Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on September 28, 2006 03:09 AM
> The Japanese Constitution has long been considered as > being read-only. Until recently, it was considered evil or > violent to discuss changing/modifying the Constitution. > I don't know why exactly, but that's Japan, where > no change is considered good.
That is not right. We love good changes.
What is the "good change" for the Constitution? The New York Times: <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/20/world/asia/21japancnd.html?_r=1&oref=slogin" title="nytimes.com">http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/20/world/asia/21ja<nobr>p<wbr></nobr> ancnd.html?_r=1&oref=slogin</a nytimes.com> > TOKYO, Sept. 20 — Shinzo Abe, the nationalist politician > who has pledged to revise Japan’s pacifist Constitution, > won the leadership of the governing party today, > ensuring that he will become Japan’s next prime minister. (snip) > In a race that was his to lose, Mr. Abe avoided specific > comments about how he would pursue the country’s economic > reforms or how he would repair Japan’s strained relations > with China and South Korea. > > Instead, he spoke of revising the constitution, > imposed by American officials after the war, > to remove restrictions against fielding a full-fledged > military. He advocated permanent legislation to allow > Japanese troops to be deployed overseas and making it > possible for Japan to exercise the right to collective > self-defense with the United States.
I don't think it's a good change. It does not mean "no change is considered good".
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
That's Japan, we love good changes
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on September 28, 2006 03:09 AM> being read-only. Until recently, it was considered evil or
> violent to discuss changing/modifying the Constitution.
> I don't know why exactly, but that's Japan, where
> no change is considered good.
That is not right.
We love good changes.
What is the "good change" for the Constitution?
The New York Times:
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/20/world/asia/21japancnd.html?_r=1&oref=slogin" title="nytimes.com">http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/20/world/asia/21ja<nobr>p<wbr></nobr> ancnd.html?_r=1&oref=slogin</a nytimes.com>
> TOKYO, Sept. 20 — Shinzo Abe, the nationalist politician
> who has pledged to revise Japan’s pacifist Constitution,
> won the leadership of the governing party today,
> ensuring that he will become Japan’s next prime minister.
(snip)
> In a race that was his to lose, Mr. Abe avoided specific
> comments about how he would pursue the country’s economic
> reforms or how he would repair Japan’s strained relations
> with China and South Korea.
>
> Instead, he spoke of revising the constitution,
> imposed by American officials after the war,
> to remove restrictions against fielding a full-fledged
> military. He advocated permanent legislation to allow
> Japanese troops to be deployed overseas and making it
> possible for Japan to exercise the right to collective
> self-defense with the United States.
I don't think it's a good change.
It does not mean "no change is considered good".
#