The political lie: Why your favorite candidate became ambiguous

Have you noticed the pattern? A passionate election candidate sharply criticizes the government, wins the seat, and then starts making deliberately ambiguous remarks, seemingly losing their convictions. You feel betrayed, thinking, “If only I were in charge, I’d deliver absolute justice!”

While I won’t defend every politician, I believe the decent ones are destined to be ambiguous. Absolute justice is a myth. Utilitarianism demands the greatest good for the greatest number, but this “tyranny of the majority” often fractures society. Decent politicians understand that maintaining coexistence requires not confronting issues head-on, but finding a common, ambiguous ground that avoids deep, lasting resentment. In a diverse society, ambiguity is a necessary evil—a survival mechanism.

The genetic curse: Why Japanese ambiguity is an ancient wisdom

In terms of embracing ambiguity, the Japanese are world champions. Rarely is a majority vote cast in a company meeting; leaders actively avoid imposing their opinions. Decisions are almost always made through an atmosphere of ambiguous consensus. As a younger person, this irritated me intensely; I saw it as profound irresponsibility.

However, I now believe that workplace ambiguity is an ancient wisdom for organizational harmony. Whenever I see a young employee who is frustrated by the ambiguity and pushes back against it, I feel an urge to bow deeply and apologize (dogeza) to my former bosses and seniors.

This trait may even be genetic. According to research, Japanese people have a higher prevalence of S-alleles of the serotonin transporter which is linked to heightened anxiety and self-torture. This is theorized to be the result of natural selection unique to our isolated island nation, which is constantly battered by tsunamis and earthquakes. In short: we are genetically too anxious and scared to thrive in an environment defined by clear, confrontational accountability.

Ambiguity, therefore, is not a failing of character; it’s a necessary cultural cushion.

The backlash wisdom: From nervous people to durable wood

If we are so pathologically anxious and avoid clear responsibility, how do we maintain quality? The answer is: We don’t need external accountability. Our genetic predisposition toward anxiety (self-torture) provides the internal quality control.

This concept of strategic, necessary looseness is mirrored perfectly in our craft. Consider the joints in wooden furniture. Some joint parts must have backlash—a small, intentional amount of space or ambiguity—to absorb the natural expansion and contraction of wood due to temperature and humidity. Without that “play,” the wood would tear itself apart.

The modern age of digitalization relentlessly seeks to eliminate all ambiguity, demanding rigidity and instant accountability. Yet, physical things that are designed to endure and coexist—whether they are human organizations, ancient wooden temples, or high-quality furniture—still require that small, vital space for ambiguity to absorb our differences. That small, hidden gap is what ensures long-term harmony.

---

---