The Seattle Protest at the end of November, 1999 was numerous and had great impact through the whole world. Protests broke out in big cities like London and Geneva but not in Japan.

When I was walking down the street in Ginza last week I came across a demonstration on American base in Okinawa. They were marching slowly in straight line. It was quite easy to note that few people were looking confident and determined with the rest reluctant and tired. Only those who were leading the mass in front was exclaiming aloud against the base through amplifiers. But then I feel something weird about what I'm seeing. It's not about an old man talking on the phone laughing in the demo nor the right wings yelling at the poor feeble protesters 'Get out of Japan you betrayers!!!!'. It is that, I eventually figure out, there is not a single young man.

Do young people in Japan not protest because the major medias hide the true factor of things and we do not know anything about it? I do not think so because in many countries governments control information but people still go and get under-covered stories and protest if needed. Not having information for the control of the media is not always directly related to ignorance. Suppose the case in South Korea in 2008 when president Lee, newly elected, declared his policy concerning the free trade agreement, privatization, and the ownership of Dok-do. People including mothers with children, students and their friends, and old people started none-violence protest with candle light. It was responded by government with violence and by media with distortion of the truth. Only those who were actually in the protest know that the protesters were physically assaulted and there were 50,000 of them instead of 500. In spite of the distortion and concealment of the fact, voices of people spread and more and more people gathered in the protest. This indicates that media control can be defeated if we try ourselves to get to know what really is happening around us. Then what is the difference?

I remembered the words I frequently hear 'I'll do if you do.' People wait for someone to start it but do not be the one who starts. Even when someone starts something they will watch it from distance if many people are gathering around it. There was a TV program questioning why young people can not eat lunch by themselves. The answer from students from some university was that they do not want to be regarded to be a lonely person or not to have friends. They do not want to be alone not because they themselves do not like it but because they are too sensitive to people's eyes that might not even be looking at them. I call this kind of attitude passive attitude.

With this attitude how can a protest of 50,000 be possible but only one of old people marching in long but narrow line? The main difference is the attitude of people, especially the young ones, caring what seemingly other people do and not caring what seemingly other people do not.