The United States of Japan

The author's basic premise stands: Japan has undergone a post-industrial transition where the sudden prosperity of post-WWII generations was quickly followed by stagnation of those coming of age later; the shrunken opportunities afforded to the younger cohort leads them towards idle leisure, or anxiety-filled corporate drone work. The nature of consumerism has changed: there's still outward signalling but the goals have coalesced around personal experiences and fulfillment within an intimate group, as opposed to nebulous segments of the society at large. This makes for an interesting comparison with South Korea, where the nature of consumerism has become markedly more extroverted instead.

The economic and demographic points are fair, but the author tries too hard to tie elements of Japanese culture in with American trends. Yes, Japanese animation has mainstream appeal, but not universally. Video games can be pointed to as the most successful cultural export, but enduring appeal of Mario, Pokemon, and Link isn't functionally more different than Lego or Barbie in their respective times. If the world of video games were devoid of the above, they would be more realistic, more violent, with bleak storytelling and morally ambiguous characters, as we've seen from typical Western AAA games, so perhaps ironically, Japan's most influential cultural export is optimist escapism.

The economic and demographic points seem to lack perspective in some places and in others are downright conflicting.

Take the evidence cited about how NEETs make up 10% of young people. However, the report itself offers one explanation for the numbers. "More than two-thirds of NEETs, in particular young women, are not actively looking for work. The NEET gender gap is larger in Japan than in most other OECD countries as many women in their late 20s withdraw from the labour force to care for children." People leaving the workforce to pursue homemaking and childrearing shouldn't be a societal problem if it's done voluntarily.

On the other hand, in the US, unemployment among 16-19 y/o's is around 14% and among 20-24 y/o's is around 7%. These populations are actively seeking work and unable to obtain it (and not homemaking), meaning that the number of "American NEETs" is likely higher than these numbers. The author seems to suggest that the US is downstream from Japan and that the epidemic of NEET-ism will only get worse, but if the current numbers are any indication, America's NEET problem is far worse than Japan's.

But the differences in unemployment between the two countries seem to be something more systemic. The total unemployment rate in the US has been roughly double Japan's for the past decade. And of course, it is natural that younger populations are hit harder by scarcity of jobs because most of them have little work experience. The author seems to suggest that shifting cultural trends are causing younger people to increasingly choose a life of unemployment. But past generations have had this same class of youth, be it the beatniks of the 60s, hippies of the 70s, or "Jay and Silent Bob" suburbanites of the 80s and 90s. The primary shift is in how this class is presenting itself culturally. Many of these people are simply embracing a lifestyle of joblessness to feel content in the lack of opportunity being presented.

The author cites a lack of human labor as a source of Japan's societal woes, but this is a leading contributor to why the country has what the author calls an "envious" 2.5% unemployment rate. Importing labor en masse from the third world will inevitably limit opportunities for citizens, especially young adults who will be competing for entry level jobs. Furthermore, lower class wages decline, increasing income disparity. The data supports this, Japan has a significantly lower Gini-coefficient (37.9) than the US (47.0). Indeed, keeping migration into the country low is not a source of problems, but instead giving Japan the upper hand on important measures of economic well being.

A lot more profound than I expected from the title. I recommend reading it if you’ve skipped to the comments :)

I was particularly impressed by the comparison the author drew between aspects of Japanese youth culture that developed during the Lost Decade and aspects of “millennial” culture today in the US. I would be interested to see if anyone has developed that further.

This isn't really the main point of his article, but he glosses over one very important point about young people & the work ethic today:

People who get labelled as "freeters" aren't necessarily bouncing from job to job voluntarily. For decades Japanese corporations were labor-heavy because of life-time employment. When the bubble burst, they broke that unspoken promise and shed themselves of thousands of workers.

When things picked up again, instead of returning to that previous promise, they hired temporary workers. No benefits, no annual pay raises or twice a year bonuses, etc. (And no loyalty from these workers)

The Japanese corporate system is set up that you are hired after college at a low salary, but you are guaranteed a steady climb until you can retire comfortably in the end. The corporations pulled the rug out from under that system.

So you now have many young people who have been fully employed at MegaCorp for 3 years, but on a contract basis, never knowing when it will end, never getting a decent raise...

If you read newspaper and magazine articles here you realize there is an enormous sense of insecurity among the 20 to 30 year age group; and so they are unwilling to take risks, get married, buy homes, etc. People are retreating into themselves.

It would make sense that that is linked to minimalism - or at least, a reduced consumerism - but that would only be my own speculation.

It is an interesting thing to contemplate, how there really are “leading” and “trailing” cultural activities. I noticed this in Australia how culturally, they were about a decade behind the US (this is not a snipe, just an observation on cultural norms). It is interesting to think that the US is culturally behind Japan. It leads me to wonder if that really will be our future as well, will we go through two lost decades? I fear we very well may do so. There at some point needs to be some method for dealing with the crushing amount of debt the US has collectively accumulated, and with internal “growth” so low (low birth rates as pointed out by the author). I see there eventually being no other choice than some sort of devaluing of currency to relieve the debt situation. The question is, what happens then? Do we go through a period of economic stagnation? If so, what happens to those “left behind”?

> "A drop in fertility is virtually a defining trait of industrialized economies. This isn't a bug; it’s a feature."

Interesting to see programming terminology in a New Yorker article that doesn't seem particularly targeted towards a tech audience.

> [W]e're all otaku now.

Are we? Perhaps this is true for the people that write New Yorker articles, and a big chunk of those who read them, but from what I can tell most average Americans use Facebook, play basic app games, watch popular movies, and occasionally read a best-selling book. I don't see or hear about much cultivation of deep, obsessive, specific cultural interests.

>Stripped down to its most minimalist outlines (an approach that Kondo would surely approve), a life of uncluttered simplicity represents a fantasy.

What part of it "represents a fantasy"?

It's rather the idea of becoming eventually rich while piling on debt consuming all kinds of crap that's, statistically a fantasy. As in statistically most don't ever get to that.

Not at all related to the article, but visiting Tokyo, it was immediately interesting to me just how similar to NYC it was. The feel was very New York, except stores close much earlier on par with the rest of Asia. And no one has ever seems to have heard of a suit that isn’t black.

A lot of difference of course, but overall it very much felt like New York to me.

As to the article, no doubt that the world is getting smaller. Good and bad.

I have trouble getting any value from this article, which seems relatively devoid of pertinent facts.

The author wants to claim "Japanization" of America after the Great Recession because of a reduced fertility rate and an emphasis on the experience economy.

But, although he notes that fertility declines are a mark of industrialized nations, he fails to adequately compare the U.S. phenomenon to other countries, to compare and contrast those relationships with the relationship between the U.S. and Japan. In brief: the author presents no cogent argument as to why this is Japanization rather than, say, Frenchification (the French are notoriously anti-materialistic, preferring travel and cuisine to accumulating junk).

This New Yorker article appears to be nothing more than a blog post detailing some personal interpretive lens with no new information or analysis.

The USA and Japan have a very strange relationship.

As far as Asian countries are concerned, Japan has fewer immigrants to the USA than Philippines, China, Vietnam, Korea, and India. But Japan sticks out despite the relatively low migration rate.

* The USA in general does have a sense of "the importance of the foreigner" or outsider. Foreigners invite new thought, new culture, and new experiences.

* Japan seems to make an ideal outsider. They're physically on the other side of the world. Their history is basically isolated from "The West" for hundreds, or even thousands of years.

* Yet, with all of that, modern Japan has integrated very finely into the culture of the West. Japanese brands are well-liked (Nintendo, Sega, Sony, Mazda). And as far as I can tell, Japan also likes a number of USA brands (KFC, Pizza Hut, 7-11, Disney, Levi Jeans, McDonalds, Star Wars).

* The media empire of Japan (not movies necessarily, but Japanese anime and Japanese video games, which are popular in the USA) has a lot of synergistic play / counterplay with USA. For example, the "RPG" genre has been shaped by both cultures heavily. While the USA can claim the big-daddy Dungeons and Dragons, as well as Rogue, Diablo, Bauldur's Gate (Canada, but still "Western"), World of Warcraft, and Skyrim... Japan has the Final Fantasy series, Dragon Quest, Legend of Zelda (including Breath of the Wild). There's a lot of influence and synergy between the "JRPG" and "WRPG" genres.

In short: Japanese culture is both familiar and foreign.

Cowboy Bebop is perhaps the best example of what I'm going for. Its a hardcore scifi space opera filled with Jazz: the American-influence on the anime cannot be ignored. But its still an anime with big eyes and the unique "Japanese" drawing style.

The familiarity allows American audiences a degree of comfort, while the Japanese tropes entice us with their exoticness. Its both familiar and different.

And from my understanding: the opposite occurs in Japan. The Jazz and "Americanisms" in the anime are designed to give a bit of an exotic feel for Japanese audiences and entice them. While the Anime tropes are there to give them familiarity.

And that's why its synergy. Familiar to us is exotic for them, and vice versa.

--------

EDIT: And then there's "Power Rangers", the weirdest thing to ever happen between the USA and Japan. Its neither fully American nor fully Japanese. Its clearly "Super Sentai" footage, but the "American Parts" with Johnny / Kimberly / Jason are still core to the series.

Its not just "Power Rangers" either. Transformers, and Sonic. Sonic is a Sega-owned video game character... but a lot of the animation was... American/France. How's that for a change? Outside of the "Sonic X" anime--- Sonic SatAM, The Adventures of Sonic, Sonic Underground, and Sonic Boom are all primarily animated in the West. With the comics done by Archie.

Off Topic - I do wish magazines that exist for long form articles would build the page so you could use the space bar to advance without covering the top lines with their navbar.

I don't sit and relax with long form story on a Sunday morning on my phone

As one who lives on the internet for work, I have never heard of any of the things mentioned at the beginning of the article which makes me suspicious of its foundation. Years ago, we heard of Japan taking over all of technology due to their innovation and we see how well that went.

It is the USA with the biggest influence on the world, not the other way around, especially short-term fads like those mentioned in this article.

I've heard one interesting hypothesis concerning the paradox that the poor tend to have more children than the rich. You would typically expect the reverse. The poor, unable to provide for more children, should have fewer. And, according to this hypothesis, that's what is typically the case historically. The major cause for the reversal is the consumerist ethos. Those with more money choose to spend it on things rather than children because when "keeping up with the Jones'" consumerist values are in play, having a child is a relative loss. You are much better off buying more stuff.

> "[...] there is little in the way of the internecine strife rending America’s public discourse at the moment. What keeps Japan from flying apart, in the face of ongoing political, economic, and demographic uncertainty? A standardized national curriculum that insures a shared level of basic educational experience? An egalitarian pay ethic, with far less income disparity than there is in the U.S.? A refreshing lack of a 24/7 news cycle or televised punditry?"

The author is trying way too hard here to push their American political agenda. Are they implying that e.g. if we suddenly had an equitable education system our nation would suddenly be at peace?

What keeps Japan from flying apart in the face of uncertainty? I doubt the author would ever admit it as it's not very politically correct (and doesn't fit their agenda), but, before all the superficial options the author proposes, the homogeneous society in Japan is the number one thing keeping their societal fabric strong. Conversely, the heterogeneity of America is a big factor making our situation so tumultuous.

I'm an American currently working in Japan. Japan is awesome, and each day I witness cultural customs or processes that just wouldn't work in the US - and I think in large part it's due to nearly everyone being Japanese and raised with the same values. That's not to say I think America would be better off as a homogeneous society either; America is great in many other ways because of its incredible diversity, though it means we have challenges no other nation has had to face before.

But to ignore the role of diversity (or lack thereof) in the strength of bonds in a society is dishonest and misleading.

Side note: as an expat in Tokyo, I often feel bad for simply existing there. I try to conform to all the cultural norms here, but sometimes its hard to, and I know there are many expats who simply don't care to try at all, and I feel like this is slowly leading to the demise of an awesome aspect of Japanese culture. Indeed the neighborhood I live in, which is the expat neighborhood Roppongi, already seems to have lost some of the Japanese charm - with dirtier streets, rude people, expats being loud on the subway. Most people lock their bikes in this neighborhood now and a friend couldn't find their phone after dropping it at a bar the other day here (almost never happens in Japan - your lost stuff is either where you left it or taped to a nearby wall so you can easily find it). Purely anecdotal but, as I said above, I think the more heterogeneous Japan becomes the more of this culture we take for granted will be eroded.

Maybe I am wrong, but I have always perceived that the influence of Japanese culture on America is no longer as strong as it was in the 90s and early 00s. That could be my childhood bias though.

An interesting opinion. If true, the future holds interesting problems, and I liked that it noted that there are worse things for a society than calmly growing old together.

And as an aside, I find myself very willing to click on any HN submissions linking to the New Yorker. It's website is usually clean, minimal, and seems genuinely intent on conveying an intelligent message to the reader, which is a breathe of fresh air as clickbait and sensationalism seems to only be growing.

>A suicide rate that is one of the highest among industrialized nations.

Please stop saying that. Japan's suicide rate is on the decline and not that high.

>We don’t buy into Kondo’s life-changing magic just because we think Japan is cool; we also buy because our country is, in many ways, increasingly like Japan.

On point.

Hey, is this related to Code Geass?

This article is written from the viewpoint of the US urban dweller.

(All hail Lelouch.)

This is what happens when you write an article about Japan without having any particular understanding of history.

The future of America won’t look anything like Japan because America is not a far flung outpost of an empire in decline. It’s the center of that declining empire. The circumstances of globalized Capitalism do create superficial “cultural” similarities, but if you want to understand the fate of America, you’re better off looking at the current state of countries that were the former the rulers of the Ottoman, British, or Soviet empires. Great Britain became more Indian in the wake of losing its empire as well, but it wasn’t anything like this article describes.

This article has a bit of truth and a provocative thesis but with a few notable exceptions it becomes more and more contrived as it winds on. Most egregiously it tries too hard to tie unique Japanese cultural phenomena which can be explained in other ways to universals that don't exist.

>Another societal struggle that Japan was one of the first developed countries to encounter can be seen on the opposite end of the age spectrum, in its large population of unemployed young men and women. A report from 2017 revealed that, in 2015, there are some 1.7 million of them, a full ten per cent of those between the ages of fifteen and twenty-nine—a shocking number, given that Japan’s unemployment rate is an enviable 2.5 per cent. Officially, Japan calls these people NEETs (“not in education, employment, or training”) and “freeters” (temps who drift among various short-term jobs). The press has other, less generous terms for them, including “parasite singles” and “herbivore men.” In the early aughts, journalists spilled a great deal of ink on the herbivores’ seemingly unique lack of interest in moving out, getting married, or finding a girlfriend.

It's telling that the author starts out his hitjob on NEETS as stating they're both officially men and women, and finishing with the implication that they're actually all men.

I'd expect better editing from The New Yorker!

>Tellingly, the Japanese have a slang term for people like this: otaku. Literally meaning “one’s home,” the word emerged in the early eighties as slang for young adults who eschewed normal relationships in favor of the virtual worlds of manga, anime, and early video games.

It's hard taking an article seriously when it's wrong on such a basic fact like this. It comes off as someone who has no idea what they're talking about trying to make connections between things to sound informed and enlightening on a subject. Especially when all you need to do is read the wiki article [0]. The word is closer to "geek". How would 銃オタク (gun otaku) fit under the media umbrella of manga, anime, or video games?

[0] https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%81%8A%E3%81%9F%E3%81%8F