Spielberg Adapting Ghost in the Shell into Live-Action 3D!

First of all, I’m not an Asian expatriate as you unjustifiably assumed. Second, I didn’t cite specific examples because I’m operating under the assumption that you’re not as familiar with comparative constitutional law as I am. Basically I didn’t feel like explaining how the two systems of government work in contrast with each other. But since you asked, I’ll explain briefly why the US wouldn’t make a good setting for a Ghost in the Shell feature.

1) Why the Laughing Man storyline wouldn’t work.

The FDA is too dissimilar from the Drug Evaluation Board depicted in SAC. In contrast to SAC’s approval system, no single person makes a decision on approval or denial of approval. Additionally, not only does the FDA employ its own system of testing new products, it often relies on findings of independent laboratory trials in making its decisions.

The American DEA is not an enforcement branch of the FDA. The DEA is a subordinate organization of the Department of Homeland Security, while the FDA falls under the purview of the Department of Health and Human Services. Unlike SAC, the FDA can’t just call in the DEA to deal with its problems without jumping some major constitutional hurdles. Jumping those hurdles would draw too much attention.

Yakushima’s actions can’t happen in the U.S. In a federal system, legislators do not and in fact are constitutionally forbidden from wielding powers reserved to the executive branch. He wielded the commander-in-chief power by calling in the Umibozu against Section 9, and he also wielded chief executive powers when he directed the DEA to raid the Sunflower Society and to kill Imakurusu. The Secretary General of the Japanese Diet is an office most similar to Senate Majority Leader or Speaker of the House, both of which are legislative positions. These actions require collusion by far too many people if one were to try to cover it up, and given the scrutiny under which the members of the highest level of government live here, it’s just not possible. Here’s a bit of cultural trivia on that point: Japanese citizens trust their government a lot more than we trust ours. There’s nowhere near the same level of press scrutiny on leaders there.

Serrano, as a whistleblower, would have immunity from prosecution for his actions in the conspiracy. Since the reason for his silence was fear of going to prison, and his company would be hurt by the conspiracy if it continued, he would have no reason not to come forward immediately.

2) Why the Individual Eleven storyline wouldn’t work

The Cabinet Intelligence Service would never exist. Again, this type of organization would violate the separation of powers. It’s a creation of the legislature, which spies on government activities as well as private citizens. Congress would exceed its authority in even the attempt to create such an agency. Even as an executive branch agency, because it lacks a clearly mandated purpose and any governmental oversight, the CIS would still be illegal.

Nuclear materials would never be left behind. A major point in the 2nd Gig’s conspiracy is the theft of fissionable material from a nuclear power plant in bombed out Tokyo. There are several regulatory agencies in place in the US that keep tabs on such materials. Also, owing to the risk of having it fall into terrorist hands, the government would reclaim the materials itself, and would do so immediately after the plant goes offline rather than waiting several years to do it.

The refugee policies would fail judicial scrutiny. The 14th Amendment and the US Code prohibit governmental discrimination on the basis of national origin. The society of the US may be a bit insular, but (and here’s another bit of Japanese culture for you) the Japanese are FAR more insular than the US. Sentiments won't run as hot as quickly, which would give the government time to react and find solutions.

At this point, I feel I’ve made my argument that conspiracies which work in a country with a one-branch government would not work in a nation with separated powers, so I’ll move on.

3) Cultural issues affecting the characters

Batou, Ishikawa, and Saito all joined Section 9 after having combat experience, to varying degrees, with or against the Major. In the US, there is a military policy that precludes women from serving in military posts that are likely to engage in combat. If the Major were prevented from seeing combat under this policy, the three Section 9 members would not have met her, and would likely not respect her in the same way (especially Batou, who seems to be something of a sexist meathead even after having known the Major for years). This changes the dynamic of the team, and means it’s not the same Section 9 we know and love.

Aramaki would likely not hold his office in the US. Section 9 is an agency subordinate to the Ministry of Home Affairs, which is roughly equivalent to the American Department of Homeland Security. No matter what the department, he’s an appointee rather than having been elected. In Japan, an elderly man holding an appointed position in government simply because he doesn’t want to retire is normal. In the US, those in the position to appoint someone else to Chief of Section 9 wouldn’t “respect his honor” and let him retire on his own. Someone his age, upon the election of someone to whom he isn’t politically favorable, would be replaced. He’s not seen as “respected elder,” he’s seen as “senile old man,” no matter what his competence may be.

You're free to disagree, but remember that calling someone's opinion "crap" simply because of who you happen to think they are is not conducive to civilized discourse.