|
【Why Students Stay Away 2】
Even Japan’s so-called elite universities struggle to attract students from around the world. Why is that? There are two major reasons. Reason #1: Weak Pathways to Employment and Long-Term Residency We covered this in the previous blog post. Reason #2: Low Wages GDP per capita is commonly used as an indicator of a country’s productivity. Broadly speaking, it’s also said to reflect the average annual income across all professions. After all, when per-person productivity is low, it naturally limits how much employers can pay in wages. Consider the following data: 2024 GDP per capita (global ranking):
Japan’s figure is now less than 40% of the US. Within Asia:
Japan now trails behind all of them. Most troubling of all, Japan is on a clear downward trajectory. At the height of its economic power in 1990:
Over the past 35 years, aside from Singapore’s dramatic rise, it feels less like other countries have surged ahead and more like Japan has fallen sharply behind. As a side note, Singapore’s remarkable growth coincides with the fact that roughly 47% of its population consists of immigrants--a point that aligns with the importance of inclusive experience. Even during it’s economic peak, Japan could hardly be described as fully “advanced” especially in terms of immigrant/refugee acceptance, or broader human rights and humanitarian standards. Now, after three and a half “lost decades” following the collapse of the economic bubble, even Japan’s once-reliable economic strength has declined to the point where we can no longer call it an “advanced country.” It’s only natural that students around the world hesitate to gather in a place where productivity and wages are in long-term decline. This dynamic is not unique to Japan. A similar pattern can be observed within the US. The Trump administration promotes the slogan “Make America Great Again” (MAGA), and its strongest support comes from conservative rural regions. Yet very few students around the world dream of moving to the US to work in rural agriculture, forestry, mining, or oil industries. Instead, most are drawn to overwhelmingly liberal urban centers--Silicon Valley, Wall Street, cutting-edge medical research, and the entertainment industry. Trump MAGA’s internal contradiction is clear: the movement that seeks to dismantle liberal openness undermines the very condition that makes America great. The more open a society is, the more it attracts students from around the world. The more closed it becomes, the more they stay away. The data below shows the number of Japanese and American universities ranked in the global top 50 across four major world university rankings. While we should treat these rankings as only a reference point, looking at all four provides a broad perspective. The four major rankings are:
(Note: There’s currently no globally influential university ranking published from Japan) Global Top 50 (number of schools):
These rankings reinforce the broader pattern: the US attracts students from around the world while Japan not so much. Japan struggles to attract students from abroad because of:
The consequences are cyclical, making it difficult to create an inclusive environment.
And so the cycle repeats. At the end of this vicious spiral lies persistent decline. In the next post, we’ll examine this issue further in light of Japan’s general election results a few weeks ago. Read Previous: 80 Years Later, Japan’s Big Problem (6)【Why Students Stay Away 1】 Read Theme: Inclusive Diversity 【Why Students Stay Away 1】
The central reason why Japan, Tokyo, and rural America remain strikingly conservative, while urban America is overwhelmingly liberal: differences in inclusive experiences. Below are comparisons of student demographics at colleges considered to be the most selective in the US and Japan. Foreign Nationals and Immigrants
The University of Tokyo’s 16% is the highest proportion of international students among the top universities in Japan. Data on immigrant students is virtually nonexistent, largely because their numbers are so small. [See Previous] Knowing these facts or not, comments like the following are common: “Instead of admitting foreigners, UTokyo should accept more Japanese students.” What’s even more striking is that such claims are sometimes made by people who themselves--or whose children--have benefited from studying abroad in countries like the US, where international students are actively welcomed. Yet the data speaks for itself. In reality, even Japan’s so-called elite universities attract relatively few students from around the world. While this could be taken to imply limited effort, information released by the universities suggests otherwise: they are, in fact, making serious attempts to attract international students. So why don’t students want to study abroad in Japan? There are two major reasons. Let’s start with the first. -------------------- Reason #1: Weak Pathways to Employment and Long-Term Residency Universities that attract students from around the world place great importance on inclusive education and environments. This inclusivity extends beyond academics to include clear pathways into post-graduation life: employment and long-term residency. Today’s college students are intensely focused on life after graduation, so they’re likely to choose universities with future job prospects in mind. Employment, in turn, often sways where new graduates begin their adult lives and lay long-term foundations. For this reason, countries that actively welcome immigrants are especially attractive to students worldwide. Consider the following data: Immigrants Welcomed (% of population)
Only 2% for Japan. Compared with inclusive countries, Japan is profoundly unwelcoming. [See #109] Knowing these facts or not, some frequently express sentiments like: “Japan’s already flooded with foreigners!” “We’re going to be taken over by China!” “Japan will stop being Japan!” But once placed in a global context, such statements reveal how shallow and detached from reality they are. And again, what’s striking is that such claims are sometimes made by people who themselves--or whose children--have benefited from living abroad in countries like the US, where foreign nationals are actively welcomed. There’s also a fear-mongering conservative mindset that portrays foreigners as a threat: “Crime has skyrocketed because of the foreigners!” However, even Japan’s National Police Agency has made it clear that there’s no factual basis for this claim. Once again, the underlying issue appears to be an inability to think independently, grounded in factual/evidence-based reasoning. That said, it’s true that the number of foreign residents in Japan has increased in recent years, particularly as we often see technical intern trainees working at urban convenience stores. This increase is driven by Japan’s declining birthrate and aging population, which have sharply reduced the domestic workforce. As a result, foreign workers are now essential to keeping society functioning, and everyone living in Japan should be thanking them rather than demonizing them. Even so, compared to advanced nations, Japan’s increase in foreign residents remains minimal. Moreover, the Technical Intern Training Program is largely a misnomer. In most cases, little specialized skill training actually takes place. Instead, trainees are usually assigned unpopular, low-pay work, are prohibited from switching jobs, and are forced to leave Japan after only a few years. Some cases are so abusive that they’ve been described as a form of modern slavery. Although the program is set to transition into the new Employment for Skill Development Program, there’s a real risk that this will amount to little more than a name change unless underlying conservative mindsets shift. Returning to the main point: in a society like Japan where immigrants aren’t welcomed, opportunities remain unstable. Even after beginning to build a life, foreign residents are forced out after only a few years. This means starting over almost entirely: not just work and housing, but also relationships, community ties, and everything else. Under such uncertainty, studying abroad in Japan is hardly an attractive option for students around the world. The Trump administration seems eager to turn the US into a country more like Japan--that is, a society dominated by an overwhelming racial and ethnic majority. To achieve this, they aggressively seek to reduce immigrants and international students. Refugee acceptances have been slashed, family separations normalized, and inhumane deportation of undocumented immigrants pursued without hesitation. It’s been barely a year since these conservative policies were pushed forward, yet students around the world have already begun avoiding American Universities. This clearly demonstrates how crucial post-graduation pathways to employment and long-term residency are for students. In the next post, we’ll examine the second major reason. Read Next: 80 Years Later, Japan’s Big Problem (7)【Why Students Stay Away 2】 Read Previous: 80 Years Later, Japan’s Big Problem (5)【Inclusive Experiences】 Read Theme: Inclusive Diversity 【Inclusive Experiences】
Japan’s education system is designed so that people learn as the government wishes to teach. And students who excel at rote memorization are rewarded the most because college applications are largely decided by memorization-heavy admission exams. In contrast, inclusive education--widely embraced in urban America--intentionally cultivates a broad range of intellectual, emotional, social, and creative abilities. Precisely because they value this inclusivity, most American universities strive to welcome students from a wide variety of backgrounds across the world. This difference is clearly supported by data. Below are comparisons of student demographics at colleges considered to be the most selective in the US and Japan. 1. Foreign Nationals and Immigrants
US: Approximately 25% (Stanford) to 39% (Columbia) of students are foreign nationals. In complete contrast to the current Trump administration, the US has long embraced a liberal mindset on immigration. It’s reflected in the fact that immigrants account for another 32% of the student body. Altogether, well over half of students are either foreign nationals or immigrants. JPN: Only 2% (Keio University) to 16% (University of Tokyo) of students are foreign nationals. Data on immigrant students is virtually nonexistent, largely because their numbers are so small. 2. Race
US:
JPN: Although racial data is limited, roughly 93% of foreign students come from Asia--primarily China, Nepal, Vietnam, Myanmar, and South Korea. When combined with Japanese students who make up the overwhelming majority, over 99% of the student population is Asian. 3. Gender
US: Women make up about 51% (Princeton) to 54% (Harvard) of the student body. JPN: Women account for only 20% (UTokyo, Kyoto University) to 39% (Waseda University). -------------------- What do these numbers reveal? Taken together, they highlight a stark reality: while American universities actively practice inclusive education by welcoming people from diverse backgrounds worldwide, it’s difficult to argue that Japanese universities have created environments that truly embrace diversity. Even among the most selective universities, the differences are striking. Given this gap, it’s no surprise that disparities also emerge in the cultivation of broad intellectual, emotional, social, and creative abilities. These differences extend to human rights awareness, openness to diversity, social engagement, and independent thinking grounded in factual/evidence-based reasoning, as well as putting it into action. Of course, some individuals who never had access to inclusive education still develop broad abilities, strong awareness of human rights, and the capacity to think independently and act based on fact/evidence. Conversely, there are graduates of so-called “elite” universities who have experienced inclusive education yet fail to develop these same qualities. Still, one overarching pattern remains clear: learning in an inclusive, human rights-based environment is key to moving beyond a conservative mindset and toward a liberal mindset. This pattern is again clearly supported by data from the 2024 US presidential election, which shows a strong correlation between voting preferences and voters’ levels of education:
A similar trend appeared in the 2020 election:
These results visibly demonstrate that inclusive experiences at universities create the foundation for moving beyond a conservative mindset and toward a liberal mindset. By contrast, in Japan’s upper house election in July, conservatives dominated 71.1% vs. liberals 28.9%, nationwide. Tokyo--where education, diversity, and resources are highly concentrated--voted even more conservatively than the rest of the country: conservatives 75.2% vs. liberals 24.8% [See #123]. Viewed alongside the education data, it becomes clear why these conservative support levels resemble those found in rural America, where inclusive education is often shunned. This is the central reason why Japan, Tokyo, and rural America remain strikingly conservative, while urban America is overwhelmingly liberal: differences in inclusive experiences. Read Next: 80 Years Later, Japan’s Big Problem (6)【Why Students Stay Away 1】 Read Previous: 80 Years Later, Japan’s Big Problem (4)【College Admissions】 Read Theme: Inclusive Diversity 【College Admissions】 Inclusive education places great emphasis on independent thinking grounded in factual/evidence-based reasoning, as well as putting it into action. Learning in an inclusive, human rights-based environment is key to moving beyond a conservative mindset and toward a liberal mindset. With that in mind, let’s take a look at Japan’s education system. In simple terms, Japan’s education system is designed so that people learn as the government wishes to teach. [See #25] This system is highly effective in cultivating memory-based skills. Its roots trace back to the memory-heavy Kanji writing system introduced from China about 2,000 years ago, and to the teachings of Confucius from 2,500 years ago. His teachings largely focus on the respect for parents/elders, which was widely accepted across Asia and still deeply embedded in many of its cultures today. Confucianism promotes the idea of “living one’s life by following the wise leader.” Within this framework, citizens are expected to obey rather than to think independently. A memorization-heavy education fit neatly into this worldview: memorize what’s taught by the “wise leaders,” not question them. During Japan’s post-war reconstruction and subsequent era of rapid economic growth, this education system worked remarkably well. To mass-produce quality goods at low cost, society needed large numbers of workers who would diligently follow instructions passed down from “wise” politicians and corporate executives. More than half a century later, what’s unfortunate is that despite profound changes in the modern world, Japan’s education system hasn’t evolved accordingly. In many ways, it clings to “traditional values” simply because it wants to preserve the tradition regardless of good or bad. This is why students who attend cram schools late into the night and excel at rote memorization are often praised “smart” or “knowledgeable” because college applications are largely decided by memorization-heavy admission exams. Meanwhile, most other activities are deemed “irrelevant to college admissions” and pushed aside. As a result, students miss valuable opportunities to develop a wide range of intellectual, emotional, social, and creative skills that come from broader engagement. Consequently, the system often fails to cultivate individuals who can think independently and act based on fact/evidence. This stands in stark contrast to the holistic education widely embraced in urban America. Unlike Japan’s centralized model, the US education system grants schools/teachers considerable freedom to design their own curriculum. Because of this, even within the country, there’s a clear divide between holistic education in urban America and the education often accepted in rural America. Holistic education values not only grades and standardized test scores, but also broader engagement including extracurricular activities, clubs, volunteer work, internships, and even entrepreneurship. These are not superficial add-ons; meaningful, real-world experiences significantly strengthen a student’s college application. And when holistic learning takes place in an environment that embraces diversity--gender, race, ethnicity, origin, family background--it becomes what we call inclusive education. Most American universities strive to welcome students from a wide variety of backgrounds across the world precisely because they value this inclusivity. Yet, some may argue, “But isn’t it unfair for colleges to reject someone with high grades or test scores while others with lower grades/scores get accepted?” This is a common view among those who maintain that memorization-heavy admission exams are the fairest system. However, holistic education recognizes that grades and test scores alone cannot fully measure a student’s progress. Consider this example: A student growing up in a financially strained household may have parents working long hours just to make ends meet. That student might have to work part-time to help support the family or spend hours caring for younger siblings. They likely have neither the time nor the money to attend cram schools or hire tutors. In contrast, students from affluent families have their daily needs taken care of; they have both the time/resources for top-tier cram schools and private tutors to improve their grades/scores. Inclusive education understands that our society’s structural factors tend to drive down the grades and test scores of students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds. For this reason, instead of applying uniform criteria, holistic admissions aim to take into account each student’s circumstances, individuality, and character as fully as possible.  [Author: Unknown]
Given the stark difference in college admissions between Japan and urban America, it’s no surprise that what/how students are taught in elementary, middle, and high school also diverges significantly. What’s more, teachers themselves are shaped by these systems and differ in their training, teaching methods, and overall mindset. The more an education system values inclusivity, the more intentionally it cultivates a broad range of intellectual, emotional, social, and creative abilities. As a result, even before starting college, students tend to already display different levels of human rights awareness, openness to diversity, social engagement, and independent thinking grounded in factual/evidence-based reasoning, as well as putting it into action. These differences create the foundation for moving beyond a conservative mindset and toward a liberal mindset. This perhaps is the biggest reason why Tokyo remains strikingly conservative while urban America is overwhelmingly liberal. In the next post, we’ll explore this further by looking at actual data. Read Next: 80 Years Later, Japan’s Big Problem (5)【Inclusive Experiences】 Read Previous: 80 Years Later, Japan’s Big Problem (3)【Inclusive Education】 Read Theme: Inclusive Diversity 【Inclusive Education】
As shared in the previous blog post, recent election results show striking contrasts:
Even where conservatives won statewide, urban centers tell a very different story:
These results raise an intriguing question: while major urban cities in the US are overwhelmingly liberal, why is Tokyo so overwhelmingly conservative? Urban cities are often seen as important barometers of social progress, globally. It’s because they attract people, education, jobs, and diversity. With an ever-increasing concentration of everything in Tokyo, it’s especially so in Japan. With that in mind, let’s take a closer look at inclusive education--an education that fosters human rights awareness. The more a society cultivates inclusive education grounded in human rights, the less likely people are to be drawn toward:
In short, people become less inclined to cling to “traditional values” simply because they want to preserve the tradition regardless of good or bad--that is, they move away from a conservative mindset. Conversely, the stronger a society’s commitment to inclusive education grounded in human rights, the more likely people are to embrace:
In essence, people move toward a liberal mindset--one that seeks to preserve what’s good from the past while changing what’s harmful, to build a better tomorrow for everyone. This shift from conservative mindset to liberal mindset can be illustrated by a few examples:
Inclusive education places great emphasis on independent thinking grounded in factual/evidence-based reasoning, as well as putting it into action. As it takes root, people often move away from a conservative mindset and toward a liberal mindset. Of course, in every country, there are individuals who may not have had access to quality education yet can still think independently and act based on fact/evidence. Conversely, also in every country, there are graduates of so-called “elite” universities who fail to think independently or act based on fact/evidence. The most wasteful cases are when people who’ve had the privilege of an excellent education use their knowledge not for the common good, but to exploit loopholes or twist interpretations for their own personal gain. Still, one overarching pattern remains clear: Learning in an inclusive, human rights-based environment is key to moving beyond a conservative mindset and toward a liberal mindset. And this understanding is essential to explaining why Tokyo remains strikingly conservative while urban America is overwhelmingly liberal. In the next post, we’ll explore this further by looking at the differences between Japanese and American approaches to inclusive education. Read Next: 80 Years Later, Japan’s Big Problem (4)【College Admissions】 Read Previous: 80 Years Later, Japan’s Big Problem (2)【Even in Urban Cities】 Read Theme: Inclusive Diversity 【Respect Individuality】
For women who feel their own professional/social advancement can take a back seat as long as they’re pampered/given lucky benefits. And for women who wish for a society of equal footing/opportunity to thrive. What’s important is that we all strive together to change our society so that both of the women, and women of all diversity spectrum can feel comfortable regardless of gender. When we think in this way, the same can be said for men of all diversity spectrum. For some men, rather than working at an office or elsewhere, they wish to stay at home as a house-husband, doing the housework, managing the domestic affairs, or raising the children. It’s equally important to change our society so that men can feel comfortable without worrying about the public eye. Just as we need to remove the social norm that aims to define "This is how women should behave," we also need to do away with the idea of "This is how men should behave." And naturally, this takes us beyond just women and men, as the same can also be said for LGBTQ individuals. There are people who were born biologically female but feel male at heart, and therefore live as men. There are people who were born biologically male but feel female at heart, and therefore live as women. We must aim for a society where each person can live authentically as themselves, with no hesitation, without any reservation, free from the traditional confines of the "woman" or "man" identity, and with the universal protection of equal rights. When we try to block that effort, or fail to support it, or respond with “I’m comfortable as is, so I don’t want to change anything,” then we have a problem. And to be sure, this isn’t only a problem in Japan or Asia. As the Gender Gap Index reveals, every country in our world needs to change. It’s a common mistake to highlight the biological/inherent differences between women and men, and claim, "It’s not about gender equality, it’s about gender separation." Or, to insist that "It’s not discrimination, it’s a mere distinction." It’s also wrong to lump all women, all men, or all LGBTQ individuals into one category, and then delude ourselves into thinking we’re "respecting the differences." To truly respect our differences, we begin by respecting the individuality of each person, with honesty and sincerity, rather than lumping people into categories. We must sincerely respect what each person wishes to be and how they want to live authentically as themselves. And most importantly, we must value the individuality of each person, with respectful care for each and every one of us, striving together for everyone’s happiness. The true meaning of gender equality lies along this path. Read Next: Truth on Gender Equality (5)【What Elections Tell Us】 Read Previous: Truth on Gender Equality (3)【Hesitant Women】 Complete Series: Truth on Gender Equality (1)～(6) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] Read Theme: Inclusive Diversity 【Hesitant Women】
The deep-rooted culture of our society fosters a social norm that “This is how women should behave.” So much so that not only men, but also many women tend to accept them. Nonetheless, there are also many other women who live rather comfortably in this society. “I enjoy getting pampered, treated to fine dinners, and heavy bags carried for me. Honestly, I’m given lucky benefits because I’m a woman. Studying hard, or working so hard isn’t my ambition. I get along well with men, so it’s quite comfortable for me the way it is.” Yes, we can say that they’re the women more or less at ease with the current social norm that aims to define “This is how women should behave.” In fact, they rarely feel “forced” into conformity, but instead, it’s almost instinctive as if second nature. So, they’re often welcomed by those around them, and in turn they feel even more comfortable. To be fair, it’s not that they don’t see any problem with today’s society. Surely, they do. But for some women, their own professional/social advancement can take a back seat as long as they’re pampered/given lucky benefits. As a matter of fact, they’re more troubled by a separate concern. “I’m comfortable in today’s society. Does that make me no good?” In particular, they become extra hesitant when they feel subjected to a harsh stare down as if a hinderance to gender equality. If we are to respond to this concern, it’d be “not at all.” Rather, it’s a blessing for anyone to be able to find a place of comfort. That’s a good thing; there’s no problem in that. Instead, the real challenge is for all of us to strive together to change our society so that women who don’t feel comfortable in today’s society can also feel comfortable. Surely, “all of us” includes “women who feel comfortable in today’s society.” If their response is “I’m comfortable as is, so I don’t want to change anything,” then we have a problem. “I want to be evaluated not on my looks, but on my performance. I want an equal footing with men for a fair shot at professional success. I want to study more at school. Whether in science or engineering, I want equal opportunity as men.” A society that’s also comfortable for women who wish for such equality. And it’s profoundly important to change our society to make this wish come true. For women who feel their own professional/social advancement can take a back seat as long as they’re pampered/given lucky benefits. And for women who wish for a society of equal footing/opportunity to thrive. What’s important is that we all strive together to change our society so that both of the women, and women of all diversity spectrum can feel comfortable regardless of gender. It’s not “either/or” but “both.” Read Next: Truth on Gender Equality (4)【Respect Individuality】 Read Previous: Truth on Gender Equality (2)【Petty Men】 Complete Series: Truth on Gender Equality (1)～(6) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] Read Theme: Inclusive Diversity “I’m special.”
It’s very important for young children be able to feel this way, not only to form a healthy attachment with parents, but also to develop emotional stability. From the moment we’re born, parents/relatives often teach us that we’re special. This reassurance helps us feel loved and protected. Along the way, we find a special sense of belonging/identity in our country, race, ethnicity, culture, and religion. These identities often become the foundation of our self-esteem. This sense of “I’m special” is particularly important in early childhood. Without it, children tend to struggle in forging a healthy emotional bond with parents, which can disrupt the development of a stable sense of self. However, a troubling truth emerges when this mindset carries unexamined well into adulthood. What once nurtured us can begin to cause immense harm. As adults, holding tightly onto "I'm special" often turns into “If I’m special, then others aren’t--at least not as special as me.” This way of thinking fuels “as long as it’s fine for us” behavior, which lies at the root of many forms of discrimination/conflict/war that persist across the world. This mindset also shows up in more subtle ways, without direct attack/violence. A classic example is inheritance, where most people almost thoughtlessly keep wealth within the family. [See #34] We call it “thoughtless” because the true victims of this “as long as it’s fine for us” thinking are people who simply happen to born into hardship through no fault of their own. Some simply happen to born as minorities and face unreasonable exclusion/rejection. Others simply happen to born in conflict/war zones and unreasonably face life or death situations every day. Still others simply happen to born into an economically strained family, where they scramble for basic necessities like food/clothes/shelter, endure unrelenting humiliation, and lack fair access to education--let alone assets to inherit. Meanwhile, those who simply happen to born into the majority, in safe places, or into economically sufficient families, may unknowingly sustain systems that make it nearly insurmountable for others to overcome the inborn disparities. “As long as it’s fine for us,” we continue on because life works for us. Yet the truth is simple: our inborn traits are just that--traits we simply happened to be born into. They have nothing to do with how hard we work or how much we strive. To put it another way, it’s pure luck; nothing more and nothing less. For this reason, it’s unreasonable to be given a preferential treatment on the one hand, while excluded/rejected on the other, for something we’re born into. As we grow up and mature into responsible adults, we must grow beyond our narrow sense of belonging/identity that perpetuates such injustice across generations. To resist being swept up by “as long as it’s fine for us” thinking, we must outgrow the childhood sense of “I’m special” that once served us well, but no longer does. That means outgrowing our national, racial, ethnic, cultural, religious, or even family identities we’ve held close to our hearts for so long. To be clear, this does not mean denying or ignoring these identities, nor pretending as if they don’t exist. That’s not at all what we mean. Rather, it means expanding the boundaries of our own identity; freeing ourselves from the stubborn “as long as it’s fine for us” thinking so that we don’t exclude/reject others who live outside of our familiar circles. In other words, it means maturing into an “identity of humanity” or even more broadly, an “identity as a living being.” Because if I’m special, then others are just as special. While this may not be enough in our early childhood, once we reach adulthood, we must mature into an identity that’s broad and inclusive. We must grow beyond our original identity, not deeper entrenchment in it. Our original identity is a starting point, not the destination. To make this world a better place for everyone, it’s essential that we as adults continue to grow our minds broadly and inclusively--by expanding our sense of who belongs. Read Theme: Inclusive Diversity 【Hypocrisy】
When it comes to wars and conflicts, nationality and its borders are exploited to the ugliest degree of divisiveness fueled by inborn privilege. To be sure, America is no exception. With the Russian military’s ongoing atrocities in Ukraine unfolding, the Biden administration stands steadfast in repudiating the military invasion. This unwavering opposition against violence is truly honorable, yet, we must also remember that America is guilty of past invasions of its own doing. For instance, in 2003, the Bush administration invaded Iraq without UN authorization, largely as a retaliation to the 9.11 attacks, forcefully professing that Iraq is hiding weapons of mass destruction. And despite this military invasion, weapons of mass destruction were nowhere to be found, while Iraq was confirmed to have no connection to 9.11 attacks. In the 1960s as the Vietnam War escalated, American military invaded Vietnam while foolishly arresting its own citizens back home who opposed the war. Regrettably, even today, America seldom apologizes for its own guilt in past invasions and actions by its military. What’s more--from the Holocaust, to the unspeakable cruelty by Russian military in Ukraine, to the Chinese government’s heinous human rights crime against the Uyghur Muslims--the Biden administration remains steadfast in repudiating genocide. This unwavering opposition against gruesome violence, too, is truly commendable. Yet, we must also remember the mass murders committed by the American atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki; the firebombing air raids on over 200 Japanese cities including Tokyo, Osaka, Kobe, and Nagoya; the napalm attacks in Vietnam--even today, America denies to call its own military crime a genocide, a breathtaking hypocrisy. Also to our dismay, despite disheartened and infuriated by such American contradiction, Japanese government is also quick to deny its own Chongqing air raids in China a genocide. What this tells us is that even when the current administration’s policy/ideology are fundamentally different from the past administrations guilty of invasions or genocides, they still get caught up in nationality and its borders; become trapped in the divisiveness fueled by inborn privilege; and hesitate to make this world a better place for everyone. Of course, that should be expected under the existing global system of nationality which allows only the citizens to vote in elections. As a result, regardless of how much support you garner from the non-citizens, no matter how loved you are by people across the world, they don’t translate into votes, and thus won’t win you elections. As such, our existing system of nationality exacerbates inborn privilege and division. And those who wage a war will justify any means no matter how dirty, inhumane, or dishonorable, for their desired end. It’s victory at any cost; violence, discrimination, threats, lies, cover-ups, destroying evidence--you name it, they’ll use it. They’ll justify ignoring people’s freedom, destroying the livelihood, taking away fathers to military, losing mothers to violence, ending innocence of children, ripping families apart, trampling on the human rights, and wasting precious life. Killing fellow humans becomes an honorable deed, and refusing to kill becomes a criminal act. And just like that, war topples the human morality upside down. Fanning the flames of patriotism with a blind pledge of allegiance to the flag, nationality and its borders are exploited to the ugliest degree of divisiveness. On the one hand, liberal education in America welcomes diversity, encourages unity over division, inspires critical thinking empowered by one’s own mind, and teaches to resolve conflicts without violence. On the other hand, conservatives and liberals alike, America today is practically obsessed with touting our military troops as heroes. Military--whose job, ultimately, is to kill fellow humans--often gets the special praises and perks. A job that ultimately requires you to kill when your boss orders you to do so, in an obsolete institution where questioning your superiors is forbidden. Ordinary people take up this job to make a living, and once you get employed there, you’re an automatic Hero. It doesn’t matter what your personal values are; how good a human you truly are. You join the military, and boom you’re a Hero. If that’s a Hero, then we’re essentially teaching our children that a person willing to blindly obey their boss’s order to kill fellow humans is a Hero. Admitting this breathtaking hypocrisy, we must honestly confront the historical realities, apologize our past blunders, continue to take responsibility of our crimes, and commit to an honest education. That is, a genuine peace education in the truest sense, not just in form but in truthful spirit--to ensure that the tragedy will never again fall upon anyone, anywhere. Today, we can’t help but make a regrettable observation that the existing global system of nationality impedes our progress in this front. That’s why on our march towards non-divisive diversity, it’s imperative that we embrace our differences with a warm welcome and rid our traditional privileges. Read Previous: For Non-Divisive Diversity (6)【National Interest】 Complete Series: For Non-Divisive Diversity (1)～(7) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] Read Theme: Inclusive Diversity 【National Interest】
In many ways, when it comes to wars and conflicts, nationality and its borders are exploited to the ugliest degree of divisiveness fueled by inborn privilege. As a matter of fact, wars and conflicts are most often waged at a national level. It’s because the existing military system around the world is designed on a single-nation basis, with each country in control of its own armed forces. Under this system, nations deploy their troops proclaiming to Protect the lives of our own citizens. And humans continue to repeat the senseless history of war for several thousand years because this system is prone to exploitation--to selfishly advance national interests at the expense of others. To maintain this system, nations fan the flames of patriotism. And when push comes to shove, killing fellow humans becomes an honorable deed, and refusing to kill becomes a criminal act. With a blind pledge of allegiance to the flag, the military won’t hesitate to take away freedom, livelihood, dignity, happiness, and life of not only its enemy but also its own citizens. In this way, our sense of patriotism is abused and the emotion of fear is heightened to force us to kill and praise killers. It’s a classic example of a nation’s propaganda to ensure that we glorify war, so we can wage a war at the whim of government. Regrettably, we witness this pattern in many countries across the globe. Naturally, love for one’s homeland is heartening, but it’s important to keep it within reason--away from violence and hatred. For instance, it’s fine to cheer for our home team in soccer, but don’t let it run out of whack by inciting violence or hateful words. Similarly, it’s fine to rave about American hamburgers as “the best in the world!” but if we begin to shout “America-First!” then the people of other countries will start to do likewise, and we’ll end up inciting more division than unity around the globe. If everyone demanded As long as it’s good for my country, then it’s fine for the other countries to suffer, then the world will be mired in cruelty and hatred. Even then, My-Country-First policies tend to gain populist traction because the existing global system of nationality allows only the citizens to vote in elections. When only the beneficiaries of those policies are allowed to vote, the election results won’t budge a bit no matter how hard the non-citizens who stand to lose from those same policies oppose them. It’s a classic example of inborn privilege and division. Indeed, the politicians who selfishly advance national interests are convenient tools for those who choose to ride the wave of privilege and division. We cannot overlook this fact because selfish advancement of national interests breeds irreversible consequences like the ongoing Russian military’s abhorrent invasion of Ukraine. Putin administration’s gruesome mass murder is the result of years of support by the corrupt Oligarchs and many Russian citizens who, knowingly or not, chose to ride the wave of privilege and division. “It's false to call our military operations in Ukraine a war or an invasion. Journalists who call it as such will be jailed up to 15 years.” Lies and threats have now become the law of the land in Russia as Putin signed it in March. Also in March, after 8 hours of being held at a police station in the Siberian city of Krasnoyarsk, a Russian woman named Vera Kotova became one of the firsts to be found guilty under a new law that charges anyone deemed to have discredited the Russian military. Her crime: writing No to war with a heart mark in the snow. What’s more, since February, sexual violence of Ukrainian women by Russian soldiers have grown grimly widespread. A woman raped repeatedly by a Russian soldier after her husband was killed outside Kyiv. A mother of four gang raped by Russian soldiers in the southern Ukrainian city of Kherson. These atrocities evoke memories from the 1900s Japanese military’s invasion of many Asian nations including China and Korea. It reminds us of the Japanese military abusing its own citizens who opposed the gruesome war, calling them a Traitor, ripping their families apart, jailing, and torturing. It reminds us of Japanese soldiers raping women in the Asian villages, laughing and killing their families, and burning the whole house down to destroy evidence. And we cannot forget the estimated 50 thousand to 200 thousand women from at least 11 countries coerced into sexual slavery by Militarist Japan. This heinous crime cannot be reasonably denied as troves of factual evidence have been unearthed from the public documents made available by the governments including Japan, US, Netherlands, and Australia; numerous studies carried out by scholars from around the world; and testimonies, memoirs, and wartime diaries of Japanese veterans, physicians who were stationed in war zones, and politicians. Despite such abundant evidence worldwide, from former-Prime Ministers Shinzo Abe to Taro Aso to Yoshihide Suga, and to the current Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, the vast majority of the central figures of ruling Liberal Democratic Party are members of Japan Conference (Nippon Kaigi) who insists that “Japan’s wars weren’t invasions.” Japan Conference bends the facts by promoting lies that “there were no sex slaves” or “Nanjing Massacre never happened.” To make things worse, Japan Innovation Party (Nippon Ishin), now the third-largest party in the National Diet after gaining populist votes in recent elections, promotes similar lies. These actions and words remind us of Putin administration. And like many Russian citizens, many Japanese citizens, knowingly or not, are also choosing to ride the wave of privilege and division by supporting these political parties. Truth be told, when it comes to wars and conflicts, nationality and its borders are exploited as a divisive tool to pit nations against nations, citizens against citizens. Read Next: For Non-Divisive Diversity (7)【Hypocrisy】 Read Previous: For Non-Divisive Diversity (5)【Citizenship】 Complete Series: For Non-Divisive Diversity (1)～(7) [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] Read Theme: Inclusive Diversity |
ENG/JPN Posted Alternately
日本語/英語を交互に掲載 Author ﾌﾟﾛﾌｨｰﾙ
JOE KIM Theme ﾃｰﾏ
All
Visits ｱｸｾｽ15,321 (as of 3/1/2026) 
|
RSS Feed