This document summarizes and compares two academic articles about multiculturalism and ethnicity in Japan, and briefly draws a comparison to Colombia. The first article by Nagayoshi explores how Japanese society accepts multiculturalism and how ethno-national identity affects support for minorities' rights. The second by Yamashiro introduces the concept of heterogeneous global ethnic groups and discusses how notions of "Japaneseness" differ both within Japan and abroad. While both Japan and Colombia guarantee equality under the constitution, realities of exclusion and discrimination persist against minorities like Koreans, Ainus, Afro-Colombians and indigenous groups in both countries.

1. 1
Ritsumeikan University
School of International Relations
Japanese Culture
Final Paper
Presented by: Jenny Lafaurie
RUID: 8152160015-2
Date: July 12th
, 2016
Multiculturalism and Ethnicity in Japan: A Review of Nagayoshi, Yamashiro and a
Comparison with the Colombian Case
Multiculturalism and ethnic identity –or „Japaneseness‟- are subjects of many
interesting controversies and discussions in the realm of Japanese studies both in Japan and
abroad. The literature on these topics abound (both in English and Japanese), undoubtly
benefiting those who find these subjects fascinating and puzzling. As a foreigner that only
recently became acquainted with Japanese culture, society, and politics in more detail in the
last few months, my pre-conceived about Japan have been completely challenged to the core.
Perhaps the most challenged pre-conception has been that of Japan as an „ethnically
homogeneous society‟. After all, the image that Japan projects to the world does not stray
away from this core argument. For instance, it was not until recently that the terms „Zainichi‟,
„Burakumin‟, and „Ainu‟ came to my attention for the first time. More surprisingly, perhaps,
was learning of the discrimination and exclusion that these minorities face in the country on a
daily basis. I am certain that I am not the only one oblivious to this reality.
A newly found fascination on the subjects of multiculturalism, ethnicity and minorities
in Japan has presented me with the opportunity of further research to help me understand what
explains the social realities around these topics in the country. This fascination has also raised
interesting questions regarding the same topics in my home country of Colombia where, at a
surface level, we pride ourselves in the multicultural nature of our nation and try to portray it

2. 2
as one where different ethnicities come together under the banner of Colombian national
pride.
The following paper aims at enhancing my understanding of these interesting issues in
Japan. For this purpose, I have chosen to review two academic articles on the subject: the
first, written by Kikuko Nagayoshi, is entitled “Support of Multiculturalism, But for Whom?
Effects of Ethno-National Identity on the Endorsement of Multiculturalism in Japan”,
published in the Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies in 2011; the second one, “A Triple
Parallax: Japanese as a Heterogeneous Global Ethnic Group”, written by Jane H. Yamashiro
and published in The New Centennial Review in 2012. After a brief review of these academic
articles, I will briefly comment on the conception of multiculturalism and ethnicity in
Colombia in order to draw a comparison with Japan.
Review: Kikuko Nagayoshi - “Support of Multiculturalism, But for Whom? Effects of
Ethno-National Identity on the Endorsement of Multiculturalism in Japan”
Nagayoshi explores how the idea of multiculturalism is accepted in Japanese society
and addresses the existing relationship between ethno-national identity, support for
multiculturalism, and the endorsement for equal rights to minorities (Nagayoshi, 2011, pp.
562). The author begins his article by defining the meaning of multiculturalism, and he
explains that it pertains to answer the question of “who belongs to a nation?” (Nagayoshi,
2011, pp. 563) The answer to this question, the author asserts, varies depending on whether
one uses the civic/voluntary definition of multiculturalism, or the ethnic/ascriptive definition
of the term: the former –also referred to by the author as the conventional view of
multiculturalism- values cultural diversity within a nation, including ethnic minorities; the
latter –or the alternative view on multiculturalism- is applied to a “nation defined in ethnic
terms”, that is, a nation that conceives of citizenship as a right only to be held by the ethnic

3. 3
majority of nation, and therefore establishing an “ethnic hierarchy” under which minorities do
not fully belong (Nagayoshi, 2011, pp. 562-63).
Once these concepts are discussed, Nagayoshi briefly looks into the situation of ethnic
minorities in Japan –such as the Ainu-, the status of their rights, and the policies put forth by
the Japanese government regarding immigration and multiculturalism. The author points out
that the principle of jus sanguinis in Japanese law has not allowed descendants born in Japan
of ethnic minorities –such as Koreans- to become fully Japanese; they are regarded as “legal
aliens”(Nagayoshi, 2011, pp. 566). Also, the author mentions that there is a strong sense of
monoculturalism in the educational system, and laws regarding racial discrimination do not
exist (Nagayoshi, 2011, pp. 566-67). In regards to ethnic minorities, the author concludes that
the relative small size of ethnic minority population in Japan has allowed the myth of
Japanese ethnic homogeneity to be maintained and to perpetuate the widespread obliviousness
to ethnic diversity in Japanese society (Nagayoshi, 2011, pp. 562).
Nagayoshi also presents the results of the survey he conducted on 1,102 respondents
on questions regarding endorsement of cultural rights of minorities, support towards
multiculturalism, attachment to the idea of Japanese homogeneity, criteria for being Japanese,
and support of an ethnic/ascriptive view of multiculturalism. The author concludes that
Japanese regard ethnic minorities as “exceptions within a culturally homogeneous society”;
maintaining the image of “pure Japanese people” is still extremely important in Japanese
society; and that it is under this context that it is all the more necessary to establish a legal
framework to ensure equal rights to ethnic minorities in Japan (Nagayoshi, 2011, pp. 574).

4. 4
Review: Jane H. Yamashiro - “A Triple Parallax: Japanese as a Heterogeneous Global
Ethnic Group”
In order to explain the different notions of Japanese ethnic identity –or „Japaneseness‟-
both in Japan and in the United States, Yamashiro introduces the concept heterogeneous
global ethnic groups, which the author defines as “people who share a common ancestry, real
or imagined, who are historically and culturally linked, but whose histories have diverged to
create new, unique cultural forms and communities around the world” (Yamashiro, 2012, pp.
192). The author argues that both geography and “historical diversity” play an important role
in shaping the notions of Japaneseness both in the homeland and abroad and, at such,
Yamashiro asserts that Japanese identity abroad is shaped by “assimilation” and
“acculturation”, while in the homeland these notions change “in the larger society over time”
(Yamashiro, 2012, pp. 193).
The different interpretations of what it means to be Japanese, the author argues, are
formed by the intersection of “racial categories, boundaries, and meanings […] with political
and social forces, and differ by context” (Yamashiro, 2012, pp. 195). In the particular case of
ethnic homogeneity inside Japan, the author explains that the discourse shaping Japaneseness
is inherently related to the idea of nihonjiron, according to which Japanese are bounded by
“ancestry, phenotype, blood, culture, and citizenship” (Yamashiro, 2012, pp. 218). The idea
of Japanese homogeneity is also further ingrained based upon the notion that Japanese “look,
speak, and act the same” (Yamashiro, 2012, pp. 217).
According to Yamashiro, Japaneseness has been “constructed against” two different
types of “foreigners”: the West and the rest of Asia, being the former “highly regarded in
Japan”, while the latter “are perceived as less prevalent in the global arena” (Yamashiro,
2012, pp. 216). At such, Yamashiro asserts that inclusions and exclusions to Japaneseness are

5. 5
established, and terms such as kikokushijo, hafu, and nikkeijin are useful categories to
determine who is fully Japanese and who is not (Yamashiro, 2012, pp. 216). The author
concludes that „Japaneseness‟ is to be understood under “their respective sociohistorical
contexts” (Yamashiro, 2012, pp. 220).
Multiculturalism and Inclusion in Japan and Colombia: A Brief Comparison
The Constitution of 1991 the Republic of Colombia was hailed for making
multiculturalism and inclusion two of the pillars upon which the values of the Republic
stands. Articles 7 and 13 give paramount importance to this newly established respect for
diversity. As Article 7 reads: "The State recognizes and protects the ethnic and cultural
diversity of the Colombian Nation" (1991 Constitution of Colombia). While Article 13
proclaims: "All persons are born free and equal under the law, they will receive the same
protection and be treated equally by the authorities and will enjoy the same rights, liberties,
and opportunities without any discrimination based on sex, race, national origin or family,
language, religion, political or philosophical opinion. The State will promote the conditions
under which equality can be real and effective, and it will adopt measures to protect
discriminated or marginalized groups[...]" (1991 Constitution of Colombia).
If we are to compare the Constitution of Colombia to the 1946 Constitution of Japan,
Article 14 is similar to the aforementioned Article 13 of the Colombian Constitution, as it
reads: “All of the people are equal under the law and there shall be no discrimination in
political, economic or social relations because of race, creed, sex, social status or family […]”
(1946 Constitution of Japan). As it is evident, theoretically both Constitutions guarantee
equality under the law for “all”. The reality, however, is very different.
In the case of Japan, the aversion to multiculturalism has perpetuated the existence of
great gap between the ethnic majority and the ethnic minorities in Japan, exemplified by the

6. 6
lack of educational, cultural, and labor rights faced by the Koreans and Ainus (Nagayoshi,
566-67). In the case of Colombia – which we can identify as ascribing to the ethnic/ascriptive
definition of multiculturalism defined by Nagayoshi - a national pride based on the cultural
diversity of our peoples is met with the uncomfortable reality of the minorities – comprised of
10.6% afro-descendent and 3.4% belonging to an indigenous group (Morales and Suárez) -
suffering from acute exclusion. According to Zuluaga, two are the main challenges that these
minorities face: afro-descendents, albeit the fact that access to education has increased, their
income is still lower than of those who do not belong to this ethnic minority; while in the case
of indigenous people, access to the education is still hindered and their income is lower than
that of every other sector of the population (Zuluaga). Such conditions perpetuate the cycle of
poverty in these populations. Furthermore, there is a lack of reliable data regarding the
conditions and needs of these minorities, in spite of the efforts put forth by the government to
improve the data collection process across the country beginning with the National Census of
2005, thus leading to the lack or misformulation of policies, programs, and initiatives towards
the indigenous and afro-descendent population (“En Colombia Aún Persiste el Racismo”).
Conclusion
Discussions on multiculturalism and ethnic identity are complex and
multidimensional, regardless of the country we chose to study and analyse. In the case of
Japan, the self-imposed image of an “ethnically homogeneous country” can be challenged by
the existence of the ethnic minorities of Koreans, Ainus, and Burakumin. As Nagayoshi
suggests, multiculturalism is a term that is applied differently in every society (Nagayoshi,
2011, pp. 575). In Japan, as he explains, multiculturalism is seen through an ethnic/ascriptive
lens, which regards ethnic minorities as an exception in the midst of a homogenous majority
(Nagayoshi, 2011, pp. 562, 574). Adding to the complexity of the discussion is the shifting
notion of what it is to be Japanese, or „Japaneseness‟, which is “constructed within [the]

7. 7
respective sociohistorical contexts” (Yamashiro, 2012, pp. 221) of those who regard
themselves as Japanese.
Last but not least, by briefly comparing the case of Japan with that of Colombia we
find ourselves facing two interesting scenarios. In the case of Japan, it is a country that has
never hailed the presence of ethnic minorities as part of its national construct of what it is to
be Japanese. On the contrary, it has always portrayed the image of an ethnically homogenous
society to the world and to itself, perpetuated by the politics of exclusion discussed by
Nagayoshi. In the case of Colombia, we find two contradicting trends: a country that hails
multiculturalism as a cornerstone of its existence as a Republic -both to the world and to itself
- but the social, economic, and political dynamics and realities inside the country have
systematically excluded and marginalized its minorities.

8. 8
Works Cited
“En Colombia Aún Persiste el Racismo”. El Espectador. 21 Mar. 2013. Web.
Morales, Martha and Alberto Mario Suárez D. “El 6% de Directivos de Empresas son Afros.”
El Tiempo. 25 Feb. 2014. Web.
Nagayoshi, Kikuko. “Support of Multiculturalism, But for Whom? Effects of Ethno-National
Identity on the Endorsement of Multiculturalism in Japan.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration
Studies 37, no. 4 (2011); 561-578.
Yamashiro, Jane H. “A Triple Parallax: Japanese as a Heterogeneous Global Ethnic Group.”
The New Centennial Review 12, no. 1 (Spring 2012); 189-226.
Zuluaga, Blanca. “Sobre las Minorías Étnicas en Colombia.” América Economía. 17 Sept.
2013. Web.