by Ryoko Yorifuji

On September 17 last year, a movement happened in New York. The movement, Occupy Wall Street, is that the grass roots people protest against a gap in the USA. The movement’s appeal began July in last year and happened to the movement after two months. Most of participants are the young and the unemployed. Their insistences are increase of employment, criticism of relief to financial institutions by the government and criticism of treating the rich very well. Moreover, the movement was spread around the world; New York, London, Berlin, Paris, Sydney, Rome, Tokyo, and so on. The movement showed how many people were dissatisfied with the present society in the world.

The slogan of Occupy Movement is “We are the 99%”. This slogan shows the situation which is assets of the rich; high-rank 1% has continued to increase in the USA since 1970s. In 2007, the richest high-rank 1% has 34.6% of all of assets in the USA, and the next 19% has 50.5% of those. The taxation system in the USA doesn’t strict against the rich, but against the poor, the system is stricter than the rich. So, the rich become is more and more richer, and the poor is more and more poorer. In this way, the gap is wide and the poor’s complaints are grown; why the rich is continued to treat very well? We keep living in poverty. Such a condition is unfairness!

However, I cannot attack the rich and agree the poor simply. I am not rich and I don’t intend to stand by the rich. Why do I think like this? The reason that I think the rich’s success is the result of their efforts. But I feel that the movement insists the rich earn their income by doing easy jobs or nothing. In fact, the rich is treated well and a part of them may do easy jobs. However all of them are not like this. If some had taken pains and climbed all the way up to the present position. So, I cannot unconditionally say the rich should be levied heavy tax.

The movement has a feature; Internet or SNS (Social Network Service). In New York, a crowd of several thousand people gathered for the movement. Why could so many people gather? The answer is Internet. They looked at Twitter, Facebook and other SNS and knew about the movement. The movement spread too rapidly. Why? The answer is Internet or SNS. By Internet, other country people could know the movement and take action at once. So, the movement was only today.

The movement express today; poverty, gap or SNS. And insists of the movement are doubted. I look at nothing but venting the participants’ anger.

However, I think the present society should be changed; the low-rank people need not to live poverty. If the high-rank people made the effort, the present gap is too wide. And the gap must be corrected. The movement is weak and transient. But the movement shows the society is needed to change. Now the movement becomes calm, however such a movement must be happened in the near future.

Reference

Occupy Wall Street | NYC Protest for World Revolution. [occupywallst.org/] (2012/06/11)

Occupy Wall Street | World news | The Guardian. [http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/occupy-wall-street] (2012/06/11)

Occupy Wall Street and the King Memorial Ceremonies. [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/clarence-b-jones/obama-mlk-memorial-_b_1016077.html] (2012/06/11)

It’s the Inequality, Stupid. [http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph] (2012/06/11)

by Yuuki Tashiro

Now I study the affairs in 90s personally. When I thought the changed point before 90s and after it, I noticed the collapse of the Soviet Union had important role. In this blog, I write the cause and result about it.

Firstly, as we know, the Soviet Union had big power and influence to a lot of country as a biggest communist country from 50s to 80s. However, in the country corrupt practice gradually became quiet common among the communist party. And the power decreased through the cold war with the US. For example, they used huge budgets to military affair. So a lot of material and daily necessities lacked with ordinary people. Beside the party’s oppression to people was a big problem in the country. Soviet Union needed to oppress democratization in order to oppose with democracy and capitalism which the US insist on. Although, Gorbachev who elected as a secretary- general in 1985 started liberalization and democratization. It is called perestroika. At the same time, he started glasnost in this policy, public information proceeded. For example, a nuclear power plant disaster in Chernobyl was known by people at the first time. And people knew that government hide a lot of information. As a result, this action by Gorbachev guided collapse of a wall of Berlin. Finally Soviet Union lost the influence to the communist countries and member of Soviet Union left from it in 1991. Then Russia gave up communism and made CIS. This is the present Russia.

Well, the collapse of Soviet Union affected all over the world. There are many changed things before and after this collapse. The end of cold war is one of the biggest occurrence. By that time, opposition between communism and capitalism made built frame of the world, however, after this incident, new frame was built up. Firstly the US had biggest power and influence. In other ward, the US got hegemony of the world. So now, American’s globalism spread to everywhere. Also It can say that capitalism and liberalism, democracy spread except for a few countries, for example North Korea. I think it is good point, but there are bad points, of course. After this incident, ethnic conflict increased. East‐West confrontation had hidden ethnic conflict, but collapse of Soviet Union opened the veil. But at the same time, United Nation gradually works well. In cold war, Soviet and the US used many vote powers, so United Nations Security Council was not able to work in such conflict. It may be good changed point of collapse of Soviet.

References

ポスト・ペレストロイカの世界像、「帝国」はなぜ崩壊したのか / 進藤榮一著　筑摩書房

MSN Sankei news 2011.12.19. <http://sankei.jp.msn.com/world/news/111219/erp11121907510003-n1.htm&gt;

by Momoyo Tanaka

It is difficult for working mothers to balance work and family at the same time. Once it was said that men have to work outside, and women have to keep their house and care children. But now, in many developed countries, it is common for both mother and father to work outside the house because one salary does not provide enough income. Even in this situation, it is said that mothers should keep the house more than fathers because of former values. If working mothers work hard, they can’t care for their children a lot, and children might feel lonely. Then, if working mothers tend to care children a lot, they would have backlog, and they would trouble her company. Women should be supermom to solve this problem, but it is difficult in actuality. These two things are important to manage work and family: fathers’ support and coming in contact with children.

First, father’s support is necessary for every working mother. Even if father is busy, he should support his wife. For example, washing clothes, washing the dishes, taking children to and from kindergarten ― It is OK to help only something simple. If the father helps with housework, the mother would feel physical and mental relief, and she can work more hard. To realize such good situation, it is important to talk about divide up the housework between mother and father well.

Second, coming in contact with children is also essential. Even if mother and father are hectic, contacting is so important for children. But it is difficult for working parents because if they are at home, they are busy to do a lot of housework. Then, should do it together! The parents do housework changing to playing. If mother want to wipe the floor with a damp cloth, she should compete with her children whether which can wipe a large range. And if father want to wash a car, he should wash it with his children while playing in the water. The housework that mother and father do is very interesting for children, so if parent do it with their children, they can use the time effectively. They can share time with their children a lot.

Therefore, women can balance work and child care if she cooperates in family. Mothers should not do both of them perfect alone.

by Akiko Takano

I was shocked to read “The Care Crisis in the Philippines” as homework. Indeed, there was the mutual love between parent and child even if mother lives far distantly. However, it is ironic for migrant mother to go abroad and take care of the unrelated child in order to earn money even though she has own child. Migrant mother works overseas; meanwhile, she can hardly meet her child, and father and the relative bring up her child. I was interested in the facts, so this report introduces the example that Philippine migrant parents who went to Italy for working and I want to find a solution of this situation.

In this paragraph, I discuss an example that not only mother but also father go to Italy from the Philippines for migrant workers and have their relative bring up their child. Migrant parents can take a child younger than 18 years to Italy if they acquire residence permission in Italy. However, migrant parents actually not only leave their child in the hometown, but also send back even their child born in Italy to their hometown, and their relatives take care of their child. Why on earth such matter happens? There are mainly two reasons. First, migrant parents have little time to take care of their children. Because they come Italy to earn money, they often get full-time or live-in job. If bring their child, they have to reduce work. Second, the cost of living becomes rise if they live with their child in Italy. Because the prices of the developed country are high, it is cheaper bringing up their child in the mother country than migrated place. In short, migrant parents face problems of time and money if they try to receive their child. As a result they choose to leave their children in the Philippine.

Well then, how will this problem be solved? I think that children had better live with their real parents even if they have the relatives who bring up them. However, the structure of the migrant worker in the Philippine cannot be changed immediately. It supports the economy of the Philippines. Although, I believe there is a way to improve this situation. The country accepting migrant workers should have understanding for the child care of the migrant worker. The government should arrange the system that they are compatible with work, and child care. Not only migrant parents but also the country accepting them should grapple with this problem. If the country assists, future of the children will become bright.

Reference

Itaru Nagasaka. (2009). “国境を超えるフィリピン村人の民族誌　トランスナショナリズムの人類学”. tokyo:Akasi syoten.

by Mari Sunagawa

Most people accept the conservative gender ideology automatically. It is common for the women to do housework. Not only in family but also in the society, the women are engaged in the job like housework. The jobs such as housekeeper, nanny and teacher in nursery schools are occupied by the women. The men don’t want to do such works so they tend to leave everything of housework to the women. People think that women should do housework even if they work outside. The thought that women don’t work is old ideology. On the other hand, people regard the thought that women should do housework as natural, not old.

In China, the equal employment opportunity law was established in 1949. After that, women who have children started to work outside. The number of the working women had increased. However, in 1980, the quality of housework was regarded as very important thing to grow children up. They said that children must be taught social rules and studies at home.

If the husbands earn enough money to make a living, some of their wives become housewives because they cannot do housework and work in outside. They do not have the way that the husbands do housework. According to the questionnaire in China, the 42,7% Chinese women thought that the men should work and the women should housework. They do not refuse the gender ideology. Nowadays, both parents have to work outside to earn money. This situation produced the new gender ideology. The women must do housework and work in outside. It is difficult to do both works so it is said “Work Family Conflict” by Japanese scholar. Though it is the problem of both parents, the husband connects it with the ability and effort of wife. Few men help women cooking or cleaning clothes. When Chinese government establishes the only child policy, the Chinese hope to have a son, not a daughter. They want him to work hard although the women can work as well as the men.

I noticed some reason why the gender ideology has existed. First, people suppose that the men are more efficient than the women in society so the women had better stay at home. I think that there are physical differences based on sex but the gap of ability between women and men doesn’t exist. Second, the women accept this gender ideology. It helps keeping conservative thoughts. Participating the movements, the women called for jobs and got it. Next step is to tell the men that the housework is not women’s job. The social movements are required to change the mind of people in the world.

Reference

Hiromi Ishizuka. 2010. Chugokuroudou no gender bunseki. Keisoushobou

by Megumi Shishido

The society is supported by the work of people. According to “United Nations, The second half of the year of Female 10 years,” women occupy 50% of adults’ population of the world, one third of the world’s public works and two thirds of whole works in the world, but women receive only one tenth of world’s income and have 1% or less of world’s property. Women are often engaged in unpaid work; house work, childcare, nursing care, volunteer and so on. These works aren’t paid money. Also women can’t work like men because women often have to work while they do house work and their paid works aren’t estimated as same as male paid works.

Sex roles are received in Japan yet. However, when we look back at human history, such cooperation is a very recent thing. In a hunter-gatherer society, men went to hunt and women gathered fruits, nuts and rhizomes and so on to keep their living. In an agricultural society, men and women did agricultural productions as business partners. In these societies, male and female works were estimated equally. The development of industrialization changed the cooperation to sex roles that men work in the outside of house and women work in the inside of house. So women must depend on men financial. According to “United Nations, The World’s Women 2000: Trends and Statics,” generally women spend more 50%~70% times than men do, but in Japan and Korea women spend doing unpaid work seven times as long as men do. And the world’s economy is a depression, so both men and women work outside the house to keep family living. Women became to work outside the house, but men didn’t become to do unpaid works. We will be able to say at least in Japan the tendency was strong. Women became to a double burden that women must be coexist with household and work.

Therefore, women should participate in paid work more and men should participate in unpaid work more. For the realization, the most important thing is preparing female environment for work. Nursery schools for leaving children without anxiety and care homes for looking after parents should be set up. Especially at husbands’ place of work it should become easier to take childcare leave. Like this, companies should prepare environment for work and consider each employee’s family conditions. Also the idea of sex roles should be changed among people, especially among older people. Some of older people have the idea that women must work inside the house yet.

In Japan, we have the problems of gender and sex roles. As stated above, most of these problems are about female treatment. However, if women participate paid work more, next male treatment may be regarded as a problem.

References

Kiyoko Kinjo. “Gender Law, 2nd ed.” Yu-kakusya, 2007.

by Koki Shiozaki

In 2011, the movement took place in NY, screaming frames “Occupy Wall Street” and “We are the 99％.” Wall Street is the center of world economy and symbolized for the rich. So to occupy there stands for the protest to share everything, money ,right, opportunity and so on with us. This movement spread all over the world, included Japan. And this key frame also spread, such as “Occupy Tokyo.” this frame is easy to understand and have great effect on the others. When political and economic issues are transformed into cultural issues, they become inevitable. The party of Wall Street give us a question to the modern world.

Anti-globalism maintains that modern globalism is wrong, but we do not oppose to globalization itself. Merely because the rich who have almost all welfare of the world should be distributed. This movement also has their key  frame, that is “Another World is Possible.” this movement is represented by World Social Forum.  Anti-Globalism and Occupy movement have the same goal. But today each movement have their own frame and repertoire.  Only a big frame like “Another World is Possible” can not tie up each movement. Each movement need their own movement and policy for a goal. “a movement of movements” (T. Mertes, ed., A Movement of Movements: Is Another World Really Possible? 2004, Verso.） indicates that each movement has independence each other and they don’t disappear within a big movement.

Each movement have relationship and act each other. A movement which take place in a country became transnational movement. Concretely, a movement in a country gain to support from international NGO( Naoto.H p214). Taiwanese human rights movement appeal to American human rights party, instead of Taiwanese movement have an opportunity to appeal to their own government. And  American movement take an action to American government, and  the government pressure on Taiwanese government. Like a boomerang, the influence goes by roundabout route.

“Occupy Tokyo,”“Occupy Wall Street,” “Another World is Possible” are all connected. A movement occurred in  a certain country has grown up and have great  effect on the world and play an important roll in the world. These frames make the movement easy to connect and spread.

Reference

Naoto. H  2004    “Shakaiundo toiu Koukyokukan”   

David. H  2012   “ REBEL CITIES”   

T. Mertes  2004  “A Movement of Movements: Is Another World Really Possible?” Verso