gilahank t1_izmfbqz wrote on December 10, 2022 at 4:25 AM

I would be interested in a conversation about the ethics of dedicating land solely to one race of people. I’ve never seen an honest debate about that, just racism or accusations of racism. In the modern world, why is it ok for a handful of people to claim land for their race forever, but we’d all think it racist and wrong if Japan, South Korea, Iceland, or most any other country said that their borders are solely for people of one ethnic heritage?

BalrogPoop t1_izmi7b4 wrote on December 10, 2022 at 4:53 AM

We'll, regarding Japan, they sort of did this for a couple centuries and as a sovereign state they were entitled to do it, provided they can bear the consequences.

It wasn't until the USA sent a warship into the harbour and said "At least open yourself up to trade or well make things very unpleasant for you" that they allowed any foreigners in at all.

Even now, it is incredibly hard to emigrate permanently to Japan as a non citizen unless you have some sort of ancestry I imagine. In many countries you cannot own land as a foreigner.

It's "okay" because they are a sovereign state and can make whatever laws they feel like and short of going to war or applying sanctions noone can do shit about it. Same as Indonesia can make pre marital sex illegal, or outlaw being gay.

Countries don't really operate on ethics the same way individuals do is my short answer.

[deleted] t1_izmrako wrote on December 10, 2022 at 6:34 AM

[removed]

Drakotrite t1_iznlj6c wrote on December 10, 2022 at 1:19 PM

>we’d all think it racist and wrong if Japan, South Korea, Iceland, or most any other country said that their borders are solely for people of one ethnic heritage?

A few nations, including Japan, do this. The only place where it is called racist is the US but only if it's white people.