Where are the used pantie vending machines?

In twenty years of teaching foreign nationals in Japan, I had a number of (male) students who went looking for such things. Only one, a Norwegian student, found something that might have been such a vending machine and it was not a machine that one might imagine. It was one of those things that dispenses plastic eggs with toys inside. The sign was very coy and gave no definitive answer to what was in the plastic eggs.

Exotic vending machines is a standard story in the foreign press but in a quarter century in Japan I have seen very little other than soft drink vending machines. Beer vending machines used to be common outside off licenses but they are largely gone and now can be found only inside of hotels.

I’ve seen condom vending machines in public places, but not recently. I know a few places where there are vending machines for soft-core porn magazines but they are not on the street. You have to know where they are.

Further, the journalists and other writers who have played up this story have been engaging in what I call cultural racism - trying to show the Japanese as weird and deviant.

Do an English language search on “used panties” or “used knickers” and you will find that there are on line sites for this kind of thing in the US, the UK, Australia, and I would imagine other countries.

Woman who rakes in cash selling her DIRTY KNICKERS online reveals how her business started… and the one thing she’ll never flog

Here is everything you need to know about selling your dirty knickers online

That these claims about such vending machines live on is, to put it bluntly, based on (cultural) racism, the idea that the Japanese are so deviant culturally you can find things in Japan that exist nowhere else.

Even if such machines existed they would not be outside on the streets and they would be a sign not of perversion but of technological backwardness, that Japan did not yet have the on-line marketplaces that exist in the Anglophone countries.

NOTE:  This is an edited version of a response to a question posted on Quora.  The original thread and response is here.

Who is Tarnishing Whom or What: Jeff Kingston on the Incarceration of Carlos Ghosn

Who is Tarnishing Whom or What


INTRODUCTION

On 17 January the Washington Post published an opinion piece by Jeff Kingston a professor at Temple University Japan under the title “Brand Japan is taking a hit.” The nominal purpose of this article appears to be informing an audience that the arrest of Carlos Ghosn and recent reports of misogyny in Japan are harming the image of Japan.  In his concluding sentence Kingston writes, “ Alas, the old, conservative, male elite that still dominates Japanese society is betraying Brand Japan along with the aspirations of women and young Japanese.”

Leaving aside the question of whether this assertion is valid, is not this
a message for the Japanese people to be delivered in the Japanese language, not an American audience that presumably already has its image of Japan tainted by those who are in Britain termed “pale, male, and stale”?

As far as I have been able to determine, Kingston has written nothing in Japanese for Japanese readers despite a voluminous output of commentary telling the Japanese in general and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in particular that they ought to do this, that, and the other thing.  Not only does Kingston not write in Japanese for a Japanese audience, judging by the references in his more nominally academic writing about Japan, he does not read Japanese.  In his essays in his Press Freedom in Contemporary Japan, there are no references to Japanese language articles, even articles that might support his claims.  Further, as shown below, he has not read widely or carefully in even the English language reports pertaining to the arrest of Carlos Ghosn.

GRADING HIS ESSAY

In what follows, I provide commentary on the first half of Kingston’s essay much in the manner I did for undergraduate students essay over nearly four decades teaching Japanese history and sociology.  I limit myself to what Kingston has to say about the Carlos Ghosn case because what constitutes misogyny is highly subjective and because the Ghosn case is more timely.

(JK) Pity Carlos Ghosn. Japanese prosecutors have denied bail to the jailed former Nissan chief executive, extending his two months in pretrial detention where he is subject to up to eight hours of interrogation a day without access to legal counsel.

(EHK)  He has access to legal counsel although he does not have counsel present while being questioned.  The French system (and other continental legal systems) do not necessarily allow lawyers to be present during questioning or require them to remain silent.  A New York Times article noted this fact and it is explicitly stated in a British government advisory for British nationals arrested in France. 

If Ghosn was a foreign national arrested in France, he would have little chance for bail and according to a British government publication, foreign nationals typically spend 24 months in pretrial detention. In the case of Brazil, it is 18 months. In Lebanon “you can be held on remand indefinitely without specific charges being brought.”  In other words Ghosn is not necessarily worse off in Japan than a foreign national would be in any of the three countries where he holds citizenship.

Bail is, moreover, a system of extreme class inequity.  For that reason California recently abolished cash bail and moved to a system that gives judges great (some say too much) latitude in deciding on conditional release.  Nearly one-quarter of the enormous US prison population is made up of people who cannot make cash bail.

(JK) By wearing him down psychologically, prosecutors are trying to coerce the Franco-Brazilian-Lebanese executive into signing a confession drawn up in Japanese, a language he isn’t fluent in.

(EHK)  Ghosn’s son has asserted that his father is being pressured to sign a confession.  His lawyer (Motonari Otsuru) has publicly denied this saying,  "Not once has Mr Ghosn said to us he has any concerns about being asked to sign something in a language he doesn't understand."

(JK) From the time of his “perp walk” in handcuffs as he was escorted off his private jet until he appeared in court with a rope around his waist ….

(EHK)  By using the American slang term “perp walk,” Kingston is  inadvertently drawing attention an American practice.  Not only is it common in the US that those charged with crime appear in handcuffs, they are often shackled and dressed in orange jumpsuits.  Pregnant prisoners have been forced to give birth while handcuffed.  Roger Stone, arrested in conjunction with the Mueller probe appeared in court handcuffed and shackled.

According to the New York Times, “Rudolph W. Giuliani, then a federal prosecutor with a somewhat cavalier approach to the rights of the accused, built a tough-guy reputation by marching accused Wall Street types before the press.”  The same article goes on to note, “One of the more famous walks of recent vintage involved Dominique Strauss-Kahn, who in 2011 was managing director of the International Monetary Fund and a likely candidate for the French presidency.”This produced outrage in France with numerous commentators describing the arrest as a lynching.

If Kingston’s goal is to present the Japanese approach as being out of line with “global standards,” introducing the American “perp walk” is a singularly odd way to do this.

(JK)  He has been “prosecuted” by a cascade of leaks in the media that make his conviction appear inevitable. Indeed, less than 1 percent of defendants are acquitted, despite qualms in the legal community and civil society organizations about the extent of false confessions extracted under duress.

(EHK)  Anyone who follows American court cases and investigations will know that leaks are hardly a Japanese peculiarity as a Google search on “Trump leaks” will instantly confirm.  Moreover, Japanese judges are generally described as being tone deaf when it comes to public sentiment rather than being swayed by it.

The “less than 1 percent” acquittal rate, more usually stated as a 99% percent conviction rate, has been well explained by Harvard University Law School Professor J. Mark Ramseyer in a study published in 2001 and collaborated by all subsequent research on this subject. Japanese prosecutors simply do not go forward with cases they think they might lose.  In practice they drop approximately 40 percent of possible criminal prosecutions rather than risk an acquittal.

There is, moreover, nothing particularly notable about a 99% conviction rate if US Federal Courts are used as the comparative standard.  They too have 99% plus conviction rates.  Some US Federal Courts have a 100% conviction rate.

If there is any country that extracts confessions by duress, it is the United States, not Japan.  Numerous sources state that 95% of criminal cases in the US are handled by plea bargains.  A plea bargain “is an agreement that, if an accused person says they are guilty, they will be charged with a less serious crime or will receive a less severe punishment.”

Plea bargains involve both coercion and duress.  Often agreeing to a plea bargain is a condition for getting bail. This is the duress part.  The coercion comes from the risk you run in going to court under the charges prosecutors have lodged against you.  Studies show that if you do go to court without having agreed to a plea bargain, you stand a high probability of being convicted and receiving a sentence more than twice as long as what you would have received otherwise (up to seven times longer for drug offenses).  The American Civil Liberties Union and other groups are highly critical of US-style plea bargains.

(JK) By global standards, the former chief executive of one of the world’s most profitable car company was not overpaid, but by Japanese standards, he was, and that’s the yardstick authorities are applying to his case.

(EHK)  This statement is completely false.  How much he was being paid is not at issue.  He (and Nissan) has been charged with understating his compensation on a required financial report.  False statements on financial reports are a serious legal matter in general, not just Japan, and ironically the reporting requirement that is at issue here was one introduced based on an American model and in response to foreign criticism that Japanese reporting requirements were too lax.

As for Ghosn being overpaid, there was actually more criticism of this in France than in Japan.  In February of 2018 the Wall Street Journal reported that Renault shareholders and the French government had insisted that Ghosn take a 30% pay cut as a condition for getting a final two years as Renault CEO.

His flamboyant lifestyle which included renting the Versailles Palace for his second wedding did not sit well with the French public.  The Renault union has shown little sympathy for Ghosn.

AFP interviewed Renault workers after Ghosn’s January court appearance. Comments ranged from indifference to hostility. "He's rolling in gold and doesn't increase pay for his employees," said one. Union official Philippe Gommard commented on Ghosn’s somewhat gaunt appearance. "I don't think workers will be too upset that Ghosn has lost weight. On the contrary, given how employees work in this factory, their working conditions, and given how he is seen as always asking for more while always taking more for himself, I don't think anyone here will miss him.”

He has also been the subject of satirical cartoons in the French press.  One had him complaining that there were no gold flakes on his rice at the Tokyo Detention House.

Even before his arrest, Ghosn was being described as the personification of the “Davos man,” a not particularly positive image.  Subsequent to his arrest, the same Wall Street Journal that had described his arrest and interrogation as an inquisition carried a long and detailed article documenting his extravagant lifestyle and use of Nissan-owned facilities for personal, non-business activities.

(JK) The puritanical zeal exhibited in the Ghosn case may play well to the domestic audience, which is apparently thrilled by the takedown of a greedy gaijin (foreigner).

(EHK)  Kingston offers no evidence that the Japanese domestic audience is “apparently thrilled by the takedown of a greedy gaijin (foreigner)” and this assertion contradicts his previous accurate claim that Ghosn was “lionized” in Japan.  It is also known that the whistleblower responsible for the investigation of Ghosn was not a Japanese but a gaijin.

(JK) Yet no such enthusiasm was evident in a number of recent Japanese corporate scandals such as Olympus (cooking the books), Takata (dangerous air bags) or Tokyo Electric Power (Fukushima fiasco).

(EHK)  This is the single most bizarre sentence in this article. Clicking on the link for Olympus takes the reader to a BBC article that states, “Six executives sacked by Japan's Olympus have been ordered to pay more than half a billion dollars in damages after a massive accounting fraud.” The link for Tokyo Electric Power takes the reader to an article in The Guardian describing how three former executives of the company are on trial for professional negligence.  That Japan did not prosecute Takata or its executives is irrelevant.  Three Takata executives were prosecuted in the US and the company fined one billion dollars.  Further, the defective Takata airbags were manufactured by a subsidiary, not Takata itself, in Coahuila, Mexico.

(JK) Ghosn is also accused of submitting falsified documents. That, to be sure, is a serious offense. Yet last year prosecutors decided against indicting bureaucrats for tampering with documents submitted to the Japanese parliament that exonerated Prime Minister Shinzo Abe in a scandal involving a sweetheart land deal. Double standards?

(EHK)  Quite possibly, but this is a whataboutism argument and the kind of thing that gets a “two wrongs don’t make a right” argument when I have the temerity to point out that Japan is not the only country with warts.  I have found that critics of Japan revel in comparisons that show Japan in a bad light but as soon as I introduce a comparison that shows Japan no worse than another country or even better it elicits the “two wrongs don’t make a right” or “just because the US/UK or wherever is worse than Japan, that does not mean that Japan should not strive to be better.”

There is, moreover, a double standard in Kingston’s reference to the “sweetheart land deal” more usually referred to as the Moritomo Gakuen scandal.  Kagoike Yasunori (65) and his wife were held for 300 days in the same system that is holding Carlos Ghosn.  Although the Japanese press speculated that they were held solely to keep them from further embarrassing Abe, Kingston’s favorite target, I could find no evidence that Kingston expressed sympathy for their plight let alone editorialized about it.  To be sure, Kagoike and his wife are not a very appealing couple, but ten months incarceration for an alleged non-violent crime is still  ten months incarceration whether you are Japanese or a Davos man with French-Brazilian-Lebanese citizenship, $60 million in Nissan stock and a declared income that was running at more than $340 thousand per week at the time of arrest.

CONCLUSION

I would not accept something like Kingston’s piece as an undergraduate essay.  I’d hand it back and say rewrite it.  You don’t have to agree with me but you need to demonstrate that any comparisons you make or imply between Japan and other countries are comparisons of Japanese reality with foreign reality, not comparisons of Japanese reality with foreign ideals.  Further, if there are numerous sources that do not support your thesis, cite them and explain why you think they are not relevant, don’t just ignore them.

Finally, if you are saying what the Japanese should or should not be doing, write in Japanese in Japanese language venues.  Better yet, if you think your ideas would improve Japan: (1) naturalize and vote; (2) stand for election.  Naturalization is not difficult.  Naturalized foreigners have been elected to the Diet and local government office.  Even if election attempts fail, giving stump speeches will enable more Japanese to get the message than if writers confine themselves to English language venues.

NOTE:  For a version of this commentary with footnotes and links, click here.

White Makes Right When It Comes To Contemporary Whaling

INTRODUCTION

On the last day of 2018 the Editorial Board of the New York Times issued one of its ex cathedra statements telling Japan and the Japanese what it had determined was best for them.  Under the headline “Japan: Stop Slaughtering Whales,” this NYT version of a papal bull repeated in several variations statements that “most of the world … have moved on from the days when killing whales was deemed an acceptable pursuit.”  This clearly shows that the NYT Editorial Board is well aware that Japan is not the only nation outside the IWC that engages in commercial whaling but no where are those nations named:  Norway, Iceland, and depending on definition, Denmark. (36735)  It is hard to imagine an approach more carefully crafted to confirm the belief of many Japanese and not a few non-Japanese that racism is a component of foreign opposition to Japanese whaling.

Adding to the implicit message that the NYT editors think whaling is not so bad if white people do it is an article that appeared only a few months before the condemnation of Japan under the headline “Meet Iceland’s Whaling Magnate. He Makes No Apologies.” (61617)  Although Sea Shepherd opposition was mentioned, the article basically let Kristjan Loftsson, a commercial hunter of fin whales have his say including his advice that those offended by his whaling operations should look the other way.  The article concluded with him saying, “There’s nothing wrong with this.”  Reading the condemnation of Japan in conjunction with this article makes it hard to think that the editorial on Japan was driven by anything other than racism.

Not to be outdone, The (LA) Times Editorial Board issued its we too statement on Japanese whaling on the 3rd of January. (11090)  It proclaimed, “But among the more than 80 nations that belong to the International Whaling Commission and have signed on to its ban on commercial whaling, Japan has always been a renegade member” artfully omitting the fact that while Iceland and Norway are nominal members of the IWC, both conduct commercial whaling following quotas they set themselves.

The editorial went on, “But the start-up of commercial whaling in its coastal waters in the North Pacific is an outrageous flouting of a long-established and still necessary global effort to preserve whale species and help them thrive.”  Again, there was no mention of Iceland and Norway even though whaling in their Exclusive Economic Zone is precisely what Japan has said it will do.

In a long-standing pattern of woke Americans telling the Japanese what they should do, the editorial concluded, “ It’s past time for the Japanese to join the overwhelming majority of the world and put the practice of whale hunting to rest, once and for all.”  Once again, it is hard to imagine an approach more carefully crafted to confirm the belief of many Japanese and not a few non-Japanese that racism is a component of foreign opposition to Japanese whaling.

Guardian commentator Owen Jones also launched a vitriolic attack on Japan published under the title “The idea of Japan resuming commercial whaling is Horrifying.”  (69812)  Although mentioning other nations, he named none, and concluded, “Japan’s actions should meet universal condemnation.”  Again, it is hard to see this as anything other than racism.  We won’t even mention those “other nations” since they happen to be predominantly white.  Although many appending comments to this article agreed with Jones, not a few pointed out the failure to mention Norway, Iceland, and Denmark (Faroe Islands).

NPR (National Public Radio) was among those reporting Japan’s withdrawal with no reference to Icelandic or Norwegian whaling and using quotes such as “"This is the path of a pirate whaling nation, with a troubling disregard for international rule." (38043)

JAPAN KILLS PREGNANT WHALES

Even before the flap over withdrawal from the IWC there was a spate of articles about Japan killing pregnant whales in its Antarctic operations.  A typical article such as one in The Guardian carried a quote saying, ““The killing of 122 pregnant whales is a shocking statistic and sad indictment on the cruelty of Japan’s whale hunt” while making no mention of Iceland or Norway.  (59841)

Whales do not have obvious “baby bumps” and if you kill whales, some will be pregnant females.  Whales have long gestation periods (10-17 months) making it difficult or impossible to avoid taking pregnant whales through a seasonally limited catch.  Further, the only reason those critical of Japanese whaling had this ammunition is because Japan reported this information as part of its research whaling.

Reports that Norway had taken more than three times the Japanese catch and that 90% of the whales taken by Norway were pregnant received a small fraction of the attention and condemnation meted out to Japan.  Even where there is condemnation of Norway in these articles, the rhetoric is notably muted compared to that used for Japan.

JAPANESE GOVERNMENT REBUTTAL

he Japanese government responded to the NYT editorial with a letter published (11 January 2019).  The rebuttal noted that the editorial “didn’t mention critical facts” which were given as (1) there would be strict catch limits; (2) no endangered species would be taken; (3) whaling would be limited to “Japan’s 200-mile exclusive economic zone, where it has the sovereign right to use the living resources”; (4) “there is no general international prohibition on whaling”;  “whaling has been a part of Japanese culture for centuries, just as it has been in Norway, Iceland and Denmark, and among indigenous peoples in the United States and Canada, who continue to engage in it.” (89864)  Other news media do not seem to have received a rebuttal or not published published them if they were received.

Perhaps wisely the Japanese government did not describe the NYT editorial in terms of racism.  Doing so would have almost certainly have provoked whataboutism of the form, “How can Japanese condemn racism when Japanese discriminate against ….”  But, it is not only Japanese who have sensed racism in the condemnations of Japanese whaling.

AUSTRALIANS SEE RACISM IN OPPOSITION TO JAPANESE WHALING

Some Australians have recognized a racism component in Australian opposition to whaling.  Writing in The Conversation in 2011 the University of Queensland anthropologist Adrian Pearce noted that Iceland’s “booming Arctic fin whaling” was more of a threat to whales than the faltering Japanese operation in the Antarctic but, “'Demonising the Japanese has long been the other side of the coin to worshipping the whale…. But Icelanders look like us and talk like us, their science is much the same as ours (including the science which sets whale quotas) as are their political processes. Turning　our gaze northwards to Iceland's whaling economy will require realignment of our moral compass.” (13993) (Get original)

The one sided-condemnations of Japanese whaling and Japan’s withdrawal from the IWC ignored an important point that a small number of more intelligent and less biased commentators noted.  The announced plan for commercial whaling in Japanese territorial waters and its economic zone does not represent an increased whale but rather a substantial scaling down of Japanese whaling.  The territorial waters and economic zone whaling has been going on at ever diminishing scale without adverse foreign comment and Antarctic whaling will be stopped as well as North Pacific expeditions (46553).

WHAT JAPAN IS ACTUALLY DOING

The one sided-condemnations of Japanese whaling and Japan’s withdrawal from the IWC ignored an important point that a small number of more intelligent and less biased commentators noted.  The announced plan for commercial whaling in Japanese territorial waters and its economic zone does not represent an increased whale but rather a substantial scaling down of Japanese whaling.  The territorial waters and economic zone whaling has been going on at ever diminishing scale without adverse foreign comment and Antarctic whaling will be stopped as well as North Pacific expeditions (46553).

Adding to the feeling that the NYT and LA Times editorials were knee jerk Japan bashing is the absence of serious consideration of what Japan says it will be doing: scaling down its whaling and perhaps even phasing it out.  If the NYT and LA Times were concerned first and foremost about protecting whales rather than Japan bashing, this should have been emphasized.  Whether Japan is in the IWC or not, whether the whaling is called commercial or research, if far fewer whales get killed that should have earned Japan praise and led to condemnation of Iceland and Norway because both have announced increases in their self-imposed quotas.

Remarkably, even Jeff Kingston a longtime critic of Japanese policy in many areas and a severe critic of the Abe government in particular, recognized this is in an opinion piece published in the South China Morning Post.  Although not entirely sure his scenario would play out, Kingston observed, “Thus, it is possible to imagine a positive scenario where Japanese whaling will be scaled down, taxpayers’ money will not be squandered, and Japan will no longer be cast as the Voldemort of the oceans.” (99006)

Julian Ryall, another inveterate critic of Japan and Japanese policy, cited Japanese sources to make much the same point in an article in The Telegraph. (56521)  Other British papers had unsigned articles making the same point. (46533) 

As noted by Kingston and a small number of other commentators, the Japanese withdrawal from the IWC and planned resumption of commercial whaling has something for everyone.  Sea Shepherd can proclaim success.  The Australians and New Zealanders can applaud the ending of Japanese whaling in an area over which they claim a special interest.  Those Japanese who see the IWC strictures as an affront to national sovereignty and pride can say we told the IWC what to do with its moratorium.  Whaling communities can find comfort in the stated government policy of resumed commercial whaling.

There are also suggestions that the costs of sustaining the Antarctic whaling operation have made it impossible to sustain.  The main factory ship the Nisshin Maru is in need of replacement or complete refurbishment and new regulations (CHECK?) on ships operating in the Antarctic region require them to be double skinned.  That means that Japan would have to ignore this regulation or replace the rest of the whaling fleet as well.  (98135)

That the Japanese withdrawal from the IWC, the abandonment of research whaling, and the resumption of commercial whaling might actually be the beginning of a  stealth withdrawal from whaling (“don’t ask, don’t tell”) should have occurred to the US and UK editorial writers if for no other reason than that it was being enunciated in readily available English language news media.

CONCLUSION

I have eaten whale meat.  I rather like it.  I have even tried to cook it myself with unfortunate results.  The least bit of overcooking turns it rock hard.  Nonetheless, as a Japanese tax payer and later as a citizen, I have always thought that Japan should get out of whaling or at the very least stop the “research whaling” that was widely and rightly considered a farce.  The Japanese demand for whale meat can easily be met by imports from Iceland or Norway.  Let them take the heat.

Having said that, I must also say that racist criticism of Japanese whaling is not to be permitted.  Moreover, racist criticism of Japan is not limited to whaling.  English language articles about Japan in both foreign media and domestic media such as the Japan Times and Japan today are larded with derogatory comments about Japanese culture.  It is insular, backward, xenophobic, sexist, feudal, and even worse.  Even Japanese writers make such statements.

The converse of denigrating Japanese culture which means in effect the denigration of Japanese people is the elevation of Western culture which is a code word for European white culture.  It is high time that Japanese stopped denigrating their own culture and ultimately denigrating themselves while giving ammunition to foreign racists.  At the same time, Japanese companies should seriously consider withdrawing advertising from media but domestic and foreign that manifest blatant racism against Japan and the Japanese.

NOTE:  Five digit numbers in parenthesis in the text are for my personal source tracking system.  Any item cited in the text can be supplied upon request.

Why are foreign pundits so resistant to fact checking and so wedded to stereotypes?

Japan accepts it needs immigrants for its economy to survive – so why is it still so resistant to change?

The real issue here is why foreign pundits are so resistant to fact checking and so wedded to ethnic, even racist, generalizations.

Selections from the original article by Hamish McRae are in italics in the commentary below.

But throughout Japanese history there has been a sense of exceptionalism: that Japanese people, and their society, are different from the rest of the world. Not only different, but better.

That may be the case for some Japanese now, but there is a general tendency in Japan to cite other countries, especially the Nordic countries, as doing many things much better than they are done in Japan. Further, there have been at least two periods in which a collective inferiority complex prevailed in Japan: in the second half of the 19th century when there was a concerted effort to modernize Japan on mostly European models; in the wake of defeat and surrender in 1945.

Fewer Japanese study abroad, fewer learn foreign languages, fewer are posted abroad for work.

Because the college-age cohort has declined in size by more than 40% since it peaked in 1992, the decline in the number of Japanese studying abroad has more to do with demographic change than any turning inward. Further, the number studying abroad has actually been increasing in recent years. Foreign language study remains popular and the teaching of English in the schools has in fact been expanded.

A seldom noted factor in the shrinkage of the Japanese population in recent years is an increase in the number of Japanese nationals living and working outside of Japan. Specialists in Japanese demography are aware of this pattern but journalists who write about Japan have ignored it.

When an immigrant fails to fit in – and the obvious current example is Carlos Ghosn, former head of Nissan and engineer of the Nissan/Renault partnership – then Japanese society rebels.

Carlos Ghosn is by no stretch of the imagination an immigrant. He has never styled himself and immigrant; he has never been styled as an immigrant.

Nissan management may have been unhappy with Ghosn, but in Japanese society at large, he has been treated as a folk hero. There was even a Japanese manga celebrating him as a hero. Japanese society at large was extremely surprised by his arrest.

"The nail that sticks up must be hammered down,” as the Japanese aphorism maintains. 

This is an aphorism used by foreigners, not Japanese. In 25 years residency in Japan and 45 years as someone using Japanese in my daily life, I have never heard Japanese use this expression. There are other aphorisms with a similar meaning that are used by Japanese but this one is primarily something foreigners cite, not Japanese.

This will not change Japan. The country has deemed it more important to preserve its culture and identity than to ease economic strains, and it will continue to do so.

As one of those skilled migrants, a Japanese citizen, and an historian specializing in modern Japanese history, I would beg to differ. Japan has been very adaptive in the past and will almost certainly continue to be adaptive

Go to my primary or secondary webserver.

Primary website is here.  Secondary website is here.