“…The difficulty was that democratic impulses manifested on the grass-roots level -in the rice riots, the growth of labor unions and tenant farmers' associations, the universal suffrage movement, and the movement for a proletarian political party-remained divorced from the political parties, which were widely viewed as corrupt and closely tied to large landowners and the huge financial interests of the zaibatsu. In the words of Kato Shuichi, "The participation of the mass in politics still rested largely on votes in elections which were not much more than mere formalities" (Kato 1974:229)-The oligarchical politics of the Meiji period had indeed given way to "party rule" (Duus 1970(Duus , 1968; nevertheless, as the parties became more activist, they were increasingly integrated into the political establishment, and the maneuvers of their leaders became barely distinguishable from the machinations of the genro, military men, and bureaucrats who had dominated the Meiji era. As the masses remained disenchanted and disengaged from political parties pursuing separate interests, those seeking political action from below were finally compelled to generate reformist, and then radical, alternatives to the Taisho political framework.…”