{"id":11916,"date":"2013-10-19T10:46:08","date_gmt":"2013-10-19T20:46:08","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.debito.org\/?p=11916"},"modified":"2013-10-19T11:02:16","modified_gmt":"2013-10-19T21:02:16","slug":"come-back-brazilian-nikkei-all-is-forgiven-in-a-policy-u-turn-after-goj-repatriation-bribes-of-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/?p=11916","title":{"rendered":"Come back Brazilian Nikkei, all is forgiven!, in a policy U-turn after GOJ Repatriation Bribes of 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"

eBooks, Books, and more from ARUDOU Debito (click on icon):
\n\"Guidebookcover.jpg\"<\/a>\"japaneseonlyebookcovertext\"<\/a>\"Handbook<\/a>\"\"<\/a>\"\u300c\u30b8\u30e3\u30d1\u30cb\u30fc\u30ba\u30fb\u30aa\u30f3\u30ea\u30fc\u3000\u5c0f\u6a3d\u5165\u6d74\u62d2\u5426\u554f\u984c\u3068\u4eba\u7a2e\u5dee\u5225\u300d\uff08\u660e\u77f3\u66f8\u5e97\uff09\"<\/a>\"sourstrawberriesavatar\"<\/a>\"debitopodcastthumb\"<\/a>\"\"<\/a>
\nUPDATES ON TWITTER: arudoudebito
\nDEBITO.ORG PODCASTS on iTunes, subscribe free
\n“LIKE” US on Facebook at http:\/\/www.facebook.com\/debitoorg<\/a>
\nhttp:\/\/www.facebook.com\/handbookimmigrants<\/a>
\nhttps:\/\/www.facebook.com\/JapaneseOnlyTheBook<\/a>
\nhttps:\/\/www.facebook.com\/BookInAppropriate<\/a><\/p>\n

Hi Blog. \u00a0In an apparent policy U-turn, the GOJ decided last week to lift the ban on certain South Americans of Japanese descent (Nikkei) from re-entering Japan. \u00a0This after bribing them to leave in 2009 so that they would not become an inconvenient unemployment statistic (not to mention that it was cheaper to pay their airfare than to pay them their social welfare that they had invested in over the decades, or pay them their pensions in future when reaching retirement age).<\/a><\/p>\n

The reasons for this U-turn are being discussed in a recent Japan Times article, excerpted below. \u00a0The article speculates that a couple of embarrassing lawsuits and visa-denials might have tipped the GOJ’s hand (I for one doubt it; Japan’s visa regimes, as can be seen for example in its perennial stance towards refugees<\/a>, are generally impervious to public exposure and international pressure). \u00a0I believe it was more an issue of the GOJ facing reality (as happened more than one year ago at the highest policymaking levels, where even the GOJ still maintained the stance that if immigration was an inevitability, they had better bring back people with Japanese blood<\/a>; after all, the only ones in attendance were all Wajin and one token Nikkei<\/a>).<\/p>\n

Debito.org has spoken out quite hot-tonguedly about how ludicrous the Nikkei Repatriation Bribe was<\/a>, not the least because of its inherently racialized paradigms (because they only applied to Nikkei — people who were also in even more dire financial straits due to the economic downturn, such as the Chinese<\/a> and Muslim factory workers<\/a> laboring in conditions of indentured servitude<\/a>, were left to fend for themselves because they lacked the requisite Japanese blood).<\/p>\n

So as a matter of course Debito.org cheers for the lifting of the ban. \u00a0But the Bribe and the Ban should never have happened in the first place. \u00a0So the GOJ can also take its lumps even if they are ultimately making the right decision.<\/p>\n

Does this mean that the numbers of registered NJ residents of Japan will start to increase again<\/a>? \u00a0I will say it could happen. \u00a0I stress:\u00a0could<\/em>, not will<\/em> happen. \u00a0But if it did, that statistic, not any asset bubbles and transient stock-market numbers that people keep championing as the putative fruits of “Abenomics”, will be the real indicator of Japan’s recovery. \u00a0 That is to say, if Japan ever regains its sheen as an attractive place to work for international labor, then an increase in Japan’s NJ population will cause and signal a true leavening of Japan’s economic clout and prowess. \u00a0But I remain skeptical at this juncture — as I’ve said before, the jig is up,<\/a> and outsiders generally know that Japan has no intention or enforceable laws to treat immigrants as equals, no matter how much of their lives and taxes they invest.<\/p>\n

At this time, I believe international migrant labor will continue to vote with their feet and work elsewhere. \u00a0So good luck with significant numbers coming to Japan even with this ban lifted. \u00a0Arudou Debito<\/p>\n

==========================
\nReferential article:<\/strong><\/p>\n

Ban lifted on \u2018nikkei\u2019 who got axed, airfare<\/strong>
\n But Japanese-Brazilians must have work contract before coming back<\/strong>
\n BY TOMOHIRO OSAKI, The Japan Times OCT 15, 2013<\/strong>
\nEXCERPT:
\nIn what could be a significant change in policy affecting \u201cnikkei\u201d migrant workers from Brazil, the government Tuesday lifted a ban on the return of Japanese-Brazilians who received financial help in 2009 to fly home when they were thrown out of work during the global financial crisis.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Ostensibly an attempt to help the unemployed and cash-strapped Latin American migrants of Japanese ethnic origin escape the economic woes here, the 2009 initiative offered each an average of \u00a5300,000 to be used as airfare. It eventually resulted in an exodus of around 20,000 people, including 5,805 from Aichi Prefecture and 4,641 from Shizuoka Prefecture.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Although some of the migrants were genuinely thankful for the chance to get out of struggling Japan and find jobs back home, others were insulted because accepting the deal also meant they couldn\u2019t come back to Japan at least \u201cfor the next three years\u201d under \u201cthe same legal status.\u201d This was seen as an outrageous move by the government to \u201cget rid of\u201d foreign workers as demand for their services fizzled out.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

The migrants were initially banned from re-entering Japan for an unspecified period of time, but after a storm of both domestic and international condemnation, the government eventually said it might green-light their return after three years, depending on the economy.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Rest at http:\/\/www.japantimes.co.jp\/news\/2013\/10\/15\/national\/ban-lifted-on-nikkei-who-got-axed-airfare\/<\/a>
\nENDS<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In an apparent policy U-turn, the GOJ decided last week to lift the ban on certain South Americans of Japanese descent (Nikkei) from re-entering Japan. This after bribing them to leave in 2009 so that they would not become an inconvenient unemployment statistic (not to mention that it was cheaper to pay their airfare than to pay them their social welfare that they had invested in over the decades, or pay them their pensions in future when reaching retirement age).<\/p>\n

The reasons for this U-turn are being discussed in a recent Japan Times article, excerpted below. The article speculates that a couple of embarrassing lawsuits and visa-denials might have tipped the GOJ’s hand (I for one doubt it; Japan’s visa regimes, as can be seen for example in its perennial stance towards refugees, are generally impervious to public exposure and international pressure). I believe it was more an issue of the GOJ facing reality (as happened more than one year ago at the highest policymaking levels, where even the GOJ still maintained the stance that if immigration was an inevitability, they had better bring back people with Japanese blood; after all, the only ones in attendance were all Wajin and one token Nikkei).<\/p>\n

Debito.org has spoken out quite hot-tonguedly about how ludicrous the Nikkei Repatriation Bribe was, not the least because of its inherently racialized paradigms (because they only applied to Nikkei — people who were also in even more dire financial straits due to the economic downturn, such as the Chinese and Muslim factory workers laboring in conditions of indentured servitude, were left to fend for themselves because they lacked the requisite Japanese blood).<\/p>\n

So as a matter of course Debito.org cheers for the lifting of the ban. But the Bribe and the Ban should never have happened in the first place. So the GOJ can also take its lumps even if they are ultimately making the right decision.<\/p>\n

Does this mean that the numbers of registered NJ residents of Japan will start to increase again? I will say it could happen. I stress: could, not will happen. But if it did, that statistic, not any asset bubbles and transient stock-market numbers that people keep championing as the putative fruits of “Abenomics”, will be the real indicator of Japan’s recovery. That is to say, if Japan ever regains its sheen as an attractive place to work for international labor, then an increase in Japan’s NJ population will cause and signal a true leavening of Japan’s economic clout and prowess. But I remain skeptical at this juncture — as I’ve said before, the jig is up, and outsiders generally know that Japan has no intention or enforceable laws to treat immigrants as equals, no matter how much of their lives and taxes they invest.<\/p>\n

At this time, I believe international migrant labor will continue to vote with their feet and work elsewhere. So good luck with significant numbers coming to Japan even with this ban lifted.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[54,43,36,34,50,35,5,26,4,16,15,41,11,53],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-11916","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-pinprick-protests","category-bad-business-practices","category-bad-social-science","category-exclusionism","category-gaiatsu","category-good-news","category-human-rights","category-ironies-hypocrisies","category-japanese-government","category-labor-issues","category-lawsuits","category-pension-system","category-problematic-foreign-treatment","category-unsustainable-japanese-society"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11916","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=11916"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/11916\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=11916"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=11916"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.debito.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=11916"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}