Tag Archives: immigration

Should the Japanese Government Institute an Education System for Immigrants?

Posted on by

by Megumi Takase

In “International Sociology” class, I was surprised to hear that in Europe, students from other backgrounds take two or three times a week to have lessons in their native languages. In Japan, some elementary schools in which there are many foreign students have Japanese classes for them to understand regular Japanese classes. However, few schools have lessons for immigrants in their own languages. In addition, there are not many ethnic schools in Japan. Even though foreigners living in Japan mostly consist of Chinese, there are only 5 Chinese Schools in Japan. If children from other countries continue to attend Japanese schools and don’t do vigorous effort to learn their history or culture, they will have difficulty in building their identities. This is one of the reasons why foreigners are unwilling to live in Japan for a long time.

In my opinion, Japan should institute an education system for immigrants. For example, it should begin classes for immigrants in their native languages. It not only benefits students from other countries but also Japanese. It will increase the number of immigrants if Japanese education system is reformed in favor of foreigners. Japanese is suffering an aging society, so Japan will face the problem of lack of labor in the near future. Thus, Japan should accept immigrants to solve these problems. In order for foreigners to be willing to come and live in Japan, Japan should create the environment for them to live comfortably. One of reforms which Japan should tackle is education system.

It will also lead to intensification of international competitiveness of Japan if many foreigners immigrate to Japan. It is said that Japanese have difficulty in speaking foreign languages. In the times of globalization, people who are fluent in many languages are needed. If immigrants grow up as bilingual and begin to work in Japanese corporations, they will largely contribute to corporations.

If Japanese government begins to institute an education system for immigrants, many people will come from other countries and live in Japan. They will serve Japanese society. It is difficult for schools to begin classes for immigrants in their native languages because immigrants come from different countries around the world. Schools should create these classes cooperating with the local universities specializing in foreign languages. It will also lead to create Japanese bilingual students.

Reference

[i] Weblio. (n.d.). Retrived October 17, 2013 from http://www.weblio.jp/ontology/%E4%B8%AD%E8%8F%AF%E5%AD%A6%E6%A0%A1_1

Are foreign languages a threat to the host country culture and language?

Posted on by

by Glenn Soenvisen

In the mid-90’s a new term, “Kebab-Norwegian,” was coined in Norway; it meant the dialect of the Norwegian language which contained relatively many loanwords from non-western immigrants. This term was soon picked up and used vigorously by the media, where it sometimes was stated as a reason for the deterioration of the “real” Norwegian language. In some extreme cases it was even stated that the verb was put in the wrong place when speaking “Kebab-Norwegian” and female and neuter gender nouns became male. Some even said that it brought unwanted culture into the country, stating that degrading non-western words for “females” were used to refer to females in general. In short, some people perceived “Kebab-Norwegian” as a threat to the “real” Norwegian culture and language. Therefore, we needed assimilation of the users in order to retain our national identity and values.

What I find funny about this, though, is how little basis there are for these utterances. For one thing, “Kebab-Norwegian” is only used in the eastern parts of the Norwegian capital Oslo by immigrant youth and their possible native Norwegian friends; it’s an ethnolect rather than a dialect, and there has been no proof of it spreading to other parts of the country, as is only logical since ethnolects are associated with specific ethnic or cultural subgroups. You could say it is an in-group way of speaking.

And that brings me to another thing worth pointing out: the ethnolect in question is spoken, not written. Sure, users may write it when chatting online through facebook and the like, but those services are closed networks and not available to everyone. Furthermore, even Norwegians may write in their own dialects in such contexts, but it doesn’t seem to affect their ability to write correctly written Norwegian when needed.

Moreover, considering that “Kebab-Norwegian” is almost exclusively used by youths, the users of it are most likely bilingual, or even trilingual, having learned “real” Norwegian from a very young age, as well as English which are being taught from early elementary school level. Keeping this in mind we can take a look at what Alejandro Portes writes in his feature article “English-only triumphs, but the costs are high:” bilinguals outperform their monolingual counterparts in almost all cognitive tests.

In short, immigrants speaking “Kebab-Norwegian” should have no more difficulty in using suitable language to suitable situations on the same level as native Norwegians do. That learning two or more languages at the same time makes for underdeveloped ability in both/all is a thought for the 1930’s.

Besides, even Norwegians themselves mess with the genders of the nouns. I myself use all three genders (male, female, neuter), but in some parts of Norway the female one doesn’t exist. There’s also often the case that nouns can be used as both male and female. What’s more, the new rages in the language debate is that native Norwegian children are more and more using the sound sh [ ʃ ] where kj [ ç ] should be used and, to a lesser degree, using the word hvem (who) where hvilken (which) should be used.

Lastly, it’s not like degrading words for females in general is exclusive to non-western languages. I dare say that bitch is, unfortunately, used extensively in informal spoken English and Norwegian both.

Of course, foreign languages may have influence on the national language and culture, but only in minor ways, such as adding words which we don’t have any words for in our own language, replacing interjections, or introducing new foods. However, this cannot be considered a threat at all. Rather than threatening, the influences enrich and enhance, like an add-on to your browser. If “Kebab-Norwegian” really was a threat, one can wonder why the English influence, which is much bigger, hasn’t made us all speak “Norwish” yet. There is no need for complete assimilation.

“Now I know what it’s like to be black!” Invisible Minorities and Privilege in Japan

Posted on by

by Robert Moorehead

Recently, the Japan Times ran a column encouraging readers in Japan to take advantage of their new minority status to re-examine their racial attitudes. In “What Being a Minority Allows Us to See,” columnist Amy Chavez tries to contextualize complaints about ethnic and racial inequality in Japan as reflecting the eye-opening experiences of those who, for the first time, find themselves as racial subordinates.

So far, so good. Chavez makes an important point that living abroad can place us in unfamiliar situations, and that we should apply the lessons of those situations to our lives back home. Those of us who were in the majority in our home countries, and are in the definite minority in Japan, could think about how our experiences parallel those of other minorities, and maybe we can learn some empathy.

However, digging deeper we see how this approach perpetuates problems facing racial minorities. Firstly, Chavez assumes that her readers are members of racial majorities in their home countries. As she writes,

“The Japanese are no more racist than Americans or people of many other countries. The only difference is that when you come to Japan, for the first time in your life, you are a minority and get to see what it’s like to be one.”

In one sentence, Chavez renders invisible the people in Japan who were minorities in their home countries. I doubt the Nikkeijin (overseas people of Japanese ancestry), including Japanese Americans, Brazilians, Peruvians, and Filipinos, are experiencing being in the minority for the first time. Rather, they migrate to what they’ve been told is their ancestral homeland, only to find themselves racialized as gaijin. Adding insult to injury, now they’re left out of the discussion altogether.

“After being subjects of discrimination here, we scream like spoiled children … While we have suddenly gained … an ability to see though the eyes of minorities …, we are blinded by our own self-worth and don’t suddenly empathize with other minorities struggling to achieve equality. No light bulb goes on in the head making us think: Aha! … So this is what … African-Americans in the U.S. struggle with every day!”

Does an African American need to travel to Japan to learn what African Americans in the U.S. face?

And have we learned to see through anyone else’s eyes? Is getting rude treatment from a taxi driver (as I did recently) the same as what African Americans face? Am I being stopped and frisked repeatedly? Do I risk being shot for wearing a hoodie and carrying Skittles and iced tea? Am I attending poor schools? Do I stand a greater chance of being in the correctional system than in a university? Am I more likely to live in a highly segregated neighborhood? Am I more likely to get a subprime mortgage, when I’m able to get a mortgage at all? Do I have a higher risk of heart disease or diabetes? Do I have a shorter life expectancy?

The problems Chavez refers to, like employment discrimination and racial stereotyping, are real, but they do not compare to the African American experience. Not all forms of discrimination are equal.

“Your small brush with discrimination in Japan is something that has been a lifelong battle for others who were born into a life of being a minority in our own countries. And many of them suffer far worse than we do in Japan.”

“Try being an African-American in the U.S. Or an aboriginal in Australia.”

Some readers do not need to try being an African American or an aboriginal. They are African Americans or aboriginals.

Chavez’s approach is similar to John Howard Griffin’s classic book Black Like Me, in which Griffin, a white man living in the Jim Crow South, darkens his skin to learn what it’s like to be black. Griffin recounts his experiences and shares the terrorism of Jim Crow with a white audience. But this is only half of the equation. This idea that blackness is something to be understood leaves whiteness unexamined. We study discrimination but we avoid examining privilege.

“This is the role of compassion. To accept that these problems are your own and be willing to not just admit they’re wrong, but to do something about them. Speak on the behalf of other minorities, help raise their profile. Especially you — you who have had a taste of what it’s like to be in their shoes!”

Minorities can speak for themselves, thank you. They do not need a white guy who had a racial epiphany in Japan and now suddenly understands black experiences to speak for them.

Chavez also avoids the word “privilege,” even though this is what she is trying to describe. Instead, she chastises readers for allegedly lacking compassion, and tells them to talk to minorities about their experiences. Instead of trying to understand minorities and speaking for them, how about understanding the white experience and try to dismantle the systems of privilege that give unearned advantages?

“The best way to fight discrimination is by using your experience for personal growth, and to spread the idea of compassion while working to develop a mind that is non-judgmental.”

No, the best way for those in the majority to fight discrimination is to gain a broader understanding of their role in systems of privilege, and to challenge that privilege. Non-judgmental minds that operate in systems of institutional inequality are not enough. A non-judgmental mind does not challenge the fact that the median wealth for whites in the U.S. is 20 times that of blacks, or that more black men are currently in the U.S. correctional system than were enslaved in 1850.

Don’t get me wrong, non-judgmental minds are wonderful. But we live in a world in which racial inequality is built into the very structure of our societies. Challenging this requires much more than looking in the mirror and freeing our minds. To paraphrase Canadian PM Stephen Harper, now is the time to commit sociology. If it helps, we can crank Michael Jackson and En Vogue while we do it.

I strongly recommend the work of Tim Wise, including the new documentary film, White Like Me. The film is available for online streaming until August 31. Tim’s books are also widely available in paper and electronic forms.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Separate and Unequal: The Remedial Japanese Language Classroom as an Ethnic Project

Posted on by

Peruvian Student Ricardo Relaxes in the Remedial Japanese Language Room

by Robert Moorehead

My article in The Asia-Pacific Journal examines the remedial Japanese language program at a school in central Japan. I argue that the program systematically denies educational resources to low-performing immigrant students. Despite the Japanese educational model of equality and inclusion, these immigrant students are tracked into a program that is separate and unequal.

Teachers explain this pattern in ethnic terms by referring to immigrant students’ supposed need not for specialized remedial instruction, but for relaxation as a break from the difficulties of learning Japanese.

To read more, please visit The Asia-Pacific Journal, a peer-reviewed, open source journal that focuses on the Asia-Pacific region. Also, check out Language and Citizenship in Japan, an edited volume published by Routledge.

Learning to read hiragana, katakana, kanji, and the air

Posted on by

Celebrate Diversity!by Robert Moorehead

With the spring semester now over, I’ve been thinking about the challenges of getting students to think differently about incorporating non-Japanese into Japanese society. The arguments students make and the ones sociologists usually cite in the research literature are like two roads that never meet.

As I’ve written before, students’ view of Japanese history seems to skip the roughly 100-year period between the Meiji Restoration and the Tokyo Olympics—nothing important happened in Japan between the 1860s and the 1960s, did it? Based on this, students often claim that Japanese people have little to no experience interacting with people of different cultural backgrounds. Plus, Japan is an island and thus was inaccessible to other groups. The invention of boats around the world apparently didn’t impact Japan … but I digress.

Students also state that Japan, unlike other countries, is a “high-context culture,” meaning that much communication in Japan is unspoken. Meanings are implied, and understanding those meanings requires reading between the lines and reading the context of the situation. Those who can’t “read the air” (空気を読む or “KY”) are treated as socially inept and may struggle in their social interactions.

This is a fair point, as communication in Japanese proceeds somewhat differently compared to communication in English, Spanish, or other languages. But, can’t people learn to “read the air”? Is Japanese culture so byzantine, so complex and inscrutable that non-Japanese can’t simply figure out how to talk to people?

Students also claim that because Japanese are not used to interacting with “KY” people, they can only accept people who are just like them. Interacting with non-native Japanese speakers and people who can’t “read the air” is too much work, so non-Japanese are just out of luck.

This inherently conservative argument could be extended to justify excluding pretty much anyone. Japanese women want a right to equal opportunities for employment? Too bad. They could never really understand men’s particular communication style, and their presence might make men uncomfortable—no more sex jokes in the workplace—so women will just have to settle for serving tea and lower pay. The disabled want to work? Sorry, accommodating their needs could be inconvenient, so they’ll just have to stay home. Okinawans and the Ainu want to express their cultural and linguistic distinctiveness in mainland Japan? Sorry.

This approach dismisses the rights of the individual in support of the rights of the majority. That is, the majority only has to respect the individual rights that are convenient. This approach fits with the LDP’s planned revisions to the Japanese Constitution. As Lawrence Repeta notes, these revisions would subordinate individual rights, such as free speech and free assembly, to the demands of public interest and public order.

On the one hand, I should be thanking students for their honesty. But do researchers cite any of these ideas when analyzing immigrant incorporation? I just finished teaching a course on international migration, and we spent the semester reviewing the sociological literature, including the main schools of thought, and issues of gender, education, transnationalism, citizenship, among others.

And not once in that literature did anyone talk about “high-context cultures,” or the whether interacting with cultural others might be too inconvenient.

So, have sociologists missed the boat? Are we just talking in circles, clueless as to the real issues?

Or is communicating across cultural and linguistic lines simply a fact of life for many people on the planet? Don’t we have to make all sorts of adjustments every day, even if we don’t have any foreigners in our midst? We communicate across lines of class, gender, age, and sexuality all the time, so why should we treat communicating across cultural lines as some special case?

As famed anthropologist Harumi Befu (2001) has noted, the United States is often held up as the main contrast to Japanese society. The US is multicultural and a nation of immigrants, while Japan is neither of those things. In the US, people complain about the challenges of diversity, like struggling to pronounce new names, understanding various accents, and talking with people who are still learning English. But … so what?

Seriously, so what? Is learning new names and using a modicum of patience to interact with non-Japanese really that difficult? Is “reading the air” really that complicated? Are foreigners really that inept at communicating in Japan?

Is it more difficult than figuring out how to pay for health care and pensions for Japan’s elderly, when Japan’s population is dropping and postwar boomers are retiring?

Since Commodore Perry’s black ships forced open Japan to international trade, Japan has gone through the Meiji Restoration, imperial expansion across much of East Asia and the Pacific, multiple wars, fire bombing, nuclear attacks, defeat, occupation, democratization, reconstruction, development into a global economic power, bubble economies, inflation, deflation, stagnation, population booms and declines, earthquakes, tsunami, and nuclear disasters.

Change is the constant. In light of all that, talking to foreigners seems like it should be the least of their worries.

References

Befu, Harumi. 2001. Hegemony and Homogeneity: An Anthropological Analysis of Nihonjinron. Melbourne: Trans Pacific Press.

Is the DREAM Act Good for American Society?

Posted on by

by Satoshi Tanaka

In the United States, the DREAM Act has not yet been put into law. It is the act that the government gives a green card to the youth who have undocumented parents and who satisfy some conditions. These conditions are that they came to the U.S. before they were sixteen and that they have lived there more than five years. Moreover, to qualify, they must have a higher education or serve in the armed service at least for two years. Usually, these undocumented youth have lived only in the U.S., and they can speak English only. Therefore, if they are forced to go back their own countries, they would have a big difficulty from living. While the conditions to get a green card are not so easy for everyone, they would have a possibility to be accepted to live in the U.S. formally thanks to this act.

However, basically, I disagree with this act. First, this act may cause a problem. For example, it is difficult to deal with their parents, and this has been already discussed. Even if the youth get a green card and are accepted to live in the U.S., they have to be separated from their parents if the parents are forced to leave the U.S. During youth age, to be separated from the parents may have a big influence on their life. In addition to the risk of causing a problem, I disagree with the act because immigrating without permission is prohibited in a law. I know that undocumented immigrants left their home countries and came to the U.S. to survive. Therefore, if they are forced to leave from the U.S., they have to have a harder life in their home countries than life in the U.S. However, I think that it is needed to consider the reason why the government passed the law which prohibits immigration without permission. This is because any countries do not have enough capacity to accept all immigrants who they have a desire to come. To keep the social order, the government has to prohibit illegal immigration, and manage the number of immigrants.

Emotionally, I want the government to support these immigrants and their children and it is the best thing that they avoid having a hard life. However, the government cannot wrestle with the problem because of an emotional reason, and they have a responsibility to keep the social order. Therefore, I think that the government should not allow the special case, and they should deal with all immigrants equally.

Immigrant problems in the US, Japan, and Germany

Posted on by

by Noriyuki Tanaka

There are many immigrant problems in America, for example the Flores family, whom we saw in the documentary The New Americans, had hardships from being immigrants. At first, Pedro worked hard for his family to live in Mexico. He earned money in America to support his family, but their family wanted to live with their father. This is a love of family. This is only documentary video, but there are many immigrants who cannot live with their families.

For each country, receiving immigrant has big merits and demerits. The merit is that a public estimation from various countries become good, so many immigrants want to go to the countries and the level of the country, as one state rises because the country tries to deal with the problems of increasing foreign people, for example language education, labors, and taxes. On the other hand, a big demerit is that a country leans to ignore original people in the country. Like an unknown man coming in your house, increasing immigrants in own country makes original people anxiety. They may lose jobs, the security may become bad, own culture may be reigned by immigrant cultures.

I am going to think about specific countries according to immigrants. Japan isn’t positive to receive immigrants or refugees because Japanese people consider Japanese carefully. Of course, it is also important that people treat own countries importantly, but important to live with world people. I think that Germany has good measures to protect immigrants and original people. Germany had many Turkish immigrants after World War Ⅱ. The German government received immigrants positively, so now the percentage of immigrants in German is 19%. However, there are many problems because immigrants are not German, for example difficulty of employment of people who cannot speak German, incidents by immigrants, and women problems. The German government reflected these problems with education. It improves language education, and Germany doesn’t have enough laborers that have special knowledge. By raising the level of education, it tries to solve the difficulty of employment. Plus, to avoiding conflicts of national citizens, the German government made sport activity active to improve sportsmanship, which is the spirit of helping each other. I think these solutions to immigrant problems by German are good. Japan should receive immigrants and think original solutions.

My opinion about the situation of undocumented immigrants in the U.S.

Posted on by

by Ryota Takatsuka

In class, we discussed about people who have no legal passport in the U.S. Before this class, I was not familiar with this problem. The reason why the guy who appeared the video we saw (Jose Antonio Vargas) does not have a legal passport is that his parents brought him when he was a baby and made fake passport. According to the video, generally those who have fake passport realize that truth when they go to driving school at 16 years old. They were revealed by reception that this is fake passport and you should not come here anymore. No identification prevents those people to try many things. In his case, he could not travel overseas, and he hid his secret and he lived in fear of being arrested. My opinion against this problem is that country should support them to fit the country. There are two supporting reasons why I think that way.

The first reason is that through supporting immigrants America can be a model country in terms of diversity. In this world there still severe ethnic or cultural conflicts. They argue that what ethnic group is suitable as ruler or what culture should be promoted. However, under the globalization, it is nonsense to think that way. Accepting cause diversity into America automatically, and if America set some good policy to immigrants and achieve leading this movement toward growth of the country, whole world may accept diversity and globalization will move to more high level than scientist expect now.

The second reason is that rejecting the undocumented ruins their opportunity or talents. In fact, the guy is now famous journalist in America, however, before his ability admired, he had to give up chances to step up such as going to coverage to another country which has potential to make his career better because of illegal passport. There are many people who have same disadvantage for their future. In other words there must have been talented person who ruined their gift and forced to fade out from society. Preparing enough environments for immigrant will give chance for them to contribute to American society.

To sum up, according to the documentary, many immigrants face obstacle to fit into American society such as language barrier and parting from their family. As generally regarded, there is severe competition in American society and people can achieve the American dream. However, under the policy of the U.S, the starting point of the competition is not even. In order to make circulation of contribution system that was mentioned above, the U.S has to consider immigrants as precious investment for the future.

Is the dream act a good solution for undocumented immigrants in the US?

Posted on by

by Ryohei Sugiyama

The DREAM Act is a law that was suggested in the US in 2000. The purpose of this law is to give young illegal immigrants the opportunity to get a higher education. In the US for a long time the treatment toward young illegal immigrants has been one of the largest sections of immigrant problems. Many of the young illegal immigrants do not have consciousness that they are illegal immigrants. They were taken with their parents and grew up most of their lives in the US. Therefore, there are few differences between these people and American citizens. Nevertheless, these do not get appropriate supports. At this point, the DREAM Act is the progress of the immigrant problem in the US.

If the DREAM Act is approved, young illegal immigrants can have the opportunity to live in the US legally. This is very good point of this law. Today there are a lot of illegal immigrants in the US. They are paying large amount of taxes each year, and actually they have a large influence on the economy of the US. Nevertheless, they get unfair treatment like not entering higher-level schools or not getting jobs because of their illegalness. Especially there is no reason for young immigrants to get unfair treatment. So long as there is no reason, the young illegal immigrants should get the same opportunity as the legal people in the US.

On the other hand, there are a few negative points in the DREAM Act. The article about the military is one of the examples of the negative points. In older for young illegal immigrants to get the legal status there are mainly two choices: one is the entering higher-level school for two years after graduating from high school in the US, and the other is the joining the military. Many of the young immigrants hope to advance a grade, however they sometimes cannot do it because they do not have enough money. In this case in older to get legal status they have to join the military. They may be sent to Iraq and be forced to engage in hard actions. In my opinion, it is an inhumane act. They have to get wounds so as to get rights.

In this way the DREAM Act has some good points and bad points. Therefore, I partly agree with this law and partly disagree. Bad points, of course, should be changed. For instance, in my idea, instead of joining the military, they should engage in public enterprises such as cleaning streets or works at public places. However, it is true that the government of the US intends to tackle with the problems of illegal immigrants. Dream act is the expression of the attitude of the government, and the governments should continue to tackle with the problems of illegal immigrants sincerely and positively.

References

Dream Act Portal. Retrieved June 26, 2013 from http://dreamact.info/

Is the dream act good for the US? Retrieved June 26th 2013 from http://shimamyuko.wordpress.com/2013/05/29/ドリーム法案は米経済にプラスかマイナスか？/#more-3416

Immigration, Development, and Human Rights

Posted on by

by Mei Satoi

In the documentary film of our class (The New Americans), we could see an immigrant family from Mexico. This family’s father worked in the United States separated from his family in Mexico. This situation made the Mexican family feel sad and uncomfortable life. Therefore they decided to move on the legal way to the U.S. On the other hand, the number of immigrants from Mexico is decreasing. As Mexico has been developing its economy and the U.S.’s development has slowed. So, Mexicans choose to get job and life in their homeland. It shows that economic development helps decrease immigrants. When you and your country want to decrease immigrant number, you should support the economic development.

In the Japan, there are some troubles between Korean schools and the government, or Korean schools and citizens. One example is that the Japanese government decided public high school in Japan will be free. However some people have insisted that Korean school do not have to be free and do not need support from the Japanese government. The reason why is that Korean school has settled under the North Korea system. So Japanese government said to make an exception so that Korean high schools will not be free. It means that only Korean school cannot get support from the Japanese government. However, the purpose of the free of high school law includes Korean schools. In the human rights view, Korean schools also should be free. However a lot of citizens have rejected this. This idea comes from discrimination, misunderstanding, and prejudge. The purpose of the free of high school law is protecting and respecting the children’s right to study. The Japanese government and citizen do not have the right to take the opportunity of education from children because of prejudice. In addition, the Japanese government is trying to produce more multicultural and global talented people in the Japanese educational system. Korean people help to feel and think what is multicultural to children.

There are some immigrant and Zainichi people in Japan. If Japanese wants to eliminate them, they should support their homeland’s economic situation. Then the number of immigrants would decrease. In the now, Japanese government has stopped economic support to the North Korea. Before Japanese complain about free Korean schools, they should help the North Korea situation. In addition, Japanese should protect and respect immigrant. To establish brush up education system with Japanese, immigrants, and Zainichi each other, talented people and high quality people are given from Japan.