No Koreans Allowed
A Japanese TV program visits the island of Tsushima to investigate the frictions between Korean tourists and locals. At one restaurant, they found a sign banning the entry of Korean customers. Here’s a subtitled video clip of them speaking to the restaurant owner:
The owner was fed up with the “bad manners” of Korean tourists, so he decided to reject everyone from their country.
Afterwards, they visit a restaurant that is happy to welcome Koreans. The owner used to be involved in the fishing industry and would frequently travel to South Korea, so he has some experience with Korean culture. He says that Koreans tend to act the same way at restaurants in their own country, so it’s not like they are deliberately being rude in Japan. Some Japanese without his experiences might not understand the differences in manners and customs between the two countries.
The next clip shows some behavior that is a deliberately rude:
At Tsushima’s Watatsumi shrine, they find a prayer tablet with Korean writing on it. Their interpreter tells them that it contains the message “Tsushima belongs to Korea” alongside a declaration of Korean sovereignty over the Liancourt Rocks.
The issue of Koreans trying to claim Tsushima as their own territory has been mentioned in previous posts about Korean visitors to Tsushima. The South Korean city Masan has passed an ordinance claiming ownership of the Japanese island, and nationalist groups have also held “Tsushima belongs to us” protests on Japanese soil.
Other Japanese news reports have included images of prayer tablets that had their original Japanese messages crossed out and replaced with nationalistic messages from Korean vandals.
Finally, here’s a clip about Korean garbage that litters the shores of Tsushima and the illegal fishing practices of some Korean tourists:
The marine garbage problem has been getting a lot of Japanese media attention, as Tsushima isn’t the only area being hit by a flood of junk with Korean writing on it. As has been mentioned in previous posts, South Korean volunteer organizations have been helping clean up the trash on Tsushima’s beaches.
The fishing issue involves the dumping of bait into the water to attract extra fish. To prevent overfishing, there is a law that bans non-citizens from engaging in this practice. Every time the Japanese media sends a camera crew to Tsushima, they seem to have little trouble finding Koreans who are violating this law. Some are unaware of the law, while others knowingly violate it. The South Korean media has even aired TV reports about the illegal fishing and bad manners of Korean tourists who visit Tsushima.
Over at the Marmot’s Hole, Robert has been posted a video clip of a small group of Japanese welcoming South Korean tourists to Tsushima with cries of “Go back to Korea!” They use the term “chosenjin” when referring to the Koreans, apparently because it is considered an offensive term in Korea:
The people in the clip are identified as members of the Tokyo citizen’s group Shuken Kaifuku wo Mezasu Kai (The Society to Seek Restoration of Sovereignty), which has also been active in pushing for changes to Japanese history textbooks that “give school children false information.” It would seem that they got so riled up about the actions of certain Korean tourists that they bought plane tickets from Tokyo and flew over for a protest.
- Akihabara News – Gadgetry from Japan (Subscribe)
- dannychoo.com – Your portal to Japan (Subscribe)
| Related Posts: |
|
Zainichi Koreans in Japan (Al Jazeera Reports) Koreans copy Japanese products? No way! Japanese still tend to like Koreans, but the feeling is not mutual |
Full RSS Feed
wow thats not nice..these two countries will never get along.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
The government of Korea does not claim this island, so why do these protesters waste their time?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
“National pride” is just another way to say “Complete idiot”
Rate this comment:
0 
0
A local government of Korea claims this island, however.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I really want to clean up the shoreline, as long as the Japanese govt pays for all the travel expenses
Where do I send in my request? Maybe I’ll make it to tv lol
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Ok, submitted request to the ministry of environment. My chance: 0.
lol
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Right wing hate is never very different in other countries, is it? It’s things like this that make me want to leave flaming bags of dog poop at their rallies. Immature, but at least they’d be focused on something other than furthering the divide between nations and their people
Rate this comment:
0 
0
complete idiot
national disgrace
Rate this comment:
0 
0
And who might you be referring to?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Of course the Japanese guys yelling at the Korean tourists, “go back to Korea, Koreans!”
Who did you think I was referring to?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Well, the meal-stealing Korean tourists, for one.
What with the tendency to Korea-bash in issues involving both countries, it’s a bit hard to gauge the comments.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Well, the meal-stealing Korean tourists, for one.
You see reasonable evidence of korean tourists stealing a meal somewhere?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
> You see reasonable evidence of korean tourists stealing a meal somewhere?
As we all see in the first video clip, according to one of the restaurant owners, some Korean customers grabbed and ate plates of food without ordering and others claimed they had no money and leave without paying the bills. Another restaurant owner who was more sympathetic to Koreans also says, “There was a Korean customer who ordered a whole case of beer and didn’t have the money to pay for it.”
Rate this comment:
0 
0
leitmotiv:
I guess it wasn’t evident in the wording of my comment, but my intention was to imitate the tendency of the “OMG Japan is so awesome!!” crowd to criticize Korea in any situation involving both countries, regardless of who’s actually at fault.
So no, I didn’t mean to imply that all Korean tourists are actually “meal-stealing” thieves.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
うん。確かに何もしていない観光客に、罵声を浴びせるのは良くない。
反日外人に攻撃される隙を作るべきではなかったね。しかしこの行為
に至ったこれまでの経緯については共感し納得する。問題を解決する
最も良い方法は、日本人が対馬に積極的に観光旅行へ行く事だろうね。
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Goodness gracious. Citizens of both countries acting like complete idiots, over a piece of rock. That restaurant owner and those Japanese ladies are pathetic.
I realize this piece of rock has a lot of natural resources and financial potential, but come on already. Sadly, both sides are the losers here, and most damaging, it only fuels the ignorant views the outside world has of both Korea and Japan.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
These videos are about Tsushima, with only a passing mention of the Liancourt Rocks.
Tsushima ≠ Takeshima
Tsushima is a 708.61 sq. km island.
And the Koreans claiming it is like France claiming the Isle of Wight….
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I stand corrected James. But I still find the behavior of all involved, pretty disgraceful.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
And interestingly, there is this on the news section at the top…
http://sg.news.yahoo.com/afp/20090924/tap-un-assembly-diplomacy-russia-japan-d1078a1.html
Seems like some countries can get toghether and resolve territiorial dispiutes in Asia.
Korea… will you come to the table?
(PS… the Marmot as a source?)
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I wouldn’t be very optimistic about any resolution of the Russo-Japanese territorial dispute.
That story is pretty much the same as one that was reported when Aso and Putin agreed to do the solve the island problem:
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/90001/90777/90851/6656385.html
Correct… but at least it is ‘on the table’, unlike the Liancourt issue.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Thread topic, as written, seems pretty unbalanced. Is that intentional? The minor irritations of Korean tourists and some fishing flotsam are irrelevant in comparison to the blatantly racist actions of the ignorant Japanese restaurant owner and shameful Japanese anti-foreigner group.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I can understand why the restaurant owners reacted the way they did to the ruder Korean customers, but I’d have to agree that yelling at random “chosenjin” tourists (who might not have anything to do with the disturbances) to go back to Korea is a pretty dick move.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I can understand why the restaurant owners reacted the way they did to the ruder Korean customer,
Rethink your understanding. He did not react in any negative way to rude korean customers. He reacted in a negative way to all korean people – full stop. It is an inexcusable and racist act.
Whats also worrisome is how the news casters are somewhat deferential to him, as if his action may have SOME merit, even if they perhaps dont personally agree. I would have preferred that they confronted him on his stupidity, or at least educated him on Japan’s laws against discrimination (toothless as they may be). It seems the other local Japanese may not have done so, allowing him to proudly hoist a racist sign — which in turn will help cast Japan in a bad light through the magic of YouTube.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Well if barring a particular nationality from your establishment is “racist”, how would you deal with a specific known subset of visitors who trashes the places, breaches etiquette and refuses to pay? Particularly if it’s so bad that you consider the lost revenue to be not as big as a drawback than to deal with the so-called minor irritations?
If you have a good idea, I’m sure that store owner would like to hear about it.
I suppose you’re one of the rare breed of people who have big enough hearts and can accommodate all sorts of dicks and assholes out there, but I’m not, so as ij487i said, “it’s understandable” that he would react that way.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Holy crap. How about you kick out any customers who trash the place and breach etiquette? If you have repeat offenders ban those people from your establishment. How hard would that be?
Refusing to pay is probably the hardest point to deal with, but anyone is capable of leaving without paying. Just because some Koreans might do it doesn’t justify blocking entry to an entire group of people!
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Oh….another apologist for an unfortunately common racist action demands the sceamingly obvious to be pointed out. What a surprise!
To your child-like question…Let’s see….
Put up sign (i.e., “you touch, you buy”)
Verbal reprimand
Ask persistant rude customers to leave
Call cops
“I suppose you’re one of the rare breed of people who have big enough hearts and can accommodate all sorts of dicks and assholes out there, but I’m not”
What I suspect you really mean to say (at least when you are trying not to reveal whatever freudian conflicts that apparently infest your thoughts) is “accommodate the general public”. Its something everyone in the restaurant business must accept at some level to be in that business. If they cant they are in the wrong business. Importantly, it seems to not be a problem for other Japanese restaurant owners on the island.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
The offenders are foreign tourists on short visits. Banning each offender from your establishment won’t help the situation. Most will only ever go to that restaurant once.
The best solution would be printing a list of rules in Japanese/Korean and putting it on his door. One rule could be “new customers must pay before receiving their food.”
Rate this comment:
0 
0
韓国人 describes citizens of South Korea. It’s a nationality, not a race. How could one prove the shopkeeper is being “racist” with his rule? Japanese and Koreans aren’t so different that the cranky old shopkeeper can just point and say “this person is the Korean, this person is Japanese.” A Zainichi Korean with flawless Japanese could probably fool him.
It is not racism, it is discrimination against the citizens of one country.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
That’s exactly the point. As the restaurant owner, you have the right to refuse service to people causing trouble – how can you possibly know if someone is going to cause trouble simply by knowing their nationality?! You’re not trying to educate Korean people, you’re running a business. If someone does something that you feel affects your business, KICK THEM OUT.
You are more than welcome to print rules, but helical’s only suggestion was a complete ban of people from an entire country because of a few troublemakers. Where is the sense in that? It’s unbelievable that in this day and age people like this still exist.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
All right, I concede the point that the store owners should take steps before outright banning all Koreans. And I had the Freudian thing coming. But we don’t know if he’d already taken steps like that until he decided that he was fed up.
Discrimination that gets widely condemned is based on unfounded hatred or condescension for the target group of people just because of the color of their skin or being from a particular ethnicity. I have no problem in calling out people who engage in this kind of behavior.
But the actions of this store owner is based on his actual experience in dealing with a particular group. He gives examples and says he doesn’t want to deal with it. Even the store owner who was more welcoming was in agreement regarding the behavior of the Korean customers.
As an example, there are persistent rumors (urban legends?) on the internet of particular schools which have been banned from Tokyo Disneyland because students on a field trip got too rowdy and started with antics like trying to unzip Mickey. Apart from being kind of funny, I think Disneyland’s supposed actions are understandable and though it sucks for the students who did behave, I don’t it wouldn’t be considered remotely discriminatory or morally wrong.
But why is it all of a sudden outrageous and inexcusable when visitors from a larger group (this time an entire country) gets banned from a restaurant because of past behaviors of their own members? Is it because of the preconception and premise that the Japanese are racist and look down upon Koreans?
I think a similar issue has been raised here on Japan Probe before with inns and hot springs that refused all foreigners because of the frequent horseplay and difficulty in communicating with them.
Some small hotels don’t want foreign guests
http://www.japanprobe.com/?p=6595
I believe the general opinion then was that while it may be xenophobic and is less than ideal on the establishment’s behalf, it was still the choice of the establishment to make, and barred visitors could simply take their business to more accommodating places and let the money speak in the long run. In fact, the word “racism” didn’t even appear once in the comments.
How is it any different in this case?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
“How is it any different in this case?”
You only go to the banned school for a few years, and are free anyway to go as an individual at any time.
I agree it is not racism, which is bandied about far too regularly, but it is discrimination. Perhaps it may be the simplest way to solve the problem, perhaps it may be a last resort, which doesn’t mean it is “nice,” of course.
I think I’ll start up a shop with a No Humans Allowed sign….
Rate this comment:
0 
0
It’s funny that you bring up the school example. My high school was banned from attending the Nutcracker ballet because a few students started shouting profanities at the dancers mid-performance. As far as a school is concerned I personally think that this is perfectly acceptable because it serves as a learning experience – i.e. students can take the lesson as part of their education.
But any kind of discrimination based on nationality or skin color really should be put to an end because there is nothing you can do to change this fact.
The one thing that bugs me about that restaurant owner is that if he really had that many Korean customers, I seriously doubt he would have cut his earnings to avoid some bad behavior. What I’m thinking is he probably only had a handful of Korean customers, and probably a disproportionate number of bad experiences, and decided to implement his discriminatory policy.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
All right, I concede the point that the store owners should take steps before outright banning all Koreans…..Discrimination that gets widely condemned is based on unfounded hatred or condescension for the target group of people just because of the color of their skin or being from a particular ethnicity. I have no problem in calling out people who engage in this kind of behavior. But the actions of this store owner is based on his actual experience…blah blah blah blah….
Then you concede nothing. Why dont you just say you agree with such discriminatory practices and be done with it? There is not a circumstance where “banning” a nationality or race is acceptable in 2009 in an advanced country. There are only two positions on the topic. Pick one already. Trying to call this merely a discriminatory action rather than a racist action, as if that is some meaningful difference, is complete nonsense in this case and clearly splitting hairs to obfuscate the topic. Grow a backbone and have some conviction in your apologies for the discriminatory and racist practice depicted above.
韓国人 describes citizens of South Korea. It’s a nationality, not a race. How could one prove the shopkeeper is being “racist” with his rule?
I agree it is not racism, which is bandied about far too regularly, but it is discrimination. Perhaps it may be the simplest way to solve the problem, perhaps it may be a last resort, which doesn’t mean it is “nice,” of course.
Oh puh-leez!….This topic invariably becomes like some never-ending game of Twister on these boards. The apologies and obfuscations spill ever forth from that odd but vocal subset of (often gaijin) Japan enthusiasts….the ones that wear blinders and rationalize such practices as acceptable and unavoidable — but then next week will shriek about cultural arrogance, double standards, and reliance on tired, stereotypical canards when some hapless NYT or BBC reporter writes about discrimination in Japan.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
You might want to be more specific.
Otherwise you might sound like making the same misleading comment as before.
BTW, I am happy to see you using the word “gaijin”. Please tell your gaijin friends that the use is not derogatory at all.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
You might want to be more specific.
No. I dont. Its very clear. Just not to you, perhaps — as you falsely make that claim every time logic and/or reading comprehension fail you (which is often). But I can live with it.
BTW, I am happy to see you using the word “gaijin”. Please tell your gaijin friends that the use is not derogatory at all.
I have no idea what you refer to, what you mean, or how this might be a relevant comment on this topic. This from ponta who demands within same post to “be more specific” and, generally, repeatedly demands of those who disagree to “stay on topic”. More obvious bait for a reaction? Back to the clown car with you.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
You don’t remember which comment about BBC and NYT articles you were talking about?
You don’t even remember what you wrote?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
leitmotiv: “There is not a circumstance where “banning” a nationality or race is acceptable in 2009 in an advanced country.”
Do you know there is no US federal law against foreigner discrimination?
These are what US laws and federal agencies had to say about foreigner discrimination.
8 USC Sec. 1324b(a)(4)
“Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, it is not an unfair immigration-related employment practice for a person or other entity to prefer to hire, recruit, or refer an individual who is a citizen or national of the United States over another individual who is an alien if the two individuals are equally qualified.”
US Department of Housing and Urban Development:
“The Act does not prohibit discrimination based solely on a person’s citizenship status. Accordingly, asking housing applicants to provide documentation of their citizenship or immigration status during the screening process would not violate the Fair Housing Act.”
http://www.hud.gov/offices/fheo/library/sept11.cfm
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission:
“Title VII (of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) does not prohibit citizenship discrimination per se”
http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/national-origin.html#VI
The US must not be an advanced country then.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
The US must not be an advanced country then.
Great. I encourage you to post your paradigm-shattering legal research over at USA-Probe blog. It does not seem terribly relevant here.
Let us know how it goes!
Rate this comment:
0 
0
So what are Koreans? A nationality or a distinct race? Race gets conflated with ethnicity far too often these days, as “racism” is such an easy and powerful criticism to toss around.
“Trying to call this merely a discriminatory action rather than a racist action, as if that is some meaningful difference”
It cannot be racist as it is not about a different race. Nationalist or ethnicist, if there is such a word. Of course there is a difference; all racist actions are discriminatory, but not all discriminatory actions are racist.
Your comments are blurring into little more than ad hominem rants and insults against people who don’t agree with you. You seem to argue from emotion, not logic, much like a petty temper tantrum.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
OK…pls drop the meaningless semantic contortions and just move forward finally. Is “it” (i.e. the “racist act”, “discriminatory act”, described above) acceptable?
Perhaps it may be the simplest way to solve the problem, perhaps it may be a last resort, which doesn’t mean it is “nice,” of course.
Suggests you do find it acceptable. Its unfortunate that someone whose handle suggests analytical rigor would also appear to accept racial and/or national discriminatory policies as reasonable.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
leitmotiv, you should be responsible for what you say. Since you implied that discrimination against foreigners is not permitted in any advanced nation, what I said is relevant. What you implied is wrong.
Now, establish why it is wrong to discriminate against foreigners without resorting to “that is the norm in any advanced nation.” I am against your logic, not necessarily against your conclusion.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
leitmotiv, you should be responsible for what you say. Since you implied that discrimination against foreigners is not permitted in any advanced nation, what I said is relevant. What you implied is wrong.
I try to be responsible for what I say, though I will not claim 100% success. But perhaps I try harder than you in this case. I did not “imply”, I “stated” — and did so rather clearly in fact. Further, what I stated made no reference to what is “permitted”, as you seem to insist. Morover, your legal research seems irresponsibly disconnected from anything that anyone has stated, much less from the original posted topic. You apparently intend to imply with your odd citations that there are no effective legal mechanism against such racist acts in the US (off topic as the US is). If that is your intent, I assure you it is not the case (…rather than demonstrating such to you — which would go way off topic and should not be needed anyway for curious readers with analytical skills higher than that of a typical ficus plant)
I am against your logic, not necessarily against your conclusion.
We apparently agree (according to you) that the shameful and disgusting racist acts by some japanese people (depicted above) are in no way acceptable. But you still feel some need to argue about something. Puzzling. I am curious what drives that – please share.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
“Suggests you do find it acceptable.”
So when I said “which doesn’t mean it is “nice,” of course” which part of that did you take to mean I thought it WAS nice?
I’m saying the guy may have reasons, he may consider them justified, but that still doesn’t make it a “good” thing to do.
The “semantic contortions,” as you dub them, are not “meaningless” either, as I have stated. They simply state the facts.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
So when I said “which doesn’t mean it is “nice,” of course” which part of that did you take to mean I thought it WAS nice?
I’m saying the guy may have reasons, he may consider them justified, but that still doesn’t make it a “good” thing to do.
*eyeroll*
“acceptance” does not necessarily mean “enthusiastic embrace” I assume you have an opinion on the matter, since you posted here. When will you reveal it finally? This is one of those rare topics that is extremely binary, so the hair-splitting is very annoying. Is it
(a) Overthinker finds it extremely distastful and would of course never personally do such, much less ever set foot in an establishment that does such, but nonetheless will grudgingly accept that man should be able to ban koreans (or any other nationality/ethnicity) if he has determined some need.
or is it
(b) Overthinker finds such acts unacceptable under any circumstance and, as needed, should be legally proscribed
Rate this comment:
0 
0
leitmotiv: “You apparently intend to imply with your odd citations that there are no effective legal mechanism against such racist acts in the US (off topic as the US is). If that is your intent, I assure you it is not the case.”
I do not know what your nationality is, but if you are a US citizen, you really need to know the US laws before making such statements.
They are not “odd citations”, but rather a long-standing policy of US government. Non US citizens have no equal rights. There are laws that ensure equal rights for your fellow citizens with different skin color, but there is no law for foreigners.
If you think otherwise, just find one US federal law that ensure equal rights for foreigners.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Just wanted to say first that I tried calling the place to try to get a more detailed and complete version of the storeowner’s story, but nobody answered the phone. Maybe the google search results are outdated, the store’s gone out of business, or it just isn’t open today (The days of business was listed as “不定期 (irregular)” after all…)
@The Overthinker & Kevin
OK, that is a point.
Being the subject of ban for a permanent and generally immutable attribute like nationality is different and much more unfair than for just an attribute like a school that is transitory and easy to disassociate from by going privately.
But I hope that I’ve at least communicated that, I’m arguing that banning an entire group for the undesirable actions of some individuals, is justified in some circumstances. The justification should be stronger, if and when there is a perceived correlation between such acts and association with said group. The ban could be for either for punitive or preventative reasons, but the preventative aspect would take on a bigger ratio in the case of the presence of a correlation.
Of course, there very well may be an even stronger justification to oppose such a ban, as leitmotiv has vigorously argued, but as I’ve said earlier, afflicted parties desiring an outright ban of the offending party is at least “understandable” to me.
The scale may tip one way, but I acknowledge that there are weights on the other side too.
@leitmotiv
I probably should have stated my stance clearer from the beginning, but to be honest, my opinion on this matter wasn’t as organized in my head when I first posted. Sorry if I inadvertently contradict my past statements … I did have a whole day to mull over it.
And excuse me for butting in the conversation, but ignoring all the loaded words and expressions and appeals to emotion in the choice presented to Overthinker, my opinion regarding the store owner is choice A.
If you are saying that the only two positions are being for or against discrimination defined only in absolutes, I disagree with that.
I do believe that while such acts are very distasteful and normally should not be permitted, I also believe circumstances can provide for instances when such acts are more acceptable than others.
Qualification of the store owner’s motives for the ban, which you dismissed as “splitting hairs” and “obfuscating”, do matter to me, as I would need it to gauge if the ban is acceptable or unacceptable when it’s my choice to not judge matters by an overarching and absolute moral rule.
Now please don’t call me names … I don’t know if my naive and fragile heart can take the battering.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
No, I do not think this should be acceptable, and have never indicated otherwise. I have said it is not racist, I have said it may be understandable and the man may have reasons he considers adequate, but you seem to consider an attack on part of your premise as an attack on the entire premise, and also any statement that isn’t a passion-filled outright condemnation to be support for it.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
you really need to know the US laws before making such statements. They are not “odd citations”, but rather a long-standing policy of US government.
“odd” as in “irrelevant. I assure you that I nor anyone else with any functioning neurons need not know one iota about US law to determine them irrelevant to this thread.
Look, you already agree with me that the action depicted above (the actual topic of the thread) by the Japanese people is reprehensible and flat out wrong in any case. What are you trying to still say? Its truly a puzzle and you will not give any clues to your motivation despite request. But at any rate I’m sorry the law school thing didnt work out. I think you can take the LSATs up to 5 times now (though they also average the scores of multiple attempts) ….so good luck, ok?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
@overthinker
No, I do not think this should be acceptable, and have never indicated otherwise. I have said it is not racist
So posting the “no Koreans allowed” sign is unacceptable to you, but you also dont find that posting the sign constitutes an act of racial discrimination? Do I understand correctly? Very weird, if so. Please do the experiment and hang up such a sign anywhere and convince one reasonably educated person nearby that, acceptability notwithstanding, it is not a act of racial discrimination. Let us know how you do.
I have said it may be understandable and the man may have reasons he considers adequate,
“may”?? Why are you unsure? Hell, I understand very clearly why he did it. Why dont you? The ignorant man only stated it openly in the video. With subtitles. But his reasons have no impact on acceptability of such an act in 2009. If a psychotic motorist runs over pedestrians because he is frustrated at having a shitty life, we understand that he had reasons and motivations, but we dont therefore call the act acceptable, do we?
@helical
I also believe circumstances can provide for instances when such acts are more acceptable than others….Now please don’t call me names ….
OK, so you find it acceptable in some unspecified circumstances. Good luck trying to specify them for practical use. I have no interest in calling names if you are being honest and not trying to attack or bait — in stark contrast to so many others here. But its unfortunately noted that you support the use of racially discriminatory acts in 2009 in an advanced 1st world country, at least in some undefined situations. That is sad IMO, as you appear to be educated. I hope you will read more and realize what acceptance of such really means. The ramifications go far far beyond the clumsy solution of a problem of some unruly restaurant customers in a sleepy island town. Depending on your age, were you also opposed to dismantling apartheid system in south africa in the 1980s?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
“So posting the “no Koreans allowed” sign is unacceptable to you, but you also dont [sic] find that posting the sign constitutes an act of racial discrimination?”
NO. For a very good reason I have stated quite clearly but you seem unable to comprehend. You have not even addressed it, but keep harping on this “acceptable” issue without ever laying out what the issue actually IS.
Answer this question: Do you consider Koreans and Japanese to be different races, and if so, why?
What is your definition of “race”? Are the burakumin a “race”? Are Scots a “race”? If you answer “yes” to the two latter questions, we have nothing further to discuss, as you have a very very different view of race to me and we are not even talking about the same thing.
“If a psychotic motorist runs over pedestrians because he is frustrated at having a shitty life, we understand that he had reasons and motivations, but we dont [sic] therefore call the act acceptable, do we?”
And where exactly have I called this sign acceptable? Do you understand the difference between understanding something and accepting something as allowable?
I see why you took the name leitmotiv: you do keep playing the same tune….
Rate this comment:
0 
0
leitmotiv: “Look, you already agree with me that the action depicted above (the actual topic of the thread) by the Japanese people is reprehensible and flat out wrong in any case.”
I have never said so. This is what I said.
“Establish why it is wrong to discriminate against foreigners without resorting to “that is the norm in any advanced nation.” I am against your logic, not necessarily against your conclusion.”
I am waiting see you establish what you insist. You really lack logic to support what you say.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Do you feel better if it is written in such a way that a shop owner suddenly start putting up the sign, “no Korean allowed”?
I think, by presenting the background we can understand better where they went wrong.
It might be that the shop owner does not necessarily hate all the Koreans.
From the shop owner’s perspective, it might so happen that all the Korean customers to his shop were rude and damaging to the shop to such an extent that he wanted no deal with them, regardless of the fact the he needed money and that he could make some money with them.
From his perspective, it might have looked to be more efficient, considering the time and effort he had to make, to put up the sign than to educate the Korean customers to his shop .
(Note also another shop owner who accepted Koreans mentioned cultural differences.)
But of course, not all Koreans tourists are rude and damaging;there are a lot of polite Korean tourists—-he might even know it—and it is offensive to put up such a sign and he had better ways to deal with the problem. And this is where he went wrong.
By presenting the background, we can come up with the better understanding of the situation.
Do you resent a Japanese not depicted as a completely irrational racist?
As for the guys yelling at the tourists, they are completely idiots.
Someone might say they are 30 years behind the “developed countries” and they should learn how the sophisticated racists act in the ” developed countries.”
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Do you feel better if it is written in such a way that a shop owner suddenly start putting up the sign, “no Korean allowed”?
I would not feel better or worse…its someone elses blog and this is just an observation. The post seems to be comparing some minor vandalism by (apparently) korean morons and some ecological side issues from korean commercial fishing practice against very clear and intentional racist acts by Japanese. To me its an odd comparison that does not add significant extra context to the stories, as noted.
It might be that the shop owner does not necessarily hate all the Koreans.
It might. Or it might be that he hates all Koreans. Or that he hates some koreans and all Singaporeans plus a few Norwegians. You do not know so perhaps you should avoid comment until you do know. Who he might “hate” is not relevant anyway, nor should anyone even care. What we do know and can comment about is that he has carried out a blatant and intentional racist act.
From the shop owner’s perspective, it might so happen that all the Korean customers to his shop were rude and damaging to the shop to such an extent that …
Maybe. You dont know. I dont know. Whatever the reality is, it cannot excuse what he did…. You already agree that it is a blatantly racist act under any circumstance, Correct? If so, then why the conjecture about whether 100% or 80% or 64% etc of his korean customers acted a certain way? This adds nothing to understanding the topic, but does come close to providing rationalization for his shameful discriminatory act.
By presenting the background, we can come up with the better understanding of the situation.
No, the “background” you mention is generally irrelevant. What is relevant is that he can carry out such an intentional racist act with (apparently) no worry about negative repercussions — such as earning a bad image among his Japanese peers or attention from authorities under anti-discrimination laws.
Do you resent a Japanese not depicted as a completely irrational racist?
Someone might say they are 30 years behind the “developed countries” and they should learn how the sophisticated racists act in the ” developed countries.”
Bait which is too obvious and silly to merit comment — more evidence of how unserious you are. But, just for fun, please identify this “someone” who thinks Japan should “learn how the sophisticated racists act in the developed countries”. I am currently aware of only one person who has typed this absurd sentence, and that is you.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
leitmotiv:
They were presented together because they were all part of the same Japanese news report about the negatives of the Korean tourism boom in Tsushima. The original TV report gave a lot more attention to the bad manners, illegal fishing, Korean purchases of real estate, and the sea garbage.
The discrimination portion was only about a minute long. I put the discrimination portion at the top of this post and gave it headline treatment. I think the discriminatory nature of the sign pretty much speaks for itself, and I don’t need to force feed the readers of this site like they are babies.
I had been planning to post about these videos for a while, but forgot about them. When the Marmot’s Hole found that video of the “Koreans go home” protest, I was reminded of it so I finally completed this post. That video was added to the bottom of this post because I did not think that discrimination in Tsushima deserved two separate posts in one day. It’s also likely that media reports such as this were what made that Tokyo right wing group so angry about Korean tourists.
Ponta & leitmotiv: Please don’t turn this comment thread into another one of your Debito arguments.
Let’s see how BBC report the case in which Foreign students banned from shop
Is the background irrelevant?and is the article unbalanced?
It seems not all people who breach anti-discrimination law are racist、again according to BBC.
Did you type it ? or Did you just copy and paste?
It is entertaining to talk with you, leitmotiv
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Ponta, I don’t get it. Are you saying banning people from other countries is acceptable behavior because it happens overseas? If not, I don’t see what the point of posting links from BBC, etc. is. I can see that you might be trying to show leitmotiv that this kind of despicable activity happens everywhere, but from my perspective you are arguing for discrimination.
We can all agree that it happens overseas, but the topic at hand is Tsushima, wouldn’t you agree? leitmotiv is erroneously using the expression ‘advanced country’ because most countries are guilty of discriminatory behavior, but the point still stands:
There is not a circumstance where “banning” a nationality or race is acceptable in 2009.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Let’s see how BBC report the case in which Foreign students banned from shop
Why? You (of all people) ought to stay on topic.
Is the background irrelevant?and is the article unbalanced?
“no” and “I honestly dont care”. Why are you trying to create some sort of journalism review out of a simple topic? You (of all people) ought to stay on topic.
It seems not all people who breach anti-discrimination law are racist、again according to BBC.
“Seems”..? You are not sure of it? I am sure of it. I did not claim otherwise. And your point? Ahh…you dont have one do you?
Did you type it ? or Did you just copy and paste?
OHH SNNNAP!!! Absent anything of substance to say, you still manage to “get one in” based on a literal reading of words rather than clearly intended meaning. I warms my heart to think how happy that must make you — a bit like when a child finally gets that first bit of food into their own mouth on their own rather than all over the face and floor. Moreover, it is both remarkable and convenient for you that your reading comprehension can apparently be turned on and off at will. And of course your laser-sharp word play also serves to deflect the obvious fact that the statement is incredibly moronic, sad, and attributable to only one original author….named ponta.
Per James request above – I will not respond to any more of your obvious attempts to bait and any other silliness that is not reasonably on-topic.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Kevin
No, kevin, I think I made it clear that it was wrong that the shop owner put up the sign and I also showed where he went wrong.
I was trying to show by BBC articles that the shop owner was not necessarily a racist just as the estate agents on the BBC article might not be racist while it was wrong that they discriminated against migrant workers.
Just calling someone a racist too quickly will get you nowhere, just as calling someone a racist is useless just because, for instance, he often overgeneralizes the Japanese people and often put Japan erroneously as against advanced country.
I was also trying to show it is useful as well as essential to cite the background to understand the situation properly just as BBC articles did.
As I see them, James and BBC put the incidents in perspective, citing the background. Rather I see their articles balanced.I don’t see what is wrong with their articles citing the backgroud.
If BBC just wrote;
“The English Real estate agents are RACISTS. They discriminated against migrant workers. ”
“The English furniture shop owner is a racist; he banned foreign students from the shop”,
the articles are shallow and unbalanced, perhaps even misleading, especially when many of the readers already have bias toward England.
If someone asks whether the BBC articles are intentionally unbalanced because they cite the background, I can’t help but wonder what emotional background toward England and English people he might have.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Just calling someone a racist too quickly will get you nowhere, just as calling someone a racist is useless just because, for instance, he often overgeneralizes the Japanese people and often put Japan erroneously as against advanced country.
ponta, who called the man a racist? You might want to be more specific.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
If you are concerned about people throwing about the term racist, you could just say that Japanese people and Koreans are considered the same race, so what the shop owner did is discriminatory not racist.
The same probably applies to the issue in England, as well. From what I read in your links, it seems that the majority of the immigrants being discriminated against are Polish, which would make them the same race as the people from England.
The point that leitmotiv is failing to get across is that no matter what the background of the situation is, banning Koreans is discriminatory and should be put to a stop. The background might explain the reason for the restaurant owner’s decision, but it doesn’t justify it.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Some people may be confused. You are arguing that the restaurant owner is ignorant and his actions are blatantly racist.
I think we could save some time if you clarified that you are using the very broad definition of racism that includes discrimination against ethnic or national groups.
Many readers of this site, myself included, see race as the classification of peoples based on heritable physical characteristics such as skin tone. “Korean” and “Japanese” are so similar that I wouldn’t even think of them do be racially different.
While almost all of us can agree on the bad and discriminatory nature of the shopkeeper’s sign, I don’t think there is a general agreement about it being blatantly racist.
leitmotiv
Just search for the word, “racist”, you will find who called the act racist. Or are you saying you call the act racist, but he is not a racist?
Do you disagree it is too quick to call somebody’s speech act racist just because he overgeneralize the Japanese and put one country erroneously against advanced country? If so why?
Now I thought you didn’t want to bite “the bait.”
I am honored to be asked a question in English in which you think I lack reading comprehension.
I am honored to be asked by someone who thinks I make a statement that is moronic, sad.
Can you write in Japanese? I’d be glad to answer in Japanese.
Anyway, I answered your question, could you be specific about whose comment on BBC and NYT articles you were talking about? And is it already clear who wrote the word “gaijin”?
Rate this comment:
0 
0
The point that leitmotiv is failing to get across is that no matter what the background of the situation is, banning Koreans is discriminatory and should be put to a stop.
Comment by leitmotiv
2009-09-24 23:17:06 …There is not a circumstance where “banning” a nationality or race is acceptable in 2009 in an advanced country.
I will admit some failure is ocurring on comprehension side. Not much I can do about it, apparently.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Just try to avoid the use of loaded statements like “advanced country.” Now you’ve got ponta hammering away on that one expression and the argument is going in circles.
Since every country around the world has discrimination problems the shortened version of your sentence would have had much more impact:
There is not a circumstance where “banning” a nationality or race is acceptable in 2009.
I personally don’t really understand why these threads always get mangled beyond comprehension, because we’re all essentially arguing the same thing.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Or are you saying you call the act racist, but he is not a racist?
Almost. I said it is a racist act. I do not know whether he is a racist. Nor can I know from the info available. Nor do I care. You also do not and cannot know. I fail to see why you do care.
I am honored to be asked by someone who thinks I make a statement that is moronic, sad.
Interesting, a bit like Bart Simpson: “Underachiever and proud of it, man!”
Anyway, I answered your question, could you be specific about whose comment on BBC and NYT articles you were talking about?
No, I will not because the articles do not exist. I clearly mentioned a “hypothetical” subject in a “future tense” to illustrate an observation using mild “sarcasm”. Look those terms up. Follow up with your english teacher (hopefully a gaijin).
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I think we could save some time if you clarified that you are using the very broad definition of racism that includes discrimination against ethnic or national groups.
That is a key misunderstanding here. Correct. Racism cannot really be prohibited (except perhaps passively through education). Racist acts can and should be prohibited. Unfortunately constant highlighting of the acts and repeated explanations of why it is wrong in face of wierd rationalizations is tedious and requires repetition.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
@Kevin
Just try to avoid the use of loaded statements like “advanced country.” Now you’ve got ponta hammering away on that one expression and the argument is going in circles.
Ponta argues about a lot of pointless things, but my reference to Japan as an advanced country is likly not one of them.
Since every country around the world has discrimination problems the shortened version of your sentence would have had much more impact:
There is not a circumstance where “banning” a nationality or race is acceptable in 2009.
Sure, I would also say that. I just want to avoid someone bringing up cases (generally in less advanced places) where inter-ethnic strife and violence is still active and the stakes actually significant compared to some ignorant restaurant owner who thinks korean customers are too sloppy or whatever. This can, unfortunatly, also extend to advanced counties as well. Exhibit A being Belfast Ireland. I am surprised someone did not throw that at me.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I see a contradiction in your logic Ponta.
You admitted that the owner’s discrimination against Koreans customers may be justified because he deems all Koreans rude,
“From the shop owner’s perspective, it might so happen that all the Korean customers to his shop were rude and damaging”
but you also admitted that not all Koreans are rude, just some of them,
“But of course, not all Koreans tourists are rude and damaging: there are a lot of polite Korean tourists”
Than by your own logic the owner is wrong, because no matter what his backgrounds is, it’s impossible that all Koreans in the world are rude (just like not all Japanese are racist or against foreigners), so no matter what his background was, it is wrong for the owner assuming that all Koreans are rude.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Than by your own logic the owner is wrong
Dissecting his logic is not needed. Ponta clearly stated the restaurant owners action was wrong.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I thought I explained it already.
Sorry, but I am not familiar with anime you take up such as Simpsonm or Acuaman, but I enjoy this kind of reaction as well as your comments such as ” Cananda is America’s hat” “eye-roll “etc..
So may I ask who you were referring to when you said, ”
The apologies and obfuscations spill ever forth from that odd but vocal subset of (often gaijin) Japan enthusiasts
.the ones that wear blinders and rationalize such practices as acceptable and unavoidable ”
Or are you referring to and accusing the non-existent people again?
leitmotiv says:
Is your English writing so hard that those English native speakers misunderstand your comment, or is it just that you need your English teacher too?— hopefully gaijin?
Okay perhaps that is your way of admitting that you’ve found what I was referring to and a subtle way to send your message to one resident in a northern part of Japan in a way not to offend him—- Clever.
I enjoyed the discussion.
I hope you’ll improve your Japanese and write in Japanese so that I can understand you better.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
One correction to the video with the trash on the beach.
At 0:40, the man ranting mentions that “Japan used to dump garbage into the ocean too, but we don’t now now that we’re a developed nation. And Korea isn’t a developing nation any more either…”.
So he doesn’t put down Korea as a developing nation, but mentions that they should be ashamed of themselves for engaging in irresponsible behavior that would only be expected of a less advanced country.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
The very first video displayed has the friendly store owners face displayed before the viewer enables play back. This gives the impression that he is the one rejecting customers. There is far to mach anti Korean sentiment and news on this site, especially within the comment section.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
YouTube’s automatic assignment of preview images is all part of an anti-Korean conspiracy.
If we close our eyes to what is on Japanese TV, maybe it will go away.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
“If we close our eyes to what is on Japanese TV, maybe it will go away.”
Exactly, with several weekly news reports, no matter how subtle they may be, regarding this issue, it is not really necessary for a site with a reputation of a “novelty / variety site” to CONSTANTLY bring these stories up. If was was from a genuine concern or desire to see social change I would welcome and encourage these topics.
Perhaps the site contributors feel more assimilated if they participate in issues which have no relevance on their lives.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
How do you define “constantly”? It seems to be a different definition than most, more like what the dictionary calls “sometimes.”
Rate this comment:
0 
0
I suggest JP to post some good news on Korea-Japan relation once in a while for Korean readers who might otherwise tend to think Japanese hate Korea
…..someting like
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Ampontan frequently posts postive Korea-Japan news to counter this sense of a prevailing antagonism boosted by news media hungry for sales.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Yes, I know. I appreciate his efforts.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
It is kinda ironic that the “father of Korean nationalism” was Park Chung Hee, dictator of South Korea, devotional zealot for the American government, and an Imperial Japanese sympathizer. The more I know about South Korea, the more I know that it is the political establishments from America and Japan who “primarily” divide Japan and South Korea.
No, I do not hate Korea. I just hate the (America/right-wing Japan-influenced) politicians who promote harmful nationalism in that small country.
If you want to blame the Koreans, you only need to blame the corrupted politicians. This will save you from embarrassments.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Yeah, America and Japan sure are partners in crime and are responsible for every evil that is plaguing East Asia!
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Except that Japan is only responsible for very small things compare to America. Japan should fight against America, not South Korea, if it wants to sort out many issues from scratch.
Sadly I have to admit this. If you like Asia, you only need to hate America.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Sadly I have to admit this. If you like Asia, you only need to hate America.
A well thought-out and persuasive bit of wisdom. Thank you so much. An Al-qaeda leader could not have said it better.
I have to admit this. If you like Canada, you only need know that it is America’s hat.
http://www.dailyhaha.com/_pics/canada_americas_hat.jpg
Rate this comment:
0 
0
And were it not for America, most Asians would be living in the Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere, and there would have been dozens of Nankings.
But maybe it would have been better. Chinese and Koreans would stop bitching about Japan, because they know they’d be shot and their villages burned to the ground if they did.
Passing that, were it not for America and the Allies, there would be no South Korea today, and you’d all be living under Kim Jong Il’s thumb. Conveniently that would also solve the trash problem, because North Korea can’t produce any goods which would later become trash.
If you Chinese and Koreans want to live in the past and blame Japan for continuing aftereffects of the war, then you must also praise America every day for saving your parents and grandparents back then. Buy an American a beer next time you see one in a bar and say “Thank you for my life”
It’s funny because it’s true.
AND
It’s funny because it’s racist.
You’re welcome.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
This is directed towards Canadian, but pray tell why should Japan go against the United States?
Why would a nation turn on one of their biggest trading partners/biggest ally in the name of some sort of weird and perverted Pan-Asian unity, especially in light of their actions of World War 2 with mainland Asian politicians and governments constantly fanning the heat of anti-Japanese sentiments to turn their attention towards an external enemy?
As Level3 pointed out, South Korea would not even exist without the goodwill and hard work from the Allies in World War 2.
Both Japan and the United States are enjoying the fruit of their labor from a mutually beneficial relationship; lets not let your anti-American/Pan-asianist screed cloud your judgment on reality.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Sadly the good old America that many people positively know today is now gone. Welcome to the 21st century, Americans. It’s even funnier to see the majority of those anti-America-ist Asians were pro-America in the past.
The saddest thing about Americans today is that they still live in the old nostalgia. Otherwise, it’s funny to see pseudo-self-hating American expats living in South Korea and China.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Why they go to Japan if they hate it so much? I don’t understand. Even if they think they’re doing bad things for Japan it still gives wrong impressions of Koreans.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Maybe just a little conquest? It reminded me a story that a Korean man went to a lake on the Mt. Fuji and planted a Korean national flag in the lakebed. As it was broadcasted on the Korean TV, you may find that on YouTube.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
the last year, korean right wings come to this island and yelled “tsushima belongs to korea!” this time, japanese right wings yelled at inocent korean ” go back to korea!” .
we deserve each other as the stupid nation.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Out of all comments made so far, this is the most intelligent.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
*sigh* What is really needed in Japan is signs that just say “We reserve the right to refuse service”, and leave it at that. That would be a perfectly acceptable out.
Rate this comment:
0 
0
Very true. If it were only so. It would save many Japan enthusiasts a lot of cerebral overclocking with strange and irreconcilable rationalizations, would void some annoying NYT reporter beats, and certainly would have saved at least one resident and one business in a northern part of Japan some time and money.
So obvious. Yet so far away.
Rate this comment:
0 
0