悪しきものはすべて相互につながっており、いずれの悪しきものも他のいずれかの悪しきものの原因になりがちである。とりわけ、疲労は非常にしばしば妬み（ねたみ）の原因である。・・・。従って、妬みを減らす方法の１つは、疲労を減らすことである。しかし、はるかに重要なことは、本能にとって満足のいく生活を確保することである。
All bad things are interconnected, and any one of them is liable to be the cause of any other; more particularly fatigue is a very frequent cause of envy. ... One of the ways of diminishing envy, therefore, is to diminish fatigue. But by far the most important thing is to secure a life which is satisfying to instinct.
Source: The Conquest of Happiness, 1930, Chap.6:Envy, by Bertrand Russell.
More info.: https://russell-j.com/beginner/HA16-080.HTM
＜寸言＞
今度の参議院選挙で多くの政党が重視している争点は、「物価高対策」「コメ対策」「少子化対策」の３つです。政党によっては、「年金対策」「就職氷河期世代対策」「外国人労働者対策」を掲げる政党もあります。本来なら大きな問題になっていたはずの裏金議員や企業・団体献金の問題は、争点として取り上げられることがほとんどなくなってしまいました。
しかし、忘れてはならない問題の一つに、「働き方改革」があります。過労死や過労が原因の自殺といった不幸な事態を繰り返さないためには、労働時間の規制が必要であり、少なくとも（勤務時間中の休憩を確保する）「勤務時間インターバル制度」は必須です。ところが、残念なことに、与党の自民党や与党寄りの保守政党は、連続労働時間の規制には消極的で、どちらかというと雇用者側や（経団連や日経連などの）経営者団体よりの姿勢をとっているように見えます。つまり、自民党や参政党などは、「働きたい人の意欲をさまたげてはいけない」と主張をし、「労働時間の削減」や「勤務時間インターバル制度」には余り熱心とは言えません。それは自民党や参政党の選挙公約にも表れています。
たとえば、2025年の参議院選に向けた自民党の選挙公約の第一の柱は「強い経済―GDP1000兆円を実現。国民の所得を5割増しに！」であり、その中に「働く人が安心して挑戦でき、個人の意欲と能力を最大限活かせる社会を実現するため、"働きたい改革"を推進。人手不足の解消にも努めます。」 という主張が載っており、「働きたい改革」という言葉は象徴的です。
一方、参政党の公約にも「過労死対策」などの記述はなく、財源など無視して「消費税を段階的に廃止し、社会保険料の負担も軽減する。国民負担率を上限35%に抑え、給料の3分の2は手取りで残す。」と現実性に乏しい理想を掲げる一方で、「男系による皇位継承の堅持」「選択的夫婦別姓制度導入への反対」「LGBT理解増進法や同性婚への反対」など、排他的とも取れる主張が目立ちます。
このような主張する参政党の支持が急速に増しているのは理解できません。SNS上の不確かな情報やデマに影響され、冷静な判断を欠いている人が少なくないように思われますが、皆さんはどう思われているでしょうか？
In the upcoming House of Councillors election, the three main issues emphasized by many political parties appear to be "measures against rising prices," "rice policy," and "countermeasures for declining birthrates." Depending on the party, other key issues include "pension reform," "support for the employment ice-age generation," and "foreign labor policy."
One issue that should have been central -- but has now almost disappeared from the main stage -- is the problem of slush funds among lawmakers and corporate or organizational political donations.
However, we must not forget the issue of work-style reform. To prevent further tragedies such as karoshi (death from overwork) or suicide caused by excessive working hours, regulations on working hours are essential. At the very least, the implementation of a working time interval system -- which ensures adequate rest during working hours -- is indispensable.
Unfortunately, the ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and other conservative parties aligned with it have taken a passive stance on regulating continuous work hours. They appear to lean more toward the interests of employers and major business organizations like Keidanren and Nikkeiren.
In other words, parties such as the LDP and the Sanseito argue that "the motivation of those who want to work should not be discouraged," and they show little enthusiasm for reducing working hours or implementing the working time interval system. This attitude is evident in their election manifestos.
For instance, the LDP's 2025 House of Councillors election manifesto opens with the slogan: "A strong economy -- Achieve 1,000 trillion yen GDP. Increase national income by 50%." Within this vision, they state: "To build a society where workers can take on challenges with peace of mind, and where individual motivation and ability are maximized, we will promote a 'work-willingness reform.' We will also strive to address labor shortages."
The phrase "work-willingness reform" is quite symbolic.
Meanwhile, Sanseito's manifesto makes no mention of measures to prevent karoshi. Instead, it offers idealistic promises without addressing funding sources -- such as phasing out the consumption tax, reducing the burden of social insurance premiums, and capping the national burden rate at 35%, while ensuring that workers retain two-thirds of their salaries as net income.
At the same time, the party emphasizes exclusionary positions such as "maintaining male-line imperial succession," "opposing the introduction of a selective married surname system," and "opposing both the LGBT Understanding Promotion Act and same-sex marriage." These stances stand out as especially restrictive.
It is difficult to understand why a party like Sanseito, with such views, is rapidly gaining support. It seems that quite a few people are being swayed by uncertain or false information on social media and are making judgments without adequate reflection. What do you think?