Anti-discrimination Education in Japan:
Buraku Sabetsu Simulation*

Daisuke Nojima**T

he structural study of discrimination using the simulation
method in school setting has pros and cons. This is true in the studyof discrimination of a section of the Japanese population known as
Burakumin (Buraku people). A famous Japanese professor on international
education warned me against writing reports on this issue for a thesis-writing contest. He was apprehensive about the possibility of the institution thatheld the contest facing difficulties in case my thesis won.
His warning was based on the experience of researcher-friend who was
unable to continue his research on the subject after receiving severe criticism from the Buraku liberation movement.
A school educator who used traditional pedagogy criticized the simulation method I used as too objective and not on the side of discriminatedpeople. However, many participants in the 2009 International Institute on
Peace Education held in Budapest, Hungary provided very positive suggestions on my research. One suggested the addition of the gender perspective in the research since behind the phenomenon of discrimination was thegender issue.
I have been using the simulation method in discussing the Buraku issue
in my classes.
Considering the suggestions, particularly the gender perspective, I
present the use of simulation method in human rights education activities
that focus on Buraku discrimination.

*This is an edited version of the article that first appeared in In Factis Pax, 3(1) (2009):
112-125.
**Daisuke Nojima teaches at the Senri International Schools of Kwansei Gakuin in Osaka,
Japan; and is a Doctoral Candidate at Ritsumeikan University Graduate School of International
Relations.

85

86

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

Vignette: Family Context
In marriage, the father in Burakumin family would often play the most decisive role. The situation differs depending on whether it is a marriage between a Buraku woman and a non-Buraku man or a Buraku man marrying
a non-Buraku woman. Therefore, I develop the opening dialogue between
Father and Son to suggest the existence of a gender problematique.
Here is a sample vignette about a father and a son who are in conflict
about the possible marriage of the son to a woman from the Buraku community. The family is faced with a dilemma between love and established practice. This vignette is based on a book authored by Nobuhiko Kadooka, who
declared that he was a Burakumin. He wrote the book entitled Hisabetsu
Buraku no Seishun (Youth in Buraku Community).1
Volunteer performers are asked to read in a skit style the following vignette, as an introduction to understanding Buraku discrimination (Buraku
sabetsu) problem in Japan:
Son: Father, I would like to marry…
Father: Oh, yes! It’s a good news! Is she your nice girlfriend,
Hanako?
S : Yes!
F : She is a good lady! You’re lucky! What a good news!
S : Father, and…I have to tell you, about…
F : What?
S : …About her origin.
F : What is it?
S : She’s from Buraku community.
F : … Oh, no, my son!
S : She says she wants you to know it, before our marriage.
F : No, it’s impossible!
S : Why impossible?
F : It will damage our family’s reputation! Absolutely, no!!
S : Why does it damage our family?
F : Because our family blood cannot be mixed with theirs!
S : It’s an old-fashioned way of thinking. Wrong belief!
F : …Though I would say OK, our relatives must be angry! It
might damage their reputation, too. Do you want to cause any
disadvantage at your cousin’s marriage and employment?
S : You cannot predict it!
F : No, the public is not easy. And I know Buraku people havestrong human rights movement, and I hear some of them haveAnti-discrimination Education in Japan: Buraku Sabetsu Simulation

87

very strong stance. I don’t want our family to be involved in suchcomplicated matters!
S : Well, give us time. We didn’t think you would become furious.
F : Mmmm…, who on earth keeps such silly discrimination system?! We are annoyed!
S : ….Father, it’s you!
Through this vignette, the facilitator encourages the participants tothink about Buraku sabetsu. The facilitator asks the participants to think of
the possible results that can arise in the case. Some possible results are thefollowing:• To overcome the difficulty, they marry with the full support of his
family. This can be the happiest solution, but they all need to staystrong.
• They marry, but keep her origin secret from his relatives; being
afraid of the disclosure. Kadooka’s book presents an interview regarding a similar case; the people involved were superficially happy,
but there was no complete solution.
• They marry and break off the relationship with their respective
families. They became very independent and decided to stay away,
but their families could not support them.
• Semi-gathered marriage ceremony (wedding ceremony with only
the family of either the bride or the groom). The famous enlightening movie “Hashi no Nai Kawa (River without a Bridge)” demonstrates this sorrowful scenario.
• Separate ways - Probably, most cases have ended under thiscategory.
• Judicial action - A coming-out reporter told her own case in court
in a publication.
• Runaway, Suicide, … etc.
These sad cases still happen.
At this point, the workshop defines Buraku sabetsu as discrimination
against people from “Outcast” community in Japan.
This type of discrimination occurs at personal and social levels. At thepersonal level, it is mostly found in cases of marriage and employment. At
the social level: those discriminated bear much difficulty in terms of social
burdens and relegation of role to tasks not wanted by many people.

88

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

Simulation: Community Context
To realize the social structural context of discrimination, participants are
asked to do a role-play of an imaginary community. This is a simulation ofgroup negotiation and decision-making in a community about burden sharing, which are necessary to keep modern living standards.
In this simulation, fifteen cards are prepared for fifteen participants:
For Stage 1: Nine Serene Cards, and six Burden Cards are prepared anddistributed through lottery. A Serene Card means the person has the privilege of living without being asked to carry any social burden. On the other
hand, the Burden Card indicates living in 1) an isolated area of the town
or city, 2) near a Nuclear Powerplant, 3) Humble House, 4) 3D-jobs (difficult, dirty, and dangerous jobs), 5) No Chance of Higher Education, and
6) Garbage Disposal Facilities. All the fifteen cards have similar design andcolor.
For Stage 2: two Elite Cards, ten “Happy?” Cards, and three Change
Cards are prepared to construct social classes.
The simulation activity has three stages.
Stage 1: Fair Burden-sharing Community
At the first stage, everyone in the community draws a card. The card
can either be the “Serene” card that ensures that the person will live in calmand “normal” life, or the “Burden” card that requires a person to bear somekind of burden that is necessary for the community (such as living in a placewith “Garbage Disposal Facility,” “Isolation Ward,” “Crematory,” “Nuclear
Powerplant,” etc.). People are requested to sit together in two groups –Serene Group and Burden Group.
Stage 2: Community with Social ClassIn each group, people are asked to compete with each other using thepaper-rock-scissors game to get the Elite Card and Change Cards. People
with the “Serene” card automatically earn the “Happy?” card, which symbolizes living happy life (without sharing social burden).
The Serene Group selects two elite people, who are responsible formanaging the whole community. The members of the Burden Group race
to get the “Change” card, which ensures changing the “Burden” card into
“Happy?” card. The winner earns the second chance to live without social
burden, while the loser gets more “Burden” cards, which are given up by theAnti-discrimination Education in Japan: Buraku Sabetsu Simulation

89

winner in this group. As a result of the races in the two groups, the wholecommunity is divided into four social classes:
1. Elite with Elite Cards and “Happy?” Cards
2. Serene (“Normal” citizen) and “Happy?” Cards
3. “Climber” with Change Cards and “Happy?” Cards
4. Burden bearers.
Chart 1The people are required to make a decision as a community on whether to go back to Stage 1, where all social burdens are shared by lottery, or
keep Stage 2 with the four social classes. Everybody votes to decide on whatshould be adopted. Other proposals or suggestions can be discussed also.
During the negotiation before the final vote, the Facilitator asks somekey questions. Examples of possible questions are:2• Who seems to be the most responsible among the members of thecommunity?
• Who has the power to change?
• Do members of each social class share common opinion within theclass?
• Why is this situation kept?
• Who gains from the system?
Stage 3: Community with Fixed Social Classes (the social classes remain
forever, even for descendants)
Whatever the community’s decision is, the Facilitator asks everybody
to imagine that the social class era continues into the future for many centuries. Further, the Facilitator asks them to express what they feel about it.

90

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

The central aim of the role-play is to realize the structural dimension
of Buraku sabetsu. The imaginary community is a metaphor of one of themost serious and historic discriminations in Japan. There are many excellent
teaching practices that encourage empathy in individual learners; however,
Buraku sabetsu has become more invisible in the Japanese social framework
due to reasons discussed below.
Therefore, we need resort to structure-oriented simulation studies, aswell as moral education to transform this severe discrimination.
The Facilitator proceeds to discussing the Buraku discrimination history, the situation of the Burakumin, the current forms of Buraku discrimination, the anti-discrimination movements, the government responses andother issues. The Facilitator uses different audio-visual aids and other teaching-learning materials for this purpose.
I. Buraku Sabetsu - Origin and Status
A. Kegare (穢れ: Impurity in mind)
To realize the deep structure of Buraku sabetsu, the concept of Kegare
should be understood. There are many theories analyzing its origin, but theyagree at least on the following: in the 8th century, noble people privatized
the land and social classes were created. Until modern age, “Kegare” exists
in the deep structure of Japanese people’s minds that forms a kind of deep
culture. “Kegare” means impurity in the mind, which can never be purified
by physical actions. For example, while a container that had cow feces andurine could be washed and disinfected a thousand times, Japanese people
might still think that impurity remains in it. The idea of kegare results inprejudice against people with specific occupations, such as funeral workers,
executioners, sweepers, leather producers, and drum makers. People withthose occupations are regarded as impure, since they touch the dead people
or animals, or dirty things like feces or skin of dead animals.
B. Fixed Social Classes
The 17th century Samurai Shogunate fixed the social hierarchy: Samurai(Warrior), Farmer, Merchant, and Craftsperson. It also defined outcast people: “Eta (extreme filth)”and “Hinin (non-human)” classes. The Shogunate
fixed the social classes in order to maintain the Samurai’s privileged status.
Outcasted people were regulated in terms of social manners and communication with other classes.

Anti-discrimination Education in Japan: Buraku Sabetsu Simulation

91

C. Social Structure
Chart 2Chart 2 indicates how the Samurai (warrior) class designed the social
hierarchy. The Farmer class had the absolute majority, and the critical point
was how the Warrior class, constituting only 8 percent of the population,
would control society. The people with power utilized the prejudice against
the outcast classes (Eta and Hinin) to preserve this unstable hierarchicalpyramid. Perhaps, many discriminatory systems in the world share common
characteristics with the Edo class system.
D. Kegare Impurity Lasts ForeverBuraku people were discriminated against even after they passed away.
For example, their gravestones show discriminatory posthumous names
such as letters for animals or slaves’ names. Buddhist priests record posthumous names called kaimyo (戒名), which means spending time after-deathin another dimension of space, that are discriminatory to Buraku people.
E. Potential of Continued Discrimination
In the 19th century, the new Meiji Government prohibited any social
class ranking, however class discrimination continued. In the era of capitalism and industrialization that followed, capitalists required cheap labor, andweak classes were forced to compete with each other. The idea of “Kegare”
was even strengthened with the introduction in this period of then new
western concepts of hygiene and eugenics.

92

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

F. The Enforced “Role” of Accepting Social Disadvantages
In the 20th century, in the era of modernization, social burdens such as
garbage disposal facilities, isolation wards, crematories, and nuclear powerplants were often constructed in or near the Buraku areas. “3D-jobs,” unemployed persons, humble houses, people with no formal education, etc.
were often found in Buraku communities. To explain the situation in another way, the modern government utilized Buraku sabetsu to put social
burdens on this group of people. If, for example, 10 percent of the population automatically accepts those social burdens, the majority (90 percent) of
the population could live without any risk of having social disadvantages (asshown in the simulation activity at the beginning of this workshop).
G. “Invisible People” - Why does it continue over the centuries?
The Buraku people are “invisible” in a certain sense, and yet they arestill discriminated against. There are no distinctive physical features that
distinguish them from other Japanese people. Buraku people cannot be
identified in normal communication, and foreign observers often ask why
this discrimination is possible. This discrimination is neither the remainsof past bad legislation, nor the habit of the past feudal era alone; it is being
reproduced even in the current modern era.
What explains this discrimination? It is caused by the perceived need ofmodern society to sacrifice the good of a minority for the benefit of society.
It is a utilitarian calculation wherein the overall benefits to society outweighthe harm done to a minority. If a fixed group of people carried social burdens, the others would feel safe from the risk of carrying them.
There are three ways through which discrimination is sustained: Koseki(戸籍: family registration system3), Buraku Chimei Soukan (部落地名総鑑:
underground publication of Buraku community address lists), and Koshinjo (興信所: private detective agencies). The first one, Koseki, a Japanese custom,
identifies the Buraku people. Northeast Asian societies have the legal custom of permanent address registration, with the Koseki as its equivalent inJapan. Though people move away from their original place and change theirresidential address (Jyuminhyou), the Koseki remains unchanged. Second,the underground “Buraku list” publications were purchased by famous companies and ordinary people. The “Buraku list” indicates which permanent
addresses are categorized as Buraku communities. Third, Koshinjo, private
detective agencies search for people’s permanent address or family status.
A law has been enacted to prohibit access to family records in local gov-

Anti-discrimination Education in Japan: Buraku Sabetsu Simulation

93

ernment offices, except by the members of the family or their authorized
agents such as their lawyers. However, the discrimination has not totally
been overcome.
II. To Learn Deeply from the Reality of Discrimination
To learn deeply from the reality of discrimination 「差別の現実に深く学(ぶ」: Sabetsu no Genjitsu ni Fukaku Manabu) is a common slogan of antidiscrimination educators in Japan. Buraku sabetsu in the modern age takes
the following forms: pressure on marriage, pressure on employment, bullying, harassment, graffiti, discriminatory description in internet bulletinboards, and so on.
A. Statistics
Unfortunately, the 1990s statistics still indicate the difference between
the “average” people’s living standard and the living standard of Buraku
people. For example:4• Prolonged absence in school: Average - 2.4 percent, Buraku - 4.5
percent• Entry into university and junior college: Average - 40.7 percent,
Buraku - 28.6 percent• Households on welfare: Average - 1.4 percent, Buraku - 7.0 percent• Company executives: Average - 6.0 percent, Buraku - 1.9 percent• Annual Income of less than 0.5 million Yen: Average - 4.7 percent,
Buraku - 10.3 percent
These situations seem to have improved a little at present; however, thegap still stands.
B. Ms. Hatsue Kobayashi’s (a coming-out writer) Talk in a TV Program5
A sensational TV discussion program broadcasted the challenging
topic of Buraku sabetsu, and a coming-out writer, Ms. Hatsue Kobayashi
introduced how Buraku people were discriminated against. She cited many
examples, such as:»» Bullying of her child in school (being excluded from lunch serving
duty, getting locked inside the toilet, etc.)»» Newcomers desperately explaining that they have no relatives in
the area

94

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c»» A small girl taking her grandmother to Ms. Kobayashi’s home andexplaining how evil she is, by pointing at the doorplate.
At the same program, Mr. Kenzo Tomonaga, the then Head Researcher
from the Buraku Kaiho Kenkyusho (部落解放研究所: Buraku Liberation
Research Institute6) introduced a statistic: 70 percent of nuclear powerplants
in Japan were located in or near the Buraku communities. Ms. Kobayashi
revealed as well that other public facilities have also been constructed in
Buraku zones, and there have been serious power struggles between Buraku
residents and the government. Due to the public’s power to oppress, theapathy of the majority of ordinary people, and the customs that regard selfhelp actions as crude, she found no way to ensure respect for the humandignity of people in Buraku communities.
C. Current Main Cases of Discrimination
Buraku sabetsu shows its face in the modern Japanese society, such as
in the following examples:(1) Purchase by around one thousand six hundred companies, including
big and famous companies, of private information from two detective agencies (1998)7 Many companies had contracts with the two detective companies to check individual information such as place of origin, personal beliefs,
and political activities, when they recruit new staff members. The information was sent by fax, and disposed of immediately, in order to destroy theevidence.
(2) Compulsion on students to rewrite job interview report (2005). To
improve the recruitment by companies of students from Buraku communities, schools requested students to report what were asked at the interview.
Questions about place of origin, landmarks near their home, personal beliefs, for example, were regarded as inappropriate questions. A teacher instructed students to make false statements in response to such questions inorder to save them from discriminatory treatment.
(3) Computerized Buraku lists (2006). As technology developed,
Buraku lists were computerized that made it more difficult for people inanti-discrimination activities to find such inappropriate publication.
(4) Defamation in internet communication. The main method of bullying in school is in the internet or mobile phone e-mail communication. The
attackers use fake names, and the bullied person cannot identify who hascommitted the humiliation. Bullying of Buraku people has also moved into

Anti-discrimination Education in Japan: Buraku Sabetsu Simulation

95

electronic communication. Many violent words are found on the internetbulletin boards, as well as bad words against foreigners and their countries.
III. Anti-discrimination Movements
The Buraku people, after a long struggle, started their own anti-discrimination movements.
a. Fruits of the Movements
A world famous declaration on human rights, Suiheisha Declaration(水平社宣言)8 was adopted in 1922 at the founding of Zenkoku Suiheisha(水平社: National Levelers League, 1922-1942). The declaration contained
the principles of self-help, solidarity, being proud of one’s self, etc. The flagof the movement (荊冠旗: Keikanki) had a crown of thorns design. The establishment of Zenkoku Suiheisha was an epoch-making event in the antidiscrimination movement history.
During the war period, Zenkoku Suiheisha faced extinction due to theunification of all parties in the war effort. At that time, they regarded unification as a significant opportunity to be recognized, by contributing to theeffort to overcome the national crisis. It subsequently regretted this collaboration on the war effort. After the World War II, a National Committee for
Buraku Liberation (部落解放全国委員会: Buraku Kaiho Zenkoku Iinkai,
1946-1955) was founded. Other organizations were also established as partof the movement.
b. Problems in Anti-Discrimination Movements
Unfortunately, the anti-Buraku discrimination movements faced somedifficulties in recent decades. These difficulties are seen as having arisen
from several factors:
1. Fragmentation of the movements that were supported by politicalparties.
2. Reports about alleged scandals involving a human rights organization and the administration of the human rights department in thelocal government.
3. Recent globalization of economy generated poorer people otherthan the Buraku people and focus seems to be weakening on the
Buraku community.9

96

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i c

IV. Anti-Discrimination Laws
A. Special Legislation
Japan enacted in 1969 a special legislation (同和対策事業特別措置法:
Douwa Taisaku Jigyou Tokubetsu Sochi Hou, Law for Special Measures for
Dowa Projects) that mainly focused on the improvement of the economic
status and living standards of Buraku communities, including the nomination of special areas and the provision of better social infrastructure. Thislaw was amended several times that extended the period of implementation of the special measures to a total of about thirty years. In education,
the Law for Human Rights Education and the Promotion of Enlightenmentof Human Rights (人権教育及び人権啓発の推進に関する法律: Jinken
Kyouiku Oyobi Jinken Keihatsu no Suishin ni Kansuru Houritsu) was enacted in 2000. This law was enacted in support of the United Nations’ Decadefor Human Rights Education (1995-2004). This United Nations’ Decade
gained support worldwide.
B. Problems - the End of Special Legislation in 2002
This Law for Special Measures for Dowa Projects as amended expired in
2002. The government seemed to have taken the view that Buraku sabetsu
had become less obvious and the Buraku communities seemed to have improved at least in the economic field. Recent thinking maintains that there
should have been a basic law on the liberation of Buraku people and community. After the expiration of the special legal measure, anti-discriminatory lectures were no longer mandatory in the teacher licensure programs
at the university, and about 40 percent of new teachers in private schools inOsaka have not learned about Buraku sabetsu.10 The recently published bookof Kadooka, a Buraku writer, tells us that though discrimination became lesssevere in general, it still exists and violations of human rights continue.11
V. Anti-Discrimination Education12
The anti-discrimination education movement had made much effort in empowering and supporting Buraku students by developing such systems asliteracy education (識字教育: Shikiji Kyouiku:), free school textbook (教科書無 償化: Kyoukasho Mushouka), and changes in the philosophy of scholarship (奨学金基準の変更: Shougakukin Kijun no Henkou). Similar to thecourse guidance support material: the General Format of Curriculum Vitae

Anti-discrimination Education in Japan: Buraku Sabetsu Simulation

97(統一応募用紙: Touitsu Oubo Youshi) required information on permanent
address by writing the name of the prefecture only, and did not include other information such as identification of any ideology being supported, etc.
The anti-discrimination education movement also carried out enlightenment education for the majority population.
Many teaching materials, reading materials, movies, etc., have been
produced, and anti-discrimination educational programs have been introduced in the human rights education curriculum of schools. Recently, thesehuman rights education initiatives have been linked to current trends in international education of using the Convention on the Rights of the Child, theUniversal Declaration of Human Rights, the United Nations InternationalYear of Human Rights Learning (2009), etc.
A. Education of Empathy with Literature
Among many human rights education-teaching materials, the book entitled Ningen (にんげん、Human) is widely introduced in the Osaka area.
It contains various stories on different topics such as: People with visualdisabilities, Hansen’s Disease, Antipersonnel Landmine, Ainu (Indigenous
people in Japan), Zainichi Koreans (Koreans living in Japan), People with
Special Needs, HIV carriers, Okinawans, Buraku discrimination, etc.13 The
discussion of these themes, mainly during homeroom period or in moral
education class, aims to develop the students’ empathy with minorities or
people in discriminated situation. The book is distributed to many schools
in the Osaka area, and has an established reputation. However, the bookdoes not focus much on the structural aspect of discrimination. The issues
in the book have mainly been taught from the standpoint of humanities, notin a social science context.
B. Problems in Anti-discrimination Education
The anti-discrimination education program faced some problems. First,
official support for human rights education weakened due to reduced budget
after the expiration of the special legislation for empowering Buraku people
and community. The printing of Ningen stopped and forced practitioners to
distribute photocopies instead. The Osaka governor in late 2000s adopted
the policy of minimizing the expenses of the Osaka prefectural governmentthat led to reduced support for educational activities. Second, the expirationof the Law for Special Measures for Dowa Projects also contributed to theteachers’ lack of knowledge about the Buraku issue, since university study

98

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i cof the issue was no longer a mandatory requirement to obtain a teacher’s license. Third, with many non-Buraku issues considered under human rights
education, the Buraku issue was thereby de-mainstreamed. The expansionof the coverage of human rights education has many merits. Traditionalanti-discrimination education practitioners regretted that the Buraku issue
has come to be seen as much less important.
VI. Trial of the Structural Approach and the Viewpoint of Transformation(Simulation Study)
The anti-discrimination education program mainly employed humanistic
ways of teaching that have good effect on students’ reflection on their daily
lives, and on mindset affected by prejudice.
But considering the issues involved, human rights education on Buraku
discrimination requires more effective ways of teaching. The social-scientific view should be emphasized to overcome difficulties that still lie behind the superficial improvement in the understanding of the Buraku issue.
While traditional education mainly focuses on the cultural violence aspectof Buraku sabetsu, there is a need to focus on its structural violence aspect
under the new human rights education programs. People’s actions and reactions around Buraku sabetsu must be included to uncover the structural
violence aspect of the issue.
To observe the structural contradiction of conflict, simulation-styled
class becomes prominent. In the structural approach of learning, the simulation of the Buraku issue discusses four social classes and explores thepossibility of social change. The discussion stage re-evaluates the traditional society. The community discusses the important decision-making issues, including whether to go back to the stage of burden sharing or not.
Other plans are of course welcomed. Human rights, especially regarding
the Buraku issue, should be taught not just as a matter of personal ethics
but also as a transformation of social structure, using the peace education
perspective. This participatory method of learning should also be employedin other anti-discrimination issues.
A. Review of IIPE 2009 Simulation
The session at the 2009 IIPE was the first time that the simulation method was introduced to multicultural participants. The paper-rock-scissors
game was too difficult for some participants from different cultures; how-Anti-discrimination Education in Japan: Buraku Sabetsu Simulation

99

ever, many people cooperated in explaining the process, which has neverbeen seen in my classroom. The discussion before voting produced various
solutions: everybody should own some parts of the social burdens; responsibility should be shared on rotation basis, and so on. In one notable instance,
one participant voluntarily owned some of the burdens of others (friends).
After the simulation exercise, the main topic discussed was the possibility of simulation method in teaching discrimination or human rights issues.
My proposal was still a prototype and needed improvements; however the
majority opinion maintained that the participatory method of human rights
learning was worth trying.
In exploring the simulation study of discrimination using the 2009 IIPE
theme (Human Rights Learning as Peace Education - Pursuing Democracy
in a Time of Crisis), the tension regarding the sharing of social burdens
among participants (modified from the real discrimination situation) waspresented as a crisis, while also raising the question: “Whose crisis?”
In support of democracy, the process should involve 1) discussion, 2)
finding solution, and 3) transformation in democratic ways. Necessarily,
this simulation study should aim at learning how to protect minorities fromstructural violence, and how to transform the distorted structure into apeaceful one, through peaceful means. This method is especially meaningful in multicultural situations, with human rights as the common language
among peoples from many cultures.
B. Reviewing My ClassMy fifteen years of experience in using this simulation method provides
a basis for some conclusions regarding its use and for a review of the learning gained in addressing social problems in Japanese society.
The students’ conclusions in sessions using the simulation method vary
by group. Some classes were very positive, and adopted almost a unanimous
agreement to change the situation in Stage 1. Other classes were negative
to changing the situation in Stage 1, expressing lack of sympathy in theirdecision. The young people’s flexibility leads to the discussion of many alternatives. For example, there were several ideas for transformation: rotatingbasis for burden sharing (as seen in 2009 IIPE), introducing compulsory
human rights education for people with “Happy?” cards, cutting the burden
into smaller pieces to be shared by everybody, abandoning some industries
or economic progress goals, etc. In all cases, the facilitator helped the students gain a deeper understanding of discrimination, using the technique

100

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i cof comparing realities, finding the same phenomena in real disputes, etc.
While not expected, the effects of empathy education were revealed throughthe simulation study; for example, deeper understanding of the victimized
people, stronger motivation to know the realities, and so on. On the other
hand, the readings-oriented approach of humanistic studies has attracted
only sensitive students in my class.
In the process of developing this structural approach, I asked two expert teachers outside our school to review it. A very traditional teacher withrich experience gave a critical comment: it could be a little rude to simulate
real wrenching discrimination situation as a “game,” it would be dangerous
if a Buraku student would play the role of a victim, teachers could not always expect fruitful discussion among very young students, etc. The other,a middle-aged teacher, thought that this approach was rather necessary in
the Buraku community because advocating for an appropriate concept ofunderstanding the real system of discrimination could help overcome thediscriminatory situation. Both comments provide very efficient guide in reviewing this type of teaching. Further, I had a couple of opportunities todemonstrate the method at teachers’ workshops in Japan, and had many
comments of encouragement, and a few criticisms (including the fear of thepossibility that the discussion could unwittingly become very serious).
Considering all the comments, I added as an improvement a shortwarm-up game before the simulation exercise to stimulate shy students andraise enthusiasm. Also, through facilitation, there should be affirmative response to any contribution by students to the discussion.
I have not used this simulation study in the Buraku community.
However, I have asked two well-known researchers from the Buraku community to do so.
Conclusion
Buraku sabetsu has been discussed mainly at the individual level. For example, the traditional methodology in anti-discrimination education sees theovercoming of prejudice as an individual challenge to the victims. However,the structural approach is necessary. People belonging to the mainstream
society should be involved in the process of overcoming social injustice andtransforming the social structure.
Simulation studies can evoke positive attitudes among many people, especially the silent majority. Students can realize that democracy needs a wise

Anti-discrimination Education in Japan: Buraku Sabetsu Simulation

101

majority, including the majority’s respect for the human rights of minorities,
and its understanding of what the entire social system produces. This approach has the same orientation as conflict resolution in Peace Education,
which aims to find ideas for transforming the contradictions in the societal
structure.
The traditional approach of human rights education in Japan has often
utilized humanistic methods of appreciation of written works of minority
people. It has aroused empathy for the victimized people and their situation. This approach aims to transform the individual’s mindset, values andway of thinking through reflection and change of perspective. On the other
hand, the structural method emphasizes the objective and comprehensive
understanding of the structure of discrimination, and encourages students
to think of ideas on how to transform the entire system of the society. To
educate on overcoming structural violence, like discrimination or oppression, the structural approach is preferable. Through participation as a player,
winner, loser, bystander, etc., the students have a chance to experience thevictims’ perspective. After the simulation, students have a chance to look at
the whole system of discrimination.
There are some critics opposed to the participatory method of humanrights education as a kind of indoctrination.14 However, the process of discussion can include all types of values. With the conclusion of each simulation session, students have a chance to review the whole structure. Further, I
find that the structural approach also very much nurtures empathy with themarginalized people.
References“Tokushu 1 - Sankagata Gakushu (Special Edition for Participatory Learnings)”
Kaihatsu Kyouiku, vol. 42 (2002)
Workshops and Lectures of Osaka-fu Shiritsu Gakkou Jinken Kyouiku Kenkyuukai(Osaka Private School’s Association of Researching Human Rights Education),
1999-2009
Betty Reardon, In order to create peaceful world - Human Rights, Gender, and
Education (workshop) held at Seisen University, Tokyo, Japan, 16-17 May 2009.
Eiji Yagi and Osamu Umeda. 1999. Ima Jinken Kyouiku wo Tou (Now is the Time to
Ask about Human Rights Education) Tokyo: Otsuki Shoten.
______________. 2002. Jinken Kyouiku no Jissen wo Tou (To Ask about Practices of
Human Rights Education). Tokyo. Otsuki Shoten.
International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism (imadr),
imadr-Japan Chapter, Buraku Liberation League (bll), and Buraku Liberation

102

H u m a n R i g h t s E d u c at i o n i n A s i a - Pa c i f i cand Human Rights Research Institute (blhrri). 2001. Reality of Buraku
Discrimination in Japan. Osaka: imadr, imadr-jc, bll, blhrri.
Johan Galtung. 2004. Transcend and Transform: An Introduction to Conflict Work.
England: Paradigm Pub.
______________, “Deep Culture” in Transcend Peace University Course, Fall 2003.
Kazuhiko Nojima. 2000. Encounter Group no Facilitation (Facilitation of Encounter
Group). Tokyo: Nakanishiya.
Ningen Henshu Iinkai. 2006. Ningen (Human) with its Instructor-oriented version.
Osaka: Meiji Tosho Shuppan.
Nobuhiko Kadooka. 2005. Hajimete no Buraku Mondai (Buraku Issue for the
Beginners). Tokyo: Bungei Shunju.
______________. 2003. Hisabetsu Buraku no Seishun (Youth in Buraku). Tokyo:
Kodansha.
Osaka-fu Shiritsu Gakkou Jinken Kyouiku Kenkyuukai (Osaka Private School’s
Association of Researching Human Rights Education). 2001. Tomoni (Together)- Human Rights Education Handbook. Osaka: Osaka-fu Shiritsu Gakkou Jinken
Kyouiku Kenkyuukai.
Manabi (Learn). 2009. Osaka: Osaka-fu Shiritsu Gakkou Jinken Kyouiku Kenkyuukai.
Richard Dukes and Constance Seidner. Editors. 1978. Learning with Simulations andGames. Beverly Hills and London, UK: Sage Publications.
Satoshi Uesugi. 2004. Korede wakatta! Buraku no Rekishi - Watashi no Daigaku
Kouza (This explains the history of Buraku! - My course in the University).
Tokyo: Kaiho-Shuppan Sha.
Shitte Imasuka? Buraku Mondai Ichimon Ittou Henshu Iinkai. 2002. Shitte Imasuka?
Buraku Mondai Ichimon Ittou (Do you know the Buraku Issue? - Q&A). Osaka:
Kaiho Shuppan.
TBS, Jinken to Buraku Sabetsu - Asa Made Nama - Terebi (All-night Discussion TV
series) (Tokyo: TBS, broadcasted in January 1989) and its extended versions inJuly 1989, May 1992, and October 1993.
William Nesbitt. 1971. Simulation Games for the Social Studies Classroom. New
York: Crowell.

Endnotes
1
This vignette is extracted from real stories described in a book, Hisabetsu
Buraku no Seishun (2003), by Nobuhiko Kadooka who came out as a Burakumin.
2
The “Inquiry” method, which raises neutral questions to students in order toseek deeper problematique, is often used as Peace Education pedagogy. See Betty
Reardon, “In order to create peaceful world - Human Rights, Gender, and Education,”
paper presented at a workshop held at Seisen University, Tokyo, Japan, 16-17 May
2009.
3
It is the registration system for births, deaths, marriages and divorces ofJapanese nationals.

Anti-discrimination Education in Japan: Buraku Sabetsu Simulation

103

International Movement Against All Forms of Discrimination and Racism(imadr), imadr-Japan Chapter, Buraku Liberation League (bll), and Buraku
Liberation and Human Rights Research Institute (blhrri), Reality of Buraku
Discrimination in Japan, 2001. Full text of the publication available at http://blhrri.
org/blhrri_e/Buraku_Reality/index.htm.
5“Jinken to Buraku Sabetsu [Human Rights and Buraku Discrimination],” ‘Asa
made Nama-Terebi (All-night Discussion TV series)’, tbs, 1989.
6
The name of the institute has been changed to Buraku Liberation Human
Rights Research Institute (blhrri).
7
This matter was not reported by the mainstream mass media since some of
the mass media companies were also involved in the issue. Only the human rights
movements reported this matter in their periodicals. Some local government leaders, for example the Minoo City mayor and chairperson of the municipal legislature, touched on this incident in their speeches at a public human rights overview
meeting. The author learned about this from a veteran instructor of Shigaku Jin Ken(Human Rights) office.
8
The full text of the declaration is available at blhrri website (http://blhrri.org/
blhrri_e/blhrri/ebooks001.htm) and also at the hurights osaka website (www.
hurights.or.jp/archives/other_documents/section1/1922/04/declaration-of-humanrights-in-japan.html).
9
Information provided by a city hall staff from a local government in Shikoku
area, interviewed at the workshop of Jinken Kyouiku Keihatsu Suishin Sentaa（人権教育啓発推進センター、The Center for Human Rights Affairs）, 17 January 2008.
10
This was revealed in a meeting for new teachers in the 2003 Shigaku Jin Ken,when the lecturer, Mr. Ninomiya Takashi, asked all the new teachers in Osaka Private
Schools on the teaching of Buraku sabetsu.
11
Kadooka, op cit.
12This paragraph is mainly based on “Tomoni” and “Manabi” by Shigaku Jin Ken.
13
Ningen Editing Committee, Ningen: Hito, Kibou, (2006). The publication of
Ningen used to have the support of local governments until 2008.
14
For example, Eiji Yagi and Osamu Umeda, Ima Jinken Kyouiku wo Tou [Nowis the Time to Ask about Human Rights Education] (1999); Eiji Yagi and Osamu
Umeda, Jinken Kyouiku no Jissen wo Tou [To Ask about Practices of Human Rights
Education] (2002).
4