The other day I happened upon a copy of the Japan Times, an English-language
newspaper that is published in Japan in conjunction with the International New York Times. Now, I
what I know about Japan is what I’ve read in newspapers, history books and
encounters with Japanese nationals—“nice” when they are tourists asking for
directions, but otherwise standoffish as
if you are something on the bottom of their shoes (Brits and Nordic types, are
of course similar to them in this regard). I gather that Japan is a society which is
tradition-bound, prides itself on “pride” and the homogeneity of its
population, and possesses a certain conceit about its ethnic superiority in the
region, even in regard to the Chinese, of whom it regards as “little brothers.”
Once someone reaches adult, any deviation from accepted norms brings shame and
embarrassment—unless, of course, it is committed by a foreigner, and that is to
be “expected” of “inferior” people.
Nevertheless, despite its pretensions Japan is a nation that
has problems just like any other country. Take for instance the following
stories that appeared in this particular addition of the Japan Times:
Yoshiki Sasai, who “supervised” a research paper on
“stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency” cells, or STAM—which seems to
concern “reprogramming” embryonic stem cells to trigger certain healthy
responses, in this case using the cells of mice—committed suicide by hanging
after many inconsistencies and inaccuracies were discovered in the published
study. Sasai apparently suffered great mental anguish and shame over the
episode, something apparently not shared by more recent generations of
Japanese. This includes the author of the study—Haruko Obokata, a young,
attractive up-and-coming female scientist—who is accused of “malpractice” and
“misconduct” in falsifying data, but who denies the charges and in fact is
“busy” attempting to “confirm” her research results. The original papers were
published in the British journal Nature,
but was later removed from the publication in a rare move that greatly
embarrassed the Japanese scientific community.
Then there is a story about a 15-year-old girl who is
charged with brutally murdering and dismembering a classmate in her apartment.
According to the Times, the unnamed
girl had been suffering psychiatric “issues” for some time. Her parents had
reported that they had previously attempted to have her committed to a hospital
psychiatric ward after she informed them that it was “fun” to kill cats, and
had a notion of killing a human being; it is not clear if a potential victim
would be her father, who she reportedly struck and injured with a baseball bat
several months previously. Doctors did not take this very seriously, and in any
case asserted that someone of her mental state would need an individual room
and no such “requirement” was available in the area. The girl was seeing a
psychiatrist, who informed the parents the day before the killing on July 26
that girl admitted to killing a cat, and that the police should be notified.
What else? The Japanese have been very loath to confess to
or apologize for human rights crimes committed during their imperial expansion
period leading up to and during World War II. In 1993, the Japanese government
made the unprecedented move of “apologizing” to Korean “comfort
women”—basically women who were kidnapped and forced to serve as prostitutes
for Japanese soldiers. Before it was implied that this was “voluntary” on their
part, and that the military and government were not directly involved in the
procuring. This changed after a man who claimed to have worked for the military
confessed to conducting the kidnapping at the behest of the Japanese military,
but now there are claims that he “falsified” his account, and that this was a
“private” occupation. There are now calls to “retract” the apology, a rather
hypocritical example of national self-denial.
Japan, as mentioned before, is a fanatically homogeneous
society, and in many ways a very racist one. Although Korean and Filipino
workers reside in the country to do some of the “dirty work”—very much like
Mexican immigrants here—no matter how long they resided in Japan or if their
children are born there, it is impossible for them to become Japanese citizens.
Now there is a story about people of Japanese descent who resided in or were
born in the Philippines who wish to have their true “ethnicity” recognized by
the Japanese government and allowed to return as Japanese citizens. The case
currently is in a Japanese court.
Much has been made about the low birthrates in Japan, mainly
due to women who want to put off having children so that they can pursue their
careers. It seems that a popular alternative is for Japanese women who procrastinate
over the issue to have procedures in which they cryogenically freeze a quantity
of their eggs for a possible “sure” pregnancy at a time of their choosing.
Younger women are urged to do this because of the decline in “quality” and
fertility of older eggs. Doctors, however, warn that successful pregnancies are
less likely after the age of 34, and preserving their eggs for future use is
not necessarily the safety net they believe it is.
Finally, Japan’s defense minister is seeking to increase defense
and armament spending to counter threats by China and North Korea, with closer
cooperation with the U.S. military. It is interesting to note that following
its defeat in World War II, it was written into its new constitution that its
military capabilities were to be severely restricted, much like the Versailles
Treaty attempted (and ultimately failed) to restrict Germany’s capabilities
after World War I. Japan has largely complied with the restrictions, instead
focusing on its domestic priorities, although it has one of the largest debt
burdens (far more so than the U.S.) per its GDP. Since Japan is such a good
“friend” of ours, and China not so much, it would seem in the U.S.’ interest to
allow Japan some lee-way in expanding its military capacity as a counterbalance
to China.
In many ways, then, people in Japan are not so different
than we are; on the other hand, the “differences” give one reason to pause
about the nature of supposed national and racial “superiority.”
No comments:
Post a Comment