Many countries are confronted with the problems of ethnic and cultural diversity in their society. Under the globalization, the flow of people from one place to another has been increasing tremendously in the past few years and yet, many countries still struggle to put their policies on multiculturalism into practice.

One of the countries that have been quite successful at putting multicultural policies in practice is Singapore. Singapore is well known for being a multi-ethnic country, with 77 percent of the population being Chinese, 14 percent Malays, and 8 percent Indians. Because of this diverse population, the government of Singapore recognizes English, which is the most widely spoken language, Mandarin, Malay and Tamil as the official languages. At school, children learn various subjects in English, but also have the choice to take courses on their mother tongue if they wished.

In addition to the different languages that are recognized in Singapore, the country also celebrates a variety of ethnic and cultural festivals such as the Chinese New Year, Deepavali and Hari Raya Puasa. Each of the racial groups celebrates festivals of other cultures, which shows how people in Singapore respect ethnic and cultural differences of the others.

On the other hand, Japan still seems to be reluctant to accept many immigrants who are non-Japanese. For example, care workers from the Philippines and Indonesia that came to Japan had to learn Japanese, be able to read Japanese and take exams to qualify for these care workers in Japanese. Many Japanese people also expressed their anxiety, such as the language barrier and fear of non-Japanese workers providing care, when Japan first accepted care workers from overseas. As a result, many institutions did not accept these foreign care workers to work at their hospitals.

Like the example of Japan, even if the country may have policies on multiculturalism, if these policies are not effectively implemented, it does not make the country multicultural. Singapore has successfully established a multicultural and multiethnic society by recognizing the different ethnic and cultural backgrounds of the people living in Singapore, and has treated all of the different identities equally. Without the recognition of the different cultures that exist in the society, it would be difficult to establish a multicultural society that everyone, regardless of their ethnicity, can feel some connection to the society that they live in.

by Nami Tatewaki

Moyer, Amy J. “Current Sociolinguistic Situation.” Singapore: A Multilingual, Multiethnic Country, n.d. Web. 4 Nov. 2011.

I’ve been living here in Kyoto for around seven months now and so far, I’ve only seen one rainbow flag proudly displayed along the quiet streets of Kyoto. I discovered Colori Caffe , an Italian restaurant owned by Yossy, an openly lesbian Japanese woman. Aside from serving Italian cuisines and good coffee, Colori is also a place where everyone can be themselves. It’s one of the few, or possibly the only place in Kyoto that openly supports LGBTs – lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered individuals.

I was happy to discover Colori, but at the same time, I was also quite surprised to find this café in a relatively conservative place such as Kyoto, Japan. I asked Yossy if all of her customers know what the rainbow flag in front of the café symbolizes, sadly, nearly half of them aren’t even aware of its meaning.

The rainbow flag symbolizes the LGBT pride; it also represents the diversity within the LGBT community. It’s often used in pride movements pushing forward LGBT rights, and yet a lot of people have no idea what it represents – most people would perhaps think of it as a symbol of peace – which it really is, but often times, its eminent message is left forgotten, drowned by its own bright colors.

Perhaps the biggest predicament is that a lot of people are still unaware of LGBT issues, if not, then they are simply indifferent. Or worse, they are heavily misinformed; hence they tend to misconstrue the issue. This problem can be traced back to the fact that most people don’t have a clear understanding of gender, primarily because gender itself is a socially constructed concept in which dominant norms have forced itself onto everyone. Hence giving birth to discrimination and prejudice against the LGBT community. This problem is not confined to Japan, but can be observed all over the world.

Most of us, as early as childhood, were probably already exposed to the dire distinctions between men and women. We were told that girls and boys should act in certain ways; otherwise, we are disturbing the imagined code of gender roles that society has imposed upon us. We live in a world which follows a strict gender binary: men are like this and women are like that. Men are supposed to be attracted to women, and women to men. But what about same-sex couples? Some would deny their existence, hence placing the issue as a taboo. While others would openly denounce same-sex couples as an “abomination,” a moral disgrace, a social deviance. This problematic outlook towards the LGBT community may be a product of a homogenized way of thinking regarding human sexuality. This homogenization of the concept of gender has been manifested through dominant teaching practices, the popular media, and through social norms.

Most societies today maintain a highly heteronormative nature – the representation of heterosexuality as the norm, and the denouncement of homosexuality as an unacceptable social deviation – this puts the LGBT community on a detrimental position. On top of that, most societies also maintain a strong patriarchal nature, hence putting lesbian and bisexual women in an even more difficult and oppressed position within society.

For decades, lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered individuals have fallen as victims of social stigma, unfair treatment, and harsh stereotypes. Myriad societies continue to look down on LGBTs, hence affecting their lives on multiple levels – socially, economically, politically, and even emotionally and psychologically.

by Fritzie Rodriquez

Last week, there was a demonstration against Japanese job hunting system in Shinjuku, Tokyo. This demonstration was mostly organized by Japanese university students but there were also some working members of society.

This demonstration’s concept is to destroy the system of Japanese job hunting these days. They raised some points they think should be changed. First, considering this depression and high unemployment rate period, students have to start their job hunting process when they are in junior year hence they cannot concentrate on their studying. Second, unlike many foreign countries, Japanese companies are not flexible to hire students who want to get out of the rail Japanese society made. For example, if a student goes abroad and travels the world for a year or so after his graduation, he won’t have as many opportunities to get a job as he could have just after he graduated. Most Japanese companies treat new graduate with very great deal but that is only for them. This tendency also encourages students to get a job before they graduate from university. Third, having these pressures, many students are worrying about getting jobs. Recently, companies to support students’ job hunting have emerged. Demonstration also mentioned these companies should not be allowed. They think these companies are making it worse because they are getting money from these students who are worrying about job hunting by offering them seminars and books.

However, this demonstration is taken as a quite negative issue. Japanese people rarely demonstrate on the streets. People think people who demonstrate are too sensitive. Some people even say that they are complaining these things because they could not succeed to get a job and they are just being bad losers by complaining those things to society.

Are they crazy? I don’t think so. I think people who have a problem should demonstrate to let society notice. These students who protest got many negative comments, but they could let society know that there are some problems in this Japanese society. They may get people’s attention and those who also think that this is a problem but never say it out loud.

One person cannot change the society but using the power of people and the media, it may work. I respect their courage to demonstrate.

by Naoko Matsumoto

After March 11 crippled nuclear power plant accidents in Fukushima, there have been many social movements against nuclear power plants. On September 19, about 50000 people gathered in Tokyo for antinuclear demonstration. It was the largest demonstration since the 1960’s when the students’ activities against Anpo (Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security between the United States and Japan) occurred. Not only this demonstration, there are many movements of farmers who had big damage on their products, and mothers who live around crippled nuclear power plant who are afraid of the effect of radiation on their children. However, it seems that these demonstrations attract little attention, and have little effect on government’s policies so far. Why have these demonstration not been successful enough to change the Japanese society which heavily relies on nuclear energy and is facing a crucial moment to think about our energy policy in the future?

Some people argue that Japanese society has less characteristic which try to change society with demonstration. Basically people leave their decision to upper class people such as politicians and obey them. There is little initiative that trying to change the society compared to other country such as U.S and European countries. Is it true? Yes, actually Japanese people tend to rely on decision of politicians and obey it. But, after the massive earthquake and tsunami which caused serious nuclear accident, and under the situation which we are facing fears of radiation from nuclear power and government unable to progress policies on compensations for victims and new energy policy, lots of Japanese people feel the neediness of some kinds of big change in our society.

I think the first reason why these social movements have not been successful in Japanese society is these movements fail to involve people who live far away from crippled nuclear power plant. Around the nuclear power plant such as Fukushima, Ibaraki, antinuclear power plant is growing because they live with some fear of radiation every day. However, we cannot see such movements in Osaka, Kyoto, and Kagoshima where is more than 1000 kilometers away from Fukushima. Since we do not have nuclear power plants close to our town, we do not care about radiation so much. Maybe most Japanese people who live away from Fukushima think like that. Furthermore there is some ironical fact. Although farmers around Fukushima nuclear power plant had big damage on their products, farmers far away from Fukushima such as Kyushu area had some advantage, because they had more demand for their products after the nuclear power plants accidents in Fukushima. Therefore, even people around Fukushima make demonstration for stopping nuclear power plants, they will attract little attention from people who do not have to care about radiation so seriously now. Of course, even if people who do not live around Fukushima, this accident is very crucial for them. We do have lots of nuclear power plants all over the Japan, and also there is possibility that we have big earthquake which can cause serious accident like Fukushima nuclear power plant. Nuclear power plant does matter for all of Japanese people. So, people who are taking part in antinuclear demonstrations have to take some actions not only in Tokyo but also in Osaka, Kagoshima where people less fear about radiation. For instance, they can hold some lectures on how nuclear accident had changed their life and what we need to in our society. It will be necessary that social movement makes all people concerned and aware that this accident is very crucial for all of us and have to take some actions.

In addition to the lack of involvement of people, I also think the goal of these demonstrations is vague. Though lots of people are taking part in demonstrations for expressing their anger caused from nuclear accidents, their goal is diversified so far. Farmers are demonstrating against Tepco for compensating its damage from radiation. Residents who had lived around nuclear power plant are demonstrating against government for guaranteeing their shelter. Currently many people are holding demonstration in a different ways based on their interests. However, to make demonstration successful, they have to corporate with each other and they have to make clear one goal of the demonstration. If people make one big demonstration which people who have different interests gather together and have a clear goal for them, it is more probable that antinuclear demonstration will be successful.

The key thing to make the social movement successful is to involve all people concerned and make clear one goal for them. If we can achieve it, antinuclear movement will be successful and be able to change our society.

by Shunsuke Ochi

It is said that in some parts of America, people got to recognize Muslim people as a habitant having evil and dangerous trait after 9/11. Then many Muslim people still hold unclear feeling due to this America’s ‘change’.

However, there are also some conscious men who are against this current situation. According to the first article, one Muslim American rapper (23), who “went through their adolescence and early adulthood post-9/11”, “speaks about his personal struggles and the political and social issues that resonate in him the most.” He tries to change people’s wrong recognition of Muslims through hip-hop music, which history was also shaped in confronting racial, social and political injustice.

‘Capital D’ is a Chicago rapper who criticizes America with the modern capitalism and the war in Iraq. He said that recently American Muslims has been taking hip-hop music into their culture, and that ‘Islam hip-hop’ is very young in its process. However as he says, I think this movement will be expanding more.

Today, many Muslim rappers succeeded in surviving through the game of hip-hop, and the number of them has been increasing. Lupe Fiasco is one of them.

Lupe (Wasalu Muhammad Jaco), a conscious rapper from Chi-town, is very explicit to proclaim that he is Muslim and talks lots of things how he thinks about Islam. In his song“Words I Never Said” (2011), he emphasizes “Murdering is not Islam!” to make people change their conception about Islam. He also criticizes (Muslim?) people who don’t take their voice out to say the truth, saying;

Now you can say it ain’t our fault if we never heard it.
But if we know better than we probably deserve it.

Since his debut in 2006, Lupe has cemented his position in hip-hop with his incredible lyrical skill. Now, he became the representative of Muslim in America and hip-hop, and became the voice of them. I’m sure we can say that hip-hop, to some extent, made it possible for American Muslims to state their social and political intentions.

This culture called hip-hop seems to have a very unique religious perspective. It has a root in Gospel, at the same time; it had a great influence of Nation of Islam and also had important support by Jewish people to become economically independent. I think this trait made it possible for Muslim people to fight the situation through hip-hop. The main thesis of hip-hop, I guess, is to do the right thing. This means to tell people the truth, removing all the inconsistency, with positive vibration.
Reading each report, I feel that Muslim are fighting their situation in America through hip-hop.

by Yuki Atsusaka

References

Madeline, D. (2010, August 17). Muslim American rapper growing up in post-9/11 America. Common Ground News Service.
Retrieved November 30, 2011, from
http://www.commongroundnews.org/article.php?id=28315&lan=en&sp=0

n.d. (2005, November 24). Muslim rappers combine beliefs with hip-hop. Associated Press.
Retrieved November 30, 2011, from
http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/6576281/ns/today-entertainment/t/muslim-rappers-combine-beliefs-hip-hop/

n.d. (n.d.). 10 Most Successful Muslim Rappers. Islamoblog.
Retrieved November 30, 2011, from
http://islamoblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/10-most-successful-muslim-rappers.html

On December 11, COP 17 (the 17th Conference of the Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change), which was held in Durban, South Africa ended with little outcome. Since Kyoto Protocol which requires developed nations to cut green house gas emissions will be expired by 2012, it was supposed to be made new framework to reduce green house gas emissions in this conference. (Actually, COP started negotiating new framework from several years ago, but it failed to settle in one conclusion.) However, they concluded that they will extend the Kyoto protocol with several revisions, and they will start a new framework which involves the U.S and China by 2020.

The most controversial issue among negotiating new framework was whether developing countries should have the responsibility to reduce emissions (Of course the involvement of the U.S was also controversial). Under the Kyoto protocol, the developing countries have no obligation to reduce emissions. However, since climate change, which probably caused by GHG emissions, has getting more visible and the necessity of cutting GHG has been growing, it is required to involve big developing countries such as China, India which do not have obligation so far but emitting many GHG. Responding to such requirement, China and India opposed to the new framework by saying that it would slow their economic growth. They also argued that since developed countries deteriorated worldwide environment, it is their responsibility to reduce it. So how can we make one solution?

To tell the truth, the amount of GHG emissions of countries, which have obligation under the Kyoto protocol, is only 26% of all emissions in the world. That means the much of GHG is emitted from other countries. Considering this situation, we cannot overlook the country which are emitting large amount of GHG without any obligation. But it is also true that a lot of developing nations are facing more severe environmental impact which is caused by GHG emissions. Developed nations have degraded the environment to grow its economy, and ironically developing nations have been facing more severe environmental damage than developed nations. We can stay without thinking about environmental effect from GHG emissions so much, however, some developing country are suffering from more environmental degradation such as sea water rising, which is threatening some whole nation, and sever climate change, which is spoiling its agriculture. Developing country is more vulnerable to environmental impact because of its weak economy and weak political system to tackle with. Therefore, we need to support them so that they can overcome these severe situations by offering knowledge and technologies, and of course we should have more responsibility to reduce GHG emissions to ease environmental degradation.

When the new framework is negotiated by 2020, the situation of world economy will be different from now days. It is possible that more developing countries will be a big economic country and have more impact on environmental degradation by emitting more GHG. It will be inevitable that such new big economical countries have obligation to reduce GHG emissions, however, developed country should have more obligation not just reducing more GHG but also supporting developing country by offering knowledge and technology so that we can create environmentally friendly country world widely.

by Shunsuke Ochi

Ernest Gellner (1983) defined nationalism as follows. “”Nationalism is primarily a political principle that holds that the political and the national unit should be congruent”. He argues nation or nationalism was invented merely because of a sociological necessity created by the birth of industrialisation. Since industrial economies continually make and put into practice technical and organizational innovations, rulers need homogeneous workers who share the same culture acquired by uniform education.

Likewise, Benedict Anderson (2006) argues nationalism or the sense of belonging to nation is just imagined. Nation is merely an imagined community, where people can feel the sense of unity with someone whom they will never meet. Nation was imagined as the movement to abolish the ideas of divine rule and monarchy, as well as the emergence of the printing press under a system of capitalism.

I apologise if I misled their arguments or my English above doesn’t really make sense, but I could find those books only in Japanese. Anyways, the important thing here is to recognise that nation or nationality is a modern creation (invention, imagination), thus it is not universal at all. I totally agree with those arguments. In Edo period of Japan, for example, no one would have recognised themselves as Japanese.

Nation or nationalism has been under severe criticism for a long time, since it has created horrible conflict between nations. Scholars tend to regarded nationalism as an inclusion of the people of the same culture, at the same time, an exclusion of the “different” people. For me, nationalism is not the best idea to represent a diverse range of people living within “nations”. However, liberal form of nationalism is necessary to maintain our democratic states (especially the welfare states). David Miller (1995) criticises both what he calls “conservative nationalism” and “radical multi-culturalism” and insists on the necessity of liberal nationalism. He argues that nation is a community comprised of people who wish to be self-determined politically. Individual identity is plural. For instance, I can call myself a Japanese person, but at the same time I am an Asian, a male, a baseball fan, a beer lover or whatever I wish to be. Nation is only one of those plural identities. What makes nation different from the other sources of identity is its political will to be self-determined. I agree with him in that without nation and nationalism, it will be much harder to achieve social justice (mainly redistribution of wealth) and individual liberty and the base of rights. Who would be willing to share the burden without common sense of unity?

In conclusion, we don’t have to blindly admire nation or nationalism, since it is a modern creation, invention or imagination. However, I think it is necessary to maintain liberal form of nationalism to some extent for our own sake. Probably.

by Yuki Sugiyama

We learned in class about “The Melting Pot.” Simply put, this is a metaphor to represent when large amounts of immigrants move to a new country or environment. This metaphor was particularly used when analyzing the immigration wave that struck the United States, but can be used for any country with the same situation.

*What I would like to find out is everyone’s opinion on how this affects society. *

Multiculturalism is hard for most people to adapt to. What effect do you think it has on jobs and the outlook on those jobs? If you look at the United States for example, there are so many cultures being mixed together in one place, and some people just cannot get used to it. When you take a good look at America, it is a country made up of foreigners. Japan is the complete opposite. Japan is a heterogeneous society that holds true to their traditions and culture. The United States is a homogenous society, and because of this there will always be racial tension.

So, after thinking about the main aspects of the melting pot, I think that when someone immigrates to a new country they can choose to do three things: conform to the new culture, keep their old culture, or try to maintain a balance between blending in with the new and keeping the old culture as well. One of the most important aspects of this is being able to speak the language. If people cannot understand you or you cannot understand them, there will always be conflicts.

In my opinion, immigration is like a double-edged sword. It can help and hurt societies. For example, it helps keep the society growing, but then also leaves fewer jobs for the native people. This could in turn have people leaving the area in search of jobs. What other situations from immigration can you think of that would greatly affect the society?

by Aaron (AJ) Glass

In ancient years, people devoted themselves to gods. They went to worship what they believe in, attended mass, made sacrificial offerings and tried to please their God to achieve enlightenment.

Nowadays, as the influence of religion is decreasing all over the world, we created new gods to find a meaning of life. It seems to me that one of the most powerful gods is capitalism. It is all about “fun” and to achieve this enlightening status, we visit department stores, which do not only sell products but a certain life spirit. We sacrifice hours after hours in part time jobs to be able to pay the price of branded clothes, buy the stylish Starbucks Coffee and other luxurious goods. But the flip side of the coin is that in order to maintain this lifestyle, our products must be produced cheap and workers only receive low wages. While we live in abundance, others suffer. And of course, most of us are aware of this, which is why capitalism needed to recreate its image in order to appear more “human”.

The so-called cultural capitalism tells us that while we are consuming, we can do something for the environment, for the future of poor children in South America or help to buy new furniture for the coffee shop. It gives us the opportunity to continue our lifestyle and feel good at the same time. However, all this will not change the fact that we are still consumers. Maybe the South American children will receive food today, but their parents must work in a factory all day long anyhow. The system in which we live in does not support long-term help for the poor coffee plucker simply because it does not have to. Letting us think that we are already doing something good is enough to stop us from questioning it. As long as our ethnical duties seem to be fulfilled, our social self is satisfied. We do not want be the cause of others’ misfortune. However, if we think we changed something, we will keep quiet and continue consuming obediently.

Furthermore, as people have the impression that no matter what they do, the situation will not change, they experience some kind of helplessness. As a result, they gladly accept the hand of capitalistic companies and numb themselves through buying frenzies. It is easier to close one’s eyes to injustice, which is the reason little people question why Starbucks of all cafés is the one standing for fulfillment of ethnic duties.

I have the impression that a part of my generation including myself is apathetic about a lot of these problems. Not because we do not care, but because we either do not want to change or because we do not know how. But this is exactly one of the reasons why things will not change: apathy. I am not sure what is worse, doing something which has no effect or not doing anything at all. I am sure, however, that we must start thinking and consuming critically and stop being fooled by the happily-ever-after-image which is displayed by those who want us to stay numbed.

by Julia Semineth

Around the world, we can see lots of Social movements happening now including OCCUPY MOVEMENT. While some activists use excellent and other use not-so-good frame which let ordinal people think in certain way, as a matter of fact, a rapper did his social movement in 2004.

In general, rappers state ‘What’s going on in reality’ and critical view to the reality. Eminem, a Detroit rapper, launched ‘Do not vote Bush’ campaign in 2004 election through his song and its video. In this song ‘Mosh’, Eminem points out various important factors in America such as, 9/11, Iraq War, conspiracy of Al-Qaeda, racial profiling, KKK, single mother, tax policy and non-violence.

In the video, people experienced the problems like above and got to join Eminem’s Mosh Movement (march). What’s interesting here is that when people join the movement they all wear black cloth their hoodies up. This ‘hoodie’ is said to be a symbol of rebel in America. At the same time, it is a symbol of crime hence, in some areas, people are not supposed to wear hoodies or otherwise they may be arrested.

Anyway, story goes on in the video, and the gathering of mosh activists becomes bigger. He yells:

How could we allow something like this without pumping our fists?
Now this is our final hour
Let me be the voice in your strength and your choice

Finally, Mosh activists reached the Capitol-like building and Eminem leads them into the building. He takes off his hoodie and looks like responsible grown man. We can see documents saying Sign in to VOTE. Then Eminem signed his ‘voice’ and the others are lining behind him. After the scene, the message “VOTE TUESDAY NOVEMBER 2” was emphasized and the video ends there.

What I think is feasible is his way of adopting a frame in this social movement. He shows us lots of things and acts like “Please follow me if you agree with at least one thing in the song and video.” I think this point should be thought highly of.

Eminem sings with strong voice:

Mosh now or die
If I get sniped tonight you know why,
Cause I told you to fight.

I thought his movement would succeed, however “video screed against President Bush that has been racing around the Internet, may not have prompted a groundswell of youth voting” (David Carr).

We are now facing new social movement like OCCUPY MOVEMENT, which might mean that      – this is the time for everybody to Mosh again.

Mosh Video

references

“The Week Ahead”, By DAVID CARR (November 7, 2004), The New York Times

http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00C11FC39580C748CDDA80994DC404482&scp=1&sq=mosh%20eminem&st=cse

by Yuki Atsusaka