Nukuram
u/Nukuram
Feed options
Hot
New
Top
View
Card
Compact
I think we're using the term "two-way" differently.
If by "two-way" you mean that immigrants to Japan should become more Japanese while Japanese people in Japan should also become more like the immigrants, then my answer is no.
If someone chooses to move to Japan, they should adapt to Japanese society because they are the one joining it.
The same principle applies in the opposite direction. If a Japanese person chooses to move to another country, they should adapt to that country's society.
That's what I consider a "two-way street."
Of course, this is only my general principle. In reality, Japanese society will naturally change as it accepts more immigrants, and there are certainly areas where Japanese people will need to adapt as well. However, I see those changes as a natural evolution of society rather than assimilation in both directions.
I'm not knowledgeable enough about Mongolian history to say whether your view is right or wrong.
However, I do think it's a mistake to expect historical fiction to follow only one interpretation of history.
Even when historians agree on the most likely version of events, we can never know the past with complete certainty. That's one reason why different interpretations can be valuable.
In Japan, historical fiction ranges from very faithful portrayals to completely imaginative reinterpretations. I think that variety has helped people become more interested in history and think about it from different perspectives.
So rather than expecting only one "correct" portrayal, I would personally welcome more historical fiction exploring different interpretations of Mongolian history.
South Korea is often known for having a more emotionally expressive culture. Compared with that, I see Japan as a society that values being rational, or at least trying to be rational.
However, I also think there is another side to that. Because Japanese culture generally encourages people to suppress their emotions and endure difficulties, those emotions can sometimes erupt all at once after reaching a breaking point.
Of course, there are differences from person to person, and I'm only talking about broad cultural tendencies. But I sometimes feel that, when viewed from a broader perspective, countries can display personality traits much like individuals do.
That's a difficult question.
Since I don't know your audience—their age, interests, or how much they already know about Japan—I'll answer it as if I were giving a general introduction to Japan.
I would start with something that is already familiar to them, such as anime, video games, Japanese food, or Japanese products. Although Japan is a distant country, many people are already connected to it in their everyday lives without realizing it.
From there, I would choose one topic and use it as a gateway to explain Japanese culture, history, religion, and ways of thinking.
For example, let's take Nintendo. It is often said that the company's name reflects the idea of "doing everything you can, then leaving the rest to heaven." Whether that explanation is historically accurate or not, it can serve as an interesting starting point for discussing Japanese values and ways of thinking.
I wouldn't try to explain everything. A presentation like this should simply be an introduction. If it makes people think, "I'd like to learn more about Japan," or "I'd like to visit Japan someday," then I would consider it a successful presentation.
I'd like to introduce you to the Japanese phrase wakon yōsai (和魂洋才).
It literally means "Japanese spirit, Western learning." The idea was to preserve Japan's traditional values and cultural identity while actively adopting Western science, technology, and knowledge.
The Meiji leaders believed that Japan had to modernize with Western technology in order to survive in a world dominated by Western powers. At the same time, they believed that losing Japan's own identity and traditions would defeat the purpose of modernization.
In other words, the goal was not to become a Western country, but to remain Japan while becoming strong enough to stand alongside the West.
It is a bit sad to see Japan being used as a comparison in this case.
I understand that the title is at least partly meant as a joke, but I'd still like to say this.
Children may imitate dances like this on their own for fun. However, parents who force their children to do it in order to make money are not acting like responsible parents. That would be considered wrong in Japan as well.
Of course, as you pointed out, the situation in Kawaguchi represents only a very small fraction of Japan as a whole. Compared with the scale of immigration issues seen in many European countries, it may seem like an overreaction.
However, Japan is currently experiencing something relatively new. The number of foreign residents has been increasing, not only temporary visitors such as tourists, but also people who come to work and, in many cases, settle for the long term. For many Japanese people, the idea of having a large foreign community living nearby used to be mostly hypothetical. Now that it is gradually becoming a reality, many people are becoming concerned about the possibility of future conflicts between local communities and rapidly growing immigrant communities.
The situation involving the Kurdish community in Kawaguchi is often seen as one concrete example of those concerns. For people who do not live anywhere near Kawaguchi, it has little direct impact on their daily lives. However, many still pay close attention because they wonder whether similar situations could eventually arise in their own communities, and how the government and local authorities will deal with them.
From what I have been able to find online, I do not believe the issue is that there is something inherently wrong with Kurdish people as an ethnic group. Rather, my understanding is that many of the problems stem from the way part of that community was formed. For years, some people reportedly took advantage of loopholes in Japan's asylum system, repeatedly applying for refugee status in order to remain in the country even after their claims had been rejected. Because asylum applicants often faced restrictions on regular employment, many ended up relying on informal work within their own community. As a result, when problems occurred, local residents sometimes felt that the community tended to protect its own members rather than cooperate with the authorities, which further increased tensions.
The legal loopholes that allowed this have largely been addressed, as far as I understand. However, the challenge of helping the existing community integrate with local society will probably remain for quite some time.
It's possible. As more people are exposed to tattoos and become accustomed to seeing them, public attitudes may gradually change. This isn't limited to rugby. Seeing foreign tourists with tattoos has also become much more common in recent years. That said, I think there's still a significant gap between getting used to the fact that some people have tattoos and being comfortable with a close friend or family member getting one.
I don't think it's generally considered very classy, so I'd avoid squatting unless you really need to. That said, if you're tired, it's understandable. Most people won't know why you're doing it, but I don't think it's something that would make people strongly dislike you. They might just see it as slightly impolite or uncouth.
Most ordinary Japanese people have never participated in a protest, so very few of us can answer your question from firsthand experience. Protests are mainly attended by a relatively small group of politically active people. Is participating in protests common enough in your country that most people would be able to answer a question like this from personal experience?
That is something I also find very difficult to understand, even though I was born long after the war.
From the memoirs and stories passed down from that time, I imagine that one reason was that, after the Japanese mainland itself came under attack, many people had lost not only the ability but also the will to continue resisting. At the same time, Japan was able to preserve some of what many people regarded as the nation's pride, such as the Emperor, and I imagine that also mattered.
However, I think the most important factor was that ordinary people came to understand that changing their mindset and rebuilding their lives would lead to a better future than continuing to resist and making the situation even worse.
Of course, luck and many other factors should also be taken into account. Still, I personally believe my grandparents' generation was wise enough to recognize reality and choose a path that focused on rebuilding the country rather than clinging to resistance.
I mostly buy digital manga these days. The biggest reason is that I don't want to clutter my room with even more books. I also find myself buying more manga when they're on sale. Of course, there's always the risk that you could lose access to your library if the digital service shuts down. However, I don't think Amazon Kindle is likely to disappear anytime soon, so I'm comfortable using it.
According to a Japanese strategy guide, the recommended tactic is to destroy the missile launchers on both sides first, then concentrate your fire on the core in the center.
Reference:
https://note.com/clamini/n/n8788d24c3bf4
When you say Tokyo being taken over by plants and animals and Japan turning back into wilderness, what kind of timeframe are you imagining?
If we're talking about something like 10,000 years into the future, then yes, I suppose that could happen for various reasons, including things like wars or other major disruptions.
「少子高齢化」質問地獄
The idea of accepting large-scale immigration as a solution to population decline may look very simple and convincing at first glance. However, I wonder if it really works that way.
The cost of integrating new people into society can be extremely high. In addition, a rapid influx of immigrants can significantly change society, potentially damaging the existing culture and failing to achieve the original expectations. Perhaps the most serious risk is that once you realize the policy has failed, it may already be irreversible.
I do not know how much AI and robotics can help maintain our society, but many Japanese people may prefer alternatives such as encouraging elderly people to continue working. Even if economic decline is inevitable, they may still prefer to maintain a familiar society rather than ending up in a society that feels unfamiliar to them.
This issue has not yet been fully resolved by the Japanese government. It may appear that they are steadily moving toward accepting more immigration, against the wishes of some citizens, but I believe that the direction will eventually be reconsidered through public debate.
As a side note, if Korea, like Japan, values its cultural homogeneity, I think it should also be cautious about accepting immigration too easily.
The comment you are responding to already addresses your point.
Since repeating the same explanation would be unnecessary, I will simply copy and paste it below.
-----------------
You seem to be trying to reinterpret the historical facts I presented without examining them individually, simply by introducing other historical facts that you already know, as though those somehow prove that the facts I mentioned are incorrect.
Even if every historical fact you mentioned is correct, that does not invalidate the historical facts I presented. Both can be true at the same time.
Therefore, this does not invalidate my overall point. In fact, I would argue that your response itself illustrates exactly what I was referring to earlier: that certain historical facts are often overlooked, while everything Japan did during the colonial period is interpreted as though it was motivated solely by malice toward Koreans.
The "breeding visa" narrative was disgusting enough.
https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/japanese-breeding-visas-hoax?utm_source=chatgpt.com
I don't have any information about this particular drama, so hopefully someone else can provide a more definitive answer.
What I can explain is the historical context. In 1976, there was no Internet, and home video recording was still uncommon.
Even television stations themselves often reused their master tapes, so it is not surprising that only fragmentary information or no recordings survive today.
As an example, Japan's public broadcaster, NHK, has an "Archive Recovery Project" that asks people to provide privately recorded videotapes of programs that no longer exist in NHK's own archives. Thanks to this project, some programs I enjoyed as a child have been restored.
NHK Archives – Archive Recovery Project:
https://www2.nhk.or.jp/archives/articles/?id=C0110043
If you're interested, I'd also love to hear how well old TV programs have been preserved in your country, and whether there have been similar efforts to recover lost broadcasts.
I don't deny your perspective. In fact, I assume many of the people who downvoted my comment probably share it.
What I'm saying is that looking at history from only one perspective does not necessarily lead to an accurate understanding of what happened. I personally value approaches that acknowledge multiple perspectives rather than reducing history to a single, easy-to-understand narrative.
Of course, learning Japanese does not guarantee that you will become fully integrated into Japanese society.
However, I do not think that should be used as an excuse.
Learning the local language is not the whole journey, but it is one of the most important first steps toward becoming part of the society you have chosen to live in.
Your description gives the impression that Japan simply exploited Korea and impoverished Koreans. However, the reality was more complicated. While some farmers lost their land during the land survey, not only Japanese but also some Korean landlords benefited from the new system. By focusing only on those who suffered, your description presents only one side of the historical picture.
You seem to be trying to dismiss the historical facts I presented without examining them individually, simply by introducing other historical facts that you already know, as though those somehow prove that the facts I mentioned are incorrect.
Even if every historical fact you mentioned is correct, that does not invalidate the historical facts I presented. Both can be true at the same time.
Therefore, this does not invalidate my overall point. In fact, I would argue that your response itself illustrates exactly what I was referring to earlier: that certain historical facts are often overlooked, while everything Japan did during the colonial period is interpreted as though it was motivated solely by malice toward Koreans.
As for Hangul, let me add one point. In the early period of Japanese rule, the Japanese government did promote Hangul education. Later, as assimilation policies became stronger, the emphasis shifted toward Japanese-language education instead. I encourage you to verify that historical transition for yourself.
Justification?
I don't know how other Japanese people think, but personally I have no intention of using these historical interpretations to justify Japan's actions at the time, unless someone deliberately brings up Pearl Harbor simply to condemn Japan again.
I'm only trying to examine some historical facts that are often left out of the discussion. There is no reason to disturb the generally stable relationship between Japan and the United States today.
From that perspective, I was a little disappointed when President Donald Trump brought up Pearl Harbor while talking about the recent strikes on Iran. As always, it reminded me of the way many Americans tended to think back in the 1980s.
That person is clearly one of the Japanese people who holds negative views toward Koreans. My own position is relatively close to his, so let me explain why.
Personally, I believe that Japan's rule over Korea included things such as expanding education, teaching Hangul, and building infrastructure, all of which contributed in some way to the development of modern Korea.
Of course, whether Koreans see those things as beneficial or as unwanted interference is entirely up to them. I do not question the fact that many Koreans do not feel grateful toward Japan. Perhaps, from their perspective, it really was unwanted interference.
What I do find frustrating, however, is that those historical facts are often dismissed entirely, and that everything Japan did during the colonial period is sometimes portrayed as having been motivated purely by malicious intent toward Koreans.
One example is the so-called "iron stake" controversy. Survey markers installed by Japanese surveyors were believed by some people to be mystical stakes intended to harm Korea through feng shui, and campaigns to locate and remove them continued until relatively recently. (I wonder if that is still happening today.)
Of course, Japan also made serious mistakes during that period. However, I believe that many Japanese people developed negative feelings toward Korea because they saw a tendency to interpret every action Japan took as being motivated entirely by malice.
I think the 2002 FIFA World Cup, co-hosted by Japan and South Korea, was particularly influential. At that time, many Japanese people genuinely wanted to support Korea. However, after seeing anti-Japanese behavior and rhetoric from some Korean supporters, many of them felt deeply disappointed. I suspect the Japanese person you encountered comes from that background as well.
That said, relations between Japan and South Korea are much more stable today. Personally, unless another large-scale anti-Japanese movement like the boycott of Japanese products several years ago happens again, I have no intention of actively discussing this issue.
Many young Japanese people today know little about these historical disputes and simply enjoy Korean culture such as K-pop. Likewise, many young Koreans enjoy Japanese anime and manga, and it seems that younger generations in both countries generally get along quite well.
At the same time, my understanding is that Japanese colonial rule is still taught in a strongly negative way in South Korea. Because of that, I think it is possible that anti-Japanese public opinion could become stronger again under certain circumstances.
As with many historical events, I think it is important to distinguish between the historical facts themselves and the different ways those facts can be interpreted.
In simple terms, Pearl Harbor is generally understood as a surprise attack carried out by Japan before its declaration of war was delivered. That is why the phrase "Remember Pearl Harbor" became so well known.
However, if you look more closely at the historical background, the picture becomes more complicated. Japan intended to deliver its declaration, but the message was delayed because of problems with decoding and delivering the diplomatic cipher. The United States had also broken parts of Japan's diplomatic code before the attack. In addition, some historians argue that U.S. economic sanctions, including the oil embargo, placed Japan in a position where its leaders believed war had become unavoidable.
How much weight should be given to each of these facts is still debated. For that reason, I do not think this is something that can be reduced to a simple question of which side was entirely right or entirely wrong.
In the end, people often emphasize the interpretation that they personally find the most convincing. That said, I personally think it goes too far to claim that the entire attack was secretly planned by the United States.
I suspect that the word kamikaze has already developed quite different meanings in Japan and abroad.
You may already know this, but let me briefly explain.
About 750 years ago, the Mongol Empire attempted to invade Japan. After fighting in Kyushu, a powerful typhoon devastated much of the Mongol fleet, and the invasion ultimately failed. This event came to be remembered as a "divine wind" sent by the gods to protect Japan, which is where the term kamikaze originally comes from.
The second episode comes from World War II. As Japan was losing the war against the United States, the Japanese military carried out suicide attacks in which pilots deliberately crashed their aircraft into enemy ships. The operation was named Kamikaze in reference to the earlier "divine wind," hoping for another miracle to save the country.
Outside Japan, the strong impression left by these attacks caused the word kamikaze to take on various figurative meanings. Whether those modern uses are close to the original meaning or have drifted far away from it is something that should probably be considered on a case-by-case basis.
(Regarding the Japanese football player's style that you mentioned: does it imply someone who sacrifices themselves to achieve something extraordinary? I'm not knowledgeable enough about football to comment on that.)
In any case, for Japanese people, kamikaze is a complicated word. It carries both the positive meaning of the "divine wind" that protected Japan and the painful historical association with suicide attacks during World War II. As a result, most Japanese people today do not use the word lightly.
Even before talking about the internet, I think we first need to organize the assumptions behind any comparison.
To make a fair comparison, we need to consider how each country was formed and at what stage it is in terms of accepting immigrants. There is a significant difference between societies that historically developed as relatively homogeneous societies and those that have always consisted of multiple ethnic groups. We should also consider what percentage of immigrants a country has accepted and for how many years. As generations change, people's attitudes naturally change as well.
We should also recognize that prejudice exists on different levels. There is a difference between judging someone purely by appearance without ever meeting them and developing negative feelings after actually living alongside them and experiencing real problems.
Japan has historically been regarded, with some exceptions, as a relatively homogeneous society. Until a few decades ago, most Japanese people had very few opportunities to interact with foreigners. The general attitude was not to judge people simply by their appearance but to try to build friendly relationships if the opportunity arose.
Today, however, Japan is in a very different situation. Large numbers of tourists visit the country, and it is no longer unusual for people from ethnic groups that many Japanese had never encountered before to move into the same neighborhoods. Under those circumstances, it is only natural that public attitudes begin to change.
Is your country in the same situation, or is it completely different? Comparing countries without first understanding those historical and social differences is, in my opinion, what actually distorts our understanding of reality.
Getting a tattoo is not a crime in Japan.
Since you seem to care a lot about your appearance, such as your Gothic style, it's possible that by getting tasteful tattoos you could find like-minded people in Japan and be appreciated within those circles.
That said, Japanese society generally does not look favorably on tattoos. (To be honest, I don't like them either.) As you probably already know, in Japan tattoos can make everyday life more inconvenient—for example, many hot springs still prohibit them. In practice, tattoos are far more likely to cause disadvantages than advantages.
Personally, I would not recommend getting tattoos in places that are difficult to cover with clothing. Of course, the decision is entirely yours. If you're thinking about getting more tattoos, I think it's better to wait until you've settled in Japan and then decide slowly after considering your environment and the people around you.
The surname Nakamura is extremely common in Japan. It's estimated that around one million people in Japan have that surname.
https://myoji-yurai.net/myojiPrefectureRanking.htm?myojiKanji=%E4%B8%AD%E6%9D%91#google_vignette
As another commenter has also pointed out, as long as positioning is done using cameras, there remains a fatal weakness in that it is weak in dark conditions. I think that unless infrared (IR) or IMU support is introduced in the future, or some other fundamentally different technology that solves the problem more radically is adopted, it will not be suitable for practical use.
Of course, from the perspective of anticipating the future, I also think it is not a bad idea to have expectations for Xreal Eye. Spatial anchoring using anchor mode is more reliable than 3DOF, and I am looking forward to the release of hand tracking.
The headline is unpleasant, and I believe Japanese media would not normally use such phrasing. My conclusion is also that the Yahoo article itself is not particularly sensational in its translation.
In my view, the use of negative emotional wording in the article’s title—such as “뭘 해도 도움 안되는 얄미운 일본”—should not have been done. That said, I understand that you are unlikely to accept my interpretation.
Continuing this conversation is not productive, so I think it is about time to bring it to a close.
Thank you for your reply—I appreciate your perspective.
I also think the article can be read in that way. While recent Japan–Korea relations are relatively stable, the article itself appears to be fairly neutral in tone overall. I would say that a certain degree of editorial “cheekiness” came through in the way the headline was written.
I did feel some discomfort with the wording of the headline, but I also recognize that this kind of tone is part of how Japan–Korea topics are sometimes expressed and received in everyday discourse.
In this discussion, what matters to me is simply my own discomfort with the headline. That is all.
Your abstract framework may have meaning between us, but for us it only has that limited meaning.
My reaction is not unjustified, and by the same logic, it is also not unjustified for other Japanese readers to feel the same way.
I'm not really knowledgeable about football myself.
But as someone from an older generation in Japan who first came to know about global football through Captain Tsubasa, Brazil still feels like the "final boss" team in that series for me.
I don't know the current strength gap between the two teams, but I hope it will be a good match regardless of who wins.
Whether I'm being overly sensitive or not is ultimately subjective, and I don't think that's something you can decide for me.
I'm not criticizing the content of the article.
I'm talking only about the headline: "That irksome Japan—No Help at All" (뭘 해도 도움 안되는 얄미운 일본).
As a Japanese person, I found that wording offensive. You, on the other hand—whether you're Japanese, Korean, or from somewhere else—simply didn't. That's all.
I don't know whether there's anything going on behind the scenes.
However, the grandchild in question is apparently not Prime Minister Takaichi's biological grandchild, but her husband's grandchild from his previous marriage. Her husband's family is also said to have had close ties with China for a long time, so, considering that background, studying in China does not seem particularly unusual.
For reference, these are the articles I looked at before commenting:
https://news.yahoo.co.jp/articles/8a78755d052fb3a20fd804e5949606e132e18c91
https://japan.storm.mg/articles/1140841
* Both articles are in Japanese.
I'd recommend checking sources like these before posting a question. If you have sources of your own, it's even better to include them in your original post, since that makes for a more constructive discussion.
I don't intend to criticize the content of the article itself. I think the wording of the headline is the only part worth discussing.
Understanding exactly what the Korean journalist intended by that headline probably requires not only a literal translation, but also a good understanding of Korean language and culture.
That said, considering both the headline itself and the nuance of the word "얄미운," which I believe is close to expressing hostility, I don't think it's unreasonable for me, as a Japanese reader, to feel uncomfortable with it, just as the OP did.
You're right that the article's title does not literally contain the word "hate." However, as I pointed out in another reply, I think the word "얄미운" may well carry a nuance that justifies that interpretation.
Unless you've looked into the nuance of that particular word yourself, aren't you reaching your own conclusion just as quickly?
I only watched a few when I was younger, but for the past six or seven years I've been following them regularly.
Of course, they're dramas, so they don't always match the historical record. And even what we currently regard as established history is not necessarily the absolute truth. Keeping that in mind, though, watching different stories set in the same period over the years gradually gives you a broader sense of how Japanese history unfolded. Personally, I think Taiga dramas are an essential series for understanding our country's history.
Recently, more people overseas seem to be taking an interest in Japan's history and how our country developed. With that in mind, I'd welcome seeing more Taiga dramas on services like Netflix. They have substantial budgets, feature many of Japan's best-known actors, and are also a good way to showcase the quality of Japanese television drama.
But you wanted to feel proud of your country, didn't you? You kept hoping things were getting better, even if you ended up disappointed. That's what I was trying to say.
Of course, some people are able to hold on to that hope, while others eventually lose it.
I'm not trying to tell you that you should be proud of the country you were born in. There are Japanese people who cannot find hope in Japan either.
