In recent years, political opponents and the media have approached cabinet scandals as occasions for pursuits of prime ministerial "appointive responsibility." Pinpointing the strategic rationale driving the phenomenon, I show that appointive responsibility operates in two logically opposed forms.
Paper long abstract:
Cabinet scandals and minister resignations happen frequently in Japan. In recent years political opponents and the mass media have approached such cases as occasions for pursuits of the prime minister's "appointive responsibility." Based on a comprehensive source material from the 2006-2012 period, this paper argues that the idea of appointive responsibility has distinct ideological implications. I pinpoint the rhetorical techniques and strategic rationale underlying the phenomenon and show that appointive responsibility operates in two logically opposed forms. Outlining and problematizing both forms, the paper analytically unravels key aspects of a new paradigm of leadership, power, responsibility, and representation in recent Japanese political discourse. Challenging established understandings of what constitutes ideal leadership in Japan, the paper argues that the contours of "proper" executive leadership emerge from repeated signs of its operative absence and functional impossibility.