Public Attitudes on Revision

If Japan’s politicians can agree on revisions to the constitution, the public will then vote in a national referendum. Polling on the constitution suggests there is greater receptivity across the political spectrum to having a national conversation, but no clear consensus on whether and what to revise.

More than three generations of Japanese have come of age since Emperor Hirohito promulgated the 1947 constitution. The issues that confront the Japanese today are far more complex than those in 1947, when the immediate concerns were the war and the U.S. occupation.

Yet despite political leaders’ interest in constitutional amendment as a means of achieving political and policy reform, Japanese citizens are cautious about changing the document that has protected their postwar democracy.

Early Public Attitudes on the Constitution

From 1955 to 1968, the Japanese government conducted regular polling in an effort to gauge how people were responding to their new constitution. The polls presented here represented the transition from upheaval and political contest to the decade of "double-income" growth that created the foundations of today’s Japan. A look back at some of these defining debates over the Japanese constitution in the 1950s helps put today’s conversation in context.

Early Postwar Attitudes

A look back at some of these defining debates over the Japanese constitution in the 1950s helps put today’s conversation in context. The LDP government asked their citizens what they thought about their new constitution. Four findings from these surveys by the cabinet office offer insights on the current debate over constitutional revision.

Diet Invites Public Comment

In 2000, the Lower House Constitutional Research Committee asked the public to share their thoughts on the committee’s work. Out of 212 written responses submitted to the committee, nineteen were selected for publication with the lower house report. The nineteen essays were written by students, teachers, company employees, and homemakers. Overall, they urged Diet members to take their task seriously. Most essays reflected skepticism over the politicians’ motivations rather than concrete suggestions for constitutional revision.

Citizen Opinions Presented to the Lower House Constitutional Research Committee

Today, the deterioration of the global environment is growing more and more serious. If we do not consider the environment and continue with our heedless economic development, the globe will sink like the Titanic. However, history has shown that human beings have wisdom, courage, and perseverance.

To that end, we must adopt new values, institutions, and technologies and change our society, just as Japan did when it became a constitutional democracy after World War II. In the fifty years since, Japan’s politics, legal system, education, and society were established under the philosophy of "expanding the economy." In other words, Japan has only evaluated its policies by asking whether they were economical.

I think the constitution of Japan is splendid in principle. However, it is unfortunate that politicians and experts did not include an environmental clause.

The inclusion of environmental provisions in the constitution will be a major step forward from the bias of "economic expansion" into a society with dual goals of "economic quality" and "environmental preservation."

Japan should take the initiative to build a sustainable society and contribute to the world in the twenty-first century. To this end, I would like the Commission on the Constitution to make an effort to include environmental provisions, including environmental rights, in the constitution.

Our constitution has deep roots in Japanese life. It prods us to take on public responsibilities, hope for peace, dislike conflict, keep our selfishness to a minimum, and place value on our contributions to society. Our constitution supports the effort we make each day to go about our lives.

I have never felt intimidated by the expectations that come from the Japanese constitution’s high ideals, its spirit, or its admonitions. I have been delighted to explore these ambitions, and I am grateful to have been born a citizen of Japan.

The constitution has been indispensable for people like me, providing citizens who are not part of an organization with a refuge and a sense of belonging. In the future, the number of people like me who live as individuals without organizational affiliation will grow. Our constitution will be even more necessary as our society becomes more fragmented, and its importance can only increase. Democracy, in fact, has arisen in response to this social need.

The direction Japan takes from now on has a particularly deep connection to our nation’s identity. If we were to say what a Japanese identity is, it would be something unique to the Japanese people, but with universal elements that we can share globally. As an island nation, we have a deeply compelling history. We understand the importance of introducing new ideas from other nations, and because we have few resources, we understand how important it is to our survival to have a global system of mutual interdependence. Also, we are the only nation in the world that has experienced the effects of an atomic weapon. We have reflected deeply on the stupidity of our prewar imperial expansion and the harm we caused by colonizing our Asian neighbors. We have also struggled with riding the wave of high economic growth, only to suffer the environmental damage it caused.

Our national identity has been deeply shaped by this historical experience, and perhaps the lessons we have learned as a consequence could become part of the preface of our new constitution. This could be a meaningful expression of our Japanese identity.

In the preamble of our current constitution, it states that we "desire to hold an honored place in an international society," but it says little about how to do that. What I would like from the Constitutional Review Commission is a discussion over what kind of constitution might help us realize this goal—a discussion that reflects our Japanese identity formed from our past experience as a nation and the lessons we have learned. We should do this in our own Japanese way, without any attempt to decorate our new constitution with the experiences of others.

Today, the deterioration of the global environment is growing more and more serious. If we do not consider the environment and continue with our heedless economic development, the globe will sink like the Titanic. However, history has shown that human beings have wisdom, courage, and perseverance.

To that end, we must adopt new values, institutions, and technologies and change our society, just as Japan did when it became a constitutional democracy after World War II. In the fifty years since, Japan’s politics, legal system, education, and society were established under the philosophy of "expanding the economy." In other words, Japan has only evaluated its policies by asking whether they were economical.

I think the constitution of Japan is splendid in principle. However, it is unfortunate that politicians and experts did not include an environmental clause.

The inclusion of environmental provisions in the constitution will be a major step forward from the bias of "economic expansion" into a society with dual goals of "economic quality" and "environmental preservation."

Japan should take the initiative to build a sustainable society and contribute to the world in the twenty-first century. To this end, I would like the Commission on the Constitution to make an effort to include environmental provisions, including environmental rights, in the constitution.

Our constitution has deep roots in Japanese life. It prods us to take on public responsibilities, hope for peace, dislike conflict, keep our selfishness to a minimum, and place value on our contributions to society. Our constitution supports the effort we make each day to go about our lives.

I have never felt intimidated by the expectations that come from the Japanese constitution’s high ideals, its spirit, or its admonitions. I have been delighted to explore these ambitions, and I am grateful to have been born a citizen of Japan.

The constitution has been indispensable for people like me, providing citizens who are not part of an organization with a refuge and a sense of belonging. In the future, the number of people like me who live as individuals without organizational affiliation will grow. Our constitution will be even more necessary as our society becomes more fragmented, and its importance can only increase. Democracy, in fact, has arisen in response to this social need.

The direction Japan takes from now on has a particularly deep connection to our nation’s identity. If we were to say what a Japanese identity is, it would be something unique to the Japanese people, but with universal elements that we can share globally. As an island nation, we have a deeply compelling history. We understand the importance of introducing new ideas from other nations, and because we have few resources, we understand how important it is to our survival to have a global system of mutual interdependence. Also, we are the only nation in the world that has experienced the effects of an atomic weapon. We have reflected deeply on the stupidity of our prewar imperial expansion and the harm we caused by colonizing our Asian neighbors. We have also struggled with riding the wave of high economic growth, only to suffer the environmental damage it caused.

Our national identity has been deeply shaped by this historical experience, and perhaps the lessons we have learned as a consequence could become part of the preface of our new constitution. This could be a meaningful expression of our Japanese identity.

In the preamble of our current constitution, it states that we "desire to hold an honored place in an international society," but it says little about how to do that. What I would like from the Constitutional Review Commission is a discussion over what kind of constitution might help us realize this goal—a discussion that reflects our Japanese identity formed from our past experience as a nation and the lessons we have learned. We should do this in our own Japanese way, without any attempt to decorate our new constitution with the experiences of others.

Today, the deterioration of the global environment is growing more and more serious. If we do not consider the environment and continue with our heedless economic development, the globe will sink like the Titanic. However, history has shown that human beings have wisdom, courage, and perseverance.

To that end, we must adopt new values, institutions, and technologies and change our society, just as Japan did when it became a constitutional democracy after World War II. In the fifty years since, Japan’s politics, legal system, education, and society were established under the philosophy of "expanding the economy." In other words, Japan has only evaluated its policies by asking whether they were economical.

I think the constitution of Japan is splendid in principle. However, it is unfortunate that politicians and experts did not include an environmental clause.

The inclusion of environmental provisions in the constitution will be a major step forward from the bias of "economic expansion" into a society with dual goals of "economic quality" and "environmental preservation."

Japan should take the initiative to build a sustainable society and contribute to the world in the twenty-first century. To this end, I would like the Commission on the Constitution to make an effort to include environmental provisions, including environmental rights, in the constitution.