This chapter examines actions and narratives that undermined Japan’s energy security, contrasts them with policies adopted by neighboring countries, and critiques the misuse of international institutions. It culminates in a call to learn from Germany’s legal framework.

2016-04-02
There was an article on the internet that appeared to prove that Masayoshi Son possesses not even the slightest sense of patriotism toward Japan.
Taken in by such a man’s smooth talk, Naoto Kan and Asahi Shimbun shattered, in a single night, Japan’s energy policy, which forms the very foundation of national security.
While Japan acted with such folly, South Korea and China, at exactly the same time, formally decided on policies diametrically opposed to Japan’s—massive expansions of nuclear power generation.
They did so while smirking at the absurd politics under which electricity from solar power companies launched by Son would be purchased at twice the global price for twenty years at the public’s expense.
To make matters worse, all nineteen new nuclear power plants to be built by South Korea are to be constructed along the coast of the Sea of Japan.
In order to point out the absurdity of Koreans reporting alleged hate speech by Koreans to the United Nations, prompting UNESCO—funded largely by Japan—to issue human rights recommendations against Japan,
one must consider their repeated refrain, “Learn from Germany.”
In Germany itself, far from a handful of obscure groups known only to a few questionable figures in Japan, fully legitimate political parties engage in hate speech comparable to that of neo-Nazis.
In response, the German upper house petitioned the courts to declare them illegal.
Yet even so, not a single German went to the United Nations to denounce their own country—a fact I sought to make known to Japan and the world.
In the course of this research, I learned that Germany had long ago outlawed the German Communist Party.
Accordingly, I proposed—truly in the spirit of “learning from Germany”—that the Japanese Communist Party should be immediately outlawed.
I am reminded each time I read articles like those in the previous chapter that this proposal was, in fact, a Nobel Prize–level discovery.
For what communist parties do is simple: dictatorship—along with speech control at home and the sowing of division in other countries.
Though I have digressed somewhat, the article mentioned at the outset will be introduced in the next chapter.