This is a fallacy I have discovered on my own, apologies if anyone else might have covered this in the past.
In Japan, male-on-female sexual assault became such a bad problem in its society that they instituted female-only subway cars and forced mobile phone manufacturers to add an audible shutter sound you cannot disable.
Many retards and cucks use this as supposed "evidence" that Japan is therefore a low-trust society where you are liable to be sexually assaulted, especially if you're a lone woman.
But the reality is likely this.
Until recently, Japan was a "proactive" society. That is to say, if a problem arises, it will be dealt with promptly and thoroughly to prevent it from happening again. Much of the world operated like this for a majority of the 20th Century; it's only since the 1970s many Western nations have done a u-turn on this way of thinking.
Japan didn't have a perv problem; a few pervs alarmed the Jap government who wanted to nip this sort of thing in the bud. So they did.
But the problem is, this is no longer the norm in much of the world. They let problems fester and be "part and parcel" of normal day-to-day life. So when they see another country that actually ACTS on their threats to society, they believe in the illusion that these crimes are an epidemic in countries such as Japan. Because that's the only way they have ever known, growing up in countries like the UK, USA, Canada, Sweden etc.
The only example of a proactive society I can earnestly name that exists today is El Salvador, maybe Singapore too given their stances towards hard drugs. Philippines under Duterte came close but the guy was a legit retard sometimes. Argentina is also close but Milei(kowsky) is likely compromised.
The fact that, without government interaction, the phone companies identified a social ill and added in a new industry standard to combat it as "good corporate neighbors" within an industry, shows that it is actually a high-trust society.
This is why people are trying to point out the value of "Karens" an "nosy neighbors".
Basically, there is a philosophical divide between individualists and collectivists that is fundamentally irreconcilable, and some trade-off becomes necessary:
The individualist is not interested in your business, and will not interfere in the things you want to do. However, this means he may not interfere even with good cause, and he might intentionally be off-put if you are trying to help, or if you are simply trying to maintain an aesthetic within the community.
The collectivist is interested in your business, and will interfere in the things you want to do. They may be more willing to help, but they are also going to do the "isn't there someone else you should have asked first" game. They may be the assholes that go to the HOA over nothing, but they may also be the guy who goes face-to-face with a suspicious character and says "you're not from around here".
This is the trade-off. When the community members have as low social IQ as we do, we will get the negatives. Are you okay with the degeneracy and atomization of individuals, or are you okay with the tyranny and reputation destruction of the collectivists. You have to choose one, and then try to build a community with high social IQ to avoid the negative.
I lean more towards the individualist preference, because I've found that social IQ is so low that any amount of collectivism seems to immediately devolve into cliques and threats force from institutions to enforce whatever clique managed to secure the most minimal of power. I can take care of myself and my family/friends well enough that I'm a better institution than the police, the church, or the neighborhood. Things might be different if socialization and competent governance were anywhere on the table, but it usually just isn't at this point. Most institutional forces can't be trusted to manage their own funds, not commit criminal fraud, or just wipe their own ass. I believe that, in the end, individualist preference will cause the development of a competent collective (like the militia, or the government of neighbors), whereas a collectivist approach never has the incentive to actually individualize.
Not a bad observation. I will go another step and assert Japs handle that contradiction with their cultural practice of uchi (inside) and soto (outside), having a public face or persona vs how you act with your in group. If what someone is doing affects or bothers the public, they are very collective, but other people and the government don't get involved in your personal business at all.
..Now you have got me thinking maybe a key defining aspect of various societies in history is how they learned to resolve fundamental contradictions in human nature.
Perhaps. I'm not familiar with this inside v. outside concept. But I guess a more general concept is how does a society handle status signaling within a collective. I think Anglo culture revolves a lot around shame, so there's a benefit to not doing things that would shame you, but would also not bother others. I don't think that's the only thing, but it might be one aspect.
Women are natural social enforcers. They can be at your workplace in HR or at home ensuring the neighbourhood doesn't have strangers and no gooders while you're at work.
Agreed
Good point. It sounds obvious now that you say it, but I never thought of it like that: obviously, whether or not relative collectivism will work well depends in large part on the quality of a society.
That's absolutely true, but it's also true for the individualist as well.
A low-trust, low social IQ, individualist society is effectively anarchic warfare.
"A few pervs exist. Therefore, let infinity foreigners into your country forever."
This depends on a country's standards. Is it really a 'bad problem' in Japan because they did something about it, and not in Germany because they simply ignore it and consider it normal day in multicultural society?
Ah, I think you're making the same point.
By the way, maybe very far off, but the very same argument was made about KiA2. Because we had translated the sitewide rules into KiA2 rules, one of them was "do not sexualize minors". So you know what they made of it? "They do it SO MUCH that they had to make a rule against it." In reality, it had happened exactly 0 times. Only time it happened later on is when (allegedly) AHS raided KiA2 and posted images which they claimed was PDF-ery.
Yes this is what I found out too. Western countries now use solutions as an admission of guilt. Western governments have followed the 1984 blueprint where everything must be framed to benefit the ruling order, and if you ever institute a "solution" it must define an enemy you want to rally people against.
In most cases there is never an admission of a problem, solutions are never presented, and if they are, the public is not supposed to hear about them unless there is a clear propaganda angle for it.
Japan is still a very high trust society where average people believe they can trust doctors, the news, police, etc. They don't instinctually think they are being corralled into a political dogfight, at least not yet.
Japanese train stations are clean, airy, and bright.
Stations at the NY Subway or BART look and smell like an open sewer, and the turnstiles look like they belong in a cattle processing plant.
You tell me which is more low-trust.
The Catholic Church and it's pedophile problem too. The only reason you know about it was because they did something about it.
Maybe Japan has a proactive society or ma-a-aybe their government is corrupt as fuck, notoriously overspending taxpayers' money on things that nobody really needs.
I think both are true. Their government is astonishingly corrupt for such an otherwise orderly & rules-following society.
I've never thought of it this way. How long have you lived in Japan?
Just a one week visit to Japan is enough to blow anyone's mind.
1 - literally every issue in modern society is open to misinterpretation.
2 - So why do we trust historians?
3 - And why the hell does anyone listen to activist-historians like black-history-professors / gender studies professors etc
Mark my words, if japan starts importing jeets and africans the female only cars will dissapear because they'll cry racism. Then will have media covering for them
賢い言い方を当たったね。よくやった～❕。
His job is to make crypto and central bank digital currencies look cool and desirable.
They give the south americans the easy work.