Slashdot Mirror
Google Earth Raises Discrimination Issue In Japan
Hugh Pickens writes "The Times (UK) reports that by allowing old maps to be overlaid on satellite images of Tokyo, Osaka, and Kyoto, Google has unwittingly created a visual tool that has prolonged an ancient discrimination, says a lobbying group established to protect the human rights of three million burakumin, members of the sub-class condemned by the old feudal system in Japan to unclean jobs associated with death and dirt. 'We tend to think of maps as factual, like a satellite picture, but maps are never neutral, they always have a certain point of view,' says David Rumsey, a US map collector. Some Japanese companies actively screen out burakumin-linked job seekers, and some families hire private investigators to dig into the ancestry of fiances to make sure there is no burakumin taint. Because there is nothing physical to differentiate burakumin from other Japanese and because there are no clues in their names or accent, the only way of establishing whether or not they are burakumin is by tracing their family. By publishing the locations of burakumin ghettos with the modern street maps, the quest to trace ancestry is made easier, says Toru Matsuoka, an opposition MP and member of the Buraku Liberation League. Under pressure to diffuse criticism, Google has asked the owners of the woodblock print maps to remove the legend that identifies the ghetto with an old term, extremely offensive in modern usage, that translates loosely as 'scum town.' 'We had not acknowledged the seriousness of the map, but we do take this matter seriously,' says Yoshito Funabashi, a Google spokesman." The ancient Japanese caste system was made illegal 150 years ago, but silent discrimination remains. The issue is complicated by allegations of mob connections in the burakumin anti-discrimination organizations.
Most tools can be used for discrimatory purposes. Just because I buy a Ford at a used car dealership over an indistinguishable GM (because I like then better) doesn't mean the dealership should get blamed.
Surely the problem is with the discrimination within the Japanese people and has nothing to do with Google.
There is no difference between a person from one linage to another other than maybe their name and genetic make up.
Just because their great great great grandfather might have killed people for a living doesn't mean that the person applying for a job now is strange in some way.
It is obviously an old custom which is not equal and fair into days society thus the problem is not with Google.
What Japan needs is some enlightment that can only come with a few episodes of Discovery Channel's Dirty Jobs. Watching Mike Rowe trying to shovel disgusting refuse from a leatherworking facility is not only entertaining, it teaches that those jobs are A) pretty difficult to learn and B) fundamentally necessary for civilization to continue!
If your solution to a problem is, "We need less truth" then you are probably trying to solve the wrong problem.
Every society has its pariahs. Japan has few immigrants, so they can't just look down to Mexicans, Turks or whatever pariah-immigrant group you might have in your country.
It seems to be part of human nature that we need someone to look down at, to make us feel better about ourselves. Akin to "well, I'm not that good, but HE is WAY worse off". I'm not saying that it should be that way, mind you, I hope we can eventually overcome this flaw and compare ourselves against those that achived more, not less, but I find it time and again in people.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
History is ugly. It's full of all the crappy things we did, and exists in part as a document to study so we can try and improve. "Those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it", but if the ugly parts are expunged, then we are erasing exactly what's needed to avoid recurrence.
Also, all oppression begins with "We must do this to protect the innocent". Whether the darkest part of the oppression comes a month later at the hands of the current controlling authority or a century later as a result of ignorance, it still exists and is the inevitable result of censorship.
I am surprised that the "employee at a large, well-known Japanese company" was not asked *why* are they doing that. They consider it normal, alright. I know that, since I knew the problem existed even in 1980's. But I am much more interested why are Eta/Burakumin/Shinheimin/whoever treated this way by people who cannot possibly remember the Edo period.
Ezekiel 23:20
Is there anything physical to differentiate any Japanese from any other Japanese?
So, if a hammer is used to build a cross that the KKK burn on someone's front yard, the hammer is "enabling" racist pigs? I guess white sheets and fire enable racism too?
Please.
Google Maps is a map. If some racist/classist/hidebound Japanese use it for perpetuating reactionary stupid stereotypes, how is Google at fault?
SLOW NEWS DAY, +1
-Styopa
One of the main things a map communicates is the relationship that the landscape of our world has with human beings, as such it will always be, on some level, an observation or a statement about people almost more than landscape. When you think about it, the first human imposed addition to any map, borders and walls, are just demarcations of division. Once you have these on a map it doesnt take long for the mere annotation or position of these to be the catalyst for violent conflict (look at the India / Pakistan border commission in the 40s, a line on a map drawn by a man who had never been there resulting in the deaths of millions, or the status of israel in western maps versus palestine in middle eastern maps)
It really shouldnt be surprising that google earth has caused some controversy, they already label Taiwan as a province of the People's Republic of China, so they have already made political statements with the program
Yup...
At least now the bone-headed practice of this discrimination is known by the outside world, and the appropriate amount of scorn, ridicule, and disapproval can be heaped on the superstitious throw-back practitioners of the discrimination.
Companies and governments from elsewhere could check whether this practice is occurring, and blacklist Japanese companies that are shown to practice this human-rights violation.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
"Companies and governments from elsewhere could check whether this practice is occurring, and blacklist Japanese companies that are shown to practice this human-rights violation."
It would be much easier to do this if there was a Google map to show us who we should discriminate against.
In Japan (and most Asian countries), lineage is considered much more important than it is in the U.S. If your daughter is marrying someone, it's common to check their lineage, and expected of you to offer it up under the right circumstances.
The complaint against Google is that they've made it easy to identify someone whose lineage goes back to these "scum towns" where only members of this untouchable caste could live. It doesn't matter that you're the youngest vice president at Toyota, your great-great-great-great-great-great grandfather comes from a scumtown, so you're scum too to your fiance's father.
Anyone who loves or hates any language, platform, or manufacturer, doesn't know what they're talking about.
Knowledge is knowledge. How a bunch of inbred tribals use that knowledge isn't the responsibility of the people who discover and/or make it available.
The Japanese have a problem with discrimination, not Google, not the web, and not the United States. Let Japan solve the problem, don't make it a Google problem, a web problem, or a United States problem.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
What with all the white trash that inhabits them. I'm all for integration, but I stop short on trailer/white trash. Call me an anti-trailer trash bigot, but that's how I was learned, and I growed up on this way of thinking. They be in the trailer parks, and that's where they should stay, them and their children's children's children.
In ancient Japan, anything to do with death, or other unclean jobs like leatherworkers, was taboo. People who did those things had to live in separate villages. Nowadays, people don't know where most of those ghettos were. Google published a series of scholarly maps that show where they are, now people can easily trace families back to these areas because Japanese family registration was fixed to ancestral address until recently.
It's like these areas are cursed to the Japanese, even if everyone's forgotten where they were, and any family originally from the area is tainted by that curse, no matter what that family has done since.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Hey! I'm the vice president at Toyota you insensitive clod!
Check out my blog!
You might note how just about every religion, most known the Hindu faith, but also islam, prescribe a caste based society. Judaism, Buddhism (search "despite this" to skip the excuses section, this is the bbc, after all), and the Japanese faiths by large also include slavery. But no religion is quite as pro-slavery as islam, especially contemporary islam.
Christianity started out as a religion amongst Roman slaves and was very opposed to the slave system from day one.
The Hindu caste system. This system exists and is operational in many parts of india.
The classes of non-muslims in islamic countries. In addition to that, there is the muslim slave trading system. Note that while the wikipedia page tries to minimize the muslims that accept slavery, however they include all sunni schools, representing over 90% of all muslims worldwide. Also, slavery is practiced today in Mecca, the center of the islamic world. Officially called slavery until 1970, today the name translates to something like involuntary contractees. Fortunately there is "some" (make of it what you want) popular opposition brewing in the muslim world to the exploitation of "involuntary workers", especially against exploitation of the sexual kind. It is, however, not outlawed, and it won't get outlawed any time soon (the gulf's economies depend on it. Especially Dubai's, but in reality all do, including Kuwait's)
There are lots of countries where muslims openly practice slavery (and call it slavery), including but not limited to : Chad, Mauritania, Niger, Mali and Sudan.
Involuntary service contracts, however exist everywhere in the gulf, Kuwait, Jordan and Syria.
Iran, despite it's horrible name and extremely objectionable nuke policy, is actually the most progressive (and tolerant) muslim country in existence, with the possible exception of the secular Turkey.
Given that Iran is just about the most open islamic country, their anti-Jews retoric must be interpreted not especially as a sign of the antisemitic nature of Iran itself, but rather how antisemitic and intolerant even a very progressive muslim country is.
Note that EVERY major religion EXCEPT Christianity actively encourages the subjugation or extermination of non-believers in one form or another. There generally are rules relating to master vs slaves relations, treatment of the captured (though they often include the right of the master to kill the servant), but all religions regulate slavery, and explicitly do not outlaw it, with the exception of Christianity. Christians are to convince non-Christians peacefully, through love and reasoning, yadda yadda you probably know the lines.
Note that, even with the exceptional theoretical difference in Christianity, all cultures, including Christianity (though modestly compared to other religions), engaged in slavery. The culture that outlawed slavery and castes, and eradicated it everywhere in the world, with the exception of a few muslim countries, as any American should know, the Christians that won the American civil war (against other Christians, who did support slavery ... nevertheless no other culture ever went to war over slaves).
Note that one of the consequences of the American civil war was the start of constant terrorist attacks on American ships by the muslims ("barbary pirates" is a name for ottoman muslims) that supplied the southerners' slaves. They lost their income, which basically ended the caliphate's access to the products of the American industrial machine. As a reaction to the attacks Thomas Jefferson bought himself a quran, read it, and proceeded to create the American Marine and bomb the shit out of Northern Africa, writing these words (th
As much as I don't agree with Iran's policy towards Israel, I must object to Iran being explicitly anti-Jewish.
Their gripe is with the state of Israel and not Jews. Calling a country that is home to the second-largest Jewish population in the Middle East (largest of course being Israel), and where Jews are explicitly protected by the consitution, as being anti-Jewish is prejudice at best.
Thomas Jefferson was not alive during civil war; or after, though that may change someday.
Humanitarian Aid to all countries. We are reducing the number
of extra vowels used by many English speaking countries in
their spelling, and are saving them up for an air drop over
Poland, a country which is in desperate need of vowels.
Who says America does not care?
discrimination: secernment (the cognitive process whereby two or more stimuli are distinguished)
You are not discriminating among different meanings of word discrimination, but giving a privilege to one of its meanings.
I'm afraid I must disagree with what is a highly selective reading of history and theology.
Christianity was not "anti-slavery" from day one. In fact Paul explicitly condones the practice of slavery, telling a run-away slave (Onesimus) to go back to his master (Philemon). Now he does tell the master not to mistreat or abuse his slaves, but Paul is handed an opportunity on a platter to condemn slavery and he quite explicitly refuses to do so.
When abolition was being debated, it was generally the pro-slavery people who were seen as have the strict biblical view, and the anti-slavery people who were seen as representing a more liberal, progressive, interpretative version of Christianity. (Similar to gay marriage today?)
Historically it was Islam that was known for tolerance of non-believers, to the extent that many regions of the Byzantine Empire preferred to surrender to Muslim invaders who would largely tolerate whatever brand of Christianity they practiced rather than their Christian overloads who were endlessly persecuting minority sects because of differences over the interpretation of the Holy Trinity, and Arianism etc.
From the persecutors' perspective, is it not better to cut off one's hand than to allow it to sin? Why allow a heretical sect to potentially lead orthodox Christians into false beliefs and so condemn them to hell? On the Muslim side, the Quoran says "Let there be no compulsion in religion". They saw all Christian sects as being equally misguided but protected by Islamic law as people trying to worship the right god at least.
On the other hand there are many stories of Saladin in particular as being the model for the later medieval concept of knightly chivalry. And as far as antisemitism goes, the history of the Crusades does not particularly bolster your theory that Christianity is all about peaceful coexistence and respect for those with different religious views whereas Islam is all about killing people. Both sides committed what we would see as atrocities, but instances of mercy and kindness to the conquered are more plentiful on the Muslim side than the Christian.
I am neither Christian nor Muslim. From what I've seen and from what I've read no religion (or atheism, or metaphysical quasi-religions such as the Marxist dieletic) has a monopoly on good or evil. Certainly your view of Islam as being intrinsically evil and backwards might be tenable if you look at the last 300 years (when most of the Muslim world hasn't done much) but when you take a longer view the result is very different.
Seriously, Japan needs a Title VII badly. The way they treat women and Burakkumin, and the way they discriminate on age, nationality, disability, and other characteristics, show that they haven't put the kind of thought into discrimination that America had been forced to over hundreds of years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakuza#Burakumin
Discrimination = Bad news. When honest people are forced out of honest jobs because of petty race or ancestry issues, they invariably turn either to immigration or the underworld.
Thing is, this might be creating an excuse for those carrying a prejudice against Burakumin; "Marry our daughter? Hell no. Er, no, of course it's not because you're Burakumin, we're progressive like that. It's just that your family might have Yakuza links! Yeah, that's it, honest."
You might note how just about every religion[...]
I wish I had mod points, as this long and bizarre invention of history has to be one of the funniest posts I've read on Slashdot in ages. Whether it's a skilled troll or a "selectively informed" and passionate individual, the gaping omissions, obvious contradictions, and glaring historical inaccuracies contrast the serious and informative tone quite well.
For the tl;dr crowd, some highlights:
- Christianity is the ONLY religion to oppose slavery from the start, however citations about religion and slavery conveniently omit those in the New Testament.
- American Civil War lead to the Barbary Wars through some sort of time vortex, and 19th Century piracy is now referred to as "terrorism"
- Through a super time vortex, Thomas Jefferson was around in this Civil War period, and "created" the American Marines after having purchased and read a Koran
- Iran is "just about the most open Muslim nation"
- There is only one existing secular Muslim country
- Christianity is known for it's non-violent approach to non-believers (from it's inception to present day, I assume)
Amm ... fair enough and Gengis han let you live and go about your relegion but slaughtered you if you opposed him. Standard tactic applied by the Spartans. If you oppose, we will not stop unless your are all dead. If you run away, we will not chase you. Works very well in wars ...
...
As for the Christians living in Muslim societies
1. The Muslims regularily taxed Christians for their faith
2. Converting to the Christian faith (from a Mulsim) is punishable by death
3. Mulsim man marying a Christian Woman is OK so long as kids are Mulsim
4. Mulsim woman marying a Christian man is punishable by death
Think of it like game theory. These rules made sure you win battles and you spread Islam most effectively.
You are going so far off-topic it's not even funny. You're also spreading lies.
Sucks to have your BS pointed out by an anonymous coward, doesn't it?
Are you asking me for a solution to the problem of evil? I mean, we are not using a certain word the same way; it seems you call "sin" any unethical behaviour, did I get this right? No, I understand "sin" strictly as whatever violates a religious taboo.
Now, some taboos are sensible; don't steal, don't murder, that's fine, got it. But these are so obvious, I don't need religion to teach me those; and many believers fail to do follow them anyway. On the other hand, some taboos are just nonsense, such as jewish and muslim dietary laws; some are hateful, as in religiously motivated violence against unbelievers, heretics, or homosexuals; some are quasi-genocidal, as the pope's statements against condoms; some are suicidal, like Jehovah's witnesses' rejection of blood transfusions.
Circumcision is child abuse.
Funny you should pick that example. When film was being developed in the 19th and 20th centuries, there was a problem: it was difficult to make photographs that showed both light- and dark-colored faces effectively.
The white face was taken as the essential image that film had to capture effectively, and a lot of technical effort went into developing film stock that showed the white face well. "Exact reproduction" produced a "beefy" look, so the film was modified accordingly[2].
In other words, if black people had developed film, film would look different and have have different chemical characteristics from what we have today. You cannot just point to the technology and say it is "neutral", to be used for good or bad purposes. During its development, the creators of every technology encounter choices that cannot be made solely on technical grounds. Those decisions always end up embedding human values - as does the technology that results.
Here's another story I read somewhere. Early computers could only represent uppercase or lowercase letters. The first choice of the technicians was to go with lowercase, because that is much easier to read. But this was overruled: because then God would not start with an uppercase letter. Now whether this particular story is true or false (it sounds too neat to me), it is certainly representative of how many technical choices are made.
As for the burakumin, I once spoke to a Japanese woman about them. She had married an American and was living in the U.S., but she said that she would certainly never have considered a relationship with one. Not because she herself was prejudiced, but because doing so would place her outside mainstream Japanese society. We have heard this before. If you haven't, I recommend watching the film Gentleman's Agreement. I won't claim I know the best solution for Google in this particular case, but a knee-jerk response of "technology has no values" brings us no closer to any kind of truth, and represents a failure to understand our relationship to technology.
[1, 2] The quotes above are by Frederick Mills and Dvaid L. MacAdam respectively, quoted in the article "Making 'white' people white" by Richard Dyer, 1997.
Except that what the Burakumin do is productive and necessary, whereas rapists simply hurt their victims. Or would like to have corpses pile up in the streets?
Yeah, maps do have a certain point of view. The finest thief in history was the first person who drew a property map.
Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
fair enough and Gengis han let you live and go about your relegion but slaughtered you if you opposed him.
Luckily for us, the Muslims were much more civilized that the Mongols. Citizens in cities taken over by Muslims were given three choices: leave, stay and become citizens and pay the tax (which I discuss below), or continue to fight. This as compared to your Mongols who gave no quarter regardless of the situation, or even as compared to what Christians did during the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades.
1. The Muslims regularily taxed Christians for their faith
Yes. However, people fail to realize that Muslims were "taxed" in the same fashion and at the same amount: 2.5% of one's earnings per year, except it's called Zakat for Muslims and Jizya for non-Muslims. This "tax" as you put it was obligatory on most people -- Christian, Muslim, Jew, etc. -- living in the Muslim State, save for a few exceptions (e.g., orphans, widows, the aged, etc. Anyone considered to be a ward of the State did not have to pay and instead received money). The tax went to help care and feed said wards of the State, including non-Muslims. Yes, that's right: if you were a non-Muslim in Muslim Spain, you could count on the State to support you if you were unable to work. There's even a famous Hadith about this.
2. Converting to the Christian faith (from a Mulsim) is punishable by death
The only basis for that ruling that I've found was a judicial ruling dating back to the 11th and 12th centuries, during the Crusades, you'll note. The premise was that yes, if a Muslim converted and was still on Muslim soil, he was guilty of treason to the state. Seeing as how Muslims and Christians were in the Until recently, no one has challenged that ruling. However, in the past few years, as Islam comes out of its religious lethargy, several graduates of Al-Azhar Mosque in Cairo have insisted that, since there is no compulsion in religion, Muslims may freely convert.
3. Mulsim man marying a Christian Woman is OK so long as kids are Mulsim
4. Mulsim woman marying a Christian man is punishable by death ...
I will not argue that what you point out in point 4 does not occur. However, you should realize it is not part of Islam at all. It's a tragic consequence of fundamentalism and a gross misinterpretation of the religion.
Throughout the life of the Prophet, Muslim women found themselves married to people who had yet to convert. This did not incur and immediate divorce or an immediate death sentence. Instead, the Prophet advised these women to have patience and to encourage their husbands to accept Islam for as long as they were able.
Any Muslim is free to marry whomever he or she wants. Muslims are heavily encouraged to marry other Muslims because it makes family life much easier to handle, but they are free to choose as they see fit. Indeed, there are two Muslim men in my mosque who have married non-Muslims, and there is one Muslim woman who married a non-Muslim man, though admittedly the man later converted.
Ne Cede Malis.
We Aussies are doing our bit in return for America's generosity Carb Relief
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of cats. MEOW!!
Note that EVERY major religion EXCEPT Christianity actively encourages the subjugation or extermination of non-believers in one form or another.
Hmmm... and yet, catholics strived to eliminate all competition from the countries they controlled (only the Jewish religion managed to survive, all others were wiped out of middle-age Europe). Contrast that with moslem countries where you have jews, christians, Zoroastrians... Or even better India where hinduism, jainism, buddhism, sikhism and ayyavazhi sometimes share the same temples.
Non-Linux Penguins ?
Are you a troll, or a sincere idiot?
In either case, I feel compelled to say something nice about /., since the rating system left you invisible to me. I only stumbled across your post by the replies. If you're a troll, you're evidently a mighty troll.
Unfortunately, I don't care. In either case, my only request is that you designate me as a foe so I'll have an even lower chance of seeing you in the future.
My qualifications to be your foe? Well, first of all, I'm highly educated, including a degree in history. Second, I'm a highly devout agnostic, and I have nothing but contempt for people whose own religious beliefs are as weak and indefensible as yours. I could come up with more reasons, but you obviously have no interest in reason, and I've already wasted far more time than you're worth.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
They're all wrong. Contrary to popular belief, history is nonsense. We can't use it to learn to avoid future mistakes because noone can agree what actually happened; either through lack of information or deliberate re-writing of history.
In my opinion, we should avoid constantly re-hashing the disputes about who's most correct on the subject of what happened n years ago and concentrate on trying to come to a collective agreement on what kind of world we want to live in.
Requiem for the American Dream