The main weaknesses of party government in Japan.

Party government - the term “party government” needs explanation. In the Meiji era, executive power was held by the oligarchs. Prime Ministers and cabinet members were chosen not from the parties that controlled the Diet but from members of the oligarchy. Thus, Ito, Yamagata, and Matsukata were Prime Ministers for the years between 1885 and 1900. In the next twelve years, 1901.12, Katsura and Saionji, proteges of Yamagata and Ito respectively, shared the premiership. Their governments were responsible to the emperor, not to the Diet.
It was not until 1918 that Hara Kei of Seiyukai was appointed to form a party government in the sense that most of the cabinet ministers were members of Seiyukai which had control of the Diet. Thereby, some sort of responsible government was established.
In 1924, Kato Komei of Kenseikai won the elections to the Diet, and he was appointed to form a government. Kato’s government, with its various achievements, marked the highest point of party politics in Japan. Nevertheless, party governments exhibited several weaknesses which contributed to its decline and replacement by militarism in the early 1930s.

Disunity within parties - the first was disunity. The parties had their origins in protest against Meiji oligarchy. So they found that only to oppose the government was much easier than to put forward a programme of their own. Co-operative and positive measures were hard to find. Also, the Diet’s ability to obstruct official policy was a weapon, but it was a negative one. Thus, the usual method was to blackmail the government for concessions without actually gaining control. Moreover, the parties did not greatly differ from each other on matters of policy. Again and again factions shifted from parties to parties, from opposing the government to supporting the government. That was because of the influence of ambition and self-interest.

For party politicians, bargains had to be made with powerful interests outside the Diet (such as the Genro, Privy Council, zaibatsu). They were more concerned with vote-winning and fund-raising than with party organization. This being so, party loyalty was seldom found. Ordinary members of the parties, knowing that all major decisions were made behind the scene, not by the Diet, gradually lost faith in their organization. Finally, mutual accusation of the parties against each other only served to discredit their image in the eyes of the Japanese. Even between 1918 and 1932, when party influence was strongest, there was less change in these habits. Taking advantage of these ills, the militarists easily rose to power.

Corruption - the two major parties in Japan were linked up with the zaibatsu - Seiyukai with Mitsui, and Kenseikai (Minseito) with Mitsubishi.. This alliance gave rise to much corruption. Instead of using the parties to breed democracy and to gain mass support, party leaders used it as tools to further individual interests. Scandals and pro-zaibatsu policies of the party governments greatly discredited them in Japanese minds.
For instance, under Hara in 1921, the South Manchurian Railway Company contributed illegally to Seiyukai funds. Later Kato’s Kenseikai was financed by Mitsubishi. General Tanaka of Seiyukai was accused of taking bribes for offering official positions, selling peerages, and deciding on army contracts.

The link with zaibatsu was a fatal thing to the parties. Firstly, business backing was not stable .because zaibatsu would support the parties only if self-interest was involved. Otherwise, they would dispense with the parties. Secondly, the Japanese people despised the parties for its corruption and unruliness.

No mass support - if the parties could not rely on business, they failed equally to build up any mass support. This was partly due to their factionalism, disunity and corruption. Furthermore, party leaders failed to cultivate the roots of liberalism and democracy. Most of them were of samurai descent; none was a member of the urban middle class.

Most important of all, Japanese peasants were discontented with party governments for they felt that it was biased in favour of landlords and businessmen. They paid taxes that were proportionately much higher than the capitalists. Furthermore, there was a general economic decline among the rural population in the 1920s. This resulted in greater landlordism. The sufferings of peasants had strong echoes among the junior military officers, many of whom were the sons of discontented peasants. In return, the peasants gave the militarists blind support to overthrow party rule and to establish a military dictatorship.

Economic failures - by the late 1920s, party governments failed to cope with those serious economic crises that shattered Japan’s economy. The 1927 Bank Crisis led to the collapse of many small enterprises to the benefits of the zaibatsu. The government failed to do anything to solve the crisis. This increased discontents among the “little men” who identified the parties with big businesses.

The death blow came with the 1929 Great Depression. This on the one hand posed economic problems that the party governments could not solve. In the face of a 50% drop in export trade and 3 million unemployed, the governments were helpless. On the other hand, it strengthened the militarists’ agitations for overseas expansion to save Japan’s economy. In despair, the Japanese people were easily moved.

Conclusion - under such circumstances, the parties were doomed to fail. The independent action of the Kwangtung Army in September 1931 (Manchurian Incident) was the first signal for the demise of party rule. The 1932 “May 15 Incident” was the death blow to party government in Japan.