Cognitiis, thank you for your demented comment about Japan.  I don’t know where people get this stuff.  Japan maintains a classical colonial relation with the US?  It was responsoble for the disintgration of the Soviet Union?  Cogy, for some reason you apparently don’t like Japan, but it is an island of decreasing importance in the world as it continues to lose world power.

Folktruther (folk) unconsciously and servilely
describes DPJ’s victory as “...de-coupling from US
neoimperialism and the homicidal racism…” Japan’s
superior technology—especially arms technology—
secured the yen as the de facto world currency in
1988 and was the proximate cause of USSR’s
destruction in 1989; with this technological and
consequent financial primacy, Japan forced open US’
consumer and financial markets while impoverishing
USSR. Recently, Japan both used its technology to
annihilate US’ industrial base and also used its yen
to annihilate US’ banking system. Since 1988 Japan
has maintained a classic colonial relationship with
US: Japan exports capital and high-value-added goods
to US and imports raw materials from US; Japan has
liberal and complete access to all US consumer
markets, while it restricts US access to Japan’s
consumer markets—a relationship similar to that
between the British Crown and American colonies
before the Insurrection; Japan funds US budget
deficit in exchange for US army and navy securing
Japan’s trade routes—a relationship similar to that
between the Crown and Australia in the Transvaal or
Dardanelles. Japan now subjugates US by facilely
corrupting Congress and Bureaucrats and Presidents,
defines US’ consumer technology by restricting high-
value-added exports and technology transfers, and
defines US foreign policy through corruption and also
by contributions to Zionists—US’ Jewish banks
accepted all their funding for the Credit Bubble
through the Yen Carry trade, which funding promoted
Zionist interests rendering US the most hated country
in the world, thus averting colonial rage from Japan.
So many unconscious and servile commentators wonder
like blinkered cattle at US’ reckless policies having
presumed a US hegemon; presume instead a Japanese
hegemon and immediately everything clarifies.

The victor in all this, Yukio Hatoyama, called it a revolution and promised to take Japan from a corporate state to a welfare state.

Bush and Cheney are absolutely beside themselves.  Smoke is coming out of their backsides.  They are red faced and apoplectic.  They are furiously telephoning their shills in the “intelligence community” to have this man assassinated.

How do we get a guy like Hatoyama to run this country?

This is a big defeat for the US power system and a historical victory for the American people, although we typically know nothing about world history.  Japan, like the rest of the world is de-coupling from US neoimperialism and the homicidal racism that is used to impose it. Latin America, Asia and Africa are resisting US imperialism, and now Japan.  Next Europe.

What is not mentioned in the long NYTimes piece or in Truthdig is China.  Japan-China trade is now greater than Japan-US trade as both tumble economies into the economic sewer, and China assumes the leading economic, and political, role in the world.  Japan is decoupling from US imperialism and going toward China, a turn away from the post WW2 power configuration.  This will accelerate the US military withdrawal from the shores of China, lessening the chances of thermonuclear war. 

And an other big defeat for US military imperialism.  As these defeats pile up, even the megalomaniacal American ruling class will understand that something has to be done to change the Bushite-Obama imperalist strategy.  The historical reason is quite simple.

After WW2 and the rise of nuclear weapons, the major powers tend to agree that the traditional wars of history are now too dangerous to fight.  They can still devastate small powerless countries, like Iraq and Afghanistan, but even here the US is being defeated.  War was always a losing strategy for the people; it is now a losing strategy for the ruling power structures.

The US, by spending a trillion dollars on military imperialism, wastes its discretionary spending on investment to slow down US economic growth.  Preventing the expenditure of future military spending.  This no win strategy will eventually trickle down to the US ruling class, who will have to withdrawn US bases in a new form of military isolationism.  Japan’s election helps toward US military isolationism.

And contribute to the populations disgust with US military adventures in Iraq and Afghan-Pakistan.  It helps prevent US increased ivolvement in Pakistan, where the US has airbases, and Africa, a traditional predatory spot for Western imperialism.  No najor African country will allow the US African Command in Africa, the US having to put it in Suttgart.

Now the idea is to get the US to withdraw its military from the Western pacific, which will increase its dominating by China.  Since China is pursuing an economic strategy to gain world power, it will increase the possibility of world peace and cooperation on climate and earthperson destituion.

Very astute insight TRF.  The last eight years have further confused the language with things like:

The War on Terror—- terror is a tactic, not an enemy.

Enemy Combatants—- Anyone that attempts to defend their nation against illegal attack by the US, or anyone that an ally wants locked up for whatever reason.

Terrorist—- Same as Enemy Combatants.

Pre-emptive War—- War of aggression and illegal under international law.

Enhanced information gathering technics—- Torture and illegal under US and international law.

Anti-semetism—- any free speach that questions Israels terrorism and brutality.

Yes Fish, your spot on.  We have to reclaim the language before we can change the dialogue.

One thing the successful revolution from the right of the past 30 years should teach us is that, regardless what true definition exists behind words and phrases, there needs to be greater care in how we use our language to promote our interests.

The neocon/Reagan revolution successfully redefined “liberal” as a derogatory term. They were so successful in this that actual liberals have shied away from applying this label to themselves ever since.

Forget that the literal definition behind that term means something like “freedom for the individual.” The neo-thuglicans successfully promoted their interests by reshaping the very thing that defines the philosophical essence of their opponents’ into a negative.

There have been recent attempts to reclaim that label as a positive attribute, but when people opt to use the term “progressive” as a replacement, they perhaps acknowledge the neocon success in reshaping (perverting) our language.

“Liberal” still, though perhaps not as much as 5-10 years ago, is a term that belongs to the language of the right. It’s a Pavlovian bell that still makes moderates/independents mouth water with a bitter taste when rung (hence the widespread use of “progressive” to avoid that reaction in listeners).

Being more liberal than moderate, I resent this reality, but I understand it.

Similarly, they have crafted the concept that there is something inherently flawed in being a “welfare state.” The neocons have successfully given it the connotation of a flawed government plan by do-gooder liberals that promotes laziness and loss of will.

I resent this reality, but I understand it.

Okay: Too long a preamble. Here’s the comment.

Unless Hatoyama spoke the Japanese terms that only literally translate to the promise “to take Japan from a corporate state to a welfare state” (I’m guessing not, since it’s not presented in quotes), I believe the summary statement rings that Pavlovian bell, casting what has happened in Japan in a negative light.

Hey, I’m more liberal than moderate, and my mouth reflexively started watering when I read it the first time.

Is it the intent of the writer to suggest Japan swinging to the “left” is a negative thing?

If not, why not tweak that summary sentence to something like Japan is swinging to “favor interests of individuals over those of corporate control”?

Yes, I know: Not such tight construction (won’t easily fit on a bumper sticker). Maybe, if we don’t lose everything over these next few months, we can have the luxury of the next 20-30 years to reclaim our language.

But we aren’t there yet.