1)Japan is different since democratic electionｓ have been held for more than half century.Not so in SK and Taiwan.
And Japan is a representative democracy where prime minister is chosen from the majority in the diet,while these two are direct democracy in chosking president.
It is undeniable that the latter gets more emotional response from the general public in choosing leaders.

2)Both SK and Taiwan are divided nations where reunification with the other polity is the big national agenda that can mobilize emotinal masses to the streets with flags in their hands.You don’t see that in Japan except during the world cup game.

3)Korea has very fragile party politics.Almost all of the leading party in the past were disbanded once the presidents step down.This is because Korean presidency is the imperial presidency.That’s why when the king falls,so shall all the king’s men.
SK had started urban sucession from 1995.And it’s election of the regional leaders has been a mess.In the last election in 2006,one out of six were accused of breaking the electoral law.
These happens partially because of the lack of modern political party that back up the candidates in the election,thus the candidates must singlehandly build up the voting machine which usually ends up in
bribery.

I know some people working for KBS,the equivalent of NHK in South Korea.When I was in Seoul in the spring of 2006,the chairman of KBS was a parachute executive appointed by the government coming from radical paper Hankyoreh,which was pretty much operating as the mouth-piece of the Roh Administration at the time.He was kicked out this year after conservative president,Lee Myong Bak took over and along with people I knew at KBS.

Lee’s current spokesperson is Lee Dong Kwan,who was the senior editor of the third largest national daily,Donga-Ilbo until this year.
Imagine Aso Taro bringing Watanabe Tsuneo out from executive room of the Yomiuri and post him to the cabinet minister,you get the idea.

The fact is,there’s no national media that is independent from politics in South Korea.Which probably is the reason why Korean’s don’t hesitate using internet as the source of information compared to the Japanese who still has emotional attachment to the print media.

This is why the public is more interested into politics,yet I reserve my judgement to say South Korean democracy the “better”.

In case of Taiwan,the political game is played between Kuomingtang,the Chinese nationalist and Democratic Progressive Party,which is representing majority Taiwanese seeking independence.
Because Taiwan had been ruled by the KMT for more than 50 years,Taiwanese establishment is dominated by decendents of the mainlanders who are KMT acolyte,plus Beijing frequently use threats of military interventions and economic sanctions to influence Taiwanese politics.
Naturally, DPP leader and former Taiwanese president Chen Shui Bian had met constant sabotage from all sectors of the society in his eight years term and couldn’t use the exectuive power that are promised to the president by the constitution.He was also nearly assacinated in 2004 and currently under arrest for corruption during his presidency.

That’s why I don’t adore Taiwanese democracy that much either.

LS’s posts can also be said to be Orientalist. By suggesting that Adamu’s writing should be limited in the themes he discusses because he is a non-Japanese living in Japan, LS homogenizes Japan’s discourse – one of the prime features of Orientalism.

It is easy to use this type of sophistry for anything, the key is making sure that you do it for a reason, like Said’s politically responsible one.

“In Korea and Taiwan, you can say that the public is extremely invested in the political structure”

I have a feeling that it may look this way from a distance, but if we were actually reading as much Korean and Taiwanese material as we were Japanese (and watching TV), we would probably see things very different. With democracy, the cracks start to show when you look up close.

In Korea and Taiwan, you can say that the public is extremely invested in the political structure and have brought the debate about their plural visions for the country into the political framework. Japan is different, maybe not “worse,” but the political subtlety does tend to unnerve those who believe that all culture should basically have some sort of “political” drive and question authority/conventions/power.

Anyway here in Japan,it is the constitution that prevented the opposition from forming a coaliion,which helped long domination of LDP rules.
Problem is this American built constitution is used as somekind of trip wire by the foreign countries and any attempt of revision is being portrayed as the revival of militarism thus the death of post war democracy.
Naturally the liberals and the lefts are comtempt with the status quo,which leads to the unintentional consequece that the oppositions don’t actully try very hard to fight for the power.
The oppositions see their raison d’eter in being the guardian of the constitution.And LDP can take advantage of this mindset by halting their urge of constitutional revision which ultimately means…not changing the system….

In my opinion,no constitutional revisiuon,no two party democracy in Japan.

Probably pointless to argue about what an actualized democracy is (Athens anyone?) as I’m sure that we all have different ideas (did anyone hear what happened in Canada? – the appointee by nepotism of the Queen of England basically prevented the opposition from forming a coalition that could have toppled the PM), but it is ironic that Japan blogs often use Korea as a “better” example while Korea blogs use Japan.

Like busting the ex-president as soon as the new guy takes over?
Don’t exactly think it’s the actualization of democracy for the better,but then,it’s just me.