I believe the entitlement is held by those who determine and control what their society should be, when their next generation are voting with their actions that they don’t want it.

It’s entitled to say those people are ‘Japan’ and the other people there, who want change are not.

1) Doesn't Japan have some kind of democratic system where they can cast their vote and make their choices about the direction of their society in a more concrete form than your arbitrary assumption about meaning of the next generation's actions?

2) The reasons for anything large on a societal level usually have more than one nuanced answer, but I'd like to try and figure out your meaning here. What significant evidence exists that certain things you listed such as Japanese youth not wanting to live in rural areas or youth not making as many babies as previous generations has anything to do with their treatment of foreigners? I don't really see a direct and obvious connection, and in fact these trends seem fairly common in Western youth (with a radically different inclusive culture) as well.

The evidence for dissatisfaction is in the article and in suicide stats found online. The issue I’m raising is that this indicates their democracy does not represent the needs of all its people.

I would argue, this is why their economy has stalled relatively, since the 90s.

Well, the same kind of cultural effects among the young exist in the Western world (the youth want to live in cities, not reproducing as much, problems with suicides, etc) and these are countries that are open and welcoming to foreigners and try and respect everybody of every race/gender/etc.

Therefore, I'm not seeing a strong case for Japan's problems being caused by them not being welcoming to foreigners because other countries are welcoming to foreigners and still have these problems in greater number today.

The suicide rate in the US is significantly higher. Japan's isn't that high compared to other peer nations.