The JCP 28th Congress The Central Committee Report of the Amendments to the JCP Program
Shii Kazuo
Executive Committee Chair
January 14, 2020
Atami, Tokyo
Dear delegates, observers and other comrades nationwide.
On behalf of the Central Committee, I will provide the report of the amendments to the JCP Program.
During the past two and half months following the 8th Central Committee Plenum held in November, the draft text of amendments to the Program and two other draft resolutions were discussed at every level of the party.
Regarding how the discussion proceeded in branch meetings, district conferences, and prefectural conferences, we have received 7 reports from each prefecture. Our public discussion paper provided a venue for a variety of opinions submitted by 214 individuals. In total, more than 1,800 opinions and comments were sent to the Central Committee. We deeply appreciate the efforts to engage in thorough discussions nationwide to have our proposal for amendments fully understood.
We will consider each of the proposals for amendments to the agenda items made by comrades as well as the opinions expressed in this congress. At the end of the discussions, we will provide you with the final drafts which incorporate those opinions.
The overwhelming majority of participants expressed support for and welcomed the draft text of the revised program. The detailed explanation on the text was already provided in the 8th Central Committee Plenum. Built on that, I would like to provide a report in response to the intra-party discussion so far and the course of events taking place at both domestic and international levels.
I. The significance of the revision: it strengthened the applicability of the program in the world today
First of all, I will touch upon the significance of the revision of the program itself.
Though the revision is a partial revision, many comrades submitted comments, such as “This is a major revision” and “It seems to be a major change in the program.”
In fact, the revision mainly covers Chapter 3, the international situation and, accordingly, some parts of Chapter 5 dealing with socialist theory. But the revisions affect the entire program. I would like to touch on three points.
The approach envisioned in the program for transformation in Japan is in line with global transformation
First, it is very helpful in advancing our cause that the draft program has articulated the need for a historical as well as a forward-looking long-term analysis to outline the potential for transforming the world in the 21st century.
As I stated in the report to the 8th Central Committee Plenum, the fundamental position of the revised program is its thorough application of a progressive understanding of the prospect for progressive in the 21st world based on the analysis of the huge changes effected in the 20th century, basically characterized as the “transformation of the world”, in particular, the collapse of the colonial system. Underlining that assertion is the fundamental position the party is based on, i.e. scientific socialism and historical materialism: “People’s struggles make history.”
When we look at a variety of events separately, the world appears to be a continuation of hardships and sufferings. However, viewed with a century-long perspective, the human race continues to take huge steps toward initiating a progressive future despite setbacks and reactionary resistance.
Judging from the long-term world trend, what is the mainstream and what is the reactionary stream? By answering these questions, we will make clear that the approach towards transformation of Japan’s society which is envisioned in our program stands with the mainstream moves of the world and we will be empowered to advance our project with confidence.
Understanding struggle in Japan in the context of the world trend and develop it to strengthen international solidarity
Second, under the rubric of “globalization”, the struggle in Japan and the struggle in other parts of the world are now clearly interconnected.
The struggle for the creation of a nuclear-weapons free world, the development of regional cooperation for peace, the worldwide development of the defense of basic human rights including gender equality, overcoming the gap between rich and poor, addressing and alleviating global climate change, the struggle to oppose any forms of hegemonism and to demand a peaceful international order, which are all explicitly mentioned in the revised program, are urgent issues concerning not only Japan but the world. These issues form the center of global concerns and must be seriously and urgently addressed.
The revised program, which puts these issues in a long-term perspective and in the context of world-capitalist contradictions and makes clear the prospect to resolve them, has attracted support and understanding from both inside and outside the party. It will help answer people’s concerns and anxieties, develop the struggle in Japan in the context of global changes and strengthen international solidarity at the grassroots level.
The review of our understanding of China led us to a review of the entire program
Third, we reassessed our views on China and reached the conclusion that China is can no longer be regarded as a country which “began a new quest for socialism” and proposed the related parts of the current program to be deleted. This decision led us to an overall review of the current program.
As a result of the revision, we reject the world theory legitimizing a coexistence of the capitalist system with a socialist system. Instead, we focus on the contradiction inherent in global capitalism squarely, and by doing so, present a prospect towards the creation of a future society. This is a major change in the party program.
In addition, regarding the global significance of a socialist transformation in Japan, we newly put forward the following proposition: Social changes effected in a developed capitalist country lead to the high road to socialism or communism.
In this way, our proposal for the amendments to the JCP Program helps broaden the applicability of our position in not only our world theory but also the entire program.
II. On the deletion of the phrase of “a new quest for socialism”
Now, I will report on the revision of the program regarding China.
In the 8th Central Committee Plenum, regarding the problems associated with China in the international arena, we pointed out that China is moving in the wrong direction, and is increasingly engaging in a grave course of great power chauvinism and hegemonism, and made clear the following four points in detail.
First, China’s reactionary position rejecting the call for the abolition of nuclear weapons is increasingly serious. Second, China’s hegemonic behavior in the South and East China Seas has become more aggressive. Third, China has not taken any meaningful steps to rectify its arrogant behavior displayed in international conferences by undermining democratic procedures, which is in violation of the principles mutually agreed upon by the JCP and CPC. Fourth, human rights abuses have become increasingly grave, especially in Hong Kong and the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region.
In the previous Central Committee Plenum report, we detailed our position on these problems and concluded that they are all in contradiction with the ideal and principles of socialism. Then, we concluded that China can no longer be regarded as a nation “beginning a new quest for socialism.” So, we proposed the related parts in the current text of the program be deleted.
The proposal has drawn very positive responses in the intra-party discussions, such as “It is now crystal clear how we should view China.” In addition, Japanese news media are paying close attention to our new assessment of China.
Regarding two issues which developed since CC 8th Plenum
I would like to mention two issues pertaining to what have developed since the JCP Central Committee 8th Plenum.
China’s hegemonic actions in East China Sea escalate
First is that China’s hegemonic actions in the East China Sea are escalating. In 2019, the number of Chinese vessels entering Japan’s contiguous zones, including their intrusion into its territorial waters surrounding the Senkaku Islands, totaled 1,097, 1.8 times more than the previous year and the highest ever. It is also grave that the jurisdiction of the China Coast Guard, which sends vessels to the area surrounding the Senkaku Islands, was transferred in 2018 from the State Oceanic Administration to the Chinese People’s Armed Police Force. As a result, the China Coast Guard is now under the leadership of the Communist Party of China Central Military Commission as a semi-military organization with better equipment.
While proclaiming in 2018 that Japan-China relations “are back on their normal trajectory,” China in the very next year had its vessels regularly intrude into Japan’s territorial waters and increased the number of intrusions sharply. It must be said that such an attitude claiming normalcy is extremely dishonest.
No matter what the Chinese government argues, its frequent actions in the area under the effective control of Japan in an attempt to change the status quo, to weaken the effective control, and to press Japan to recognize the area as China’s territory are hegemonic acts and in violation of the principle calling for peaceful resolutions of conflicts set by the U.N. Charter and others international laws. The JCP strongly criticizes such actions by China and calls for their correction.
Human rights violations in Hong Kong – human rights are not only domestic but also international issues
The other issue is that human rights violations in Hong Kong have become more serious. Amid the Hong Kong police’s increasing repression of citizens protesting for freedom and democracy, the JCP on November 14, 2019 released a statement calling for an immediate halt to the repressive acts and conveyed its position to the Chinese government.
Regarding this issue, some argue that while violence committed by the Hong Kong police is outrageous, so is violence by protestors, and therefore both have to be criticized. Our party does not take that position. We have stated that it is important for protestors to refrain from acts of violence and use peaceful ways to express their opinions. At the same time, the crackdown by the Hong Kong police using lethal firearms is a different level of violence. Considering the facts, it is clear that the Hong Kong and Chinese governments are responsible for causing the current serious situation. It is extremely grave that the repression has been conducted under the approval of China’s highest leadership.
China pays no attention to international criticism on this issue, arguing that it is “interference in its internal affairs.” However, as the draft revision of the Program clarifies, various standards of international human rights have been established in the world, and “[d]efending and developing human rights has become an international task.”
China supported the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights and also signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which was a part of the International Covenants of Human Rights adopted at the U.N. General Assembly in 1966. It also supported the Vienna Declaration adopted at the World Conference on Human Rights in Vienna in 1993 which states, “It is the duty of States, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems, to promote and protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms.” China is strongly urged to seriously fulfill these international agreements on human rights which it has supported.
In the Hong Kong district council elections in November 2019, pro-democracy forces won more than 80% of all seats, showing citizens’ strong demand for freedom and democracy. However, the authorities have continued repressing protesters even after the elections.
The JCP again strongly demands that the Chinese leadership put an end to the human rights violations in Hong Kong and the Uyghur Autonomous Region.
Questions submitted during intra-party discussions
I would like to comment on some questions raised during the intra-party discussions regarding the revision of description of China in the Program.
‘I wish it had been done earlier’ – conclusion drawn after thorough and careful examination of facts
We have received opinions stating that although they support the proposed revision of the Program, they wish it had been done earlier.
Pointing out problems with China is not something that came out of nowhere. I would like to stress that the JCP has openly pointed to problems whenever they emerged, especially since 2008-2009.
In 2008, when a rise in casualties in Tibet due to the escalation of turmoil and violence and crackdown on protesters, the JCP called for a peaceful resolution of the Tibet question through talks in a letter sent to then President Hu Jintao and in talks with then Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi who visited Japan.
In 2010, when Chinese writer Liu Xiaobo received the Nobel Peace Prize, the Chinese government strongly protested, and China’s human rights issues caught international attention. At that time, the JCP expressed that it strongly hopes for the Chinese government to fulfill a series of international agreements regarding basic human rights which it ostensibly supported.
In 2013, amid escalating conflicts over the Senkaku Islands, our party stated that Chinese vessels’ intrusion into territorial waters should never be allowed as means to settle conflicts in the present world and demanded that the Chinese government strictly refrain from such actions.
At the 26th Party Congress in 2014, regarding China’s future course the party warned, “There may be a recurrence of past hegemonistic or great-power chauvinistic behaviors. If they commit such a grave mistake, they would be in danger of decisively straying from the path toward socialism.” This was based on our serious concerns about actions taken by China at that time.
At the 27th Congress in 2017, we severely condemned that “a new form of great-power chauvinism and hegemonism” was emerging in China, stating specific examples. As one example, we criticized the hegemonistic behavior displayed by a delegation of the Communist Party of China during the general assembly of the International Conference of Asian Political Parties (ICAPP). However, as I explained during the CC 8th Plenum, we avoided taking the position of recognizing it as a problem of the CPC Central Committee and asked China to answer our question and waited to make an official decision until our next Congress.
I would like to stress that the proposal in the draft partial revision of the Program for this Congress is the conclusion we drew after we thoroughly and carefully examined China’s trend and expressed our position openly and moderately from time to time over the last 10 years as well as based on undeniable facts and our own experiences.
On Question about judgement on China’s economic system:
We refrain from making official our judgement because it pertains to the internal affairs of China
In the pre-Congress discussion, regarding the statement that reasons to recognize China as a country “beginning a new quest for socialism” no longer exists, some members asked about how the JCP perceives China’s economic system.
In response to this question, I have to point out that what type of economic system each country adopts is a matter of the right of self-determination and basically a matter of domestic policies. Individual experts and persons are free to express their views. But, if the JCP as a political party makes a judgement, it would be criticized for interfering in the internal affairs of another nation. Therefore, the JCP at this moment refrains from making an official judgement and evaluation of China’s economic system while continuing to conduct research. I’d like to stress that only by maintaining the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of another nation can our criticism of China’s great-power chauvinism and hegemonism be accepted as legitimate.
As stated in the report to the 8th Central Committee Plenum, when we evaluate China, what counts most is whether its leadership is sincere in pursuing a course with socialism in mind as an ultimate goal. In our relations with China, we maintain this stance. If China’s leadership keep taking an attitude of pursuing the quest of socialism with seriousness and sincerity, it will be able to get through the growing pains. But it will be not easy to move on, if this attitude is abandoned. Our party maintains the attitude of forming a judgement based on direct contacts with the Chinese leadership and on an analysis of its foreign policies and behavior. I’m fully convinced that our position is rational.
Why these problems have been caused -- historical conditions that China has been subjected to
In the pre-Congress discussion, some members asked what triggered these problems. In the closing remarks I delivered at the 8th CC Plenum, I cited the Chinese leadership’s responsibility as the direct factor. As a more fundamental factor, I referred to the following points regarding China’s historical conditions.
One is that the “Chinese Revolution occurred in a non-parliamentary manner in the form of a revolutionary war with the absence of various effective systems protecting freedom and democracy, and the development of the concepts of freedom and democracy was not prioritized in the post-revolutionary period following the introduction of a ‘one-party system’ Soviet-style.”
The other is that China “has a history of great power chauvinism. Before the modern era, China, as a major power in East Asia, has a history of creating tributary systems affecting neighboring countries and putting them in a position of subordination. […] because of that history, it is absolutely necessary that the Chinese leadership exert strong self-control and prudence in order not to fall again into great power chauvinism and hegemonism.”
Actually, there are some documents which indicate the Chinese party’s determination to learn about these historical conditions behind two issues.
Regarding the issue of freedom and democracy, the Chinese Communist Party in 1981 adopted a resolution which examined the Great Cultural Revolution. In the document, the party expressed remorse by stating, “China is a nation in which feudalism has had a long history. […] it remains difficult to eliminate the evil ideological and political influence of centuries of feudal autocracy.” However, the then Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping who proposed this resolution carried out the crackdown on the 1989 Tiananmen Square protests. When considering the current situation of China, I have to judge that the historically developed weak points which the Chinese party itself was cautious about has appeared.
As for the issue of great-power chauvinism, the CPC in 1956 in an article in the People’s Daily stated that Chinese people need to keep in mind that China in its history experienced great-power eras Han, Tang, Ming, and Qing dynasties. It continued to warn that China will face a grave risk, if fails to prevent its exercise of great-power chauvinism. Despite this, in the late 1960s, at the time of the Great Cultural Revolution initiated by Mao Zedong, problems of hegemonism emerged. Even today, these problems occur taking new forms.
At present, I have to point out that the underlying factors that cause China’ various problems are the historical conditions that China has been subjected to.
On questions about relations with China’s ruling party -- Maintain relations and continue making efforts for possible cooperation
In the pre-Congress discussion, there was also a question raised regarding how the JCP sees the future of its relations with the CPC.
Inter-party relations are determined by both sides’ will. From this point of view, we take the stance of maintaining a relationship with China in the form of exchanges between the JCP, an opposition party in Japan, and China’s ruling party.
We will continue making efforts for cooperation with China on such urgent tasks as establishing peace and stability in this region, such as the “Initiative for Peace and Cooperation in Northeast Asia” advocated at the JCP 26th Congress.
On Questions about significance of the proposed revision to the Party Program and how to evaluate and deal with China
I’d like to explain the significance of the draft revision to the Party Program and the basic principle on how to evaluate and deal with China.
Significance of the proposed revision to the Party Program --- Based on party’s half-century struggle
Our party’s fight against so-called “socialist” countries’ great power chauvinism and hegemonism has a half-century history. When explaining the draft revision from a view based on this history, I’d like to stress that the Revised Program took a new step forward in our struggle.
Our party in the 1960s began resisting against the fierce hegemonic interference in our internal affairs by the Soviet Union and China and developed our policy line of sovereign independence. Our Party severely criticized the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia and Afghanistan. Furthermore, regarding the Chinese leadership’s high-handed measures to suppress democracy, such as during the Great Cultural Revolution and in the Tiananmen Incident, we condemned these acts in the strongest terms. At the same time, we made these criticisms as part of our struggle against great-power chauvinism and hegemonism as well as against autocracy emerging in so-called “socialist countries”.
In contrast, the draft revision deeply analyzed the great-power chauvinism, hegemonism, and human rights violations which become evident in China, and then formed a judgement that reasons to recognize China as a country “beginning a new quest for socialism”
no longer exists. We made such a decision for the first time since the start of our fight against hegemonic actions emanating from China and the Soviet Union. We stepped into a new position based on party history.
And, at the root, things that enable us to take a new position is our party’s half-century history of fighting against great-power chauvinism and hegemonism by the so-called “socialist countries”. I’d like to stress this point. Our judgement was made in line with the history of our struggle as a party of sovereign independence. I’d like to report on this point with due respect for the forerunners of the party who waged this struggle with courage and commitment.
There is no doubt that the revised Program will be very helpful in overcoming misunderstandings about and prejudices against the JCP. The Chinese party refers to itself as a “socialist party” or a “communist party”. However, its great-power chauvinism and hegemonism and acts of human rights violations are anathema to socialism. The party is not deserved to be called a communist party. To clarify this point in our Program is essential to our effort to talk to the general public about the merits of socialism and communism.
This effort is also significant in pursuing a course for world peace and progressive social development. The hegemonism and chauvinism which emerged in China, believed to soon become the world’s largest economic power, are a matter of importance for the world and cannot be overlooked. Nevertheless, international society for the most part neglects to criticize the problematic behavior displayed by China. In particular, the Japanese government takes a submissive attitude. The JCP’s criticism, made in a rational and calm manner, will deliver a heavy blow to China’s hegemonism and make an international contribution. I’m convinced of this point.
How to face China: three important points
As the last part of this issue, I would like to make clear how we face China. The JCP has criticized China’s actions based on following three positions we have held fast to.
First, we strongly oppose the government’s military buildup under the pretext of the China threat. Japan’s military buildup will bring on an arms race without end. The JCP resolutely adheres to maintaining a diplomatic policy based on working for a peaceful resolution of disagreements or conflicts.
Second, the Japanese Communist Party criticizes unreasonable wrongdoings by Chinese leaders, at the same time, we oppose attempts to inflame “anti-China” sentiments and the use of rightwing historical revisionism to beautify Japan’s wars of aggression in the past. The only way to build true friendship between nations based on mutual trust and understanding is reflect on each other’s past failures sincerely. This is our unwavering and principled diplomatic policy as it pertains to Asia.
Third, as China is one of the most important neighboring countries, our criticism is based on our sincere desire to establish true friendship between the governments and the peoples of Japan and China. We propose that pointing out faults in a subdued and rational manner can help to build friendly relations between both countries. This is what we believe firmly.
We would like to express our resolution to keep these principles in mind regarding our position on diplomacy in this congress.
III. How to grasp the world in the 21st century 1: unleashing the power of “the world structural change”
Next, I move to the theme of how to understand the world in the 21st century.
In the draft revision of the Program, we explain how to best understand the world in the 21st century in the light of two perspectives: “the change of world structure”, which has begun to demonstrate its vital power promoting peace and social progress, and the contradictions of global capitalism.
Section 9 in the draft revision clarifies three specific issues which have emerged in the 21st century with the change of the world structure in the 20th century, progress towards the abolition of nuclear weapon, regional cooperation for peace, and advance of international human rights.
We received a lot of positive feedback on our analysis and proposals. Based on our overall discussions and the comments received after we released the draft revision, I would like to introduce two issues.
Regarding the creation of a “world without nuclear weapons”: Pope’s visit to Japan
First it is about a movement towards creating “a world without nuclear weapons”.
In November 2019, Pope Francis visited Japan and his statements in Nagasaki and Hiroshima greatly touched people’s hearts both in Japan and throughout the world.
We warmly welcome the remarks made by the Pope in Hiroshima and Nagasaki
The Statement by Pope Francis shows his strong resolution to help work for the abolition of nuclear weapons. His commitment to work for the abolition of nuclear weapons goes far beyond the urgings of previous Popes.
Pope Francis said, “How can we propose peace if we constantly invoke the threat of nuclear war?” thereby denying the validity of the nuclear deterrence theory outright. Proclaiming, “We need to ponder catastrophic impacts of their deployments, especially from both humanitarian and environmental standpoints,” he points out the inhumane nature and environmental destructions of nuclear weapons. He added, “We must never grow weary of working to support the principal international legal instruments of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation, including the Treaty on the prohibition of nuclear weapons”. He then stated his unwavering resolve to work with other to have the treaty ratified by the world and take effect without further delay.
Additionally, the Pope said “To make this ideal reality calls for involvement on the part of all: individuals, religious communities and civil society, countries that possess nuclear weapons and those that do not, the military and private sectors, and international organizations”, highlighting that collaboration between every nation and civil society will be the ideal driving force to realize “a world without nuclear weapons”.
The pope’s statement was warmly and enthusiastically welcomed in countries, civil societies worldwide, the anti-nuclear and peace movement in Japan, and the Japanese Communist Party.
The remarks reflect “the structural change of the world”
We focus on the background of the statements.
It is said that there are 1.3 billion Catholics in the world. As a result of a calculation by the Vatican City, it was found that 62.5% of Catholics live in a country where their government supports the nuclear weapons ban treaty. In the report in our Central Committee 8th Plenum, we state, “The adoption of the treaty to prohibit nuclear weapons on July 2017 with overwhelming global support was the most historic event indicating a majority of nations along with civil society finally replaced the handful of major powers as key players in the arena of world politics”. The Pope’s statement reflects “the change of world structure”.
The Vatican City ratified the nuclear ban treaty immediately. I remember warmly our interactions with the representative of the Vatican at the UN conference on the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in 2017. On July in the same year, after the adoption of the treaty, I talked with the representative of the Vatican and we celebrated the conclusion of the treaty. I said, “In the preamble of the treaty, religious leaders and parliamentarians are noted as key actors to represent the public conscience as well as Hibakusha. Let’s cooperate with each other”. The representative of the Vatican responded, “Certainly, I’d like to do so” and we confirmed our commitment to collaboration in the future. He also said, “I was impressed with the fact that the communist party in Japan worked so hard on this, the most challenging issue for peace.” “We would like to seek broad cooperation with various religious in the world including Islam.” His remarks really impressed me.
Let’s go beyond differences between religions and work together with people of all religions all over the world to achieve this common goal for humanity.
Let us create a government which signs the TPNW
As new movements toward a world without nuclear weapons have increased, we have to look at the shameful attitude of the Japanese government.
The appeal of Pope Francis made in the atomic-bombed cities, denying the validity of the nuclear deterrence theory, and highlighting the significance of the nuclear weapons ban treaty can be seen as a severe criticism of the Japanese government which asserts the validity of the nuclear deterrence theory and holds onto the U.S nuclear umbrella, rejecting the treaty and at the same time claiming to be pacifist. A response made by the Japanese government to the Pope’s remarks was that “nuclear deterrence is the foundation of national security”. It just repeated their outdated and shameful excuse for opposing the treaty.
The resolution on the elimination of nuclear weapons in the UN general assembly in 2019 submitted by Japan didn’t mention the nuclear weapons ban treaty at all. It states that abolishing nuclear weapons is “the ultimate goal”. It ignores the achievements made in the Review Conference of Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons so far and puts on display Japan’s subordination to nuclear weapons states such as the U.S. This resolution by the Japanese government received severe criticism from international society.
After leaving Japan, Pope Francis recalled his visit to Japan in front of a congregation in a general audience at St, Peter’s Square, Vatican.
“Japan, with its unhealed wounds made by the atomic bomb, should play a vital role to appeal for fundamental human rights for people’s lives and peace all over the world.”
Nuclear weapons abolition is the demand of the majority of governments and peoples in the world. Our party congress demands that the Japanese government ratify the nuclear weapons ban treaty without delay. Otherwise, we will work to bring about a change in government with a coalition government composed of current opposition parties to ratify the treaty.
On gender equality
The second point is the issue of gender equality.
In the draft revised program, the development of the protection of human rights and the growing international trend for gender equality are characterized as a promising development. The draft program clearly states the importance of the task to create a gender equal society and eliminate discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity as part and parcel of the democratic reform Japan must undertake. These amendments have been responded to positively.
Based on the intra-party discussion so far, I would like to touch upon several points regarding the issue.
What is gender? Is it different than equality of both sexes?
What is the meaning of the term of gender? Is there any difference between gender equality and equality of both sexes? Such questions were raised in the discussion.
The term “gender” refers to socially imposed norms characterized by terms such as femininity and masculinity or social assumptions such as “women should be this and men should be that.” Generally, gender is defined as the socially constructed definition what it means to be male and female. Although “sex” is a biological given, “gender” is a social construct that has been politically and historically created by ruling classes in order to maintain social control.
For example, in workplaces or offices, you may hear somebody say, “Women should raise children, so they should give up pursuing a career,” or “A man should work outside and bring home the bacon to raise his dependent wife and children.” With this kind of societal assumption, men and women are forced to live under brutal exploitative systems based on a “divide and rule” strategy. This is a typical example of gender discrimination. I would like to emphasize that the struggle for the creation of a gender equal society means the struggle to overcome elite control and oppression coming from dividing people on the basis of false gender assumptions.
Of course, the equality of both sexes is still a very important goal to be achieved, but even if sex equality is established in laws or in a form of legal system, it is not enough because the social status of women in such a society will still be very low and discrimination against women will remain. A lot of women still cannot obtain full-time jobs, enter political arena, or enjoy their rights and liberty fully, and are exposed to physical and emotional violence, so cannot unleash their full potential. Underlining all of this is the continuation of gender discrimination.
Therefore, what a gender equal society should be is to aim to create a society in which all people, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity, are treated equally, respected equally and can unleash their potential fully, while seeking the equality of sexes in every aspect of society.
The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted in 2015 put 17 goals to be achieved by 2030. Its 5th goal is “Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls.” In addition, all goals are required to be approached with a gender-sensitive perspective. Thus, gender equality is now expected to play an indispensable role in effectively addressing a variety of issues.
The concept of gender equality gives us a broader perspective, empowers us to cooperate with a variety of people in order to create a society without sexual discrimination and a society in which every individual can live with dignity. Based on the understanding above, we decided to incorporate this issue in the draft revised program.
Why is Japan lagging far behind?
In this field, Japan is lagging far behind other countries. In the World Economic Forum Gender Gap Index in 2019, Japan placed 121st among 153 countries, the lowest recorded rate for Japan. What caused such a shameful result?
In fact, the business circles led by large corporations make use of gender discrimination for their profit-first management style while touting “equality of the sexes.” They use women as a cheap and expendable labor force and make them bear the responsibility of taking care of family members while demanding men become corporate warriors and impose them extremely long work hours. A quick look at the Japan Business Association (Keidanren) shows that the chair and 18 vice chairs are all men. It is very revealing that all the 19 seats are occupied by men. When the International Labor Organization (the ILO) adopted a new convention on violence and harassment with overwhelming support, Keidairen abstained from the vote. As Japan is often referred to as a country exercising capitalism without rules, we have to point out that one of the worst aspects of it is the rampant existence of gender discrimination.
One thing I would like to add here is that the center of post-war Japanese politics has long been occupied by political forces which believe in male superiority over female and the subjugation of individuals to state power. In particular, the Abe administration is extreme in this regard. When you look at the history of Japan, systematic discrimination against women was established in the state institutions in the late 19th century. The absolute Tenno system was served by the extremely anti-women family system. This discriminatory system was passed onto the post-war era, and now, as the Abe administration no longer hides its ambition to restore the old-fashioned and outdated ideology, the political narrative is now rampantly inundated with abusive pronouncements against women. And they are engaging with whitewashing the historical truth of the sex-slave system imposed by Imperil Japanese military. We cannot allow political leaders to incite and spread gender discrimination in such disgusting manner.
Let us stand up together to eliminate gender discrimination by defeating the reckless and shameless profit-seeking tactics at the expense of gender equality used by the business circle and the conservative political circle which are trying to refashion and impose the old-fashioned disturbing ideology of patriarchy.
How JCP deals with the problem: learn and reform itself
How does the Japanese Communist Party address this issue? This is one of the focal points in the intra-party discussions and that is very important.
First of all, a variety of movements for gender equality such as Flower Demo, a women’s group demanding the elimination of sexual violence, movements for the elimination of power harassment in workplaces and on university campuses, and movements for eliminating discrimination against sexual minorities and protecting their dignity are all part of our solidarity with the spirit of #WithYou. So, listen to their demands carefully, and support if not participate in their activities. And stand up together to eliminate the political barriers that now are before us obstructing the demand for gender equality.
At the same time, our party has a proud history of involvement in the struggle for women’s liberation. However, we need to learn more and make further efforts for self-improvement. Frankly speaking, we are not completely free from gender-biases or discriminatory prejudices. Let me call on all comrades to make efforts to overcome biases and learn about the high standards which the world has already set and listen closely to the brave people who are standing up and raising voices in order to change Japanese society in a positive way.
Without gender equality in our party, there will be no gender equality in Japan. I would like to emphasize this here to you so that we can strengthen our resolve to make efforts to obtain gender equality in Japan.
IV. How to grasp the world in the 21st century 2: contradictions in global capitalism
The draft revision in Section 10 clarifies the 21st-century world by examining contradictions in global capitalism.
Expanding gap between rich and poor and worldwide climate change – what must be done to address these issues
Section 10 in the draft revision states at the beginning, “Capitalism’s contradictions arise from its inability to control the enormously developed productive power”, and makes special mention of “the unprecedented worldwide expansion of the gap between rich and poor” and “climate change, which is causing various disasters on a global scale” as the focus of global contradictions inherent in capitalism. It states that these two issues have “questioned the sustainability of the capitalist system itself in the 21st century, and the struggle to properly deal with these issues is of vital significance for the future of humankind.”
Amid unprecedented increase of economic gap, ‘rehabilitation’ of socialism emerges in new way
To tackle these two major issues is an urgent task and is a matter of life and death for the future of humanity.
At the same time, it is noteworthy that among those who are dealing with those issues, the “limits of capitalism” and the need to change the profit-first economic system are widely called for.
In the U.S., with the gap between the rich and the poor widening unprecedentedly, various movements promoting socialism are developing. Calling for a politics not for the 1% but for the 99%, they demand better social security services and eradication of economic injustice by appropriately taxing the rich among other measures. They share the same motivation and goals as us organizing in Japan.
According to an opinion poll recently conducted by “Pew Research Center” (April-May, 2019), about half of millennials (from 23 to 38 years old) have positive opinions of socialism.
Another poll conducted by “Harris” (April 2019) also shows an increasing public support for socialism. According to the poll, 4 in 10 Americans as well as 55% of women between 18 and 54 years of age said they would prefer living in a socialist country over a capitalist country. A news agency reporting this result said, “Socialism is losing its Soviet-era stigma, especially among women.”
Nearly 30 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, contradictions of capitalism have been exposed for all to see. Under these circumstances, a “rehabilitation” of socialism is emerging in a new way in the U.S., the world’s largest advanced capitalist nation. I believe this is a notable turn of events.
Worldwide climate change – humankind faces emergency
The outcome of COP25 (the 25th Conference of Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change) in December last year disappointed many people throughout the world. Although it adopted a resolution encouraging countries to set up more ambitious targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions, it put off a decision on operational rules for the Paris Agreement.
Humanity is literally facing a “climate crisis”, an emergency situation where shelving the problem can no longer be accepted.
A UN Environment Programme (UNEP) report released in December 2019 warns that even if nations meet their present emission targets, the average global temperature will rise by 3.2 degrees Celsius from the pre-industrial levels by the end of this century. It also estimates that the rise would be by 3.2 – 3.9 degrees Celsius if the emissions continue to increase at the current pace. The earth would fall into a catastrophic ecosystem collapse.
In order to limit the global temperature rise to below 1.5 degrees Celsius, which is the target set in the Paris Agreement, dramatically raising emission reduction targets is urgently needed. To this end, greenhouse gas emissions must become “virtually zero” by 2050, which is just 30 years from now. It means that we have to achieve this within one generation, and in order to do so, tremendous efforts in the next few years are crucial. The situation is so urgent that UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres described it as a “climate crisis”.
Implement urgent measures in Japan to mitigate the severity of climate change in solidarity with the rest of the world
Under the present situation of climate crisis, actions calling for seriously addressing the issue of climate change have been expanding worldwide.
In late September last year, the “Global Climate March” attracted 7.6 million citizens in 185 countries. The number of participants exceeded that of demonstrations against the Iraq War in 2003 and became the largest globally united demonstration in history. Young people are rising up, saying, “Don’t burn our future!” Greta Thumberg, a 17-year-old Swedish climate activist, said, “[T]he biggest danger is not inaction. The real danger is when politicians and CEOs are making it look like real action is happening”. She also said, “We are in the beginning of mass extinction,” increasing the activism of young people around the world.
After Thunberg was named Time’s Person of the Year, U.S. President Donald Trump tweeted, “So ridiculous. … Chill Greta, Chill!” Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro called her a “brat”. Russian President Vladimir Putin said, "Nobody explained to Greta that the modern world is complicated and complex." Japan’s Environment Minister Koizumi Shinjiro commented, “I believe ending up with condemning adults has no future either.” Which side is “ridiculous”, lacks understanding of “the modern world”, or “has no future” is more than obvious. I strongly admonish those politicians who have no ability to listen to young people’s demands and concerns, and they should be ashamed of themselves.
Serious negative effects associated with global warming and climate change have also affected Japan with more intense typhoons and heavy rains, abnormally high temperatures harming rice production, and poor catches of fish due to rising seawater temperatures. German think tank “Germanwatch” published a ranking of countries which suffered from extreme and severe weather events such as heavy rains and heat waves caused by global warming. Japan was ranked 1st in damages in 2018. Nevertheless, the Japanese government has shamefully constructed more coal-fired thermal power plants and exported the technology to other nations, refused to raise emission reduction targets, and has received the “Fossil of the Day” award numerous times from environmental NGOs.
Young people in Japan have launched their own campaign in solidarity with the Global Climate March. Let us work with others to force the government to implement urgently needed measures in Japan to curb the severity of climate change in solidarity with activists and governments worldwide.
“Adapting socialist ideals to the contemporary era” is solution for climate change (US major magazine Foreign Affairs)”
What is noteworthy is that activists have raised the concerns that if capitalist nations fail to implement effective measures to tackle global climate change, the capitalist system itself must be fundamentally transformed.
The latest issue of the U.S. magazine Foreign Affairs carried feature articles under the theme of “The Future of Capitalism.” I’d like to quote from one of the articles.
“Capitalism is in crisis … Owing in no small part to the massive levels of consumption and fossil fuel use required by an economic model that prioritizes growth above all else, climate change now imperils the future of human existence … Just like the economic breakdown that has chipped away at people’s quality of life, environmental decline is rooted in the crisis of capitalism. And both challenges can be addressed by embracing an alternative economic model, one that responds to a hunger for genuine reform by adapting socialist ideals to the contemporary era.”
It is notable that a U.S. major magazine published an article stating that the solution to deal effectively with climate change may be to apply socialist ideals to the current global climate crisis. The profit-first principle -- the bedrock of capitalism, which puts profit-seeking before environment protection, and intends to fill the insatiable demand for more production and fossil fuel use is now being called into question.
Comrades, let us actively engage in explaining to the general public that socialism can bring prospects for a fundamental solution to many pressing problems while working at first within the capitalist framework to resolve not only the issue of the increasing gap between rich and poor but also the issue of global climate change.
Imperialism and hegemonism -- on draft revision and contemporary world
Next, the draft revision explains political conflicts in the capitalist world.
The draft revision portrays the aggressive nature of U.S. imperialism from two angles. Firstly, it asserts that the United States continues with its policy of global military hegemonism, and prepares and carries out its preemptive attack strategy against other countries in total disregard of the United Nations Charter and international law. Secondly, it points out that the United States “has set up its extensive network of military bases throughout the world and holds itself in readiness to intervene and attack anywhere in the world.”
The revised Program stresses, “U.S. imperialism is now the greatest threat to world peace and security as well as to the sovereign rights and independence of nations.”
On question of how to define characteristics of U.S. imperialism under Trump administration
In the pre-Congress discussions, some members asked about how to define the dimension and characteristics of U.S. imperialism under the Trump administration.
President Trump, who won the presidential election three years ago with his the “America First” slogan, in his diplomacy keeps a firm stance of disregarding multinational frameworks like the United Nations by treating them as constraints on U.S. foreign policy. The U.S. withdrew from the Paris agreement, the Iran nuclear deal, and UNESCO. Regarding the trade issue, the Trump administration has turned its back on U.S.-led multinational free trade talks and intends to secure the national interest through power-based bilateral trade agreements.
At the surface level, it may appear that the Trump administration intends to depart from the postwar world order created and led by the United States. However, the reality is totally different. Pursuing U.S. national interest aggressively under the “America first” policy, sticking to the policy of military hegemonism with its preemptive attack strategy, and maintain and fortifying U.S. bases across the globe -- the Trump administration is actually furthering blatant imperialist policies.
A typical example of the aggressive nature of imperialism is the killing of the head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard’s Quds Force on January 3 in a drone strike operation at the Baghdad airport in Iraq by order of President Trump. No nation has a right to kill a top official of a foreign sovereign state. Such an act is an unlawful preemptive attack which violates the UN Charter. It is obvious to all concerned that the increase of tensions between the U.S. and Iran originated with the withdrawal of the Trump administration from the Iran nuclear deal in May 2018.
The situation remains at risk of a military confrontation triggering a war. The only way to break through the deadlock is to return to the path working for a diplomatic resolution. The JCP demands that all parties concerned exercise their self-restraint, and we call on the Trump administration to end its policy of “maximum pressure” on Iran and return to the nuclear deal. To the Abe government, we strongly urge an immediate cancellation of the outrageous plan to dispatch Self-Defense Forces to the Middle East to support the U.S.
The U.S. preemptive strike strategy has been a total failure. It has been 18 years since the U.S. in 2001 carried out its preemptive attack on Afghanistan under the guise of a war on terrorism. Even now, in Afghanistan, terrorist attacks and clashes continue, and more than 40,000 civilians have been killed so far. A survey by a researcher of the Watson Institute at Brown University shows that America now carries out anti-terrorist operations in 80 countries on six continents. U.S. military bases in 40 countries are mobilized for war. The U.S. forces in 14 countries are involved in actual conflict situations and in seven countries conduct airstrikes and drone strikes. The U.S. war on terrorism launched with the preemptive attack strategy has spread to more than 40% of the countries in the world. This attests to the fact that terrorism cannot be destroyed by the threat and terror of war.
President Trump has complained that U.S. allies such as Japan, South Korea, and NATO do not shoulder their fair share and demanded an increase in burden sharing. He made this demand not from any intent to withdraw from the military alliances but from the standpoint of strengthening the military alliance network by imposing further cost-sharing on allies.
Thus, under President Trump, the aggressive nature of U.S. imperialism combined with the nationalistic America First policy has in effect created more danger. The JCP will continue to firmly oppose U.S. militaristic hegemonism, including the U.S. attempt to place and keep Japan in an even more subservient position serving U.S. interests.
Struggle for hegemony between U.S. and other major powers -- JCP oppose any nation’s hegemonism
The draft revision incorporated a new dimension to its analysis of the current world structure by stating, “It is grave that the struggle for hegemony between the U.S. and other emerging powers has intensified and created new tensions in the world.”
In terms of hegemonism, in the discussion of the U.S. imperialism which is widely acknowledged as the greatest threats to the world peace, we need to squarely face the fact that moves toward hegemonism in China and Russia have increased and that a struggle for hegemony among these three nations has intensified.
The U.S., China, and Russia are now in a nuclear arms race extended to outer space and together oppose the UN nuclear weapons ban treaty. Struggle for hegemony between the U.S. and China in the Indo-Pacific region has caused new tensions to rise in Asia. NATO’s eastward expansion and the emerging hegemonism in Russia have caused new tensions to erupt in Europe.
With these developments in mind, the draft revision stresses, “[…], we are faced with the fundamental choice between an international order of peace based on the U.N. Charter and the choice of a hegemonistic international order which threatens the independence and sovereignty of nations.” It also points out the need to oppose hegemonistic intervention, war, oppression, and domination by any nation and the pressing need to establish an international order for peace.
Hegemonism has no future. This judgement has been made repeatedly throughout human history. The JCP as a party of sovereign independence has fought squarely against the hegemonism of the U.S. the former Soviet Union, and China. We will do all we can to oppose all forms of hegemonism and work with others to bring about an international order for peace.
Advance to socialism is the inevitable course of world history
The ever worsening economic and political contradictions associated with global capitalism in the 21st century indicate that it is only a matter of time before humanity decides to overcome this social system and move toward socialism. In the draft revision of the Program, the last part in section 3 on the “World Situation” points out the reality of global capitalism in demise:
“Although there may be numerous ups and downs as well as temporary or long-term retrogressive movements in the course of history, it is only a matter of time for the social development to be achieved through overcoming imperialism and capitalism and advancing toward socialism.”
Considering glaring obvious contradictions of global capitalism, it is crucial to advance toward socialism without too much delay. We shall strive with this unwavering conviction.
V. The global significance of socialist transformation in an advanced capitalistic nation
I move on to the next issue.
We revised the last section of Chapter 5 of the Program (The Future Society Theory) and made clear the theoretical significance of introducing socialist changes in a developed capitalist country in accordance with our reevaluation of China and reassessment of the modern world history since the Russian Revolution.
I would like to go over several points that were raised in party discussions.
Regarding our new assertion “Socialist changes in a developed capitalist country offer the high road to socialism or communism”
Firstly, I would like to explain why we assert in the draft revised program the following: “Socialist changes in a developed capitalist country offer the high road to socialism or communism.”
This new emphasis has elicited positive feedback and renewed determination for our cause among comrades.
At the same time, during the discussions, we heard some opinions like “the use of the term ‘the high road’ is exaggerating things” and “It could be considered to be rude to communists working hard in the developing countries.” Although we have already clarified our positon regarding these points, we would like to add some further points for clarification.
Why it is the “high road”: conditions have matured to advance to a future society
Why did we use the term “high road” (“Daidou” in Japanese)?
We use the word “Daidou” as it literally translates to “wide road.” The Koujien, the most widely used authoritative dictionary in Japan, lists “wide road” as the primary definition of “Daidou.” Although the word can be defined as “right path,” we do not here imply the question of “right” or “wrong” in choice of approach. We use the term to mean “just a way forward” in general.
As the draft revised program notes, and as Karl Marx pointed out repeatedly, the process of the maturing of capitalism itself includes various subjective and objective preconditions upon which we will be enabled to proceed toward a transition to our envisioned progressive society.
The draft revision places those preconditions into the following five categories: high productivity fostered under capitalism, a system to socially regulate and manage the economy, rules to protect people’s lives and rights, institutions protecting freedom and democracy gained through people’s struggles, and fully developed capabilities of individuals.
When a highly advanced capitalist nation initiates a transition to socialism, the preconditions which are needed to establish socialism / communism are already in place. The society can be transformed into a new progressive society by utilizing those preconditions already created in the capitalist system and incorporating them in its transitional process characterized with the socialization of productive means. Here we can find “rich and great potentials” unprecedented in human history. We use the term “high road” in the draft revision to emphasize this defining characteristic.
Difficulties of socialist transformation in underdeveloped capitalist nations
As we mentioned in the 8th Central Committee Plenum, we will not deny the feasibility of socialist transformation in developing countries where capitalism is still in a state of maturing. As long as contradictions in capitalism are apparent, there exists the possibility for socialist transformation in any country whatever their stage of capitalist development.
We highly evaluate the role developing countries have played in their achieving independence from the colonialism, and their contribution to world peace and progress in the 21st century through their efforts to initiate and implement social change. The draft program states explicitly that the structural change that took place in the world in the 20th century has begun to clearly demonstrate its vital power.
At the same time, the century-long experience of world history since the Russian Revolution has clearly shown that socialist transformation in developing countries are faced with far more great difficulties.
Regarding the Chinese Revolution, the unique difficulties it faced in its sudden attempt to transition to socialism, namely, the lack of an effective democracy and its history of great power chauvinism, were recognized by the Chinese Communist Party. In regard to the early period of the Russian Revolution, Lenin himself was well aware of Russia’s own unique difficulties and obstacles associated with not only its underdeveloped level of productivity but also the dismal socio-educational status illustrated by the fact that the literacy rate was only 30%.
For those two nations, the five preconditions above mentioned as needed to establish socialism didn’t exist or were in a premature developmental stage at best. They had to attempt to create those elements by themselves after the revolution in order to successfully advance toward socialism. However, neither Russia nor China was able to do so. That brought about extremely difficult conditions for a transition to socialism.
Our analysis of the developmental stages of world history
Our assertion that “Social changes in a developed capitalist country lead to the high road to socialism or communism” in the draft program is drawn from our theoretical premise that advanced capitalism creates the preconditions with which a transition towards socialism can be initiated, and our reassessment of the historical experience of nations which attempted to depart from capitalism following the Russian Revolution.
In the closing remarks on the 8th Central Committee Plenum, we state; “We have drawn such a conclusion from looking closely at the world’s history.” That is a conclusion based on the theoretical analysis we just outlined.
Certainly, our party has no intention to encourage other international revolutionary movements to adopt our theory. We emphasize that this proposition newly inscribed in the Program is to show our resolution, as a political party working for progressive social change in Japan, to take up the challenge to traverse the unpaved path to socialism.
The ongoing struggle is directly connected to the creation of a progressive future society
In my closing remarks of the 8th Central Committee Plenum, I emphasized that our ongoing struggle is the struggle to enrich the elements for our progress and is directly connected to the creation of a progressive future society,” and “They prepare for a future society in a fundamental manner.” Many comrades have resonated with these lines and sent us their positive feedback such as “Oh, that’s ambitious” and “It gives us a concrete picture of a future society.”
Regarding this issue, I would like us to pay attention to the theoretical assumption that the advanced capitalist system itself creates the conditions which will enable us to advance to the next phase of societal development. The revised program raises 5 elements regarding this aspect. Some of them are inevitably created through the development of capitalism while the others are contingent on the achievements gained by people’s struggles.
Elements which capitalism inevitably creates
High productivity is an inevitable creation of the development of capitalism itself and offers the foundation for creating a more progressively advanced society. Marx stated in Das Kapital, “Development of the productive forces of social labour is the historical task and justification of capital. This is just the way in which it unconsciously creates the material conditions of a higher mode of production.”
Second, the development of capitalism also inevitably creates “a system to socially regulate and manage the economy.” As I pointed out in the report to the 8th Central Committee Plenum, Marx views the bank and credit system as the most useful product advanced by capitalism which serve as a “powerful lever” for promoting socialist transformation. In this sense, this type of regulating systems is inevitably created by the development of capitalism itself.
Elements only people’s struggles realize
At the same time, some elements are only realized by people’s struggles.
One of these elements is “Rules to protect people’s lives and rights”. Those rules or regulations have been created through people’s struggles both nationally and internationally. When you look at the history of the shortening of labor hours, the first-ever labor act was made in England in the middle of the 19th century which limited work to a daily maximum of ten hours. Marx praised this act as a great achievement that was accomplished by a half-century long struggle by working class. That is a great achievement gained by people’s struggles. Now, in the current era, we demand decent jobs with decent wages as well as sufficient social security. We are still striving to create these rules. It is people’s struggles that creates the rules and regulations which will be passed on to a future advanced society.
Another important creation due to people’s struggles are the institutions standing for and protecting freedom and democracy. Liberty and democracy, which the postwar Japanese constitution embraces, are achievements made due to the pioneering pro-democracy struggles in the pre-war era which was also influenced by and had ties with the international public opinions and movements. Even now, the confrontations between political forces which try to undermine these ideals and the forces which make efforts to realize these ideals are the central to the struggles taking place in the post-war constitutional politics, and now is the time for Japanese people to fully embrace and further strengthen the freedom and democracy, and such efforts will lead to the ultimate guarantee of human rights which will be passed on to a more progressively advanced future society.
In addition, based on the theoretical advances in the drafts of Das Kapital by Marx, the revised draft program points out “the rich individuality of human beings” as an element which is also passed on to a future society. The development of human individuality, however, is not something naturally formed in the capitalist system. In fact, a sense of democracy that all people are equal, a sense of citizenship that citizens are the protagonists in their nation, a sense of human rights in which the dignity of individuals must be respected, a sense of gender equality in which society should be free from any form of biases and discrimination based on gender, these senses are all historically created and even now being refined and expanded upon through people’s struggles.
Thus, our current struggles are all directly connected to our vision of a progressive future society. With this in mind, let us advance boldly in our daily struggles.
Special difficulties facing socialistic transformation in an advanced capitalist country
Finally, the draft program states that socialist transformation from an advanced capitalist nation has great potential but is faced with special difficulties. Here, I would like to add some thoughts on this point. One comrade asked, “Socialist transformation in a developing nation is difficult, and socialist transformation in an advanced nation is also difficult. So, both are difficult, aren’t they?”
What we intend to emphasize here is that an advanced capitalist nation has special difficulties and obstacles in initiating revolution with the support of the majority of the people. In Japan, that means, first, we must achieve democratic revolution with the support and consent of the majority of the people, and then, we can proceed to socialistic transformation. This process will inevitably be faced with special difficulties.
As I stated in the 8th Central Committee Plenum, the ruling forces in an advanced capitalist country have in their hands a dense network of domination linked with huge economic power in both urban and rural areas. In particular, the ruling forces in advanced capitalist countries have the corporate media under their control which exerts a great influence on the political awareness of the people. These represent particularly difficult conditions we need to recognize and confront. In order to break through such difficulties, we need to constantly strengthen support for the JCP among Japanese people and a build stronger party that can work to help form national united fronts in which we can play an important role. This is absolutely essential.
And, despite those difficulties in initiating “the majority-based revolution”, once we achieve a democratic revolution and initiate socialist transformation in Japan, we will have rich and grand potentials. This is the prospect embodied in our ongoing efforts to create a progressive future society.
Our current joint struggle working together with other opposition parties and concerned citizens, our efforts to make a great advance in coming elections, and our determination to build a stronger party, these are all tasks which demand that we continue on with our daily struggles and activities. That requires patience and a persevering spirit. But overcoming such difficulties and realizing grand potential is something that we need to accomplish one day. With this in mind, let us continue to exert our utmost efforts.
On this note, I conclude my report to the Congress.
