Talk:Demographics of Japan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Japan (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Japan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Japan-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Current time in Japan: 07:56, December 14, 2014 (JST, Heisei 26) (Refresh)
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Anti-japanese Sentiments?[edit]

"In folk crafts and in right-wing politics, in the new religions and in International management, the Japanese have reinvented their past to interpret the present, for example, by reinventing "Sexually tortured women" into "Comfort Women" or rewriting Japanese History texts terming well documented "massacres" into "incidents" and "300,000 Deaths" into "many people" died [4].

This seems like it is biased against japanese people. And I don't really think it belongs here (demography of japan). Anyone else agree? 129.2.206.65 22:06, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree. It might be worthy of a separate article on "Historical whitewashing in Japan", but until I see articles on the same subject in other countries, I'd think that was pretty silly as well. Bakarocket (talk) 13:10, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

This whole article is seriously weak. It is internally contradictory, makes numerous implicitly comparative claims without giving comparative data, and completely lacks any references to recent development in immigration policy. Further, there is no discussion of the two different data sets (census, resident registration) that provide demographic data for Japan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ehk (talkcontribs) 21:34, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Why is there so much emphasis on emmigration and immigration policy and the problems thereof? Half the space under demographics is dedicated to perceived policy problems. I thought wikipedia was focused on giving information from a neutral viewpoint. Sumedha Dharmawardhane (Sri Lanka) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.245.165.30 (talk) 11:00, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Improving article[edit]

More pedagogical images like population density and other kinds of maps needs to be added to the article. Lord Metroid 07:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Biological Origin[edit]

I wonder about the usage of the term race in the article. Shouldn't the usage be restricted to biological terminology, for greater clarity? Since this

"Japanese people are considered to be a homogeneous race but recent studies have shown that the Japanese race is very mixed. It consists of Korean, Altaic, Tungusic, northern Chinese, Polynesian and proto-Mongoloid blood which explains the variety of Japanese facial structures."

seems to be about biological distinctions, only biological usage is appropriate. I would prefer something along the line of

"Japanese people are often considered to be a very homogenous population, but studies have shown (significant) Korean, Altaic, Tungusic, Northern Chinese, Polynesian and proto-Mongoloid influence."

Just a suggestion, I haven't verified how significant the influence of these populations actually was.

southern Kyushu[edit]

About 80 million of the urban population are heavily concentrated on the Pacific shore of Honshu and in southern Kyushu.

The biggest cities of Kyushu (Fukuoka, Kitakyushu) are in the North of the Island. I am not a native speaker of English and therefore I am not sure if "southern Kyushu" means that Kyushu is an Island in the South of Japan. Kagoshima in Southern Kyushu is considerably smaller than Fukuoka.--203.205.193.47 13:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Possible POV copied from public domain[edit]

These paragraphs, among others, bother me. They were copied from a US gov't site. They seem accusatory:

If Japanese society is reluctant to readmit returnees, it is even less willing to accept as full members of society those people who are not ethnic Japanese. In 1991 there were 1.2 million foreign residents in Japan, less than 1 percent of Japan's population (if illegal aliens were counted, the number of foreigners might be several times higher than the quoted figure). Of this number, 693,100 (about 57 percent) were Koreans and 171,100 (some 14 percent) were Chinese. Many of these people were descendants of those brought to Japan during Japan's occupation of Taiwan (1895- 1945) and Korea (1905-45) to work at unskilled jobs, such as coal mining. Because Japanese citizenship was based on the nationality of the parent rather than on the place of birth, subsequent generations were not automatically Japanese and had to be naturalized to claim citizenship, despite being born and educated in Japan and speaking only Japanese, as was the case with most Koreans in Japan. Until the late 1980s, people applying for citizenship were expected to use only the Japanese renderings of their names and, even as citizens, continued to face discrimination in education, employment, and marriage. Thus, few chose naturalization, and they faced legal restrictions as foreigners, as well as extreme social prejudice.

All non-Japanese are required by law to register with the government and carry alien registration cards. From the early 1980s, a civil disobedience movement encouraged refusal of the fingerprinting that accompanied registration every five years. Those people who opposed fingerprinting argued that it was discriminatory because the only Japanese who were fingerprinted were criminals. The courts upheld fingerprinting, but the law was changed so that fingerprinting was done once rather than with each renewal of the registration. Some Koreans, often with the support of either South Korea or the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (North Korea), attempted to educate their children in the Korean language, history, and culture and to instill pride in their Korean heritage. Most Koreans in Japan, however, have never been to the Korean Peninsula and do not speak Korean. Many are caught in a vicious cycle of poverty and discrimination in a society that emphasizes Japan's homogeneity and cultural uniqueness. Other Asians, too, whether students or permanent residents, face prejudice and a strong "we-they" distinction. Europeans and North Americans might be treated with greater hospitality but nonetheless find it difficult to become full members of Japanese society. Public awareness of the place of foreigners (gaijin) in Japanese society was heightened in the late 1980s in debates over the acceptance of Vietnamese and Chinese refugees and the importing of Filipino brides for rural farmers.

Is it POV, well-written, or both? I'm hesitant to do something.--The ikiroid (talk parler hablar paroli 说 話し parlar) 14:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Why do you say it comes from a US Government source? I Googled part of the text and I could not find it anywhere else. Don't accuse others of being accusatory!
However I think that the article needs to be rewritten. About 30% is about demography and 70% is opinion on a few cute issues, while more relevant topics like population distribution patterns are ignored —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kransky (talkcontribs) 01:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Bias and citations?[edit]

While I am not disputing the claims in the migration and foreign residents sections of the article. I think that it comes across as very one-sided (critical of Japan) and lacks the usual citations showing external support for the claims made.

"Discrimination and minorities" section has problems[edit]

This section has a lot of vicious anti-Japanese statements, accusations of alleged prejudices and discriminations allegedly practiced by the general Japanese public towards minorities, especially towards nationalities with high anti-Japanese sentiment. These statements are backed up with zero sources cited in the article. That's one problem, but another problem I see is with the awkward section title. There's no section for simply just "Minorities." So, Ryukyuans must be put under Discrimination because it belongs in Minorities. I suggest either:

  • A. Spllitting the section into two sister sections "Minorities", and "Discrimination"
  • B. Put "Discrimination" as a subsection under "Minorities"
  • C. Leave out "Discrimination" for another article in the "See also" section
  • D. Rename "Discrimination and minorities" to "Minorities" and keep all the accusations in there

Tokek 12:27, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Rename from demographics to demography[edit]

Please see Talk:Demography#Demographics_vs_demography_confusion and comment.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  19:30, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Birth Rate section doesn't make sense[edit]

The two last sentences of the Birth Rate section don't make sense:

The general concern on a shrinking population in the next 50 years puts a strain in Japanese economic growth and social stability, as some demographers argued that Japan is no longer a very crowded country in terms of Japan's high population density.

What does it mean to be uncrowded in terms of your own population density?

It has been theorized and estimated in demographic research that of the less than 50,000 ethnic Japanese of mainly non-Asian-American descent, either white or African American, are children of intermarriages between American soldiers stationed in the country since after World War II and Japanese women taken as their wives, who stayed in Japan instead of coming with their husbands to America.

This sentence doesn't seem to say anything at all. I think there's a missing number or percentage before "are children of". Unfortunately, I can't supply it. Can anyone help here?

--Joachim Heck (talk) 21:07, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

love[edit]

Ââ₡₡₡₡₡₡₡₡ṢṢṭŐÞ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.218.196.214 (talk) 10:04, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Citations needed for claims of greater Chinese influence on Ryukyuan culture[edit]

The article presently claims that Ryukyuan culture has been more greatly influenced by the Chinese due to the islands' geographical position relative to the east coast of China and the island of Taiwan. This claim requires a citation, but the one that had been provided (The island dependencies of Japan; an account of the islands that have passed under Japanese control since the restoration, 1867-1912 by Charlotte M. Salwey) did not present any such claim nor any evidence to support such a claim. Ebizur (talk) 20:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)


Wrong number?[edit]

In February 2007, most demographers and the Japanese government announced the first significant rise in the national birth rate in 40 years took place in 2006. The nation had an estimated 33,500 new births that year, a sign of a small but suitable rise in the Japanese population, held as one of the fastest aging and least growing in the developed world.

The figure 33,500 sounds too low. Is it really correct?

--Peter —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.128.38 (talk) 21:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes its too low. Maybe its the surplus, births -deaths ?

The article that does not match the purpose of the encyclopedia[edit]

Planth (talk) is done in an act and the reconstruction of the deletion article to put act to add the outside link which does not match making and the purpose of the new article that does not match the purpose of the encyclopedia to an established article, the same outside link on the several articles.


An open quote

==== "Alien card" lawsuit ==== Japan‑born ethnic minorities are legally called "alien" by "Alien Registration Law"<ref>[http://www.moj.go.jp/ENGLISH/information/tarl-15.html Japan's Ministry of Justice Website<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>, a real Japan's law, and must carry "an alien card" anytime anywhere.<ref>[http://www.moj.go.jp/ENGLISH/information/tarl-15.html Japan's Ministry of Justice Website<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> Alien Registration Law is described in a [[UNHCHR]] report, PREVENTION OF DISCRIMINATION The rights of non-citizens, as follows: "An amendment to the Japanese Alien Registration Law recently abolished a fingerprint requirement to which all non-citizens had been subject. The revision of the law relieved about 600,000 residents from having to register their fingerprints. Instead, they will be asked to file their signatures or the names of their family members. Although the fingerprint law has been repealed, foreigners are still required to carry their alien registration cards at all times and violators face heavy penalties including incarceration for up to three years or fines of up to 300,000 yen. This requirement has been widely condemned abroad."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.unhchr.ch/Huridocda/Huridoca.nsf/e06a5300f90fa0238025668700518ca4/a80788bbc13a7676c1256be90035b864/$FILE/G0213907.pdf |title=a UNHCHR report, PREVENTION OF DISCRIMINATION The rights of non-citizens,|}}</ref> Suruga Bank denied minorities a bank account if they do not present "an alien card." Even if minorities show a driver's licence, Suruga Bank rejected a bank account.<ref>{{jp icon}} [http://web.archive.org/web/20070209234820/www.surugabank.co.jp/my/request/printer.html former Suruga Bank Website<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref>There was no reason for this. It was not a loan, jusut a bank account. "Alien Registration Law"<ref>[http://www.moj.go.jp/ENGLISH/information/tarl-15.html Japan's Ministry of Justice Website<!-- Bot generated title -->]</ref> says, "The alien shall present his registration certificate to the Immigration Inspector, Immigration Control Officer (meaning the Immigration Control Officer provided for in the Immigration Control Act), Police Official, Maritime Safety Official or any other official of the state or local public entity prescribed by the Ministry of Justice Ordinance, if such official requests the presentation of the registration certificate in the performance of his duties." Suruga Bank is not an "Immigration Inspector" or "Police Official." {{nihongo|'''VAIBS, Victims Against Illegal Bank SURUGA'''|違法銀行スルガと闘う被害者の会|Ihō ginkō suruga to tatakau higaishia no kai}} sued Suruga Bank over its "Alien Card" policies and practices. "Alien Card" lawsuit against SURUGA Bank charges racial/ethnic/national discrimninatiton. The case number is HEISEI 19(RE)467 in [[Tokyo District Court]]. You can read the court paper in [[Tokyo District Court]]. The next court trial was set for September 2008, but was suspended because Suruga Bank refused to disclose the disputed policy.

The above quotation end

I think that there is the case that I damage the act to put act to add the outside link which is not correct in making and the purpose of the new article that does not match the purpose of the encyclopedia to an established article, the same outside link on the several articles, and is considered to be an act even if Planth did not have the intention.--219.112.28.46 (talk) 01:53, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

To put this in plainer English, the allegations made in this paragraph aren't sourced to anywhere. While there are some links to corroboratory material (the laws and bank policies, for instance), there is no link to information about the lawsuit, and, doing a web search, all I can find is a few free blogs. These are not sources. Indeed, an article on the lawsuit was deleted back in July on the grounds that the suit wasn't notable and wasn't sourced. Reinserting it here in a similarly unsourced form isn't appropriate. Zetawoof(ζ) 02:46, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Languages[edit]

"99% of the population speak Japanese as oranges their first language."

Is there a hidden message embedded in that sentence68.91.133.68 (talk) 22:15, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Poverty Rate[edit]

I think one of the articles on Japan should give the poverty rate and perhaps a few comments about poverty in Japan. The number of families on welfare recently recorded an all-time high. See http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20101215b1.html --76.204.73.166 (talk) 20:42, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Average or median age[edit]

There doesn't seem to be an average or median age from the last census anyplace. That is important information. Student7 (talk) 20:00, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

180.29.236.219 (talk) 13:27, 9 January 2013 (UTC)==Marital Status== This data cannot be correct...on its face, it is wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.88.2.162 (talk) 01:49, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

"Internal to Japan, a distinction between 'Polynesian-type' (darker-skinned, round-eyed) Jomon and 'Continental-type' (lighter-skinned, narrow-eyed) Yayoi is sometimes observed, although the popular shorthand does not actually reflect the observed 90% Yayoi / 10% Jomon haploid-group frequency of modern Japanese DNA." What is this sentence? It doesn't have citation of studies where such frequences have been observed. In all studies i know about it's totally different frequency, about 60 / 40%. Moreover, why Jomon is called Polynesian type? I have never heard such term. Any ways, i think this sentence is completely wrong, and even supposed it's true, it lacks citation and doesn't belong to this article. I suggest sentence to be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.73.122.185 (talk) 20:16, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

    *Agreed, that sentence is completely unnecessary, uncited and inaccurate. It simply has no purpose remaining there under Wikipedia standards. 180.29.236.219 (talk) 13:27, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Ageing and population shrinkage[edit]

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/07/in-rapidly-aging-japan-adult-diaper-sales-are-about-to-surpass-baby-diapers/277706/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/japan/9999591/Japans-population-suffers-biggest-fall-in-history.html

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2013/03/28/Japans-population-decline-highlighted/UPI-11001364445270/

http://www.cnn.com/2012/01/30/world/asia/japan-population-decline

http://thediplomat.com/2013/02/japans-demographic-disaster/

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2013/04/17/national/japans-population-falls-by-record-level/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/currentevents/2013/02/13/declining-populations-make-peaceful-neighbors/

Rajmaan (talk) 18:06, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Loaded language problem[edit]

"In many cases special residents, despite being born in Japan and only speaking Japanese, have chosen not to take advantage of Japan's mostly automatic granting of citizenship to special resident applicants." This makes it sound like it's the NJ's fault that he or she doesn't have Japanese citizenship. That is hardly impartial. In contrast with Japan, many countries have birthright citizenship and allow dual citizenship. --Douglaspperkins (talk) 05:53, 27 August 2014 (UTC)