Who's public sacrifice was more powerful.... Jody Wilson-Raybould's or Yukio Mishima's?
Jody Wilson-Raybould was appointed Justics Minister and Attorney General in the Liberal party before she resigned over the SNC-Lavalin affair. The Prime Minister at the time had gone to her in private and asked her to ignore criminal charges brought against his 'friends'. She felt uncomfortable doing so, and informed the public of what was going on which led to her getting essentially thrown out of the liberal party(but re-elected by her constituency). Now she is an Independent MP that is still able to voice her opinion, but is probably viewed askance by most of the other MPs. (I actually find it surprising that Wilson-Raybould did this, because prior to the affair, whenever I saw her on CPAC I found her to be one of the speakers whose expression was most artificially constructed and evasive, uninspired really--- I guess she got sick of suppressing her true voice and couldn't take it any longer?)
Yukio Mishima was an literary artist who missed the good ol' days of Imperialistic rule-- which he considered to be far preferable to the corporate barony that was emerging and controlling the fate of his Nation. He trained himself plus a bunch of young men, in body and mind, and eventually went and stormed a military base and killed a figure, followed by ritualistic seppuku.
Jody Wilson-Raybould has been described by Native Americans sovereigntists as the perfect example of why the system will never have their interests at heart : "We elected a person to represent our belief systems, and look at what happened to her when she tried to stand up for truth. Can we really trust a system like that?"
Most Japanese individuals, when asked (by me: I always quiz Japanese tourists about him when I meet them) say that Yukio Mishima was "Very sad." "very unhappy." But the artistic sectors of the Westernized world praise his defiance as a monumental act.
Both gave up their power to make a public statement, and both, in return have gained both symbolic status and scrutiny. One did so non-violently, by speaking the truth, and one did so violently, by committing to an act.
Both sacrificed for "what was right" and both potentially had ulterior motives (Wilson-Raybould, to gain public trust, and Yukio Mishima to immortalize his artistic works)
Both symbolic acts had little impact on the system as a whole. Wilson-Raybould however presented clear evidence of something we already knew; the cronyism of the elite. Yukio Mishima was able to get his books a wider audience and have people contemplate his viewpoint.
Which of the two do you believe was the "better martyr"?