"Give us an example of working Socialism, Will!" I found one.... - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Willravel · 04-23-2009, 09:21 AM

Quote:

A Workers’ Paradise Found Off Japan’s Coast
By MARTIN FACKLER
Published: April 21, 2009

HIME ISLAND, Japan — If Marxism had ever produced a functional, prosperous society, it might have looked something like this tiny southern Japanese island.

At first glance, there is little to set Hime (pronounced HEE-may) apart from the hundreds of other small inhabited islands that dot the coasts of Japan’s main isles. The 2,519 mostly graying islanders subsist on fishing and shrimp farming, and every summer hold a Shinto religious festival featuring dancers dressed as foxes.

But once off the ferry, the island’s sole public transportation link to the outside, visitors are greeted by an unusual sight: a tall, bronze statue of Hime’s previous mayor, rare in a country that typically shuns such political aggrandizement. Rarer still is that the statue was erected by his son, who is the island’s current mayor.

In fact, the father, who died in 1984, and the son, who succeeded him, have won every mayoral election in Himeshima, the island’s village, for 49 years — without once being challenged by a rival candidate.

And it is not just the cult-of-personality politics that smack of a latter-day workers’ paradise. This sleepy island, just off Japan’s main southern island, Kyushu, has recently come under unaccustomed national media attention for a very different reason: it invented its own version of work-sharing four decades before the current economic crisis popularized the term.

Under Hime’s system, village employees earn about a third less pay than public servants elsewhere in Japan, though they work the same hours. This has allowed the village to create more jobs: it now directly or indirectly employs a fifth of all working islanders. Most of the rest are engaged in fishing, also government-subsidized. In fact, village officials say, there are few fully private-sector jobs on the island.

Islanders admit to the socialist parallels, even while proclaiming themselves political conservatives who vote for the governing right-wing Liberal Democratic Party. Some jokingly take the analogy a step further, comparing themselves to a much more repressive family-run regime in Japan’s geopolitical neighborhood.

“Hime Island is North Korea, just a livable version,” Naokazu Koiwa said with a laugh. Mr. Koiwa, 32, repairs fishing boats.

Unsurprisingly, the current mayor, Akio Fujimoto, flatly rejects the North Korean comparison. Rather, he and most other islanders call Hime a repository for traditional Japanese values, like economic egalitarianism and social harmony. They say the rest of the nation has lost these in an embrace of more competitive capitalism, especially under the prime ministership of Junichiro Koizumi from 2001-6.

“Our thinking is, ‘let’s all share the economic pie and get along, instead of giving all of it to the rich,’ ” said Mr. Fujimoto, whose father, Kumao Fujimoto, devised the work-sharing system in the 1960s. “Avoiding competition is the traditional Japanese way.”

Now, with the current crisis causing a national questioning of American-style laissez-faire economics, and business leaders and unions seeking alternatives to widespread job cuts, Hime’s work-sharing scheme is suddenly being held up as a new model. Islanders call it ironic that the current crisis has made traditional values appear progressive, even utopian.

Nor does the island’s penchant for equality stop at work-sharing. At an annual village ceremony to mark the coming of age of 20-year-old islanders, women are forbidden to wear traditional kimonos for fear the differences in quality could reveal their households’ economic status.

Dismayed by the inconsistent television reception across this mountainous island about half the size of Key West, the current mayor installed a free cable TV system that now reaches 97 percent of homes.

Even by clannish Japan’s standards, the island seems a friendly, close-knit place. Islanders cheerfully greet passing strangers. Roads, parks and even public toilets are immaculate. Doors are left unlocked, and the island has only one policeman.

Mr. Fujimoto also cites traditional attitudes to explain his own political longevity, a claim most islanders seem to accept. He says islanders shun public elections because of a deep-rooted abhorrence of confrontation. He said the last time the village held a mayoral election, in 1955, it split the island, creating ill feelings that took a generation to heal.

To avoid a repeat of such trauma, he said, the island decided to choose mayors by consensus, finding someone on whom everyone could agree beforehand. Last year, Mr. Fujimoto won his seventh straight four-year term, once again by default in an uncontested election.

“My job is to prevent elections by keeping everyone equal, and thus happy,” said Mr. Fujimoto, 65, sitting in a modest office in the village hall. His only visible sign of authority was a buzzer on his desk that he pushed to summon an assistant.

Mr. Fujimoto said he would resign immediately if a serious rival appeared in an election. “That would be a sign the village has lost confidence in me,” he said.

Many islanders say Mr. Fujimoto is able to stay in office partly because of the reverence still felt here for his father, who lifted Hime from postwar poverty by turning it into a loyal source of votes for the Liberal Democratic Party, which rewarded the island with generous public works.

“We have our own little personality cult,” said Shokai Dozono, a Buddhist monk who runs one of the island’s two temples.

The island and its mayor also have outside critics. Keizo Nagai, the ombudsman for Oita prefecture, which includes Hime, calls the island the least transparent local government in the prefecture. He criticized it for refusing to make information like detailed budget records available to non-islanders, which he attributed to a closed local culture rather than to a cover-up of wrongdoing.

“Hime Island acts like an independent kingdom,” Mr. Nagai said.

Many islanders say they accept the status quo simply because life here is comfortable. They say rocking the boat would only ostracize them on an island where everyone knows one another.

“Everyone is basically satisfied,” said Shusaku Akaishi, 29, who works at his family’s gas station. “This is a conservative place.”

That conservatism is strong enough at times to annoy even Mr. Fujimoto. His biggest complaint is that traditional attitudes prevent him from extending family control of the mayor’s office for another generation, because he has only a daughter.

“Hime Island can’t be run by a woman,” he sighed. “This place is too medieval for that.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/wo...l?pagewanted=2

First off, let me say that I'm not suggesting this is a viable option for larger economies. It almost certainly would end in disaster if a similar system were implemented in the US or even Europe. Still, I find this little island quite fascinating.

Long have I decried the necessity for competition in all economies at all times, instead suggesting that competition and cooperation are both necessary for success. This wonderful little island demonstrates that socialism-ish systems do not necessarily lead to corruption, power grabbing, or people "not getting their fare share". The economy is based on egalitarianism and equality, yet not everyone makes the same wage. The article cites that different households have different economic statuses, which means that working hard or having a higher position can mean earning more money, but the island is simply without an ultra rich few that assert their economic power on the poor.

If people were intimidated by the one-man police force or were unhappy with mayor Fujimoto, people would run against him.

What are your thoughts on this?

loquitur · 04-23-2009, 11:17 AM

Will, it worked in kibbutzim in Israel, too. At least for 80 or so years it did. Then they went free-market.

---------- Post added at 07:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:15 PM ----------

The key is size and homogeneity. With small size and a populace similar in values, outlook, ethnicity and background, enforced equality is more tolerable. The more individuality and diversity you have, the less likely you'll see people willing to put aside their own individual muse to do what the rest of the society tells them to do.

Rekna · 04-23-2009, 11:29 AM

Here is working example of socialism: The US highway system.

dksuddeth · 04-23-2009, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by loquitur

Will, it worked in kibbutzim in Israel, too. At least for 80 or so years it did. Then they went free-market.

---------- Post added at 07:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:15 PM ----------

The key is size and homogeneity. With small size and a populace similar in values, outlook, ethnicity and background, enforced equality is more tolerable. The more individuality and diversity you have, the less likely you'll see people willing to put aside their own individual muse to do what the rest of the society tells them to do.

I would tend to say that the small size in population and geography, it's not enforced, but mutally accepted as necessary. Smaller populations will generally band together in a more socialist grouping for mere survival.

Willravel · 04-23-2009, 12:30 PM

Well yes and no. Hime Island could very well be more capitalistic, more free market, but they choose not to because they've found something that works better for them.

roachboy · 04-23-2009, 01:06 PM

how exactly is this socialist?

Seaver · 04-23-2009, 01:07 PM

I have never stated that socialism does not work. The Inuit (or Eskimo as even some of them like to be called) live(d) in a truly socialist society. They shared everything pretty much equally, if they didn't it was death. However, the vast majority of the population was essentially direct relations. In the small tribal band, it's hard to not-share equally. In addition, EVERYONE knows if you're not pulling your weight. They know if you're down on your luck or just slacking. Obviously, one's willingness to help hinges on this knowledge. Once you have large groups of the population who have never even met each other, the empathy and sympathy quickly dissolve. The nameless face is much easier to shake off than someone you've known your whole life.

Willravel · 04-23-2009, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

how exactly is this socialist?

It isn't really, it's simply an example of people allowing themselves to move slightly away from capitalism on the grand economic scale of whatever. Still, it illustrates what I've been talking about in that it's less free market yet still clearly capable of supporting a society in 2009.

loquitur · 04-24-2009, 08:16 AM

The more family-like a group is, the more likely it is to be able prosper with weaker market mechanisms. That goes for both size and characteristics. My own family is strictly "from each according to ability, to each according to need," and it happened without anyone even thinking about it - it never occurred to anyone to do it any other way.

guy44 · 04-24-2009, 11:57 AM

You know, I'm really sick of socialism being defined down. Socialism refers to the state control over the means of production and the subsequent redistribution of produced goods. I get that redistributive or welfare programs, or state-supported projects that benefit all (i.e., national parks, defense) are kind of socialist in that the government pays for them and often-times progressively collects tax money to support them.

But.

Those programs aren't socialist, OK? Socialism is a specific thing, and with very rare exceptions it isn't done in the United States.

JumpinJesus · 04-24-2009, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willravel

"Give us an example of working Socialism, Will!" I found one....

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willravel

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

how exactly is this socialist?

It isn't really, it's simply an example of people allowing themselves to move slightly away from capitalism on the grand economic scale of whatever. Still, it illustrates what I've been talking about in that it's less free market yet still clearly capable of supporting a society in 2009.

...umm...

Nisses · 04-27-2009, 06:56 AM

As long as your monkeysphere encompasses everybody in your community, it can work. Once it grows beyond that, it stops being workable I'd say.

stealing from people you don't know anyway and won't meet, seems easier.

Willravel · 04-27-2009, 09:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JumpinJesus

...umm...

Yes, yes, yes, the fun's over. The above Japanese island is not an example of socialism, it's an example of what the right believes is socialism, which is capitalism with a slightly larger government, a few more government-run social programs, and slightly higher taxes. It's still capitalism, it's just not as free-market (in the laissez-faire sense of the term) as most conservatives in the US are comfortable with.

Real, no-fooling socialism features much more advanced forms of collectivism which encompass social organization, economy, and government. You'd see very clear community control over every aspect of life, such as worker controlled production and services, collective ownership, and even rule by worker councils.

spectre · 04-27-2009, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willravel

Yes, yes, yes, the fun's over. The above Japanese island is not an example of socialism, it's an example of what the right believes is socialism, which is capitalism with a slightly larger government, a few more government-run social programs, and slightly higher taxes. It's still capitalism, it's just not as free-market (in the laissez-faire sense of the term) as most conservatives in the US are comfortable with.

Real, no-fooling socialism features much more advanced forms of collectivism which encompass social organization, economy, and government. You'd see very clear community control over every aspect of life, such as worker controlled production and services, collective ownership, and even rule by worker councils.

Can't say I blame you for that. ""Give us an example of working what the right believes is socialism, which is capitalism with a slightly larger government, a few more government-run social programs, and slightly higher taxes. It's still capitalism, it's just not as free-market (in the laissez-faire sense of the term) as most conservatives in the US are comfortable with, Will!" I found one...." doesn't work as well as a thread title.

roachboy · 04-27-2009, 06:20 PM

well, for what it's worth, i wouldn't have asked anything about the op had the article not been so silly--it pitched the equivalence to socialism in the opening paragraphs by way of a personality cult schtick--but i understood the motivation. fact is that socialism does not require that people just like to be nice to each other. but us conservatives like to imagine that this is the case, mostly so they can juxtapose to it their manly man commitment to competition and all that...its all like a jack-in-the-box: turn the crank and the puppet inevitably pops up.

but spec outlined the logistical problem with an alternate title....

Zenturian · 04-29-2009, 06:45 PM

What I find telling about socialism, is that it will not tolerate capitialism within its system. In fact, socialism forces others to bend to it system. While capitalism does not care if groups wish to be socialist within its borders.

04-23-2009, 01:06 PM	#6 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	how exactly is this socialist? __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

04-23-2009, 01:07 PM	#7 (permalink)
Seaver Junkie Location: Fort Worth, TX	I have never stated that socialism does not work. The Inuit (or Eskimo as even some of them like to be called) live(d) in a truly socialist society. They shared everything pretty much equally, if they didn't it was death. However, the vast majority of the population was essentially direct relations. In the small tribal band, it's hard to not-share equally. In addition, EVERYONE knows if you're not pulling your weight. They know if you're down on your luck or just slacking. Obviously, one's willingness to help hinges on this knowledge. Once you have large groups of the population who have never even met each other, the empathy and sympathy quickly dissolve. The nameless face is much easier to shake off than someone you've known your whole life. __________________ "Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

04-24-2009, 11:57 AM	#10 (permalink)
guy44 Somnabulist Location: corner of No and Where	You know, I'm really sick of socialism being defined down. Socialism refers to the state control over the means of production and the subsequent redistribution of produced goods. I get that redistributive or welfare programs, or state-supported projects that benefit all (i.e., national parks, defense) are kind of socialist in that the government pays for them and often-times progressively collects tax money to support them. But. Those programs aren't socialist, OK? Socialism is a specific thing, and with very rare exceptions it isn't done in the United States. __________________ "You have reached Ritual Sacrifice. For goats press one, or say 'goats.'"

04-27-2009, 06:56 AM	#12 (permalink)
Nisses Shade Location: Belgium	As long as your monkeysphere encompasses everybody in your community, it can work. Once it grows beyond that, it stops being workable I'd say. stealing from people you don't know anyway and won't meet, seems easier. __________________ Moderation should be moderately moderated.

04-27-2009, 06:20 PM	#15 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	well, for what it's worth, i wouldn't have asked anything about the op had the article not been so silly--it pitched the equivalence to socialism in the opening paragraphs by way of a personality cult schtick--but i understood the motivation. fact is that socialism does not require that people just like to be nice to each other. but us conservatives like to imagine that this is the case, mostly so they can juxtapose to it their manly man commitment to competition and all that...its all like a jack-in-the-box: turn the crank and the puppet inevitably pops up. but spec outlined the logistical problem with an alternate title.... __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

04-23-2009, 11:17 AM	#2 (permalink)
loquitur Junkie Location: NYC	Will, it worked in kibbutzim in Israel, too. At least for 80 or so years it did. Then they went free-market. ---------- Post added at 07:17 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:15 PM ---------- The key is size and homogeneity. With small size and a populace similar in values, outlook, ethnicity and background, enforced equality is more tolerable. The more individuality and diversity you have, the less likely you'll see people willing to put aside their own individual muse to do what the rest of the society tells them to do.

04-23-2009, 11:29 AM	#3 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	Here is working example of socialism: The US highway system.

04-23-2009, 12:30 PM	#5 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Well yes and no. Hime Island could very well be more capitalistic, more free market, but they choose not to because they've found something that works better for them.

04-24-2009, 08:16 AM	#9 (permalink)
loquitur Junkie Location: NYC	The more family-like a group is, the more likely it is to be able prosper with weaker market mechanisms. That goes for both size and characteristics. My own family is strictly "from each according to ability, to each according to need," and it happened without anyone even thinking about it - it never occurred to anyone to do it any other way.

04-29-2009, 06:45 PM	#16 (permalink)
Zenturian Banned	What I find telling about socialism, is that it will not tolerate capitialism within its system. In fact, socialism forces others to bend to it system. While capitalism does not care if groups wish to be socialist within its borders.