Invisible Children: Meaning to talk about the Past

Watching the documentary, "Invisible Children," visiting the web page of it, and reading an article on http://ilto.wordpress.com/2006/11/02/the-visible-problem-with-invisible-children/, I would like to note some of my personal responses to those.

The problem related to "Invisible Children" is not the existence of the documentary or followed movement by the organization, but something related to "One Story," which we have talked about on this blog while ago.

"Invisible Children" is not a bad documentary. Yes, the illustrated situation that children were abducted or walking on the night is the event of the past, not the presence. But talking about the past and spreading what HAD happened is important not to forget, not to repeat, and to think the current similar situation in other parts of the world.

In fact, we do talk about the genocide in Rwanda even today. International community could not take a productive action at that time, and it was a crucial failure. But that we talk about the tragedy NOW is to rethink our failure and prevent the similar situations happening again not only in Rwanda but also any other places.

We do talk about World War II even when more than 65 years has passed since its ended. True, none of the brutal situations in war time, including forced labor, comfort women issues etc, are not happening at this moment. Yet, we still talk and think about the issues in order not to repeat the same tragedies.

Furthermore, even when outsiders consider an issue the event of the past, people directly affected might still be in pain. Although people do recover from painful past and reconstruct their life, 6 years might not be enough for some of them, and it is only natural to think that 65 years might not be enough for some people to be healed fully.

Also, even though the situation has changed in Uganda, the similar problem of child soldiers is still happening in DRC, Somalia, and other countries. Thus, though it is the past in Uganda, it is not the past in other parts of the world.

As we closely look the web page of "Invisible Children," their activities seems to be focused on reconstruction from the conflict time and supporting people to re-engage to their communities. Although we cannot see the detailed activities from the web page, the work of reconstruction and re-engaging sounds to me meaningful somehow even today because those things cannot be finished within a few years (Though the effectiveness of their activities does depend on the range of their connection to the local and reactions to the real needs etc).

So the real problem, I think, is not showing the documentary and doing the followed movement, but showing ONLY the documentary in the past. I think many of us can share this feeling; we want people know our past AND the presence; do not stick up with "One Story" which only tells people one dimension of a country or the people.

In terms of aid work, I think problem is HOW to do the work. It is true that people get ruined by excessive aid products. For example in Tohoku region of Japan, I heard that some people spend much money provided as aid for pachinko, Japanese gambling game. I also heard that quite many of the donated TV etc are actually sold to second-hand shop in Tohoku. When people get so much money at one time or get so many things for free, it is natural for many of us to take the advantage of it. On the other hand, people do need some life saving things in the early stage of the emergency, and reconstruction requires great amount of money. The worker and people do need to consider what is needed and how we should proceed.

The left out question is about "Flying” to developing countries without thinking much. Personally, I agree to learn and know about the country and the people before entering a country. I feel those pre-knowledge helps me fit in to the community faster, and I would get better friendship with the local people. To be frankly, when I was in a developing country in Asia, I did sometimes get annoyed a little with some foreign people denying the local culture and acting with complete "western" style. In fact, with my subjective view point, I do not understand why some people can risk their life for visiting a county they do not even know much.

However, I am not sure if "Flying" to developing countries with ignorance is really bad. I do not think that we expect people to travel knowing a destination perfectly. It should be left to individual choices. Some people are really into researching, which is good, but we cannot force everyone to do so. Most importantly, our individual "Flying" does not really matter because we do not change the world much.

When people go from a developed country to a developing country, the visitor gets more influence from the people in developing countries than give an influence to them generally. In the documentary for instance, the local people met a few foreigners and heard little about American life, but the American visitors met hundreds of people and heard their lives. Even for a longer stay such as being an aid worker in a developing country, they receive more influence from the local. I know that some aid worker who are from a hectic working environment moved to a developing country and immediately fit in to the local style. Although we do have mutual influence when we visit a country, we are not as great as to change the world just by visiting a country.

Overall, the problem is HOW to convey the countries’ information and HOW we take an action. Certainly, some means can do more harm than good. But it does not mean that we better stay at home and do nothing thinking those are their problems. Criticizing the current aid system is important, but we cannot stop there and should think what and HOW we need to change the current system. Also, I think following the updated information is not the only thing media should. We need not only the presence but also the past.

(Note that his is mere my personal and subjective views.)

By S.M.

Adding Comments:
The documentary I saw was the very original version only with the stories visiting Uganda. Today, I saw a different version, about Kony 2012. I feel that this movie is misleading a bit.

Although the movie does tell that the current situation in Uganda has changed and is much more peaceful, such explanation ends only with one line. Moreover, just targeting Kony as a "bad guy" sounds making a scapegoat. Of course, reconciliation is needed, and ICC has a potential to provide some solutions. But it is, I think, dangerous to target one person as a "bad guy" without knowing the background situations for why it happened. Psychologically, many of us are able to do terrible things in a certain situation. The reason I did not become Hitler is because the society around me did not make me become like him.

Shouting and pointing out to a "bad guy" is easy and sounds cool. But that does not solve much. We need to consider why and how it happened, and how we can prevent happening again.

Read more...

Sorry to be realistic

Job hunting; it is a huge issue for the university students especially in recent years that 50 % of the recent graduate cannot find any job. Becuase of the system of job-hinting in the country I live in, we, the students in the third grade, spend half a year for job hunting; participating seminars, meeting the senior friends working in a company, taking interviews, doing internship, etc etc etc.

I myself am in the middle of job hunting process. And by taking several interviews and talking with HR people, I found a very interesting point that reflects the reality of the society: gender discrimination.

Of course, our society has the gender equality laws and system on the paper. So the company cannot say, "we want to recruit male only" even if the company actually selects male in reality.

However in the recruitment for the university students, the gender discrimination is something that we think "of course" we have. Indeed, not only the HR people but also university students take it granted. Thus for the interview, companies and career centre of the university divide male students and female students so that companies can select X numbers for male and X number for female. Also, what the company expect for future employers are different depending on gender. In fact, company Y recruits males who has a passion while it recruit female who is calm and able to analyze with good eyes. (And often, being good-looking is important for female!)

Gender discrimination exists everywhere. But the job hunting situation was the first environment for me to see the discrimination soooooooooo clearly and SOOOOOOOOOO obviously. We do not even try to hide the discrimination.

By facing with the gender discrimination, I suppose that no students accuse companies for it. First, we want to get a job by being obedient, and second, speaking up for the gender discrimination might be considered as a "childish" reaction. The gender discrimination is the reality of the society. So if we cannot accept the reality, you are just a child who cannot survive in the real society.

We, students, consider such discrimination as an "adult" society. In the adult society, good is not always considered as good. There is something more important than the moral judgement. Am I being too discriminative? Well, I am merely being realistic...?

by S.M.

Read more...

We are in Poverty?

The beauties of Cape Town; glorious Table Mountain in the South, developed urban city in the middle, dream world at the North Harbour, and the Lion Head, a mountain next to Table Mountain, looking over us. And we, South Africans and non-South Africans, enjoy the privilege of living in the one of the most beautiful landscape in the world.
 
In the middle of the beautiful city, there is an apartment facing to Table Mountain and Lion Head. I have lived there for about one month so far. Every day and night, I enjoy the view through the window. There, I share a room with my new friends, which makes my life much more fun and fruitful.
 
And those are the stories that I experienced in this great city, Cape Town.
 
Story 1
The other day, we were enjoying our pizza for our supper. With the good smell and taste, our conversation went on and on and on. And we started to talk about the poverty in South Africa and in the United State of America. My roommate, who is an American, told me that the gap between the rich and the poor in the State grew because of the recession. She said; I am from a middle class family, but the recession pushed us down to the poverty. I have to loan to pay my university tuition fee because my family cannot afford it at all. I am in poverty.
 
Next day, we went to Harbour for dinner.
We ate dinner at a nice restaurant, which cost me R120 (about CAD$20). After the dinner, we went shopping to a huge mole nearby Harbour. And my friend got a nice top and a browse, which cost her R600 (about CAD$100).
 
Is she in poverty?
 
Story 2
One day, I was in a township which is 1.5 hours drive away from Cape Town Central City. We had a financial literacy workshop and talked about needs and wants. One participant told us that he got his mobile phone at a shop for R300. The phone is a new version with camera, internet, memory card, music player, and so many other functions that I do not even remember. The participant said that he does not use some of the functions but he likes the phone.
 
Honestly, I was so astonished that he spent R300 for a phone because I have never spend any cents to get a mobile phone: when I was in Australia I got a second-hand phone from my friend for free, in Japan I got a zero yen phone at shop (a couple of years after companies release a version, they sell them for free), and I did not have a phone when I was in Canada. So, many of my friends tease me that I must come from stone-age since I do not use a phone, MSN, and Facebook (I DO use them one in a while, though!).
Anyway, I was pretty surprised that he spends a lot of money on the phone while he could have bought it as good as R0.50 through the Internet.
 
Often, people associate Township to poverty automatically. But are people in Township in poverty?
 
Story 3
Another day, a lady came to a centre to ask for financial support. She said that she does not have money even R10 to buy food. She looked desperate, and she burst out crying when the centre told her that it does not provide direct financial support.
 
But the worker at the centre eventually found out that she use a very nice product to maintain her skin beautiful. She spends R60 in one week just for her skin. And she is telling that she does not have even R10 to buy food.
 
Is she in poverty?
 
Stories of Poverty and Consumerism
First, I have to say that poverty is a controversial term. "Poverty" itself is a relatively new measure to divide the world so that we can see "progress" in economical development. So even though "poverty" seems a term to define easily, it is not as simple as it may look.
 
Second, we have to think of relative poverty and absolute poverty. Other than drawing a line at US$1-2 for a day spending, poverty is a matter of "feeling." So if we have a relatively wealthy neighbourhood and we are not as rich as they are, then we will feel that we are poor. If we live in a rich country, we are in relative poverty provided that we earn less than majority of people even if we have sufficient money to spend for food, water, accommodation, healthcare, education, entertainment, and so forth.
 
Third, society does not allow us to cut certain spending: we have to spend money for cell phone and accommodation to find a job. Indeed, even when we are unemployed and struggling to make a living, we have to have a mobile phone because some companies require having a phone/they contact us for recruitment on the phone. Also, we have to have an address to submit CV and get a job. And when we live in a house, we have to pay for electricity and water etc.
 
Fourth, being poor does not necessarily mean being good at controlling desires. Commercial advertisements are like magic. They mentally control us to believe that "we have to buy this and this." Thus, we tend to spend money for luxury stuffs, rather than to save, without noticing that we actually do not need them.
 
That is why Financial Literacy Education is so important for us. Even though we often hear NGO projects to increase income, I feel that desire control is not so much taken care of. But even a small thing, such as keeping a record of our spending, can be a good educational tip to notice the flow of money. Of course, we need entertainment once in a while, but we should cut off unnecessary spending before claiming for free food, donation, or financial support. And by realizing how naughty advertisements and consumerism are, I believe that we can go one step further to get out from "poverty. "

S.M. 

Read more...

Stereotypes toward Nationalities

When I get tired, of school assignments, of miscommunication with my parents, of the lack of my ability, of having nightmares or what ever,many things that usually do not bother me start to annoy me a lot; I feel annoyed by the ice on the road, the snow stepped on by so many foot, the cigarret butte wet on the snow, the person threw the cigarret, the person smoking while talking on the phone, the person talking in the language I do not understand, and even the person talking in my mother tongue, Japanese.

Indeed, there is the time that I suddenly start to hate being a Japanese speaker. More correctly, I sometimes hate to be a Japanese. Even more specifically, I hate to be seen as a Japanese girl.

I am not saying that I hate Japanese people or Japanese culture. As a person who grown up in Japan, I know so many heartful and awesome people who are Japanese. I also like the culture I have grown up with, and I do respect both modern and traditional culture of Japan. I like Japanese literature, and I like the handy and reasonable book style that what we call bunko-bon in Japanese. I like, well, I should stop here other wise I would take hours to list everything I like in Japanese culture.

Yet I sometimes hate to be Japanese because some people see me as a Japanese girl. Being labeled as a Japanese girl annoys me so much because I think many of stereotypical images of a Japanese girl do not represent who I am at all.

What are the stereotypes of Japanese (or East Asian as a whole)? The other day, we talked about it in class, and what my classmates said are;
a. Polite
b. Hard working
c. Quiet
d. Passive
e. Women are subordinate of men
f. Women works only at home no matter how high they are educated
Indeed, those are the STEREOTYPES of Japanese, andnone of them are applicable to me.

Well, I would love to be a polite and hard working person, but I am not successful so far. And I am pretty talkative person especially when topics come to politics or social issues. I like to experience new things actively, and I like to state my opinions out loud. I like to decide what to do by myself, and I hate may father telling me to follow what he says. Plus I have no intention to marry anybody. So will I be a house wife and prepare meals and bath and open a door to greet a husband coming back from his work, saying "Welcom home, my darlin, would you take a bath first or have a dinner" ? No way.

Of curse, there are Japanese who are polite, quiet, and working hard as a house wife. Indeed, my mother is polite, hardworking, quiet, and working as a house wife (even though she is neither passive nore suobordinate of her husband). I respect my mother, and I admire her having such nice personality.

But it is that those charactristics do not fit into me. So when people see me as a Japanese girl, I feel the huge gap between how they see me and how I see myself. I have my name and my personality. You cannot judge me in the categoly of Japanese girl.
"Oh, you are so talkative as a Japanese girl."
Excuse me? What do you mean "as a Japanese girl"?

I suppose that many people feel uncomfortable that people assume who they are with stereotipical images. If you have a blond hair and blue eyes and come to Japan, you would most likely to be English speaker, Christian, carzy over parties and drinkings. If you are from Phillipine and live in Japan, you would be automatically labeled to be a prostitue. If you are from Kenya, you would be seen as a person running with lions and being nature friendly. Those sound redicuras, but I feel that many of us still use stereotypes to judghe people unconciousely. I heard the story that my friend's friend who is a Native American encountered the situation at his university that his classmate said, "oh, you are pretty clever as a native."

So I just do not like that some people judge me with stereotypes of a Japanese girl. Even though I am not a patriotic person, I am happy to be Japanese, holding a Japanese passport (because in many cases I do not need a visa). I do see myself Japanese when I think of Japan's war crimes. And I am a Japanese girl in the end. Thus,it is just stereotypes that annoy me a lot.

S.M.

Read more...

"Development" can be harmful, but still...

Development is a problematic field. It is originated to colonial strategies, so development workers can actually harm people who live in so called "developing countries." So should all the development workers quit working for development in developing countries?

It is the reality that the works for development in "developing countries" benefits donor countries than receiving countries. Besides, International aid is a good money making business. With the name of ODA spending, donor countries can expand their market share. Indeed, development workers can "advise" to promote certain products which benefits their countries or companies. Even when they "donate" money, receiving countries have to pay back the debt in the future anyway with interests. Despite the all the fruits that donor countries can gain, International aid often sounds good, and they can have better international reputation.

Donor countries also control the politics in receivers' countries. Development workers go to the countries to spread liberty, democratization, and gender equality. With those "honourable" missions, development workers actually can promote militarization, terrorism, or any armed forces. So by manipulating politics in "developing countries," donor countries are making profits.

NGOs and NPOs are often not related to one country's interests; however, development workers in NGOs and NPOs are not exception of doing harm to people in "developing countries." One significant and obvious harm is advertisement. In advertisement, NGOs and NPOs' workers often illustrate that "(all the ) Africans" are poor, helpless, and they need OUR HELP. Even when they avoid such stereotyped images, NGOs and NPOs picture people in "developing countries" as innocent, pure, nature friendly people. Both stereotyped images on advertisement are problematic in that they lead to Culture Talk, imposing systems and values on people, and etc etc etc.

I recently read an essay that criticize development workers on the point that how they are motivated to work in the filed. According to the essay, major motivations are; 1. they want to help and rescue people. 2. they want to work where they have much privilege. 3. they want to travel and know new culture. 4. they want to have challenging environment. I like the part that the author includes not only people who blindly believe that they are doing "good," but also people who realize the problematic elements of development and admit the self-centered motivations for their work. The article argues many interesting issues in various fields, so it is hard to summarize all the points here. But I think that main points the author criticizes are the fact that development workers go to "developing countries" because they arrogantly want to be "good," and/or they want benefits for themselves rather than for people in "developing countries."

So should all the development workers should stop working for development?

No, I do not think so.

If I only think of ideal solutions, we should change the social structure that causes poverty on certain people instead of having International aid or NGO and NPO support. May be capitalism, may be trade system. May be the way to capture histories. May be military situations. Those issues create the poverty and make people suffer. So rather than giving food and try local movements, we should change the ulternative causes of the poverty in order to have sustainable social stability.

But such approach is only the ideal and not practical. Even if we want to quit capitalism, we do not know an alternative way to manage the world economy. Even if we want to give up all the military forces from all the countries, we cannot abandon them at this moment. In the end, we are the human creatures who cannot use any magic to make a great change.

That is why I believe that some people still need to work on peace building in "developing countries." I know that peace, development, progress, better life, etc are very tricky words that we have to consider what they mean twice. But if there is an element that may threaten human life, why not working to take the element out?

Change is such a big word. For make a better change for the people living there, we have to make approaches with not only governments, but also citizens. And here is what NGOs and NPOs can contribute in.

When I read an interview article about the person working in Disarmament Demobilization and Reconciliation, those words of him hit my heart; it is true that spread democracy is merely the Western agony. But reality is that, without such Western benefits, no one wants to give money for projects. And at the field where we have to do things, people giving money are the top of hierarchy of course.

So what I think of development workers are that they have to know all the critics, issues, paradox, and everything in development work, and then they should be the negotiators between all the problematic donors' ideas and the real need of the people who themselves wish some outside supports. In other words, I think that development workers can alter a bit of negative impact from the donor government to better effects on the people. Indeed, Japanese government wants ODA spending in African countries just because the government wants their votes in the U.N. , and development workers can even use the selfish motivation of the government to persuade the government to have support programs in the countries.

International aid and support are already out there and hard to be withdrew now. When I went to Nepal, my friend there told me that NGO and NPO are the popular employers since they pay good salary. And he said that he welcomes outside supports as long as the workers do work for the benefits of the local people. So I think it is true that development workers can harm local people with their selfish-motivations. Still I believe that there is something, even so small things, that development workers have potential to do "good" for the people.

S.M.

Read more...

"Japanese" and Japan's War Crimes

Apple, thank you for inviting me to this blog. You are so nice, awesome, and sweet!

On February 2, 2010, my friend and I attended “63 Years On” which was a documentary screening and presentation about “Comfort Women”. “Comfort women” refers to all the women “who were pressed into sexual servitude during the Asia Pacific War that began with the invasion of Manchuria in 1931 and ended with Japan’s defeat in 1945” (Soh, 2008). The majority of the women are Korean, and many Chinese women were also victimized (Soh, 2008). Japanese army also forced women from Philippines, Indonesia, Indochina, and Burma. The army also used non-local people in those courtiers, Americans, Dutch, French, and British. And a limited number of Japanese women were also included (2008). The film showed how much Korean, Chinese, and Dutch women suffer from the sexual slavery even now. It also showed Japanese people visiting museum in Korea to learn issues around “comfort women.” So the film did not accuse Japanese people as a whole rather focused on accusing Japanese government refusing to apology for war crimes. As I watched the film, listening to panellists, and talked with my friend, I felt uncomfortable when I heard “Japanese” forced, “Japanese” killed, “Japanese” committed. As opposed to “Japanese government,” “Japanese military,” or “Japan (as a nation state),” the language use of “Japanese” as a subject seems to include every single person who has a Japan’s nationality. I even felt that I was racially discriminated. But I have to think twice here; is it a racial discrimination to accuse all the Japanese for the Japan’s war crimes?

My cultural, social, and educational backgrounds entirely rely on “Japan”. I have grown up in Japan, raised by my Japanese father and mother. I went to a public elementary school and a public junior high school in Japan. And I attended a private high school in Japan, and my high school had some connection with a Ward Government in Tokyo.

Therefore, I have received so much information that includes hegemonies controlled by media and the government in Japan. Indeed, I have rarely seen any news about commercial whale hunting by companies in Japan. I have heard people on television saying that Japanese are so gloomy about ourselves, so that Japanese people should be proud of being Japanese more. I heard that some Japanese intellectuals said that Japan already paid compensation to China for the World War II, and Japan already apologized to China for the war. I heard many of my Japanese friends, ranged from my age to 73 years old, talking that China always demands for an apology every single time when their prime minister changes. My friends go on to say that “anti- Japanese” is nothing but a mere political strategy for Chinese government to have a unity in China. Furthermore, did anybody tell me anything about Japan’s war crimes in any of South East countries? No much at all.

Despite all the hegemonies I received in Japan, I have been a most pro-China person among my friends and family. Because I made so many friends from China, Taiwan, Philippine, Australia, America etc when I spent one year as an exchange student in Australia, nationality do not bother me to have friendships. At several occasions when I met Chinese people in Australia, they did not react “You are Japanese, and I am Chinese,” but he said, “Oh, we are same Asians!” I liked to think that we were all the same Asians. So in order to keep the good relationship with them, I wanted to take serious responsibility to admit the Japan’s war crimes, and refuses all the war in order not to repeat the same crimes. Japan’s war crimes were my original sins.

So why do I feel uncomfortable to hear “Japanese” as a subject of the war crimes? For me, holding Japanese nationality itself is not a sin. Even though the nation state, Japan, committed so many war crimes during Wald War II and even after the war, it does not mean that all the Japanese people became evil. I am quite sure that I am brain washed at this point by the Japanese government and the American strategy under the GHQ head quarter, but I think that Japanese civilians, especially children, women, and the youth, were the victims of the war. Of course we have to examine the cause of the war and who are responsible for each crimes. But I believe that the problem was the war itself rather than the race. So, when we talk about the war, using “Japanese” as a subject might seem to include a racial discrimination.

I, and I believe majority of people would, think that racial discrimination is immoral, and universities usually educate people not to have racial discrimination. Do I dislike all the “Arab people” in Sudan for committing genocide? No. Do I hate all the British people for colonization? No. Do I dislike all the Iraqi people for terrorism? No. Do I dislike all the Americans for the Iraqi War? No, I do not.

Even when I think of the cases that Japanese people were victimized, I would not dislike all the people who would be categorised to the same group of the people committed a crime. Indeed, do I dislike all the Americans for atomic bomb? No. Do I dislike all the North Koreans for systematically kidnapping Japanese and South Korean people? No.

Yet, I am not too sure for a case that I think of my closer people being hurt. If my mother was killed by a person from country A, would I hate all the people from the country? I hope not, but I might not be able to stop disliking at least all the family members of the criminal.

In order to think about the issues around discrimination against family of a person committed a crime, there is a great book to refer; a repetitive novel “Tegami” written by Keigo Higashino (2003). In the novel, one character says to a man whose brother committed a murder: as you have noticed, people would be even nice to you, as they feel sympathy. People know that having a criminal as a brother is not your fault at all. But people naturally avoid you because murder or crimes are something we want to keep a distance. To keep a comfortable and safe life, people try not to have connections with you. And this is only a natural reaction. Even though you are angry with such people behaviours, and you even feel seriousely discriminated, this discrimination is necessary for maintaining an order in the society. When your brother committed a crime, he socially killed himself. And his payment for his crime includes your suffering. People see you to understand that committing crime means socially killing ourselves and even our family (2003).

Applying this way of thinking to the Japan’s war crimes, we can think in this way. The fact that Japan committed war crimes means Japan socially killed all the Japanese people including the next generation. Thus, discrimination against Japanese people is necessary for teaching a lesson not to committee war crimes.

Of course, violence is totally not acceptable at any case. So even in any protests or activists' movements, I do not agree to have violent acts. And when we think of a brother of the criminal, he is sacrificed for the social goods (public welfare). So we have to think if we should discriminate any people even when the discrimination helps society organized well.

Still, it is also true that we emotionally cannot just stop disliking a criminal’s family even when we understand the family, especially the criminal’s daughters or sons, has no responsibility for the crime.

“Do not tell us to like the Russian people. With all the scars we had, we just cannot.” This was the wards of a man who was forced to involve in the conflict between the Russian government and Georgia. He was educated man and working for the peace reconciliation. Yet his scar is so deep that he cannot escape from his emotional hatred.

The scars on human minds are real, and the scars are what we have to consider first among of all. Yes, both Japanese and Chinese governments use Yasukuni issues and even “comfort women” for their political strategies. Many Japanese intellectuals who are pro-Japan argue to protect Japan mentioning International laws, treaties, and research strategies, and they usually ignore personal feelings of the women, who had to face so sensitive issues (It would be so hard and need great courage for me to publically speak up that I was raped.)Issues are so complicated. So much information is manipulated (by various governments, media, etc), and it is hard to judge which is close to the truth. Even inside Japan, there are arguments between the left side and the right side etc. But one thing for sure is that the women who were forced be “comfort women” have scars on their mind, and none of us should ignore nor deny them.

My conclusion for now; disliking all the “Japanese” would be a racial discrimination, yet you can hate “Japanese,” you can hate me, because with the scars you have and your people have it is only natural to hate “Japanese.” And that is what a war brings to us. Indeed, wars do not produce any good. Wars protect nothing. Wars leave people scars. And wars force us to hate each other. And as a person holding a Japanese passport, as people see me as Japanese, and as a person whom you might hate, I have a responsibility to consider and act for the issues related the Japan’s war crimes.

S.M.

Read more...