Over at Japundit he has a letter to the editor that many of you in Korea may find interesting:
Regarding the Sept. 2 article “The ‘gaijin’ debate: Arudou responds”: Debito Arudou’s claim that the word “gaijin” is racist not only borders on whining but also smacks of something that could only be brought up by a white person. I’m part Japanese and part black, and I’ll tell you right now that I would rather be called a “gaijin” over “nigger” any day.
Arudou sounds like someone whose whiteness got him special treatment in the United States. He sounds as if he must have been shocked when he went to another country and realized that being white there wasn’t the same as it was in the U.S. All of a sudden, he was in the marginalized category normally reserved for nonwhite minorities.
I have news: “Citizenship” does NOT make one part of the Japanese race, no matter how much one wishes it. In the eyes of the Japanese, Arudou is a gaijin. Japan is not where he is from. Arudou appears to be going through a major identity crisis. To think that one can walk into another country, change citizenship and then expect the whole country to accept one not as a foreigner but as a fellow Japanese is something ripped out of the pages of Western colonialism.
I have to agree with the letter writer that being called a “gaijin” is not racist just like being called a “weiguk” in Korea is not racist as well.
Popularity: 2%
2:26 pm on September 4th, 2008 1
If I understand the article’s intent, the Androu claims that the word “gaijin” is inherently racist like the n-word in the sense that it creates a division in society, relegating anyone who is not Japanese to a generality. Now, the letter writer’s claim that the word is not racist but merely a factual statement.
They’re both right and both wrong. It’s more complex. “Gaijin,” is not inherently racist because simply it’s the way the Japanese refer to all foreigners. It’s merely a descriptive label. Now, do the Japanese ever use to word in a derogatory and hurtful manner? The answer is yes. “Gaijin” can also be used as an insult, particularly to someone who is actually Japanese or someone of Japanese descent. Like most East Asian cultures, collectivism is the natural state. So being different is not really appealing. If you’re Japanese, but let’s say have a habit that you picked up whilst living in another country, it’s not at all uncommon to hear other Japanese call you a “gaijin” for the purpose of insulting you.
2:32 pm on September 4th, 2008 2
Waeguks call each other waegooks. Koreans call us waegooksaram. Like gaijin, it’s not inherently racist, but it is sometimes inappropriate. For example, if I am in a business and the clerk is talking about me, I should, like any other customer, be referred to as sonnim, not waeguksaram, which any person who’s not blind is already aware of. Koreans have an opportunity to model polite language when speaking to and in front of foreigners. I picked up bun as an honorific alternative to saram when a Korean referred to me as a waegukbun.
6:17 pm on September 4th, 2008 3
I perfer being called waeguk to long nosed.
9:30 pm on September 4th, 2008 4
Disinterested….Isn’t the word for long nose “benco”? I remember my wife telling me years ago, that many Koreans refered to westerners as “Benco” or long noses. It was derogatory in meaning. I remember my brother-in-law thought it was funny.
8:15 am on September 5th, 2008 5
The letter writer has a good point about arrogance and the importance of realizing the limitations of your previous experience, but when Arudou complains of being called a foreigner, it’s not like he is fresh off the boat here and in some early stage of culture shock. The man is a member of the Diet, for crying out loud. Calling him a foreigner is analogous to refusing to call Arnold Schwarzenegger, Henry Kissinger, Madeleine Albright, etc., Americans. Are we aware of their foreign heritage, yes. But truly only a racist or an insane nationalist would refuse to call them Americans. So the words foreigner and ???and ??? may not be racist in and of themselves, but their use often is.
8:16 am on September 5th, 2008 6
Uh, those question marks are supposed to say gaijin and waegukin.
9:28 am on September 5th, 2008 7
Woah!!! Korea-Beat… I think you have ove-valued Debito Arudou.
“The man is a member of the Diet, for crying out loud.”
The man may be ON a Diet, but he is not a member of THE Diet!
At least, thats what this says…http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Debito_Arudou
… and that he would be un-electable, of course.
2:14 pm on September 5th, 2008 8
If I want to be racist or rude to a foreigner I would call him “weguknom” or “wegukseki”. The last one is pretty offensive.
Calling a foreigner “wegukin” is not offence, but as Sonagi observed it would be a better sign of respect calling him “weguknim” (but don’t expect to be treated like this unless you are in an extremely special occasion).
2:34 pm on September 5th, 2008 9
I didn’t say weguknim. I’ve never heard of that term. I said that foreign customers should be referred to as sonnim (customer). Koreans confirming the identity of a foreigner over the phone can ask, “Waegukbun isseyo?” instead of “Waeguksaram ieyo?” After the first and only time a Korean addressed me in that manner, I began using “Hangukbun” instead of “Hanguksaram” when confirming the nationality of strangers. Like I said, Koreans give foreigners a double benefit when they take care to speak to us politely. They show us respect and they model for us respectful language.
11:46 pm on September 5th, 2008 10
Asians have a long history of being racist towards foreigners, but react quite violently when given a taste of their own medicine.
They need to understand that in order to get respect, they must first learn how to give it.