Category Archives: Class Pages

Multiculturalism in Japan

Posted on by

by Yukari Deguchi

About two decades ago, the majority of immigrants in Japan were Korean whose purpose was to get right of permanent residence after WWⅡ. But today, immigrants’ home countries, their purpose, and occupations become more various. It’s not unusual to see immigrant students at even public elementary and junior high school.

Along with this change in Japan, in 2006, the Fundamental Law of Education was amended to push ahead with education of multi- cultural society (多文化共生社会). Its principle is to understand and love each student’s own culture at first and then, realize the differences in other culture. It seems to deal with the trend of globalization, but it also gives us a question—is it able to achieve multicultural coexistence (共存)? Isn’t it side-by-side existence (並存)?

The first notable point is to understand and love each student’s culture “at first”. This patriotism-like expression has already been controversial topic among teachers, policy makers, scholars, and activists. Patriotism is not bad thing, but they concerned about connection with imperial system from historical view.

The other point is to realize the differences in other culture. I particularly would like to mention about “realize differences”. I think it may draw a firm line between “my” culture and “your” culture. Without any doubt, it’s not a problem about the matter of personal preference, like preferring bread or rice. However, are there also no problems when it comes to issues that are related with us, like whether our country should make war or not? Can Japanese accept the foreigners’ opinion that Japan should do war just because they have other cultural idea? I think the answer is no. Many Japanese might deny the opinion. Multi-cultural society is epoch-making idea though, by these examples, I’d like to say that if we misunderstand it, it becomes rejection of other culture or indifference to other culture like “I don’t care, just as you like”.

These attitudes effects some immigrants issues in Japan, such as weather immigrants can have dual citizenship or not, and how should we assure the right of illegal immigrants. These issues get little attention from society and are lack of discussion. Not for politicians, but for citizens, the reason is because they are not interested in it so much, or they don’t want to be involved in the issues that have negative effect to their living. We have to change this situation to real multi-cultural society, which is coexistence of multi culture. Otherwise, there are more and more legal and illegal immigrants who are exploited and live in poverty hidden from public view.

References

Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology「改正前後の教育基本法の比較(Contrast Between Before and After the amending of the Fundamental Law of Education)」 http://www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/kihon/about/06121913/002.pdf. Accessed 2012, 11, Nov.

Skin color and discrimination

Posted on by

by Nurussakinah Mahmud

African American history of discrimination can be traced back since early 1600s when they were brought in as slaves for white people. Although slavery has been made illegal for centuries, the discrimination against them while can be said as somehow are now more discreet, it is sadly nowhere near any ending.

While racial discrimination is not something new in this world, I admit that discrimination because of skin colour or skin tone is quite new to me. The first thing that I thought of was why would people who know how hard being discriminated against, want to discriminate each other still? The documentary of students in Hampton University showed that even in black society, the tone of your skin can also causing you to be judged by people. Suddenly, it is not just a matter of black or white anymore. It is now how dark is your skin tone; is it very dark brown, dark brown, medium brown or lighter.  But this is all happening in the African American society. Are they, after so long of being discriminated by whites, start to subconsciously thinking that they ought to become nearer to whites too in term of skin tone? Is the mass media responsible for this kind of thinking?

The portrayal of black people in television can reflect a lot to this way of thinking. For example, black is always been stereotypically portrayed as the villains or the ugly ones, thus, to not be associated with being bad, they try not to look like that, ergo they want to lighten their skin. While it is said that African Americans do have higher self esteem than whites, especially women as they are always portrayed as strong and independent, the study by Keith shows that having lighter skin tone boosted the self esteem of the women. Thus we can probably say that while they are not ashamed of being black per se, having lighter skin tone is still thought as being fairer and healthier than being darker.

Another point we discussed during the presentation was the connection between skin tone, achievement and self esteem. We pointed out that Michael Jackson for example, had a quite successful career before turning ‘white’, therefore skin tone and achievement cannot be said to be in a direct relation to each other. But after discussing it, we do found the point to be a weak one since the number of successful black men is just too few in comparison to the much lighter ones. And because the focus of this chapter is on women, the scale is definitely more imbalance.  In a world where the perception of beauty is equal to having a fair skin and physical appearance is also quite an important factor considered when looking for a job, women with lighter skin tone do get higher privileges.

Furthermore, marriage, however pathetic this may sound, is also an important socioeconomic factor or an achievement in a woman’s life. Thus, to get a good husband, a woman has to put herself at par with the others in term of beauty. This is where the self esteem (as well as good whitening products) comes into equation. Even though one can be successful without having a high self esteem, self esteem definitely can boost up one’s chance to be successful and if being lighter skinned can make a woman self esteem to increase, her chance to get a good husband is also indirectly increased since she is now what people generally assume to be a beauty.

Skin Color and Self-Esteem

Posted on by

by Marina Sata Khan

The chapter presented research that showed that those with lighter skin tone had been able to “achieve” more, in terms of income, jobs (even within the “Black” race), yet Black women have overall high self-esteem. To be honest, I was not surprised at all with the latter discovery.

Watching USA TV shows, Black men tend to be portrayed as criminals, gangsters, and rappers from the ghettos (other than the President). But on the other hand, I recall that Black women were portrayed simply as successful “strong” women on TV that are confident, well-spoken with an outgoing attitude. Such examples are Oprah Winfrey, Tyra Banks, Naomi Campbell, Whoopi Goldberg and Beyoncé. All these women tend portray an image of the “Strong independent black woman”, a certain identity that seems to promote and encourage high self esteem amongst black women.

Not having ever been to the USA (except for the state of Hawai’i), it was not until recent that I was truly aware of a Black and White divide. As a young child, I had been engrained with the image of ‘Sesame Street’ where to every blonde ponytail girl there was a boy with a black Afro. They lived in the same flats and played with each other on the stairs along with their Hispanic and Asian friends. ‘Arthur’ was also such TV show, although they were all animals – I believed that Arthur, a smart loveable mouse with glasses, was a Black boy, and he had many friends of different races. As a child, I thought that the USA was a perfect multiracial country.

But as I grew older I realized that this was all “just a lie”, around the time I became familiar with rap music and began to watch more than morning children shows. At school I learnt about Black slavery, but along with the Civil Rights Movement, making it seem that there was something in the past, but that did not matter anymore as things were all mended now. However, I continued to become aware of the discrimination that still existed, especially through exposure of US media. I began to think about if Britney Spears or Lindsay Lohan was African American… I hardly doubt their court cases would simply be written as some “naughty party girl” issues under the gossip column. I remember hearing Naomi Campbell’s cases of assault on the afternoon news, and the image around was that she was completely “evil”, everyone conveniently forgetting her efforts that even led her to be referred to as an “honorary granddaughter” by Nelson Mandela.

The chapter went even deeper, into the issue of skin tone even within the Black community. This was the point that was shocking to me rather than the part about self esteem. As long as there is a group that benefits from a certain characteristic in society, i.e. fair skin color, I feel as though people who have lighter skin would be advantaged and the darkest of the darkest pushed to the bottom. This is certainly another form of discrimination, and doesn’t this need to be addressed alongside racism?

Mestizaje and skin color

Posted on by

by Jun Sakakibara

According to the reading, “mestijaze” is a racial concept and national ideology lies in Mexican society. Mexican people understand that Mexico is such a multi-race nation and since everybody is mixed race, there should be no discrimination against racial differences. They prefer to use the word of “color” than “race” when they describe other people.

The reading also brought the fact that it may not be a complete racism, however, at least a sort of preference towards lighter skin color exists in society. People want to be their offspring white, people think white people are more attractive, and some seeks whiter skin colored partner for marriage. Mexican women try to whiten themselves and being white could be a part of beauty for them.

I guess Japanese people also have same kind of preference towards white as Mexicans do. For instance, many Japanese women are addicted to get whiter skin (“bihaku”) and they put a lot of medical efforts to get it. Since in Japan there is only one race, even though we hold preference to whiter skin people, it never is a serious problem and it never is a source to judge people. While Japanese its tendency can be seen just as “preference”, I think Mexico’s case goes a bit further than that. There would be status exchange issue behind. The image of white people can be such as “good people”, “socially better status” or “wealthier”. As I mentioned above, if you are not white and if you have dark colored skin, you want to get married with whiter skin colored partner not only for you own benefit of getting higher social status but also for your offspring. In this sense, it goes over the preference.

The discussion point was whether Mexico should have affirmative action and change to white supremacy. The book of psychology, which I am reading these days said we create oneself by interacting with other people in society and we see ourselves as how others see us. Thus it is a normal thing that we always want to be better than others and we want to be seen better and higher by others. Also, in my opinion their preference is too strong but I do not think they do as much racists’ discriminations compared to US, for instance. So I am not sure if I agree to take affirmative actions in Mexico. In addition, it sounds such a contradiction that Mexicans say they are not racists at all and in reality they do things, which seem like a racist, though, can we say Japanese people are not racists at all? We think we are not racists either, but for example, none of us would be happy to marry with burakumin unless you are burakumin. Isn’t it same kind of discrimination as Mexicans do? In fact, Mexican people’s preference can be much more stronger than Japanese’. However, for me it seems that Japanese society has contradiction of national race concept as well. I feel if we say Mexico needs change, Japan needs change too. The difference is that In Japan, this kind of racial topic is a taboo to talk whereas in Mexico it could be an open topic to discuss. In this sense, I think Mexico has a bit more process towards race issue than Japan.

The Dynamics of Color

Posted on by

by Marina Sata Khan

Christina A. Sue writes on the perceptions of Mexican people regarding skin color, making apparent the tones of racism under the surface of their “mestizaje” society.

In her interviews, many Mexicans responded that they would like a lighter skinned partner, finding “white” features to be attractive. Many expressed their want to have a fairer partner lying in the fact that they wanted their children to have lighter skin. The preference towards whiter skin was more than obvious.

I grew up in Australia, a so-called “multicultural” nation. I would say “race” probably does not play a role as big as it does in the United States, however, I would find it more than wrong to say racism does not exist in Australia. I think it could even be said that it has one of the most legally racist histories in the world, especially to the indigenous Aboriginals.

The Stolen Generation refers to the Aboriginal children who were removed from their families and placed in missionaries and foster families. The idea behind this was to eventually eliminate the Aboriginal people, by encouraging intercultural marriages. If a “half-caste” married a White, and so did the next generation, eventually there will be no full-blooded dark skinned Aboriginals (although they were believed to die out anyway due to the popular belief of Darwinism). We see today that many Aboriginal cultures and languages have disappeared, and the Aboriginal people still continue to be underprivileged despite the apology by Kevin Rudd (then Australian Prime Minister) in 2007 for such actions by the government.

Although in the case of Mexican society people are simply ‘preferring’ to marry whites, there seems to be something similar. If all Mexicans choose to marry lighter skinned partners, would darker skinned African descendant Mexicans eventually disappear? Is this right? Is this natural? Is this wrong? Or is it simply something that would never happen with absolutely no similarity with the Stolen Generation example?

I think this would be a very interesting topic to discuss and think about, as not only does it apply in Mexico, but in most parts of the world where the undertones of white supremacy still seem to play a large role in societies today.

Shifting Identities

Posted on by

by Karen Mori

The new type of racial approach which ignores the salience of race, claiming that there is no such thing as race and racism can be observed in Latin America and the author is predicting that this “Latin Americanization” can occur in the United States.

This Latin Americanization will form a complex racial stratification system developing a triracial system with whites at the top, an intermediary group of honorary whites, and the nonwhite group at the bottom, according to the author. Rank ordering of groups and members of groups are defined according to phenotype and cultural characteristics. As a result, these groups of races are not cleanly delineated, and unlike biracial system, intermediary group will play a role as buffer of racial conflicts. Nevertheless, the idea of racial mixing or racial democracy adopted by this racial approach does not challenge the white supremacy in colonial or post-colonial Latin America. For example, the social practice of whitening, gives a goal to move upward in hierarchical movement, instead of showing racial flexibility, so the result is white supremacy.

The authors are arguing that America will become like Latin America because racial minorities have increased, and race relations are becoming globalized in United States. While some analysts welcome Latin Americanization as a positive trend, others questions that if it is to maintain a white supremacy.

On the other hand, Japan is now believed that it is a homogeneous country, but this is an illusion. Japan used to have extended definition of Japanese during the time of Japanese colonialism. Under Japanese empire, all people in colonized country became Japanese. Japan educated Korean and Chinese to be Japanese, and gave Japanese citizenship. However, some people claim that there were racial stratification discriminating Chinese and Korean.

After the Japanese Empire collapsed, Japan started to claim Japanese uniqueness and homogeneity of shared blood, culture and language, so definition of Japanese became narrow. What we call Nihonjin-ron is a product of the war and increased a sense of Japanese identity and pride as well as the visibility of “Others”, particularly resident Koreans. Kana and I think this definition of Japanese(ness), either prewar definition or postwar definition, has some similarity to the situation of Latin America or the United States.

Mestizaje, Racism and Blackness in Veracruz, Mexico

Posted on by

by Isabel Cabañas Rojas

“Latin America is a region of mixture”. Many cultures, religions and races are gathered; all condensed in one major community, unified under one idea: we are mestizos. Every country has their own particular characteristics though, but despite historical or regional small differences, we are all mestizos, latinos, sons of a common history and memory derived from the presence of Spaniards and Native Americans. At least this is what we are told since childhood.

This assumption is probably one of the most powerful discourses still present nowadays, that defines our identities, nationally and as Americanos, even transcending internal boundaries within the region. A very powerful and, yet, dangerous discourse, for it hides a latent reality that has enabled discrimination and the suffering of many, a big ‘minority’, who does not enter in this category, as are the descendants of African slaves.

This has happened in many countries of Latin America; however, the case of Mexico is very emblematic: its historical trajectory of mixture has only accepted the presence of Spaniards and Indigenous populations, and has denied and silenced a whole history of sub-Saharan African migration and its role on the Mexican society. Because of Mestizaje, and its strong presence as a national ideology since the nineteenth century, the presence of Africans started to blur, for economic and social reasons. Until today being ‘black’ escapes the limits of being Mexican, and Mestizaje has come to hidden the phenotypic features that is better to erase, by a process of whitening, in order to belong.

As Sue (2009) explains, Mestizaje has become a national ideology category, dynamic and diverse, which makes really hard the analysis of color in the Mexican society, as almost everybody can be included on it (Sue, 2009, pp. 114-115). Thus, in a practical level, Mestizaje is a denial and elimination of any difference, as “we are all mestizos”.

Veracruz–along with the localities of Guerrero, Oaxaca and Tabasco–is one of the historical settlements of African people in Mexico, since the fifteenth century. Therefore, their descendants today, even though very mixed with the local population of Indigenous and Spaniards, have a skin and background of African features, which they try to hide so as to be part of a society that also has segregated them socially and economically (Velásquez & Iturralde Nieto, 2012, pp. 110-113). In a Survey made by the National Council to Prevent Discrimination (2011) around 15% of the interviewees think that their rights have not been respected because of skin color (National Council to Prevent Discrimination, 2011, p. 41).

This case of Afro-Mexicans in Veracruz, and the outcomes of their skin-colors for their daily life, challenges the notion of mestizaje, which not only has shaped the history and culture of Mexico, but of all the countries of Ibero-America; and sheds new light on other issues, such as Racism and Discrimination. Any discussion on Race and discrimination is, in paper, not pertinent, because Mexico became a race-blind country. How, then, can we address racial minority needs if they theoretically do not exist?

References

Martínez-Echazabal, L. (1998). Mestizaje and the Discourse of National/Cultural Identity in Latin America, 1845-1959. Latin American Perspectives, 25 (3), 21-42.

National Council to Prevent Discrimination. (2011). National Survey on Discrimination in Mexico, Overall Results [ENADIS, 2010]. Mexico.

Sue, C. (2009). The Dynamics of Color. Mestizaje, Racism, and Blackness in Veracruz, Mexico. In E. Nakano Glenn (Ed.), Shades of Difference. Why Skin Color Matters (pp. 114-128). Stanford University Press.

Velásquez, M. E., & Iturralde Nieto, G. (2012). Afrodescendientes en México. Una historia de silencio y discriminación [Afrodescendants in Mexico. A history of silence and discrimination]. Consejo Nacional para Prevenir la Discriminación.

The Social Consequences of Skin Color in Brazil

Posted on by

by Joana Ito

Cultural diversity and racial miscegenation is now an image that Brazil is pride to export. However, the ideal of racial democracy in Brazil is still a dream. Although the ideology of miscegenation is widely spread, the mixing of races and colors did not result in physical nor socioeconomic homogeneity.

The problem of racial discrimination against blacks in Brazil is largely attributed to the historical past. The racial inequality that remains in Brazilian society is regarded as a consequence of the long history of enslavement, an inheritance of a dirty past of exclusion and discrimination. However, in a society where the general perception of “being black equals being poor” remains, and where most would be truly surprised if they met a black lawyer, doctor or businessman, the discussion of race and color cannot be limited to matters of correcting a “historical debt”.

Black African slavery did, undeniably, impose social economic exclusion for black people and was cause and consequence for the establishment of racist values of white superiority. Amazingly though, the question of white privilege is often disregarded in the discussion of racial inequality in Brazil. In its discussion, the focus is not on the income concentration of white elites, but on the poverty of the black. It is more about the fact that the black cannot benefit from the free public higher education, rather than about the fact that richer white portion of the population enjoyed for decades a “free” education in public universities, subsidized by taxes of the whole population and with high costs for the public budget.

In August this year, Brazil government enacted an affirmative action law requiring federal universities to reserve half of their admission spots for students from public secondary schools, with racial quotas prioritizing the blacks, pardos and indigenous. Additionally, a plan for the adoption of quotas for blacks in the federal bureaucracy should be announced in late November, representing important gains for the Black Movement. Nevertheless, it is relevant to point that the protection of white privilege is an issue that is not limited to the problem of access to quality education and job opportunities. The historically very high concentration of land ownership inherited by white elites and also the regressive tax system that largely lifts the burden from the higher income class are not only issues that protect an economic elite, but mostly a white economic elite.

The plurality and differences of the Brazilian society are not only in the color of the population, but also reinforced by a socioeconomic stratification in which the majority of the black and pardos remain in the lower class, while the white enjoys the effects of white privilege. To believe that Brazil is a racial paradise, in essence, is to deny the relevance of these issues of inequality and dominance.

Is Brazil’s New Affirmative Action Policy Fair?

Posted on by

by Satoru Kishi

On August 29th, 2012, the Brazilian government passed a law to oblige all public universities in Brazil to ensure fifty percent of their admission seats to the poorer background students. The fifty-nine federal universities in Brazil, usually free of charge, have only four years to implement this law (Romeo, 2012). The objective of this affirmative action is to bring major changes in the social structure and lessen the income inequality in Brazil.

First, this law will generate a great transformation of social structure or the seats of the elite jobs. Currently, most of the elite jobs or high wage jobs are possessed by the so-called “whites”. If the new affirmative policy were to be enforced, it would create better chances for blacks or Africans and the indigenous people to be educated in great universities, fewer for the affluent whites, automatically assuring more possibility for the poor background blacks to attain high-wage, elite jobs, like becoming a lawyer and a governor. This will also contribute in reducing the gap between the rich and poor, or whites and blacks, since the people with poorer background will have better opportunity.

Despite of this reputable intention, there are questions of whether this affirmative action policy is just or not. There are many aspects to this issue.

From the Utilitarian perspective, since this was signed by the President and given consensus by eighty out of eighty-one senators, who were elected by its citizens through domestic impartial election, the implementation of the affirmative policy is justified, because it signifies the majority of its opinion, maximizing the utility and happiness of all people.

For the libertarians, the only consideration for them is whether this policy violates the fundamental individual human rights. Through giving an invented example, this issue can be seen clearly. Let’s assume that that the university admission requires students to take a central exam. A black woman score 50 out of 100 and a white woman score 70 out of 100. With the new policy implemented in four years, a university may take this poorer black woman, rather than highly educated rich white woman. Some may say this is unjust, prejudice and violate the white woman’s individual rights, because she is discriminated in something that she cannot control. On the other hand, some may claim that this is just, when considering the fact that this black woman could not afford to attend a good high school as the white woman, due to economic reasons. This corrective reasoning of justifying the affirmative action is still arguable.

Another justification for the affirmative action is compensatory reasoning. From the 16th to the 19th century, the “whites” or former Europeans had been importing massive African slaves, seven times of the number exported to the United States, and forced them and the indigenous people to work on agriculture and mining, with cheap labor or for free (Telles, 2009). To compensate for historical exploitation, it is arguable that this affirmative action is temporary justifiable, until the blacks reaches the social and economic equality as whites. In contrast, there are many people who argue that “why do the present people have to pay for what their ancestors or what people in the past did” (Sandel, n.d.).

Another possible justification for this affirmative action is that universities are better off to have more diversity, whether people are coming from different social, economic, national, ethnic or racial background. Assuming that the universities’ main objective is to educate students and make them attain better jobs, having diversity in universities is an advantage, because it creates an opportunity for students from different background to share their opinions, cultivate in way of thinking and learn how people from diverse background look at the world differently (Sandel, n.d.).

Currently the public universities in Brazil is said to be better than the private ones (Romeo, 2012). However, due to the implementation of the affirmative law, there may be a large flow of educated white professors and students into private school, who dislike blacks, lowering the educational level of Brazil’s public university.

References:

Romeo, S. (2012). Brazil enacts affirmative action law for universities. The New York Times: Americas. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/31/world/americas/brazil-enacts-affirmative- action-law-for-universities.html?_r=0

Sandel, A. (n.d.). Justice: What’s the right thing to do? Episode 09. Harvard University Lecture. Podcast retrieved from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUhReMT5uqA

Telles, E. E. (2009). Affirmative action in Brazil. Wideangle. Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/wnet/wideangle/lessons/brazil-in-black-and-white/discrimin ation-and-affirmative-action-in-brazil/4323/

Nihonjinron and the Latin Americanization of Race

Posted on by

by Kana Masaki

The chapter says that American race relation is becoming Latin America–like. It has two main characteristics. The first one is color–blind racism, which denies the salience of race. In other words, it’s a racism that acts as if race doesn’t matter at all even when it does matter. The second one is triracial stratification system. It consists of whites at the top, honorary whites in the middle, and the collective blacks at the bottom. According to the authors, the existence of honorary whites can lessen conflicts between whites and blacks. The author also says that these three groups are stratified based on color. Racial approaches in Latin America are racial mixing, triracial stratification system, colorism and so on. The reason why Latin Americanization is happening now is because of the increase of racial minorities, color–blind racism and so on. The date proves Latin Americanization is happening such as gaps in terms of income. As a conclusion, the author predicts the change of racial politics in the future.

We think Nihonjinron and Japanese racial supremacy during Japanese emperor period have something to do with Latin Americanization. Basically, Latin Americanization is making white supremacy even bigger. Nihonjinron and Japanese racial supremacy thoughts also made Japanese people superior. During the Japanese colonization against Korea, the government made some documents written about Japanese supremacy such as hakkou-ichiu. It says Japan should be the one who controls East Asia because they are superior. Also, the government needed to create their own identity, Japaneseness to catch up with Western countries. Nihonjinron shows off claims of Japanese uniqueness and homogeneity of shared culture, blood, language.

Personally, I thought this reading was interesting. It made me realize that racial inequalities still exist. Always, racial inequality is difficult to feel for me, because I live in Japan and never been to America and other racially mixed countries. My personal question is whether whites realize they are still discriminating against honorary whites and blacks. Do they know that they are just getting involved with color–blind racism trend? Do they really think that inequalities against blacks are because of the lack of efforts or something? I think white supremacy never disappears unless they realize they are just going with color–blind racism trend. It’s maybe a psychological thing, but once people get a supremacy, they tend not to throw it away, because they’ve already known how nice to be superior to others. In this sense, supremacy is really scary, I think.