03/16/2010 (3:09 pm)
Should JAPAN be selective about asylum and immigration?
Before concentrating on Japan, let us focus on multi-ethnic and mutli-racial nations, and then see what problems this may bring to Japan.
Now it is clear that the United States is the most dynamic economic nation in the world, yet her foundation was mainly based on massive Christian migration which fused together the sucess that became the United States. Of course other migrants went to this land, notably Jews and the Chinese, and of course slaves were taken against their will; yet the binding factor of the United States was a shared Christian heritage and the need to keep religion out of government.
Yet the United States, like France, the United Kingdom, and other multi-ethnic nations in modern times are plagued with enormous social problems. For example Beirut and the Lebanese civil war was bloody; yet the entire total dead in this conflict relates to the same amount of murders that takes place every year in the United States. And crime in major cities in the UK and France are real problems, while many communities are divided on religous or ethnic grounds. At the same time drug problems are major issues and high crime rates.
If we look at Indonesia and Nigeria, both multi-ethnic and multi-religious, then it is clear that these nations are divided by Islam and Christianity, and ethnic groups within these nations of the same religion also clash. For example Aceh Muslims are being killed by the Indonesian armed forces, while tensions remain in the Spice Islands and West Papua between Christians and Muslims.
Therefore, multi-ethnic nations and multi-religious nations can create countless negative problems; and given this, shouldn't Japan be selective about immigration and asylum in order to maintain confucian ethics of social order, which is fused with Shinto and Buddhist ways in Japan?
This implies that Japan should allow skilled workers if shortages are apparent in certain sectors. While asylum could be based on shared Buddhist values. Given this, asylum and immigration could be focused on Chinese migrants/asylum seekers, Koreans (high Christian population), and other nations like Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam which are mainly Buddhist.
By doing this, Japan will preserve her confucian ethics of social harmony which is fused with Shinto and Buddhism. At the same time, skilled workers would benefit Japan and not be a drain on resources.
Of course negative attitudes towards the Chinese and Koreans within Japan would have to be tackled. Yet this policy may benefit Japan!
Lee Jay Walker Dip BA MA
You start off by saying it's ok for Japan to stay Japanese, and decide their own immigration policy.
You end by saying you can't get in and they're all jerks?
I said Japan can decide to make whatever policies it wants in regard to immigration, nobody else has the right to decide on Japan but the Japanese, i didnt say i agreed with it.
You fail.
It kind of caught me off guard.
Well, besides the impracticality (economically self-sufficient?) of your idea, I think, this is not really fitting the essence of the right on asylum.
Hardly a concentration camp if a whole island thats got plenty of food and shelter is given up for them, bossel dont be fooled.
Asylum is for the persicuted not a handy way to sneak into a country like its ussually abused for.
All asylum needs to provide is a safe location with all the basic human needs for the asylum seeker to live in safety and relative happyness, un-molested until such a time as they may return.
If they want to immigrate to countries, well, thats what immigration laws and the proper official routes to immigrate are for.
Also some islands are fairly big, i know your in germany so you dont have many of them but, their hardly tiny concentration camps.
Some of you guys are intimidated by a multi ethnic nation. Some of you are ignorant to the fact that there are nations out there such as Canada that are a complete success story when it comes to immigrants because Canada is one of the best countries to live in, due the fact that immigrants are the ones that help build this great nation. Yeah we do have our problems no doubt but if Japan looks at Canada as an example they will have more Pakistani's, Sri lankins, Jamaicans, Indian and others from around the world making Japan the # 1 2 or 3 nation just like Canada. I am teaching my Japanese students about black history and the benifits of others coming into your nation and making it better then it is now and they are listening.
FAILED.
You sound exactly like those harping american patriots with lots of nice sounding buzz but little fact, but your a Canadian, you have even less basis to be all rpoud and puffed up then Americans.
No-ne cares if Canada is full of purplians.
That's true, actually. A lot of people do think that foreigners are taking Germans' jobs. But most people know that this is not really the case.
No its true, its just their taking jobs germans feel are below them, or their simply too lazy to take themselves.
If you think your too good for the likes of a crappy cleaners job, a foreigner will be more then happy to take it.
The US has only developed into a super-power since mass-immigration started, and it is widely recognised that immigration has been one of the keys to that success.
Failed.
It was Japan pushing America suddenly into world war 2 that made it a big success.
And what with blacks fighting for equal rights, japanese put away in detention camps, indians being abused and finally thrown into waste-land reservations, the immigrant communities all hiding in their own neighbourhoods of a city, america is hardly even close to the textbook example of multi-racial and cultural unity and success.
I know americans have been brought up to believe their country's ass smell's of roses and the sun shines out your ass but honestly, the united states has never been perfect.
Nothnig wrong with immigration and multi-ethnicity if a conutry is willing to make it work, still its hardly a crime if you want to keep your country for your own people, sure, it looks a bit selfish, but that could be said for the fgluttony of the west when thrid world people starve every day.
If Japan honetsly wants to stay fully japanese, then good luck to it,maybe the birth rate will come round suddenly.
Theres the vast majority of the world and at least two continents are fairly open to multi-culturalism, if Japan doesnt want us, then f**k it, no law requiring us to live there.
Still if you want to no harm in trying.
I probably cant live their myself, you need a college degree or some **** like that just to get a job....im sure it will look really great when my girlfriends future husband cant go to work because Japan has denied me the right to based on a ****** peice of paper. :/
Suffice to say if she doesnt want to live in the UK chances are its over.
Thanks alot japan you jerks.
You are a optimist! :giggle:
Europe will suicide with immigration tollerance.
I totally agree. If only more European politicians could understand that...
Asylum has been used and abused in the western countries and a large proportion of asylum seekers are little more than legal immigrants
.
So you're saying that the tide of foreignern hordes washing upon the shores of the Americas will destabilize it, simply by force? You're probably not the first person to make this assumption... There simply needs to be a set of fair & humane immigration laws that deal with those who want to honestly integrate into the country. I find it a shame that a good portion of foreign residents chose to speak to their children in their native languages first, and English only secondary... Often, the parents are not even able to speak English and use their children as proxies... In Japan, raising a child like this would be considered not simply ludicrous, but almost like a form of developmental retardation.
I am saying that even the most ardent supporter of immigration cannot deny the enormous problems that will come with 700 million new people in america of differing ethnicities, cultures, religions etc. etc. It very well may prove to be utterly ruinous to the country. It will largely depend on the culture of the nation, but with so many different cultures and interests, it will be very hard to have anything on a wide scale but a shared lowest comman denominator and factional interests based on race, language, and perhaps religion. After the movements of the 1960's we had all hoped and expected that race would cease to be such a prevailing motive and yet racial tensions between blacks, whites, and hispanics are probably worse now than they were in the 1970's and 1980's. Perhaps the situation can improve but the extremists are working overtime these days to polarize the various groups.
Yes, in Russia and the former Soviet Union, there is also a deep rooted amount of racism towards many different peoples... So, motives like this aren't good for dealing w/ Immigration... simply because it makes you feel better about yourselves as a nation.
There are many prejudices and biases among peoples of all nations.
I have travelled a good deal and all peoples have at least some bias and prejudices based upon race and culture.
Most africans, chinese, japanese and indians that I have met would fit into modern definitions of racist. if I were to try to become a zimbaweian, a chinese, a korean, a japanese I would always suffer from the fact that racially and culturally I am not quite "one of them".
I would point out that the Russian people have lived under the most dire circumstances for 100乫s of years. To them, issues of national identity and culture are not mere intellectual exercises. They have felt the sting and the horror of culture gone sour, of invasions, and have experienced the darkest side of man乫s potential for tyranny. I think it is understandable for them to be reluctant to cavalierly introduce the wild card of multiculturalism and excessive immigration to their country. The Russian people like any other people have the right to self determination. If they wish to remain a people that is their right. This does not mean that they necessarily hate other nations or other peoples.
Japan, like the United States makes descisions on immigration in order to not just preserve a type of culture, but to improve it in the future... This 100 years back and forth nonsense is simply that, nonsense..
I don't think that it is nonsense... culture doesn't just happen. But to a rootless american, I can see why it might seem nonsense.
Japanese subtleties and customs developed over centuries. They are customs and subtleties which could not have possibly developed in a country like the united states. The incomparably high artistic developments in japan could only come about in a nation with centuries of living tradition passed down and refined from generation to generation. In the united states, because of the nature of its society whenever anything is constellated it is quickly overthrown and very little of real value is ever created. In a country of 300 million people the question why the majority of America乫s artists are the worst in the world answers itself, if you take a look at the culture. Culture does need to move forward, but it can't develop in a vacuum and spring up from nothingness. High culture is always based on the developments of precursers and traditions. It is quite possible and even likely for culture to move backwards especially when you are dealing with the masses and the great numbers of the world. America had a few small beginings of a very real, distinct, and dynamic culture with Ralph Waldo Emerson, Walt Whitman, and the like, but it has come to nothing.
The reason people are so facinated by japan is the culture.
*I'd like to note that language-adoption should be a minimum requirement for immigration to a country, and the United States fails completely in this aspect as far as immigration is concerned.
I would agree with you that at least a basic requirement for a nation is language. If we don't have that than any kind of national unity is out of the question. Clearly something is going to have to pull people together if it is going to work. We are rushing headlong into massive and unprecedented changes which will change the entire ethnic and cultural makeup of america over a very short period of time. Given man's history, at the very least, we should admit that it will be very problematic. If we are going to do this, at the very least we need to go into it with our eyes wide open. I will be honest when I tell you that I personally fear the world that we are bequeathing to our decendants. Each generation of americans, up until this one, has expected that their generation would do a little better than the previous one. I don't think most american's feel that way anymore. If we listen carefully to what is going on in the public schools where incidentally 1 out of 3 students in california now drops out, in the universities, and in the newspapers I think we can understand why. What little national culture we ever had is falling to pieces, but it is not being replaced by something better.
Whether or not something constellates that can move america where it needs to be remains to be seen... but a nation is only as good as the quality and the psychological health of its people. Right now in the prototype of multiculuralism, los angeles, people have hunkered down into enclaves. Most people here have very little sense of community, or trust and anyone who is able sends their children to private schools. If the los angeles of today is the future of america, it is going to be an ugly future. Whether or not we can turn all this dross and all these disparate elements into gold remains to be seen. I am not for homogeneity, but some things have to pull a people and a nation together or else you have anarchy, civil war etc. etc.
If the situation in los angeles were different I would say so... but having been all over the world I think I am in a relatively good position to diagnose what is wrong with los angeles. You can't look at press releases and travel brochures, you have to go on the streets and among the people. I would say that the average man on the street of all races in los angeles has a deep sense of dislocation, fear and disquiet in this city -- they are trying to escape, to "get away". Most of them feel the only way to do that is to make lots of money.
After reading all the massages above, I had a notion that Turks are much more welcome to Japan than any other nationalities, or is it easy for my friends just because they are grad students?
And also my friends are advicing me to join them, i am thinking of it now... They say Japanese people very much resemble Turks and that i will have little cultural problem than that of Americans or Europeans...
If Japans do not apply precautions, Japan will be the second mainland of Turks in 50 years... :) :cool:
Part One: Here (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=17&ItemID=9778)
Part Two: ...here (http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=9779)
Here is at least one of the threads started by Maciamo:
http://www.jref.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1055
Personally, I don't feel that this some sort of issue that should even be debated. Accepting those who seek asylum due to unjust threat to their very lives is a basic tenet of the ideals of human rights, & should be followed by any country which wishes to respect and preserve those rights.
It's sadly coincidental that it was a Japanese woman whom recently tried to abuse the Asylum laws in order to preserve her stay within Australia... The thread in which I wrote about this particular subject is also somewhere here on JREF.
If you haven't read these articles on Migration (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/special/migration/) from the BBC, please take a moment and have a look.
Reading Jihadjay's list of problems and solutions, I can only see how the proposed cure will make the patient even sicker.
shouldn't Japan be selective about immigration and asylum in order to maintain confucian ethics of social order, which is fused with Shinto and Buddhist ways in Japan? Japan does not guide its immigration policy by politico-religious associations. The above concepts you mention are nebulious even to the Japanese themselves. The average person does not walk around asking themselves if this or that fits into their "confucian ethics of social order." It is counterproductive to superimpose a system of exclusion based on a philiosophy that hasn't been activly supported since around 1868. Undoubtably Japanese culture has been influenced and shaped by the things you mention, but saying Japan should guide immigration by long-inactive philospohies is like saying Old World Puritanism should sweep America because the original immigrants were hard-core Puritans. Time and people change. We should not pigeonhole Japan into some romantic ideal.
This implies that Japan should allow skilled workers if shortages are apparent in certain sectors. Japan has shown a general inability to act fast in economic matters. Just look at the banking system. Now imagine having to retool not only an immigration system but also a social structure to attract and retain migrant workers. By the time Japan selectivly opens its doors and closes them again, the damage would have already been done and the skilled labor too late to fix any problem quickly. To respond effectivly to market pressures, you need a pool of workers to draw from. This can only be done by allowing and encouraging controlled immigration consistantly and over a sustained period of time.
While asylum could be based on shared Buddhist values. Given this, asylum and immigration could be focused on Chinese migrants/asylum seekers, Koreans (high Christian population), and other nations like Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam which are mainly Buddhist. To start with, this ignores the fact that Japanese Buddhism is very different from Buddhism in the other countries you mention. Most Japanese people would even seem un-religious in comparison. Plus, when you start granting asylum on relgious grounds, you polarize the world into political and social spheres based on a belief system - even more so than it already is. We are already having enough trouble getting along; we don't need to draw further lines between us.
By doing this, Japan will preserve her confucian ethics of social harmony which is fused with Shinto and Buddhism. At the same time, skilled workers would benefit Japan and not be a drain on resources.The people in Japan I have come across who think this way, would rather see no immigration at all. The others don't feel foreigners are a threat to "Japanese-ness." If Japan want's to protect its culture, they needs to start preserving it themsleves. I have met fewer groups that are better at concreting over their history and ignoring the past. A group that consists of less than 2% of the total population is the least of Japan's problems when it comes to issues of cultural identity.
Periods of migration have always caused concern within a host nation at first. To quote Dr. Shrover of Leiden University "Over time, the settled population has feared that newcomers would dilute the original culture, spoil the morals, steal their women (not their men of course) and bastardise the language...Fear of migrants rests upon the fear of change, and especially changes to culture. Culture is, however, not a fixed concept. Cultures change continuously over time. The cultures as we know them today are the result of centuries of migration. But at least in Europe (apparently), two or three generations after the initial migration, people are no longer viewed as a problem. This is because each time new groups of migrants arrived, they were considered even more problematic and different then their predecessors. Hardly a solution, but it shows that over time a group can be assimilated into the larger national body if given half a chance.
The problem with Japan is that the government, with an insular mindset, wants little to do with any group of immigrants - from Asia, Europe, Africa, North America, or Mars. This is not due to some high-flying ideal of preserving Japanese culture or history, but just plain dis-ease with progressive change.
Japan is no paradise and neither are western nations. It is a grave, grave oversimplification to say immigration = social decline. History just has not shown that to be true. Any mass migration causes tensions, but given enough time, the host nation come out stronger and better for the trouble (in ways too tangental to go into here - check out that BBC article).
It always helps to remember when looking at social issues in Japan that society went from a pseudo-feudal footing to full-modern in about 40 years. It took Europe around 400 years. By the end of the 1800's Japan was taking on world powers and winning.
However, it is easy to politically and economically reorganize a nation. Social change always takes much longer. I won't go into the English Civil Wars and the century or so it took to establish in practice the rights of man, but the point is you cannot expect a nation to come out of complete isolation and be on an even social footing in a century for what others have been working on much, much longer.
If Japan honetsly wants to stay fully japanese, then good luck to it.....
...
Suffice to say if she doesnt want to live in the UK chances are its over.
Thanks alot japan you jerks.
How can you reconcile the first two statements with the last.
You start off by saying it's ok for Japan to stay Japanese, and decide their own immigration policy.
You end by saying you can't get in and they're all jerks?
Personally, I don't feel that this some sort of issue that should even be debated. Accepting those who seek asylum due to unjust threat to their very lives is a basic tenet of the ideals of human rights, & should be followed by any country which wishes to respect and preserve those rights.
It's sadly coincidental that it was a Japanese woman whom recently tried to abuse the Asylum laws in order to preserve her stay within Australia... The thread in which I wrote about this particular subject is also somewhere here on JREF.
Well, quite clearly yuko the Japanese don乫t want a lot of immigration in their country and they don乫t want to become a dumping ground for the worlds poor.
In this day and age that is a pretty big ground with the world population at 6 billion and expected to rise to 9 billion by the year 2050.
I do think that, for example, if America continues down the
road she is going with projections of 1 billion people by the year 2100 largely from immigration from 3rd world countries America may become virtually unlivable. It is a legitimate topic.
I think that Japan, like Russia who is also careful about immigration, have a history of what it means to be a defeated nation and a defeated people. They also understand the importance of being a unified people in times of trouble. I think the Japanese have a right to self determination. When a natural disaster strikes a country like japan, everybody pulls together. When a natural disaster strikes america, people shoot at the rescue helicopters and loot the city.
To say that the Japanese have no right to debate the issue is flat out wrong. The Japanese, in any event, are always very careful about the things they do 乧 I believe they have chosen a wise course of action, the only sane and far sighted option available to them. A culture like japan thinks 100乫s of years backwards and 100乫s of years forward. The United States with 200 short years of history can barely think 5 years ahead.
I'm sorry, but despite western criticism and western liberal values, I think the japanese are very wise on this issue.
On the contrary: if Europe doesn't go for immigration, that would be suicide (on the long run). Eg. the German population would be shrinking without immigration. There are estimates that population will fall from 82 million now to 73 million in 2050. The German pension system is quite stable for now, but problems will increase the less payers & the more beneficiaries there are.
Similar developments are going on (& projected for the future) all over Europe (& in Japan), German population growth at the moment is -0.1%, the Europe-wide average is -0.2%.
BTW, Mandylion's link to the BBC is really recommendable!
Bugger me! You mean something like elaborate concentration camps?
Well, besides the impracticality (economically self-sufficient?) of your idea, I think, this is not really fitting the essence of the right on asylum.
At around 130 million inhabitants in Japan, that's about 890 people per square mile. with 300 million inhabitants, the US's population density is one tenth of that. Assuming that the US population does more than triple in the next century (to 1 billion), the population density would still be only about 270 people per square mile. That's still less than a third of Japan, assuming the population of Japan remains unchanged (and that we're not all under water by 2100...)
Or was the implication that such a population boom brought on by rampant immigration would lower the standard of living because said immigrants would bring their quality of life to the US (as someone said, "a dumping ground for the worlds poor")?
At around 130 million inhabitants in Japan, that's about 890 people per square mile. with 300 million inhabitants, the US's population density is one tenth of that. Assuming that the US population does more than triple in the next century (to 1 billion), the population density would still be only about 270 people per square mile. That's still less than a third of Japan, assuming the population of Japan remains unchanged (and that we're not all under water by 2100...)
Or was the implication that such a population boom brought on by rampant immigration would lower the standard of living because said immigrants would bring their quality of life to the US (as someone said, "a dumping ground for the worlds poor")?
Yes, that乫s a valid point. But the japanese have a culture and a unity which allows them to live cheek and jowl. Ironically, many people on this board are criticizing them for not wanting to change the culture that allows so many japanese to live peacefully and in close proximity.
But lets consider India -- at the turn of the century india had 200 million people乧 they now have around 1 billion people. This came from internal population growth from a country with centuries of traditions. Neverthless, very few westerners would want to trade places with the life of the average Indian.
Even with 300 million people america is coming a apart at the seams with racial tensions, gangs, drugs use etc. etc. As an example, in california's once vaunted public education system 1 out of 3 children now drop out.
I don乫t think it can be denied the importance of culture for a stable and prosperous America 乧 and no matter where anybody stands on the subject, I think they would have to admit that adding another 700 million people of different races and cultures to america sucessfully is going to be no small feat. To me, the idea seems somewhat mad.
I would prefer that america focus on quality, and not on quantity.
I recently took a tour though the underbelly of los angeles, its prisons, its asylums, its slums, and it doesn't take genius to see the tremendous destructive tensions that exist as a result of America's experiments as well as the 1000's of lives that are being lost. I compared my trip in los angeles to my experiences in europe and in japan and I came to the conclusion that the situation in los angeles is quite grave culturally compared to societies like Japan and even Germany.
I think we need to begin to ask ourselves, what is the goal of our society and what kind of people do we wish to produce and value ? Culture is a very important thing.
The problems with American immigration is that if say an illegal immigrant gives birth to a child, that child becomes a naturalized American citizen, at a certain age, that child's parent will also then become a citzen, as well as grandmothers etcetera...
Imigration in Europe is different entirely, where you have a country like Italy whose onus it is to stem the tide of immigrants from countries within Africa...
I do think that, for example, if America continues down the road she is going with projections of 1 billion people by the year 2100 largely from immigration from 3rd world countries America may become virtually unlivable.So you're saying that the tide of foreignern hordes washing upon the shores of the Americas will destabilize it, simply by force? You're probably not the first person to make this assumption... There simply needs to be a set of fair & humane immigration laws that deal with those who want to honestly integrate into the country. I find it a shame that a good portion of foreign residents chose to speak to their children in their native languages first, and English only secondary... Often, the parents are not even able to speak English and use their children as proxies... In Japan, raising a child like this would be considered not simply ludicrous, but almost like a form of developmental retardation.
It is a legitimate topic.Immigration may be a legitmate topic, but you seem to have either not read my post at all, or misunderstood the word "asylum", or the post in general.
I think that Japan, like Russia who is also careful about immigration, have a history of what it means to be a defeated nation and a defeated people.Yes, in Russia and the former Soviet Union, there is also a deep rooted amount of racism towards many different peoples... So, motives like this aren't good for dealing w/ Immigration... simply because it makes you feel better about yourselves as a nation.
To say that the Japanese have no right to debate the issue is flat out wrong.Please show my where I even sugested that any nation had no right to debate it's own immigration issues, please.
A culture like japan thinks 100乫s of years backwards and 100乫s of years forward. The United States with 200 short years of history can barely think 5 years ahead.Japan, like the United States makes descisions on immigration in order to not just preserve a type of culture, but to improve it in the future... This 100 years back and forth nonsense is simply that, nonsense.
I totally agree. If only more European politicians could understand that...I'm sorry, I don't think I understand what you are agreeing with... Is it that the intent of immigration control is to prevent the dilution of a nation's cultural base, lest it be corrupted?
I suppose that these are the types of ideas that lead nations like France to institute a policy that everyone migrating to France (largely because they are filling skilled technical jobs which are not being filled by native French for some reason[...] I'll let readers ponder that.) to adopt propper adoption of the accepted ideals of 'French culture', beyond simply language.*
*I'd like to note that language-adoption should be a minimum requirement for immigration to a country, and the United States fails completely in this aspect as far as immigration is concerned.
I agree with your post jihaday.
Japan should stay primarily Japanese.
Modern Americans and Europeans are only taught about the benefits of multi ethnic and multi religious nations but not their drawbacks 乧 It is because the west is desperately hoping that its current expiriment will 乬work out乭 and needs its citizens to endorse the idea. Hence, the strongly felt comments of some of the people on this forum.
My opinion is that if Japan allowed massive immigration it would cease to be japan. I think the japanese are wise to limit immigration.
I think japan will still be a dynamic force in 200 years... I am not so sure about america and europe.
I am saying that even the most ardent supporter of immigration cannot deny the enormous problems that will come with 700 million new people in america of differing ethnicities, cultures, religions etc. etc. It very well may prove to be utterly ruinous to the country.The United States was built by colonialists who built a nation upon the backs of refugees who sought a better life there. It's already multi-ethnic, in every way possible. At the federal level, the United States does not even have an official language. If you thought it was English, you were incorrect. I don't know where, and over what time frame you're getting the number of 700 milion, seventy percent of a billion immigrants, but I suspect it's just hyperbole to make your point seem more urgent.
[...]it will be very hard to have anything on a wide scale but a shared lowest comman denominator and factional interests based on race, language, and perhaps religion.Control of the interests of the United States is in the hands of the upper two to one percent who control the wealth, and has for the most part, always been. Their agendas are served first and foremeost, and much like the prolatariat in Orwell's 1984, the masses are either too dumbfounded, or too defeated to change this very much.
After the movements of the 1960's we had all hoped and expected that race would cease to be such a prevailing motive and yet racial tensions between blacks, whites, and hispanics are probably worse now than they were in the 1970's and 1980's.Really. How so? Please give me some indication that race relations are worse... When people are actually considering a black candidate for the presidency, they can't be too much worse. They certainly aren't as awful as the racial tensions which exist, and have existed in Europe.
Perhaps the situation can improve but the extremists are working overtime these days to polarize the various groups.Extremists have the internet, which is a wider audidence than one gained from photo-copied pamphlets. I don't know if there is any indication that they are working "overtime" or even any better at undermining race relations.
Most africans, chinese, japanese and indians that I have met would fit into modern definitions of racist. if I were to try to become a zimbaweian, a chinese, a korean, a japanese I would always suffer from the fact that racially and culturally I am not quite "one of them".Believe it or not, a lot of societies do not accept foreigners as "one of them". Englanders are known to still think of foreign residents as not truly being English, regardless of their nationality... But I don't want to go off on a tangent.
I would point out that the Russian people have lived under the most dire circumstances for 100乫s of years.The've also inflicted a great deal of agony over the last few hundreds of years as well. Not just upon their own people, but on any who uposed them. An estimated seven to nine million people in the Ukraine were killed by Stalin, by effectively starving them to death through forced famine. Within the state you could look forward to being sent off to the Gulag archipelligo if your views seemed even remotely against it. But let's take a few moments to feel sorry for the dire circumstances of the Russian people, and how they got themselves there.
[...]and have experienced the darkest side of man乫s potential for tyranny.Again, they've also been responsible for the darkest side of man's potential for tyranny... even recently. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Litvinenko_poisoning) So much so, that I can't fathom how you can make this statement without the least bit of the acknowlegement of irony inherent to it. It would take a colossal effort to dismiss their actions throughout the history of communism--- It's impossible to talk about the Russian state, even at present, at a time when the oligarchs, men who rode the destruction of their own country to heights of great wealth seem to be at odds with Putin, without there being an intrinstic idea consistant with those of a tyranny, of either fear, or wealth or otherwise.
The Russian people like any other people have the right to self determination. If they wish to remain a people that is their right. This does not mean that they necessarily hate other nations or other peoples.Yes, this has nothing to do with asylum.
They are customs and subtleties which could not have possibly developed in a country like the united states.This statement isn't right, ...it's not even wrong. It simply has no meaning or bearing on the subject whatsoever.
The incomparably high artistic developments in japan could only come about in a nation with centuries of living tradition passed down and refined from generation to generation.Do you make a point of avoiding all history that is contrary to your own opinion, or do you simply espouse views like this that make it seem as if you do? I'm not even going to argue this statement. Yes, the artwork in Japan could only come from Japan. You've certainly got that right.
In the united states, because of the nature of its society whenever anything is constellated it is quickly overthrown and very little of real value is ever created.I know of thousands of authors, painters, and musicians who would feel quite at odds with this statement. I'm not going to give you a lesson on the history of American art, but you should look into it. What are you basing your opinions on? You seem to have the type of knowledge of American history that one might get from collecting matchbooks at a 50's style diner.
Each generation of americans, up until this one, has expected that their generation would do a little better than the previous one. I don't think most american's feel that way anymore.Yes, I agree with you 100%. This has nothing to do with racism, culture, or immigration however.
[...]but having been all over the world I think I am in a relatively good position to diagnose what is wrong with los angeles.I don't think you're in a relatively good position to find your own backside, honestly.
I could pick apart each of the things that you've said, and you've said so many, that are simply either hyperbole, agrandisement, opinion, or outright condemnation of a society you seem not to understand, but this seems fruitless...
You seem to me, to be a nationalistic, racist, historically-ignorant person. I know that this seems to be an insult, and I won't add a "please don't be offended"... But from the viewpoints you espouse, concerning the near perfection of the Japanese society, the asylum seekers you refer to as simply criminal rabble, your base and frankly limited knowlege of American history, right down to your own need to somehow justify Russia's own innocence, you seem to have qualified yourself for this label.
Asylum is a basic human right, and if you feel so, you also feel that any free country which respects human rights respects the great need to accept those who in truth are persecuted by their own countries.
Please see above. This is my point. Nothing you have said has had anything to do with it other than your specious claim that asylum seekers are simply immigrants, illegal or otherwise.
If you have something to respond allong these lines please do. Any other sort of subject matter will simply be ignored.
PS. I'll remind you, in one of your posts (http://www.jref.com/forum/showthread.php?p=337993#post337993), you praise James Clavell's novel Shogun, while dissmissing its historical inaccuracy (something you seem to brush aside as if it were not quite necissary...), as, I'm quoting you, a work of art.
I really don't feel you do find much need for historical accuracy, but I think I understand now more of your idea & appreciation for Western "art".
Naturlich bin ich in Auslander...aber in Deutschland (ich lebte in Niedersachsen, in einer kleinen Stadt, "Melle") ist das Wort etwas sehr schrekliches. Zum beispiel, ich hatte einen Freund der mit mir spielen wurde, und wenn seine Mutter mich sehen wurder wurde sie mich uberhaupt nicht angucken...warum denn? Ich werde ihr nichts tun...ich war doch 7 jahre alt! Naja, sowieso ich hoffe das die situation mit den Auslandern jetzt besser ist...bossel, woher in Deutschland lebst du?
Ich wurde gern zuruck zu Deutschland kommen aber ich jetzt muss ich hier in den Staaten zur Schule gehen. :relief:
This implies that Japan should allow skilled workers if shortages are apparent in certain sectors. While asylum could be based on shared Buddhist values. Given this, asylum and immigration could be focused on Chinese migrants/asylum seekers, Koreans (high Christian population), and other nations like Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam which are mainly Buddhist.
1st you should not mix asylum & immigration issues. Asylum is a human right! If you don't know what it means, look here:
http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/lang/eng.htm
Quote:
"Article 14 1. Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution."
There is also a Declaration on Territorial Asylum:
http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/o_asylum.htm
In article 14 you see the word "everyone", this means that you are not allowed to discriminate regarding ethnicity, religion or whatever. There are restrictions, but based on "acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations".
Immigration is a completely different issue. Every country has the right to decide who to let in. But even here it is rather short-sighted to be too restrictive. Most industrialized countries will need the influx of immigrants (who are mostly rather young & tend to have more children than the original inhabitants) to keep their social systems intact. For the birth rates are too low, too many old people may lead to a collapse of current systems.
I don't know in how far this already happens in Japan (I heard that birth rates are dropping), but it's a problem they also will face sooner or later.
Cultural values change over time. What do you want to do? Preserve Japan as it is now or as it was 100 years ago? Do you want to create a huge open-air museum?
Regarding Europe & immigration: the problems are highly exaggerated.
Drug problems are a major issue in the US, not so much in Europe. Same goes for high crime rates, which are anyway not really related to immigration but to poverty & social circumstances.
That is a load of political crap :)
Canada is BY FAR more dynamic than the United States, and everyone in the entire world seems to know this except for the US. And... an economic nation? The economy of the US is cracking.
Hardly a concentration camp if a whole island thats got plenty of food and shelter is given up for them, bossel dont be fooled.
Asylum is for the persicuted not a handy way to sneak into a country like its ussually abused for.
All asylum needs to provide is a safe location with all the basic human needs for the asylum seeker to live in safety and relative happyness, un-molested until such a time as they may return.
If they want to immigrate to countries, well, thats what immigration laws and the proper official routes to immigrate are for.
Also some islands are fairly big, i know your in germany so you dont have many of them but, their hardly tiny concentration camps.
Nurizeko, you're not related to one of my students are you? When we discussed immigration issues in a debate/discussion class I taught, one student raised the issue of all foreigners in Japan living in separate areas.
Don't you realize many people that left their countries under asylum probably may never be able to return in their lifetimes? So how would imprisoning them on an island help this situation? A good example is a recent Afghanstani who decided to change his religion. A religious death sentence was issued. What sane person would want to return to that?
It was Japan pushing America suddenly into world war 2 that made it a big success.
I would agree that a military backed foreign policy has fueled some of the US success story, but hardly that Japan made the US successful. We've needed a lot of other wars to keep that part of the economy going, though recently, that has had the opposite affect with the Iraq 'war' plunging the US government into a cycle of 'patriotic debt'. The US technology and information age is what has fueled the US economy recently, and we are now looking for the next generation of commerce (possibly biotech?) to fuel an over leveraged economy.
To get back to the main topic, Japan doesn't deal well now with Koreans who were born here and visiting foreigners. Changing the average citizen's attitude to foreigners will take a long time, but that doesn't mean that no effort should be made to do it. As to how selective they should be in allowing people in, that is up to Japan, but losing its culture is an overstated fear in my opinion. It's this kind of paranoia that fuels Japanese xenophobia and reinforces their non-immigration policy (and also in turn perhaps reinforces the absence of Japanese as a major language in the world).
Well, I don't know which nationality you are, but if you are not German, you are an Ausländer (= foreigner). There is no particular negative connotation. It very much depends on the people who say it, though. The amount of people who hate foreigners is not extraordinary high in Germany. I think, the rate of racists in the population is up to 15% (to varying degrees, violent racists are less than 0.1%), which is pretty much the same all over Western Europe, AFAIK.
Die Auslander sind gut fur die Deutsche Wirtschaftlichkeit aber es kann man vielen Deutschen nicht erklaren. Die denken das die "Auslander" ihre Arbeit nehmen vollen.
That's true, actually. A lot of people do think that foreigners are taking Germans' jobs. But most people know that this is not really the case.
Yet the United States, like France, the United Kingdom, and other multi-ethnic nations in modern times are plagued with enormous social problems
Your post is a complete mish-mash, and I havn't got time to point out all the consistencies, and I see others are doing so. In this short passage two things jump out though:
The US has only developed into a super-power since mass-immigration started, and it is widely recognised that immigration has been one of the keys to that success.
Also - the US hardly keeps religion out of politics - or have you never heard Dubya give a speech? The nation that is most secular (and I admire most in this aspect) - France - is cited by you as having enormous social problems.
Your friends had an easy time because they are students sponsored by a school who have, in effect, told the Ministry of Justice that they will vouch for them. They didn't have an easy time of it just because they are from Turkey.
Japan loves short-term sponsored workers/students/visitors because they are just that - they will be going back to where they came from fairly soon. Becoming a permanent resident is a very, very different ballgame.
Please come to Japan, Ulabatli and enjoy yourself :) It is a great place and a wonderful experience.
As for regular immigration, most of the foreign residents and naturalised Japanese are from Korea and China (see stats (http://www.jref.com/society/foreigners_in_japan.shtml)), so it does feel like they are being selective about the visas. The vast majority of permanent residents and naturalised Japanese are also Asian. Most Westerners only stay in Japan for a few months or years.
Japan does not yet have a significant (let's say over 1% of the population) minority group from one different ethnic* or religious origin, unlike most Western European countries which now have big Muslim communities (between 3 and 10% of the population depending on the country). The largest ethnic and religious minority are the Catholic South Americans, which make up about 0.2% of the total population.
* I consider the Koreans and Chinese to belong to the same ethnicity as the Japanese, as it is too hard to tell them apart, especially if they all speak fluently Japanese.
A martal poison for Japanese System is the alien ethnic religion of other Countryes, like Middle East or even Europe. The negative attitude of Johannes Paulus II against China and Japan, must be a remark for Japanese Administration and People, 'cause if Japan will become a multiethnic society, his end like a united and great nation will be sonn.
Luckily, the real situation is distant from this conjecture; but I hope that the Japanese Govern will go on the street of a true discrimination of immigrated citizen and tourist.
pesonally i dont think its a good idea to have many other ethnic people coming to your country. it is a proven fact that multi-ethnic countries have more social problems that homogenus countries. btw i dont think Japanese would want foreigners to take over their countries just my two cent
Similar developments are going on (& projected for the future) all over Europe (& in Japan), German population growth at the moment is -0.1%, the Europe-wide average is -0.2%.
BTW, Mandylion's link to the BBC is really recommendable!
Ja, aber viele Deutsche hassen die Auslander...ich erinnere mich wenn ich ein kleiner Junge (1992-1996) war haben mich Leute "Auslander" genennt...:(
Die Auslander sind gut fur die Deutsche Wirtschaftlichkeit aber es kann man vielen Deutschen nicht erklaren. Die denken das die "Auslander" ihre Arbeit nehmen vollen.
Caim: Turkish People have a lot of history in Japan. The biggest mosque in Tokyo's is called a "Turkish Culture Center," I forgot which ku it is in. There's a mosque in Hachiouji-shi, one in Shibuya-ku. I think the turkish one is in Shibuya-ku. ANyways, Turkish people have a long history in Japan, and there are many Japanese tourists in Turkey. Many Turkish salespeople and clerks have learned Japanese.
road she is going with projections of 1 billion people by the year 2100 largely from immigration from 3rd world countries America may become virtually unlivable. It is a legitimate topic.
That unlivable America is much more confortable than present Japan.
Canada is BY FAR more dynamic than the United States, and everyone in the entire world seems to know this except for the US. And... an economic nation? The economy of the US is cracking.
Canada is a country of around 30 million. the United states is a country of around 300 million.
There is no comparision ... except that canada is, or at least was when I visited it 15 years ago, a nicer place.
I know, I simply disagree that japan should be forced to accept "assylum seekers". With the world population at 6 billion and expected to be 9 billion by the year 2050 there are huge numbers of people at this very moment and their will be huge numbers in the future who face poverty and death for a variety of reasons ... it is ugly I know but the solution to these problems does not come from japan opening her country to everyone in the world who has a problem.
The United States was built by colonialists who built a nation upon the backs of refugees who sought a better life there. It's already multi-ethnic, in every way possible. At the federal level, the United States does not even have an official language. If you thought it was English, you were incorrect. I don't know where, and over what time frame you're getting the number of 700 milion, seventy percent of a billion immigrants, but I suspect it's just hyperbole to make your point seem more urgent.".
The population projections in America if legal and illegal immigration continue as it is for the year 2050 is around 500 million and for the year 2100 is around 1 billion. The size of the population of India.
By the year 2100 many demographers estimate there will be 700 million more people in America than today if current trends continue. Since 1970 to the present the po
Its not an experiment, its common sense.
I want to be able to just live and get on with things with my fellow man, white black or orange, without my friends or even relations being tormented and me aswell because of smething as insugnificant as skin colour.
You do relise how insugnificant that is?, the worlds problems are cultural & ignorance, not racial.
Its just common human respect, my mate "Bob" (not his real name) is a smart human being, he likes basket ball, he enjoys my type of music and wants to pass the same course I'm studying, he is born and bred within the UK, he comes from Montrose and consiros himself Scottish.
Should that be taken from him, should our friendship be frowned upon because he is of Chinese descent?.
Am I somehow criminally guilty for having sexual and emotional intimate relations with a Japanese girl?, am I instead of greeting an asian shop worker, to spit in his face and shout profanities at him because his skin is darker then mine?, am I to smack up a passing black man who otherwise has done me no offense because his skin is brown?.
Seriously, what planet do you live on?.
Dont mistake your views as fact, their based on noe thnig and one thing alone, pure ignorance.
A human being is a human being, the differences, are literally only skin deep.
As for ethnic tensions, these are caused by cultural differences.
What the human race needs is more stricter checks on our ability to spawn little nooblets.
On a plus side, as Japanese population falls and the economy falls, causing quality of life to fall, there will be higher incidents of less edumacated people, and more people with less demands on their time *cough*perhapsunemployed*cough* and therefore more making fun sexy times which would arrest the freefall and bring the population up, perhaps it is a halway effective natural check on our numbers, who knows.
[/rant]
#If you have any other info about this subject , Please add it free.# |