How far-right Japanese First party made big election gains
Tokyo, Jul 23 (AP) Japan's far-right populist Sanseito party was one of the biggest winners in the weekend's upper house election, attracting many voters with its 'Japanese First" platform that included calling for tougher restrictions on foreigners and the curtailment of gender equality and diversity policies.
Sanseito added 14 seats in Sunday's vote to the one seat already held by its leader in the 248-member upper house, the less powerful of Japan's two-chamber parliament.
The surge in the party's popularity came amid the backdrop of a historic loss by the long-governing conservative coalition of Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, with Sanseito attracting frustrated voters struggling with economic woes.
Sanseito leader Sohei Kamiya said Tuesday that he has no interest in forming an alliance with conventional parties like Ishiba's Liberal Democratic Party, or LDP.
Kamiya said he is open to cooperating with other emerging parties, but he's expected to wait in the hopes of gaining more seats in the more powerful lower house. His ambition is to have more influence to possibly form a multiparty coalition like those in Europe.
Started online Sanseito, which translates to 'Participate in Politics," started in 2020 when Kamiya gathered people on YouTube and social media to create a political group to attract voters discontent with conventional parties.
The group began to grow as its members started winning seats in local assemblies, stepping up its presence and grassroots support base.
Sanseito achieved a foothold in national politics in 2022 when Kamiya won a six-year term in the upper house. The party won three seats in the October election in the lower house.
The party holds 15 seats in the upper house, compared with the 122 held by Ishiba's governing coalition, but Kamiya has been steadily reaching a much larger audience.
Sanseito has gained more than 100,000 YouTube subscribers over the past few weeks to nearly 500,000, compared to the the LDP's 140,000.
'Japanese First' Sanseito party stood out from Japan's other parties, with a tough anti-foreigner stance as part of its 'Japanese First" platform, apparently inspired by US President Donald Trump's 'America First" policy.
Under his slogan, Kamiya proposes a new agency to handle regulations on foreigners. During the election, the party campaigned for stricter screening for allowing Japanese citizenship and to exclude non-Japanese from welfare benefits.
Critics say that the party's stance has encouraged the spread of xenophobic rhetoric in the election campaign and on social media, prompting other ultraconservative candidates to be outspoken. A typical claim is that a rapid increase in foreign workers has hurt Japanese workers' wages and that foreigners use a large share of welfare benefits and have made Japanese society unsafe.
That resonated with many Japanese, even though most foreign residents pay taxes and social security as required, and only account for about 3% of both Japan's total population and of welfare benefit recipients.
His xenophobic views, antisemitic remarks and emphasis on Japan's ethnic purity have alarmed human rights activists and many experts, prompting protests.
Kamiya's party, and another big winner, the Democratic Party for the People, which pushed for an increase of 'take home wages," attracted workers who feel frustrated and ignored by conventional parties.
Their advance is also part of a new move led by younger people connecting on social media with hopes of changing Japan's political landscape, Izuru Makihara, a politics professor at the University of Tokyo, told a NHK television talk show. Sanseito is still inexperienced and its future success depends on whether its elected members can achieve policies, he said.
Fan of Trump policies Kamiya, a former Self-Defence Force reservist and an assembly member in the western town of Suita, promotes an anti-vaccine and anti-globalism platform, while backpedaling on gender equality and sexual diversity. He has repeatedly talked favorably about Trump for taking bold measures.
During his campaign, he said that Trump's leadership is part of a growing anti-globalism movement in the West, and that 'we share the same concern." He also told a party leaders' debate that Trump policies are for protecting U.S. national interest and are good examples that Japan should follow. Kamiya is supportive of Trump's move to repeal decarbonization and diversity, equity and inclusion policies.
Fiery speech and contentious remarks Kamiya, a fiery speaker, is also known for stirring controversy and has become a target of scrutiny as his party gained attention.
top videos
View all
He has blamed the government's gender equality policies for triggering Japan's declining birth rate and population.
Kamiya, who opposes allowing a female-line emperor, was also criticized for suggesting that the imperial family would have to turn to concubines if the government was too slow in taking measures to ensure a stable succession. (AP) NSA NSA
First Published:
July 23, 2025, 09:15 IST
Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Deccan Herald
14 minutes ago
- Deccan Herald
The new arsenal of punitive sanctions
Have you ever considered economic sanctions or tariffs to be weapons of mass destruction (WMD)? How about drones and social media? Wikipedia describes a WMD as a biological, chemical, radiological, nuclear, or any other weapon that can kill or significantly harm many people or cause great damage to artificial structures, natural structures, or the biosphere. However, this definition is by no means officially accepted since most governments limit their definition of WMD to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear weapons (CBRN) capable of a high order of destruction or causing mass casualties. By including the word 'biosphere', the Wikipedia definition takes into account the damage caused to the environment when CBRN weapons are any case, neither of the two definitions specifies what constitutes significant harm to people or structures and how this is to be measured. In the 9/11 terrorist attacks, commercial aircraft carrying full tanks of jet fuel were used. Accepted definitions of WMD certainly do not include commercial aircraft as weapons, do they?.Calls for including certain classes of cyberweapons (e.g., drones and malware) have been rejected because they cannot directly injure or kill human beings as efficiently as guns or bombs, and they do not meet the legal and historical definitions of WMD. History cannot be altered, but surely, the laws surrounding WMD can be origin of the term 'weapon of mass destruction' can be traced back to 1937 when William Lang, the Archbishop of Canterbury, in his Christmas address, spoke of the appalling slaughter and suffering inflicted on Spain and China and remarked, "Who can think without horror of what another widespread war would mean, waged as it would be with all the new weapons of mass destruction?" He was acutely aware of the 1937 bombings of cities by the fascists in Spain and by the Japanese in China as well as the chemical attacks on Abyssinia by Italy in updated legal definition of WMD, one that takes into account different contexts in which what constitutes a weapon, the nature of the destruction (kinetic, economic, psychological etc.), and the scale of destruction, is called for. This difficult task should be entrusted to the United Nations and not left to individual governments, no matter how powerful, or select organisations such as NATO, which hardly represent much of the world..I would suggest that the current WMD interpretation of the word 'weapon' go beyond its conventional CBRN meaning and be made flexible to include sanctions, tariffs, drones, and social media, all of which have proven themselves capable of producing a great deal of harm, be it physical, economic, or psychological, across the globe. When applied to social media, WMD stands for weapon of mass destruction as well as weapon of mass serve as a foreign policy tool used by the US, EU, and others to influence the behaviour of other countries. The US has imposed two-thirds of the world's sanctions since the 1990s. According to The Washington Post, in 2024, it imposed "three times as many sanctions as any other country or international body,' and 60% of low-income countries (e.g., Somalia, Darfur, and Libya) were under some form of US financial sanction. Comprehensive sanctions are currently in place for all of Cuba, North Korea, Iran, Russia, and Syria. Sanctions prohibit US citizens from engaging in financial transactions with individuals, entities, or governments on the sanctions list, except by licence from the US Government, and require the US to oppose loans by the World Bank and other international financial institutions. The sanctions on Cuba and Iran date back to 1962 and 1979, respectively. If a country is sanctioned by the US, a third country wishing to conduct business with the sanctioned country is itself subject to US and sanctions are directed at individuals (e.g., Putin) or entities (International Criminal Court) that engage in activities contrary to US foreign policy or national security goals. The ICC has been sanctioned because it dared to brand the genocidal leader of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, as a war criminal and issued a global warrant for his arrest. There are currently 37 active sanctions programmes – not one of them is directed at Israel despite its genocidal activities in why should sanctions be made part of any redefinition of WMD? Consider this. US sanctions on Venezuela have resulted in over 100,000 deaths since the country was prevented from access to medicine and medical devices. In May 1996, Madeleine Albright, the US Ambassador to the UN, when asked to comment on the fact that over 500,000 Iraqi children died from the comprehensive sanctions imposed on Iraq in 1990, and whether the price was worth it, had this to say, "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price, we think the price is worth it." She was rewarded for her callousness by being appointed US Secretary of a 2020 interview, the same Albright remarked, "We learned in many ways that comprehensive sanctions often hurt the people of the country and don't really accomplish what is wanted in order to change the behaviour of the country being sanctioned. So we began to look at something called 'smart sanctions' or 'targeted sanctions.'" This use of the word 'smart' came long before AI entered the common man's vocabulary. Denis Halliday, the UN Humanitarian Coordinator in Baghdad, Iraq, resigned in October 1998 after a 34-year career with the UN to have the freedom to criticise the sanctions regime, saying he didn't want to administer a programme "that satisfies the definition of genocide.".The 1941 siege of Leningrad has now been replaced by the 2025 sanctions on Saint Petersburg. Not much has changed in the intervening 84 years, has it?.(The writer is a retired professor; he has written extensively and presented lectures on the societal and geo-political implications of technology)
Indian Express
44 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Calcutta HC asks Odisha to file affidavit on detention of Bengali migrants
The Calcutta High Court on Wednesday directed the Odisha government to file an affidavit on the alleged detention of Bengali-speaking workers on suspicion of being illegal Bangladesh migrants. Hearing habeas corpus petitions filed by the families of two migrant workers from West Bengal, the Division Bench of Justice Tapabrata Chakraborty and Justice Reetobroto Kumar Mitra directed the Advocate General of Odisha, who had joined the hearing virtually, to submit the affidavit by August 20 and to be physically present in the court. During the hearing, the Division Bench asked the Odisha government's counsel to apprise the court whether the two Bengali migrant workers – Rakhibul Islam Mondal and Sainur Islam, both from Murshidabad – 'were arrested, interrogated, or detained'. Pitambar Acharya, the Advocate General of Odisha government, denied they were arrested and called the petitions 'frivolous'. The petitioners' counsel then informed the court that Mondal and Islam were released by Odisha Police after the High Court's intervention and demanded compensation for 'illegal detention'. 'The detention was illegal and therefore, compensation should be given. Those who have been released have stated that many others like them remained in custody — detained illegally and not produced before a magistrate.' Odisha's AG, Acharya, told the High Court that the documents of the two migrant workers had been verified. 'As per the Foreigners Act, 1946, Section 3, when the citizenship of suspected persons is in doubt, we investigate for lawful verification of documents. People from all over the country come to work here, and lawfully, on suspicion, their documents are verified,' Acharya added. Senior counsel Kalyan Banerjee, appearing for the petitioners, argued, 'There must be some grounds. Only on suspicion, they cannot declare someone a foreigner.' Refuting the petitioners' contention that Bengali-speaking migrants were being targeted, the Odisha AG said: 'Bengalis are our brothers and neighbors. Don't mislead them by saying these things against us. Our Chief Justice is from Bengal. It is not a matter of Bengali or non-Bengali here. It is being verified whether they are citizens of this country or not.' To this, counsel Banerjee countered, 'Then tell me, how many Tamils and how many Gujaratis have been arrested? Why are Bengalis being selectively verified?' The High Court Bench then directed the Odisha government to file an affidavit on the detention. The petitioners were directed to file replies by August 27, before the court scheduled the next hearing on August 29. The Division Bench on July 10 had directed the Odisha government to place before it relevant documents on whether the two had been detained or were missing. They were directed to answer that if detained, whether such detention was in connection with any court's order and the grounds for that. One of the habeas corpus petitions has been filed by Nasima Mondal, mother of Rakhibul, resident of Hariharpara in Murshidabad district. She claimed that her son was detained in Odisha's Jagatsinghpur district on June 25 and was held for more than 24 hours without being produced before a magistrate in violation of his fundamental rights. According to her petition, Odisha Police 'ignored valid documents' in his possession — including Aadhaar, voter ID, and ration card. The petitioner alleged he was targeted for speaking Bengali and suspected of being Bangladeshi, without any proper identity checks. The second petition was filed by Rajjak Sheikh, also from Hariharpara, seeking the release of his son, Sainur. He claimed Jagatsinghpur police detained his son during a similar identity verification drive on June 30.
India Today
2 hours ago
- India Today
Trump warns of 'higher tariffs' if countries fail to open markets to US products
US President Donald Trump has once again warned that countries refusing to open their markets to American products will face even higher tariffs. On Wednesday, several nations, including South Korea, rushed to finalise trade agreements with the US before the August 1 negotiation a strongly worded post on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump stated, "I WILL ONLY LOWER TARIFFS IF A COUNTRY AGREES TO OPEN ITS MARKET. IF NOT, MUCH HIGHER TARIFFS! Japan's Markets are now OPEN (for first time ever!). USA BUSINESSES WILL BOOM!"advertisementHis post came just a day after he announced a new trade deal with Japan, which includes a 15 percent "reciprocal" tariff on Japanese goods entering the United States. This new rate is 10 percentage points lower than what had previously been announced. According to Trump, Japan will invest USD 550 billion in the US, with 90% of the profits going to the United GREAT POWER OF TARIFFS: TRUMPTrump also defended his use of tariffs as a negotiation tool. In another post, he wrote: "Another great power of Tariffs. Without them, it would be impossible to get countries to OPEN UP!!! ALWAYS, ZERO TARIFFS TO AMERICA!!!" The president has been arguing that tariffs help create leverage in international trade talks, forcing other countries to remove trade barriers and give US businesses a fair shot in foreign markets. According to Trump, the goal is always to eliminate tariffs altogether—but only when other nations do the approach is putting pressure on countries like South Korea, which is working to avoid the harsh consequences of US tariffs. The Korean government is particularly concerned about proposed 25 percent reciprocal tariffs, as well as separate duties on steel, aluminium, and automobile exports. These sectors form the backbone of South Korea's economy, which heavily relies on House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt backed Trump's remarks during a press briefing. She said, "If not, they will continue to face tariffs and pay a steep price to do business in the United States of America, which remains the best market on the face of the planet."- EndsTune InMust Watch
