Diversity

[Galilean]

A question for proponents of multiculturalism and diversity, do you think a country like china,
or japan, needs diversity?

 

[Yusuf Evans]

Ever been to Tokyo? How about Okinawa? There's plenty of diversity there. Hong Kong is pretty diverse, so are a few other parts of China. Their government is starting to open up to trade, so maybe that will help bring new cultures into the country.

 

[Willtor]

A question for proponents of multiculturalism and diversity, do you think a country like china,
or japan, needs diversity?

I think that any society needs to permit diversity. But some places are relatively homogeneous, and it doesn't make sense to talk about multiculturalism in that context. The problem is when a society is intolerant of diversity.

 

[Galilean]

But some places are relatively homogeneous, and it doesn't make sense to talk about multiculturalism in that context.

I'm not sure what you mean by this, please elaborate.

 

[Willtor]

I'm not sure what you mean by this, please elaborate.

This is most easy to express in the context of a tribe or other small society in which the whole society is comprised of one ethnicity, one language, one religion, etc. Sociologically homogeneous. The question of multiculturalism arises when there are multiple cultures that live in close proximity. How do they relate to each other? If they live close enough, one is going to become the "majority" culture, or at least the prevalent culture in which communication occurs. As a consequence, there is the danger of the majority culture dominating the minority culture.

 

[Galilean]

This is most easy to express in the context of a tribe or other small society in which the whole society is comprised of one ethnicity, one language, one religion, etc. Sociologically homogeneous.

So it is perfectly ok for a country like sweden, for instance, to stay homogenous, ethnically and culturally?

 

[Willtor]

So it is perfectly ok for a country like sweden, for instance, to stay homogenous, ethnically and culturally?

It's not a question of whether it stays homogeneous. It's a question of if and when it receives different cultures, how will those cultures be received? Whether it remains homogeneous because of a lack of other cultures is not an ethical question.

 

[sethad]

America wasn't open to other cultures in its early days, but except for the few who are still stuck in the 1800s, it is generally more open and accepting now.

 

[Galilean]

It's not a question of whether it stays homogeneous. It's a question of if and when it receives different cultures, how will those cultures be received? Whether it remains homogeneous because of a lack of other cultures is not an ethical question.

But do you think its ok for a country to wilfully try and keep itself homogenous and core cultural?

 

[Verv]

Even in the big city of Seoul, Korea, there are occasions when someone feels a little odd being white (and I feel sorry for blacks, they are often stared at far more). So ina sense it would be good if there was a degree of more diversity.

But at the same time, I want to see Korea remain Korean, and Japan to remain Japanese. Diversity is a good thing but a national character should not be jeopardized by it for the sake of the political statements. A nation is defined by its' people, and its' people are defined by its' nationality.

 

[Mirelys]

Even in the big city of Seoul, Korea, there are occasions when someone feels a little odd being white (and I feel sorry for blacks, they are often stared at far more). So ina sense it would be good if there was a degree of more diversity.

I am happy for you if you only feel odd on occasion! I'm tired of standing out so much

 

[Helo]

But do you think its ok for a country to wilfully try and keep itself homogenous and core cultural?

If they inhabit a world where there is no other group that the group that lives around them.

Mixing of cultures is important for growth as a civilization.

 

[Galilean]

But at the same time, I want to see Korea remain Korean, and Japan to remain Japanese. Diversity is a good thing but a national character should not be jeopardized by it for the sake of the political statements. A nation is defined by its' people, and its' people are defined by its' nationality.

I agree.

 

[CSmrw]

Is it "OK"? I don't think it matters one way or another. I am no fan of tradition, so to ME it's just plain ridiculous, but I am not the be all end all of what is valuable in this universe. I have never seen the value of maintaining artificially any sort of cultural heritage or bias. I believe this to be ancient, tribal thinking more suited to a world where vast distances separate the many pockets of humanity and survival was no sure thing for any human. I think it hinders us as humans from becoming whatever it is we might become, from seeing each other AS humans instead of AS Japanese humans. It makes it easier for the petty among us to disregard the hjumanity of the Japanese humans because they can be seen as lesser in status than American humans. It just strikes me as childish and weak minded. But maybe there is an advantage to it I have not come across.

 

[loriersea]

Diversity does not simply refer to ethnic diversity. If a country is keeping out immigrants for the sole purpose of keeping their country ethnicly "pure," then I would find that troubling. However, if they simply have a naturally large population that is relatively homogenous, then it's not like they should start forcing people of other ethnicities to come to their country.

I do think it is dangerous for outsiders to start judging whether or not a country is diverse, though, because it is very easy, from the outside, to assume that there is more homogeneity than their actually is. Many people would say that Asia is not a very diverse continent, because they assume that all Asian countries have a similar culture, which is simply not true. And, we might assume that all people living in China or Japan are the same, because they look pretty similar to us, but there are ethnic and cultural differences that we cannot see.

But, again, diversity is not only about race and ethnicity, and it's not as if countries have to work to create diversity. After all, nobody had to create diversity in the United States. It was already here. The issue is respecting the diversity that exists within a country, not manufacturing a false diversity.

Even homogenous areas still have diversity, and still have problems respecting diversity, though. As a kind of microcosm example, if you go to any high school in a ethnicly homogenous area of this country, you will find that even if the students in question are all middle-class white kids, or urban African-American kids, within their school, there are tons of sub-cultures, and lots of hierarchies, and many problems with some groups not respecting other groups. So, ethnic homogeneity does not mean there is no diversity, nor does it ensure that there aren't going to be hierarchies based on other factors.

 

[Willtor]

Is it "OK"? I don't think it matters one way or another. I am no fan of tradition, so to ME it's just plain ridiculous, but I am not the be all end all of what is valuable in this universe. I have never seen the value of maintaining artificially any sort of cultural heritage or bias. I believe this to be ancient, tribal thinking more suited to a world where vast distances separate the many pockets of humanity and survival was no sure thing for any human. I think it hinders us as humans from becoming whatever it is we might become, from seeing each other AS humans instead of AS Japanese humans. It makes it easier for the petty among us to disregard the hjumanity of the Japanese humans because they can be seen as lesser in status than American humans. It just strikes me as childish and weak minded. But maybe there is an advantage to it I have not come across.

The fact of the matter is that different groups of people have different ways of communicating with each other. It's easy to say, "forget about cultural differences," when one is in the majority culture. This is not a statement against the majority culture, but merely an argument that the majority culture should not supplant minority cultures. It makes sense to allow a majority culture. It doesn't make sense to ignore differences of culture, or to say that a person of a particular culture should not be seen as a member of that culture.

You're right that Japanese people want to be seen as people, but I'd hardly go so far as to say they don't want to be seen as Japanese. Here's the thing. I'm a white, north-eastern American. I'll always be that. The ways of communication in which I was brought up will always be the ways in which I am most fully expressed. My culture happens to be the majority culture. But I'm not doing anybody any favors by saying that their culture (in which they are most fully expressed) should be ignored in favor of some idealized "person." I think that such a perspective stems from the view that cultures have nothing positive to offer, and only serve to divide.

 

[CSmrw]

I don't really care what anyone wants. I don't even care what I want as far as these kinds of conversations about entire populations are concerned. I see no value in articificially maintaining something outdated. If a culture maintains itself then whatever, but if it is dragged backward through fear or ignorance then I say do away with the draggers and let's get moving. As long as I am being asked. The fact of the matter is that people will do whatever they want and my thoughts are useless.

 

[sethad]

Even in the big city of Seoul, Korea, there are occasions when someone feels a little odd being white (and I feel sorry for blacks, they are often stared at far more). So ina sense it would be good if there was a degree of more diversity.

Diversity is a good thing but a national character should not be jeopardized by it for the sake of the political statements. A nation is defined by its' people, and its' people are defined by its' nationality.

Well excuse me for being multiracial.

What exactly is that nationality of America? Americans come from all ethnic backgrounds, there isnt just one. And not one is any better then that next, and mixing races will do nothing to mess up the people.

Unless of course you think intermarriage does mess up in the people?

Hmm...multiracials the children of the devil perhaps? Boy that sounds familiar

Maybe I took your post the wrong way, I don't know. But it sounds like your against interracial marriage because it messes up the people which in turn messes up the country.

 

[Phylogeny]

A question for proponents of multiculturalism and diversity, do you think a country like china,
or japan, needs diversity?

Well, I can't say much about Japan but I definitely think China would be better off with more diversity----not just of races, but of cultures and ideas. The country is hardly homogenous but it doesn't enjoy nearly the amount of diversity that countries such as the US has.

This was always made clear to me when I visit my family in a small city in central China. When told I had only dated white guys, reactions ranged from discomfort to unbelief. Hey, I live in a predominately white area, what did they exepct me to do? Drive several hours to the nearest Chinatown and pick a boy from there?? One of my cousins looks at my interracial dating as akin to dating another species----I would have told him exactly what I felt about his opinion except I didn't know how to properly swear in Chinese.

My cousins make fun of my foreign habits such as drinking water while eating---which is also done in other parts of China, but they don't know that, they think it's "Western" since I do it and no one else around them does it. Hence, I get made fun of at the dinnertable. It's annoying to see their smug faces thinking they somehow have superior table manners.

My relatives also have a hard time assimiliating alien ideas. They don't comprehend that people can date other races, that 'looking Chinese' doesn't equate to automatically 'thinking' like a Chinese.

Contrast that with Beijing where there's always been a large diverse population (moreso today than ever before), and you see a noticeable difference in how people there absorb new ideas. But Beijing and other large coastal cities are unique in China. I think the lack of diverse thinking, the slow spread of ideas in the hinterlands prevents people from thinking 'outside the box' if you will. They are more apt to listen to whatever the government says, to feel that any foreign critics of China must be bad and hate China.

Beijing, perhaps of its approximity to the central government, seems to contain a more jaded population. People are more willing to accept the idea that they must discern the truth for themselves. I think part of this is the result of a freer flow of information, the influence of foreigners, which helps people to acknowledge that people from other countries are not the amphorous 'They' but distinctly human, with their own ways of thinking, hence making it easier to listen and accept foreign ideas.

This is just what I get from my personal experiences visiting the good ol' motherland, but I feel I have been at the receiving end of some bits of xenophobia from my relatives in large part due to their ignorance of the outside world, and the homogenity of the culture they live in.