socialist organization by a merger of the above mentioned Democratic and Liberal Parties after the war in 1955 (The '55 System), and with the United States' blessing. The LDP was liberal in the classical Western sense in that is supported, and still supports, trade liberalization (to a degree, arguments over trade protectionism notwithstanding), voting rights, free markets, individual rights, etc. It is Democratic in that it does not advocate ending elections or reducing the franchise (maybe not a necessary statement to make, but you never know). "Conservative" and "Liberal" do not mean "anti-freedom" and "pro-freedom" any more in the United States than they do elsewhere. You have to analyze the meaning in light of the local context. If you use the classical Western European context of "liberal" and not current ideologically-driven contextual meanings then the name makes sense. Wtlegis 07:31, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Name

message: Could you please add more references to the article? Use <ref> and ,  and family. Shinobu 16:55, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: References

message: There are quite a few things that bothered me about the "Platform" section in this article. The section carries a very negative tone with respect to the party. 
To begin with, the section mentions that one single author has likened the LDP to a communist party, without providing any explanation whatsoever as to what it is about the party that makes it communist, or why Japan seems to be a "working communism" under the party. Not only that, but this appears to be the opinion of a single author and not a general point of view of the party, let alone a neutral one.
Next, the article states "The party is the most right-wing and conservative party in Japan, and is still the most popular.", as if the party is popular in spite of its conservatism. This kind of tone gives the impression that conservatism is by its very nature unpopular and wrong, and while I personally don't follow conservative ideology, I don't think that wikipedia should be advocating against it.
The section goes on to state "Nevertheless, because of its status as the ruling party, it is marred by various special interests pushing for government patronage. The LDP has also been troubled by financial scandals.", yet it provides no proof or basis for this so-called patronage and these scandals.
Finally, it states "The Democratic Party of Japan is their major opposition and is gaining control over the conflict. The DPJ is putting an end to the anti-terrorism refueling mission." It would probably be nitpicking to call this paragraph out for NPOV, but there are other problems with it so I might as well throw it in there anyway. What exactly does this mission entail? How is the DPJ putting an end to the mission? Are they even putting an end to it, or is this just party rhetoric, stating that they are trying to put an end to it? The paragraph gives the impression that the DPJ is somehow wresting control of Japan's armed forces from the governing party, which I find hard to believe.
I'd also like to add that the section says absolutely nothing about the party's actual platform except that it is conservative (duh) and that it advocates this refuelling mission. This section definitely needs more information, and it needs to be presented in a more neutral tone than it is now.
Uniqueuponhim (talk) 11:31, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality of '''Platform''' Section 

message: What's the point of having that there? It just reads like an advertisement for his book. Rmsharpe (talk) 06:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Friedman quote? 

message: While I agree with the removal of unsourced info by the IP, could everyone please stop edit-warring about the party's ideology?  It's really not so different if it's a "center-right" or "right-wing", and whether it's "nationalist" or not.  If you (I don't mean just the IP, I mean the various editors that have been adding and subtracting these recently) really want to argue, do it here on the talk page instead of just changing it back at forth. If y'all don't stop, I'll either request the page to be locked, or report one or more of you for edit-warring.Qwyrxian (talk) 07:32, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ideology edit warring 

message: Is the section on Seiwa Seisaku faction vandalised? Some seriously bitter text there, and no source either. I have not the slightest idea about Japan politics, but I find it hard to believe a faction would survive from such a platform.Jostikas (talk) 17:23, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Faction information 

message: It cannot be where a person in his own country support center-right policies and support center-left parties of other countries. People need to be straight. I look at US Republican Party as American nationalist and reactionist, but I don't go in that article and start inserting those text on that page. People need to look at this objectively. 67.190.167.127 (talk) 13:45, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Stop edit warring

message: Strong Support There's already a section in the main article covering the modern history of the party. No reason not to include the rest of its history- common-sensical... Veryproicelandic (talk) 08:38, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge Liberal Dem. Party with History of LDP 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Liberal Democratic Party (Japan). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080820033055/http://voanews.com/english/2007-09-23-voa5.cfm to http://voanews.com/english/2007-09-23-voa5.cfm
*Added  tag to http://www.japantoday.com/category/politics/view/new-political-party-to-be-named-tachiagare-nippon-stand-up-japan
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:48, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: It is not that the LDP itself is the extreme right, but that it does not appear to be a violation of NPOV that states that extreme right-wing actions exist within the LDP.
I don't think 'Jeff6045' has suggested an unreliable source. (In addition, this is something that even 'Helper201' that I and I argued about in the talk document did not take issue with.(problems with the logical position of the LDP)--삭은사과 (talk) 10:16, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: To be honest I think the far-right sections should probably be left out of the infobox. However, I do think the party's far-right factions should be mentioned in the main text of the page. The problem is that it is inconsistent formatting to include a 'sections' area of the political position part of the infobox. I don't know any other political party Wikipedia page that does this. Many big political parties have factions in them that differ to the party as a whole but we don't include it in the infobox. We only include how the party is labelled as a whole. Helper201 (talk) 16:00, 2 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Isn't it true that there is a significant 'hard right-wing' stake in Japan's Liberal Democratic Party? 

message: LDP is widely described as conservative ,but this party is a big-tent, so I think that centre-left aspect should not be ignored. I can show you some articles that position the LDP as social democracy or pacifist:
https://diamond.jp/articles/amp/211556?skin=amp&device=smartphone&display=b
https://www.nippon.com/en/currents/d00122/bringing-internationalism-back.html
Also, some consider the LDP policies like 2015 Japanese military legislation to be militarism, but the official view of the Japanese government is aimed at the development of pacifism and international coordination.  I think that Wikipedia should not include only evaluations that are considered militarism among various evaluations.
Official website of the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs:
https://www.mofa.go.jp/policy/security/
index.html
If you have any comments or suggestions, please reply here.  Thanking you in advance.
Littlelessleast (talk) 10:40, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: I couldn't read it all because it was long. (Someone asked to take part in this talk.) It is my belief that the LDP's welfare policy cannot be seen as a universal 'social democracy' because it has been strictly combined with conservative social and cultural policies.--삭은사과 (talk) 07:27, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

text: Also, I think it is better to refer to Western media articles than to Japanese media articles. Because Japan may not be neutral because LDP has dominated society for a long time.--삭은사과 (talk) 07:39, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Social democratic and pacific factions 

message: If you look at the sources of the ideas in the introduction section of the LDP document, they are from the 2010s, and some are from the 2000s.
The source, however, that the LDP described as conservative liberal, was in 1976. As of 2010, there are no sources proving that the party is conservative liberal. The current LDP is clearly conservative and hardly a conservative liberal party. That is why I think the introduction of the LDP document should be removed from the conservative liberal section or at least put the phrase "historic"--삭은사과 (talk) 02:42, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  There is no evidence that the current LDP advocates [[conservative liberalism]]. 

message: I object to adding "Liberal conservatism" and "Conservative liberalism" to Factions. Listing them all up makes them look messy and less readable. Moreover, since the two ideologies are derived from liberalism, there is no problem with just one expression of liberalism.  In addition, 'Ultra-nationalism' must be clearly stated in "Factions". Because reliable sources clearly indicate that the LDP itself is pursuing a project based on "Ultra-nationalism". Originally not "Factions" but the ideology of the LDP itself deserves to be described.--삭은사과 (talk) 07:07, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe that the LDP itself should be clearly stated in infobox as 'Ultra-nationalism' instead of being basically limited to certain factions of the LDP. However, it reserved its position that it should only be described in "Factions" as previously because such descriptions could clearly lead to editorial disputes. And no party that advocates 'Ultra-nationalism' is classified as 'Centre-right'.--삭은사과 (talk) 07:12, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

text: If I have to describe it so far, I rather believe that "Japanese nationalism" should be replaced by "Ultranationalism" or "Japanese ultranationalism."--삭은사과 (talk) 07:17, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

text: Social democracy is hard to see from the current position of the LDP. It is also hard to call it social democracy if it takes a politically extreme nationalist stance while taking a position close to social democracy economically. Europe's far-right populist parties also take a stance closer to social democracy economically, but it is not social democracy because it is based on Welfare chauvinism.--삭은사과 (talk) 07:20, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

text: About 40 percent of Japanese lawmakers belong to Nippon Kaigi, and more than half of them are members of the LDP. It is usually a violation of NPOV to label a party closely linked to a Ultra-nationalist group as 'Centre-right'.--삭은사과 (talk) 07:22, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

text: Let's take another example. The Bharatiya Janata Party was described as a center-right in the Washington Post. "Modi was elected in a landslide victory in 2014 and is seeking reelection. He leads the Bharatiya Janata Party, a center-right political party built around Hindu nationalism ..." But Wikipedia never calls the Bharatiya Janata Party a center-right. because there are not a few articles from Western press that describe the far-right tendency of the BJP. Even Nippon Kaigi has a stronger Ultra-nationalism tendency than Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh. There is no reason why LDP should be labeled Centre-right.--삭은사과 (talk) 08:07, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

text: I don't agree with that opinion. The LDP itself has never been described as a Social democracy. But the LDP itself has been described as Ultranationalism.--삭은사과 (talk) 07:29, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

text: It should also be remembered that, as described above, the social democratic economic policies of the far-right of Europe are not called 'Social democracy'. Far-right politicians are often more welfare-friendly than Liberals because of their strong Nationalistic nature.--삭은사과 (talk) 07:31, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

text: Apart from being unreliable because it is a Japanese thesis, more than half of the politicians who belong to an apparent far-right group are involved. Such a party is generally not referred to as 'Centre-right'. Japan's LDP is not the only exception.--삭은사과 (talk) 07:39, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

text: The view that there are many moderates within the party itself is not NPOV-like. Currently, LDP politicians are mostly members of far-right organizations. This is an undeniable fact. Therefore, I clearly disagree with your opinion. Unless the current LDP document is to be maintained, the LDP itself should be clearly labeled as 'Ultra-nationalism' and the LDP itself as 'Right-wing to far-right' should be removed.--삭은사과 (talk) 07:55, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Related to the "Factions" Ideological Descriptions of LDPs in infobox 

message: While Ideology supports maintaining the status quo, I think there should be some change in the Political position. I propose to abbreviate the LDP's infobox's Political position item to a simple 'Right-wing' like Bharatiya Janata Party . More than half of the current major members of the LDP belong to far-right groups, and as long as the LDP is even described as Ultra-nationalism, Centre-right should no longer be maintained in infobox.--삭은사과 (talk) 08:13, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Of course, if you remove "Centre-right" from Infobox, you will also remove "with far-right factions". Of course, if "Centre-right" is not removed, "with far-right factions" should also be maintained.--삭은사과 (talk) 08:16, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: However, it would be good to describe it as "Right-wing" or "Right-wingBig-tent"with the coexistence of far-right nationalists and liberals within the LDP."--삭은사과 (talk) 08:21, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

text: Yes, let's just leave the "Right-wing" like the BJP document! The current LDP cannot be seen as Centre-right, but it is too large a major party to see all LDP members as Far-right.--삭은사과 (talk) 08:23, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

text: Thank you for agreeing. I just corrected it!--삭은사과 (talk) 08:49, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

text: Right-wing seems like a good consensus for a party that represents a big tent of the right. We recently did something similar on Talk:Law and Justice, as there were different sources describing the party as centre-right, right-wing and far-right.--Jay942942 (talk) 13:14, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

text: I'm against it. This is because the party is now more mainstream than the hard-line conservatives.--삭은사과 (talk) 09:27, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

text: The reason for not removing "liberalism" from Infobox is that it remains symbolic because there are a few moderate politicians in the LDP. However, moderates are obviously very minority, so there is no need to add "liberal conservatism" or "conservative liberalism." That's because it's quite possible to infer.--삭은사과 (talk) 10:18, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political position 

message: The article starts like a joke: "The Liberal Democratic Party of Japan is a conservative party." The article would be better if it could explain the contradiction of the name (liberal) with the ideology (conservatism). Is it just a fusion of the name of it's predecessors or is liberal democracy perceived as conservatism in Japan or a simple misnomer? --Randam (talk) 08:34, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, it is very common for a political party to not match its name and actual tendency. (ex. Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, Social Democratic Party (Portugal), Social Liberal Party (Brazil), etc) It seems that no further explanation is needed.--삭은사과 (talk) 11:32, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

text: The LDP was founded in 1955. The reason why the LDP puts "liberalism" in its name probably means liberalism as a contrast to the "socialism" pursued by the Japan Socialist Party at the time.--삭은사과 (talk) 11:35, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Outside of the US, "liberal" general means promoting economic liberalism such as the Liberal Party (Australia). So it's not that unusual even by international standards This post was made by orbitalbuzzsaw gang (talk) 17:59, 15 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why does the party name not match with ideology? 

message: Even though the party is supported by far-right groups such as Nippon Kaigi, the whole party is often described as a centre-right because there are also many centrists within the party. 
I understand that there are a certain number of far-right factions within the party, but it should not be ignored there are valid sources that also refer to the existence of the centrists. Even though left-leaning Asahi Shimbun, critical of the LDP also mention that there are many liberals such as Democratic Party (Japan, 2016) in LDP. Littlelessleast (talk) 01:32, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be taken into account that the Japanese media are controlled to some extent by the Japanese government.(Of course, there is a debate here about whether Japan really controls the media.) India's BJP is also referred to by many Western media as Centre-right, but only "Right-wing" is written in the infobox of the BJP document with Wikipedia. This is because, in practice, the BJP shows a strong conservative color based on nationalism, unlike the usual centre-right. Also, check the Talk in the BJP document, but the Indian press was biased and prevented from quoting. India's center-left media also call the BJP center-right. I object to your attempt to overturn the agreement made just a few days ago.--삭은사과 (talk) 03:14, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

text: Japan's current prime minister is Shinzo Abe, a ultra-nationalist, and a moderate in the LDP is basically not free from nationalism. Political relativism of each country should be considered when presenting political positions, but it should also be taken into account what real ideology the party advocates. Nationalism, usually a form similar to LDP in the First World, is not inherently different from that of far-right parties in many Western European countries or Canada. As long as the LDP is linked to the far right group Nippon Kaigi, it should not be labeled as "Centre-right" or simply "Big Tent." The LDP is practically right-winged and has many aspects that are hard to say to take a centre-right political stance.--삭은사과 (talk) 03:18, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: ..... Are we going to change the the party's position everytime they elect a new leader? The party is now headed by Kishida, a center-left politician. The detail could be explained in footnotes but I think a more appropriate description for LDP party position now is either Centrist or big tent, especially with the development of political landscape from 2020-2022 in Japan in mind. C933103 (talk) 05:32, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

text: The BJP also has a centrist faction within the party. Under such logic, BJP, unlike LDP, is rarely referred to as 'ultra-nationalism'.--삭은사과 (talk) 03:21, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

text: Of course I think it's right to write down the political particles of the LDP as 'Right-wing to far-right,' but as you say, there are moderates within the Party. That's why it's simply written as "Right-wing". Is there a problem?--삭은사과 (talk) 03:45, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

text: I disagree with that view at all. More than half of the LDP members belong to Nippon Kaigi. Fifteen of the 20 cabinet members of the fourth Shinzo Abe cabinet belong to Nippon Kaigi. Even LDP members who are not members of the Nippon Kaigi often show a tendency to nationalism. Can the centrist within the party be as mainstream as the far right?--삭은사과 (talk) 04:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

text: So I mean "far-right" is overwhelmingly more than "Centrist" in the LDP. Members of the LDP, not the extreme right, also tend to Japanese nationalism. This is at least hard to call center-right.--삭은사과 (talk) 04:37, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

text: There are clearly fewer articles reporting the party's centrist faction than those reporting the party's far-right faction. It is not fair to call the far right group and the LDP a separate organization when the mainstream is affiliated with the far right group.--삭은사과 (talk) 05:22, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

text: If so, the LDP's political position will remain "Right-wing", but it would be better to state that there are centrist factions within the LDP in the "a" footnote. Instead, it should be stated that the centrist faction is clearly non-mainstream within the LDP. In other words, it should be described as a "minor centrist faction" within the LDP.--삭은사과 (talk) 08:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I have polished the LDP document myself. This seems to be the maximum compromise. # --삭은사과 (talk) 08:50, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

text: Readers who do not explore LDP documents deeply think it is better to write them down because they may not even check 'Nippon Kaigi' documents.--삭은사과 (talk) 08:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

text: "a" I will only erase what the footnote calls Nippon Kaigi "ultra-nationalism." This is my best agreement.--삭은사과 (talk) 09:25, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Centrist factions 

message: I just wanted to point out that the LDP appears to be re-branding lately to using red as its color instead of green (see official Japanese LDP website　and social media accounts) Japanese media has also been associating the LDP with the color red over the past few years as well. I'm not necessarily saying we should change the color right this second, but it's something worth considering. It would be an issue since the JCP uses red also though. Basil the Bat Lord (talk) 07:00, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: @ noted, i agree though. for example on this pamphlet (Liberal Democratic Party Reiwa 3rd Year Policy Pamphlet), the "自民党" Logo is red in colour. but on this case, i think it is better to keep it green. Atleast for now. since the logo on the party's website hasn't changed color, and still green overall. Keppa 13:11, 28 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Party Color 

message: Conversatism Is Center-Right and this party is Mostly Conservative AstrowszechwiatWKG (talk) 13:34, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  i really think that the position is wrong 

message: Per analysis at Talk:List_of_political_parties_in_Japan#Party_list_and_party_positions, many of the references currently included for LDP's political position are not appropriate. I will proceed to remove them from being the source of political position of the LDP. C933103 (talk) 05:29, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political position source 

message: :The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 
The result of the move request was: no consensus. (closed by non-admin page mover) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 06:04, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Liberal Democratic Party (Japan) →  – I argue that this is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Liberal Democratic Party". Taking a look at the two usual criteria:
For usage: Out of all the articles called "Liberal Democratic Party", this article gets the bulk of the views (i.e. more than two-thirds.) Unfortunately there's too many to fit into one pageviews query, so here's two links.
For long-term significance: Of the other articles called Liberal Democratic Party ([country]), all are minor parties, and most never won any parliamentary seats. Contrast that with this article, which is about a party that has governed Japan for the vast majority of the last 70 years. YttriumShrew (talk) 20:32, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

text: Move. Neutral All the other LDPs are minor while this is the leading party of Japan, also redirects like President of the Liberal Democratic Party already link here. Though this is the LDP with the most views, WikiNav shows that most of the people who go to the list that LDP currently redirects to go to Liberal Democrats (UK). CLYDEFRANKLIN 21:41, 23 July 2022 (UTC)

text: Disambiguate The Japanese LDP seems to be the most popular party named the "liberal democratic party" (partly because of Shinzo Abe), but I would suggest turning the link into a disambiguation which points to the four or five largest/most well known LDPs, with a wikilink list to the others. I think that's a middle ground that we could all agree on, but if push comes to shove, I would oppose and side with Cilidus as I think his reasoning for why we have US disambiguations in the Democrats and the Republicans here. InvadingInvader (talk) 04:36, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Requested move 21 July 2022 

message: Several IP users attempting to re-write inappropriate writing that has been deleted many times after it was written by a sock user. However, the writing has fake quotes from several sources. For example, the Kyunghyang Shinmun writes that Yoshihide Suga said, "The phrase 'forced to work' as recognized by the Japanese government, does not refer to forced labor as defined by the ILO, but to requisition." The Yonhap News writes that Fumio Kishida asked the German Chancellor to remove the comfort women statue. The Guardian writes that the Japan Times and the Yomiuri Shimbun have changed their terminology regarding World War II. The Hankyoreh writes that there are differences between Japan and South Korea on the detailed interpretation of the phrase "forced to work". Those sources never say that many members of the LDP are in denial about the war crimes committed by the Empire of Japan against the Korean people. The sock user is writing from a false quotation from the sources, synthesizing the information and then making his own interpretation.--SLIMHANNYA (talk) 13:36, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Description by sock user