5 ms·

> the West also had its fair share of organised crime That's missing the point: Which is that in Japan (and maybe other East Asian societies), organised crime

> the West also had its fair share of organised crime That's missing the point: Which is that in Japan (and maybe other East Asian societies), organised crime isn't even seen as crime, and the people perpetrating it aren't seen as criminals. They don't have to do it in the underground like for instance the Mafia has to in Italy. Only after WW2 when the US restructured Japan somewhat, they forced Japan to call these syndicates "organised crime". Before that, they were simply a part of society that "might do some bad stuff, but only to people who deserve it" but also "lots of good for the community". Not many people in Japan will agree or even know what you mean when you tell them you think the Yakuza is a problem for Japanese society. They are well liked, unless they draw negative attention to Japan itself. Also: Whataboutism.

RyEgswuCsn 5y ago
> organised crime isn't even seen as crime, and the people perpetrating it aren't seen as criminals Do you speak of your own first-hand experience, or you got the impression from some material you read? I don't think they are that different from how Mafia is perceived. Regarding Whataboutism --- I find the accusation really low-effort. My point has never been "The West has/had organised crime so what's the problem with the East having it?"; rather, I am pointing out how you seem to think "The West is superior just because and the East should appreciate being patronisied by the West", while the West had also experienced many of the issues you described. Of course Japan has its problems, but I'd argue it would be up to the Japanese people to figure out what they are and how to solve them.
- suction 5y ago
  The key difference you seem to be missing is, in very simple terms, that organised crime in the West is universally accepted as a negative thing and the people who perpetrate it need to keep their identities and operations secret. While in Japan, that's not the case: Every Japanese knows what local businesses are run by the Yakuza, knows where local Yakuza headquarter is (it's not hard to find even for foreigners - it's usually a house with 24/7 shuttered windows, high spiked fences, and grim looking guys hanging out in front. In Italy, that house would get raided in an instant. In Japan, it's just part of the neighborhood, people don't go near it, but otherwise ignore it. Japan's problems are very unique and no Western country has them. I stand by that. And of course if they want to keep it that way, so be it - but then Japan should not at the same time pretend they're a country of law worthy of a G7 membership. They probably should go back to Sakoku because this two-faced way to be is honourless - and they allegedly put great importance on the concept of "honour", right? And yes, this is all my personal observation from living in Japan for a couple of years.
  - RyEgswuCsn 5y ago
    > worthy of a G7 membership What makes a country "worthy" of G7 membership? Does constant war-waging disqualifies a country from G7? Unfair treatment of a minority group, perhaps? I'd argue that expecting countries/organisations to behave like virtuous individuals would be too naïve. Also I feel Japanese honour is more about loyalty than ethics. Trying to shame them for tolerating crime syndicates probably won't make a difference.
    - suction 5y ago
      I think being a country of law, which Japan is decidedly not, is a must-have for G7 membership. I'm not American and have never set foot in the US, so don't take my criticism of Japan as some sort of "America #1" cultural chauvinism.
      - RyEgswuCsn 5y ago
        Well you already suggested that you are an European so that was a given. What I meant was judging a country's "worthiness" is already a weird notion --- how should "country of law" be quantified and compared? Who gets to say which country / system of law is better or worse? The notion that a group of rich and powerful countries gets to decide how other countries should behave when said rich and powerful countries got to where they are through (both past and ongoing) atrocious exploitations of other people doesn't sound particularly convincing, don't you think?
        suction 5y ago
        Japan does not have a system of law. They were forced by the US after WW2 to pretend they care about these things, so they just looked what other countries have, translated it, and from then on they were able to show anyone who asked "see here we have these huge volumes with lots of written down laws, what do you want from us?" But in reality, laws are extremely relative in Japan, much more so than in any stable Western country.
  - fomine3 5y ago

RyEgswuCsn 5y ago

> organised crime isn't even seen as crime, and the people perpetrating it aren't seen as criminals Do you speak of your own first-hand experience, or you got the impression from some material you read? I don't think they are that different from how Mafia is perceived. Regarding Whataboutism --- I find the accusation really low-effort. My point has never been "The West has/had organised crime so what's the problem with the East having it?"; rather, I am pointing out how you seem to think "The West is superior just because and the East should appreciate being patronisied by the West", while the West had also experienced many of the issues you described. Of course Japan has its problems, but I'd argue it would be up to the Japanese people to figure out what they are and how to solve them.

suction 5y ago
The key difference you seem to be missing is, in very simple terms, that organised crime in the West is universally accepted as a negative thing and the people who perpetrate it need to keep their identities and operations secret. While in Japan, that's not the case: Every Japanese knows what local businesses are run by the Yakuza, knows where local Yakuza headquarter is (it's not hard to find even for foreigners - it's usually a house with 24/7 shuttered windows, high spiked fences, and grim looking guys hanging out in front. In Italy, that house would get raided in an instant. In Japan, it's just part of the neighborhood, people don't go near it, but otherwise ignore it. Japan's problems are very unique and no Western country has them. I stand by that. And of course if they want to keep it that way, so be it - but then Japan should not at the same time pretend they're a country of law worthy of a G7 membership. They probably should go back to Sakoku because this two-faced way to be is honourless - and they allegedly put great importance on the concept of "honour", right? And yes, this is all my personal observation from living in Japan for a couple of years.
- RyEgswuCsn 5y ago
  > worthy of a G7 membership What makes a country "worthy" of G7 membership? Does constant war-waging disqualifies a country from G7? Unfair treatment of a minority group, perhaps? I'd argue that expecting countries/organisations to behave like virtuous individuals would be too naïve. Also I feel Japanese honour is more about loyalty than ethics. Trying to shame them for tolerating crime syndicates probably won't make a difference.
  - suction 5y ago
    I think being a country of law, which Japan is decidedly not, is a must-have for G7 membership. I'm not American and have never set foot in the US, so don't take my criticism of Japan as some sort of "America #1" cultural chauvinism.
    - RyEgswuCsn 5y ago
      Well you already suggested that you are an European so that was a given. What I meant was judging a country's "worthiness" is already a weird notion --- how should "country of law" be quantified and compared? Who gets to say which country / system of law is better or worse? The notion that a group of rich and powerful countries gets to decide how other countries should behave when said rich and powerful countries got to where they are through (both past and ongoing) atrocious exploitations of other people doesn't sound particularly convincing, don't you think?
      - suction 5y ago
        Japan does not have a system of law. They were forced by the US after WW2 to pretend they care about these things, so they just looked what other countries have, translated it, and from then on they were able to show anyone who asked "see here we have these huge volumes with lots of written down laws, what do you want from us?" But in reality, laws are extremely relative in Japan, much more so than in any stable Western country.
- fomine3 5y ago