Other Societies - Identities PDF

CHAPTER 4 RACE AND ETHNICITY «I accept with all humility," in a typical Japanese fashion, was how Kise11osato Yutaka first reacted to his promotion to the highest rank of sumo in 2017. His achievement, however, was something that he could not downplay as he insta11tly became a national symbol for...

CHAPTER 4 RACE AND ETHNICITY «I accept with all humility," in a typical Japanese fashion, was how Kise11osato Yutaka first reacted to his promotion to the highest rank of sumo in 2017. His achievement, however, was something that he could not downplay as he insta11tly became a national symbol for becoming the first Japanese-born wrestler to reach the esteemed yoko- zuna (grand champion) title in almost two decades (Lui, A group of sumo wrestlers, including those who are from Mongolia and Eastern 2017). Sumo is the national Europe prepare for a well-attended tournament in Osaka, Japan. sport of Japan and has been an important feature of Japanese tradition for centuries. Since the 1990s, however, top-tier sumo tournaments have been won by several renowned Mongolians as well as wrestlers from Bulgaria, Estonia, and Georgia, which resulted in a crisis among many Japanese who saw this «foreign in- vasion" as a symptom of a larger ill afflicting their cultural identity and social stability. Coinci- dentally, this sporting crisis occurred during the so-called «lost decade" - a period of economic stagnation in the 1990s, which many observers have extended (''the lost decades") to refer to the country's comparatively subpar economic performance in the subsequent decades (Funabashi and Kushner, 2015). Given the centrality of the wrestler's body in sumo, it is expected that the discussion on the foreign takeover of this uniquely Japanese sport would center on race. In the course of the de- bate, however, the issues were largely tackled in the context of natio11ality, or through the broader concept of ethnicity. This is notable, especially in a comparative context, since the concerns sur- 49 50 Part Two Identities rounding identity, discrimination, and racism in Japanese sumo are similar to some of the racial issues that hound sports in many countries around the world. From the African footballers in Eu- rope to the Chinese table tennis players in Singapore, the same type of questions come up when one sees foreigners in a sport that is supposed to represent the «true Japanese spirit" (Light and Kinnaird, 2002). Perhaps, because it is about the ''spirit" and not the body that the concept of race is less relevant than ethnicity. However, by taking the discussion away from the racial discourses on sports, more emphasis is given to the politics of sumo than on the plight and welfare of the wrestlers, both foreign and local. What is the relevance of the concepts of race and ethnicity in understanding the issues about the foreign domination of sumo? How will Japan, and its national sport, in particular, enrich our understanding of these two fundamental sociological concepts? The following sections define and distinguish race and ethnicity, demonstrate how they are socially constructed, and explore the consequences of such social constructions on the everyday lives of people. WRESTLING WITH CONCEPTS: RACE AND ETHNICITY Race and ethnicity are important social categories that classify people based on human ancestry and geographic origin. They emerged as people identify with groups and collectively distinguish themselves from other groups. In the modem period, these distinctions were formalized and utilized as tools in classifying empirical information about specific human populations. In turn, these sets of data are necessary for policymaking, for delivering social services, and as instruments of surveillance and social control. As such, the categories of race and ethnicity are commonly viewed as social constructs - ideas that are created and given great importance by people as part of the everyday functioning of society. Being social constructs, however, does mean that these concepts are merely imaginations since they materially manifest in objects ( e.g., identity card, dress) and are corporeally and socially experienced (e.g., privilege, discrimination) by people in their interaction with others in society. Race is the categorization of people based on perceived biological commonalities such as molecular structure and physical traits. There is an ongoing debate on the link between race and genetics, particularly in the fields of molecular science and biomedical research. However, this discussion has previously been subjected to criticism and currently has received limited interest in sociology due to its highly technical character and the lack of direct relevance to people's every- day knowledge and social interaction. In official categorizations, bodily attributes like skin shade, hair type, and height remain the most common markers in sorting individuals into specific race groups. For instance, in a photo with his fellow top sumo wrestlers, Kisenosato Yutaka can be dis- tinguished as Japanese ( deemed a distinct «race" in his country) through some distinctive physi- cal attributes that identify his Japanese-ness while differentiating him from the Eastern European wrestlers, and even those who are from Mongolia. Here is an enumeration of the «new bodies" that threatens the «purity" of sumo as it «wrestles with globalization" (Beech, 2011). Chapter 4 Race and Ethnicity 51 For here is the blond topknot of an Estonian ex-bouncer called Baruto (real name: Kaido Hoovelson) and the hairy chest of Bulgaria's Kotooshu (born Kaloyan Stefanov Mahlyanov). There is the telltale cellulite of a trio of Georgian wrestlers, whose bodies accu1nulate fat quite differently from the way the Japanese phy- sique does. And everywhere, it seems, are the wide cheekbones of Mongolian athletes. Whether it is obvious or less apparent, the use of physical features in racial identification is largely considered outdated in contemporary social science, and even in wider social settings. Such practices are largely deemed to be inaccurate and inappropriate mainly due to their earlier use by those who espoused the ideas of Social Darwinism. Social Darwinism (see Chapter 2) refers to the theory that racial groups are subject to Charles Darwin's laws of natural selection resulting in the survival of the best competitors and the continued evolution of societies. Although data on race are still collected and used in many societies, information is based less on biological features but more on a person's geographic origin, language, religion, and other cultural backgrounds which result in the conflation and entanglement of race with the concept of ethnicity. In contrast to race, which is based on perceived biological commonality, ethnicity is the cat- egorization of people based on the discourse of cultural commonality. The shared entity can be language, religion, colonial history or anything that is employed to set an ethnic group apart from other groups, or the larger society. An ethnic group is a distinct population living within a larger society that possesses a shared identity that is based on a perceived common ancestry or geographical origin (Francis, 1947). Despite a common perception that Japan is a homogenous society, it has a diverse population that includes several ethnic groups (e.g., Ainu, Okinawan, mi- grants) Moreover, the term ((Japanese" which has traditionally been considered as a race in Japan is used to refer to an ethnic group in the United States since the Japanese are subsumed under the ((Asians" race group, which also includes Chinese, Indians, Filipinos, and other groups. These ethnic categories, however, have a varying impact on the everyday lives of people. Its use in official transactions (housing, health, other services) in some societies will likely lead people to place ethnicity at the core of their identity and will likely have a strong influence on their everyday interaction. On the other hand, in societies where categorization is hardly uti- lized, ethnicity will likely remain a taken-for-granted part of people's everyday lives. As such, an individual's sense of belonging to an ethnic group can vary from fervent to non-existent (Verkuyten, 2005). For instance, being a sumo fan can be an avid way of honoring one's sen- timental connection to ancient Japanese traditions, while for others, it is merely an occasional pastime to support a wrestler who hails from their hometown. In the same way, ethnicity can be an all-encompassing identifier for a Japanese-American which also points to her first language (Nihongo), religion (Shintoism), or even her affinity for sumo. On the other hand, ethnicity could be something that has been passed down by her first-generation immigrant parents but has no relevance to the language that she speaks, her religious affiliation, or which sports chan- nel she watches after dinner. 52 Part Two Identities Apart from their diverging biological-cultural positions, race notably differs from ethnicity on how it is institutionalized in certain societies. The collection of information on race in the United States, for instance, is required by federal laws and are used on a variety of policy-making decisions and in the implementation of civil rights, equal employment, health, and other pro- grams (Prewitt, 2005). Although other countries do not officially collect data on race, a com- parable practice often happens when categories such as religion, nationality, or ancestry are utilized in the same way as race. For instance, despite the absence of official records on race in Japan, citizenship (foreign residents) and indigenous group membership (Burakumin) are ra- cialized (Yamashiro, 2013 ). In some countries, racialization, the process of ascribing a racial (or ethnic) mark on a group of is instituted, when they are partly or completely not receptive to the categorization. In many places, the institutionalization of race has resulted in the formation of identity tags and rigid social boundaries that are imposed on people. Many feel uncomfortable with these im- positions, especially when such tags are not representative of their assumed identity or when they put people in marginalized positions. When there are no opportunities to negotiate with these institutional interventions, the situation can lead to involuntary ethnicity, a condition when people, from different geographical origins or cultural backgrounds, are compulsorily assigned to an ethnic (or racial) category. The Hispanics in the United States and the Others in Singapore, which will be discussed in the proceeding section, are just two of the many examples of involun- tary ethnicity that exist around the world. In the long run, the institutionalization of race results in the reification of its labels and categories. Reification refers to how people tend to view race (as well as other social categorizations) as real, natural and incontestable, forgetting that they are creations of powerful regimes. In contrast to race, ethnic categories tend to be more fluid and flexible allowing for an indi- vidual to straddle or move between groups. This can happen, for example, when a second-gener- ation immigrant successfully assimilates into the host country, or when an individual undergoes a religious conversion. Over a longer period, individuals, to some extent, can also negotiate their ethnicity through selective forgetting, a process by which individuals are not aware, resist, or fail to pass an ethnic heritage to the next generation. A Mongolian migrant family in Japan might put less emphasis on practicing their traditional customs and encourage their children to be fluent in Nihongo and adopt other aspects of Japanese culture to facilitate their assimilation into their new country of residence. As a result, these children might not learn how to speak the Mongolian language or even have limited knowledge about their parents' customs and traditions. Finally, an individual's sense of ethnicity can also shift the other way through ethnic renewal. Ethnic renewal happens when individuals, such as an adopted child or descendants of immi- grants, seek to learn, live out, and make a concerted effort to identify with newly found biological relatives or with a forgotten ancestor's ethnic group. A descendant of a Japanese who migrated to Brazil in the 1900s, for example, might revive his connections to his lost Japanese ethnic identity Chapter 4 Race and Ethnicity 53 by mastering the Japanese language, participating in sumo wrestling competitions, making the Japanese culture an intrinsic part of his identity. SYSTEMS OF RACIAL AND ETHNIC CLASSIFICATION Most societies have to co11struct a system of racial and ethnic classification to deal with an inher- ently diverse population, to account for the arrival of a large group of new migrants, or to con- form to international conventions (see Table 4.1). This section looks into the cases of Japan, the United States, and Singapore to present a comparative analysis of how racial and ethnic classifica- tion are formulated and enforced in different historical, political, and social settings. In her work on the social construction of race and minorities in Japan, sociologist Jane Yama- shiro (2013) highlighted the following key points that outline the historical and social locatio11 of race and ethnicity in Japan. First, the Japanese government does not collect data on race and eth- nicity but records citizenship to keep track of foreign residents. Second, the idea of being ''Japa- nese" conflates the concepts of race and ethnicity with language, citizenship, and cultural literacy. Third, race and ethnicity are largely seen as foreign concepts that were appropriated by Japanese scholars or imposed by foreigners who came to study Japanese society. With the huge majority of its population, which is currently at 98.1%, co11sidered as "Japa- nese," the absence of official race classification in Japan appears to be an expected result of its racial homogeneity. This homogeneity, however, is not a mere expression of the country's "inher- ent uniqueness" or "pureness" but is a product of a long history of isolationist policies, hardline assimilation of indigenous communities, and the ideological construction of a "myth of homo- geneity" (Yoshino, 1992). Since the 1868 Meiji Restoration, the social construction of race was developed as part of the larger project of modernization, nation-building, and imperialism. To emulate and to raise their country to be at par with Western powers, local scholars affirmed the existence of a distinct "Japanese race" to distinguish their people from other Asians as well as to draw its minority groups in forging a unified and grander race that assumes a higher place in the world's racial hierarchy (Yamashiro, 2013; Siddle, 1996). This racial ideology lived through the country's emergence as a modern nation-state, its rise as an imperial power, and its renaissance as an industrial giant after the Second World War. This ideology of racial homogeneity serves as the rationale behind why Japan currently does not collect data on race. In contrast to Japan's emphasis on racial homogeneity, the United States is one of the most racially diverse countries in the world and diversity has been at the core of the country's popula- tion policy since the early period of its history. The United States has several patterns of original settlement (e.g., Alaskan Natives, Native Americans), colonial history (e.g., British, French), im- migration history (e.g., transatlantic migration, slavery), and imperial expansion (e.g., Mexican- American War, Philippines' colonization). Throughout this period, key legislations, such as the Indian Removal Act of 1830, 1865-1866 Black Codes, and the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882, decreed the subjugation of minorities and immigrants. Nonetheless, the ideal principle that "all 54 Part Two Identities men are created equal," that is enshrined in the country's 1776 Declaration of Independence, inspired subsequent actions against slavery and racial discrimination. These actions resulted in the 13 th (abolition of slavery), 14th (citizenship rights) and 15th (right to vote) Amendments to the U.S. Constitution (Omi and Winant, 2015) as well as hosts of other legislative and legal actions at the state and local levels. The United States currently identifies five racial categories: (1) White or European Ameri- can, (2) Black or African American, (3) Native American and Native Alaskan, (4) Asian Ameri- can, and (5) Hawaiian and other Pacific Islanders. In addition, Hispanics and Latino are clas- sified not as a race but as an ethnicity. This was formulated to account for the racial diversity of the Hispanic and Latino population in the United States ( e.g., White Hispanic, Black Latino, Asian Hispanic). As of 2016, White Americans are the racial majority making up 77% of the population. When its population across all the races are combined, the Hispanic and Latino Americans are the largest minority group comprising 18% while the African Americans are the second largest with 13.4% of the entire population. Asian Americans (5.9%), Native Americans (0.8%), and the Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders (0.2%) make up the rest of the minorities (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020). Finally, the system of racial and ethnic classification in Singapore closely resembles that of the United States for its diversity but is enmeshed in the same regional matrix as Japan. Singa- pore was a sparsely populated island when the British decided to turn it into a regional trading hub in 1819. In the subsequent years, the British colonial regime populated the island by fa- cilitating the immigration of a diverse mix of people from the different territories in the Asian region and beyond. When the first official census was made in 1871, 33 categories were used to classify the local population. The classification involved groupings that were based on racial, ethnic, religious, geographical, and social backgrounds. Ten years later, the list was reclassi- fied into six main categories: (1) Europeans and Americans, (2) Eurasians, (3) Chinese, (4) Ma- lays and Other Natives of the Archipelago, (5) Tamils and Other Natives of India, and ( 6) Other Nationalities, which brings together racial, ethnic, and national identifications (PuruShotam, 1998). This classification became the basis of the current CMIO model (Chinese, Malays, Indi- ans, and Others), which was formulated when Singapore gained its independence in 1965. The CMIO model is founded on an immutable definition of race where individuals are recognized to have only one unchanging racial identity. This fixed identity category is determined through the paternal line and is recorded in one's national identity card and travel passport (Vasu, 2012). As the colonial and national states focused on the institutionalization of race, various ethnic groups were subsumed under these umbrella categories. The Chinese (Fujian, Cantonese, etc.) Indians (Tamil, Bengali, etc.) and Malays (Bugis, Boyanese, etc.) are made up of various ethnic backgrounds. The Eurasians, which earlier held its separate category, were subsumed under the ''Others" category. Chapter 4 Race and Ethnicity 55 The racialization of the CMIO categories during the British colonial period was expectedly in- fluenced by Social Darwinism that emphasized difference and hierarchy, crystallizing intergroup boundaries and justifying inequality with notions of inherent racial characteristics (Hirschman, 1986). After gaining independence in 1965, the CMIO classification was pivotal in the imple- mentation of the state's ideology of multiculturalism. This principle refers to the political ar- rangement where different cultural groups strive to co-exist and build a shared society while maintaining their traditions and identity (Vasu, 2012). The racial classification became a tool of social engineering that influences an individual's access to housing, welfare benefits, and other government services. They are also the basis in adopting Singapore's four national languages: ( 1) English, (2) Mandarin, (3) Malay, and (4) Tamil. According to the recent census (Department of Statistics Singapore, 2019), the country's population is divided into the following racial composi- tion: Chinese (76.2%), Malay (15%), Indian (7.4%), and Others (1.4%). TABLE4.1 Racial and Ethnic Classification Country Racial Classification Ethnic Classification Ethnic Minorities (Ainu and Okinawans) Japan No official record , Japanese (98.1%) Minority Group/Caste (Burakumins) Foreign Residents Hispanics or Latinos White Americans (77%) Irish, Italians, etc. USA African Americans (13.4%) Black Caribbeans, African-Brazilians, etc. Asian Americans (5.9%) Chinese, Indians, Filipinos, etc. Native Americans (0.8%) Cherokee, Inuit, etc. Hawaiians & Pacific Is. (0.2%) Western Samoans, Chamorros, etc. Chinese (76.2%) Hakkas, Teochews, Peranakans, etc. Malays (15%) Bugis, Boyanese, etc. Singapore Indians (7.4%) Tamils, Bengalis, Punjabis, etc. Others {1.4%) Eurasians, Filipinos, etc. Sources: Dept. of Statistics, Singapore (2019), U.S. Census Bureau (2020), Yamashiro (2013} RACE-ETHNIC CLASSIFICATION AND SOCIAL BOUNDARIES As systems of racial and ethnic classifications are utilized as the basis of governance and in fa- cilitating the interaction between groups in society, they have a profound impact on people's everyday lives and life chances. Racial or ethnic categories confer social status that shapes the way a person views herself and influences how she interacts with others. They also influence an individual's access to a broad range of opportunities including education and employment. In 56 Part Two Identities Japan, for instance, the Ainu (the indigenous people of the northern Japanese island of Hok- kaido) have an average income that is 60% lower than the national average. They also have lower educational attainment and are more dependent on welfare when compared to the rest of the population. These challenges can also be observed among the other minority groups in Japan (Htun, 2012). Even foreign sumo wrestlers, despite their heralded success, decry the so- cial discrimination and institutional obstacles that they have to wrestle with in the professional and personal undertakings. As a result, some top sumo wrestlers reluctantly take up Japanese citizenship in their effort to overcome these obstacles and further their careers in the country (Asahi Shimbun, 2021). Majority Groups vs Minor- ity Groups Power plays a central role in racial and ethnic classification. They are planned and implemented by pow- erful regimes against varying degrees of acceptance and resistance but more importantly, these classifica- tions influence the power dynamics between groups in society - animat- ing conflicts, justifying inequalities, solidifying differences, and drawing A member of New Zealand's Maori community performed a traditional war dance in front of a group of tourists. a line between the majority and the minority groups. A majority group is the most dominant racial or ethnic group that controls most of the valued resources in society, especially political power. Except in a few cases such as the Alawis in Syria, majority groups often occupy the largest segment of the entire population. The White Americans and the Chinese Singaporeans are good examples. Moreover, within the monolithic Japanese identity is the less familiar ethnic identity called Yamato, which has been used histori- cally to refer to the inhabitants of mainland Japan - technically, the country's majority group. (Weiner, 2009). Although the official use of this category has been discontinued to promote a homogenous Japanese identity, looking into this term gives us a better picture of the social loca- tions of the Ainu, Okinawans, Burakumins, and other minority groups in Japanese society. In contrast, a minority group are the subordinate racial or ethnic group whose members have significantly less economic and political influence than the members of the majority group. Although it is common to hear news about the discrimination and oppression of some minority groups, more subtle forms of deprivations also occur in the everyday lives of its members. Peggy McIntosh's White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack (1992: 73-75) received a wide Chapter 4 Race and Ethnicity 57 commendation for its insightful depiction of the majority group's taken-for-granted ad- Contrasting Concepts: vantages that minorities do not enjoy. Below Amalgamation vs Assimilation are a few of the statements written in McIn- These two concepts demonstrate some of the ways in tosh's list. which racial and ethnic groups relate to one another. Amalgamation happens when a majority group and I can if I wish arrange to be in the a minority group merge to form a new group. Early in company of people of my race most the 20th century, there was a shared perception of the of the time. United States as a "melting pot" where people with If I should need to move, I can be different racial and ethnic backgrounds can come to pretty sure of renting or purchasing forge a blended cultural identity (Gordon, 1978). On the other hand, assimilation happens when housing in an area which I can afford an individual ceases to identify and abandons the tra- and in which I would want to live. ditions of her racial or ethnic group to become part I can tum on the television or open of another group. Although the Ainu are viewed as a to the front page of the paper and see separate ethnic group in Japan, their history of dis- persion, forced resettlement, and adoption of main- people of my race widely represented. stream Japanese culture have made it difficult to iden - I can be sure that my children will be tify its members from the larger population. given curricular materials that testify Between these two concepts is an idea that is typ- to the existence of their race. ically used to describe Singapore's racial formation - "rojak" integration." Rojak (means "mix" in Malay) is a I can be pretty sure of having my voice local salad of mixed vegetable and fruits, drizzled with heard in a group in which I am the sauce made from prawn paste and lime. The dish is only member of my race. used to exemplify the racial and ethnic diversity, em- phasizing on mixing without losing the uniqueness of In Singapore, «Chinese Privilege" an idea in- each part (Rocha, 2011). fluenced by «White Privilege" became a re- cent topic of debate in academia and other social circles. Its main critics questioned the relevance of the American concept to history and the everyday realities of racial discrimination in the Asian city-state (Yuen, 2021). This reasoning underscores the embeddedness of the practices of racial and ethnic classification to the specific historical, cultural, and political landscapes. Thus, there are varying numbers of categories, en- forcement strategies, and impacts across the three cases that we covered in this chapter. Segregation The boundaries between racial and ethnic groups are not only drawn through biological and cultural lines but are also constructed geographically by demarcating spaces where members of each group live, work, and feel a sense of belonging. Segregation refers to the spatial separation of people in social groups, mainly by residence but also by workplace and other social activities. The sociological roots of this concept can be traced back to the emergence of cities (urbanization) in the early modern period when people from various cultural backgrounds congregate in greater 58 Part Two Identities numbers and participate in more complex social relations. This phenomenon is further distin- guished into de facto segregation (occurs due to circumstances or customs) and de jure segrega- tion (occurs due to institutional legislation). De facto segregation prevails when existing communities (mainly based on religion and eth- nicity), as well as new immigrants, develop in separate enclaves or districts. These congregations occur mainly for practical reasons as these spaces host houses of worship, shops, services, and other facilities that cater to specific ethnic or other social groups. The proximity to people who share similar beliefs, traditions, and cultural practices also contributed to the growth of enclaves. Moreover, new immigrants also arrive through family and other social networks that would likely bring them to such enclaves. Major cities around the world host such enclaves in varying historic and contemporary significance. For instance, a rising number of ethnic enclaves hosting Koreans, Chinese, Filipinos, Nepalese, and other ethnic groups have recently sprouted in Tokyo mainly as a result of the country's recent effort to attract migrants. With an ageing population, the government eased on its stringent immigration policies to address its shortage of workers (Gelin, 2020). Such enclaves, however, have long been a feature of many cities around the world. De jure segregation utilizes the enactment and enforcement of laws to separate people into racial or ethnic groups. It mainly exists in the context of institutionalized racism (e.g., South Af- rican Apartheid, U.S. Jim Crow Laws) and colonialism. When the British colonial drew a town plan for Singapore in 1822, one of its prominent features was the demarcation of ethnic enclaves for its diverse population (Pearson, 1969). Due to the long struggle of minorities and the influ- ence of the Civil Rights Movement, most of the de jure segregation was eventually abolished. For instance, U.S. segregation was abolished in 1964 while the South African Apartheid ended in 1991. Furthermore, the colonial-era racial segregation in Singapore was eventually disman- tled in the 1960s when the government moved families from the crowded ethnic enclaves into its public housing townships. Around the same period, the country was also shaken by cases of ''race riots" which drove the government to use the allocation of public housing to promote mixing among its various racial and ethnic groups. To achieve this objective, a "race quota" was implemented to ensure that a proportion of the CMIO, the four official races, live in each hous- ing block and neighborhood. Policies were also instituted to control the resale of housing units to prevent the re-emergence of ethnic enclaves and to promote the state's ideology of multicul- turalism (Loo, Shi, and Sun, 2003). So, what happened to the colonial-era ethnic enclaves? The old ethnic enclaves were developed as heritage zones, which currently serve as some of the most popular shopping and tourist attractions in Singapore. RACE-ETHNIC CLASSIFICATION AND SOCIAL INEQUALITY People tend to use the terms stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination loosely in everyday con- versation. In sociology, however, these three are not just terms but concepts that are loaded with meanings, so it is important to understand their distinctio11. Overall, these concepts deal with Chapter 4 Race and Ethnicity 59 how practices of race and ethnic classification are inspired, intertwined, and impact the dynam- ics of power in society. In particular, they shed light on some of the important conceptual and concrete nuances that enrich our understanding of social inequality and exclusion. Stereotypes People create generalized and rough ideas about the different and unfamiliar people they encoun- ter in their environment. Such stereotypical ideas about specific individuals can be expanded to several others and eventually, to an entire race and ethnic groups - some disappearing as quickly as they are made, others lingering on for a long time, while a few crystalize as a widely accepted description of specific social groups. A stereotype is a widely held, simplistic, and sweeping description of members of a social group. It is used to point out «typical" characteristics of members of a social group, which vary greatly in their consistency and accuracy. Stereotypes are instant categorizations that help peo- ple process unfamiliar things or practices that differ from their own ways. Sport is a common stereotypical description used to identify members of a certain race and ethnic group, particu- larly in the United States. For instance, White Americans play hockey, African-Americans play basketball (white men can't jump!), Latinos play baseball, Pacific Islanders are natural-born American football players, while Asian-Americans don't play sports (they are doing their home- work). In Singapore, the Chinese play table tennis, Malays play football (soccer), while Indians play cricket. With the recent success of Mongolian sumo wrestlers in Japan, there is a good pos- sibility for people to assume that every Mongolian that they meet on the street knows how to wrestle. All of these stereotypes are based on an assumption that each group has the «typical" physical attributes (race) and/or culturally acquired skills ( ethnicity) that make their members excel in that specific sport. Prejudice A prejudice is a stereotypical description of members of a social group that is held despite evi- dence against it. It is usually a negative prejudgment. Such negative prejudgment can be kindled and maintained through socialization through one's family, peers, religious organizations, educa- tional institutions, and state ideologies. One's personal experience of antagonism against another group can also fuel prejudicial mindsets and emotions. Although the sports stereotypes of the dif- ferent races and ethnic groups in the United States are taken lightly by more people, they can also be prejudicial. These prejudices are marginalizing, especially for the members of minority groups whose opportunities can be constrained by this relegation to a specific profession. The idea that members of the minority groups as «natural-born athletes" sidelines those minorities who are not interested in sports (Adair and Stronach, 2011; Entine, 2000). Moreover, these prejudgments promote the Social Darwinist idea that members of minority groups have limited intellectual ca- pacity. Thus, their success and overall contribution to society can only be accomplished through 60 Part Two Identities their physical labor (brute). Similar rationality was used by imperial powers to justify slavery and colonization. Prejudice is often a product of ethnocentrism, which refers to the belief that one's group is superior to all other groups (this concept will be discussed again in Chapter 7). Ethnocentric peo- ple feel that their group is chosen by divine providence or they adhere to a universally superior ideology that they are more pure, advanced, and powerful than other groups. As a result, they use their racial or ethnic group as the yardstick against how all of the other groups are measured and judged of their worth. Most people would readily disapprove of racial or ethnic prejudice, yet all of us hold prejudices against other people, in varying intention and intensity. They do not neces- sarily lead to ill feelings or hostility against others. Prejudices can serve as productive foundations for open dialogues, mutual understanding, and social harmony. Discrimination If prejudice is an attitude, discrimination involves actions and practices of majority groups that are detrimental to members of a minority group. Discriminatory actions also vary in intention and intensity, ranging from a disparaging comment to genocide - the systematic extermination of an entire population. In examining its nature and impact, sociologists often distinguish be- tween individual and institutional discrimination. Individual discrimination is a damaging ac- tion against a minority (or his property) that is perpetuated by a member of a majority group. It is often emotionally driven and can take place as an isolated incident or a premeditated action. For instance, a sumo fan might verbally abuse a foreign wrestler to express his strong objection against their participation in Japan's national sports. On the other hand, institutional discrimina- tion is a system of rules and practices of private organizations or state bureaucracies that harm members of a minority group. The citizenship requirement to coach sumo in Japan, for instance, is one of the discriminatory rules that prevent Mongolian wrestlers from advancing their careers after their retirement from the sport (Asahi Shimbun, 2021). Despite their difference, individual discrimination and institutional discrimination are closely intertwined and are intrinsically just two aspects of the same social phenomenon. Individuals who carry out discriminatory actions are influenced by their locations in a structure of inequality or by their affiliation to specific institutions. In turn, systemic discriminations are implemented by individuals who reinforce and help maintain these discriminatory rules in organizations and institutions. Discriminatory practices are seemingly impossible to eradicate because beliefs and attitudes are passed on from one person to the next and from one generation to another. Despite the challenges, however, many societies around the world, including Japan, the United States, and Singapore have made considerable progress in making some changes to address racial and ethnic discrimination. Moreover, many people who are the objects of discrimination do not merely ac- cept or passively experience their marginalization and oppression. Members of minority groups individually and collectively respond to escape, resist, and change their disadvantaged conditions. Chapter 4 Race and Ethnicity 61 Racism When the Japan Sumo Association instituted rules to limit the number of foreign wrestlers to one per stable in 2002, many decry the move as a manifestation of the «embedded racism" that reflects the larger marginalization of foreigners (including citizens) in Japanese society (Aru- dou, 2017). Apart from questions regarding their racial «purity," foreigners are also seen to lack the strength, discipline, and dignity to represent the Japanese physical and spiritual might as sumo champions. Racism refers to the beliefs that genetic and physical differences explain and even justify inequalities between racial and ethnic groups. These biological differences (e.g., skin color, height, good «genes") are seen to represent physical strength, intelligence, beauty, among many other qualities. Racism has existed for a long time and so are the efforts to eliminate them. Modern racism emerged out of the subjugation of African, Asian, and South American people by European colonizers. Colonialism created a system of hierarchy wherein the White European colonizers are placed at the apex while the local population are subjected to military conquest, slavery, ex- ploitation, or expulsion. This system facilitated the exploitation of resources that brought about economic prosperity and technological advancement in Europe. Soon, progress also reached the colonies as new technologies were introduced, new institutions were established, some members of the local population were given access to education and power, which led to the entrench- ment of their political and economic influence. These advancements justified the highly un- equal system and were used to demonstrate the racial superiority of the colonizers. In particular, scientific racism used the principles of science (e.g., Darwin's theory of evolution) to create a system of racial ranking that places whites at the top of the highest stage of human evolution. The field of eugenics, a field popular at the turn of the 20th century, developed to identify ways to improve the genetic, physical, and intellectual qualities of the human race. Eugenics promote racial segregation and purity as mixing was believed to result in degeneration (Heggie, 2016). Japan imposed an isolationist policy for 220 years to shield itself from European imperialism before the country was eventually forced to open by the Americans in 1854. This relationship with foreign imperial power, along with Japan's own modern state-building and imperialist his- tory, shaped the current stringent racial and ethnic policies that some criticize as marginalizing (Yamashiro, 2013), or even as cc racist" (Arudo u, 2017). Eventually, the anti-colonial struggles resulted in the dismantling of most colonial regimes around the world. The resulting post-colonial state formation and the civil rights movements led to the dissolution of institutional racism and the universal denunciation of racism in con- temporary society. The movement to promote racial and ethnic equality as well as to condemn racism come through legislation and reforms in the workplace and other social settings. Sports, in particular, has emerged as an important stage in the protest and mobilizations against the per- sistence of racism - from the Black Power salute at the 1968 Olympics to the recent involvement of the NBA (National Basketball Association) in the Black Lives Matter movement in the United 62 Part Two Identities States. Nonetheless, despite the major advances in promoting equality, racism continues to be a considerable cause of the marginalization of many people and conflict between racial and ethnic groups in many societies. WRESTLING WITH RACE AND ETHNICITY: FOUR SOCIOLOGICAL APPROACHES Racism and the other issues concerning race and ethnicity can be examined using the four theo- retical approaches. The functionalist approach mainly focuses on macro-level race relations be- tween members of the majority and minority groups to analyze their impact on political stability and economic development. The conflict approach concentrates more on the dynamics of power and economic disparity between groups to uncover instances of social inequality and exclusion. The interactionist approach, 011 the other hand, studies how micro-level interactions between people affect race and ethnic relations within a specific group or locality, emphasizing how people make sense of their experiences of racism and other related issues. Finally, the reorientationist approach puts greater attention on finding the historical roots of race and ethnic conflicts and in comparing these cases across larger cross-national or cross-regional contexts. Functionalist sociologists study migration patterns, migrant and immigrant policies, as well as other demographic information to analyze issues concerning integration, co11flict, and the overall impact of the interactions between race and ethnic groups on the larger economic, politi- cal, and social relations. Racial and ethnic categories are utilized for national planning and poli- cymaking to control the flow of migration, to tailor reproduction or other programs to specific racial and ethnic groups, address insurgency problems, and other interventions to ensure that a sense of cohesion exists among groups and that they are aligned with the larger project of political stability and national progress. Conflict sociologists investigate access to power and resources in their analysis of race and ethnic relations. For instance, they investigate the links of race and ethnicity to the formation of class structure in society. Who are the people who belong to the upper class? Who are those in the lower class? Are these class groups dominated by a specific racial or ethnic group? Class divisions can also follow the boundary between race and ethnic groups. Split-labor market, for instance, refers to the division of the economy into two areas of employment, an upper tier of highly paid professionals (majority group) and a lower tier of blue-collar workers (minority group) (Bonac- ich, 1972). Such disparity is often traced to people's displacement from their ancestral land, histo- ries of marginalization, or to the prevailing system of inequality. To address these types of issues, a sociologist who used conflict theory works to contribute to reforms in land use, labor, educa- tion, and other policies to improve the conditions of disadvantaged groups. One of these reforms is the policy of affirmative action. This policy takes race or ethnicity into account to ensure the consideration of largely overlooked minority groups in hiring decisions and university admis- sions, among several other settings. Chapter 4 Race and Ethnicity 63 Interactionist sociologists focus on the significance of race and ethnicity as the basis of a person's identity and interaction with others. In 1954, Gordon Allport (1954), a psychologist studying race relations in the United States, highlighted three conditions that would reduce prejudice between two groups: (1) the contact must be among individuals of equal status, (2) the contact must be sustained, and (3) social norms favoring equality must be agreed upon. These findings were affirmed by Herbert Blumer, the American sociologist who coined the term, «symbolic interactionism," who also emphasized that racial prejudice developed due to the lack of interactions between the majority group and the minority group. For instance, majority groups tend to develop an abstract picture of a minority group (racial myths) within their circle, which results in prejudice against minority groups (Blumer, 1958). Both studies are in line with Singapore's effort to prevent the formation of enclaves and promote social «mixing" among the different race groups in its public housing development (Loo, Shi, and Sun, 2003). Apart from its focus on social interaction, interactionist sociologists also emphasize how such interaction influences identity formation. The case of Hakuho, the Mongolia-born wrestler who eventually decided to acquire Japanese citizenship after almost 20 years, provides a good picture of how people negotiate with the politics of race and ethnicity. His deep cultural roots in Mongo- lia, the image of his father as Mongolia's sports hero, strict sumo rules, stringent Japanese rules that do not allow dual citizenship, his marriage to a Japanese, his children who were born in Ja- pan, and his desire to stay in sumo as coach after retirement were some of the things that he had to consider before he eventually decided to abandon his Mongolian citizenship (Gunning, 2018). Despite his acquisition of Japanese citizenship, other people might still question his Japanese- ness for not being born in Japan, for not having the «typical" Japanese looks, or for not having the Japanese ''character." Erving Goffman, a prominent interactionist scholar used the term stigma to describe the significance of race and ethnicity among many minorities. Stigma refers to a physi- cal trait (e.g., Hakuho's Mongolian facial features) or other attributes (e.g., Hakuho's Mongolian ethnicity) «that disqualifies an individual from full social acceptance" ( 1963: 8). If a celebrity like Hakuho can be subjected to such a discrediting question, can you imagine the experience of an ordinary person? Finally, reorientationist scholars give attention to the legacy of colonialism on race and eth- nic issues as well as the rootedness of these issues to specific national or local settings and how they can contribute to the larger discussion on matters of race and ethnicity. The works of Franz Fanon (1925-1961), a French-West Indian psychiatrist, is seen as one of pioneering and land- mark studies on race and colonialism. His first book, Black Skin, White Mask (1967), offers a potent and enduring take on the profound impact of racism and subjugation on the lives and minds of minority groups. By looking into the embeddedness of racial prejudice in literature, art, and academic works, he noted how white-dominated colonial society created so many harmful myths about black people that both groups ended up being trapped in their own racial looping. Across the globe, Syed Hussein Alatas echoed the message of Fanon's work in his analysis of the 64 Part Two Identities enduring impact of colonialism in Southeast Asia. In his seminal worl