When you are old your values change and you're just looking for convenience and people in the same boat. That does not mean they want to not have ethnic diversity they just don't want to deal with non 'generians so much. They still want some younger people, but want the understanding of older people around them --no, they also don't want to be depressed by those near the end, but I'm not talking that stage home.
And I don't think homogeneity is gross. Do you think Nigerians feel gross, or do you think the Japanese feel gross? It's neither better nor worse then heterogeneity.
They don't want any random fix of their demographics where they just bring in young people of whatever nationality. They want a Japanese fix to their demographics.
If they viewed people as just interchangeable culturally, why even care about their falling demographics? Other Asian and Africans countries make up for them.
I don't think homogeneity is what makes Japan work. More likely it's a common identity and shared values. You can have that without everyone looking the same or having the same ancestry. Strong institutions of cultural transmission are probably far more important.
I wouldn't rush to dismiss tribalism as a bad thing for society. Homogeneity is like any tradeoff: upsides and downsides. Japan is as homogenous as they come.
East Asian countries, Japan included, see ethnic and cultural homogeneity as a good and desirable thing (and are quite openly racist and xenophobic as a result).
OP is making a joke -- if you want to call Romain Britain ethnically diverse, you might as well call Japan ethnically diverse. The term becomes meaningless.
We are walking a narrow path between reasonable speculation and grotesque racism now. I just sort of understand the discomfort (racist - yes, unnatural and better to pretend nonexistent - hardly) numerous Japanese may feel considering inflow of people of completely different kins (European, African, whatever) and assume it would be easier to deal with people which look at least a tiny bit similar and share some common cultural elements with you historically. Sure I could say China and Korea instead but these are developed countries so there probably isn't nearly as many resourceful people interested in immigration.
What's wrong with them having preference for people of a similar race? What's wrong for looking at the source countries of many of these immigrants and saying no thanks? No one's in a hurry to make sure lots of whites have positions in Mexico or China.
Japan has a low birthrate but doesn't accept losing their ethnic makeup is a good solution.
What's wrong with that? They just want to preserve their culture, don't see a problem with that. I've spent a decent amount of time there, much of which was with locals. Despite being a white dude outsider, part of my attraction to Japan is the cultural homogeneity. I hope they can keep it up.
I'm not a fan of this article because it focuses on the most 'technical' definition of homogeneity based only on race, immigration, skin-color, etc. It also reads to me like "I know more about Japan than you" elitist talk which is all-to-common in fandoms of various kinds (and Japanophiles in general).
When I talk about the diversity of Japan, I like to focus on the different regions of Japan. Much like we recognize distinct traits between people from California, Texas, Minnesota, and New York in the US, Japanese people have distinct characteristics depending on which region they are from: Okinawa, Kansai, Tokyo, or Hokkaido to name a handful. Beyond that each of those regions is geographically different and has their own local customs and cultural quirks which I've always enjoyed learning about.
I think such a narrow view of what 'homogeneous' means is only used to serve a specific goal, and not to analyze the topic as a whole and in good-faith. Disclaimer: I grew up in Japan as a foreigner and still have much to learn, but it's my favorite place in the world by far.
These posts rarely point out incredibly strict immigration policies and the stark racial makeup of the countries that rely on group dynamics for rather inconvenient reasons. When you have a largely homogenous population that has been stable over decades - centuries in the case of Japan - then these types of relationships evolve.
Japan doesn't want an influx of foreigners and rightfully so. It is a total failure in any nation state where they tried this experiment. Everybody declare that "diversity is our strange" but there is no proof for it at all, it is almost like a religious mantra that people mumble in order to justify the mess they have created. I used to believe this bullshit until I had the chance to live in Japan and to experience the huge advantages in an homogenous cohesive society.
It will be very hard to tear down the walls of peaceful homogeneity, since Japan takes so many steps to preserve its culture.
Of the very few people who successfully naturalize as Japanese citizens, all of them have to legally take on a Japanese name. Japanese citizens are proud of their demographic and seek to maintain it.
This has worked very well for Japan. In all heterogeneous countries, you see strife for decades at a minimum---see the Irish immigrants in America in the 19th and 20th centuries---and centuries or eternity at a maximum---see African Americans.
There is a threshold of difference between ethnic groups where, if you cross this threshold, turmoil and hatred and discrimination will fester, no matter what. This can be seen in America, with its numerous, very distinct ethnic groups, and in Europe, with its massive influx of Middle Eastern and African immigrants. Regardless of how many want to get along, a large portion of both sides will inevitably hate each other, and will vote accordingly.
I'm not sure what the solution is to heterogeneous societies. I think it can be worked out. But it is insanity to claim multiculturalism works in its current state and homogeneity does not. All of the most peaceful, successful societies the world has seen so far have been largely homogeneous. Japan is a fantastic modern example.
This article is funny as the author seems very upset about misperceptions, although everything in the post shows that Japan is extremely homogeneous.
Even 93% is an extremely homogenous country and showing a few example of famous Japanese people with diverse backgrounds doesn’t change the fact that they are rare.
Doubling from 1% to 2% in the Japanese census doesn’t mean that Japan isn’t homogenous, it just means it is changing.
Maybe a better concept is that Japan is changing to be less homogenous over time and in many decades it could be as diverse as its neighbors.
Japan doesn't have the same melting pot background as the U.S. It would take significant culture change for the Japanese to adopt an immigrant-inclusive culture.
I think OPs and parent posts are more content with the fact they will never be Japanese, and feel comfort in that they still get treated with more dignity and respect than in America.
Your examples are of mixed race people who strive to be Japanese, but are denied due to their mixed heritage. Apples and Oranges. One group cares about integration, the other doesn't.
And I don't think homogeneity is gross. Do you think Nigerians feel gross, or do you think the Japanese feel gross? It's neither better nor worse then heterogeneity.
reply