Raj Feridun wrote:

> On Tue, 25 Nov 2003 20:59:13 +0900, Eric Takabayashi
> <etakajp@yahoo.co.jp> wrote:
>
> >Raj Feridun wrote:
>
> >> No, I do not try to deny that there is a big problem in Japan of
> >> racism towards other Asians.
>
> >Problems with ANY manner of foreigners.
>
> Aside from one time in an Ikebukuro pachinko parlor back in '85 I
> haven't experienced very many problems personally despite my white
> skin and balding brown hair.

Try to get this. The problem of racism (or homelessness, or lack of kindness) in
Japan is not limited to your lack of experience.

> I think it depends very much on the foreigner in question.

Then why do you only believe there is a "big problem" of racism toward "Asians"?
What about toward Latinos, Africans, whites, blacks, and others?

Or are you referring to proportion of the foreign population?

> Yes, if you
> look Japanese but are not or if you are from any other country in
> Asia, particularly China or Korea you're going to encounter the
> problem.

Real estate agencies are the only businesses I can recall at the moment who care I
am foreign when I am a customer. I have not yet taken out a loan at the bank,
however.

Are you just generalizing again, or are you being racist?

> The same goes for blacks.

American Blacks may say they feel quite comfortable in Japan because Japanese,
despite their stereotypes, lack the extreme negative views which developed through
history in the US.

> But not many of my whitebread
> friends have run into problems renting houses/apartments for example
> or been denied entrance into public places. At least down here in
> Utopia anyway that's how it is.

Rural Shikoku is not Tokyo. Fukuyama is quite like Tokyo and other areas of Japan
concerning real estate for foreigners.

> >> It reminds me very much of the problem in
> >> America of black racism. I grew up in a whitebread, middle-class
> >> community that an African-American family would have had a very
> >> uncomfortable time of moving into.
>
> >Yes, take out a lot of the anger and violence, and foreigners in the US can feel
> >like blacks among racists in the US. Which is why caucasians can find being in
> >Japan to be a learning experience if they try.

I meant foreigners in Japan who face discrimination can feel like blacks among
racists in the US.

> My single experience was a learning one.

Good. But I doubt you were a problem at home, either.

> >Oh. Yeah, like the above. But instead I see a lot of pissed off white people.
> >And thanks to the terrorist attacks, I don't don't see much improvement after
> >they go home.
>
> Whose fault is that, the white people or the terrorists?

Those who discriminate are at fault. No terrorism is required, it is just an excuse
for the feelings to surface.

Do you blame foreign criminals for media and public obsession with foreign crime, a
small percentage of Japan's growing crime rate? Yes, I blame them, the relatively
few of them there are, but the discrimination would not be a problem were it not for
those who carry out and promote the discrimination.

> >> As
> >> for unneeded items my experience here in Japan is that the Japanese
> >> tend to throw away amazing amounts of perfectly good working things
> >> and clothing often for no better reason than they just replaced them
> >> with new things or are moving and don't/can't bring them.
>
> >Precisely. Trash.
>
> I didn't say trash. I said perfectly working items: household
> appliances, books, furniture and clothing.

What people put out for collection as trash is "trash", no matter what it may be. I
am not using the negative connotation of "trash". Japanese put out some incredible
things, things they would prefer to throw away, than sell, recycle, or give to
people who may have a use for them.

> >> They may not actually physically deliver them to the homeless but they put
> >> them on the street where anyone can take them.
>
> >No, they are putting out trash, it is not meant to be a compassionate
> >redistribution of wealth. People who care might actually take small items to
> >people who can use or need them.
>
> Again, you're not understanding me. I never said it was meant to be
> compassionate.

Then there is no need to link putting out useful items in the trash to a talk about
kindness toward strangers.

> I specifically said they do NOT deliver these items to
> the needy. I said that for whatever reason they throw away working
> things that in the USA might be sold for used much less given away. I
> don't see many "garage sales" here although occasionally there are
> flea markets.

Yes, there are flea markets. It's good that buyer and seller can benefit, and I hope
it helps the environment, if not the economy. But there are still people who can't
afford those goods.

> >Yes, the poor might easily eat well or find useful necessities out of the trash,
> >but that is no reason they should have to resort to doing so.
>
> >What an excuse. That's like people saying they are doing enough because they pay
> >taxes. They should have a look at how the budget is spent before claiming they
> >are helping the poor, for example.
>
> <Anger>OK, Pardon me but who are YOU to dictate how others should lead
> their lives or how they should spend their money or direct their
> charity?!? </Anger>

Someone who cares about helping people and does so, despite having little. I spend
my money stupidly, but I am not one of many who does so, yet whines about paying
taxes or insurance with more than enough to do so, completely ignoring the plight of
others who do not.

This is also a popular tactic to those who prefer to do nothing but care for
themselves.

Who are you?

> Even Jesus wasn't as proselytizing as you are for the Church of
> Charity for the Homeless.

And perhaps no one I've ever met in my entire life who slanders the poor, those
people who are doing some of the actual ignoring as they walk downtown, has spent as
much time being critical, or been so critical of people's efforts to help, as you.

The New Testament is a very brief account of a number of years of ministry which can
be browsed in about an hour containing relatively few memorable passages.

I no longer call myself Christian, but it seems you know something of the teachings
of Jesus.

Care to do something more about them than being critical of those making an effort
according to their meager means or abilities?

> >Thank God Bill Gates, who plans to give away about 99.975% of his wealth before
> >he dies, is not so selfish. He is even kind enough to focus on the needs of
> >developing nations who might not accomplish anything without it.
>
> I'm surprised you aren't demanding that Bill lives his entire life up
> UNTIL he dies in poverty

Bill Gates giving up all his tens of billions at once would be useless. It would be
gone in less than a year. He wouldn't even be able to restore Iraq by himself, and
the rest of the world would be as screwed as ever. It is true, however, that he
could probably buy out North Korea for the sake of saving the people.

So he and his wife have decided to help many disadvantaged people and regions of the
world over time, in such long range efforts as improving public health.

Thank God for Bill Gates and his wife.

> since not to do so with the amount of money
> he has would be shirking his charitable responsibilities. Before he
> dies isn't doing much for the homeless right now while all those
> billions sit in a bank somewhere.

Now you question the effectiveness of Bill Gates, who in monetary terms, and perhaps
in percentage of sacrifice, is or will be the greatest single philanthropist alive.
Who are you, indeed.

He is helping perhaps millions of those less fortunate elsewhere, because quite
frankly Americans are quite capable of helping their own, if only they cared to. And
the Gates Foundation is actively seeking ways to spend its money, but even their
budget is limited. All Bill Gates' wealth would not pay for one year of the US
education budget, so such an attempt to fight underemployment, poverty and
homelessness, for example, would be quite useless. We should question instead why
the US spends so much money on Iraq and defense, for example.

> Oh yeah, I forgot, I'm selfish so I have no right to comment. Go ahead
> and deflect.

There is no need for me to deflect attention from my argument or myself. And the
fact remains it is I helping strangers downtown with my time and money my family
should be using, not other people who have the means to make a real difference such
as providing aid or jobs.

You, however, seem to have some great need to avoid addressing what you may or may
not be doing to help people with no relation to you, with your own time and
resources. You avoid addressing the fact I want to send homeless and unemployed to
your warm and kind town, not to be rid of them, but for them to get what they need.
Why do you hinder me?

Whatever you may be doing for others, you prefer to be overwhelmed by the problems
of the world than look for what even you can do. Even a school child picnicking in
the park can be of use to a hungry man laying out in the cold. My preschool age
children can understand why I do not give them so many snacks, with no fuss. When
they are a little older, I want them to do the helping themselves.

What are you doing for others?

> >> That's down here anyway and from what I've read and seen it's even moreso in
> >> the big cities.
>
> >Yes, big cities can generate a lot of trash. It is a reflection of population
> >size and materialism, not kindness.
>
> See above.

Yes, I see your talk about incredible levels of Japanese materialism and waste while
others literally starve to death, even in Japan, has nothing to do with arguing
against lack of kindness.