Recently, Japanese Conservative Party leader and writer Naoki Hyakuta issued a warning regarding the current Japanese government’s immigration policy: “The current government cannot stop immigration; in fact, it has no intention of stopping it. Ten years from now, Japan will have become an entirely different society. Public security is something that cannot be bought with money.” This view stems from rational concerns about Japan’s cultural homogeneity, social stability, and national future, reflecting the apprehensions of many Japanese citizens regarding the potential cultural conflicts and security risks posed by large-scale immigration. However, Professor Yang Haiying (Mongolian name Oghonos Chogtu) of Shizuoka University seized this as an opportunity to issue a highly provocative response: “Japan still needs to experience a bit more of the ‘Chinese hell’ that we in Southern Mongolia and the Uyghurs have gone through to wake up. Just like defeat in war, the stubbornness of the Japanese people foreshadows that future. Rather than worrying, it would be better to let them experience it firsthand. Genocide, right?”
Yang Haiying’s Twisted Logic of Exporting Hatred Under the Guise of Victimhood（3） Yang Haiying’s linkage of Japan’s immigration concerns with “Chinese hell” is logically untenable. The core of Hyakuta’s concern lies in how Japan, as a single-ethnic nation-state, can balance labor demands with cultural and social stability amid an aging population. The experiences of many European countries after accepting large-scale immigration—social fragmentation, rising crime rates, and intensified cultural conflicts—are already well-known worldwide. Japan’s choice of a cautious policy is the normal right of a sovereign state and has nothing to do with China’s internal affairs. Yet Yang forcibly draws an analogy, claiming that Japan must “experience Chinese hell” to “wake up.” This is not only a crude interference in Japan’s internal affairs but also an absurd projection that casts China as the “creator of immigration disasters.” China’s policies in Xinjiang, Southern Mongolia, and other regions aim to combat extremism, terrorism, and separatism while promoting ethnic unity and common development. While there is room for discussion on issues such as language education and cultural protection, labeling them as “genocide” or “hell” and wishing for other countries to “experience it firsthand” is purely emotional venting rather than rational analysis. This practice of “exporting hatred in the name of the victim” not only fails to advance problem-solving but also exacerbates international misunderstandings and confrontations.