![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
unjapanologistBBC: Japan nuclear crisis: Pensioners seek work at Fukushima (3 min)
In this interview, which I can't embed because BBC doesn't allow that, Mr. Yamada Yasuteru explains that he and many other retired volunteers want to help out at the struggling Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant to save younger people the risk of radiation accidents with lasting consequences. About two minutes in, the interviewer asks if the volunteers would describe themselves as "kamikaze pensioners" and their work as a "kamikaze mission".
Mr. Yamada is clearly baffled by the suggestion and explains that he and his volunteers are in no way comparable to WWII kamikaze pilots. The reason why he believes pensioners are better suited to work at the Fukushima Daiichi plant is that if an elderly worker accidentally received a dose of radiation high enough to possibly cause cancer, the worker would die naturally before any cancer can develop (it takes a few decades). The work is somewhat risky, Mr. Yamada says, but he and his volunteers would be managing that risk properly and have no intention whatsoever of getting killed.
It's quite absurd that he even needs to clarify that. But indeed, by comparing the volunteers to kamikaze pilots, the interviewer does suggest that they will be throwing themselves into mortal danger without any forethought, ready to lay down their lives for a yes or for a no -presumably because that is what Japanese people volunteering for dangerous work must be like. Mr. Yamada makes it clear that the volunteers simply think they are the right people for the job, and they intend to do it efficiently and while minimizing risk to themselves and others, like any worker would do under any circumstances.
The interviewer's kamikaze suggestion is not just inaccurate. It's a prime example of how Western media who know very little about the cultures of non-Western countries often whip out random concepts they know to be connected to that culture, then slap them onto completely unrelated situations and cause all kinds of misunderstandings. Calling the people who work (or want to work) at the Fukushima Daiichi plant "kamikaze" is a quite insulting misrepresentation. It suggests that the workers are mindless, irrational drones who have no sense of self-preservation, and that they are in some way comparable to people who blew up ships full of soldiers because they'd been brainwashed by militaristic propaganda.
In this interview, which I can't embed because BBC doesn't allow that, Mr. Yamada Yasuteru explains that he and many other retired volunteers want to help out at the struggling Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant to save younger people the risk of radiation accidents with lasting consequences. About two minutes in, the interviewer asks if the volunteers would describe themselves as "kamikaze pensioners" and their work as a "kamikaze mission".
Mr. Yamada is clearly baffled by the suggestion and explains that he and his volunteers are in no way comparable to WWII kamikaze pilots. The reason why he believes pensioners are better suited to work at the Fukushima Daiichi plant is that if an elderly worker accidentally received a dose of radiation high enough to possibly cause cancer, the worker would die naturally before any cancer can develop (it takes a few decades). The work is somewhat risky, Mr. Yamada says, but he and his volunteers would be managing that risk properly and have no intention whatsoever of getting killed.
It's quite absurd that he even needs to clarify that. But indeed, by comparing the volunteers to kamikaze pilots, the interviewer does suggest that they will be throwing themselves into mortal danger without any forethought, ready to lay down their lives for a yes or for a no -presumably because that is what Japanese people volunteering for dangerous work must be like. Mr. Yamada makes it clear that the volunteers simply think they are the right people for the job, and they intend to do it efficiently and while minimizing risk to themselves and others, like any worker would do under any circumstances.
The interviewer's kamikaze suggestion is not just inaccurate. It's a prime example of how Western media who know very little about the cultures of non-Western countries often whip out random concepts they know to be connected to that culture, then slap them onto completely unrelated situations and cause all kinds of misunderstandings. Calling the people who work (or want to work) at the Fukushima Daiichi plant "kamikaze" is a quite insulting misrepresentation. It suggests that the workers are mindless, irrational drones who have no sense of self-preservation, and that they are in some way comparable to people who blew up ships full of soldiers because they'd been brainwashed by militaristic propaganda.
Tags:
no subject
no subject
Looking at the five million kamikaze references that have appeared in Western media in connection with Fukushima, I'd say reporters intend "kamikaze" to mean someone who undertakes a very dangerous task and expects to die while finishing it. What strikes me as odd is that these same reporters seem to be infusing "kamikaze" with a positive meaning -they all present workers at Fukushima Daiichi as very brave and selfless. It's an extremely weird mixture of a word that doesn't mean what they think it means and a general tone of "how brave and sacrificing these people with their exotic mindsets are, although their slavish devotion to the group is kind of creepy".