Why is there no looting in Japan?

[jobyts]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100079703/why-is-there-no-looting-in-japan/

I had the same question even before seeing many blogs on this. I agree with the blogger of this article - solidarity seems especially strong in Japan. Kudos to the Japanese.

 

[nismaratwork]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100079703/why-is-there-no-looting-in-japan/

I had the same question even before seeing many blogs on this. I agree with the blogger of this article - solidarity seems especially strong in Japan. Kudos to the Japanese.

Way to find the silver lining... so... what would they loot exactly, where would they take it, and how would they transport it?

 

[mharten1]

Self preservation takes precedence over all else. Japan isn't out of the woods yet, deity the nuclear reactors. No one is bothering to think about looting right now.

 

[nismaratwork]

Self preservation takes precedence over all else. Japan isn't out of the woods yet, deity the nuclear reactors. No one is bothering to think about looting right now.

Oddly enough, looting is often one of the first acts in a crisis...


...It may be that the crime-averse shame-averse Japanese society kept it from being first on the mind... a crime in a Japan, however petty, follows you for LIFE. It's brutal, but it seems it may have upsides.

 

[Proton Soup]

it's all relative whether a person is seen as looting bread or finding bread. if they look like your relatives, then they found it.

 

[russ_watters]

The places swamped by tsunamis have nothing to loot. The places not swamped by tsunamis weren't damaged enough for society to break down.

 

[nismaratwork]

The places swamped by tsunamis have nothing to loot. The places not swamped by tsunamis weren't damaged enough for society to break down.

That makes the most sense, a la Occam's razor and the evidence at hand.

Hey, I think I'll loot that pile of burning cars after wading through field of sucking mud!...


...yeah I don't see that happening.

 

[BobG]

The places swamped by tsunamis have nothing to loot. The places not swamped by tsunamis weren't damaged enough for society to break down.

Maybe in the areas nearest the coast.

The same lack of looting was reported after the 1995 earthquake in Kobe, though.

http://factsanddetails.com/japan.php?itemid=863&catid=26&subcatid=161

 

[nismaratwork]

So... as usual... a combination of factors?

As I recall, the Kobe quake started more than a few fires, so it may not have been entirely disimilar from a looting perspective. You still face the basic issues: what to loot, how to keep it, and how to transport it? What can you loot in such a situation that's worth the looting, and in a society where hiding it would be profoundly difficult?

 

[jobyts]

The places swamped by tsunamis have nothing to loot. The places not swamped by tsunamis weren't damaged enough for society to break down.

same as New Orleans, right?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

a friend in tokyo once left a cell phone on the subway. a few hours later she returned to get it and it was still there.

 

[hypatia]

Trust me, if they were, we would never find out about it.

 

[hotvette]

Low (or no) poverty?

 

[nismaratwork]

I think Hypatia has it... often 'petty' crimes are dealt with victim to criminal, especially if they're young. As I said, any criminal record in Japan is an end to MANY MANY opportunities in life.

 

[russ_watters]

same as New Orleans, right?

Not even close. New Orleans was near-deserted including being devoid of a police force.

 

[nismaratwork]

Not even close. New Orleans was near-deserted including being devoid of a police force.

...And people had a place to take looted items, the crime rate in NOLA is absurd before and after, and there was a sense of abandoment which causes alienation and anti-social behaviour.

Japan could not be more culturally or situationally different.

 

[Aknazer]

The Japanese have a different mindset, but they also do things differently. When I was in Japan it wasn't uncommon for them to complain in the newspapers about the American presence, but yet you would rarely see anything about Japanese crime in their newspapers. When I talked with various local nationals they said it wasn't that the crimes weren't happening, it's that the media wasn't reporting on them like how the U.S. reports on crime. Hell while I was there they changed their law on swords and knives because of multiple sword attacks in public; but yet those attacks weren't in the news in the way attacks like that are in the U.S. news.

So looting could very well have gone on in a few places, but simply wasn't reported on.

 

[apeiron]

The places swamped by tsunamis have nothing to loot. The places not swamped by tsunamis weren't damaged enough for society to break down.

Or alternatively it just is a fact that Japanese culture is sufficiently different that the probability of a help yourself, free for all, mentality is less likely.

It was same when we had our two earthquakes in New Zealand (where shops lay broken open, transport was not an issue).

The first thought on the mind of US commentators was "where are the looters?". Whereas locally, that was about the last thought.

Here you can explain it as a small town effect. In Japan you can explain it due to the greater social discipline.

 

[apeiron]

Research here does make the case for social inequality as the key factor.

It was not just the lack of social control that facilitated post-Katrina looting. It was the confluence of that factor and the historically evolving socioeconomic conditions that have produced a largely minimum-wage economy and a population of which nearly one-third was living in poverty.

http://www.colorado.edu/hazards/o/archives/2007/mar07/index.html

And the relevant inequality measures...

Japan - 24.9
US - 40.8
NZ - 36.2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality

[edit] That in fact puts Japan as having the world's lowest level of income inequality along with Denmark and Sweden.

NZ equates with the UK, Italy and India.

US sits down there with Senegal, Turkmenistan and Cambodia.

 

[russ_watters]

Since a typical poor person in the US is far better off than an average person in Senegal, all that suggests is envy turns people into criminals. That's all income inequality arguments really ever are: an attempt to justify envy.

Note that in Katrina, along with the complete loss of social function, the people who left were those with the means to leave and the people who stayed were those without the means to leave. The relative sizes and difference of each group really isn't relevant. Whether a person was middle-class, upper-class or mega-rich, pretty much all of them left.

The fact that people had the opportunity to leave before Katrina and they didn't before this earthquake/tsunami certainly does play a role that I didn't mention before.

[edit] Oh, also important to note: the word "inequality" does not appear in that first link of yours. It's talking about poverty. It doesn't support your thesis/you're trying to twist it to support one of your unrelated beliefs. It's a non sequitur.

 

[apeiron]

Since a typical poor person in the US is far better off than an average person in Senegal, all that suggests is envy turns people into criminals. That's all income inequality arguments really ever are: an attempt to justify envy.

Lol. So let's get this right. Your explanation is that it is envy that was the motivator in New Orleans, rather than poverty. Yet somehow this isn't then an income inequality story?

If I had to draw conclusions from the data, it would be precisely that it was envy rather than absolute poverty that is the issue. So I agree on that. And so therefore as a logical consequence, a country with high inequality levels would be more subject to such social envy. Furthermore, this would also quite nicely explain why that country would feel so fearful of envy based threats like looting.

Quite plainly, the envy of the looters, and the fear of the lootees, would have to be two sides of the same social coin - one minted in the currency of inequality statistics, not absolute levels of poverty or wealth.

So that wasn't even a very good go at twisting the argument around, was it? :p

Note that in Katrina, along with the complete loss of social function, the people who left were those with the means to leave and the people who stayed were those without the means to leave. The relative sizes and difference of each group really isn't relevant. Whether a person was middle-class, upper-class or mega-rich, pretty much all of them left.

The fact that people had the opportunity to leave before Katrina and they didn't before this earthquake/tsunami certainly does play a role that I didn't mention before.

This is just your speculation. Or can you back it up with sources?

The devastation in Japan is pretty widespread. Many have been evacuated around the reactors. Anyone bold could have rushed off to scavenge pretty soon after the tsunami in those areas. There is also the evidence of previous Japanese disasters, and even civil disturbances.

So at the moment your arguments about "lack of opportunity" are hand-waving. I prefer arguments backed up by research and direct experience.

[edit] Oh, also important to note: the word "inequality" does not appear in that first link of yours. It's talking about poverty. It doesn't support your thesis/you're trying to twist it to support one of your unrelated beliefs. It's a non sequitur.

OK, so the articles say stuff like...

a concentration of disadvantaged persons exposed to everyday perceptions of major differences in lifestyles

atypical instances of mass lootings that only emerge if a complex set of prior social conditions exist

And then you seize on the bit that says...

It was the confluence of that factor and the historically evolving socioeconomic conditions that have produced a largely minimum-wage economy and a population of which nearly one-third was living in poverty.

So now you do a swift 180 and argue that this is a statement claiming US absolute poverty levels rather than US envy levels are the driver of the behaviour?

But you've just said even the US poor are well off by world levels. So the article must be about relative wealth and envy at inequality. Or you are just pulling another fast twist of logic to support some unrelated belief of yours.

 

[jobyts]

So... as usual... a combination of factors?

As I recall, the Kobe quake started more than a few fires, so it may not have been entirely disimilar from a looting perspective. You still face the basic issues: what to loot, how to keep it, and how to transport it? What can you loot in such a situation that's worth the looting, and in a society where hiding it would be profoundly difficult?

Looting starts with few hungry teenagers throw stones at a bakery, succeeds in getting some food, more hungry people follow them, eventually gets greedy, looting all kinds of shops, gets into an uncontrollable large scale. It's not as someone does a mastermind plan for an attack, think about the logistics of transporting the goods, etc.

 

[russ_watters]

Lol. So let's get this right. Your explanation is that it is envy that was the motivator in New Orleans, rather than poverty. Yet somehow this isn't then an income inequality story?

You misunderstood: that was your explanation. *I* am calling it absurd.

This is just your speculation. Or can you back it up with sources?

I guess it's just speculation based on logic - are you saying that you believe the opposite? That the people left in NO after Katrina had the same socio-economic cross section as those there before? I can't see a logical reason why that would be true. And note, you didn't cite the gini for NO, you cited it for the entire US. I won't speculate about what NO's gini was (I don't consider it a worthwile statistic anyway), but certainly NO had a poverty rate below the US average before the earthquake.

Either way, you still haven't cite a source that argues inequality is the key factor. You need to do so or drop this non sequitur argument.

You do realize, you're suggesting that people in a disaster zone (New Orleans) with little access to food or water, but an easy means to steal it and no police to intervene were not motivated by their immediate thirst and starvation but were instead motivated by the existence of rich people a thousand miles away, right? Even in the best of circumstances, envy is not a good moral argument against the existence of rich people ('you shouldn't be so rich because it makes people jealous...')

OK, so the articles say stuff like...

And then you seize on the bit that says...

[shrug] That was your quote from the article!

But you've just said even the US poor are well off by world levels.

I most certainly said no such thing - I said exactly the opposite.

Listen - in a country with few real barriers to lifting onesself out of poverty (ie, a free education that people don't take advantage of), it is tough to argue that there isn't a cultural problem perpetuating poverty. That same social problem could well include a lack of discipline possessed by those who aren't poor. So that part of the idea isn't without merrit. But the idea that people become criminals because of jealousy due to a statistic they probably have never even heard of is pretty far fetched.

 

[Pythagorean]

Japan already has one of the lowest crime rates with one of the highest population densities. I'm not surprised by this.

 

[apeiron]

You misunderstood: that was your explanation. *I* am calling it absurd.

You are continuing to be rather opaque about what you are claiming then.

Patently the articles I cited back the thesis that it is inequality, hence envy in your words, and not simply poverty, that were a driver in the St Croix and New Orleans instances. The article say that as the quotes show.

So are you saying the articles instead argue simply for poverty, not inequality? Or something else yet again? If so, perhaps you could show how your reading of the quotes should be preferred?

You first. Cite a source that argues inequality is the key factor or drop this non sequitur argument.

You posited your explanation first - but without sources. So I am challenging you to support your original assertion, if you can. Or you should drop your unsupported position.

And then the articles I linked to were precisely an argument about social inequality. Or do the words "a concentration of disadvantaged persons exposed to everyday perceptions of major differences in lifestyles" not say that to you yet?

While you are at it, you might try to make the case that inequality levels just aren't an obvious driver of such behaviour. Others in this thread have already thought it a reasonable explanation. I just supplied some actual research and national data in support.

You do realize, you're suggesting that people in a disaster zone (New Orleans) with little access to food or water, but an easy means to steal it and no police to intervene were not motivated by their immediate thirst and starvation but were instead motivated by the existence of rich people a thousand miles away, right?

Was that all they looted? I didn't realize. How could anyone have got upset at people taking food and water in those circumstances?

But I am puzzled by these far away rich people. Are they the ones with the means to get the heck out of town (yet prompted no envy from the left behind poor)?

I most certainly said no such thing - I said exactly the opposite.

Again I must stand corrected. So it wasn't you who wrote...?

Since a typical poor person in the US is far better off than an average person in Senegal

 

[Newai]

a friend in tokyo once left a cell phone on the subway. a few hours later she returned to get it and it was still there.

Larceny is one of their most common crimes. And yet that story is very typical. Which says a lot.

 

[jtbell]

How much looting was there in Haiti after the earthquake there last year?

 

[nismaratwork]

Looting starts with few hungry teenagers throw stones at a bakery, succeeds in getting some food, more hungry people follow them, eventually gets greedy, looting all kinds of shops, gets into an uncontrollable large scale. It's not as someone does a mastermind plan for an attack, think about the logistics of transporting the goods, etc.

That is how looting occurs in some countries, especially at the onset of a riot, but I'm sorry to say that's not typical of looting behaviour in the USA at least. There is no mastermind, but looting isn't usually a cooperative process on a large scale in the USA either.

Remember, stealing a television is wrong, but stealing bread after a disaster, keeping it for yourself... that's bordering on evil. Looting like that tends to cause panic, and in that panic stronger people end with the food... the kids who start it, the elderly, the average woman and the infirm lose.

Again, it's hard to apply that model to the image of a guy wading hip deep in NOLA with a flatscreen.

@jtbell: What there was to loot, was looted, then generally re-sold by existing criminal groups. Candles were a hot commodity for a while... food and water were already scarce.

 

[nismaratwork]

Japan already has one of the lowest crime rates with one of the highest population densities. I'm not surprised by this.

True, and I love Japan, but let's not forget the enormous trade the average Japanaese citizen makes from birth to buy that lack of crime. Singapore may treat you in a harsher fashion at first, but in Japan a crime follows you... FOREVER, kid, teen, adult... doesn't matter. You have a set of social expectations, and they are inextricably linked to a culture that values the group over the individual, yet is ruled by rotating door of corrupt officialls.

If that bubble ever finishes bursting (social, not economic), it won't just be kids with '50s haircuts to worry about.

 

[BobG]

How much looting was there in Haiti after the earthquake there last year?

Haiti earthquake: looting and gun-fights break out

US troops are due to be deployed this weekend to help the distribution of aid and quell the threat of violence. But for now the Haitian capital, a tense and insecure place at the best of times, has no effective police force.

(bolding mine)

In general, looting isn't a natural reaction to disasters. It does occur in areas where crime was high before the disaster and it does occur during riots. It's almost guaranteed to get media attention when it does occur because looting and the response to looting creates dramatic scenes.

In general, crime rates drop immediately after a disaster.
(Common Misconceptions about Disasters: Panic, the “Disaster Syndrome,” and Looting)

If anything, civil defense planners should place a little more emphasis on developing, or at least anticipating, the more natural reaction of communities to take control of their own situation rather than sitting passively, waiting for the emergency responders to rescue them.

For example, first aid and some disaster skills for scenarios likely in the local area should be taught in high school. I know in Kansas, how and where to find shelter from tornadoes, how to respond to the sirens, etc, was something taught even in grade school (and even in Ohio we had drills to prepare us for the onset of nuclear war).

One of the problems in Katrina was getting people to evacuate. That's a much more common problem than looting. I like this quote, since it shows the balance between people's willingness to follow directions and their reliance on their own self:

EXAMPLE: Tornado, Grand Island, Nebraska, 1980. Sirens were heard frequently from April through late summer, but their warning value may have been somewhat tempered by a sense of relative invulnerability. (The last time a tornado had hit Grand Island was in 1857, and year after year since that time, those storms that had appeared always veered north of the city.) Sirens did not usually trigger a sense of immediate danger. They were heard during Civil Defense tests, conducted twice each month, and they were heard when funnel clouds had been sighted nearby, funnel clouds that ended up not actually posing a threat to the city. The townspeople seemed to rely primarily on their own weather sense and ability to read environmental clues. The sound of sirens was interpreted not so much as a warning of clear and present danger as it was a signal to watch the skies. Thus, unless conditions looked particularly threatening, the sirens did not generate much alarm. However, on the evening of June 3, they were not heard with the usual complacency. The skies did, on this occasion, look uniquely ominous. Many people turned on the radio, began making personal weather observations, and in general became sensitized to signs of potential danger even before the sirens began to sound. When the sirens began to go off, they were heeded. The result was that, in spite of bearing the full and extended force of 6 twisters that flattened one-fifth of the town (population 40,000), there were only 5 deaths and a relatively small number of injuries. The experience of most persons interviewed after the storm can be summed up in the words “We hear the sirens all the time, but for some reason, [this time] we paid attention.”

 

[nismaratwork]

Haiti earthquake: looting and gun-fights break out


(bolding mine)

In general, looting isn't a natural reaction to disasters. It does occur in areas where crime was high before the disaster and it does occur during riots.

In general, crime rates drop immediately after a disaster.
(Common Misconceptions about Disasters: Panic, the “Disaster Syndrome,” and Looting)

If anything, civil defense planners should place a little more emphasis on developing, or at least anticipating, the more natural reaction of communities to take control of their own situation rather than sitting passively, waiting for the emergency responders to rescue them.

In a country like Japan, you can reasonably expect shelters pre-loaded with food-stocks, water and first aid to be left alone until needed... I find that a hard image to hold with the USA. Maybe palletes pre-packaged every 7 or so years that can be airdropped even in flood-waters with MRE's, antibiotics, etc... to fill that gap in crisis/response?

 

[Chi019]

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100079703/why-is-there-no-looting-in-japan/

I had the same question even before seeing many blogs on this. I agree with the blogger of this article - solidarity seems especially strong in Japan. Kudos to the Japanese.

Strong cultural bonds, Japan is 98% japanese so there is pretty strong social cohesion too.

The Japanese also have relatively low levels of crime in general. This is partly cultural and sociobiological. For instance, In 'The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution' the authors discuss a gene associated with ADD & impulsive behaviour:

"The polymorphism is found at varying but significant levels in many parts of the world, but is almost entirely absent from East Asia...

The Japanese say that the nail that sticks out is hammered down, but in China it may have been pulled out and thrown away.

Selection for submission to authority sounds unnervingly like domestication..."

(page 112)

http://books.google.co.nz/books?id=IaflsA4MyFQC&printsec=frontcover&"

 

[Artus]

They even do lines to wait for aid:

We have to learn from them.

 

[lisab]

They even do lines to wait for aid:

We have to learn from them.

Ah, but note they didn't all park their bikes in the allotted area.

 

[mugaliens]

Strong cultural bonds, Japan is 98% japanese so there is pretty strong social cohesion too.

Homogeneity has its advantages.