11th June 2013
Privileged information
Here in Cambridge there has been an MI5 briefing, a Vice Chancellor’s Garden Party, and a farewell to research colleagues. One of the most outstanding aspects of the news has been the sense of privilege felt by some for themselves, and by others of others, and how this affects their respective lives and actions.
The first sense of privilege is that felt by certain politicians that they are an elite, above rules, norms, and standards. They include Japanese and British pols, the former seeing their public profiles as providing perfect pulpits for their prestigious pontifications, while the latter have been conspicuous over the past week in asking for money from lobby groups to lobby on their behalf, a point that might seem obvious, except that such payments are against the rules, and possibly illegal.
The main Japanese star in failing to understand that every drop of spittle from his silver tongue may not be pure gold is Hashimoto Toru, mayor of Osaka, national (once stella) possibly-not-quite-rising star and self-proclaimed political maverick who has tied himself with former Tokyo Governor Ishihara. This blog detailed how he managed to shoot his mouth off and hit nothing other than both feet.
Kirk Spitzer (among many) has written on this issue as has this blog. (http://www.kirkspitzer.com/Kirks_Site/Blog/Entries/2013/5/27_Japan_Conservative_Backs_Off_Sex_Advice_For_Marines.html )
Hashi has had his trip to San Francisco called into question by his partial retraction of his comments on comfort women, US forces in Japan, and the nature of women and provision of sexual services. He recently was forced into a retraction of certain comments, that the US military could learn a thing or two about the provision of military brothels from the tremendous efforts made by Japan in the 1930s and 1940s. In short, the 'comfort women' system was useful, military personnel are sex and violence obsessed beasts, so we should feed them women and red meat.
Having recently attended 70th anniversary events for the end of the critical phase of the Battle of the
Atlantic recently in Liverpool, surrounded by service people from around the
world brought Hashimoto's comments into stark perspective. How would we analyse
his comments? Is he making a sensible point, with some rational basis, however
clumsily? Some options below to consider his comments.
Option 1 No, he is talking bullshit, the end.
An attractive option, but insufficient as Hashi is limited but not a complete idiot.
Option 2 Yes, he is right and we should listen more carefully and stop listening to critical voices from Korea, China, and the US.
Difficult
to accept, even though some of the Asian and other reactions have been of the
knee-jerk variety. They are often knee jerk, as the comments made are so common
and so outrageous, and so amazingly ignorant, as though history were never
studied by such national politicians.
Option 3 Basically Option 1 again, but with an added question: Why is he
talking such BS? That is a much more interesting point.
His views of women, sex, and soldiery are all so massively distorted that he
could come up with such a nonsensical comment and actually be surprised by the
reaction it created. That such a narrow minded person exists in such a
responsible position may appear astonishing, but the far more astonishing
aspect is his seeming surprise that the condemnations flowed so strongly. He was truly surprised that his privileged position did not automatically lead to his comments being accepted as though words of wisdom from on high.
Women: his view is that women provide sex, as a commodity, and therefore women
are purveyors of service industry commodities, and therefore there should be no
surprise or logical or moral difficulty in by extension seeing women as a
commodity to be traded in a market. His view is that such a market should be
legal, regulated, and policed.
Sex: as sex is a commodity it may be in greater or lesser demand according to
local market conditions. It is detached, essentially, from human emotions in
the general consideration, emotions only becoming important factors when
attempting to ascertain where and when demand will rise and fall, and he links
this closely with the emotions of aggression and violence. Presumably his view
of sex education would be a market forecasting attempt, so that students will
know when to best exploit their resources in the marketplace. He thinks that
sex demand can rapidly rise, and is closely linked to aggression, so that any
aspect of sex as positive is diminished or removed. Sex is an animal action,
brought upon by aggression and violence, and women who act in the market to
diminish that aggression-violence should be lauded. Possibly he will be
encouraging his own female family members in that career direction. He seems not
to have considered homosexuality, and therefore possibly has not considered
such a career move for himself. In true political terms, he hasn't thought
that he should put his arse on the line in the national interest.
Soldiery: he views members of armed forces as intrinsically violent and
aggressive beings, and therefore requiring regular services of sex workers.
There is a perfect logic to his argument. It is, however, slightly problematic
when members of armed forces are nice, caring, and loving people. Even odder when they are themselves female. How can this
equate with his logic? Well, it requires a view of all soldiers today as those
of the IJA in the 1930s and 1940s, raping and pillaging as a normal part of
soldierly life. This is highly problematic, for not only does it cast Japanese
soldiers, and by extension the present JSDF, in such an unattractive light (were his
ancestors really so awful? What of Nakasone and all the other IJA/IJN old
boys?), but it also seems to go against the evidence for most soldiers for the
past century.
Crimes by US military personnel in Japan are, apparently, lower in incidence
than those of the general Japanese male population. Yes, lots of high profile
cases which have rightly caused outrage, and obviously concentrated in Okinawa, but statistically, nationally low. They have usually come
about due to poor quality troops, poor leadership, and poor disciplinary
management. This is common. Even in the hell of Bosnia in the early 1990s, the
most appalling sex crimes were committed by militia, irregulars, gangsters
masquerading as soldiers, making money and indulging their macabre fantasies,
rather than by regular troops of the JNA, who were more content to shell
civilians. Not a very nice contrast, and hardly a moral compass for the world’s
youth, but while both could be seen as crimes only one has any sort of shade of
grey of military logic or justification.
Then there is the discipline of military life. He seems to regard military life
as a blood lust trail, which leads from one battlefield to the nearest brothel
to the next battlefield. Most soldiers, even those heavily engaged in Iraq and
Afghanistan have spent far more time in barracks, on peace operations duties,
training, and spending time with the kids. Reservists, committed more over the
past decade than at any time since 1945, have returned to families and jobs,
and although they have encountered many problems which should not be downplayed
they have rarely become highly abusive as a legacy of military service.
Military life requires the reduction of selfish desire to the aims of the
military unit. Sex crimes, or even consensual dalliances, are detrimental to
that discipline, and this is why most militaries outlaw sexual activity between
troops and members of military families. An affair between a Sergeant's wife
and a Corporal would result in the Corporal being dishonourably discharged.
Perhaps Hashi would see that as the need for the outsourcing of such 'services' to
a third party.
Soldiers have abused civilians and other soldiers, including sexual abuse, as
have teachers, parents, and politicians, but indicating that this equals a
blanket indictment of soldiers is simply untenable. Abuses by UN personnel in
Bosnia and Kosovo were primarily committed by white collar office staff and
civilian police, usually those personnel who have had the lowest levels of professional
training. When one considers the number of cases where military personnel have
put their lives on the line to aid or save civilians, not simply due to orders
but also the desire to protect life, the ultimate duty of soldiers in most
countries, and certainly in the JSDF, it seems the ultimate insult that their
very being should be characterised in the way that Hashimoto chose.
So, Hashimoto seems to be deeply ignorant of sex, history, human conduct, and the nature of the society in which he lives. I hope that most Japanese don't see sex or their career options in the commodified way he does, nor that most soldiers are rape robots with no alternative settings. But then again most Japanese don't have the same privileged positions as Hashi, although they seem to have a far greater understanding that such privilege should only be granted as a reward for selfless devotion to public service.
Having spent time a weekend in the company of Russian, Polish, British, Canadian and many other serving and veteran soldiers, sailors, marines, and airmen, as well as merchant seamen, it seems that Hashimoto is the odd man out, the one man who overflows with aggression and violence. Let us hope that his family can love him still.
In Britain, there have been MPs who have been taking cash in order to promote lobbyists, such as (very oddly) re-admitting Fiji to the Commonwealth. As yet nobody has lost their jobs, although MP Tim Yeo has stood down as chairman of a parliamentary committee, and the government’s response has been to think about tightening up the rules on lobbying.
http://www.channel4.com/news/tory-mp-tim-yeo-abused-position-in-return-for-cash
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22844988
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22745476
In the UK, the sense of privilege seemingly extends beyond Westminster. Here in Cambridge there are the cases of Colleges such as Trinity and Kings where the majority of students are from ‘public’ (ie. Private fee paying) schools, and this has resulted in a range of people having a very negative view of the whole university and events related to it, even the May Bumps boat-race series that commences from tomorrow (where rowing boats attempt to ram each other in the only known legitimate form since 1950s Hollywood epics; and yes, it is June, but the May Ball week is also now underway, in June) which have previously been sabotaged by anti-privilege activists (although they are probably not so well-organised as forming a cogent body).
However, a recent study has shown that the level of regional admissions to Oxbridge colleges also seem to indicate that there is a massive privilege problem based upon the regional origins of students. It seems that Surrey, the affluent county to the west of London, known as the ‘stock-broker belt’, sends almost as many students to Oxbridge colleges as the entire north-east of England and Wales combined. That is an affluent county of less than two million compared to areas of approximately 10 million people. And, within this overall pattern, the lowest single performance of any English local authority? Step forward the blog’s hometown. Yes, Middlesbrough sent one student to Oxbridge last year, the lowest in the land. Coincidentally, Middlebrough has one of the highest rates of single parent families, unemployment, and premature death. Oddly, neither Eton nor Harrow are based in Middlesbrough, although I was born and raised on Barker Road, Middlesbrough, which is bordered by Cambridge, Oxford, and Eton Roads.
And the government response to this? Education Secretary Michael Gove has announced his third attempt to reform school exams (the first two failed), by emphasizing 19th century literature and Shakespeare, while abolishing continual assessment and project work. Yes, a policy for the 21st century dreamed up by a cabinet of Eton and Oxbridge old boys (not girls, obviously).
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2013/jun/11/michael-gove-gcse-reforms
And the lesson of this? Well, it seems that privilege is fine for the government, and most of those within the privileged zones. The trouble is that Oxbridge provides a fine education in all so many ways, and the latest Guardian assessment of university teaching places Cambridge first and Oxford second, with St Andrews fourth, and Durham sixth, the places of privileged preference when facing the sub-Oxbridge second tier. So, there is a silver lining to the privilege cloud. But the government is looking straight up, so can only see the silver.
As one of the oddities as a Middlesbrough man within the Cambridge society the view of privilege from this perspective is rather conflicted. However, perhaps both sides can be satisfied by cheering for Cambridge students attempting to ram and sink each other in a river.
Recent Comments