@misc{10481/73236,
year = {2022},
month = {1},
url = {http://hdl.handle.net/10481/73236},
abstract = {Since the outbreak of COVID-19, we have been facing one of the most severe challenges
of our modern era. As the world experiences ever-greater globalization, a process of
assimilation has accelerated in numerous spheres such as cultural, educational, economic,
etc., but it is notable that the measures taken by countries to combat the impact of COVID-
19 vary significantly. A considerable number of countries have implemented lockdown
strategies backed by new laws, whereas some others have been relying on the virtues
of good citizenship in order to not depend on their legal systems. Within Asia there are
also contrasting approaches; for instance, China and Korea responded with a quick and
effective tracking method, while Japan depended on a self-restraint strategy.
The Japanese and Swedish approaches to COVID-19 are unique and ambiguous, because
they are based on voluntary self-restraint. There is no legal or political mechanism to control
people’s behaviours. Still, in rough terms these methods seem to have been working,
at least until now. In order to understand the puzzling practice of self-restraint, this research
explores the origin and cultural background of self-restraint in Japan descriptively
and evaluates its positive and negative consequences. Rather than utilizing the philosophy
of communitarianism as the theoretical base, it examines the deep relationship between
Japan and the surrounding environment, and the use of self-restraint in various events,
including those related to COVID-19. Moreover, this study adds to the debate on seeking
the right balance between the communitarian common good that is especially emphasized
in the East, and an individual’s rights and freedom that are highlighted in the West.},
abstract = {Od izbruha COVID-19 se soočamo z enim najhujših izzivov sodobne dobe. Kljub temu
da svet doživlja vse večjo globalizacijo in se je proces asimilacije pospešil na številnih
področjih, kot so kulturno, izobraževalno in gospodarsko, je mogoče opaziti, da se ukrepi
držav za boj proti vplivu COVID-19 med seboj znatno razlikujejo. Veliko držav je uveljavilo
strategije zaprtja, podprte z novimi zakoni, medtem ko so se nekatere, da ne bi bile
odvisne od svojih pravnih sistemov, sklicevale na vrline dobrega državljanstva. V Aziji
obstajajo tudi nasprotujoči si pristopi; na primer Kitajska in Koreja sta se odzvali s hitro
in učinkovito metodo sledenja, Japonska pa je bila odvisna od strategije samoomejevanja.
Japonski in švedski pristop h COVID-19 sta edinstvena in dvoumna, saj temeljita na prostovoljnem
samoomejevanju. Ne vsebujeta pravnega ali političnega mehanizma za nadzorovanje
vedenja ljudi. Kljub temu so te metode grobo rečeno vsaj do sedaj dobro delovale.
Da bi razumeli zapleteno prakso samoomejevanja, pričujoča študija proučuje izvor in kulturno
ozadje samoomejevanja na Japonskem ter ocenjuje njegove pozitivne in negativne
učinke. Namesto da bi kot teoretsko podlago postavila filozofijo komunitarizma, preučuje
globlji odnos med Japonsko in obkrožujočim okoljem ter uporabo samoomejevanja
pri različnih dogodkih, vključno s tistimi, povezanimi s COVID-19. Poleg tega študija
prispeva k razpravi o iskanju pravega ravnovesja med skupnim dobrim komunitarizma,
ki je še posebej poudarjen na Vzhodu, ter pravicami in svoboščinami posameznika, ki so
poudarjene na Zahodu.},
publisher = {University of Ljubljana},
keywords = {COVID-19},
keywords = {Japan},
keywords = {Self-restraint},
keywords = {Communitarianism},
keywords = {Disaster culture},
keywords = {Japonska},
keywords = {Samoomejevanje},
keywords = {Komunitarizem},
keywords = {Kultura nesreč},
title = {Individual Rights vs. Common Good? A Case Study on Japanese Self-Restraint (jishuku) and COVID-19},
doi = {10.4312/as.2022.10.1.69-95},
author = {Ito Morales, Kyoko},
}