英語日記 Discussion in EnglishコミュのReferendum bill

ふじいさｎ, thanks a lot for posting a topic!!

Well, I think the national referendum bill (NRB) passed this time contains a lot of problems and I didn't want it to be passed, it could be improved.

First of all, I want to make it clear that I agree with constitutional revision, including Article 9, but, of course, it must be done properly. I feel a dangerous atmosphere brewing around Japan recently, do you? I think NRB is the symbol of it. The bill has many serious problems, which could lead to a wrong revision.

One of the problems is that the bill doesn't have enough regulations on TV and the Internet ads about constitutional revisions. It bans any ads about constitutional revisions on TV from 2 weeks before a vote day. It seems to be alright, but how about 15 days before a vote day? There's no regulation about it, which means the more a party has money, the more advantageous it would be, because it can advertise its opinion by using money. Also it doesn't have any regulation on the Internet. For many people, the Internet is the most important way to get information now. I think it is ridiculous.

Another problem is that it has no regulation about a minimum vote rate, which means that if 20 percent of constituency votes, only 10 percent of constituency's agreements are needed to revise a constitution. You don't have to be majority to change a constitution.

I think LDP is trying to pass it quickly because of the coming up election. This issue is controversial and could lead LDP to lose the election.

In conclusion, the issue is extremely important, so they should take time to discuss, if needed. This NRB is incomplete and I disagree with it, though I support the constitutional revision.

I wish I could stop it（；´д｀ ）！！

Thank あーくん for your opinion

Although I slightly change the subject of this thread, can I ask the reason why you support the constructional revision?
I also agree to make a clear construction to forbid aggressive war and to be able to defend effectively from attack of another country like North Korea. I worried the ruling party and US government trick us into supporting a construction, which can attend US aggressive war to Middle East countries like Iran. Not only an ethical standpoint, but also an economical standpoint, advanced country should not spend many for war but for prevention of global warming.

>ふじいさn

I support a constitutional revision, but I STRONGLY disagree with LDP’s revision. The difference between my opinion and LDP’s is that LDP allows Japanese troops to go to a foreign country, while I think the troops should NOT be dispatched to any foreign country, even under an UN peace-keeping operation. Pacifist Constitution forbids Japan to have any military power, but, in fact, it has troops called Self Defense Force. This difference between what Pacifist Constitution says and the realty leads to distortions. The government says SDF is not a military, but I think it is. It’s obviously against the constitution. Those distortions have exposed SDF to great dangers in some countries such as Iraq by sending it to foreign countries. As I said, I think Japan should not dispatch its troops to any other countries, but LDP allows. That’s what I don’t like about LDP’s revision. SDF is obviously a military power, so Japan should define it as “Self Defense Military” by a constitutional revision.

Also, I think Japan should add some Articles about so called “new rights” such as environmental quality rights.

In conclusion, the reason why I support a constitutional revision is that the constitution should match with the realty to avoid distortions, not to enable Japan to go to war. Also, I want to emphasize that it is better to leave Pacifist Constitution as it is now than revising it as what LDP says.

Thank あーくん for answering my question and I’m sorry about delaying response. I agree with your opinion. We tried not to be tricked by LDP.

The referendum bill passed today.