CODE OF ETHICS FOR FAMILY -----WANGO
Code of ethics for family---harmonious and successful families are built on moral and spiritual foundations and care about other families in the community.
COPYRIGHT 2010 by WORLD ASSOCIATION OF NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS------WANGO.
We spent last week discussing the attack on what it means to be male or female, family able to have children, and that pathway to having employment allowing citizens to support those children ---and CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA MOVING FORWARD works hard to DISMANTLE all of the above. So, there IS NO INTENT OF CREATING AND MAKING STRONG families in US or around the world ---the OPPOSITE IS THE GOAL.
Above we see a global NGO---WANGO pretending to have a goal of educating as to what a GOOD FAMILY LOOKS LIKE. WANGO is global 1% banking killing thousands of years of policies towards FAMILY------they are those OLD WORLD CATHOLIC AND JEWISH FREEMASON 1% MERCHANTS OF VENICE ---not religious, only using religion to gain power and wealth.
What we saw in China during GREAT LEAP FORWARD----then ONE CHILD POLICY ---is that gradual destruction of societal policies around what family, community, right and wrong had been for thousands of years. ORGANIZED RELIGION CREATED THOSE CONCEPTS ----evolution installed biological imperatives of SURVIVAL OF FITTEST------NATURAL SELECTION----- we KNOW what family and community are in public policy-----what CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA global 1% pols and players are now doing is CONVINCING 99% WE THE PEOPLE that all that is wrong and there is something BETTER.
If we KNOW one child created all kinds of chaos, hardship, death, suffering for hundreds of millions of Chinese citizens----is it MORAL OR ETHICAL for the US MOVING FORWARD to do the same ---AND WORSE as with sterility?
Demand for wives in China endangers women who live on its borders
Local residents often turn a blind eye to trafficking
Nov 4th 2017 | BEIJING AND LAO CAI
HUONG was only 15 when she went out to meet a friend in Lao Cai, a city in northern Vietnam on the Chinese border (see map). She thought she would be gone a few hours, but it was three years before she managed to return home. Her friend had brought with her two acquaintances—young men with motorcycles. They squired the girls around town and took them to a karaoke bar, where their drinks were spiked.
When the girls grew drowsy they were hoisted back onto the bikes, each sandwiched between two male riders. They were driven into the hills and across the Chinese border to a remote house in the countryside. There they were told they would be sold. The girls screamed and cried but were subdued by two men, one of them wielding a stick. The traffickers told Huong that by crossing the border she had sullied her reputation, but that if she behaved well they would find her a Chinese husband. After marrying she might find a way home, they said. If she refused she would stay stranded in the hills.
Huong—a pseudonym, to protect her identity—is now 20 years old. She lives in a large bungalow in Lao Cai, which she shares with a dozen women aged between 15 and 24 (an occupant is pictured). They are all survivors of trafficking networks that smuggle girls across the Vietnam-China border, sometimes to be sold as prostitutes but more often as brides. Their house, with its enormous teddy bears and fleet of fuchsia-pink bicycles, is a shelter run by Pacific Links Foundation, an American charity, which helps victims finish their education and cope with their trauma.
Around the world some 15m people are living in marriages into which they were forced, including some who were abducted, according to a recent study by the International Labour Organisation, a UN body, and human-rights groups. In China the trafficking of women is particularly acute, in part because a preference for sons has left the country with a severely skewed sex ratio. Between 1979 and 2015 the imbalance was aggravated by a one-child-per-couple policy, which prompted many to abort females before they were born. The Chinese Academy of Social Sciences has estimated that by 2020 there will be 30m-40m Chinese men who will be unable to find wives in their own country.
One consequence of this is booming business for matchmakers who offer to import women from China’s poorer neighbours, particularly Laos, Myanmar, Cambodia, Vietnam, Mongolia and North Korea. Some of these women, seeking a route out of poverty at home, freely choose a Chinese marriage and gain the necessary approvals. But along China’s borders, kidnapping is rife.
The stories told by trafficking survivors and Vietnamese officials in Lao Cai shed light on this grim trade. Each year between 100 and 150 trafficked Vietnamese women return to their country through the town’s border gate, says an official there—probably only a small proportion of the total who are lured or abducted the other way. Some of the victims’ ordeals begin when, like Huong, they are drugged or kidnapped. Others are duped into thinking they are going to a party or to meet a potential boyfriend. Sometimes members of their own families are complicit.
Diep Vuong of Pacific Links thinks victims are getting younger (in China, women have to be at least 20 to get married, but marriages to abducted foreigners are often unregistered). The spread of cheap smartphones and improvements in mobile networks are making it easier for traffickers to use social media to befriend schoolgirls in Vietnam’s hills. These criminals earn as little as $50 for each woman they bring into China, where they are often resold far inland by middlemen. Chinese police report that at their final destination Vietnamese women fetch prices of between around 60,000 and 100,000 yuan ($9,000-15,000).
Some snatched women and girls return home swiftly. A 17-year-old who lives at the bungalow with Huong says she was gone for only two days before a woman on the Chinese side of the border helped her to escape. A fellow resident, who returned from China a month ago, walks with a limp. She says she broke her leg leaping from the house in which her traffickers were holding her. Chinese police later found her lying in the street.
Huong’s story is longer. She was kept at her traffickers’ house and threatened for two months. When she finally agreed to be married she was driven for two days to a city in Anhui, a province north-west of Shanghai. She was warned not to let her new family find out that she was Vietnamese. She was to pretend to be a Chinese citizen belonging to an ethnic minority with cross-border cultural links.
The man to whom she was sold into marriage was in his early 20s. He was from a wealthy family, which had paid 90,000 yuan for her. Her husband explained that he had not really wanted to get married, but that his parents were keen. They had told him that an ethnic-minority bride would be more obedient than someone from the ethnic-Han majority. Such claims are commonly made by matchmakers. One Chinese mail-order marriage site says Vietnamese women are cheap, obedient and unlikely to run away: they are “so gentle and loving they will make you melt”.
The greatest demand for foreign wives is in the countryside, particularly among men who are poor or disabled, says Jiang Quanbao of Xi’an Jiaotong University. In rural areas not only is the sex ratio an impediment to finding a bride, so too is the migration of women to the cities in search of work and higher-status males. Impoverished villages sometimes end up with dozens of foreign wives, as word spreads of their availability.
Villagers often have sympathy for the buyers—they may even help to prevent trafficked women from fleeing. Escape is not at all simple for women without money of their own and with limited Chinese-language skills. North Koreans who contact the authorities risk being repatriated and then sent to concentration camps. That makes them particularly vulnerable to traffickers. Amid rising tensions on the Korean peninsula caused by North Korea’s nuclear tests, police in nearby Chinese provinces are becoming more watchful for unauthorised migrants from across the border, including North Korean women who have been sold into marriage.
Once victims become mothers, their decisions about whether and how to leave China become even more difficult. So it was for Huong. She had been taken to Anhui with another Vietnamese girl who was being sold into the same district. The pair agreed that they would find a way home together. But their plan had to be postponed soon after arrival, because Huong’s friend became pregnant. By the time the baby was delivered Huong was expecting a child, too. Less than a month after she gave birth, Huong’s in-laws sent her to live and work at a textile factory nearly four hours away, leaving her baby behind. Her husband would turn up on payday to collect most of her wages—about 6,000 yuan a month. Eventually Huong concluded that the family meant to keep her estranged from her daughter. She resolved to escape back to Vietnam.
Huong scraped together enough money to travel independently. Her own parents, whom she had managed to contact a few months after reaching Anhui, helped her work out where best to present herself to the authorities. The Chinese police kept her for three months while they investigated her story, after which they arrested some of the people involved in trafficking her. Then they sent her back to Vietnam, though her baby remained in China.
In June the American government reported that China was “not making significant efforts” to tackle human trafficking. It relegated China to the ranks of countries, such as Venezuela, Turkmenistan and South Sudan, which it rates as the worst for their record in dealing with the problem. But Chinese police say they are not sitting on their hands. They report that between 2009 and the middle of last year, they “rescued several thousand women of foreign nationality” in anti-trafficking operations that involved co-operation with their counterparts in Vietnam, Myanmar and Laos (pictured are victims being sent back to Vietnam by Chinese police in 2015). More than 1,000 people were arrested for related crimes.
In some provinces government registrars are trying to spot unwilling foreign brides by hiring staff with knowledge of regional languages. The government says that stricter policing last year in the borderlands reduced trafficking from Vietnam.
It is difficult, however, to prosecute people for buying abducted women. In 2015 the law was revised to make legal action easier. But the law says that, in cases where the woman wants to return and the buyer does not try to prevent it, punishment can be lighter or the sentence can be commuted. Cross-border operations remain hostage to China’s relations with its neighbours. Ties with Vietnam, an age-old rival, are often frosty.
Huong is now finishing high school, and hopes to study medicine. She says she “will not regret” having to leave her daughter in China. A baby would have been a burden on her family in Vietnam, and she worried that having no father would thrust the child into a legal limbo. Her in-laws were wealthy, at least, and seemed devoted to her daughter, she says. They were “good people.”
Our Asian societies for thousands of years were built on FAMILY HONOR, duty, shame, with a hierarchy of which people in society are those who receive that HONOR, DUTY, SHAME. Why is there no crime in Japan while US is filled with criminal activity from top of income ladder to bottom?
Japan and other Asian societies are very XENOPHOBIC----meaning they think their culture is best----they want to keep every other culture out----and this lays the foundation for keeping families tied to helping one another to make community. Communal living no matter what form it takes depends on long-term economic building and stability. Our native American tribes, African tribes, Asian tribes, European tribes all developed cultures that did just that----the success of that tribe is only as good as THE LEAST OF ITS MEMBERSHIP. If 90-99% of a tribe is brought to enslavement or instability with no hope of survival---that tribe is GOING, GOING, GONE.
Left social progressives have always stood with the following in promoting equality, opportunity, and justice for all------CULTURAL IDENTITY IS NOT RACISM-----CULTURAL/TRIBAL IDENTITY IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO A FREE SOCIETY-----every immigrant group coming to US gathers together to create economic advantage and to assure survival of other members of that culture.
WHEN GLOBAL 1% HAVE GOALS OF BREAKING DOWN ALL CULTURAL/ETHIC TIES EDUCATING ALL THIS IS RACIST AND IMMORAL----WHILE ADVANCING THE POWER AND WEALTH OF A GLOBAL 1%-----THEY ARE NOT CREATING ANYTHING 99% OF US OR GLOBAL CITIZENS WANT.
INSIDER OR OUTSIDER ----has as many definitions as freemason/Greeks/secret society groups do-------when our groups tighten and become more exclusive leaving out more and more of our own cultural members----it becomes EASY PEASY for global 1% to KILL these groups....DIVIDE AND CONQUER-----
Why is There No Crime in Japan?- Insider vs. Outsider: Culture Lesson
# 12Posted on March 18, 2011 by Emily Cannell- Hey From Japan
Have you noticed that throughout all the turmoil in Japan, where after the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear plant debacles, the media stories bombard us with news of black outs, curtailed train schedules and empty grocery store shelves but fail to mention riots, looting or increases in crime? Have the confined incidences stopped or has it not started? The Japanese I observed stoically waited for late trains and stood politely in lines at virtually empty grocery stores. Where is the tremendous crime wave to accompany the reduced store hours and electricity black outs? Where are the bad guys?
On a normal day crime is virtually non-existent. As an example, through out Japan vending machines sell everything from books to drinks, operate 24 hours a day, are well-lit, always clean, electronic, and consistently in working order. Never does one find oneself beating the machine senseless for the drink now balanced precariously- but not dropping- at the top of the shelf. In fact, so pristine are they that both cold and hot drinks are available from the same machine. Never tampered with or covered in graffiti, they are located on every street corner. Truly, given their illumination and sheer number, each marking regular intervals down the sidewalk, street lights aren’t needed at night.
Another example: children as young as 6 routinely ride the subway unaccompanied. Nary a clutchy parent in site. Every time I see one I get nervous- apparently for no reason for as I snuck this picture, everyone on the train started to watch me suspiciously for fear I might be the bad guy on it.
Just one more- I’ve had my eye on two metal chairs that someone thoughtfully placed at the bus stop for the comfort of the waiting neighbors. I’ve watched these chairs with greed in my heart for 8 months, as they sit, unmolested, unchained, for all passers-by to grab and yet still they remain. Obviously this isn’t my old neighborhood where any unclaimed item within 10 feet of the curb was fair game for anyone with a means to transport it.
My Japanese friends explain the lack of crime, and maybe the reason behind the lack of a massive crime wave post earthquake, has to do with the Japanese concept of the Insider vs. the Outsider and putting the group well-being above that of the individual. In the old days, Japanese lived in villages where all were taken care of regardless of ability. Everyone contributed to the management of the village in some way and in return, the poorer members were fed and housed. The village was the Inside. As long as one was a member of the village, an Insider, all needs would be met. If a person did something criminal, that person was cast out of the village- and would become an Outsider. The Outsider no longer had the advantages associated with having all needs met and became completely self sustaining- probably to their detriment. For that reason, people did not want to become Outsiders as it became both a survival and a social issue.
Committing a crime, which negatively impacts the overall group, causes the criminal to become an Outsider. This desire to remain part of the Inside group, and/or not to appear different, is the crux which keeps the criminal activity to a minimum. Additionally, the laws when caught are harsh and swift. I like to remind the Offspring should they get any ideas about illicit substances, that if caught, they can be put in jail for 30 days. During that time, the police are not required to call the Embassy or the parents. At the end of the 30 days, both they and the family are deported. Activity such as fighting, drunken public behavior are also not tolerated therefore the repercussions of having a negative engagement with a policeman carry catastrophic consequences.
The stores and businesses are running on 5-8 hour days in order to save power which leaves one of the largest cities in the world in complete darkness. Hopefully, this strong cultural influence which focuses the people on taking care of those in need and douses the desires of would be offenders, will continue as Japan struggles with this horrible crisis.
'Committing a crime, which negatively impacts the overall group, causes the criminal to become an Outsider'
Being an insider vs outsider does not have to be race/creed/culture specific-----the DEFINITIONS of what a population group deems INSIDER/OUTSIDER define community and family. In US we struggled with these issues as what is WHITE vs BLACK, or BROWN. The solution was EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND ACCESS to economic stability. Global banking 1% in US being OLD WORLD EUROPE-----did not allow that to happen.
In fact, global banking 1% during ROBBER BARON few decades worked hard to make 99% of WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens forced to move away from creating family and community based ON HONOR, ETHICS, MORALS----breaking down all that was US RULE OF LAW, legal standings as citizens----
LAISSEZ FAIRE IS GLOBAL EMPIRE-BUILDING AND DOES NOT WANT STABLE SOCIETIES, FAMILIES, MORALS AND ETHICS.......LAISSEZ FAIRE IS REAGAN/CLINTON NEO-LIBERALISM WITH BUSH NEO-CONSERVATIVISM AS THE MILITARY COMPONENT.
Nation-states were created to allow TRIBAL/CULTURAL GROUPS to grow their own economies----our American US Constitution and founding fathers installed immediately the STANCE OF NOT BEING EMPIRE-BUILDING----NOT BEING EXTREME WEALTH EXTREME POWER ----just so America could be that melting pot for cultures/tribes able to achieve economic opportunity and stability.
AMERICA WORKED AS THAT MELTING POT AS LONG AS IT HAD REAL POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY AND ACCESS. FLASH FORWARD 300 YEARS TOWARDS MORE POPULATION GROUPS HAVING OPPORTUNITY----
It is NOT a failure of AMERICAN DEMOCRATIC FREEDOMS,LIBERTY, JUSTICE AND PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS FOR ALL....it is the fact 99% of US citizens black, white, and brown citizens allowed those global 1% bring back domination of US economy by a global 1% tied to EUGENICS in a narrow definition of what is SUPREME. Don't be fooled by a global 1% of European, working with a global 1% of Asian, working with a global 1% of Arabic as multi-cultural---they simply have shared goals of keeping 99% of their citizens enslaved and DEPLETED.........MOVING FORWARD
Below we see an article by a global 1% media outlet SLATE----telling us our US melting pot is broken---and indeed it is-----GLOBAL BANKING 1% INTERJECT INSTABILITY -----our US Constitution and Federal court precedence strengthened opportunity and access.
The Melting Pot Is Broken
How slowing down immigration could help us build a more cohesive and humane society.
By Reihan Salam
Who's winning, who's losing, and why.
Oct. 31 2014 5:41 PM SLATE
I’m obsessed with the idea of America as a melting pot. We owe the term to Israel Zangwill, who wrote a mostly forgotten play of the same name in 1908. (I remember it like it was yesterday …) The play was forgettable, but the snazzy metaphor was not. “Yes, East and West, and North and South, the palm and the pine, the pole and the equator, the crescent and the cross—how the great Alchemist melts and fuses them with his purging flame!” How indeed!
Much to my chagrin, the melting pot metaphor has been out of style for decades. Way back in 1963, Nathan Glazer and Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously lamented that in New York City, at least, we were already “beyond the melting pot,” as various ethnic groups maintained their distinctiveness generation after generation. In 1972, Michael Novak wrote Rise of the Unmeltable Ethnics, a quirky defense of ethnic particularity and lower-middle-class cultural conservatism against the (alleged) homogenizing influence of academic liberalism. Then, of course, there was the rise of multiculturalism, which held that diversity ought to be celebrated, and that there was something both tragic and unjust about the expectation that members of ethnic minority groups ought to surrender what separates them from the cultural mainstream. America is no longer a melting pot, we’re told. It’s more like a salad bowl, full of ingredients that retain their unique flavors.
As delicious as this multiethnic salad sounds—more croutons, please—I continue to be the melting pot’s biggest fan. As a consequence, I’ve gone from being a rah-rah enthusiast for mass immigration to one who is more skeptical of its virtues. That’s because I think the melting and fusing of different ethnic groups is essential to building a more cohesive and humane society, and that slowing down immigration would help this process along.
The biggest challenge we face in the United States, in my view, is a lack of togetherness. I realize that this sounds like a line from a cheesy love ballad, but bear with me. There is a vast gulf separating those who belong to networks of family members, friends, and acquaintances that grant access to valuable social goods and those who don’t belong to these networks. What kind of social goods do I have in mind? Money is the obvious one, but so is know-how. Most people learn to make their way in the world from parents or peers. Think about every job opportunity you’ve ever had, or how you learned to navigate any big, impersonal bureaucracy. The insider knowledge that was imparted to you was not available to just anyone—you, and those close to you, had privileged access to it, and whether you like it or not, this privileged access has played a central role in your successes.
This isn’t simply a racial inequality. There are plenty of ultra-connected people from minority backgrounds and there are plenty of whites who are outsiders in every socially relevant respect. But race is often used as a rough proxy for this kind of inequality because it is generally true that an American who can trace her roots back to the Mayflower will have a bigger, richer, and let’s say more privileged network than a descendant of slaves, or a recent immigrant with little in the way of formal education.
Race also allows us to identify this phenomenon in the data. Last summer, for example, Elizabeth Ananat, Shihe Fu, and Stephen L. Ross released an important working paper, which found that the gap in average wages between whites and blacks gets bigger as the size of the city in which they live gets bigger. Their (fascinating) explanation for this finding is that while workers benefit from the knowledge spillovers that come from living and working in a place where there is a higher concentration of people doing a certain kind of job, these spillovers tend to be bounded by race. That is, blacks have fewer same-race peers than whites from whom they can learn new skills and suss out new opportunities, and so whites gain more insider knowledge with each passing year, which in turn allows them to earn more money. There are, of course, some blacks (and Asians and Latinos) who are plugged into “white” networks, which aren’t always lily-white, especially in places like Silicon Valley and Wall Street. As a general rule, however, race makes a big difference.
Instead of calling this racial inequality, you could call it roots inequality. Who among us has the firmest, deepest roots in American life, which can allow us to stumble and make mistakes while still being able to depend on loved ones who can lend a hand? This isn’t so much about how long one’s ancestors have been in the country. Rather, it is about the solidity of your connections to other people who themselves stand on solid ground, and who can afford to offer help of all kinds, monetary and otherwise, when you need it.
Earlier this week, Richard V. Reeves and Joanna Venator of the Brookings Institution observed that educated people tend to have educated parents. This news will probably not shock you. What is interesting is that the transmission of education advantage from one generation to the next seems to be even stronger than the transmission of economic advantage, at least for the children of the most educated parents.
Reeves and Venator suggest that a big part of the story is the rise of positive assortative mating, the phenomenon in which people with similar levels of education marry each other. This contributes to household income inequality, predictably enough. Yet it has another, subtler effect. When a college-educated adult has a child with a non-college-educated adult, she can pass along her tacit knowledge about what it takes to make it through the educational system even if her partner isn’t in the same boat. When two non-college-educated adults have a child, that young person is going to have a much tougher time working the system. It’s no coincidence that the high-achieving, low-income students who never make it to selective schools are disproportionately drawn from the children of non-college-educated parents, and from rural areas and small cities. These kids might have high grades and test scores, but they don’t belong to the networks that grease the wheels of upward mobility.
What does any of this have to do with immigration? Americans are, for obvious historical reasons, deeply romantic about the immigrant experience. More than one-tenth of Americans, like me, are the children of immigrants, and there are many more third- and fourth- and fifth-generation Americans raised with heady stories about flinty ancestors. The truth is that some immigrants are poised for great success in a society like ours, and others will have a tough time making their way into the middle class. If we accept that we have a collective responsibility for the well-being of every member of our society, as I think we should, it makes sense to select immigrants who have at least a fighting chance of making it.
When thinking about which immigrants do have that fighting chance, it’s important to recognize that the economic realities of the first decades of the last century are profoundly different from those of the first decades of this one. That earlier era was one of labor scarcity, when people with limited skills could climb the economic ladder by doing dangerous, strenuous work. In today’s economy, people with limited skills are finding that market wages are stagnant or even falling.
The educational gap between immigrants and natives in the 1900s was modest when compared to the yawning gap that separates them today. Earlier this year, the OECD, the consortium of the world’s rich democracies, released its latest assessment of adult skills. The survey divvies up people from age of 16 to 65 into several levels of proficiency in literacy, numeracy, and, my personal favorite, “problem-solving in technology-rich environments.” A disturbingly high 18 percent of Americans fell in Level 1 or below (the lowest proficiency levels) in literacy, 30 percent in numeracy, and 61 percent in problem solving. The numbers were far worse for U.S. immigrants, 40 percent of whom fell in Level 1 or below on literacy, 48 percent on numeracy, and 76 percent in problem solving. Given the transmission of educational advantage from one generation to the next, it is a safe bet that second-generation Americans like me are overrepresented among the lowest native-born performers.
The fact that our immigration policy has in recent decades tended to lower the average skill level of our workforce isn’t news, or at least it shouldn’t be. What we often fail to appreciate is how the fact that so many immigrants have such limited skills interacts with the rise of positive assortative mating and opportunity hoarding. College-educated people tend to marry other college-educated people, and we are all more likely to share opportunities with people in our networks than with random strangers. Those realities mean that newcomers to our society with below-average skill levels, as well as their children and even their grandchildren, are going to have a hard time getting past the bottom rungs of American society. If you believe Gregory Clark, an iconoclastic economist at UC–Davis, it might take even more than three generations for the descendants of less-skilled immigrants to reach an average level of social status.
Legalizing large numbers of unauthorized immigrants will definitely help them attain that social status. Yet it won’t change the fact that even under the best circumstances, the wages commanded by people with less than a high school diploma tend to be very low, and the social connections they can draw upon are usually limited to other people facing similar challenges. Moreover, while the best evidence we have finds that less-skilled immigration doesn't have a negative effect on the wages of less-skilled natives, it does have a substantial negative effect on the wages of less-skilled immigrants already living in the U.S. These are precisely the people who have the weakest social connections to other Americans, and who need all the help they can get to put down roots in this country.
Which brings me back to the melting pot. There is an alternative to allowing today’s less-skilled immigrants and their descendants to form the bedrock of an ever-expanding underclass. There is a way to help poor members of our foreign-born population form the social connections they will need to move from the margins of American society to the mainstream. What we need to do is limit the future influx of less-skilled immigrants.
OH, REALLY????? THIS IS BROOKINGS INSTITUTE TELLING US THE GLOBAL 1% AND THEIR 2% ARE BEST SUITED BUT THAT IS NOT THE GOAL OF MOVING FORWARD.
Zangwill wrote The Melting Pot in the 1900s, but the true heyday of cultural amalgamation, among whites at least, started in the 1920s, when the United States shut off the spigot of European immigration for three generations. Mary C. Waters, the Harvard sociologist best known for her work on Caribbean immigrant identity, has written that “in the absence of appreciable numbers of new arrivals successive generations of acculturated Americans, not unassimilated greenhorns, became the majority among the new ethnics.” This in turn meant that for second-, third-, and fourth-generation Italian and Polish Americans, “ethnicity became less intense and increasingly intermittent, voluntary, even recreational.” Ethnic enclaves slowly faded away and the descendants of European immigrants intermarried their way into the mainstream.
Now, in contrast, ethnic enclaves in our biggest cities are flourishing, and expanding their footprints—the booming Chinatowns of Brooklyn and Queens stand in stark contrast to Manhattan’s fading Little Italy. Those Chinese Americans who, in effect, “exit” their ethnic groups by assimilating and intermarrying and leaving Chinatown behind are, Waters explains, replaced by new arrivals who are content to lead a Chinese life on American soil. Distinct ethnic cultures are continually being replenished through immigration. For Waters, this means that the story of assimilation—the third-generation Chinese American who gets an MFA at Yale, marries an Anglo investment banker, and who hardly ever sets foot in Chinatown—is obscured by this parallel story of ethnic replenishment. It is also true, however, that ethnic replenishment will tend to limit assimilation and intermarriage, as most people prefer to marry and socialize with members of their own group.
So if we want the Mexican and Bangladeshi immigrants of our time to fare as well as the Italian and Polish immigrants of yesteryear, we need to do two things. First, we need to spend a considerable amount of money to upgrade their skills and those of their children, as the world has grown less kind to those who make a living by the sweat of their brow. Because public money is scarce, this is a good reason to limit the influx of people who will need this kind of expensive, extensive support to become full participants in American society. Second, we need to recognize that a continual stream of immigration tends to keep minority ethnic groups culturally isolated, which is yet another reason to slow things down. No, this won't suddenly mean that poor immigrants will become rich, and that well-heeled insiders will stop hoarding opportunities. But it will give us the time we need to knit America's newcomers into our national community.
Just staying for now with our Japanese societal structures which look much like other Asian nations before being taken by MOVING FORWARD GLOBAL NEO-LIBERALISM and Foreign Economic Zone industrialization after WW 2.
The US grew on the moral and ethical stance of EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND ACCESS to growing economic wealth and family/community stability.......we only weaken as a nation when each population group is pushed to desperation and families break----which always happens when GLOBAL BANKING 1% ARE ALLOWED TO TAKE HOLD. If the goals of MOVING FORWARD SMART CITIES is eliminating jobs and categories of employment----the goals are eliminating our ideas of family, duty, honor-----then we are not moving in the right direction for our US citizens OR our new IMMIGRANT citizens and global labor pool wanting to come to an America----filled with freedom, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.
Global banking 1% are Asian, European, and Jewish----our Jewish identifying as WORLD CITIZENS----some as ZIONIST in Israel. Our Asian and European global 1% would like global 99% to think the OTHERS ARE OUTSIDERS making WE THE PEOPLE feel we need to be INSIDERS in economic wealth----in comes those GREEKS AND FREEMASON GROUPS controlled by the above global 1% banking.
Should I join a European global 1% because I am white----even though they are MOVING FORWARD breaking down our US sovereign nations having a goal of ending all my rights, freedoms, wealth-----just to stay clear of the global 1% Asian corporate owners filling our US cities deemed Foreign Economic Zones---our to stay away from those global 1% banking Jewish citizens killing our US sovereignty as well?
THESE ARE NOT GOOD CHOICES---IF 99% OF WE THE PEOPLE BLACK, WHITE, AND BROWN ALLOW THESE KINDS OF FEAR CONTROL OUR ALLIANCE---WE LOSE AND RETURN TO DARK AGES ---AND FROM THERE COMES GLOBAL 1% UTOPIA---MINUS 99% OF PEOPLE.
As we started this conversation----the ideals of HONOR---DUTY-----FAMILY-----COMMUNITY differ in each culture and US 99% of WE THE PEOPLE must understand our new immigrant stances on these very important policy stances AND educate our history as Americans building a strong MELTING POT that worked as long as global banking stayed at bay.......5% TO THE 1% GREEKS AND FREEMASONS----not working for family, community, morals or ethics----and certainly not HONOR AND DUTY beyond that of working for a global 1%.
Honour and Loyalty in Japan
Home >> christian living >> Honour and Loyalty in Japan
Honour and Loyalty in Japan
On November 30, 2016, Posted by javon ,
In christian living,international missions,Japan,japanese culture,japanese culture series,Japanese Life,ministry,missions in japan,prayers, By asian culture,heritage of loyalty in japan,honor and loyalty,honour and loyalty,honour in japan and why it's special,japan culture series,japanese culture series,ministry,missions,need to know for missionaries in japan,samurai honour,the loyalty of the samurai,unique culture of honour in japan,what i wish i would have known when I was a missionary in japan ,
Honour and Loyalty
Japanese Culture Series
Perhaps more than any other term, Bushido is most commonly recognized by Americans when it comes to Japanese culture. Bushido or ‘way of the warrior’ has been dramatized by anime, manga, samurai movies, and war history. But what exactly is Bushido characterized as in modern Japan? First, some background:
From Japanese history, during the Edo period, a combination of Zen Buddhism and Confucianism created a moral and ethical system to govern the samurai class. Much like the feudal chivalry system known to the Western world, Bushido was a code that really dictated all aspects of life to its adherents. Among the concepts involved were those dictating interactions between people, property management, and governmental relations. For instance, great loyalty to one’s local ruler or overall government was essential in this teaching. Also, a system of honor to manage everyday interactions was essential to the degree that it became more important than life itself. So then, when something deemed dishonorable occurred, rather than to dishonor oneself or family it was seen as noble to take one’s own life through ritual suicide than to live through the great shame of being dishonored. How have these concepts passed into modern times?
In modern Japan, Bushido has greatly contributed to the overall unique Japanese national character. This has both positive and negative connotations. Unquestioning loyalty to one’s leaders, honorable interactions with others, and avoiding shame at all costs have become essential elements of Japanese culture where it is said that a system needs to be maintained to ensure cooperation on a small island with a dense population. This has led to a mindset that values maintaining the system above the individual need which is seen as a lesser priority. Even in modern times, suicide can still be glorified as an acceptable way to escape pain! Perhaps this is part of the reason why suicide rates in Japan are still highest in the modern world.
How can Bushido impact missionary work? Not only the issues from obviously romanticized views of suicide in culture but also extreme unquestioning loyalty can be a hindrance to spiritual growth as it tends to close down clear communication in favor of maintaining harmony. Also, Bushido elements may sound good from a non-spiritual aspect, however, they promote self-reliance upon the flesh to produce outward character change rather than inward reliance upon the spirit to produce outward change by yielding to God. Is a person trained by society to act a certain way genuine or acting to avoid feeling shame from others? As in our own culture self-reliance must be countered with Christ-centered spirit reliance! Please pray for spiritual breakthroughs to occur as the Gospel reaches Japan!
MADAME BUTTERFLY the modern opera looks at just these societal structures operating under a Japanese during WW 2 occupation ------a Japanese woman drawn into a marriage to US military man by a MARRIAGE BROKER breaking Japanese moral, ethical, honor, family, duty structures and in doing so has made herself AN OUTSIDER who, when that US military man goes home and leaves her----has only choice being SUICIDE. We saw that last week as China's ONE CHILD leaving 99% of Chinese citizens with no family or ability to marry and have children being made OUTSIDERS------
We want to take this coming week to discuss how ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE FOR ONLY THE GLOBAL 1% has broken down these vital societal structures overseas as FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES were installed to understand what MOVING FORWARD US CITIES DEEMED FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES will do to our US societal structures. It is vital for 99% of US WE THE PEOPLE to stop MOVING FORWARD corruption of what ethics, morals, family, community, and duty are------and it is vital that our 99% of Asian immigrant citizens coming to America for American freedoms know how AMERICA AS A SUCCESSFUL MELTING POT came about. REAL left social progressives love our 99% of global immigrants-----we do not want those global 1% of foreign rich bringing OLD WORLD DARK AGES FEUDALISM to replace our thriving first world, developed nation, land of freedom and opportunity for ALL 99% of black, white, and brown citizens.
Madame Butterfly - Maria Callas
Emil A. Zafirov
Published on Feb 19, 2010
Puccini's Opera ''madame butterfly'' by Maria Callas
MADAME BUTTERFLY is a perfect example of the return of OLD WORLD EMPIRE-BUILDING ------where a global banking 1% come into any and all nations to subject them to the worst of societal capture.
Oh good say CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA ---there is JAPAN dressing like US business people being global market neo-liberals-----killing morals, ethics, Rule of Law, God's Natural Law to advance the wealth of OLD WORLD GLOBAL 1% RICH.
We look at international media to see articles suggesting that JAPAN is only now moving to neo-liberalism when in fact it was the earliest of Asian nations taken to global neo-liberalism after WW 2. ABE is a great big global 1% banking puppet-----we are to believe he is a US ALLY-----ABE works for global 1% banking Europe vs Asian -------China being that Asian gorilla.
It seems very clear that JAPAN as a sovereign nation has disappeared-----there are indeed global banking players being installed as politicians-----there is nothing happening in Japan for 99% of Japanese citizens----so don't bring to US cities deemed Foreign Economic Zones those global neo-liberal societal structures------WE DON'T WANT THEM EITHER!
September 30, 2013
by Mike Whitney Counterpunch
Abenomics is largely a bunko-scam wrapped in public relations gibberish. It has no chance of producing a strong, sustainable economic recovery. The real aim of the policy is to temporarily juice GDP with a sizable blast of fiscal stimulus ($100 billion) so the Bank of Japan can stealthily transfer more money to its chiseling investor friends via its bond buying program called QE. In other words, the program works the same way it does in the US, the only difference is the scale of the operation and a number of anti-worker provisions touted as “critical reforms”. Sound familiar?
Naturally, Abenomics–which is named after right-wing loony, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe–has attracted worldwide attention for its bold “shock and awe” approach to monetary policy. Liberal economists in the US –notably Stiglitz and Krugman—are absolutely gaga over the program and just about wet themselves every time they talk about it. They seem to think that the BoJ’s bond buying blitz will fare better in the Land of the Rising Sun then it has in America where the sputtering economy is still on life support five years after the market crashed.
KRUGMAN AND STIGLITZ ARE FAR-RIGHT WING NEO-LIBERAL ECONOMISTS SAME AS ABE------THAT IS WHY THEY ARE GA GA OVER ABENOMICS
Why are they so optimistic?
Probably because BoJ governor Haruhiko Kuroda has taken a “damn the torpedoes” approach and pledged to double the money supply in two years in an effort to pull the economy out of 15 years of deflation. Kuroda figures that raising prices will boost spending and corporate investment laying the groundwork for more activity and hiring, greater demand and stronger growth. The only bugaboo is how to get all that newly-minted money into the economy. As Fed chairman Ben Bernanke has discovered, the liquidity that flows into bond purchases stays locked in the financial system making stocks bubbly, but leaving the real economy largely unaffected. That’s why unemployment in the US is still above 7 percent and GDP is in the 2 percent-range even while the Fed’s balance sheet has ballooned by $3 trillion. It’s because trickle down doesn’t work for shit.
That doesn’t mean that Abenomics hasn’t had an impact. It has. It’s slashed the value of the yen and sent equities into the stratosphere. It’s also increased exports by many orders of magnitude. Too bad import prices have been rising at the same time or it might have made a difference. Check out this recent update from the Testosterone Pit:
“Exports did jump 14.7% in August year over year, the Ministry of Finance reported. But the rest was ugly. Exports were valued in yen, and the yen had lost 20% of its value over the year. So in most categories, export volume actually declined. But Imports jumped 16%, from a higher base, and the trade deficit soared 25% …Analysts were shocked. It was the worst August trade deficit ever. …. 27% higher than the trade deficit of August 2012….
Japan’s trade fiasco is on a steep downward slope. August was the worst August ever, July the worst July ever, June the worst June ever…. There’s no discernible turning point on the horizon.” (“Trade Is Supposed To Save Japan, According To The Gospel Of Abenomics, But In Reality… “, Testosterone Pit)
Hurrah, we shot ourselves in the foot! Our economic plan must be working!
So what was gained by cutting the yen? A big, fat nothing, that’s what. The situation for the average working stiff is worse than ever. Why? Because everything’s gone up except his lousy wages. How does a cheap yen help if gas just jumped from $4 to $6 bucks a gallon but you haven’t gotten a raise in 5 years? Explain that to me? The only way inflation can have a positive effect is if wages rise at the same time as other prices and generate more spending, otherwise it’s a bust. Here’s how Satyajit Das explains it over at Minyanville:
“Japan needs demand-driven inflation, reflecting the effect of increasing wages, higher consumption, and increased purchasing power….Higher costs may, in fact, reduce consumption unless incomes rise commensurately. But wages reached their lowest level since 1992 in January 2013…
The conventional analysis that suggests the current initiatives will increase consumption may prove incorrect. Rising costs may reduce purchasing power, unless matched by rising wages and real incomes.” (“Satyajit Das: In Japan, Neither the 2020 Olympics Nor Abenomics Will Be Magic Bullet”, Minyanville)
That’s simple enough, but the problem is that wages aren’t going anywhere in Japan. Abe has appealed to big business to raise salaries, but it’s a joke. The corporations have workers right where they want them, under their bootheel. That’s not going to change without serious tax reform and progressive legislation aimed at redistributing more of the nation’s wealth. Don’t hold your breath on that one. Here’s more from Das:
“Stagnant incomes are not offset by the wealth effect of higher stock prices. The bulk of Japanese savings are held as low-yielding bank deposits. Over 80% of Japanese households have never invested in any security; 88% have never invested in a mutual fund. …. Rising stock prices affect a very small portion of the population, boosting consumption of luxury items rather than driving broad-based increases in consumption.”
See? Abenomics is just like QE. All the money goes to rich a**holes who play the stock market. All working people get bupkis. There’s nothing here for here for workers or the economy. It’s all just smoke. Here’s a little more background on Japan’s gloomy wage situation from Bloomberg:
“Japan salaries extended the longest slide since 2010 in July, raising the stakes for Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s decision on whether to increase a sales tax. Regular wages excluding overtime and bonuses dropped 0.4 percent from a year earlier, marking a 14th straight month of decline, according to data released today by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. …
Boosting workers’ incomes is key to the success of Abe’s efforts to resuscitate the economy after doses of fiscal and monetary stimulus helped weaken the yen and start a recovery, boosting corporate profits. …
“Companies aren’t confident enough on the sustainability of the economic recovery,” said Yoshimasa Maruyama, chief economist at Itochu Corp. (8001) in Tokyo.” (Japan Salaries Extend Longest Fall Since ’10 in Threat to Abe”, Bloomberg)
“Confident”? When did confidence ever have anything to do with raising wages? The way you get a raise in the real world is by having your union rep put a gun to managements’ head. That’s the only way your going to squeeze a fair wage out of these yahoos. But since we’ve done away with unions, labor’s share of revenues is going to continue to plunge. And it has.
Okay, so wages are in the toilet, we know that, but what about growth? At least GDP is improving, right?
Sure, it is, in fact, second quarter GDP was just revised upwards to an impressive 3.8 percent. But that’s mainly because the wily Abe frontloaded his program with $100 billion in old fashioned fiscal stimulus. Unfortunately, the fiscal component is a one-shot deal scheduled to run out next year, so the wheels of activity should slow considerably in the months ahead.
None of the knucklehead analysts talk about the Keynesian part of Abenomics because it detracts attention from Kuroda’s QE-fireworks. We can’t have that! The media wants everyone to believe that it’s actually possible to grow the economy by pumping up bank reserves and stuffing the pockets of shady speculators with more boodle. Isn’t that what QE amounts to; a big freaking giveaway to silk stocking plutocrats and their fatcat buddies?
Abe doesn’t give a hoot about the real economy which is why he’s just about to initiate a sales-tax increase that will reduce consumption even more. According to CNBC, the presumed “consumption tax is due to rise from 5 percent to 8 percent next April and Abe is widely tipped to approve the hike on October 1, when his decision on the matter is due.” The absurdly regressive tax is another hammerblow to working people who are being asked shoulder the entire burden of Japan’s soaring national debt which ballooned to gargantuan proportions because of fiscal mismanagement, “old boy” cronyism, and lavish bailouts for zombie financial institutions. Here’s more from CNBC:
“A rise in the sales tax is a done deal,” said Bank of Singapore Chief Economist Richard Jerram. “[Policymakers] have more or less said they will go ahead with the rise and a stimulus package to buffer the impact.”
According to recent media reports, the government could unveil an economic stimulus package worth about 5 trillion yen ($50 billion) next week with possible corporate tax cuts to offset any negative impact on the economy from a sales-tax hike.” (“Japan’s Abe to rule on sales tax rise: Will he, won’t he?” CNBC)
Can you believe the nerve of these guys? They freeze wages, force working people to pay for their gambling debts (via the consumption tax), and then–just for hell of it–cut themselves another fat check in the form of corporate perks and more money printing. It’s infuriating.
One last thing: Abenomics was supposed to boost Japan’s economic vitality by increasing capital investment. At least on that score, the strategy has succeeded. Here’s the scoop from Reuters:
“Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe got an early sign of how his blueprint to revive Japan’s industrial vim and economic vigor was working when two of his country’s biggest car makers unveiled $900 million worth of investments to boost production.
There was one drawback: the new assembly plants and expanded factories announced by Mazda Motor Corp (7261.T) and Honda Motor Co Ltd (7267.T) are not in Japan, but more than 2,000 miles away, in Thailand.”
HA! Thailand! How do you like that? Great program you got there, Shinzo.
The sad fact is that no one is investing in Japan anymore. According to Reuters: “capital expenditures in Japan fell 4 percent in the first six months of this year” “manufacturing investment is still contracting” and “companies are investing abroad.” Also “Japanese companies socked away roughly $144 billion in cash” in the last year “bringing their total cash pile to $2.24 trillion.” (“Abenomics speeds corporate investment, but not in Japan”, Reuters)
Can you see how sick and ridiculous this is? Abe has basically launched a program that creates incentives for the outsourcers, the offshorers, the big money banks and the other corporate cutthroat vermin to continue their inexorable search for cheap labor, cheap resources, and higher profits ABROAD!
Abenomics has nothing to do with rebuilding Japan’s economy, that’s just public relations fluff. The real objective is to suck as much lucre as possible out of the public purse before moving on to the next victim. And that, my friend, is just the way this stinking system works.
MADAME BUTTERFLY was symbolic of the shame and loss of honor brought to JAPAN during WW 2 loss of war and occupation. Now, left social progressives have no love of Japanese hierarchy emperor rule ----but thousands of years of culture, art, religion creates a version of HONOR, ETHICS, MORALS, FAMILY, COMMUNITY, AND DUTY----which are very much like our US societal structures.
If 99% of US WE THE PEOPLE do not know our understand SHINTOISM or BUDDHISM-----we cannot understand our new Japanese citizens. It allows us to understand their vision of MORALS, ETHICS, HONOR, FAMILY, DUTY.
'Shinto is deeply rooted in the Japanese people and their traditions, so practices like conversion don't exactly go along with what Shinto is'.
What we will see is much like our Christian or Jewish ideals of good and evil-----knowing that each human is capable of both-----and has a goal of striving for good over evil. Keep in mind---these religions are thousands of years old-----humanity evolved knowing the need for MORALS, ETHICS, GOD'S NATURAL LAW-----no matter how one sees that GOD/god.
Do I as a US citizen living in a largely Christian/Judah nation tied to ONE GOD worry about our new citizens having religions tied to different views of higher being?
NO, THAT IS WHY THE US IS FREEDOM OF RELIGION----THAT IS WHY OUR US GOVERNMENT WAS BUILT ON SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.
The only people in US and around the global worried about how others practice their religions trying to keep people tied to a FUNDAMENTALISM strict interpretation of religion are those FREEMASON/GREEK PLAYERS trying to use religion to gain power and wealth for THEMSELVES.......if our US Congress did not have that FAKE RIGHT WING MORAL MAJORITY that were all OLD WORLD MERCHANT OF VENICE GLOBAL 1% FREEMASONs not tied to religion---we would not have had division between our 99% of WE THE PEOPLE.
Shinto: Japan's Native Religion The foundation of Japanese culture itself
March 25, 2013 • 914 words written by John • Art by Aya Francisco
Shinto is the indigenous faith of the Japanese people and it is as old as Japan itself. Today it remains Japan's major religion alongside Buddhism and Christianity. Most people who have any interest in Japanese culture are aware of this, but how many people actually know the intricacies that make up Shinto and its beliefs? In this post I hope to convey a bit more on what Shinto is all about and where the beliefs came from and what makes it what it is today. But don't worry, this won't be too terribly boring – we'll try and make things fun.
What is Shinto?The customs and values of Shinto are inseparable from those of Japanese culture. Many Japanese activities have their roots in Shinto. Elements of Shinto can be found in ikebana, traditional architecture, and even sumo wrestling. Also, a lot of Japanese pop culture, especially anime and manga, draws from Shinto for inspiration.
Shinto doesn't really have a founder or sacred scriptures or anything like that though. Religious propaganda and preaching are not common here either. This is one of the things that sets Shinto apart from most of the popular religions today. Shinto is deeply rooted in the Japanese people and their traditions, so practices like conversion don't exactly go along with what Shinto is.
Since Shinto is very Japanese by nature and does not try to press others to join them, the percentage of Shinto followers living in this world is very small, with pretty much all of them residing in Japan. I think that's nice though. Shinto is inherently Japanese, and its just another one of those things that you can really only get the full experience and understand while in Japan.
Instead of sacred texts, Shinto bases most of its beliefs on four ancient books. These books are the Kojiki (Record of Ancient Matters) which is the foundation to written Shinto history, the Shoku Nihongi and its Nihon Shoki (Continuing Chronicles of Japan), the Rikkokushi (Six National Histories), and the Jinnō Shōtōki (a study of Shinto and Japanese politics and history).
Shinto is all about the kami. Kami (sacred spirits) are the "gods" in Shinto. They take the form of many things such as animals, plants, lakes, and rivers. As such, Shinto is a form of animism. Humans become kami after they die and are honored as ancestral kami with some families actually having little shrines in their homes. The Goddess Amaterasu is widely considered to be Shinto's most famous kami and she was even the star of her very own video game, Ōkami (see above).
There are no real absolutes in Shinto – everything is kind of grey. They don't believe in absolute right or wrong and they acknowledge that nobody is perfect. They view humans as fundamentally good, with the evils in the world being caused by troublesome and devilish kami. As such, the purpose of most Shinto rituals is to keep away evil spirits. This is achieved by purification, prayers, and offerings. It sounds like a pretty laid back religion to me. I like that.
Since Shinto is very Japanese by nature and does not try to press others to join them, the percentage of Shinto followers living in this world is very small, with pretty much all of them residing in Japan. I think that's nice though. Shinto is inherently Japanese, and its just another one of those things that you can really only get the full experience and understand while in Japan.
Instead of sacred texts, Shinto bases most of its beliefs on four ancient books. These books are the Kojiki (Record of Ancient Matters) which is the foundation to written Shinto history, the Shoku Nihongi and its Nihon Shoki (Continuing Chronicles of Japan), the Rikkokushi (Six National Histories), and the Jinnō Shōtōki (a study of Shinto and Japanese politics and history).
Purification rituals are an essential part of Shinto. New buildings constructed in Japan are frequently blessed by a Shinto priest during the groundbreaking ceremony, and many Japanese cars are blessed at some point in their assembly. I wonder if they get a little sticker or certificate saying they were blessed. Hmm… Anyway, many Japanese businesses built outside Japan often get Shinto rites performed on them as well.
Both men and women can become Shinto priests, and they're even allowed to marry and have children. Some even live on site with the shrine they're in charge of. Priests are aided by young women known as miko during Shinto rituals and performances. Miko wear white kimono, must be unmarried, and are often daughters of the Shinto priests.
Followers of Shinto can seek support from kami in many different ways. They can pray at the shrines in their homes or visit a local public shrine. There are also millions upon millions of little charms and talismans available to give people good health, good grades, good business, and more.
A large number of Japanese wedding ceremonies today Shinto ceremonies. I think Christian weddings are up there too though. Death on the other hand is considered a source of impurity, so Japan lets the Buddhists deal with all that. If you want to learn more about it, you can check out my post on What Happens After You Die in Japan. Because of this there really aren't any Shinto cemeteries, just shrines.
While I don't really ascribe to the beliefs of Shinto myself, I still think it's pretty cool and a unique aspect of Japanese culture. While we were over there, we got to see a lot of Shinto shrines and they were really cool. They felt very calm and usually had a lot of nature going on around them. Shinto's okay in my book.
An UNOFFICIAL poll of Greater Baltimore new citizens from Asia as to whether they want the US to operate as Foreign Economic Zones overseas has 100% OF ASIAN 99% IMMIGRANTS AGAINST THIS----they came to America for American values of freedom, liberty, justice, pursuit of happiness, and EQUALITY FOR ALL 99% OF CITIZENS black, white, and brown citizens.
So, have our 99% of Asian citizens been able to thrive in our US melting pot? We see Asian citizens creating those same cultural/tribal communities as Europeans created and they have indeed built local economies keeping families strong, employed, integrated to US standards of governance these 300 years. What has changed for our Asian 99% of US citizens is the same as all other US population groups. MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD FOR ONLY THE GLOBAL 1% Clinton/Bush/Obama has brought those global 1% and their 2% of Asian rich into America wanting to kill our 99% of Asian citizens and their wealth and stability.
OLD WORLD MERCHANTS OF VENICE GLOBAL 1% COME TO US CITIES DEEMED FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES AND ENSLAVE OUR SUCCESSFUL US ASIAN 99%.
It is vital that US 99% understand this corruption in MOVING FORWARD. Most US citizens simply want to have opportunity and access to support their own families and communities not caring if other population groups do the same. The race and class issues seen in media today are created by global 1% PLAYERS------
DO WE WANT IMMIGRANTS TO ASSIMILATE?
What does that mean? This is key to our basic US freedoms, liberty, and justice. The idea of speaking English only occurred in early US because US was a EUROPEAN COLONY-----we fought a revolution to be free of EUROPEAN AND UK RULE and created a societal structure allowing all citizens to determine what those structures would be as long as US Rule of Law and structures of governance were followed-----THAT IS WHAT ASSIMILATION MEANS IN AMERICA.
Who is running around shouting Americans must speak English? Those 5% to the 1% global banking pols and players wanting to create tensions between 99% of US WE THE PEOPLE.
The US has never had a period that our new immigrants lived a few generations NOT SPEAKING ENGLISH.
Do We Really Want Immigrants to Assimilate?
Peter Skerry Wednesday, March 1, 2000
A few years ago Nathan Glazer posed the question: “Is Assimilation Dead?” His answer was yes, more or less—certainly as a national ideal or policy objective, though he stressed that assimilation remains an ongoing social process. While I certainly agree with Glazer that assimilation persists as a social reality, I strongly disagree that it is dead as a national ideal or policy objective. To be sure, assimilation is moribund among many of our elites, especially ethnic, racial, and minority group leaders. But as an animating force in our communities and in our national life, assimilation is alive and well.
I base this judgment not only on the available social science evidence (some of which I will review here), but also on the views and opinions of ordinary Americans whom I encounter as I travel about the country. I would also point to Peter D. Salins’s widely noted Assimilation, American Style (1997). That Salins, an academic economist, wrote this book under the auspices of the Manhattan Institute and The New Republic attests to the persistence of the assimilation idea even among some of our elites.
Yet if assimilation endures as an idea, it is a very confused and muddled one. “Assimilation” has become part of the liturgy of our civil religion, and like any liturgy, we repeat it without often pausing to consider what we mean by it. I will argue here that when Americans say they want immigrants to assimilate, they may think they know what they want, but in fact they don’t understand the concept or its place in our history. Indeed, if Americans better understood the process of assimilation, they might well ask for something else.
This confusion is highlighted by the contradictory assertions we hear about the assimilation of newcomers. Immigrant leaders and advocates claim that America is a racist society that will not allow “people of color” to become part of the mainstream of American life. Alternatively, it is argued that the assimilation of such individuals into that mainstream is an insidious process that robs them of their history and self-esteem. No one ever bothers to explain how both claims can be true.
Echoing immigrant leaders, nativists and restrictionists also argue that today’s newcomers are not assimilating. Yet as I will argue here, there is abundant evidence that they are. How can so many Americans be mistaken about such a relatively easily verified and fundamental aspect of our national life?
What I propose is to scrutinize what is typically understood by the term assimilation and then contrast it with a more adequate conceptualization of the process. I will be particularly concerned to highlight how assimilation has been bowdlerized such that we conceive of it as a benign step toward social peace and harmony, when in fact it generates new social problems and strains.
If you were to ask the average person on the street what is meant by “assimilation,” he or she would say something about immigrants fitting into American society without creating undue problems for themselves or for those already here. In Assimilation, American Style Peter Salins presents a considerably more thoughtful, though in my opinion incorrect, version of this common sense view of assimilation. Salins argues that an implicit contract has historically defined assimilation in America. As he puts it: “Immigrants would be welcome as full members in the American family if they agreed to abide by three simple precepts”:
First, they had to accept English as the national language.
Second, they were expected to live by what is commonly referred to as the Protestant work ethic (to be self-reliant, hardworking, and morally upright).
Third, they were expected to take pride in their American identity and believe in America’s liberal democratic and egalitarian principles.
Though hardly exhaustive, these three criteria certainly get at what most Americans consider essential to successful assimilation. But let me examine these more closely.
English as the National Language
It is not at all clear what Salins means when he insists that immigrants should “accept English as the national language.” He apparently opposes designating English our official language. Yet Salins seems to have much more in mind than immigrants just learning to speak English, which is what most Americans focus on. Unfortunately, he never really elaborates.
Perhaps Salins understands that one can speak English but nevertheless remain emotionally attached to a second language—even, or perhaps especially—when one does not speak it. For example, the evidence is that immigrants and especially their children learn to speak English (even if they don’t necessarily learn to write it). Yet battles over English acquisition persist. Why?
One reason is that English typically replaces the language of one’s immigrant parents and grandparents. As a result, linguistic assimilation sometimes fuels efforts to regain the language and heritage that has been lost. I am reminded of a young Mexican American I met in Corpus Christi, Texas. Having just completed his first semester at Yale, this young man was pleased to be at home for the Christmas holidays and eager to tell an Anglo visitor from back East about his Mexican heritage. Since he had grown up 150 miles from the Mexican border, I assumed this fellow was more or less fluent in Spanish. So, when I happened to inquire, I was surprised to hear him suddenly lower his voice. No, he replied, he did not speak Spanish, but he considered the language a critical part of the Mexican culture he fervently wanted to hold onto. For this reason, I was assured, he would see to it that his future children would learn Spanish before English. Shortly thereafter, we parted. So I never had the chance to ask him how he intended to teach his children a language he himself did not speak.
It’s easy to poke fun at this fellow, but efforts to recapture parts of a heritage that have been lost do not reflect mere adolescent confusion. Many Latino politicians and public figures grew up speaking only English, but have subsequently learned Spanish in order to maintain their leadership of a growing immigrant community.
A more subtle and intriguing example is the career of Selena, the Tejano singer who has emerged as a cultural icon among Mexican Americans since being murdered by a fan in 1995. The tragedy of Selena is that having conquered the Spanish-language Tejano music world, she died just as she was about to cross over to the English-language market. The irony of Selena is that she was raised (in Corpus Christi, it so happens) speaking English and had to learn Spanish in order to become a Tejano star.
Further evidence that English acquisition does not necessarily lead to the positive outcomes we expect, emerges from recent ethnographic research on the school performance of Latino adolescents. Several such studies report that although newly arrived students experience significant adjustment problems attributable to their rural backgrounds, inadequate schooling, and poor English-language skills, their typically positive attitudes contribute to relative academic success. Yet among Latino students born in the United States, the opposite is often the case. Despite fluency in English and familiarity with American schools, many such students are prone to adopt an adversarial stance toward school and a cynical anti-achievement ethic.
My point is obviously not that learning English is to be avoided. But insofar as it reflects assimilation into contemporary minority youth culture, English acquisition is not an unmixed blessing. In the words of a veteran high school teacher, “As the Latino students become more American, they lose interest in their school work…. They become like the others, their attitudes change.”
As for the Protestant work ethic of self-reliance, hard work, and moral rectitude, there is certainly evidence that some immigrants have been adopting it. A recent study by the RAND Corporation reveals that Japanese, Korean, and Chinese immigrants enter with wages much lower than those of native-born workers, but within 10 to 15 years these newcomers have reached parity with the native-born. On the other hand, Mexican immigrants enter with very low wages and experience a persistent wage gap relative to the native-born, even after differences in education are taken into account.
Now it is not at all clear why Mexican immigrants experience this persistent gap. The RAND researchers who identified it cite several possible causes: the Mexicans’ quality of education, their English language skills, wage penalties experienced by illegal aliens, and discrimination. The RAND researchers also cite “cultural differences in attitudes toward work,” which of course speaks directly to Salins’s concern with the Protestant ethic. Yet the fact is that we just don’t know why Mexican immigrants are faring much worse than others are.
Among immigrants generally, there are other trouble signs. For example, welfare participation rates among immigrants have been climbing in recent years, though overall those rates are currently about the same as among non-immigrants. Some immigrants are clearly involved in criminal activities, though to what degree is subject to dispute. Such indicators are indeed troubling. But along with the ethnographic findings about Latino adolescents cited above, they do indicate that immigrants and their children are assimilating-but not always to the best aspects of American society.
Salins’s third assimilation criterion-taking pride in American identity and believing in our liberal democratic and egalitarian values-has typically been a difficult one for immigrants to satisfy. But the problem has for the most part been not with immigrants, but with native-born Americans’ perceptions of them.
The assimilation of newcomers has long been characterized by the emergence of new ethnic group identities in response to conditions in America. The classic example, of course, is how earlier this century European peasants left their villages thinking of themselves as Sicilians, Neapolitans, and the like, but after arriving here gradually came to regard themselves as they were regarded by Americans-as Italians. Later, they, or more likely their children and grandchildren, came to see themselves as Italian-Americans. Yet the fact that such group identities were one stage in the assin-tilation process was lost on most native-born Americans, who condemned “hyphenated Americans” and considered such group identities as a fundamental affront to America’s regime of individual rights.
Similarly today, immigrants from Mexico, Guatemala, Colombia and other Spanish-speaking countries do not come to the United States thinking of themselves as “Hispanics” or “Latinos.” That is a category and a label that has come into existence here in the United States. Andjust as with European-origin groups earlier this century, Americans are troubled by this assertion of group identity and fail to understand it as one step in the assimilation process.
Still, there is one important difference between group categories like Italians earlier this century and Hispanics today. For the latter designates a racial minority group (as when we refer to “whites, blacks, and Hispanics”) that is entitled to the same controversial benefits-affirmative action and the Voting Rights Act—that black Americans have been granted. These are group-based claims of an extraordinary and unprecedented nature about which Americans have reason to be anxious.
But, once again, such group claims are in response to conditions here in the United States, specifically the incentives presented by our post-civil rights political institutions. To focus on one immigrant group-Mexican Americans-I would note that Mexicans in Mexico do not agitate for the Voting Rights Act and affirmative action. Mexicans engage in such efforts only here in the United States, and they do so because our institutions encourage them to. Perhaps even more to the point, such institutions and programs, originally established in response to the demands of black Americans, have been crafted by our political elites in the name of the very same liberal democratic and egalitarian values that Salins invokes.
Assimilation Is Multidimensional
This commentary on Salins’s three criteria leads to three overarching points about assimilation. The first is that assimilation is multidimensional. This point was made more than thirty years ago by sociologist Milton Gordon in his classic study, Assimilation in American Life. Yet academic and popular commentators alike continue to talk about whether this or that group will “assimilate,” as if assimilation were a single, coherent process when, in fact, it has several different dimensions—economic, social, cultural, and political. Even when these different facets of assimilation are acknowledged, they are typically depicted as parts of a smoothly synchronized process that operates in lock-step fashion. In particular, it is typically assumed that the social, economic, or cultural assimilation of immigrants leads directly to their political assimilation, by which is invariably meant traditional ethnic politics as practiced by European immigrants at the beginning of this century.
But as Nathan Glazer and Daniel Patrick Moynihan observed many years ago in Beyond the Melting Pot, what makes sociological or economic sense for a group does not necessarily make political sense. Certainly today, what makes political sense for immigrants is often at odds with their cultural, social, and economic circumstances. Take the situation of Mexican Americans, which term I use loosely to include all Mexican-origin individuals living in the United States. As I have indicated above, there is evidence that Mexican Americans are having problems advancing economically. Nevertheless, there are other indicators—of Englishacquisition, of residential mobility, of intermarriage—demonstrating that Mexican Americans are assimilating socially, culturally, and to some extent even economically. In other words, the evidence on Mexican-American progress is mixed and, as I have already suggested, our understanding of the underlying dynamics is limited.
In order to advance politically, however, MexicanAmerican leaders downplay or even deny signs of progress and emphasize their group’s problems. More specifically, these leaders define their group as a racial minority that has suffered the same kind of systematic discrimination as have black Americans. However regrettable and divisive, this political stance is hardly irrational. Indeed, it is a response to the incentives of our post-civil rights institutions, which have brought us to the point where our political vocabulary has only one way of talking about disadvantage—in terms of race. The resulting irony is that even though Mexican Americans are assimilating along various dimensions much as other immigrants have, their political assimilation is following a very different and highly divisive path.
Assimilation Is Not Irreversible
The second point to be made about assimilation is that it is not necessarily an irreversible process. To be “assimilated” is not to have arrived at some sociological steady state. Or to borrow from historian Russell Kazal, assimilation is not “a one-way ticket to modernity.” The assimilated can and frequently do “deassimilate,” if you will. I have already offered the example of language, of how linguistically assimilated Mexican Americans who speak only English may reassert the importance of Spanish in their own and in their children’s lives.
As sociologist John Stone has noted: “There is a dialectic of fission and fusion that marks the ethnic history of most eras.” Indeed, assimilation is not a simple linear progression, but one that moves back and forth across the generations. As historian Marcus Lee Hansen put it succinctly: “what the son wishes to forget the grandson wishes to remember.” However flawed as a precise predictor of generational differences within specific ethnic groups, Hansen’s basic insight remains valid: the process of assimilation is a dialectical one.
A case in point is intermarriage. Social scientists and laymen alike point to intermarriage as one of the most-if not the most-telling indices of social assimilation. (I myself did so above, when highlighting evidence of Mexican-American assimilation.) Yet when we cite these data for such purposes, we make large and not always justified assumptions about how the offspring of such unions will identify themselves, or be identified by others. For example, we point to blackwhite intermarriage as an indicator of a desirable amalgamation of the races. And to be sure, in this spirit the children of some such marriages now refer to themselves not as black or white, but as multiracial. Yet their numbers are small, and the fact remains that most such individuals tend to see themselves, and are seen by others, as black.
Another example of the dialectic of assimilation can be seen in the findings of the Diversity Project, a research effort at the University of California at Berkeley. Project interviewers were particularly concerned to delve into how minority undergraduates identify themselves ethnically and racially before and after arriving at Berkeley. Despite evident differences across groups, it is striking how many such students describe themselves in high school as having so assimilated into majority Anglo environments that they did not think of themselves as minority group members. It is at Berkeley where such individuals begin to see themselves differently.
The situation of Mexican-American students at Berkeley is particularly instructive. Though predominantly from working-class backgrounds, they typically speak no Spanish and are described as products of “sheltered secondary education.” One undergraduate, who did not think of herself as “a minority” or “a Mexican” before Berkeley, recounts her surprise when she got introduced as a classmate’s “Mexican friend.” Another such student reports that she was not familiar with the word “Chicano” when growing up in a predominantly Anglo community in San Luis Obispo. Another student complains to the Berkeley researchers that the student body at his Jesuit high school in Los Angeles was “pretty white washed,” that most of the Chicano students there spoke “perfect English,” and that he and they were “pretty much assimilated.” One other undergraduate, referring to his identity as a Mexican American, describes himself as being “born again here at Berkeley.”
I am struck that the rapid assimilation experienced by these students parallels what I have found in my field research throughout the Southwest. In the impoverished Rio Grande Valley, right next to the Mexican border, a prominent Mexican-American physician and Democratic Party activist expressed dismay that his grown children “think like Dallas Republicans.” In the barrios of Los Angeles, a persistent complaint is that Mexican grandmothers who speak little English have a hard time communicating with their grandchildren, who speak no Spanish. I have heard young Mexican Americans repeatedly criticize their parents for raising them to be ignorant of their Mexican heritage. Contrary to much of what we hear today, for many, though hardly all, Mexican Americans social and cultural assimilation are so thoroughgoing and rapid that the result is often a backlash, especially among the young and well educated who, like the Yale student from Corpus Christi, want desperately to recapture what they have lost-or perhaps never even had.
Assimilation Is Conflictual
The third and final point I wish to make about assimilation is that it is fraught with tension, competition, and conflict. I offered a glimpse of this when I earlier focused on the emergence of ethnic groups as part of the assimilation process. Whether we’re talking about Italians yesterday or Hispanics today, such group identities in part signal the efforts of immigrants and their offspring to secure their place in America. Such efforts have in our history almost always been contentious. It is difficult to imagine that they could be otherwise.
Stanford sociologist Susan Olzak provides systematic evidence for this assertion. Based on her study of 77 immigrant-impacted American cities from 1877 to 1914, Olzak rejects the conventional view that intergroup conflict is caused by segregation. Instead, she argues that intergroup competition and conflict resulted from occupational desegregation. In other words, tensions are caused not by the isolation of ethnic groups but by the weakening of boundaries and barriers between groups. Olzak’s perspective is consistent with the findings of Seymour Martin Lipset and Earl Raab in The Politics of Unreason. In that study of right-wing extremism, Lipset and Raab report that anti-immigrant nativism in the United States has had as much to do with the social strains of urbanization and industrialization as with anxieties associated with economic contraction. For example, both the Know-Nothings of the 1850s and the immigration restrictionists of the 1920s flourished during periods of prosperity.
Thus, it is during periods of growth when individuals have greater opportunities to break beyond previously established group boundaries. But opportunities for more interaction also lead to opportunities for more conflict. The sociologist Kurt Lewin made this point many years ago about the consequences of advances made by Jews. The historian John Higham has similarly noted that the remarkable economic advances made by Jews in post-Civil War America resulted in the harsh social discrimination they then encountered. More recently, political scientists Bruce Cam and Roderick Kiewiet point out that while claims of economic discrimination decline steadily from first- to second- to third-generation Latinos, claims of social discrimination increase. Apparently, Latino economic advances lead to increased social contacts with non-Latinos and hence more occasions for friction. Once again, we are reminded that assimilation is a multidimensional process in which gains along one dimension may not be neatly paralleled by progress along others.
Cain and Kiewiet’s cross-generational finding should remind us that much of what drives the tension and conflict associated with assimilation concems the varying expectations of first, second, and third generation immigrants. A virtual truism of the immigration literature is that the real challenges to the receiving society arise not with the relatively content first generation, who compare their situation with what was left behind, but with the second and third generations, whose much higher expectations reflect their upbringing in their parents’ adopted home.
Thus, economist Michael Piore, a longtime student of migration, traces the labor unrest of the 1930’s to the aspirations and discontents of second-generation European immigrants to America. And this dynamic is hardly limited to foreign migrants. For Piore also points out that it was not black migrants from the South who rioted in Northern U.S. cities during the 1960s, but their childrenthat is, the second generation. In light of the foregoing, Peter Salins is profoundly wrong when he asserts: ‘@The greatest danger looming for the United States is interethnic conflict, the scourge of almost all other nations with ethnically diverse populations. Assimilation has been our country’s secret weapon in diffusing such conflict before it occurs …… To be sure, in the long term Salim is correct. But in the short and medium term he is wrong. As should be evident by now, the assimilation of newcomers and their families into American society has typically resulted in group competition and conflict. Moreover, today’s post-civil rights political institutions transform the inevitable discontents generated by assimilation into divisive racial minority grievances.
Assimilation or Racialization?
We Americans seem to have a very difficult time grasping the contentious nature of assimilation. There are several reasons for our collective obtuseness on this point. On the one hand, immigration restrictionists focus exclusively on the strife occasioned by mass immigration throughout our history. Indeed, restrictionists are so obsessed with this aspect of immigration that they overlook that immigrants did assimilate and the nation survived and even prospered.
On the other hand, immigration enthusiasts go to the opposite extreme. They focus exclusively on the successful outcome of mass immigration and totally ignore the discord and dissension along the way. For example, reading Salins one would never know that our history has been marked by nots both by and against immigrants. For that matter one would never know that Catholic schools, which Salins correctly argues promote assimilation today, were nevertheless originally established in the nineteenth century by churchmen eager to thwart the assimilation of Catholics.
My point is that both sides of this debate ignore precisely what I am arguing—that assimilation and conflict go hand in hand. But there is another reason why we Americans have such difficulty confronting these conflicts. As I have already indicated, in today’s post-civil rights environment the problems and obstacles experienced by immigrants are now routinely attributed to racial discrimination. This racialization of immigration has fundamentally altered the contours of public discourse. On the one hand, because the accepted explanation for any negative response to immigrants is “racism,” many reasonable and fair-minded individuals who might otherwise be tempted to disagree with immigration enthusiasts have been scared away from the topic. On the other hand, because racialization posits a community of interest between black Americans and immigrants who are “people of color,” obvious competition and conflict between black Americans and immigrants (especially the sizable Hispanic population) have been downplayed, ignored, or simply denied. In other words, today’s post-civil rights ideology allows us to high-mindedly rule such group competition and conflict out of bounds—such that they are not topics suitable for serious inquiry.
What can be done about this situation? To begin, we need to get beyond the romance of immigration enthusiasts as well as the melodrama of immigration alarmists. We need to introduce a sense of realism about how we think about these issues and to face up to the turmoil and strains that mass immigration imposes on our society, particularly in this postcivil rights era.
I am reminded of Robert Park, whose research on ethnic and race relations pioneered the field of sociology at the University of Chicago earlier this century. Writing to a former associate in the wake of the 1943 Detroit race riot, Park commented: “I am not quite clear in my mind that I am opposed to race riots. The thing that I am opposed to is that the Negro should always lose.”
Here are the basic elements of Park’s “race relations cycle,” which took competition and conflict (and then accommodation and finally assimilation) as the inevitable outcomes of group contact. For all the criticisms that have been justifiably directed against Park’s perspective, it did have the singular virtue of realism.
By contrast, today we recoil in hand-wringing dismay when legal immigrants are deprived of welfare benefits. Or we cry racism when law enforcement officers ferociously beat illegal aliens. Such responses may be humane and generous-minded, but they are utterly lacking in the realism of which I speak. Do we honestly believe that millions of poor, disenfranchised immigrants can be introduced into a dynamic, competitive social and political system without their interests being put at risk? If so, we bear an uncomfortable resemblance to an enthusiastic but imprudent football coach who allows inexperienced players with poor training and equipment onto the field and then reacts with surprise and shock when they get injured.
More than just realism, Park affords us a sense of the tragic dimensions of immigration. William James, one of Park’s teachers, once wrote that “progress is a terrible thing.” In that same spirit, Park likened migration to war in its potential for simultaneously fostering individual tragedy and societal progress.
As in war, the outcome of the immigration we are now experiencing is difficult to discern. And this is precisely what is most lacking in the continuing debate over immigration—a realistic appreciation of the powerful forces with which we are dealing. We have heard much in recent years about the daunting experiment we have embarked upon with welfare reform. Yet our immigration policy is arguably a social experiment of even greater import—with enormous potential benefits, but also enormous risks. None of us knows for sure how these millions of newcomers will affect the United States. Easy answers about computer scientists and welfare cheats don’t begin to help us address the enormity of this issue. And neither do ill-informed notions about assimilation.
'The important role played by the yakuza in Japan’s postwar economic rise is well documented.7 But in the late 1980s, when it became clear that the gangs had progressed far beyond their traditional rackets into real estate development, stock market speculation and full-fledged corporate management, the tide turned against them. For the past two decades the yakuza have faced stricter anti-organized crime laws, more aggressive law enforcement, and rising intolerance toward their presence from the Japanese public'.
Here we see Japan's societal structures tied to honor, ethics, morals, family, duty disintegrate at the same time our US values were attacked---1980s----REAGAN/CLINTON neo-liberalism tied to expanding Foreign Economic Zones bringing back OLD WORLD MERCHANTS OF VENICE GLOBAL 1% -------they have been doing inside Japan what our CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA and the 5% to the 1% have been doing in US---
This is NOT JAPANESE culture----it is global laissez faire neo-liberalism bringing DARK AGES GLOBAL WEALTH ECONOMICS to our modern nations. Who drives these attacks on morals and ethics?
OLD WORLD MERCHANTS OF VENICE FREEMASONRY AND GREEKS.........Japan's ties to freemasonry soared after WW 2-----ABE is that puppet just as are CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA -----ergo widespread organized crime in a nation known for strong ethics, morals, and attention to rule of law.
This is why we KNOW Chinese global 1% today are tied to this same ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE for only the global 1% taking all our developed nations including JAPAN, WESTERN EUROPE, NORTH AMERICA----
The Secret History Of The
Freemasons In Japan
By Benjamin Fulford
Exclusive to Rense.com
Japanese Freemasons claim their links with Western Freemasons go back to ancient Mesopotamian and Egyptian times but, I have not been able to verify this.
The earliest verifiable links go back to when the Khazar empire was destroyed by the Mongols and the Russians about 1,000 years ago. At the time their elite class fled with their treasure into Europe and China. The group that fled to China then fled to Japan as Kublai Khan's armies conquered China. That is why the Star of David can be seen in 1,000 year-old shrines in Japan. The original Khazars were fully assimilated by the Japanese elite over the ensuing centuries but certain Freemason/Khazar influences became a permanent part of Japanese culture.
Remember we discussed how ITALO CALVINO'S INVISIBLE CITIES-----back in 1960s was MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES all looking alike........
it is KUBLAI KHAN MEETS MARCO POLO during those OLD WORLD MERCHANTS OF VENICE GLOBAL 1% 1000 AD-------
The Life Story of Marco Polo in Under 3 Minutes
Published on Mar 2, 2015
Marco Polo is a famous historic figure who even has a TV show dedicated to his adventures! But what did he do to become this famous? Find out in this short video about his life!
We start our discussion on public policy surrounding morals and ethics with this introductions so we can see what is happening in US during ROBBER BARON few decades is indeed an organized fleecing of wealth done by a global banking 1% ------to stop MOVING FORWARD we simply need to get rid of global banking 5% to the 1% -----without those pols and players the global 1% has NO POWER INSIDE ANY SOVEREIGN NATION---especially a strong democratic republic like United States of America.
This is what makes all of what we are hearing in US media FAKE NEWS-----as global 1% Asian are working with global 1% European to create MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD for only the global 1%-----this is why we see these periods of ROBBER BARON FRAUDS----break down all ethics, morals, rule of law as is now happening during Clinton/Bush/Obama. Our 99% of Asian immigrants want as much as our US citizens to GET RID OF GLOBAL 1% POLS AND PLAYERS.
Pushing the yakuza underground may make Japan less peaceful
Laws that crack down on organised crime may encourage more ruthless groups without any concern for public order
Members of Yamaguchi-gumi attend a memorial service in 1988. Photograph: Associated PressSun 8 Jan ‘12 15.15 EST
It was a very lonely New Year's Day for many Japanese mafia members, aka the yakuza. In 2011, the top bosses would have opened their mailboxes to find them full of new year's greetings cards from other yakuza bosses, both their own and rival organisations. There would have been cards from businessmen, politicians, actors, celebrities, and possibly even envelopes stuffed with wads of yen. But alas, not this year.
The Yamaguchi-gumi (39,000 members) did not hold the traditional rice cake-making ceremony with the neighbours in front of their headquarters in Kobe; the godfather, Shinobu Tsukasa, did not hand the neighbourhood children traditional otoshidama (new year's gifts) – envelopes with the Yamaguchi-gumi symbol on them with 30,000 yen inside. The much feared and respected Yamaguchi-gumi emblem is vanishing from the business cards of the gangsters as well. New laws are pushing Japan's very public organised crime groups underground. Whether that will result in a more orderly and peaceful Japan, no one really knows.
has taken an interesting approach to dealing with organised crime since the second world war. They have not banned the yakuza, who claim to be humanitarian organisations with ancient roots in Japanese culture; instead the government has recognised their right to exist and regulated them with increasingly stringent laws. Thus, you still have yakuza fan magazines, comic books about their lives, and office buildings. A year ago it was still not unusual for yakuza members to wear their organisation badges on their Italian-made suits and to carry business cards with the group logo and their job title printed on them. The 22 officially designated organised crime groups (numbering roughly 79,000) continue to operate as usual and being a member is not a crime.
However, on 1 October in Tokyo and Okinawa the organised crime exclusionary ordinances went into effect, thus making every single local government have on the books new laws that criminalise paying off the yakuza or using them to conduct business. This may seem surprising but it was not a crime to do so in the past. As late as 2008, Tokyo Stock Exchange-listed companies like Suruga Corporation were able to hire yakuza thugs to evict tenants from buildings they wished to purchase and only the yakuza were arrested. Suruga Corporation executives who had authorised the payouts were untouched.
The new ordinances make using the yakuza very expensive. The police will only warn companies involved with the yakuza to cease relations once. After that the police can release the name of the company, shaming them publicly. However, what is at stake for the business isn't just loss of face – it's tremendous financial loss as well. Standard contracts in Japan now include organised crime exclusionary clauses that allow banks and other institutions to unilaterally nullify any agreement if the signer turns out to be yakuza affiliated.
Companies exposed by law enforcement will lose their bank accounts and financing; they will be evicted from their offices and delisted from the stock market.
It's a lie that crime doesn't pay but when the cost of doing business with criminals is financial ruin, most businesses would rather not pay the criminals. That is what the government of Japan is banking on. The national police agency last week proposed new legislation that gives the police greater power to arrest and target members of designated "dangerous organised crime groups". These new powers will be used to stifle yakuza retaliation towards businesses that decide to cut ties with them. This is unlikely to drive the yakuza out of business but it will damage their power base. After all, "the war on the yakuza" in Japan dates back to 1965, making it longer and perhaps less fruitful than the war on terror.
However, there are concerns among the cops and the yakuza themselves that the new laws will simply turn the yakuza from thugs with a bare minimum code of honour and conduct into ruthless outlaws akin to terrorists in many ways.
The yakuza have been allowed to exist in Japan for decades because each organisation has a code of ethics that keeps them from disrupting the public order or sense of public security. The codes, usually written on the wall on a scroll in Japanese cursive, prohibit armed or unarmed robbery, theft, rape, the use or selling of drugs, or any other act in disharmony with "the chivalrous way". Violations usually result in immediate banishment. One high-ranking yakuza boss puts it this way: "We have taken in the dregs of society, taught them discipline, and kept them in check – at least we don't engage in street crime. We are ninkyo dantai – humanitarian groups."
Many police acknowledge that the yakuza do play a role in keeping street crime low and that after major disasters they contribute to the relief effort.
However, when there is no longer any advantage to keeping up the pretence of being a "humanitarian organisation", there is a risk that Japan's large organised crime groups will be replaced by disorganised crime – groups of criminals that care little about currying public favour or civilian casualties.
Already, groups like Kanto Rengo, which are not "designated organised crime groups" nor traditional yakuza, have begun to seize power in Tokyo – engaging in mugging, drug dealing, purse-snatching and other crimes traditional yakuza would shun. There would be a terrible irony if the victory against the yakuza turns into a defeat in the war on crime.