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.

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.

I fail to see why you do care.

I thought I explained it already.

Interesting, a bit like Bart Simpson: “Underachiever and proud of it, man!”

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..

, 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”.

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?

Follow up with your english teacher

leitmotiv says:

That is a key misunderstanding here.

I will admit some failure is ocurring on comprehension side

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?

(hopefully a 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.

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….

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.

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?

Dissecting his logic is not needed. Ponta clearly stated the restaurant owners action was wrong.

“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.

“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?

@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.

There are only two positions on the topic. Pick one already.

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.

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.

So obvious. Yet so far away.

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.

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).

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.

*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

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.

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.

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”?

“very clear and intentional racist acts”

“blatantly racist actions”

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.

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.

ponta, who called the man a racist? You might want to be more specific.

Ponta, I don’t get it. Are you saying banning people from other countries is acceptable behavior because it happens overseas?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

“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.

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.

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!

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

To me its an odd comparison that does not add significant extra context to the stories, as noted.

Let’s see how BBC report the case in which Foreign students banned from shop

A furniture shop in a south coast town has banned foreign students who it says take their fast food into the store to eat on the sofas and coffee tables.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/sussex/8182558.stm

Is the background irrelevant?and is the article unbalanced?

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?

It seems not all people who breach anti-discrimination law are racist、again according to BBC.

4 August 2009 05:53 UK

Migrant workers face rental block

There is no suggestion that the agents themselves are racist, but the behaviour uncovered has been described by human rights lawyers as a “disturbing and shocking” breach of the Race Relations Act
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8181486.stm

I am currently aware of only one person who has typed this absurd sentence

Did you type it ? or Did you just copy and paste?

It is entertaining to talk with you, leitmotiv

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.

You might want to be more specific.

No. I dont.

You don’t remember which comment about BBC and NYT articles you were talking about?

I have no idea what you refer to,

You don’t even remember what you wrote?

from that odd but vocal subset of (often gaijin)

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

You might want to be more specific.
Otherwise you might sound like making the same misleading comment as before.

Comment by leitmotiv
2009-09-02 11:04:01
Oh dear….. Another anachronistic portion of Japan dragged, kicking and screaming, into the daylight of 21st century by western cultural imperialists — whose sole motivation is self-evidently destruction of Japanese culture. This will upset more than a few Japan Probe commenters.
Reply to this comment
Comment by Sen
2009-09-02 14:06:01
judging by the comments so far..that’s not the case. perhaps you need to reevaluate your conception of the Japan Probe commentators
http://www.japanprobe.com/?p=12374
:/

BTW, I am happy to see you using the word “gaijin”. Please tell your gaijin friends that the use is not derogatory at all.

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.”

Sadly I have to admit this. If you like Asia, you only need to hate America.

we deserve each other as the stupid nation.

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.

日韓交流おまつり：４０団体８００人、伝統芸能を競演－－ソウル
http://mainichi.jp/select/world/news/20090921ddm012040071000c.html

「日韓交流お祭り」鳩山幸さんが韓国語であいさつ
http://japanese.joins.com/article/article.php?aid=120729&servcode=A00&sectcode=A10

Lee, who plays the lead in the historical drama “Yi San,” currently being aired in Japan by Japanese public broadcaster NHK, visited Japan last week to promote the drama.

The cup Mrs. Hatoyama is holding was a special gift from Lee.

Members of the Hatoyama family, including Hatoyama’s mother, Yasuko Hatoyama, are known to be fans of Korean pop culture, also known as the hallyu, or the Korean wave
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2910345

You see reasonable evidence of korean tourists stealing a meal somewhere?