From: smittie@beach.csulb.edu (Smittie)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan
Subject: Racism in Japan
Date: 4 Sep 92 18:54:45 GMT
Article-I.D.: tui.SMITTIE.92Sep4115442
Organization: Cal State Long Beach

I am currently in the midst of doing an independent study project which focuses
on the nature of racism in Japan. The foundation or starting point of this
project is John Dower's book, "War without Mercy." I have some comments,
observations and ideas that I would like to toss out for discussion.

In reading Dower's book I had one nagging problem. What is racism? I later
figured out that the real question is what is race as it relates to racism?
Dower does not provide any kind of definition for either race or racism. Thus I
found that when faced with the need for a consice definition that I could work
with in the context of Dower's work, all I had was ambiguity. I also began to
suspect that Dower was using the ambiguity of the word to his own benefit in
the course of his writing.

When someone talks about race, I always assume they mean the word that defines
the set which contains Negroid, Mongoloid, Caucasan, etc. Thus it is to me
confusing or at least not very clear when Japanese who have particular
attitudes toward other Asians are call racists. By my understanding Japanese
are of the same race as those other Asians. Likewise I had significant
difficulty understanding how Jew could be a race since a Jew is someone who
believes in and practices the Jewish religion and has nothing at all to do with
race as I understood the word.

So, I decided that I needed to either find or develop a more concise working
definition of racism. Being a bit lazy by nature I first tried to find such a
definition. "Racism" by Robert Miles provides what I think is a good working
definition although it is rather heavily laden with 25 and 30 cent words.

	Racialization - a process of delineating a group of boundaries and
	allocating persons within those boundaries by primary reference to
	supposedly inherent and/or biological characteristics. 	

	Racism - a racialized group is attributed with additional, negatively
	evaluated characteristics and/or represented as inducing negative
	consequences on other. Those characteristics may be biological,
	cultural, or both. This naturally defined group then constitutes a
	problematic presence.
	
Working from this definition of racism I notice something rather pecular about
the very nature of racism as observed in Japan especially during the
militaristic period during the 1930's and early 1940's. Racism as observed in
the West tends to focus on how the racialized group is different. The West
usually seeks to demostrate and prove that the racialized group as somehow not
as good. For example, "blacks are stupid" focuses on how "blacks" are
different. Likewise, "Mexicans are lazy" focuses again on how "Mexicans" are
different. In the West explicit reference to the racialized group is used to
imply that "Whites" are superior. The message is still that "Whites" are
superior but the message is implicit. The Japanese message is explicit in
nature with regard to their own superiority and implicit with regard to all
others.

Because of the very nature of racism as seen in Japan, Japanese propaganda was
very different in that it focused almost entirely on accentuating some
perceived essence of being Japanese. Eliminating anything that was seen as
Western in nature or origin for example. The nature of racism as seen in Japan
is also more conducive of an image of self as the benevolent father of those
people born to "lesser races". For example the Greater East Asian Co-prosperity
in which Japan was the "good and benevolent overload."

smittie
--
___________________________________________________________________________
GEnie, MCI, AOL:Smittie | If all of us were as smart as we think we are the
smittie@beach.csulb.edu |  current world problems would be yesterday's news.
________________________|___________________________________________________
Newsgroups: soc.culture.japan