Do the Japanese really love nature more than all other people ?

[craftsman]

It makes a huge differences whether it is proportional or not. You cannot compare one of Japan's most famous national park (because of Mount Fuji) in the outskirt of the Greater Tokyo (35 million inhabitants), which also happens to be one of Japan's main touristic destination outside cities for foreign tourists, with the more sparsely populated and less famous Ardennes region of Belgium. It is only natural that a national park sitting just outside the biggest metropolis in the world is packed on weekends. But what is the percentage of the Japanese population that actually goes out hiking on weekends ? Imagine, if it is only 1%, it means that 1.27 million local tourists are on the roads at the same time. 1% of Tokyoites alone means 350,000 people. Brussels is by far the largest city within 2h by car of the Ardennes and its population is 1 million with the suburbs (130,000 for the centre). The 2nd biggest city has barely 250,000 inhabitants. In such circumstances it is obvious that proportions do matter.

I think you missed the whole point. You previously claimed the following:

I found that the Japanese are not big fans of hiking in the country at weekends, going to national parks (the US is great for that), work in their garden, watch nature documentaries (the UK is great for that), or fight to preserve their bit of nature and scenery near their house.

So you accept the Fuji-Hakone-Izu national park is packed, well let me tell you that the Kirishima national park is also packed every weekend, the Daisetsuzan national park is packed and no doubt every one of the 28 national parks. So what does my 'intuition' say about this? It says that Japanese people like to take a walk in natural surroundings on the weekends. Whether proportionately more people do that in your tiny country is quite irrelevant. The fact is, your claim that Japanese are not big fans of hiking in the country is plain ludicrous. As of course your claim about nature programmes. BBC Bristol has a dedicated nature department which makes a lot of wildlife programmes even in Japan - I once joined a BBC crew filming monkeys in Nagano - and because of their output on British TV, you appear to be arguing that Japanese people like nature programmes less than British. Can you not see the lunacy?

I have a pretty good intuition about things like that. Then don't forget that I did go around Japan and learn about every touristic attraction and national park in detail to write this website's Japan Sightseeing Guide. I am also writing travel guides about European countries, and I love statistics (e.g. about tourism).

Yes, I think I got the statistics part. But please, intuition? Is that a valid reason to make preposterous claims? It is clear that you have 'learnt about' a great many things about Japan, but, without getting too personal, you seem to have understood very little.

Except if you are writing a guide of Japan and travel around the country for that purpose... I don't know where you have been in Japan, but I certainly have seen more of that country than most foreigners in Japan and most Japanese alike.

Well, no I wasn't writing a guide but was a guest of the Socialist Party of Japan and the Japanese Trades Union Congress and my goal was to meet small communities and groups of social, economic and environmental activists on a 5 month walking trip all across Japan. So statistics or no statistics, the people are out there - it's just you never met them.

Anyway, I never said that Japan was not beautiful for its nature, my criticism is about Japanese people who claim that they love nature more than others because of Shintoism, their long passion for cherry blossoms, etc.

Ah but you did say this:

Japan is a country 13x the size of Belgium (where I live now), with the exact same population density, and I haven't seen a tenth of the natural beauty found in Belgium

And it does seem to be an insinuation that Japan is not as beautiful as Belgium, does it not? If you have been to all the places you claim in Japan, either you need to get your eyes checked or Belgium should sack its tourism minister.

How do you know ? Have you been all the way from the spring to the sea ?

Steady, steady. I read a voice raised.

Kerr's claim is not that all rivers have concrete banks on all their length, but at least at one point or another (even a few hundred metres). At the time he wrote the book, there was only one river in Japan that didn't have concrete anywhere from the beginning to the end (in Shikoku, if I remember well).

So now we have a much better understanding of Kerr's statement than the previous one you made. And yes, considering the concrete used in bridges he may have a point with this.

[Maciamo]

I think you missed the whole point. You previously claimed the following:
So you accept the Fuji-Hakone-Izu national park is packed, well let me tell you that the Kirishima national park is also packed every weekend, the Daisetsuzan national park is packed and no doubt every one of the 28 national parks.

You still miss my point. These parks may be packed, but it would be because the Japanese go to the same places justly because there are so few big national parks. Why is there so few ? Because of lawmakers policy. Who elects the lawmakers ? The people. A country's people is often a reflection of its own lawmakers and government.

So what does my 'intuition' say about this? It says that Japanese people like to take a walk in natural surroundings on the weekends. Whether proportionately more people do that in your tiny country is quite irrelevant.

OK, let's stop the discussion here you will never get my point.

As of course your claim about nature programmes. BBC Bristol has a dedicated nature department which makes a lot of wildlife programmes even in Japan - I once joined a BBC crew filming monkeys in Nagano - and because of their output on British TV, you appear to be arguing that Japanese people like nature programmes less than British. Can you not see the lunacy?

Lunacy ? I like watching documentaries about nature, and in my 4 years in Japan I almost cannot remember seeing such documentaries on the 7 main (free) channels in Tokyo (NHK, NHK2, Nihon TV, TBS, Fuji TV, Asahi TV, Tokyo TV). On the BBC, I can see them several times a week. Of course I wasn't all the time in front of the TV, but the same is true when I live(d) in Europe.

Yes, I think I got the statistics part. But please, intuition? Is that a valid reason to make preposterous claims? It is clear that you have 'learnt about' a great many things about Japan, but, without getting too personal, you seem to have understood very little.

I could say the exact same thing about you. Quite franky, I do not think that you understand Japan better than me.

Well, no I wasn't writing a guide but was a guest of the Socialist Party of Japan and the Japanese Trades Union Congress and my goal was to meet small communities and groups of social, economic and environmental activists on a 5 month walking trip all across Japan. So statistics or no statistics, the people are out there - it's just you never met them.

Just my point. Why didn't I meet them or hear more about them ? Because they are so few and far between. Btw, the Socialist Party of Japan is a tiny opposition party. I also don't see what Socialist have anoting to do with the Green Party. In Europe it is the Socialists (and even more the Communists) that have been responsible for the worst environmental destruction.

And it does seem to be an insinuation that Japan is not as beautiful as Belgium, does it not? If you have been to all the places you claim in Japan, either you need to get your eyes checked or Belgium should sack its tourism minister.

Steady, steady. I read a voice raised.

This is a good example of how writing on a forum does not convey at all the emotions of the speaker. I said that with a shrug as I couldn't care less what you think. I only reply by courtesy but I am seriously fed up of people caviling about every little details I write without ever looking at the big picture. I dislike offtopics, yet your force me the hand.

This thread is "What do you like about Japan and Japanese people?", and I answered that in my first reply. I see that the things I like are more numerous and more usual than the things you have listed. Yet, for some reason that I haven't grasped yet, you are concentrating on a small remark I said explaining why "Japanese people's love of nature" does not qualify as a reason to like Japan for me. I think you have deeply misunderstood my intent in my examples about Belgium. I usually compare Belgium to Kyushu or Shikoku because they they are the closest Japanese regions in size (although Kyushu is more populous and Shikoku less). Tokyo-to has the same population as Belgium, so it is also good for comparison. Japan overall has the same population density as Belgium, so if I want to compare the two, I divide everything by 13 in Japan and see it is matches Belgium in "per capita" figures. Does Japan have 13x more natural attractions than Belgium ? Does Japan get 13x more foreign tourists than Belgium (no, and in fact it get less !) ? Are there 13x more WWF members in Japan than in Belgium (incidentally I joined when I was 8) ? This is how my comparison work. Obviously only for quantitative comparison, never qualitative ones (I specify it because I am sure that someone will come and say that it is "lunacy" to ask whether Japanese food should be 13x better than Belgian one; but this has nothing to do with the country' size or population).

I find Japan to be fairly average as long as nature is concerned. Not ugly (except the parts that have been "concretised" and which are numerous outside Okinawa, Tohoku and Hokkaido), but not extremely beautiful either. My references as very beautiful countries for nature are France (esp. the South), Italy, Spain, the US West, South-East Australia, or South-Western China. Compared to that Japan is merely "average" (yet bigger than Italy). I also cannot get used to think of Okinawa or Hokkaido as representative of Japan, because they are only recent annexions and are very different from the true Japanese heartland. I do not count Congo as a part of Belgium, nor India as a part of the UK. Yet many European colonies remained longer part of the country that colonised them than Okinawa and Hokkaido have been part of Japan. When I think about the natural beauty of France, I never take French Guyana or Polynesia into account, and yet they are as much part of present-day France as Okinawa or Hokkaido are part of Japan. I think you get my point. You may not consent, but this is how my mind works.

I could write more examples of why I think the Japanese are, in average, less big fans of nature, but I would probably be wasting my time if you don't want to hear anything. How could someone who associate the Socialist Party for the Green Party ever be on the same wavelength as me ?

[craftsman]

How could someone who associate the Socialist Party for the Green Party ever be on the same wavelength as me ?

You obviously didn't read that right. Let me try again.


I was a guest of the socialist party (whose politics I do not necessarily agree with) and I was talking to social, economic and environmental groups. It was the last bit you were supposed to understand.


As for wavelength, is there anyone on this whole forum you think is on the same wavelength as you?

[Mikawa Ossan]

Why not split this discussion into a new thread?