J.A.F.O wrote:I decided for myself that citizenship is kin to being on a plantation.
Yep, good point. An especial danger when citizenship is only offered on a monogamous basis.
Hot Topics | |
---|---|
J.A.F.O wrote:I decided for myself that citizenship is kin to being on a plantation.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised if this was a PC ploy by Miss Yunibasu Japan Inc. to get another win for Nippon but I don't think we should be too hard on Ariana. Apparently it can be pretty tough growing up half in Japan and it's probably even tougher when you're not the kind of half that fits their wet dreams of what a half should look like (e.g. the Michibata sisters). I'm sure that could give you a complex.
legion wrote:Samurai_Jerk wrote:Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised if this was a PC ploy by Miss Yunibasu Japan Inc. to get another win for Nippon but I don't think we should be too hard on Ariana. Apparently it can be pretty tough growing up half in Japan and it's probably even tougher when you're not the kind of half that fits their wet dreams of what a half should look like (e.g. the Michibata sisters). I'm sure that could give you a complex.
I think it is pretty tough growing up in Japan hafu or not.
Coligny wrote:Wait... There's 3 of them !?
I'll be in my bunk...
Wage Slave wrote:J.A.F.O wrote:I decided for myself that citizenship is kin to being on a plantation.
Yep, good point. An especial danger when citizenship is only offered on a monogamous basis.
J.A.F.O wrote:Coligny wrote:Wait... There's 3 of them !?
I'll be in my bunk...
Triplets Basil, Triplets!
Mike Oxlong wrote:Ah, fond memories of being the only one laughing in the theatre watching the first Austin Powers release. Beers at the movie concessions is quite civilized.
J.A.F.O wrote: I don't expect others to adopt what I believe either, just shooting the shit with my fellows at the bar so to speak.
legion wrote:I think it is pretty tough growing up in Japan hafu or not.
J.A.F.O wrote:Not really suggesting anything, just stating how I feel on the subject. Also to clarify I'm not saying NEVER force anything only that I just don't much like it. Enforcement of property rights I think is pretty important, be it corporeal or incorporeal. If we get down to brass tacks I'm pretty much against citizenship all together. Reading too much history and legal theory books (my stock in trade actually) Roman and Greco specifically and to a lesser extent Babylonian and persia. I decided for myself that citizenship is kin to being on a plantation. So that being said I don't want anyone to accept being 2nd class anything. Furthermore, until the japanese put me in a concentration camp, I am free to go to a place more hospitable should I decide that I'm being treated as such. My fear with equality is the old adage that "This guy has a ball and chain, are you sure you want to be equal?" So is the danger of regulating non-tangible things. And, in reality weren't they here before me ... Do I come in here trying to force my ethics upon the established social fabric? If I do then I am at risk of being a conquistador, so then why not just march in here with armies and destroy all opposition? Do it right and kill all the educated as Pol Pot attempted, right? I don't agree with how many of the japanese discriminate, I am however ok with their right to do so. I chose to protest by other means.
I don't expect others to adopt what I believe either, just shooting the shit with my fellows at the bar so to speak.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:Love or leave it! You're ex military, right?
Samurai_Jerk wrote:I'm with you on the citizenship thing which is by I've never understood why the so-called libertarians in the US also have such a hard on for border security and keeping illegals out. I can't think of anything more libertarian than the free movement of people.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:I also realize that the idea of people having the right to live anywhere in the world they want is one of those things that sounds good on paper. You might be able to pick up and run if things here go south but not everyone has the ability to do that. Besides I wasn't necessarily talking about guys like us or even Japan specifically with my comments. It was more of a general statement.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:I'm single, don't have kids, and don't own a home here so I could get on a plane this afternoon and leave for good without too much trouble if I wanted to. And if something better comes along I'll do just that. But so far I've found the positive discrimination outweighs the negative so I like being here and I have no desire to force Japan to change.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:That being said, if a country does allow people from the outside to move in they shouldn't be surprised if after awhile some of those people don't want to bend over and take it anymore.
Samurai_Jerk wrote:Pushing a society you live in for equal treatment isn't the same as coming in as a conquistador trying to force your worldview a bunch of savages. The fact that you chose to live somewhere doesn't mean you have less of a claim to how that society evolves. Both sides have to adapt to accommodate each other.
J.A.F.O wrote:Do I come in here trying to force my ethics upon the established social fabric?
J.A.F.O wrote:Samurai_Jerk wrote:Pushing a society you live in for equal treatment isn't the same as coming in as a conquistador trying to force your worldview a bunch of savages. The fact that you chose to live somewhere doesn't mean you have less of a claim to how that society evolves. Both sides have to adapt to accommodate each other.
I feel this is where we part in belief. On the grand scheme of things humanity is pretty cruel, and I don't see different groups accommodating each other. It tends to work on the short term but generally ends in conflict or at best the society itself fractures into factions. I'm hearing a lot about this going on in S.Africa right now.
kurogane wrote:Samurai_Jerk wrote:
I've seen it taken even further in academia. I did a paper on Japanese-Brazilian return immigration in a Japanese Political Science class. I can't remember which book it was I came across in my research but there was a passage about the myth of Japanese homogeneity. And the authors weren't even talking about Ainus, Ryukyuans, Zainichi Koreans, etc. They were claiming that Japan was a country made up of different ethnic groups that were all convinced they were part of a single Yamato race through Meiji Era propaganda. In other words, the people of places like Satsuma, Edo, and Kyoto were all different ethnicities.
I remember those ones. There were 2 or 3 such studies in rather quick succession. I do believe Stanford's Befu had a hand in there somewhere. Technically they're right, but not for the reasons they thought: as you know, the whole concept of Ethnicity is so nebulous it can mean race, group, culture, genetic heritage, or pretty much WTF the author wants it to depending on their working definition. In a Social or Cultural Anthropological sense the regional differences and variations (esp. linguistic) were so significant back then they probably would have qualified under a lot of definitions of ethnicity (but not Race), and the monoethnic discourse always was specifically a unifying discourse devised as and intended as an element of defence against Western Imperial encroachment. BUT, once the window for a definition of Japan as a broad national umbrella covering multiple regional ethnicities was closed it became pointless for everyone except grad students to question it. I still do refer to Japan as a Toitsu-ka (統一化) sareta minzoku but at the very best I still get wearily raised eyebrows, even though those that get it know I'm right.
J.A.F.O wrote:IOr when I'v suggested to them that Okinawa would have been better off as a U.S. territory. It would have been the closest thing to being an independent nation again that they could have ever gotten. .
Coligny wrote:J.A.F.O wrote:IOr when I'v suggested to them that Okinawa would have been better off as a U.S. territory. It would have been the closest thing to being an independent nation again that they could have ever gotten. .
Or do like Hokkaido, call the French and become an independent republic... For 6 month...
wangta wrote:
I don't see anything basically wrong with the study that Samurai Jerk quoted apart from the aspect of trying too hard to present Japan as multi-ethnic and putting a contemporary political spin on historical facts within a completely different context.
wangta wrote:
Yes, there was no 'Yamato race'.
kurogane wrote: pretentious pedants
kurogane wrote:That almost makes it sound like a pleasant hobby, doesn't it? But no need to worry, Yoko. There's always been a perfectly good word for it.
Ya Bigot
1) Most of the people who demand an open and honest debate about racism are racist.
2) Most of the people we demand an open and honest debate about racism are hypocrites. As soon as you point to their racism they run around screaming “You called me a racist! How dare you! You can’t say that!”
3) Most of the people who demand an open and honest debate about racism only ever see one side of the debate. That’s because they’re invariably white, and have no personal experience of what racism actually is.
4) Most of the politicians who demand an open and honest debate are lying. They just want racists to vote for them, or worry they won’t get elected if racists don’t vote for them.
5) When people want to excuse racism, they channel it through the prism of class. Say “I have a real problem with immigration” and you will be challenged. Say “Many working class communities are experiencing real problems with immigration” and you are given a pass.
6) Racism is still acceptable on all sides of the political spectrum. On the Left it’s acceptable to hate Jews. On the Right it’s blacks and Muslims. Racism towards Eastern Europeans is acceptable on both the Left and the Right.
7) It is impossible to “control immigration” to the UK.
8 The lack of black, Asian and minority ethnic representation in British public life is a far greater scandal than the under-representation of women.
9) Saying “racism is better now than it was 30 years ago” is the equivalent of saying “cancer is better now than it was 30 years ago”. Yes, we’re better at understanding and tackling it. But cancer is still cancer.
10) Ukip represent the biggest threat to British race relations since Oswald Mosley’s black-shirts.
kurogane wrote:And to be clear, the Potehto/Potahto seesaw between race and ethnicity drives me nuts and is mostly analytic masturbation
Samurai_Jerk wrote:I should have been clearer. Both sides need to adapt if they expect things to work. That doesn't mean they generally do.
kurogane wrote:wangta wrote:
I don't see anything basically wrong with the study that Samurai Jerk quoted apart from the aspect of trying too hard to present Japan as multi-ethnic and putting a contemporary political spin on historical facts within a completely different context.
My only objection is exactly that. They manage to be anachronistic, atavistic and presumptuous all at once, though I happily admit that is most fitting for such a hilariously middling class discipline as Ethnic Studies. As sincere scholarly efforts intended to elucidate I applaud their efforts even if I might groan at their findings. We used to call Ethnic Studies majors Charity Workers in Waiting. It's a made up discipline for Cat Ladies.wangta wrote:
Yes, there was no 'Yamato race'.
Well, except that now we are back into Potehto / Potahto territory. As Wilde and other Victorians used it The Yamato were a race, and have had a longer history of unified or unitary ethnic identification than most European groups. And if they think it so it means it is at one level of analysis (Thomas' Razor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_theorem). Of course, with the benefit of modern research into genotype and such, then no. I would, however, caution against concluding that because we would no longer use the word Race to describe them as a distinct group that they are also not a readily identified singular national ethnicity, as Choko and others seem to want to imply when they plays the You're All Koreans!!! card. The Yamato are a single ethnicity with considerable genotypical and phenotypical variation both within and between, which should be an obvious disclaimer but often is overlooked. The real problem lies in snotty white folk deciding that they should be the ones to tell brownie what he is or isn't, and that is unacceptable. Very few white people are trained well enough and reflexive enough to be able to pronounce on these topics without bringing all their own baggage to the table. But far too many love to think they qualify on both those criteria because they took an anthropology course 13 years ago. Which is where A'holes like me come in.
And to be clear, the Potehto/Potahto seesaw between race and ethnicity drives me nuts and is mostly analytic masturbation, though I do like to use race because it's like catnip to the pretentious pedants. Give a working definition and get on with the interesting bits is what I would say.
Anyways, great post. The race continues..........................
wangta wrote: For example, I don't think those clans of Korean origin and the people they brought with them would necessarily have identified themselves as Yamato other than for image..
chokonen888 wrote:............. hismexicans.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest