My Shingetsu News Agency VM 78: “Kimi Onoda and the Trauma of History”, on how the Cabinet Minister in charge of policy towards “foreigners” is basically removing them from Japan. I see it as the natural outcome of Japan’s legacy of abuse towards its Visible Minorities.
Opening excerpt: Making much news in foreign quarters is Kimi Onoda, Minister for a “Society of Well-Ordered and Harmonious Coexistence with Foreign Nationals” since October 2025. She is the public face spearheading policies making it more difficult Japan’s foreign population to stay.
Soon, foreign residents who want to live longer-term or permanently in Japan must prove that they consistently make more than the average Japanese household’s income. Even if they manage that, there will be stringent and tested Japanese language requirements, fees for visa renewals jumping more than 12-fold from 6000 yen to 75,000 yen, and Permanent Resident fees skyrocketing 20-fold to 200,000 yen…
Onoda is a peculiar messenger for this policy. A Chicago-born daughter of an American father, she is a subset of Japan’s Visible Minorities called a haafu (half-Japanese). As such, one might expect her to be a bit more sensitive towards other diverse Japanese, as she has faced their hardships herself. Abandoned by her father and educated in Japan’s homogenizing education system, she admits to growing up in poverty and being bullied for “looking foreign.”
However, compassion for diversity is not Onoda’s thing. She has made easily falsifiable comments about foreign crime and incarceration rates, plus defamatory claims about foreigners damaging Japanese society and the social safety net.
That nastiness is embedded in her policy justifications, claiming these revisions will prevent foreigners becoming public welfare recipients now or in old age. (Even though that’s why everyone pays into the system in the first place.) And it was also seen when Onoda got snippy about the status of Permanent Residency (eijuken) no longer being “permanent,” pedantically saying is not a “right” but a “permit” for foreigners. So it’s just another revocable visa…. Thus Onoda reveals a cruel assumption that foreigners can never truly earn the “right” to permanence no matter how long they contribute…
Why such bile and personal animus in her public exercise of power? My theory is that this is what happens when Japanese of diverse roots, bullied and scarred by their inability to fit into Japan’s “homogeneous society” narrative, become bullies themselves.
This essay will now discuss the history of Japan’s Postwar “homogeneous society” narrative, demonstrate how it stigmatized Japan’s its Postwar mixed-blood Japanese children, and argue that Onoda’s bile is a product of that. Instead of showing support and solidarity for her haafu peers, she went in the other direction, overcompensating to prove herself as a “real Japanese” by pandering to the “pure-Japanese” adherents…