What's the difference between racism and xenophobia?

[fsuman110]

In japan's case, xenophobia would mean fear of foreigners or that which is foreign in general, right? Racism is the marginalization or outright hatred of a particular race, or the thinking that one race is superior to another. While these sound different in definition, I fail to see the difference when it is broken down into experiences or everyday activities.

Take me, for example. I am a white male, and I was denied access to a gift shop in Kyoto because I am a "foreigner". In this context, being a foreigner is synonymous with being "white", and foreign is any who are not Japanese. Therefore, one can say that I was denied entry to that gift shop because I am white, which is racism.

I apologize if this is coming off as harsh. Let it be known that I love japan and that one bad experience was about the only negative encounter I had in 6 months of living there. That said, I'd like to talk a little about why I made this topic. I see people defending xenophobia in japan like it is acceptable or something. There is no doubt that Japan is very homogenous, but that is no excuse in my opinion. The world is globalized enough to the point where people should know the proper way to treat other people and not hide behind the fact that one's culture was closed off to the world for 250 years, so it's ok to discriminate or, even worse, fail to acknowledge a problem at all. And again, I'm not saying the usa is perfect because that is far from the truth. I'd just like to know why some people think it is acceptable for japan to remain xenophobic. In my opinion, it's a choice, not a mere circumstance.

Sorry for the rant, I really hope I didn't alienate myself from anyone, and hopefully, we can get a good discussion going on the matter.

 

[fsuman110]

oh sorry, i forgot to mention that of course i do not think that all japanese are this way, or even the majority for that matter. as the saying goes, " it only takes a few to ruin it for everyone"

 

[Matthew C. Perry]

You could sue the shop, and possibly even win. This woman did in a similar situation in 1999...

.http://www.migrationint.com.au/news/scotland/dec_1999-14mn.asp[/plain

It might be satisfying to at least go back to the shop, with a Japanese copy of the article and tell them they'll be sued, and lose a lot of money if they keep it up.

 

[fsuman110]

that's interesting. well, i guess it's a bit of a comfort knowing that it was acutally illegal to deny me access. but the thing is, is that i hear of that sort of thing going on all the time in japan. i've had friends denied access to clubs because they're not japanese (i'm sure it was not a dress code or any other standard kind of thing), as well as friends who couldn't go to certain onsens in hokkaido.

i'm not really interested in getting money though. if i went after that small business, then i would be reinforcing their negative image of foreigners which caused them to post that sign in the first place. i'm not saying that they're right or anything, because they're not. it's just that if i want to be somewhat accepted into that society in the future, i'm gonna have to play by their rules (at least for a while and to a certain degree).

does anyone have anything interesting to share or discuss? i'd love to discuss some people's theories as to why some japanese choose to remain xenophobic in a quickly globalizing world. and here's another question i'll throw out - what is more important, preserving an ancient society at the cost of racial equality, or striving toward equal rights no matter what the consequence? sounds like it'd be a no-brainer, but some of you may be surprised.

 

[Mandylion]

I'll sit down with your questions if I can get the time in the next few days. You have a good thread here - don't let it die under an avalanche of anime and J-pop

One question though; do you mind telling us the name/location of the store you were denied access to in Kyoto? I don't plan to picket the place or anything, I'm just curious. I also understand of you would rather not.

Sorry you had a bad experience, but thanks for keeping a cool head about it. -M

 

[fsuman110]

the store was somewhere in the pontocho area of kyoto. as far as i know the district only has a coule streets and the shop itself is facing the river.

i really hope that i haven't come off as too harsh though. again, that was one bad experience among thousands and thousands of wonderful ones. it did nothing to ruin my overall image of japan, and if i had the chance to go back, i'd be there in a heartbeat. but as i believe you said in another post, people like to blow off steam and talk about these things every now and them.

 

[Matthew C. Perry]

Originally posted by fsuman110

does anyone have anything interesting to share or discuss? i'd love to discuss some people's theories as to why some japanese choose to remain xenophobic in a quickly globalizing world. and here's another question i'll throw out - what is more important, preserving an ancient society at the cost of racial equality, or striving toward equal rights no matter what the consequence? sounds like it'd be a no-brainer, but some of you may be surprised.

I think eventually Japan will begin to recognize the principle of equal protection under the law, and the authorities will crack down on shops, landlords, etc. that openly discriminate. Still, I don't think the country will ever fully buy into the Western belief, mythical in my view, that individuals and population groups are equal in their abilities and potentialities.

 

[Glenn]

Originally posted by Matthew C. Perry
Still, I don't think the country will ever fully buy into the Western belief, mythical in my view, that individuals and population groups are equal in their abilities and potentialities.

Is that the Western belief? I thought that it was just that people are people, and everyone deserves a certain level of respect. I certainly do not believe that everyone has the same abilities and potentialities, so I guess that I just assumed that most people thought so as well. Is there an example to which you could point to show that the Western belief holds "that individuals and population groups are equal in their abilities and potentialities"?

 

[Uncle Frank]

LET ME TELL YA WHY THOSE SIGNS ......

exist. I went to a nice Japanese Resturant with a guy in the Navy nicknamed Animal. He'd had a few drinks before I met him. He started grabbing handfuls of food off people's plates, growling like an annimal, and gobbling the food down like in Animal House. He scared the hell out of the poor people and grossed me out. Next day, there was a sign on their door, no gaijens.
Again, military guys at a going- away party at a small Japanese bar. They trashed the place; and when the little ol mama-san objected, a group of guys stood on the bar and took turns urinating on her. After it rebuilt & re-opened it had the sign on the door, no foreigners !!
I'm sure these stories get around among business owners and they decide they don't want anything bad happening to their business; so up go the signs. Like all situations, their are 2 sides!!

Frank

 

[Keeni84]

Exactly, Frank. I understand what you're trying to say. That poor
mama-san. I could understand why they would put "no-foreigners" or "no military" on their doors. Not that I condone it. Every person should be given their fair chance. However, I understand why.

 

[Matthew C. Perry]

Originally posted by Glenn
Is there an example to which you could point to show that the Western belief holds "that individuals and population groups are equal in their abilities and potentialities"?

You've heard of "No Child Left Behind", right? ...the Bush Administration program which penalizes schools if they don't "close the gap" in the performance of all the various population groups? The assumption is that blacks, whites, Asians, Hispanics, etc. should all be performing at the same level academically. There is also the "underrepresentation principle" whereby it is argued that if, for example, there are disproportionately fewer black doctors in the population, then racism must be the root cause. The reality of group average IQ differences is ignored.

 

[fsuman110]

Frank, i understand what you are saying but that is still no excuse in my opinion. That's like McDonalds putting up "White Only" signs because they had a few bad foreign customers. That just doesn't fly anymore, and it shouldn't. But in no way am I trying to justify or rationalize the actions of those soldiers, what they did was disgusting and wrong and they should have been arrested immediately. But to deny an entire world (excluding the Japanese) access to your restaurant because of some bad experiences is flat out wrong. And while I don't wish for this topic to turn into a discussion about the military and what they should and should not be able to do, I think it'd be a better idea to deal with them separately, not punish the world for something a few idiot drunken sailors did. I can see their point, and it's easy to put myself in their shoes, but it's still wrong in my opinion.

It's interesting that you brought up the "No Child Left Behind Act" Matthew C. Perry. I personally think it has its merits, but overall, I think it's a disaster waiting to happen. Did you know that it is estimated that in 12 years, there will not be a single school in the United States that meets the standards of the act? Pretty crazy huh? I've taken a few classes on multicultural education and this act will do little if nothing to minorities as well as students with learning styles that vary from the norm. It could quite possibly even widen the gap that they are trying to close. Anyways, that's my rant, sorry about the length.

 

[Glenn]

Originally posted by Matthew C. Perry
You've heard of "No Child Left Behind", right? ...the Bush Administration program which penalizes schools if they don't "close the gap" in the performance of all the various population groups? The assumption is that blacks, whites, Asians, Hispanics, etc. should all be performing at the same level academically. There is also the "underrepresentation principle" whereby it is argued that if, for example, there are disproportionately fewer black doctors in the population, then racism must be the root cause. The reality of group average IQ differences is ignored.

This is looking dangerously close to a "whites are smarter than blacks" sort of thing. The fact that there are disproportionately fewer black/hispanic/etc. doctors/lawyers/etc. than white ones does hint at a social problem.

Whites are far more likely to go to college in this country (United States) because they are in general wealthier, and the proportion of wealth to secondary education is direct (i.e. wealthier people go to college at a higher rate than poorer people). You may put forth the argument that scholarships are available to everyone if they have performed accordingly. I would say that this is most definitely true. However, the difference lies in the group of wealthy average white students versus the less wealthy average minority students. Average white students are more likely to go to college because they are wealthier. You may say that an average student could not become a doctor/lawyer. On that I may have to agree with you. However, it is not the case that all doctors/lawyers are good, and many may have been average students. I have not looked into the matter, though, so I cannot say for certain.

The fact that the wealth distribution in this country is so unbalanced has less to do with ability than it does history. Minorities in this country's rights are relatively new to them; they only got equal rights in the past 40-50 years, and it takes a while to change. While there certainly are more minorities in the more prestigious lines of work (CEO's, doctors, lawyers, etc.) than in the past, they still have not been able to penetrate such fields in such a way as to even out the numbers. In the next 50-100 years perhaps things will be more proportionate. That there are still people who adhere to the way of thinking that was more common in the late 19th century today (inferiority of minorities, etc.), to me, shows that they still have not been given a fair shot to prove themselves.

Another question that I have is what exactly is the reality of group IQ? Have there been any studies on the matter? If so, what were the results? For example, are Eastern Asians the smartest population on the planet, or do they just work harder as a group than the other world populations (IQ is more related to mental processing power and ability to learn than it is knowledge)? Is that population genetically more likely to be intelligent? I would say that a population comparison would yield similar results in IQ throughout every population, but as I said, I have not seen any studies on the matter.

If you have any proof to corroborate/disprove any of the statements that I have made, I would be interested to know about it.

 

[fsuman110]

Another question that I have is what exactly is the reality of group IQ? Have there been any studies on the matter? If so, what were the results? For example, are Eastern Asians the smartest population on the planet, or do they just work harder as a group than the other world populations (IQ is more related to mental processing power and ability to learn than it is knowledge)? Is that population genetically more likely to be intelligent? I would say that a population comparison would yield similar results in IQ throughout every population, but as I said, I have not seen any studies on the matter.

Yes there have been studies and they almost always show what one would assume to be common sense. Ethnic groups do well on IQ tests that are created by and directed toward members of that ethnic group. For example, if we give a Mexican kid a Eurocentric IQ test, chances are they wouldn't do as well as an American or European. It's all relative, I think that's the main point. It's not fair to force kids of different ethnic backgrounds to take standardized as well as IQ tests that are not made for them, becaues that proves nothing about their individual itelligence. It is the same for Eastern Asians. No race is biologically smarter than another. There are several factors involved when looking at Eastern Asians. It's cultural, it's about social norms and infrastructure, it's about parental expectations and schooling. You get the idea.

But getting back to the original question at hand, what do people think about racism vs. xenophobia? Are they one in the same, with only slight and superficial variations? And what about sacrificing certain customs for the sake of internationalizing, will Japan be up for the task? One thing is for sure, they're going to have to do something. Their birth rate is alarmingly low and their percentage of senior citizens is among the highest in the world. Within the next few decades, it is certain that there will be an economic meltdown of extreme proportions unless Japan starts to face the facts.

 

[Glenn]

Originally posted by fsuman110
Yes there have been studies and they almost always show what one would assume to be common sense. Ethnic groups do well on IQ tests that are created by and directed toward members of that ethnic group. For example, if we give a Mexican kid a Eurocentric IQ test, chances are they wouldn't do as well as an American or European. It's all relative, I think that's the main point. It's not fair to force kids of different ethnic backgrounds to take standardized as well as IQ tests that are not made for them, becaues that proves nothing about their individual itelligence. It is the same for Eastern Asians. No race is biologically smarter than another. There are several factors involved when looking at Eastern Asians. It's cultural, it's about social norms and infrastructure, it's about parental expectations and schooling. You get the idea.

This is pretty much the point that I was getting at. There is no superior race/population when it comes to IQ, so that saying, "There is also the 'underrepresentation principle' whereby it is argued that if, for example, there are disproportionately fewer black doctors in the population, then racism must be the root cause. The reality of group average IQ differences is ignored," would be pedantic. There is no difference of average IQ difference.

But getting back to the original question at hand, what do people think about racism vs. xenophobia? Are they one in the same, with only slight and superficial variations? And what about sacrificing certain customs for the sake of internationalizing, will Japan be up for the task? One thing is for sure, they're going to have to do something. Their birth rate is alarmingly low and their percentage of senior citizens is among the highest in the world. Within the next few decades, it is certain that there will be an economic meltdown of extreme proportions unless Japan starts to face the facts.

Xenophobia is the fear of things foreign, and is not limited to race. So fundamentally it is different than racism. It just so happens that the foreign thing in this case is people other than the Japanese, so the terms seem to be interchangeable in this case.

As for your other questions, I would say that Japan has to adapt, or they will apparently disappear. Of course, whether or not they do it is a different question, to which I do not have an answer.

 

[Matthew C. Perry]

Originally posted by Glenn
This is looking dangerously close to a "whites are smarter than blacks" sort of thing.

Dangerously close? Whites ARE smarter than blacks on average, at least in terms of the kind of smarts you need to score well on an IQ test, or a med school entrance exam.

Another question that I have is what exactly is the reality of group IQ? Have there been any studies on the matter? If so, what were the results? For example, are Eastern Asians the smartest population on the planet, or do they just work harder as a group than the other world populations (IQ is more related to mental processing power and ability to learn than it is knowledge)?

Loads of studies have been done on population groups and IQ. American blacks as a group score about one standard deviation below whites, and have ever since the inception of IQ testing in the early 1900s. If the white IQ is defined as 100, then blacks are at about 85. East Asians score a little higher than whites, and Jews are the highest scoring group of all, in the 110-115 range.

 

[Matthew C. Perry]

Originally posted by fsuman110
Yes there have been studies and they almost always show what one would assume to be common sense. Ethnic groups do well on IQ tests that are created by and directed toward members of that ethnic group. For example, if we give a Mexican kid a Eurocentric IQ test, chances are they wouldn't do as well as an American or European. It's all relative, I think that's the main point. It's not fair to force kids of different ethnic backgrounds to take standardized as well as IQ tests that are not made for them, becaues that proves nothing about their individual itelligence. It is the same for Eastern Asians.

I've read a great deal on this topic and have never heard of any such studies. Of course, people aren't going to do as well on verbally oriented IQ tests in their second language. Still, East Asian immigrants to America score slightly HIGHER, not lower than native born Americans on allegedly "Eurocentric" IQ tests. And they score much higher on average than native born blacks and Hispanics. There are also IQ tests specifically designed to be "culture free" which yeild the same results.

 

[Matthew C. Perry]

For anyone really interested in the topic of population groups and IQ, I would recommend taking 15 minutes to read this excellent summary statement, signed by 53 leading researchers in the field of human intelligence.

Mainstream Science on Intelligence

 

[bossel]

Originally posted by Matthew C. Perry
American blacks as a group score about one standard deviation below whites, and have ever since the inception of IQ testing in the early 1900s. If the white IQ is defined as 100, then blacks are at about 85. East Asians score a little higher than whites, and Jews are the highest scoring group of all, in the 110-115 range.

Well, for what I know there are differences in average IQs between races, but when considered all circumstances (IE social environment) the differences are considerably smaller than suggested in the Bell Curve et al.

What you wrote above is a bit strange though. Jews are "white", they belong to the same race as "whites" (or "latinos", who some people put separately as well): all are caucasoid. If they show such a great difference to other caucasoid groups this is actually evidence for a non-racial origin of the difference.

Anyway, individual IQ differs greatly in all races, average racial IQ therefore is not of much importance.

 

[Matthew C. Perry]

Originally posted by bossel
Well, for what I know there are differences in average IQs between races, but when considered all circumstances (IE social environment) the differences are considerably smaller than suggested in the Bell Curve et al.

Yes. If you adjust for income and education level the gap decreases. This is stated in "The Bell Curve". But a large gap remains, and we don't know if income is more a cause of IQ level or a result. The latter seems more likely.

What you wrote above is a bit strange though. Jews are "white", they belong to the same race as "whites" (or "latinos", who some people put separately as well): all are caucasoid. If they show such a great difference to other caucasoid groups this is actually evidence for a non-racial origin of the difference.

Not necessarily, Jews are part of the caucasoid group, but they are a fairly distinct line, having married mostly within their tribe for the past 2000-4000 years. It is certainly possible, even likely, that the genes or combinations of genes behind intelligence occur in greater frequency within the Jewish population than in other groups. Of course, we don't know enough yet about genetics to claim this with certainty.

The term "Latino" refers to cultural heritage, and Latinos can be of any race. Mexicans, the largest Latino group in America, are of roughly 55% European, 40% American Indian, and 5% African heritage on average. Puerto Ricans and Cubans, on the other hand, are of almost entirely European and African heritage, with only a small fraction of America Indian ancestry.

Anyway, individual IQ differs greatly in all races, average racial IQ therefore is not of much importance.

I agree, it is not of much importance beyond scientific curiosity... unless you need to counter the argument that underrepresentation is proof of discrimination.

 

[Glenn]

Originally posted by Matthew C. Perry
For anyone really interested in the topic of population groups and IQ, I would recommend taking 15 minutes to read this excellent summary statement, signed by 53 leading researchers in the field of human intelligence.

Mainstream Science on Intelligence

I stand corrected. Thank you for posting that link; it was an interesting read, and I must say quite different than I had expected. You were right in saying, "...the Western belief, mythical in my view, that individuals and population groups are equal in their abilities and potentialities." I did buy into that mythical Western belief, but I am glad to have conclusive data now on which to base my opinion, instead of conjecture.

 

[Golgo_13]

Re: LET ME TELL YA WHY THOSE SIGNS ......

Originally posted by Frank D. White
exist. I went to a nice Japanese Resturant with a guy in the Navy nicknamed Animal. He'd had a few drinks before I met him. He started grabbing handfuls of food off people's plates, growling like an annimal, and gobbling the food down like in Animal House. He scared the hell out of the poor people and grossed me out. Next day, there was a sign on their door, no gaijens.
Again, military guys at a going- away party at a small Japanese bar. They trashed the place; and when the little ol mama-san objected, a group of guys stood on the bar and took turns urinating on her. After it rebuilt & re-opened it had the sign on the door, no foreigners !!
I'm sure these stories get around among business owners and they decide they don't want anything bad happening to their business; so up go the signs. Like all situations, their are 2 sides!!

Frank

Thanks for sharing that story with us Frank-ojisan!

 

[fsuman110]

Matthew C. Perry, thank you for posting that interesting article. Some of the points were well taken, but at the same time, there are flaws to it.

Point 5 says that IQ tests are not culturally biased, and that there are other tests available for that participant. That is true, too bad they are not given those more appropriate tests when the data for the bell curve is gathered. Try looking up scores for Mexican kids who take Mexican IQ tests in Mexico. You'll find quite a shift I'm sure.

Point 9 says

9. IQ is strongly related, probably more so than any other single measurable human trait, to many important educational, occupational, economic, and social outcomes. Its relation to the welfare and performance of individuals is very strong in some arenas in life (education, military training), moderate but robust in others (social competence), and modest but consistent in others (law-abidingness). Whatever IQ tests measure, it is of great practical and social importance.

This is very important as it explains why Blacks tend to score poorly. Blacks are educated in a White-dominated society, which has proven to be very problematic. Generally speaking, member of other ethnic groups naturally have different ways of learning and must be taught differently in order to learn effectively. However, the fact that this is not really their fault doesn't change the fact that they still score lower on the IQ tests, so this one goes to you.

I recently completed a course in Multi-Cultural Education, which taught me a lot about these gaps. However, I still argue that it is all circumstantial. Blacks and Hispanics may show up lower on the bell curve, but I do not believe them to be less intelligent. Have you read the questions on some of these bias-free IQ exams? I have, and they are certainly far from bias-free. For example, in an IQ test given in a High School in Miami, Florida last year (keep in mind the high Hispanic population in Miami) there was a question regarding tobogganing. How are kids from Puerto Rica, the Dominican, etc. supposed to know what a toboggan is when they have never even seen snow? Believe me, it does not end there. This may or may not be relevant, but did you notice that among the 50 or so "experts" only 1 of them appears to have a degree above a bachelors. Granted the signitures are collected from schools all over the country I am quite sure there is much truth in that article, but even those people I would wager, are not concerned with the semantics surrounding our discussion.

All I'm trying to say is that there is too much uncertainty and too many extenuating circumstances involved in IQ tests, and I would certainly be wary of calling one race "more intelligent" than another. Are you familiar with Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences? This theory is gaining more and more acceptance and will probably cause the extinction of the old standardized IQ test. I'm not trying to imply either that IQ tests are inaccurate, because for what they set out to measure, they are truly among the most accurate tests out there. All I'm saying is the way they are presented and the definition of intelligence that these tests aim to measure itself, is questionable.

And Glenn, I don't mean to be rude, but I hope you weren't implying that my last post was mere conjecture, as I would take much offense to that. I am majoring Multi-Lingual and Multi-Cultural Education as well as Secondary English Education and while I have much to learn, I have learned enough to question the validity of these tests. As I said before, no one race is more biologically intelligent than another. If that last comment was not directed toward me, please accept my apologies.

Sorry for that excessively long post, but I really would love to get back to discussing the issues brought up about Japan. If anyone has anything to say about it or any experiences to share that would be great.

 

[Matthew C. Perry]

Originally posted by fsuman110
Matthew C. Perry, thank you for posting that interesting article

You're welcome. It is a very interesting topic.

Point 5 says that IQ tests are not culturally biased, and that there are other tests available for that participant. That is true, too bad they are not given those more appropriate tests when the data for the bell curve is gathered. Try looking up scores for Mexican kids who take Mexican IQ tests in Mexico. You'll find quite a shift I'm sure.

If this is what your profs are telling you, you are being badly misled. People who do IQ testing are well aware of the "cultural bias" issue, and go to great lengths to make sure that their tests to not suffer from that flaw. Have you heard of this book?

IQ and the Wealth of Nations: Lynn, Richard, Vanhanen, Tatu: 9780275975104: Amazon.com: Books

The author Richard Lynn, one of the world's leading authorities on human intelligence, collected IQ studies done in countries around the world. Mexico has an average IQ of 87. And this is based on studies done in Mexico, in Spanish.

 

[Glenn]

Originally posted by fsuman110
And Glenn, I don't mean to be rude, but I hope you weren't implying that my last post was mere conjecture, as I would take much offense to that. I am majoring Multi-Lingual and Multi-Cultural Education as well as Secondary English Education and while I have much to learn, I have learned enough to question the validity of these tests. As I said before, no one race is more biologically intelligent than another. If that last comment was not directed toward me, please accept my apologies.

No offense taken. I was merely stating that I was basing my opinions on conjecture, and that having some empirical proof to contradict my opinions means that I should change them. I did not mean to suggest that your statements were conjectural in the least; in fact I found them to be insightful. This post only piques my interest in the subject more, and I am curious to see how this argument turns out. I, however, feel that I must step out of it, due to my ignorance on the subject, as I have never studied or researched any of these points. As I said before, my opinion had been based purely on conjecture. Please forgive my ignorance (it appears that I was the one being pedantic).