What can America learn about a National debate on Immigration and National Security issues from Japan?
Like a specter from immigration past, on November 18 , 2007, wrote an article entitled New Japanese Immigration Controls Worry Foreigners”, which elucidated Japan’s strict controls concerning immigration controls. As quoted from MARTIN FACKLER, article in the liberal leaning New York Times.
“… Japan will put in place one of the toughest systems in the developed world for monitoring foreign visitors. Modeled on the United States’ controversial U.S.-Visit program, it will require foreign citizens to be fingerprinted, photographed and questioned every time they enter Japan.
The screening will extend even to Japan’s 2.1 million foreign residents, many of whom fear they will soon face clogged immigration lines whenever they enter the country.”
Tom Batchelor, November 20, 2017 article entitled , “Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe refuses to relax immigration rules despite shrinking population”
“Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has insisted his administration has “no intention” of loosening the country’s strict immigration policy despite warnings about its fast shrinking – and ageing – population. On Monday during a debate in Japan’s parliament, Mr Abe suggested there was justification for accepting foreign workers“where they are truly needed” to “keep Japan’s economy and infrastructure sustainable”. But he was also steadfast in his opposition to any moves to reform the country’s strict border policy
Japan has a long-standing policy to maintain strict control over her national borders and to debate immigration policy in the Japanese parliament. As in the United States the lines of demarcation are between the Globalist more wealthy international business community and the more traditional and conservative Nationalist. The Globalists want unrequited immigration policy allowing for the importation of cheap labor. The Nationalists goals are to maintain the integrity of Japanese sovereignty.
Thus far, the more conservative Nationalist wing of Japanese politics have maintained Japan’s strict immigration policy, despite mounting pressure from international Globalist interests in exploiting cheap labor. Consider the following quotation
“The government says that many people claim asylum in Japan to find work, encouraged by access to renewable work permits for people applying for refugee status. The Justice Ministry, which oversees refugee recognition, is considering steps including restrictions on work permits for asylum seekers to curb what it deems “abusive” applications.”
(see following cite:http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/japan-immigration-shinzo-abe-refuse-relax-rules-prime-minister-policy-shrinking-population-foreign-a8065281.html)
As Kohei Usuda, points out in his opinion piece entitled, “Abe’s ‘Japan First’ immigration policy” states as follows.
“Abe, 63, himself a staunch nationalist, has been pursuing a protectionist stance vis-à-vis immigration – a stance not unlike Trump’s own strident “America First” doctrine. Just over a year ago, on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly, Abe was pressed as to whether his country should relax its stringent immigration policies by accepting refugees from war-torn Syria. The Japanese leader infamously responded to reporters that his country first needs to take steps to resolve its own domestic concerns relating to “demography” before Tokyo can entertain the possibility of welcoming newcomers – namely, addressing issues pertaining to Japan’s rapidly graying populace and shrinking birthrate, as well as mobilizing more women into the workforce to improve its chronically sluggish economy.”
(see https://japantoday.com/category/features/opinions/abe%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%98japan-first%E2%80%99-immigration-policy )
Like Japan’s traditional Nationalism, America’s Constitutional Nationalism are similar in nature and based on placing national interests over foreign interests or globalism based on the exploitation of labor and nihilation of traditional domestic labor and traditions. In the United States the current ill-feeling toward globalists may be manifested in the announcement that known open border and open trade advocate Jeff Flake resignation.
The problem many elite Globalists and their co-conspirators liberal Democrats fail to recognize is that a certain degree of “ Nationalism”denotes “patriotism” and sovereign duty for the welfare of American citizens as opposed to unbridled international foreign aid at the price of neglect for American interests.
Jeff Flake and his political and congressional cohorts are not in keeping with the warnings of another Nationalist of past decades. Listen to the following speech by former LDS President Ezra Taft Benson as among other things, he warns America against giving excessive foreign aid at the expense of American citizens via taxation. He speaks of “ loss of sovereignty and solvency” and foreign aid to communists nations. Still true, such as American Aid to North Korea or also Islamic nations which seek to undermine and destroy American government and traditions. Is not Ezra Taft Bensons warning against communism also be applied to “ Islamification” as well? No doubt, if Ezra T. Benson was alive today his voice would raise concerns regarding “ Islamification” He warned to be just as vigilant against communism as Nazism. So true, as against ‘Theocratic Islamification and Globalism”
The Japanese Prime Minister, a strong Nationalists argues National Security in articulating the enforcement of Japanese border security. Japanese Nationalists do not wish to have the refugee issues, including Islamic terrorism brought upon the European peoples as a consequence of Europe’s open borders policies. Inversely, the Japanese Globalists are less concerned regarding Japan’s national security interests and more interested in the exploitation of cheap labor. Hence, the robust debate in the Japanese parliament.
In America, the political lines have also been drawn,but the substantive issues are clouded by immigration advocate groups, elite wealthy globalists and the politicians serving their interests, put aside derisive charges of racism, white nationalism and other explosive terms and connotations and focus on the issues of national security, American education and training, importation of foreign gangs, sex and drug trade and terrorism, both via drug cartels and Islamic jihadism.
The more honest the debate; the better the Congressional exchange and the more refined presidential policies. Unlike, liberal Democrats and elite Globalists , the Japanese have opened an honest debate. The tactic of demonization of President Trump is not an honest debate but rather a cheap trick to manipulate the American public. Hopefully, the vast majority of the American public will not fall for such cheap “name-calling” tricks and demand robust debate of these immigration and national security issues in Congress.