Revisiting Japan’s Democratic Stagnation
Populism is often portrayed as a toxin to democracy—an anti-pluralist, anti-institutional movement that undermines liberal norms. Yet, in certain contexts, it may function more like a bitter medicine: unpleasant and risky, but capable of jolting an eroding democracy back to life. In my previous post, I explored the democratic stagnation and civic disengagement that characterize Japanese politics today. Against that backdrop, Japan’s Reiwa Shinsengumi presents a compelling case for rethinking populism’s role. While commonly labeled as populist due to its anti-elite rhetoric and emotional appeals, Reiwa diverges from conventional definitions in key ways. Its case suggests that populism, when practiced with a commitment to pluralism and civic inclusion, may serve not to erode democracy but to revitalize it.
In a political environment where opposition parties struggle to gain traction and public trust in institutions continues to erode, movements that challenge the status quo while respecting democratic norms become particularly important. Understanding how Reiwa fits—or doesn’t fit—within established definitions of populism can help us distinguish between democratic decay and democratic renewal.
Theoretical Risks of Populism v.s. Reiwa Shinsengumi
Jan-Werner Müller defines populism not just as anti-elitist, but as anti-pluralist: populists claim exclusive representation of “the people” and reject the legitimacy of dissenting views. Sheri Berman similarly warns that populism, while rooted in real democratic grievances, often weakens democratic institutions and enables personalistic rule. Against this backdrop, Reiwa Shinsengumi, a small, left-leaning party led by actor-turned-politician Taro Yamamoto, presents a puzzle. Despite its populist label, Reiwa appears to work toward broadening, rather than narrowing, Japan’s democratic space.
This distinction is essential in a global context where populism is largely equated with democratic backsliding. Movements such as Fidesz in Hungary or Law and Justice in Poland have demonstrated how populist rhetoric can rapidly shift into constitutional manipulation and suppression of dissent. But not all populist-appearing movements have to follow this trajectory. Understanding where Reiwa fits helps clarify what differentiates dangerous populism from potentially constructive forms of democratic pressure.
Grassroots Engagement, not Populist Capture
Founded in 2019, Reiwa is known for its grassroots activism. Yamamoto tours the country holding informal talk events, known as Oshaberi Kai (“chat sessions”), in local municipalities. At these events, he briefly introduces his party and its policies before passing the mic to audience members to ask questions, political or otherwise. He explicitly welcomes skeptics and those unfamiliar with the party, emphasizing that the goal is not propaganda but open conversation. In a society where political discussion is often taboo, these forums aim to normalize civic dialogue and foster free speech.
Before nearly every event, Reiwa also organizes a protest—an uncommon move for political parties in Japan. Yamamoto frames these demonstrations not as confrontational, but as necessary acts to cultivate a political culture where it is okay—even encouraged—to speak out. His goal, as he has said, is to “create a society where our party no longer needs to exist,” underscoring a commitment to institutional and cultural renewal rather than political entrenchment.
These practices—grassroots organizing, direct engagement, and the normalization of protest—are particularly notable given Japan’s historically passive civic culture. Citizens are often taught from a young age to avoid controversial topics such as politics in public settings, and schools typically emphasize memorization over debate. In this context, Reiwa’s methods represent not just a political strategy, but a cultural intervention. The party attempts to reshape the norms that govern democratic participation itself.
Moreover, the content of these conversations is as important as the structure. By allowing anyone to speak, regardless of political knowledge or affiliation, Yamamoto lowers the psychological barriers to participation. This departs sharply from traditional campaign events, which are often top-down and tightly scripted. Reiwa’s events emphasize listening as much as speaking, flipping the usual politician-voter dynamic.
Making the Diet Accessible—Literally
Reiwa’s electoral success also produced tangible institutional change. Upon winning seats in the 2019 Upper House election, the party sent two lawmakers with severe disabilities to the National Diet—an unprecedented move in Japanese politics. In response, the Diet was forced to install ramps, automatic doors, and provide personal aides, making the parliamentary building accessible for the first time. This moment symbolized a broader message Reiwa has championed: Political representation must include those who have long been excluded not only from policy conversations but from the political space itself. Far from being symbolic, the inclusion of lawmakers with disabilities compelled the Japanese state to confront the physical and structural barriers embedded in its own institutions. It was a clear example of how the party’s commitment to inclusion translated into concrete democratic reform. Reform that aligns with pluralist ideals, not populist exclusion.
Populist Style, Pluralist Substance
Japan’s political environment is marked by ever-declining voter turnout, a dominant ruling party, and widespread civic disengagement. In this context, Reiwa’s tactics—emotionally resonant rhetoric, anti-elite critiques, public demonstrations—function not to divide, but to reawaken. They echo what Berman calls populism’s ability to signal elite failure, but without the authoritarian impulse Müller warns against. Reiwa does not claim exclusive moral authority, nor does it delegitimize dissent; instead, it invites it.
A Pluralist Populism?
Reiwa Shinsengumi’s rise suggests that not all populist-style movements are inherently democratic threats. In systems plagued by apathy and elite capture, such movements may serve as democratic medicine, reviving participation and public voice without abandoning pluralism.
Still, this potential must be approached cautiously. Populism is not a cure-all. If unchecked, any emotionally driven movement risks personalism, polarization, or ideological rigidity. But when grounded in pluralist practice—as Reiwa appears to be—populist energy can remind democracies of their roots: ordinary people, actively engaged, with a right to shape their political future.
Müller, Jan-Werner. 2016. What Is Populism? Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 75-104.
Berman, Sheri. 2017. “Populism is a Problem. Elitist Technocrats Aren’t the Solution.” Foreign Policy December 20, 2017.
I found this case study very engaging. I think the discussion around populism’s ability to rally voters and start movements is a needed area of study. I especially appreciated how you contrasted the theoretical concerns raised by Müller and Berman with the practical strategies of Reiwa Shinsengumi, highlighting the party’s grassroots engagement and emphasis on inclusion. The focus of Reiwa seems to highlight a lot of parts of Japanese civic life that differ from other countries, like the U.S. I liked the idea of a party that values dissent and objection rather than echo chamber ideologies. I am curious, however, how sustainable you think Reiwa’s populism can be in the long term. Given the party’s reliance on charismatic voices and anti-elite messaging, is there a risk that the party will fall into the same patterns that other, more destructive populist parties have in the past? What makes Reiwa stand out among its populist siblings to make it the ‘one’ that can fix the mistakes of standard populist practices? Obviously, only time will be able to tell what will happen, but I think there is reason for light skepticism, despite the current wins of the party. I am cautiously optimistic that, as you said, Reiwa could be a “democratic medicine” for Japan. Overall, I thought that your analysis and commentary were extremely engaging and interesting! I am looking forward to seeing where this party lands in the future.