The results of the 2025 House of Councillors election felt both dramatic and strangely predictable. The ruling Liberal Democratic Party (自由民主党: Jiyū Minshutō), long known for holding together a wide ideological range, has finally lost its balance. What once functioned as a broad umbrella, accommodating both conservative nationalists and moderate reformists, has begun to fall apart from within. The defeat was not a matter of an overwhelming opponent, but rather a slow erosion of trust and coherence.
Under the leadership of Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, the LDP (Liberal Democratic Party) seemed unable to satisfy either wing of its historical support base. The conservative bloc, which once aligned itself with the assertive leadership of the late former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, has moved toward more emotionally charged alternatives like Sanseito (参政党: Party of Do It Yourself), where anger and clarity often replace caution and complexity. At the same time, the moderate or mildly progressive members who once tolerated the LDP for its stability and centrism have found refuge in the Democratic Party for the People (国民民主党: Kokumin Minshutō), which presents itself as pragmatic and socially responsive.
This split is not merely strategic. It signals a deeper problem. The LDP has ceased to be a container for difference. It no longer absorbs internal contradictions as it once did. Instead, it has become defined by its own fatigue, caught between remembering its past and failing to reimagine its future. The loss of its majority in the upper house is not just a numerical shift. It marks the end of an era where one party could convincingly pretend to speak for the entire country.
Why the Base Did Not Budge
Despite the turbulence elsewhere, many political blocs remained remarkably stable. Parties such as the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan (立憲民主党: Rikken Minshutō), the Japanese Communist Party (日本共産党: Nihon Kyosantō), and the Social Democratic Party (社会民主党: Shakai Minshutō) held their ground with little movement. Their strength lies not in sudden public enthusiasm, but in the reliability of organized support.
The CDP (Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan) continues to draw backing from labor unions, public sector workers, and civil rights groups. Its messages do not always reach the broader public, but they resonate deeply with those who see politics as a site of defense rather than innovation. The Japanese Communist Party and the Social Democratic Party function in much the same way. Their supporters are loyal, ideologically consistent, and active. These parties do not grow easily, but they do not easily disappear either.
Reiwa Shinsengumi (れいわ新選組: Reiwa Newly Selected Corps), led by Taro Yamamoto, is a somewhat different case. While still positioned on the left, its energy comes less from legacy organizations and more from emotional identification. It appeals to people, especially younger voters, who feel excluded from the economic order and who are moved by direct, personal language. Reiwa’s candidates speak plainly and emotionally. Their loyalty is earned not through policy white papers, but through the impression of sincerity.
What unites these left-leaning parties is not a shared platform, but a shared structural pattern. Each is anchored by committed supporters. They are steady, sometimes stubborn, and often skeptical of compromise. While the political winds may shift, these anchors do not. In this election, their stability highlighted a contrast. While the ruling coalition collapsed under its own contradictions, these ideological parties stood still, simply because they never tried to accommodate everyone.
Populism Steps In Where Inclusion Fails
The most visible change in this election was the rise of Sanseito. Once a marginal voice, it has surged forward with fourteen seats, surprising even its own sympathizers. This movement, often categorized as nationalist or populist, presents itself as a guardian of Japan’s cultural and moral boundaries. Its messages emphasize tradition, skepticism toward globalization, and a desire to reclaim agency in an uncertain world.
This success did not emerge from nowhere. It was waiting. Many voters, disenchanted with the procedural language of the LDP and unpersuaded by the ideological rigidity of the left, were looking for a voice that sounded honest, even if it was confrontational. Sanseito offered emotional clarity where others offered policy nuance. For those tired of being ignored, this shift felt like a return of visibility.
What makes this movement concerning is not only its substance, but its emotional tempo. It moves quickly. It feeds on anxiety and resentment. And yet it is part of a larger global pattern. Across the world, in the United States, Europe, and beyond, populist parties have stepped into the space where traditional parties failed to make people feel seen. Japan, often viewed as politically stable, is no longer an exception to this trend.
Sanseito’s rise should not be misunderstood as a victory of reasoned conviction. It is a signal. It tells us that something has broken in the connection between ordinary people and institutional politics. And if that disconnection is not addressed with sincerity, more noise will follow.
Disappointment and Integrity
For those who hoped that this election would mark the rise of thoughtful, future-oriented leadership, the results were mixed at best. Three parties carried that hope in different ways: Path to Rebirth (再生の道: Saisei no Michi), Team Mirai (チームみらい: Team Mirai, “Future”), and the Japan Innovation Party (日本維新の会: Nippon Ishin no Kai).
The Japan Innovation Party, led by Hirofumi Yoshimura, performed steadily with seven seats. It remains a regional powerhouse, especially in Osaka, and its messaging about decentralization, fiscal discipline, and administrative streamlining continues to attract a cross-generational audience. Yet it has not yet become a truly national force. Its ambition is clear, but its reach remains geographically uneven.
Team Mirai, founded and led by Takahiro Anno, managed to win one seat through the proportional vote. Anno himself will now enter the Diet, representing a voice that has largely been missing in national politics: quiet, technical, and constructive. His campaign focused not on attacking others, but on identifying bugs in the system. He refused to pander. He simply described what was broken and how it might be repaired. That one seat feels heavier than it looks on paper.
Path to Rebirth, perhaps the most idealistic of the three, failed to win any seats. Despite significant media attention and widespread public respect for Shinji Ishimaru, the party could not secure enough votes. Many commentators have argued that if Ishimaru himself had run, at least one seat would have been won. But he didn’t. And that, in itself, says something.
The Significance of Saying No to Power
Shinji Ishimaru’s decision not to run as a candidate was not tactical. It was philosophical. He has consistently stated that his purpose is to build a culture of public service that does not revolve around individual charisma. He wants politics to be something citizens enter and exit, not something they cling to as a career.
By refusing to run, he remained faithful to the principle that the role should be about responsibility, not visibility. That decision likely cost the party a seat. But it preserved something more important. It preserved the meaning behind the movement. In a political world where people often say one thing and do another, Ishimaru’s consistency stands out.
Some may call it idealistic, or even naïve. But there is something deeply valuable in refusing to use power for its own sake. That restraint, that refusal to become what he criticizes, is part of what gives Path to Rebirth its integrity. Even in defeat, it has not lost its shape.
If politics is only about winning, then all ideals eventually become negotiable. If politics is also about meaning, then sometimes loss is the more faithful outcome. Ishimaru’s decision reminded us that leadership is not always about stepping forward. Sometimes it is about stepping aside so that others can step in.
The Gentle Strength of Team Mirai
Takahiro Anno’s victory may seem small, but it carries symbolic weight. His approach to politics is different. It is careful, soft-spoken, and systemic. He is not interested in tribal loyalty or ideological purity. He wants to make institutions function better, not only for their own sake, but for the people they are meant to serve.
During his campaign, he avoided the language of outrage. He did not perform heroism. He talked about code, infrastructure, inefficiencies, and the invisible layers of daily governance. It was not a thrilling message. But it was honest. And that honesty was enough for one seat.
In a time when political discourse often rewards exaggeration, Anno’s tone felt almost radical in its calm. He focused not on blame, but on repair. He reminded voters that many of our problems are not the result of evil, but of neglect. That, too, is a kind of courage.
If Team Mirai’s example spreads, it could shift the tone of Japanese politics. It offers a vision of participation that is intelligent without arrogance, firm without aggression. In an age of noise, that kind of voice matters.
What I Learned From These Movements
This election did not bring the transformation I had hoped for. The LDP declined, but no single vision replaced it. The ideological left held its ground, but did not reach new audiences. Populism gained, and reformers remained on the edge.
And yet, I find myself grateful. Grateful for the people who still believe that politics can be something more than calculation. Grateful for those who stood not to profit, but to serve. Grateful for people like Ishimaru, who refused to betray their own principles for short-term gain. Grateful for people like Anno, who entered the system not to shout, but to quietly repair.
Democracy may not reward the most thoughtful voices immediately. But those voices still matter. They shape what becomes possible, even when they lose. They remind us that the point of politics is not just to win seats, but to protect the conditions that make civic life possible.
In that sense, this election offered more than disappointment. It offered a glimpse of a different kind of courage. Not the courage of domination, but the courage of restraint. Not the power to conquer, but the strength to serve without spectacle.
That, to me, is the direction worth watching.
Image by Jason Goh
Tom’s Blog 