Loading ...
Alex Kerr falls into “Guestism” arguments with unresearched comments
Posted by debito on April 7th, 2007
Hi Blog. I covered some of this material in a previous post on the blog. However, for the newsletter I did a significant rewrite last night, describing how flippant and unresearched comments from a noteworthy person (Alex Kerr) can cause problems for others (particularly through unscrupulous anonymous editors on places like Wikipedia). I don’t want this new version to be buried in a newsletter, so I repost it separately and delete the older version from the blog. Debito in Sapporo
////////////////////////////////////////
Some time ago, Alex Kerr, author of DOGS AND DEMONS and LOST JAPAN (and a person I have great respect for), was asked in an interview with the Japan Times (Oct 25, 2005) about he thought about activists (and, er, about me in particular). He responded:
=========================================
JT: In Dogs and Demons you argue that Japan has failed to internationalize. What do you think about the work of Debito Arudou and others to combat racial discrimination in Japan?
AK: Well, somebody has to do it. I’m glad that there is a whistle-blower out there. But, I am doubtful whether in the long run it really helps. One would hope that he could do it another way. He’s not doing it the Japanese way. He’s being very gaijin in his openly combative attitude, and usually in Japan that approach fails.
I fear that his activities might tend to just confirm conservative Japanese in their belief that gaijin are difficult to deal with.
That said, perhaps we who live here are slow to stick our necks out when we sense an injustice, and quick to self-censor in order to get along smoothly in our communities.
To me the most interesting aspect of Arudou Debito is that, in taking on Japanese citizenship, he has brought the dialogue inside Japan. His activities reveal the fact that gaijin and their gaijin ways are now a part of the fabric of Japan’s new society. A very small part of course, but a vocal and real part.
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/member/member.html?fl20051025zg.htm
=========================================
This sticks in my craw for two reasons: One is that Alex, who does incredible amounts of research for his books, seems ill-informed about the ways we have combatted racial discrimination. If he had read my book JAPANESE ONLY (and despite receiving a copy from me nearly two years ago, he wrote me last January that he still hadn’t read it), he might understand that ARE doing it the so-called “Japanese Way”. We took every channel and route available to us WITHIN the Japanese system, as I meticulously detail in the book. In fact, there are plenty of Japanese who do exactly what we do (and more), and don’t get slapped with a “gaijin” label. It is out of character for Alex to comment on something he hasn’t done thorough research on.
The other reason is that this quote has been lifted out of context and selectedly reproduced by the unscrupulous on places like Wikipedia:
=========================================
Some critics question Arudou’s brand of conflict resolution: the judicial system. Alex Kerr, author of the best-selling Dogs and Demons: Tales from the Dark Side of Japan (ISBN 0-8090-3943-5), criticize such tactics as “too combative,” is doubtful “whether in the long run it really helps,” noting that “in Japan…[the combative] approach fails.” Acknowledging that “gaijin and their gaijin ways are now part of the fabric of Japan’s new society,” Kerr also notes that Arudou’s activities may “confirm conservative Japanese in their belief that gaijin are difficult to deal with.”[24]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arudou_Debito
=========================================
The essence and thrust of Alex’s comment, which is in fact about two-thirds positive, is lost.
Anyhow, the reason I bring this up now is because Matt Dioguardi in a recent, thoughtful essay, grounds this phenomenon in historical context, from an angle I hadn’t considered before:
=========== MATT DIOGUARDI WRITES =================
As a foreign national who is making a life for himself in Japan, I’m personally concerned that remarks like his have a negative effect on me (as a so-called “gaijin”). Because regardless of what one may or may not think of Debito, unintentionally Kerr is commenting on all “gaijin”.
Compare this to C. Eric Lincoln’s vivid description of a “smart nigger” in Coming Through the Fire: Surviving Race and Place in America:
————————————————
The smart nigger was likely to be everything the good nigger was not. Most likely he was educated above the norm considered sufficient for colored folks; whether he got it in school or some bigger fool than he had put it into his head, he had some dangerous notions. In either case, Mr. Martin said that the smart nigger was a pain in his own ass, and everybody else’s too. He wanted too much. He wanted his street paved, and he wanted it paved because he paid taxes rather than because his wife cooked for the judge. His house was painted and well kept and he didn’t waste his money on rattletrap cars. He didn’t “owe money downtown,” or “take up” advances on his pay every Monday morning. More than likely he had “been up North,” and he had a colored newspaper come to his house in the mail. The smart nigger paid his poll taxes, and he was mighty slow, it seemed to Mr. Dubbie Gee, to answer when somebody said “Boy!” He didn’t think that the bad nigger was funny, or that the good nigger could be trusted. Clearly, every smart nigger would bear watching. “They don’t last long,” Mr. Martin said, and he “flat out had no use for them.” He said that if he were colored he’d either kick a smart nigger’s ass down off his shoulders or keep away from him. A smart nigger, he said “is a damn fool hell-bent for trouble. And mark my words, he’s gon’ find it quicker’n a catfish can suck a chicken gut off a bent pin.”
————————————————
Is Alex Kerr saying Debito is a “smart nigger”?
I’d like to note that Kerr should be more specific in his comments, because is it really the case that there are no non-”gaijin” doing the things that Debito does? Is he saying that when Japanese file lawsuits, this is a natural evolution of culture, but when Debito does it, it’s reinforcing the notion that “gaijin” have an “openly combative attitude”?
Is he saying the teachers who refuse to sing Kimigayo are acting like “gaijin”?
What exactly is the definitive way some one displays an “openly combative attitude”?
Moreover, what is the definitive “Japanese way”? And in what specific way is Debito not doing it?
It’s very disappointing to see some of Alex Kerr’s calibre engaging in Nihonjinron. He should know that there is nothing so destructive to Japan’s traditional local customs as Nihonjinron. Do I need to quote from his own books? Just like the centralization of construction standards begins to make all parks and all buildings look bleakly similar, the centralization of identity around the concept of “Japanese” in an essentialist sense is just as destructive to the development of a full personality.
=========== END MATT DIOGUARDI ==============
More at
http://japan.shadowofiris.com/nihonjinron/is-alex-kerr-calling-debito-a-smart-nigger/
The point is, I always find it amazing how easily people can fall right back into the “Guestist”-sounding paradigms of “nicely, nicely, don’t get too uppity, for it’s not ‘The Japanese Way’”. When in fact everything we have ever done has also been done by Japanese. I hope Alex gets around to reading my book (http://www.debito.org/japaneseonly.html) and will offer more informed comments. Arudou Debito in Sapporo
April 8th, 2007 at 12:01 am
WITHIN 24 HOURS, ALEX HAS RESPONDED WITH THIS COMMENT. THANKS VERY MUCH, ALEX. DEBITO IN SAPPORO
April 7, 2007 8:41:47 PM JST
Dear Debito,
Alex Kerr here. I see that there has been some discussion in your newsletter about my Japan Times interview of Oct 2005. It goes to show that you can never be too careful about what you say, because it lives on for years, and can even reappear and be enshrined (in distorted form) on Wikipedia.
Anyway, I wanted to let you know that in the meantime I’ve become quite an admirer of yours — to the extent that I’m a regular reader of your newsletter, and have recommended it to many friends. As you can see from the original Japan Times interview, my take even at that time was basically favorable. Since then I’ve learned more about what you do, and I’m greatly impressed by the thoroughness with which you approach the various gaijin and racism issues in Japan. Among other things, your newsletter is a goldmine of information, which is why I’ve become an avid reader.
I must admit that I began by feeling not very comfortable with your approach — but this could be due to personal circumstances and preferences. I understand that you are doing things in the Japanese way in the sense that you pursue official legal and social channels. At the same time, your style is undoubtedly combative: confronting people with what they are doing and facing them with the consequences.
It’s the not way I work personally, and my own experience is that the Japanese have welcomed and accepted the very critical things I say because my style is to speak quietly, from “within”. However, this is appropriate to my work, which is mostly in the field of traditional culture, tourism, city planning, and the environment. Those are fields in which the classic Japanese low-key and sympathetic attitude works.
But given the field which is your specialty, there is no doubt that a stronger, more direct approach is appropriate. You are bringing these issues into consciousness in the media and among society at large in a way that the traditional quiet approach could never succeed in doing. Otherwise, what you have to say would disappear in the usual muffled silence that surrounds these issues in Japan.
It’s proof that there is no one way to do things. For me, the old-style Japanese way works. For you, there’s a different way — and I respect that.
As I understand it, anyone can write in and edit a Wikipedia entry. So I suggest that you, or a friend of yours, amend that Wikipedia article to indicate that I wholly support your activities and your methods. I think I speak for many foreigners resident in Japan when I say that I feel very grateful that you’re out there paying attention.
Best wishes,
Alex
April 8th, 2007 at 3:19 pm
Debito-san:
With your permission, I would like to make an amendment to the current Wikipedia subject about you and have it link to Alex Kerr’s comment that he “…wholly support your activities and your methods.” I eagerly await your response.
Damian
San Antonio, TX
HI DAMIAN. YOU DON’T NEED MY PERMISSION
PLEASE DO, AND THANKS FOR CARING. DEBITO
April 8th, 2007 at 6:54 pm
I found it good to read Mr Kerr’s response. My comments are not meant to be directed at him, but more in general:
I find it odd when people say Debito is being ‘too direct’ or not working within the ‘Japanese way of doing things.’ I wonder if these people have ever witnessed demonstrations that go on frequently outside of government ministries in Kasumigaseki. There are a number of groups that rally, march, picket, hand out leaflets, protest and use lawsuits in order to gain attention (and hopefully support) for their causes. Many of these incidents appear in the newspapers, so I’m not sure how they go ignored as part of this dialogue.
Here I defer to Matt, who has written something I’ve thought about but was never able to put into words: could the same criticism of those Japanese people who engage in activism be applied? And, further, given that Debito is Japanese, so long as he acts within the confines of what is legal, who has a horse high enough to suggest that what he’s doing is somehow detrimental?
April 11th, 2007 at 1:57 am
Ken’s definitely touched on something here that I’ve been struggling to grasp for some time now; I’m not so sure there is a “Japanese way” anymore. Like you said, with protesters and people demonstrating in a true rebel fashion, and with Japanese-ness, so to speak, not limited to Japan-born citizens, it’s hard to know if there is a line to be drawn.
What is the Japanese way of doing things? What the majority agrees upon? And what if a clear citizen of Japan should break that pattern? Is he then not Japanese in his approach? I don’t think so.
–I DON’T THINK THERE IS “A JAPANESE WAY”. SURE, THERE ARE CERTAIN STYLES AND METHODS. BUT WHENEVER ONE RAISES “JAPANESENESS” IN THE COURSE OF DEBATE, I SEE IT AS A RHETORICAL DEVICE TO CLOAK CENSORSHIP AND STIFLE CHANGE.
THE “JAPANESE RULES” THAT ARE PROVIDED (VAGUE AT BEST IF EVER EXPRESSED) ULTIMATELY LEAD TO PASSIVITY AND DOING NOTHING. THE DISENFRANCHISED ARE BASICALLY TOLD TO WAIT FOR THE POWERS THAT BE TO DEIGN TO THROW THEM A BONE.
NOTE THAT THE PROPONENTS OF “THE JAPANESE WAY” ARE GENERALLY THOSE WHO BENEFIT THE MOST FROM THE STATUS QUO.
I’M NOT SAYING THAT ANY OF THIS IS ALEX’S INTENT. I’M JUST SAYING THAT WE SHOULD NOT BUY INTO IT. IT IS NOT A NATIONALITY OR EVEN A CULTURAL PHENOMENON. IT IS INTENSELY A POLITICAL PHENOMENON. MAKE NO MISTAKE ABOUT IT. –ARUDOU DEBITO
April 12th, 2007 at 9:33 am
[...] [Update April 12, 2007: Debito posted an entry discussing the issues raised here, and Alex Kerr responded very positively, saying he fully supports Debito’s activities. Great! Only I still kind of wish Kerr wouldn’t use the word “gaijin” … ] [...]
April 23rd, 2007 at 8:10 am
FORWARDING FROM IVAN HALL WITH HIS PERMISSION. DEBITO
Reading all of your Newsletters. Nice to see Alex Kerr reacting positively to your work. The basic difference between his approach and yours, as I see it, is that he was working in a rather ordinary Japanese business-and-negotiating context (where you go by the local etiquette, as the Japanese similarly learn to adapt to American ways in American business-negotiation contexts), as I did when working with Japanese institutions as a cultural official of the U.S. Embassy). You, however, are not only fighting on a sharp Japanese-Others racial/psychological fault line, but are also also bucking unbudging, contumaceous stronger powers, indeed a whole SYSTEM ( as I did with several systems in “Cartels”). That is a dimension in which the Japanese themselves have a long, long, tradition of very open and confrontational protest, not only as in the postwar street demos mentioned by Ken, but going back through the whole Meiji Period, even into Tokugawa.
ENDS
December 6th, 2007 at 6:34 am
Ultimately, one cannot help but appreciate how Arudou and Kerr expose the worst abuses of the system, even as such gestures bolster their own booksales. Really, who can fault moral indignation, especially by those adoptees trying to reform their newfound nationality?
Still, can’t help but feel that the most vocal critics are privileged, white males getting their first sniff of racism. Yes, it is nasty, isn’t it? I thought Kelly Osborne’s ‘Watashi wa nihonjin ni naru’ on Channel 4 was some of the most horrific stereotyping I’d ever scene. Nay a word of complaint. Debito, your comicbook counterattack on ‘Sambo’ was excellent, but almost gleeful in turning the tables. But it made its point, that’s for sure. But like Bono at Earth Day, I’m not sure where the celebrity status ends, and the activism began . . .
I’m not faulting either of you. On the contrary, you really do put your actions behind your words. It’s ultimate success in terms of method, in the long run, is yet to be seen. We all know, however, that there are social currents at play here well beyond onsen signs and crime magazines. But geez you know I never had a problem for the ten years I was over there. Perhaps owing to my religious identity and culture, I’m used to being a wanderer and outsider. ‘Guestism’ never bothered me that much.
Here in Canada, we no longer circulate buck tooth, bug eye images of Asians . . . we just hire them as nannies to work long hours changing nappies, and then charge a hefty commission when they want to send their meagre chequebooks home.
Ira Weisenthal
–I ALWAYS FIND OPINIONS OF THIS GENRE REFRESHING–HOW THEY MAKE IT SEEM AS THOUGH VICTIMS (OR “GUESTS”) OF DISCRIMINATION DESERVE A FATE AS PERPETUAL VICTIMS, AND IF WE SPEAK OUT (OR, CONVERSELY, IF WE DON’T ON ALL OCCASIONS–CAN’T WIN EITHER WAY), WE ARE POSSIBLY TRYING TO PROFITEER FROM OTHERS’ MISERY. OR WORSE YET, IF WE HAPPEN TO SPEAK AS “PRIVILEGED WHITES” (I SEE–SO ONLY NON-WHITES HAVE EXPRESSIBLE OPINIONS?) ABOUT SOMETHING THESE PEOPLE NEVER EXPERIENCED IN THEIR ARSENAL OF EXPERIENCES (THEREFORE, DESPITE ALL OF THE PRIMARY SOURCE EVIDENCE, IT CANNOT EXIST), WE’RE DAMNED AGAIN. WHATEVER FLOATS THEIR BOAT IN THEIR SMUG SATISFACTION OF FEELING AS THOUGH THEY ARE RIGHT NO MATTER WHAT.
ESPECIALLY WHEN IT TURNS OUT THEY DON’T LIVE HERE ANYWAY. YET STILL FEEL NO QUALMS ABOUT SITTING IN JUDGMENT OF THOSE WHO DO, PERMANENTLY, OFTEN AS PERMANENT RESIDENTS OR EVEN CITIZENS.
USUALLY THESE PEOPLE DON’T HAVE THE GUTS TO SIGN THEIR NAME. APPARENTLY MR WIESENTHAL DOES. SO I’LL APPROVE THIS MESSAGE. MEANWHILE, MR WIESENTHAL, IF YOU DON’T AGREE WITH US (OR BETTER YET, THINK THIS IS MERELY SOME ATTEMPT AT CELEBRITY OR BOOK SALES), AH WELL. WON’T BE ABLE TO CHANGE A DIEHARD GUESTIST’S MIND.
JUST STAY OUT OF OUR WAY–WE HAVE LOTS OF WORK TO DO. AS A “GUEST”, YOU HAVE NO REAL STAKE IN THIS ANYWAY.
December 20th, 2007 at 9:26 pm
Hello,
Having just finished books by Mr. Hall and Mr. Kerr, it was very interesting to watch how this discussion developed.
I thought I’d point out that while the English version of Debito’s page has been modified to include the above discussion, the Japanese page still quotes only Mr. Kerr’s criticisms of Debito (which were probably just a translation of the pre-edited English version).
I’d update it myself but I don’t want it to look like it was “cleaned up” by a NJ so I’ll just put it out here in the hopes that someone with better language facilities than myself can do something about it if they choose.
Here’s the paragraph I’m referring to:
法的手段に訴えるという有道の戦略を批判するものもいる。『Dogs and Demons: Tales from the Dark Side of Japan』(ISBN 0-8090-3943-5) の著者である日本研究家アレックス・カーは、彼の戦略を「闘争的に過ぎる」と指摘し、長い目で見た場合、実際には問題の解決に役立たないのではないかと疑問視している。カーはまた、「外人」および「外人の行動様式」が日本の新しい社会の一部になっていることを認めながらも、有道の行動は「外人は扱いにくい」という保守的な日本人が持つイメージを強化しているとする。[3]
[TinyURL link] http://tinyurl.com/yvqdbr
-Benjamin
–THANKS BENJAMIN. THERE ARE REMARKABLE ERRORS ON MY WIKIPEDIA ENTRIES–SO MANY THAT I DON’T TRUST WP ALL THAT MUCH AS A SOURCE. BUT IT’S NOT FOR ME TO WRITE MY OWN HISTORY–THAT HAS TO BE DONE BY OTHERS. IT’S JUST A SHAME THAT SOME PEOPLE OUT THERE (THEY KNOW WHO THEY ARE–AND I KNOW WHO THEY ARE TOO) FEEL THE NEED TO TAMPER WITH THE RECORD ANY WAY THEY CAN, FOR FUN, SELF-SATISFACTION, OR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE.
AH WELL. THAT’S THE BIGGEST SHORTCOMING OF THE INTERNET AS A SOURCE OF INFORMATION–ANONYMITY. I HAVE FAITH THAT THE TRUTH WILL OUT SOME DAY WHEN AUTHORS TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN WRITING. AND WHEN WE GET RESPONSIBLE BIOGRAPHERS ON THIS ISSUE.
December 30th, 2007 at 9:34 am
Someone said: “–THANKS BENJAMIN. THERE ARE REMARKABLE ERRORS ON MY WIKIPEDIA ENTRIES–SO MANY THAT I DON’T TRUST WP ALL THAT MUCH AS A SOURCE. BUT IT’S NOT FOR ME TO WRITE MY OWN HISTORY–THAT HAS TO BE DONE BY OTHERS. IT’S JUST A SHAME THAT SOME PEOPLE OUT THERE (THEY KNOW WHO THEY ARE–AND I KNOW WHO THEY ARE TOO) FEEL THE NEED TO TAMPER WITH THE RECORD ANY WAY THEY CAN, FOR FUN, SELF-SATISFACTION, OR COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE.”
And what errors are they? Examples? See, it does not help to say “there are errors.” It helps to dive into specifics and point them out so someone can correct them and/or judge that they are not really errors.
- Vihakowoh
–I UNDERSTAND. IN THE PAST, I HAVE HAD PEOPLE NOTIFY ME OF CERTAIN CLAIMS ON THE WIKIPEDIA ENTRY AND CONFIRMING IF THEY WERE TRUE. WHEN I SAID THAT THEY WERE NOT, AND THE ISSUE WAS BROUGHT UP ON WIKIPEDIA, THEIR/MY COUNTERCLAIMS WERE DISMISSED BECAUSE THEY WERE EITHER “NOT SUBSTANTIATED” (DESPITE BEING FROM THE PRIMARY SOURCE) OR “NOT OBJECTIVE” (SIMPLY AND PRECISELY BECAUSE THEY CAME FROM ME OR WERE ARCHIVED AT DEBITO.ORG).
THIS IS ONE OF THE PROBLEMS WITH WIKIPEDIA–SECONDARY SOURCES (OR SOURCES THAT ARE NOT, SAY, FROM DEBITO.ORG), ARE GIVEN PRIORITY OVER WHAT I WOULD CONSIDER *THE* PRIMARY SOURCE–ME. LOOK AT THE PROPORTION OF LINKS THAT ARE TO SOURCES OTHER THAN DEBITO.ORG IN THE ENTRY. IT’S BECAUSE A FAUX “OBJECTIVITY” TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER INFORMATION “FROM THE HORSE’S MOUTH”; THE ASSUMPTION IS: IF IT COMES FROM ME DIRECTLY, IT MUST BE LESS OBJECTIVE.
PLUS WHEN YOU CAN SAY SOME REPORTER OR PUNDIT SAID SOMETHING ABOUT ME (THE FACT THAT THEY DID SAY SOMETHING ABOUT ME IS TRUE–BUT IT DOESN’T MEAN WHAT THEY SAID IS TRUE–CASE IN POINT BEING HOW ALEX KERR’S COMMENT ABOUT ME WAS DELIBERATELY MISQUOTED, AND STILL REMAINS SO ON THE JAPANESE VERSION OF MY WIKIPEDIA ENTRY–THERE YOU GO, TRY AND CORRECT THAT), YOU CAN LAUNDER RUMOR INTO “FACT”.
FACING THIS KIND OF EDITORIAL POLICY, I SAY, WHY BOTHER ANYMORE. THOSE WHO GET THE CLAIMS UP THERE FIRST WIN ANYWAY, ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE IS AN EDITORIAL BIAS TOWARDS THE ORIGINAL SOURCE CORRECTING OR DELETING THEM.
SO I JUST KEEP ON KEEPING ON AND TRY TO LET MY WORKS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES. THOSE WHO DO NOT WISH ME WELL ARE JUST GOING TO MISINTERPRET THEM ANYWAY. ARUDOU DEBITO
PS: ONE MORE MINOR CASE IN POINT: YOUR QUOTE ABOVE BEGINS WITH “SOMEONE SAID”. EVEN THOUGH I SAID IT. SEE?
December 30th, 2007 at 3:35 pm
Arudou, I wasn’t sure if it was you or someone else… I don’t usually read this blog. Anyhow, I am working on your article.
Wikipedia has a policy against “original research” and “weasel words” – I found this in the criticism section, so I am removing “weasel”y sentences and making sure that names are attached to criticism.
I understand that you have no intention of editing; it’s that Wikipedia has some suspicion towards the primary websites operated by the subjects in some cases due to fears of POV.
Anyhow, I am now examining your article.
December 30th, 2007 at 4:32 pm
Okay, Arudou. Look at the criticism section now.
–THANKS FOR TAKING THE TROUBLE. SECTIONS I THINK ARE INACCURATELY OR UNFAIRLY PHRASED:
>>>Claiming to be the object of racial harassment,[6] Aldwinckle eventually quit the company. In 1993, despite his previous pledge “against ever being a language teacher again,”[1] Aldwinckle joined the faculty of Business Administration and Information Science at the Hokkaido Information University,…
>>>When Debito Arudou was a non-citizen, his wife briefly became known as Ayako Aldwinckle (アルドウイクル 文子 Arudouinkuru Ayako?) and later changed her name back; as long as she was not formally married to Debito Arudou, she could retain a separate family name.
>>>Arudou initially maintained dual nationality in violation of Japanese nationality law which requires those who naturalize to renounce their former citizenship.
>>>Following a divorce[12] from his wife in September 2006, Arudou petitioned the Sapporo Family Court to delete his ex-wife’s Japanese maiden family name from his koseki, or Family Registry, thus officially changing his name to Debito Arudou in November 2006
>>>Arudou’s claim against the city of Otaru for failing to create an anti-discrimination ordinance was dismissed as without merit.[18] The Sapporo High Court upheld these rulings on September 16, 2004[19] and the Supreme Court of Japan denied review on April 7, 2005.[18]
>>>Anna Isozaki, one of Arudou’s former colleagues who was initially active in the BENCI (Business Excluding Non-Japanese Customer Issho) project (unconnected to Arudou’s “Community in Japan” project), said that Arudou has an unwillingness to co-operate within a larger organization. Such friction contributed to a split with some of his initial supporters in the BENCI project.[25] Isozaki said that Arudou felt resentment against being told to separate “the apparent center of activity from himself.”
>>>Some critics object to Arudou’s metaphor comparing the institutionalized racial discrimination historically exhibited in South Africa, and the segregated American south with the alleged examples debated in Japan.
>>>Authors of some letters to the editor regarding Yuki Allyson Honjo’s review of Japanese Only on Japanreview.net do not believe that a collection of bath-houses, “soaplands,” massage parlors, and nightclubs is representative of Japan’s civil rights situation in any meaningful sense.
ALL THE OTHER CRITICISMS IN THE CRITICISM SECTION ARE ALSO PROBLEMATIC IN THAT THEY ARE ONE-SIDED. THE POINT IS, WHY SHOULD THE READER EVEN CARE WHAT THESE PEOPLE SAY? (FOR EXAMPLE, WHO THE HECK IS PATRICK RIAL?) AND WHAT ABOUT THE OPINIONS OF PROPONENTS? THERE’S NO ATTEMPT WHATSOEVER AT COUNTERBALANCE OR COUNTERARGUMENT.
MOREOVER ALL THE WIKIQUOTES ARE TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT AND DESIGNED TO DEPICT SOME SORT OF HYPOCRISY.
THANKS FOR TRYING, VIHAKOWOH, BUT NEVER MIND. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT DESIGNED TO GIVE CONTROVERSIAL TOPICS A FAIR HEARING. AND EVEN IF SOMEBODY DOES GET IT RIGHT, IT’S ALL TOO LIKELY TO BE SPRAY-PAINTED OVER BY THE NEXT GRAFFITI ARTIST. –ARUDOU DEBITO
August 25th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
[...] Alex Kerr, author of Dogs and Demons: Tales from the Dark Side of Japan (ISBN 0-8090-3943-5), believed that Arudou’s tactics are “too combative.” Kerr said that he was doubtful “whether in the long run it really helps.” According to Kerr, “in Japan… [the combative] approach fails.” Kerr said that “gaijin and their gaijin ways are now part of the fabric of Japan’s new society,” and feared that Arudou’s activities may “confirm conservative Japanese in their belief that gaijin are difficult to deal with.”[30] On 7 April 2007, Arudou publicly criticized Kerr’s comments on his personal blog and mass e-mail newsletter lists. Following Arudou’s public criticisms, Kerr responded in an open e-mail posted by Arudou elaborating on his initial impressions of Arudou’s tactics, his current impressions of Arudou’s newsletter and website, and Kerr’s own distinct techniques for being critical in the field of “traditional culture, tourism, city planning, and the environment” — “to speak quietly, from ‘within.’” Respecting Arudou’s “undoubtedly combative” tactics, Kerr now concluded by stating: “I wholly support [Arudou’s] activities and [his] methods.”[31] [...]