Plunge, whom many of you may already known from Chief Wiggles, has a separate blog up now on which he discusses a number of Korean issues. Two posts in particular really, REALLY deserve attention. The older one discusses the debate over Japan’s contribution to Korean development. It’s a LONG post, but I’ll reprint its introduction below so you can get an idea of its direction:
The colonization of Korea by Japan had a major impact on the direction and development of Korea. The effects of it can be felt today as Koreans take to the streets to protest the lack, or perceived lack, of an effectual apology from Japan and for the cavalier way this period is portrayed in their history books.
But, the question remains, what impact did the colonization have on the modernization of Korea? There is no disputing that it changed Korea??????????s history and caused a major upheaval in Korean society. What is disputed is whether or not any good came of this brutal period from Korea??????????s past. The debate continues and has provided a plethora of material and research for those interested in learning more.
Having read a great deal of this material, I have come to the conclusion that little good came of the colonization of Korea by Japan and that it has had little impact on the success of Korea in modern times. I am NOT saying it had no positive impact, but that the amount was insufficient to warrant any praise over the condemnation they so rightly deserve for the brutal conditions Koreans had to endure.
Be sure to read it in its ENTIRETY before making comments.
The second post discusses comparisons of Western and Japanese imperialism and the need for Japan to apologize for its past. Another lengthy post, you’re of course advised to read it fully. Here’s just a sample:
While Japan has done many good and useful things over the past 50 years the albatross of its militaristic and imperialist past will continue to hang like a lodestone around its neck until it fully recognizes and atones for its past crimes against humanity. A full and unequivocal apology from the nation and people of Japan is not only needed, it is necessary if Japan expects to be accepted as a stalwart leader of the free world.
Japan can do this. It can make the kind of apology that will endear it to most of the free world, especially to most of Asia. The bottleneck is pride and nationalism. What they don??????????t seem to realize is that through humbling themselves before the rest of Asia and the world, they will gain a status and stature that at the present is only an unobtainable dream. What also doesn’t seem to be understood is that money does not buy forgiveness.
One last note — before commenting over at Plunge’s site, please take care to read his one small request:
As normal, feel free to disagree and correct me. Discussion is welcome, attacks are not. Keep things civil and no foul language allowed. Thanks.
81 Comments
As normal, feel free to disagree and correct me. Discussion is welcome, attacks are not. Keep things civil and no foul language allowed. Thanks.
Plunge should remind people that think of commenting that he pretty much views everything as an attack. That being said, I will take this opportunity to ‘attack’. This has to be one of the most poorly researched pieces on colonial Korea that I have had the displeasure to see. It is full of factual errors and outright distortions, which I will elaborate on soon.
Nothing Plunge wrote is any surprise, nor anything I’ve known. But I think it needed to be said in a climate where Japanese acadamia supported by huge marketing dollars, and historic revisionists within and outside Japan are gaining strong momentum as of now. Korea has to do a better job in fostering research on its history and its studies. Japan on the other hand has done an excellent job growing and cultivating Japan centric Asian history outside Japan. Having a bottomless pocket to pay for it all helps too.
There was an interesting article in yesterday’s English-language edition of the Joongang Ilbo regarding the work of “VANK”, which has as its mission contacting overseas sources of information on Korea and correcting what VANK sees as inaccurate information. The leader of VANK was cited as saying that he had contacted National Geographic telling that institution that Korea’s history began in 4000 BC and that National Geographic had agreed to “correct” their publication accordingly (!)
The point is, that even one obvious lie will taint one hundred truths. Unless Koreans in a position to know better become honest about their history and historical research, it will be viewed as suspect, no matter how many VANK volunteers there are and how much money is put toward propaganda.
I could be wrong, but I have to go with my pro-Japanese mother and have to admit the Japanese have done some good -educating, reforming and modernizing Koreans.
Electricity, medicine, education, literature, modern way of thinking, hiring by abilities instead of one’s class… The list goes on.
Without the Japanese, these processes could have been delayed or may have been impossible. Old Chosun was very backward society with two distinct classes. Yangbans would have kept all foreigners out just to keep Ssangnom ignorant, and thereby further delaying modernization.
The Japanese did help Koreans in some aspects while hurting them in other things. Nothing in history is all bad or all good. Or, I could have been brainwashed by my mother; she had a great time under Japanese rule and still loves Japan more than Korea.
baduk wrote:
I could be wrong, but I have to go with my pro-Japanese mother and have to admit the Japanese have done some good -educating, reforming and modernizing Koreans.
Did you thoroughly read Plunge’s post? He does an effective job of showing that giving Japanese colonial rule credit for these things is a bit generous. There are at least a few academic papers (from outside Korea) with much the same arguments.
But while it is true that Japan effectively closed down many missionary schools and private schools, there was an effort to bring primary education to the entire country, even in out-of-the-way rural areas. Still, the point that Plunge outlines is that the same thing may well have occurred in the absence of Japanese colonial rule.
Electricity,
Funny coincidence, on Sunday I was at the Yongsan library reading a dusty old book (the original 1904 or 1907 edition, in fact), written by an American, that was talking about the electrical power plants and the railway system that American companies had built for Seoul. These things
medicine,
The missionaries from the US, UK, and Australia were the ones bringing in modern Western hospitals. Again, the Japanese presence would not have been needed to do this to take hold across the country, as was already seen even before the Japanese took over.
education, literature, modern way of thinking,
You mean like violence in wartime and modern tools of political oppression? (Just kidding, although that is as much a dig at Korea as it is at Japan).
hiring by abilities instead of one?€™s class?€?
If you were Japanese. According to Andrew Nahm’s history text (which acknowledges some positive aspects of Japanese rule), if I recall correctly, Koreans were hired in higher numbers in governmental positions only in the late 1930s and 1940s, as manpower shortages due to the war effort took hold. It was also because of this that the draft of Koreans occurred in 1943.
The list goes on.
Without the Japanese, these processes could have been delayed or may have been impossible. Old Chosun was very backward society with two distinct classes. Yangbans would have kept all foreigners out just to keep Ssangnom ignorant, and thereby further delaying modernization.
Are you so sure of that? Back in the 1990s, the newspapers here had a story that pointed out that there were more foreigners in Seoul 100 years earlier than there were at that time (mid-1990s). Most were Japanese, but there were also Russians, Americans, Brits, Chinese, etc.
Baduk, changes had already started to take place. Korea was going through a modernization fit at least in terms of technological creature comforts. This is stuff I have read from actual books published prior to Japanese annexation.
The Japanese did help Koreans in some aspects while hurting them in other things. Nothing in history is all bad or all good. Or, I could have been brainwashed by my mother; she had a great time under Japanese rule and still loves Japan more than Korea.
Well, I don’t know about your mother, but I think two points need to be made (in addition to the point that the Japanese colonial “benefit” may not be nearly as much as hyped). The first is that even if a great amount of “benefit” is demonstrated, it does not justify the annexation and often very brutal occupation of an entire country.
The second is that, even if Japanese military-colonial rule can be mostly characterized as negative, it should be noted that there were at least some Japanese who were genuinely interested in the welfare of Korea and Koreans and were trying to improve standards of living. Many of them ended up in education and other fields that would help promote general welfare. Former President Kim Youngsam once invited the family of his favorite teacher, a Japanese man, to the Blue House.
Plunge should remind people that think of commenting that he pretty much views everything as an attack.
Really? I’ve had wonderful discussions online without them resorting to attacks. People can be civil and disagree.
This has to be one of the most poorly researched pieces on colonial Korea that I have had the displeasure to see. It is full of factual errors and outright distortions, which I will elaborate on soon.
That should be interesting. I’m more than happy to reveal my sources, all of them are well thought of historians in the field of Korean studies. Not a single crack-pot among them, well, some think Bruce Cummings is kinda nutty, but he does good research.
What many don’t realise is that there is ongoing research. People use the same tired texts instead of spending time to see what is current, much of which isn’t available on the net.
Anyway, feel free to comment, you can even comment on my blog if you keep it polite.
I’m sure you are going to hate my next piece on what a wonderful decision it was to drop the atomic bomb…
Kushibo writes much of what I would have to respond. It is amazing how quickly Korea was changing before Japan stepped in.
Also, please remember I don’t say everything about Japan’s colonization was 100% negative. My point is that Korea would have done just fine on its own. There were some good things, some I mention, some I don’t and I think Kushibo explains that well in the last part of his comment as far as some of the good.
Anyway… I’ll be interested to see what happens.
Kushibo,
Well, I cannot help but think your “evidences” are rather forced. As I wrote, Old Chosun was a backward and class-separated society that would have made many of these modern advances nearly impossible.
I guess you have not seen some of these old Korean types. They are pretty ignorant and xenophobic bunch; some later became communists. Even today, many Koreans believe that being a true patriot means hating all outsiders - even Americans who did much good. With this frame of mind, they could have destroyed western electric plants for bringing a devil into the village, and have killed modern doctors for the same reason.
Chosun at that time might well had been an African nation, filled with sorcery and prejudices.
And, about education. Yangbans had to keep their strong grip over Ssangnom. Only possible way is not to keep them ignorant. Before the Japanese came, the only schools in Korea were for Yangbans; no Ssangnom, however smart he may be, is not allowed in. I am sure some Ssangnoms were very happy to see the Japanese coming.
The Japanese rule did some good. Much good, according to my mother who has lived through it. Denying it only makes you dishonest.
My bad. I used double negatives like a Russian. I am sure you can figure out what I mean(just delete one of the two).
Wow Baduk, it seems that you are a korean and you are saying somthing that the borg has not agreed to. I guess this is proof that not all Koreans act with one mind on all issues. I am sure this will get you the wrath of the Korean Kyopo Klub. Noradong Nuljidong and sawhadong are the leadership cadre of this troop. Watch your back around them. I like Mizer a lot and those three and make all sorts of attacks on him. I guess shutting up any dissenting voices is part of the Korean collective.
Keep up the good work. Maybe you, mr Baduk can change some of the negagive opinions about koreans that seem to be so reinforced on this blog.
Without Japan and the United States, who came to Korea because of Japan, Korea would have been in the same shape as China is now.
Or, most likely, even worse than China. More like NK? VietNam?
The Japanese rule, which was mostly bad according to your opinion, brought the U.S. involvement to Korea.
If these events had not happened, you and I would have been working in some sweatshop factory that is run by a Chinese businessman. And, get paid $5 a day. One has to take the good with the bad.
Also, realize, through all these events, how much God has blessed Korea.
Let’s see if I can do this without the italics getting all screwed up. (Marmot, you really should have a preview option. And if I may be so bold, you should also have a “last comment” dateline for each blog entry on your front page. But who am I, a blogger.com user, to whine about what is otherwise a most excellent site. The place to be, in fact.)
baduk wrote:
Kushibo,
Well, I cannot help but think your ?€œevidences?€? are rather forced.
Some of my “evidence” is stuff I read written and published during the pre-colonial era. Dusty old books are treasure-troves of insight into lives and attitudes at the time, without the revisionist viewpoint of decades that come later.
As I wrote, Old Chosun was a backward and class-separated society that would have made many of these modern advances nearly impossible.
But Baduk, they already were happening. Some change had been occuring for a couple decades. The tide had clearly begun to turn, but it was too late to do anything militarily or politically.
I guess you have not seen some of these old Korean types.
That’s right. They’re dead.
They are pretty ignorant and xenophobic bunch; some later became communists. Even today, many Koreans believe that being a true patriot means hating all outsiders - even Americans who did much good. With this frame of mind, they could have destroyed western electric plants for bringing a devil into the village, and have killed modern doctors for the same reason.
Paduk, are you on crack? I’m not speaking of some hypothetical creation. The electricity was really being generated, the trains really were running, and the hospitals really were treating people. No witch doctors were burning them down and killing the doctors.
Now, in all fairness to your argument, French priests were killed and there supposedly were rumors of foreigners stealing children (to eat their eyes or something), but somehow, some way, these changes managed to occur. I guess Korea wasn’t completely full of people whose modern equivalent would be readers of Weekly World News who believe the “Bigfoot Ate My Alien-Fathered Baby” stories.
Chosun at that time might well had been an African nation, filled with sorcery and prejudices.
Yes, it was. But it also had its share of pragmatic people. The things I mentioned really did happn, Baduk, even if it throws you into a state of cognitive dissonance.
What are you trying to do now? Try to prove how you’re not such a Korea cheerleader by showing you can be pro-Japanese on this issue?
And, about education. Yangbans had to keep their strong grip over Ssangnom. Only possible way is not to keep them ignorant. Before the Japanese came, the only schools in Korea were for Yangbans;
Korean women were being educated at Ewha Haktang and Christian schools were promoting education as well. Your statement represents the state of affairs that dominated for a long time but was beginning to erode as early as the 1880s.
no Ssangnom, however smart he may be, is not allowed in. I am sure some Ssangnoms were very happy to see the Japanese coming.
I’m sure that may be true. But I also believe that many of the ssangnom would have been just as happy with educational reform minus the Japanese presence. The two were not dependent on each other.
The Japanese rule did some good. Much good, according to my mother who has lived through it. Denying it only makes you dishonest.
Like Plunge, I am not saying that the Japanese occupation was 100% negative. I even stated that people should remember the presence of Japanese who had a genuine desire for life to improve for average Koreans. No denial on my part.
Saying I shouldn’t deny something I did not deny makes you dishonest.
And, about education. Yangbans had to keep their strong grip over Ssangnom. Only possible way is not to keep them ignorant. Before the Japanese came, the only schools in Korea were for Yangbans; no Ssangnom, however smart he may be, is not allowed in. I am sure some Ssangnoms were very happy to see the Japanese coming.
The education process had started to change before the annexation by Japan, especially through the schools run by foreign missionaries. The educational process began to open up offering opportunities to those outside of the elite.
The problem is the continued comparison of the Chosun dynasty and its long history to the swift changes that began in the 1870s. Once Korea was opened to trade from the outside world, the old ways were doomed. Western influence quickly came in and Korea had little choice but to change. The days of isolationism were over.
Why yes, Korea was improved much by Japan. Where would it be with out the comfortwomen and resulting boom in the sex industry, biological and chemical weapons testing, flawed legal system, education system based on memorization rather than crital thinking, the Japanese version of Korean history and forced labor and soldiering around the pacific only to be forgotten about at the end of the war (sakhalin island ex). Oh yes, Korea would have had lots of problems with out the generous help of the japanese-please, do you really believe that? For anyone that has ever been to Ch’angduk palace, you can see that the palace has been (at some point in time unknown to me) with electric lights and other ‘western’ amenities. There was a railroad in Korea before the Japanese people came here and many other things. I am very happy to see that plunge has done a good job putting the research together. There will be those that may disagree but I think they are like those that don’t believe the Nazis did anything wrong and the holocaust never happened. History is HIS-story and people will believe what they want to regardless of the evidence presented contrary to that belief.
Thanks for the kind comment James!
One can make a point that Japan’s colonization was not good for Korea without resulting to speculation and untruths.
1. Was there a post-war boom in Korea’s sex industry caused by the comfort women program?
2. Korea’s modern legal system was modeled on Japan’s, which in turn was modeled on Germany’s. Why do you believe it is flawed and in what ways is it worse than Korea’s pre-1905 legal system?
3. Was Korea’s pre-1905 educational system based on “critical thinking”? Or was it based on rote memorization of Chinese classics and the ?³¼?±° system of examination?
Uh, the correct word is “resorting”
Sorry for the typo. Let me try again.
Given that Japan has done enough evil things of which it should be ashamed and/or make amends for, not only in Korea, but elsewhere, one can easily support the thesis that Japan’s colonization of Korea was overall detrimental to Korea _without_ resorting to unfounded speculation. Doing so only weakens one’s argument.
In rebuttle to dogberts comments:
You are right, the growth and continuation of the sex industry in Korea is not Japans fault. I was speculating that perhaps women that had been forced into that industry by the japanese were left in an akward position socially after the war, being labeled by all who know them as a comfort woman and being left with few options outside of returning to a trade they already know. I am assuming that most would have little if any education and any sort of job skills would be equally limited. Absolute truth-no, speculation based on reasonable circumstantial evidence, maybe.
As for Koreas legal system, being based on that of post WW1 Germany via an Imperialist Japanese filter leads me to argue that any sort of fairness is lacking. I see signs looking for witnesses all the time for some wrong doing-presumably because the police are powerless or careless to thoroughly investigate maters unless a witness can be produced. I personally know people that have either avoided incarceration due to connections or have been wrongly incarcerated because it was convenient to have “caught” the criminal responsible for some crime with no sort of proof, let alone any sort of investigation to ascertain the facts. I am not arguing that the US or any other system is better or even inferently more fair than the Korean one, merely that from my pooint of view the Korean system is less than equitable. Last of all, the confucian government tests used to grant people government positions here in Korea I would say are based on critical thinking. Having personally examined answer sheets from people that took the tests from the late 19th century as part of my education, I can tell you that the tests were worded something like this: Mencious said this…. Confucious said this…. What do you think? The student hoping to gain a government position was then forced to have a broad knowledge of the confucian classics, both memorization as well as comprehension and be able to articulate an answer that justified what may be misleadingly differing statements by Confucian masters or be able to explain what these sayings had to do with current society and how they might be effectively implemented. Remember that these tests were given in written Chinese so the students also had to be able to articulate themselves effectively using classical Chinese. Clearly NOT just memorization.
As for the erroding social classes, it is true. By the mid 19th century the slaves were beginning to run away and there is plenty of documentation (I have seen and toouched it myself) that has survived in the form of government property tax assesments and what would amount to censuses, particularly from the Puan Kim family. They are very interesting because they show over time the changes that have taken place in the way that inheritances were distributed and in turn the family structure maintained. After a while it became cost prohibited to chase down the slaves only to have them run away. This often left the owners knowing full well where their slaves were living but unwilling to do anything to change it. Another option that eventually played out was that slave holders were responsible for feeding, housing and clothing their slaves which was alright during prosporous years but not a pleasant thing during lean years. This led to the rough equivilant of the share cropping system here. The slaves were allowed to live on a piece of land if they would cultivate it and they were allowed to keep a certain amount of what ever they grew either for personal consumption or sale/trade. The social structure was further eroded by the Tonghak movement. Despite the fact that it was put down, that was arguably one of their aims-to bring about social change and some mobility for the people who were not Yangban-all without Japanese intervention. If Kojong and Sunjong had been more capable and visionary in their leadership, perhaps history would have been written very differently.
Thank you, James, for taking the time to elaborate. I’m sorry to say I remain unconvinced, but it was an interesting response and I appreciate the remarks on the state examinations.
JYC, there is a prominent typo in James’s rebuttal — jump on it!
Do you people have nothing better to do than play typo cop?
I like “Kyopo cop” better anyhow . . .
Hey, I’m just returning the favor for “donor”, and if we’re being strictly rigorous …
It was a grammar/usage flame and not a typo flame
“I?€™m sure you are going to hate my next piece on what a wonderful decision it was to drop the atomic bomb?€?” - plunge
Go ahead, drop that bomb Plunge, give it to em. I’m eagerly awating on that piece. Your research was well written. I’ve bookmarked your site and I’m going to pass it around.
Baduk, Plunge and Kushibo aren’t saying life in the Chosun dynasty was one paradise - it wasn’t. What they’re saying is that there was finally a light at the end of the tunnel, and things were gradually improving - before Japan came along. Japan did a terrible job educating Koreans. In 1945, Korea’s literacy rate was only 20%. Why? Because Japan spent most of their energy cultivating good little loyal Japanese (of the third class kind). It was only after 1945, did Korea’s literacy rate jump to almost 100% today. That’s just one example.
This may or may not be related to Japanese colonialism, but Korea did copy Japanese economic and education model after 1960. What is the result that you see today? A mixed bag result at best. S.Korea would have been much better off copying the Western model - like Hong Kong and Singapore.
If Korea had been left alone, without Japan, Russia, and China, they would have done just fine. As it was, that wasn’t the case. If Japan didn’t, Russia would have, if Russia didn’t, China would have - these countries were big three wolves in sheep skin. The only influential power that didn’t try to take a big chunk out of the pie - happens to be the United States. If Japan, Russia, and China stayed out of Korea, Korea with the US help (not colonization) - would look very much different today - possibly ranking right up there with any economic superpower. That is just my theory.
Playing “what if” games with history is pretty useless. Too many variables and no way of really knowing what would/might/could have happened. Leave it to the science-fiction writers.
What history can do is basically what Plunge did — look at what was actually happening.
it was certainly informative research, even though some explanation donot make sense, like enrollment of schools.
for me, an ordinary japanese who has some interest in korea, it was all known theory. when you google the “japanese annexation of korea” in the google japan, i would say (just my rough perception) half of sites are similar to what plunge wrote and half of them are so-called ultra-right claims. actually some of sites the plunge refered in his post are from japanese individual or group.
even thou some or many japanese politicians made some stupid comment, they are politicians afterall. i think japanese intellectual/academia world is relatively well balanced.
sa hwa dong, please provide me a material, if you please, showing the literacy rate was only 20% in korea in ‘45.
i am not so comfortable to read “it is wonderful decision to drop A-bomb” just like i feel uncomfortalbe to hear people say “japanese colonization is all good for koreans”. in terms of political decision, dropping A-bomb could be as right as colonizing korea. but individuals, innocent people are suffering out of it.
The leader of VANK was cited as saying that he had contacted
National Geographic telling that institution that Korea?€™s
history began in 4000 BC and that National Geographic had
agreed to ?€œcorrect?€? their publication accordingly (!)
I saw that too. Now, this is pretty obviously a mistake in
translation, and “Korea?€™s history began in 4000 BC” means
“4000 years ago”. Even among Korea’s extreme nationalists,
there is no claim of 4000 BC. By the “Dan-gi” (Korean year,
since Dan-gun founded the first Korean Kingdom, or since his
heavenly father descended, take your pick), Western 2005 is
the year 4338.
This is myth with a bit of legend in it, of course.
Anything that we can legitimately call “Korean history”
is no more than 2000 years old…. unless you count Kija…
Well your argument smells bad. And rotten fish is better than what I was going write.
wow, kushibo,
your remarks really make me incline to think you and those, who put tons of posts of delight and joy in naver on 100 some death by the train accdent in japan or conscience netizens who socially killed choo yeonnam or prof. han simply because their remarks dont fit theirs, are the same race.
i am glad plunge proved the japanese colonial education was obstractive and did not contribute what korea is now.
So there were no pre-historic people in the Korean peninsula, in 4000 B.C. ???
mae, there is very little evidence that Japan played a major role in education in Korea before 1945. On the contrary, Japan’s role was obstructive. Education is empowerment, it would not have made sense for a totalitarian colonial power to have educated the natives other than to use education as a tool to shape the native Koreans into what Japan wanted them to be - a third class obedient Japanese, loyal to the Emperor. For instance, there were very few Koreans who were able to college. Ironically, right after the Japanese surrendered and left Korea, educational enrollment in Korea exploded - laying the foundation for Park Chung.
Read this research paper which backs up Plunge’s site, which states that Japan reserved all their meaty positions in economy and education to the Japanese to cultivate Japanese might, while Koreans got stuck as poor unskilled laborers who could not fill the positions of the Japanese who left Korea.
http://hdr.undp.org/docs/publi.....oc24aa.htm
“Some studies have mentioned the contribution of Japanese colonial rule to education in Korea, noting that Japan had introduced the modern educational system and also made serious efforts to expand primary education in Korea. However, there is little evidence of how successful the efforts had been. McGinn and others (1980, p.82) cite one source which states that enrolments in primary school already reached 45 percent of the Korean youth of school age in 1945. But without data on enrolments prior to 1945, it is difficult to judge how substantial the Japanese contribution was, considering that only 13 percent of adults had received a formal education in 1945, as shown in Table 3. There has also been strong criticism of the Japanese totalitarian colonial system, including its prohibition of use of the Korean language and the teaching of a much-revised Japanese version of Korean history. Furthermore, despite Japanese eagerness to provide Koreans with more primary education, very few Koreans were allowed to enrol in secondary school or to enter college. Thus, there were wide disparities of educational opportunities available to Koreans, as compared to Japanese living in Korea.18 Perhaps the most important contributions to education in Korea made by Japan were the construction of physical facilities (built for the Japanese living in Korea) and the large number of Japanese-educated Korean teachers. They, of course, remained in Korea after the Liberation and provided a basis for the new education system.”
i am not so comfortable to read ?€œit is wonderful decision to drop A-bomb?€? just like i feel uncomfortalbe to hear people say ?€œjapanese colonization is all good for koreans?€?. in terms of political decision, dropping A-bomb could be as right as colonizing korea. but individuals, innocent people are suffering out of it.
You do know this was meant ironically right? Nobody thinks it was a wonderful decision to drop the atomic bomb. It has continued to be a controversial issue to this day - the Smithsonian had protests for exhibitiing the Enola Gay.
Sa Hwa Dong,
Korea in 1900 was like China in term of culture, progress, and people. What happened in China? Boxer rebellion. The xenophobic nature of Asian people rose up to fight “western devils”.
Korea would have done the same thing. These halabuzy with long pipes would have risen and told all outsiders to go home. They would have shut the country again, much like NK is doing now.
Yangbans are not dumb. They know the western influence will undermine their power, much like KJI is feeling right now. They would have done anything and everything to shut these western schools down. And, stop the westerners coming into the country.
They had a lot to protect. From the westerners and from Ssangnom. Boxer Rebellion, War with England, losing HongKong..all could have happened in Korea.
You guys still don’t get it. Korea without the Japanese occupation would be in the same economic, political, social and cultural situation as China is in right now. Why do you think Korea would have been different? I don’t see anything that can make Korea different. We will be making $100 per month average, instead of $1500.
Think about it. And, thank God.
All pro-Japanese politicians in early 1900s were not bad. Some saw the advancements and modernization happening in Japan and felt that Korea must learn this Western technology. And, the only way to bring this into reality is to bring Japanese people in and to belong in the Japanese sphere of influence.
Some were true patriots and revolutionaries.
Now, every Korean is taught to hate all these men. I think some were very smart and forward-looking. Great CEO materials. As Donga Korean newspaper wrote today that Pres. Park was one.
However, once they are in, the Japanese were not kind to Korean people as the U.S. or other western countries would have been. Being the islanders and resource-starved people, the Japanese plundered Korea.
However, under this terrible rule, Koreans grew out of ignorance into modern age, surpassing China in culture, political system, education and most importantly in technology. Also, under Japanese cruelty, Koreans have learned to be tough,hardworking and resourceful. The Japanese have given us hard training and now we can beat Japan in alomost everything.
That is where we are today.
Baduk wrote:
You guys still don?€™t get it. Korea without the Japanese occupation would be in the same economic, political, social and cultural situation as China is in right now. Why do you think Korea would have been different? I don?€™t see anything that can make Korea different. We will be making $100 per month average, instead of $1500.
There are many differences between China in the late 19th century and Korea, including what direction they were taking and how they were being affected by Western nations. Also, while Korea in the Korean War and China in the Pacific War both experienced great devastation, the intervening half century of communist rule plays a huge role in why China is where it is today, which is why your conclusion stinks like rotten fish.
All pro-Japanese politicians in early 1900s were not bad. Some saw the advancements and modernization happening in Japan and felt that Korea must learn this Western technology.
I agree with this. Looking to Japan, which had brought itself from a feudal (?) backwater in the mid-19th century to a modern nation in such a short time, would have been a wise thing at the time.
But here’s the problem with your leap of logic: the best path for Korea would have been following the Japanese modernization model, not being swallowed up by Japan and being brutally ruled by military personnel.
And, the only way to bring this into reality is to bring Japanese people in and to belong in the Japanese sphere of influence.
The Koreans could and did bring in Japanese people to help things along. Japanese, Americans, Brits, French and Germans, etc. But bringing in Japanese for Japan’s new-found know-how did not require colonization by Japan as part of the package. Even being “in the Japanese sphere of influence” didn’t require colonization.
And it is that forced annexation and brutal occupation that stunted Korea.
Kushibo,
“There are many differences between China in the late 19th century and Korea, including what direction they were taking and how they were being affected by Western nations.”
- What differences? Korea=China in 1900, with the exception of Korea being slightly more backward than China.
“Also, while Korea in the Korean War and China in the Pacific War both experienced great devastation, the intervening half century of communist rule plays a huge role in why China is where it is today, which is why your conclusion stinks like rotten fish.”
- What makes you think Korea would have been able to escape the spread of Communism? Communism was the worldwide phenomenon. How can Korea escape this? By strict adherence to the Yangban-Ssangnom system? How? Korea would be exactly at the same point of modern development that China is at today, or even worse.
No reason to add “rotten fish” part. It makes you look bad
The U.S. salvaged the half of Korea from this Communism madness. We have to thank the U.S. soldiers for that.
Baduk wrote:
Kushibo,
?€œThere are many differences between China in the late 19th century and Korea, including what direction they were taking and how they were being affected by Western nations.?€?
- What differences? Korea=China in 1900, with the exception of Korea being slightly more backward than China.
Since you have demonstrated you have no idea at all what changes were occuring in Korea in the late 19th and pre-colonial 20th century, you really have no basis for saying this now, do you. In fact, you are going by feeling and emotion, which is why Korea bashers cite “kyopo logic” to try to win an argument. Do your freaking research and then talk about it.
?€œAlso, while Korea in the Korean War and China in the Pacific War both experienced great devastation, the intervening half century of communist rule plays a huge role in why China is where it is today, which is why your conclusion stinks like rotten fish.?€?
- What makes you think Korea would have been able to escape the spread of Communism? Communism was the worldwide phenomenon. How can Korea escape this?
Japan escaped communism. The Philippines escaped it. Australia did. So did Singapore, Hong Kong, and Indonesia. Malaysia.
Come to think of it, though, Korea did not. Thanks to the division of Korea that occurred as a result of Japanese colonization, half of Korea was split off and put under communist control.
A Korea not colonized by Japan but on friendly terms with it and/or the U.S. and the U.K. might have been able to avoid the communist wave. It would have depended on a lot of factors, but communist takeover was not an inevitability.
By strict adherence to the Yangban-Ssangnom system? How? Korea would be exactly at the same point of modern development that China is at today, or even worse.
Put the opium pipe down, Baduk. The smoke is obscuring your monitor. Several people now have noted that the yangban-ssangnom system was eroding, and it was doing so very quickly.
No reason to add ?€œrotten fish?€? part. It makes you look bad
Well your argument smells bad. And rotten fish is better than what I was going write.
The U.S. salvaged the half of Korea from this Communism madness. We have to thank the U.S. soldiers for that.
Yes. And I thank God for that every day.
“What makes you think Korea would have been able to escape the spread of Communism? Communism was the worldwide phenomenon. How can Korea escape this?”
Communist Kim Il Sung came to power in NK because the Soviets put him there. China gave support to him also. Without the Soviets and the Chinese, there was no way in hell Kim Il Sung comes to power. Without the Japanese annexation and their subsequent defeat, Russia and China wouldn’t be dividing up Korea, and there would be no North Korea. Thailand, India, Malaysia, Indonesia, and most of Asia escaped communism, so why couldn’t Korea? As noted before, the Hermit Kingdom was not really a Hermit Kingdom by the late 19th century, when Korea was beginning to open up to the West. There was just as good a chance that Korea could have experienced Korean style Meji Restoration. But as it turns out, Korea never got the chance to find out for sure.
Korea and a meji style restoration? Since when were there shoguns in Korea ruling provinces like independent kingdoms? Meji restoration happened in Japan not Korea nor could it have happened in Korea. You have access to the Internet, do a little research before you respond-it is not that hard and that way we all benefit by being able to discuss current issues on a somewhat informed level. Baduk, let me explain why Chinese history is not comparable to Korean history: about 1830 the British and to a lesser extent the French, Americans, Portuguese and others wanted to open up China and sell among other things, opium to the Chinese. To this end there were a few wars commonly reffered to as the opium wars in which China was opened up to foreigners. The boxer rebellion was the Chinese reaction to return China to the full control of the Chinese. The US wanted to strengthen an open door policy allowing anyone to trade where they wanted. The US was involved in putting down the boxer rebellion and its policy was adopted. The bottom line is that they are different in that Korea did not have foreigners running around dealing opium (the crack of that time period) while China did. Korea was making progress in the direction of change and I believe it is reasonable to believe that it would have continued to make changes without foreign pressure. The bottom line is that the three countries histories are not even similar. The situations, economic, cultural, educational or otherwise were and continue to remain distinctly different.
Communism is a revolutionary engine used when a population has been supressed usually by royalty or nobles. The revolutionist population is looking for a better life and the communist leadership is looking for a way to gain control of the country. Most western European countries and even the US have had communist parties in the past-they didn’t gain control because the population found other avenues to press for change AND the leadership responded to that pressure.
After reading through some of the books and papers available on the Japanese colonial period, some of which are histories, and others political tracts passing themselves off as history, one of former U.S. Ambassador James Lilley’s favourite sayings comes to mind: “There are three versions of every event; yours, mine, and the facts.”
kushibo on baduk:
Paduk, are you on crack?
…which is why your conclusion stinks like rotten fish.
Put the opium pipe down, Baduk.
Seriously, you?€™re sounding more and more like a nut job, and I?€™ll say that regardless of whose side of the issue you usually argue.
You’re a nutjob.
cool your jets, ‘bo. people are going to think the hive is falling apart. (there are already rumors that baduk is — gasp! — a free-thinking kyopo.)
hold on, i know what happened. kushibo was once jilted by a paduk player. you must get over her (him?), and just accept that she (he?) is not coming back. she (he?) is gone, married to that changi player. your go-stop skills just didn’t impress her. you simply can’t take out your frustration on poor defenseless baduk, even when he really does sound a little out of left field (or is it right field, baduk?).
now behave, my hive! or else i’ll have you chopped up for spare parts. resistance is futile, you will be assimilated! we are the norg.
lierlou wrote:
After reading through some of the books and papers available on the Japanese colonial period, some of which are histories, and others political tracts passing themselves off as history, one of former U.S. Ambassador James Lilley?€™s favourite sayings comes to mind: ?€œThere are three versions of every event; yours, mine, and the facts.?€?
In addition to histories and “political tracts passing themselves off as histories,” there are also a number of English-language books written at the time by people who were here. Of course, many of them are self-serving (perhaps promoting a pro-American, pro-missionary, anti-missionary, pro-British, anti-Russian, or anti-Japanese point of view), but they have the benefit of not having been written with an eye toward justifying or condemning Japanese rule, communism, World War II, Korean military dictatorship, post-War Korean historical revisionism, etc., that would occur half a century or more later.
I would put a lot of faith in the descriptions of change in daily life written in 1900, 1904, 1907. And I would certainly not think that a description of an American electrical plant in Seoul in an original 1904 edition is some made up story designed to help someone in 2005 make the Japanese look like their colonial rule didn’t contribute that much.
mae wrote:
Well your argument smells bad. And rotten fish is better than what I was going write.
wow, kushibo,
your remarks really make me incline to think you and those, who put tons of posts of delight and joy in naver on 100 some death by the train accdent in japan or conscience netizens who socially killed choo yeonnam or prof. han simply because their remarks dont fit theirs, are the same race.
i am glad plunge proved the japanese colonial education was obstractive and did not contribute what korea is now.
This was a stomach-churningly offensive thing to say and I was prepared to really let you have it on this one. I may have been “oba” in some of my comments to Baduk late last night (to which I cite the late hour and Baduk’s own tendency to link every topic to war with China as mitigating circumstances). Baduk, if I offended you, I am sorry. If you have the thick skin I think you might, then my hat’s off to you.
As for you, Mae, I found your attempt to tie my views of justification of Japanese colonial rule to some alleged glee at the gruesome and horrific deaths of over a hundred people in Japan to be absolutely sickening.
But I have read many of your posts and even when I disagree with your thoughts, I think you are a well-reasoned person and this comment above is probably not really who you are and what you’re about, so I instead of going ballistic on you, I offer a sincere opportunity to let you either take back that comment or explain it.
I have been discussing the changes in Korea prior to 1910 as evidence that Korea was starting to go down the right path. I have also suggested that Japan would be a good partner for Korean modernization. I even made it very clear that not all Japanese involved with the colonial era should be viewed with contempt, since many did have a genuine interest in helping Korea (I would even entertain the argument that Admiral Saito Makoto was among them). All I said was that Korea was finally starting to go in the right direction and that none of the benefits Japan imparted required brutal colonization.
So, specifically, what on earth makes you think these ideas would be connected with “delight and joy” over the deaths of 100 people in the Amagasaki tragedy? Even if I didn’t have relatives and friends in the Osaka area, I would be very saddened by what happened.
Really, Mae, I don’t think this is really who you are. I think you know better than to lump people who have an academic disagreement with Japanese expansionist policy with the freaks who would be happy about that because it happened to Japanese.
I loathe such people. Truly loathe them. Even if some of them are just trolling on the Naver website, their choice of such a topic to use is despicable and probably a sign of some sort of mental disorder. Anybody who looks at someone from another country as anything other than a human being deserving of the same dignity as someone from their own is in a seriously bad place.
I have great respect for Japan as a nation. I have traveled to Japan many times (and I’m not talking visa runs or Narita stop-overs). I have tried to improve my meager Japanese language skills (I took a whole year in college thinking that already being able to write hiragana and katakana knowledge of Korean would make Japanese grammar easy and) and I even “minored” in Japanese studies in graduate school.
I think Japan has been, for the most part, a very good neighbor since the war ended. I think that modern-day Japanese can look at their country’s post-war turnaround from a militaristic contagion to a beacon of peace is something they should be proud of, regardless of what the right-wing there thinks.
I used to think that there was something substantial to the argument that Japanese colonial rule did some good, but when I looked into it more and more, I began to change my mind. That does not mean that Japan has not been, could not be, and will not be a good friend to Korea. The tragedy to me about the Tokto issue and the textbook issue is how easily so many Koreans are manipulated into feeling white hot hatred toward Japan when the two countries should be very close friends. And for that I blame both sides, the side that does a foolish act and the side that reacts foolishly.
So Mae, tell me how a strong belief that Japanese colonial rule cannot accurately be described as positive for Korea is somehow connected with such an abominable belief like you described. Either that or take back the comment.
You are not doing yourself any favors by lumping together all people who hold any type of negative view of Japan in the past or present. If you see things like that, you will see enemies everywhere.
Kushibo,
You are a very intelligent and philosophical person and I love the fact that you and I share the same roots. You are my blood brother.
However, you must realize people walk in different path. I lived in the U.S. over 30 years now and I do not share what you may have learned in Korean school. Then, you may have grown up in the States. In that case, you do not share my experiences in Korea.
Everybody’s experiences led him/her to the present state. We are the product of our past experiences. Having different life experience, you cannot automatically assume your experiences are superior to mine. Am I a mental midget that everything I saw I misinterpreted? Even if I did, how would you be so sure? Therefore, when you insist that your views are the only correct one, then you are not being democratic.
We just state our opinion and we must do it in the believe-it-or-not fashion. There is no reason to overpower the opposing view, even resorting to namecalling. There are no winners and no losers in cyber blackboard like this one.
Coming back to original discussion, history is much more difficult subject than science. There must have been strong and compelling reasons why Korea had to be subjugated by Japan. But, we DO NOT know them now. We think we do but are they the real reasons? We only know that it happened, and when things and people are the same, the same equation will apply and we will again be subjugated by the Japanese.
In fact, we do not even know what is going on today. Why the Korean government is so eager to see the U.S. troops leave or why the U.S. is leaving now? Or, why did the U.S. troops stayed so long in Korea? We do not know for sure. We think we do, but we really DON?€™T. We only guess at some theories.
With no ability to understand the underlying reasons for the present events, how can we figure the past events? And, if we do not know these factors, the underlying forces, then how can we predict what would have happened if the event had not taken place, for example the Japanese rule did not happen?
My approach, which is used frequently in history, was looking at another country that was similar to Korea at the time. China seems to be the closest, in terms of people and the culture. And, I proposed one theory. You did not agree with me. That is fine. I have seen many who do not agree with me.
However, that is no reason to lose your temper and calling other people names. That was not necessary and a bad habit to get into. It is not gentleman-like.
Sometimes, we must learn to lose an argument, and be able to smile about it. After all, we are not God. We may, in many years later, embrace a totally opposite view. This happened to me many times.
I mean, after a few years later, you may see my point of view and I may start leaning toward your view. People change as they gain more experiences. I will change for sure.
So, keep your cool. And, do not believe you have to win every argument. Someone may know something that you do not. “The world is big. And, there are many gosu(experts).” - a quote from a Chinese KungFu story.
Baduk wrote:
I lived in the U.S. over 30 years now and I do not share what you may have learned in Korean school. Then, you may have grown up in the States. In that case, you do not share my experiences in Korea.
Everybody?€™s experiences led him/her to the present state. We are the product of our past experiences. Having different life experience, you cannot automatically assume your experiences are superior to mine.
No, I cannot. And I am always learning from the experiences of others.
HOWEVER, this issue at some point needs to go beyond experiences and start dealing with facts. And there are a lot of facts dealing with the last quarter century of the Chos??n era which paint a different picture from the irreversible degradation you insist upon. Read some of the books FROM THAT ERA to see what I’m talking about. I’ll go to the Yongsan library and get some titles to suggest. If you can’t find them where you are (like if they’re not available), I’ll look into making digital copies of them (I think they are no longer copyright protected).
Am I a mental midget that everything I saw I misinterpreted? Even if I did, how would you be so sure? Therefore, when you insist that your views are the only correct one, then you are not being democratic.
I don’t think you are being a mental midget. I think that too often you are arguing from emotion, even when you and I are on the same side. No offense, but when Mae rebuked me for what I said to you, he likened my thoughts to people who would feel joy at the deaths of the Japanese commuters in suburban Osaka just because they were Japanese.
But I submit that they and I are on opposite sides. They are acting on what they have experienced and felt (which in their case is overboard anti-Japanese “information” that is more like propaganda) just as you are making a conclusion based on what you have experienced and felt.
Both they and you should look more at the facts as a way to challenge your thoughts and experiences (we all should). The knee-jerk Japan bashers would find they have far less to hate Japan about, but people like you who harbor a view that maybe Japanese colonialism wasn’t so bad will find that the facts don’t really support that.
That is precisely why I said, “In fact, you are going by feeling and emotion, which is why Korea bashers cite ?€œkyopo logic?€? to try to win an argument. Do your freaking research and then talk about it.”
We just state our opinion and we must do it in the believe-it-or-not fashion. There is no reason to overpower the opposing view, even resorting to namecalling. There are no winners and no losers in cyber blackboard like this one.
Well, I may have gone overboard in my choice of words, although I still stand by my attempt to challenge you to actually check this out for yourself. I think Plunge even left a bibliography.
Coming back to original discussion, history is much more difficult subject than science.
And it becomes many times harder if we ignore things that don’t fit the preconceived notions we hold. As I said, I once held a view not too far from yours, until I started looking at the sources written by people here at the time, even pro-Japanese people.
There must have been strong and compelling reasons why Korea had to be subjugated by Japan.
There was NO reason for Korea to be subjugated by Japan. Japan annexing and then brutally occupying Korea was a betrayal to Korea, especially all the pro-Japanese Koreans and the Japanese who had a sincere desire to help improve life in Chos??n.
But, we DO NOT know them now. We think we do but are they the real reasons? We only know that it happened, and when things and people are the same, the same equation will apply and we will again be subjugated by the Japanese.
Nonsense. Nothing like that is inevitable. I even found that a number of Japanese were opposed to annexing Korea, saying that such a drastic step was undesirable and unnecessary. I would have to research this further, but some suggest It?? Hirobumi was one such person and that it was Katsura Taro who was the real architect of Korean annexation (with It?? playing something like a Colin Powell role to Katsura Taro’s Donald Rumsfeld or Condaleeza Rice).
Perhaps in the same way that invasion and occupation of Iraq was not inevitable, neither was invasion and occupation of Korea.
In fact, we do not even know what is going on today. Why the Korean government is so eager to see the U.S. troops leave or why the U.S. is leaving now? Or, why did the U.S. troops stayed so long in Korea? We do not know for sure. We think we do, but we really DON?€™T. We only guess at some theories.
But while we don’t know what is really going on, we can also point out that some things are simply not true.
With no ability to understand the underlying reasons for the present events, how can we figure the past events? And, if we do not know these factors, the underlying forces, then how can we predict what would have happened if the event had not taken place, for example the Japanese rule did not happen?
You’re right. That is much harder. Korea might have ended up on top, but it might have ended up much worse. Or somewhere in the middle.
My approach, which is used frequently in history, was looking at another country that was similar to Korea at the time. China seems to be the closest, in terms of people and the culture. And, I proposed one theory. You did not agree with me. That is fine. I have seen many who do not agree with me.
Your approach is fine as long as you recognize where the analogy doesn’t apply. When I took Korean studies courses and my professors talked about experimental groups and control groups in historical and political scenarios, I at first thought the exercise foolish. As an undergraduate, I studied mostly social sciences and physical sciences. In social sciences, an experimental or control group may be in the hundreds or thousands, in biology sometimes in the millions or billions (if you’re talking about the cellular level), and in chemistry it’s in moles (6.02 x 10^24), but in these arrangements, the control or experimental group is one, two, a half dozen. So much room for uncertainty. And when you compare late 19th century China and Chos??n, the differences make the uncertainty far greater, enough that your assured inevitability seems a na??ve notion.
However, that is no reason to lose your temper and calling other people names. That was not necessary and a bad habit to get into. It is not gentleman-like.
I never really lost my temper. I may have typed out of frustration. I have to admit I also half-suspected you might have been the “anonymous” who wrote to praise my “Catholic perspective” only to mock it, writing some very off-the-wall comments in the process. If that is not you, I am very, very, very sorry for thinking that, especially since it may have affected how I responded to you here.
Sometimes, we must learn to lose an argument, and be able to smile about it. After all, we are not God. We may, in many years later, embrace a totally opposite view. This happened to me many times.
I mean, after a few years later, you may see my point of view and I may start leaning toward your view. People change as they gain more experiences. I will change for sure.
My views are constantly changing. New information must always make us rethink old paradigms of thought. But I have already come to change my view on this after looking at a lot of sources, some of it first-hand accounts of life in late Chos??n and during the colonial period, and so I don’t expect this to change much. But there’s always the possibility I might come around and completely change my mind.
Not to interrupt these two, but i posted way up there:
Anything that we can legitimately call ?€œKorean
history?€? is no more than 2000 years old?€?.
and the Sa Hwa Dong responded:
So there were no pre-historic people in the Korean
peninsula, in 4000 B.C. ???
Uhm, well, of course there were. I happen to live near the Amsa-dong site. And they were indeed, uhmmm, PRE-historic folks.
Meaning, before history…..
kushibo,
first, my comment was not intended to denounce contents or opinion of your posts here. it is only to some of your words like rotten fish, opium pipe etc which seemingly represent your attitude towad person, in this case baduk, whose opinion or interpretation of the fact is simply different from yours. and i dont see any of baduk commnet deserves description as rotten fish.
anyway, as my comment about connecting you and naver people offended you, i would like to express my apology for that.
i visit this blog particularly to learn opinion of others, like yours, plunge, sa hwa dong etc. i respect and learn from many of your posts that you work hard to find books, historic records to seek the facts about that time, even though i have different opinion from yours on some subjects.
not able to read koreans, and to access english written of history books on korea during the colonial time, my knowledge is mainly from what were written mainly by japanese at that time, or official documents from the occupation government. of course i am old enough to know some of these books and data were politically twisted somehow, in other words historically inaccurate. (yet i think many books written by japanese scholars at that time worth reading and trust althou some people just deny credibility of them simply because they were written by japanese) hopefully i can contribute a bit here to express opinion, or facts for those posters cannot read japanese materials.
serious question about that…
i remember learning when i was little of how backward native american civilizations were. but later i learned that there actually were ‘writing’ systems among the aztec, mixtec, zapotec, epi-olmec, and maya. somehow these were not discovered until recently, and so the primitive characterization of ancient american civilizations was not always applicable.
so about my question… when do chinese records, which seem more thorough than any others in east asia, first mention what would be settlements/kingdoms/cities in what is now korea?
when do we actually see records from korea appear? are these records after china mentions ‘civilization’ here?
i guess, what is the basis of 5000 years of history (besides the 4338 since tangun)?
Kushibo,
First, I am not the “Anonymous” you are thinking of. I do not make fun of Catholics. I am a protestant Christian, and I do respect Catholics.
About Iraq, I believe that the invasion and occupation of Iraq was inevitable. I sort of believe the “energy minimum of history” that history flows because of all the factors pointing to the INEVITABLE conclusion. And, this has nothing to do with personalities, or so-called “twist of luck”.
For example, the Nazism in Germany was bound to happen. Some attributed it to a person of Hitler, but there are “Hitlers” at any time. Even today. When the environment shapes up a certain way, then these people can rise up to finish their role.
About Iraq invasion, prior to the invasion, overwhelming number of Americans supported it. If Bush had been against it, there were enough votes (over 99%) in the House and the Senate to make us go to war. Now, people just pin it on Bush.
Nora,
I like to see the Chinese record too. I believe Korea was a part of China right up to 1890s and King Yi of Korea was just an administrator of the Korean province. And, Koreans did not have separate identity from the Chinese up to that time.
Koreans do not know how the Japanese scholars and the Chinese scholars say about the Korean history.
I think part of the disagreement comes from people not being honest about the questions that they are asking and answering. Here’s how I see it.
Did Japan contribute significantly to the modernization of Korea? Yes.
Would Korea have been able to modernize without being colonized by Japan? Probably, but since it’s a what-if I can’t say yes.
There was undoubtedly some trend towards change in late Chosen society, but it’s somewhat irrelevant to where Korea was after fifty years of Japanese rule. Of course Japan’s educational system in Korea was not fair and equitable, and neither were the political or economic systems. But does that mean that no Koreans learned anything from the Japanese during that time, and that the Korean political and economic systems were not developed in a way that lasted past occupation? I don’t think so.
The possibility that Korea could have turned out as well or better without Japan’s interference hardly discounts what actually happened. Do people really believe that Koreans didn’t learn anything during 50 years of foreign rule just because they weren’t running the factories and the government? Don’t you think that if you spent thirty or forty years of your life working as a floor supervisor in a factory and then one day the higher ranking foreign foremen all disappeared that you would have the knowledge and expertise to take over and continue operations? I think that is the kind of education that was most significant from the period of Japanese rule, not the kind that was received in schools which, as several people have pointed out, was only rarely given to Korean children.
Even though I am not inclined to believe certain counter-factual speculations, I can actually understand Kushibo’s gripes at Baduk. This isn’t to say that I agree with either one’s view (i haven’t really read Baduk with my thinking cap), but it’s very difficult to be emotionally removed when your debating opponent start to exhibit these behaviors: (which as a disclaimer to protect myself from any possible fecal-precipitation, I think Kushibo sees in Baduk’s behavior)
1. Arguments based on outright lies, myths, distortions etc.
2. Dodging counter-arguments, simply ignoring them.
3. Using non-sensical, illogical, irrelevant comparisons/parallelism to support/detract a view.
4. Refusing to apply the same standards for one’s own view, as the standards he use to detract other’s views.
Without mentioning names, there is one commenter on marmot’s blog who shows these tendencies, but amazingly enough, he does not use any expletives or resort to outright ad-hominem attacks (although there is plenty of tacit, implied ad-hominem attack). Even though I am being completely hypocrital, because i tend to “blow my gasket” and become completely snide, sarcastic, generally uncivil—I want to point out the obvious that a civil discourse only supports one’s argument, at least towards the audience that counts: people who are smart enough to look through the smoke and mental diarrhea. For the fools, well, what can you do? You must wait patiently until their neurons undergoes mitosis.
As for Plunge’s post, it’s a bit hard for me to embrace the idea that the positive aspects of Japanese influences are overstated. I mean, certainly if I was talking to Shintaro Ishihara, HE might do this. But I think the general Korean society, or Western academia don’t really do this… Even on the largely english blogosphere. But I must sincerely thank Plunge for educating me on many points that I never knew about–especially Korea’s own infrastructure development through a US company. I wonder how much this ties in with protestant missionaries work in Korea, and how much of the Korea’s intellectual elite came from this group.
Also, I find lionizing Kojong and Queen Min to be a problem. Too much credit is given to these… fiends.
Everytime I see any “good” that is attributed to them, I just can’t help but compare it to statements like, “Kim Il Sung was good, because he fought the Japanese,” “Hitler was good because he made the VW buggie,” etc.
The debate here is, not whether Japan’s colonial rule has done any good - noone’s disputing that Japan did indeed do *some good especially in the form of infrastructure spending. The question here, is the degree. Did Japanese colonialism do more harm than good? We see this example in education. Korean enrollment in public education didn’t explode until the Japanese left Korea. The literacy rate went from 22% in 1945 to over 80% by 1960.
Sa Hwa Dong: What was the literacy rate in Korea in 1890, before Japan asserted cominance over the penninsula? Could 22% have been considered explosive growth in literacy in comparison? I’m not trying to be snide, I’m seriously curious what the figures were.
Literacy statistics are notoriously vague. It’s always difficult to determine what a survey means byt literacy or functional literacy or partial literacy etc. In the case of Korea I think we need to find out did the literacy rate of 22% in 1945 refer to
a: Classical Chinese
b: Japanese
c: Korean (Hanja + Hangul)
d: Korean (Hangul only)
Depending on what type of literacy they were measuring changes the meaning of these statistics immensely.
The literacy rate went from 22% in 1945 to over 80% by 1960. The literacy rate measured in what language? By 1945 the Japanese were not allowing Korean to be taught in school so it makes sense a lot of people couldn’t read Korean, but I would be willing to bet some could read Japanese. I am not trying to defend the Japanese here, but I would point out this particular statistic is useless.
I have been unable to ascertain the exact date that Korea was ?€œdiscovered?€? by China but the first recorded record of any visitors to Korea was by the Wei travelers sometime BC. There was a Chinese man named Wi-man who took over the old kingdom known as old Chosun an 192 BC. The T?€™angun myth was written by the monk Il-yon in the 13th century in Memorabilia of the Three Kingdoms. Most scholars generally refer to T?€™angun as a myth, not to say that it is a fairly tale but the argument that it is absolute truth is not tenable given the lapse in time between when it was written and when it was supposed to have taken place. Chinese sources from the 7th century record make mention of a strong kingdom in what is now the northern part of Korea and the adjacent area that is now on the other side of the border from North Korea.
As for Korean education under the Japanese colonial rule, I think it is safe to say that the Koreans would have been better off with out the Japanese. I am not going to refer to literacy levels but consider this: in 1935 only 25% of the Korean children were enrolled in school while by 1919 91% of all school age Japanese children were already enrolled in school. In 1939 there were 1.31 Korean middle school students for every 1000 of the population while there were 32.7 for the Japanese. While I do not have the census figures for those years for both Japan and Korea to compare, given that these statistics are from a full 25 years after Korea was officially annexed by Japan I think it is ridiculous to entertain the idea that the Japanese contributed significantly or even meaningfully to Korea in the area of education.
You know, when I wrote the post on the colonial period, this was the kind of discussion I was hoping to see. Fascinating facts coming from both sides. I’ve learned quite a bit just from the comments.
James without some sort of baseline your statistics are meaningless. Lets say in 1880 only 1% of Korean children were in school and 85% of Japanese children were in school. If this was the case, and it probably isn’t as I just made up the numbers, then you could look at the statistics and say Japan did help with the Korean education system. To make that statistic meaningful you need to fins out the percentage of Koreans that attended school before the Japanese colonization.
Sahwadong wrote:
“The literacy rate went from 22% in 1945 to over 80% by 1960.”
And Nathaniel responded:
The literacy rate measured in what language? By 1945 the Japanese were not allowing Korean to be taught in school so it makes sense a lot of people couldn?€™t read Korean, but I would be willing to bet some could read Japanese. I am not trying to defend the Japanese here, but I would point out this particular statistic is useless.
Mutantfrog also writes:
Could 22% have been considered explosive growth in literacy in comparison? I?€™m not trying to be snide, I?€™m seriously curious what the figures were.
Literacy statistics are notoriously vague. It?€™s always difficult to determine what a survey means byt literacy or functional literacy or partial literacy etc. In the case of Korea I think we need to find out did the literacy rate of 22% in 1945 refer to
a: Classical Chinese
b: Japanese
c: Korean (Hanja + Hangul)
d: Korean (Hangul only)
I don’t know if I would call the 22% useless, but I agree with Mutantfrong that it needs to be clarified. I doubt classical Chinese is the reference. It is probably measuring Japanese or Korean (let’s say b or d, for simplicity’s sake, especially since c could arguably be part of an overlap).
At the very least, 22% literacy in Japanese would represent an abysmal failure after forty years of much-touted educational development for Koreans by the Government-General (the Japanese military government that ruled Korea from 1910 to 1945). Just like the 25% elementary school enrollment (if this is true) by 1935, this progress at such a snail’s pace would represent an incredible opportunity cost for a formerly independent Korea that should have been left to modernize on its own terms (with or without Japanese help, although probably with), where there were educators prior to colonialization who were pushing the idea of universal education.
But let’s take the 22% figure as is and generously suggest that it is probably higher than literacy in 1905 or 1910. While this is “progress” of some kind, the end result is that it was literacy in Japanese. The question we are debating is not so much whether Japanese colonization “benefitted” Korea as much as we are asking whether Japanese colonial rule effected Korea’s post-War success.
Since Korea’s post-War success required use of Korean language, having left a country mostly illiterate in its mother tongue cannot be counted as a benefit. To be fair, there were some advantages to having so many Koreans able to speak and even write Japanese, which ensured some close relationship for at least a generation, along with post-War ease of getting Japanese know-how, but that is of limited and dubious benefit compared to what should have been provided.
That means that, on the other hand, if the 22% figure is of Korean literacy, it is fair to cite it when answering the question of the benefits of Japanese colonial policy and/or their effect on Korea’s future success, for the reasons I just mentioned. But in all fairness to Japan, that Korean literacy rate should also be coupled with a Japanese literacy rate (which I’m guessing may not be much higher, if enrollment in schools was that low).
This is a key factor in judging the “benefit” of colonial rule. Let’s say someone takes your money to completely refurbish your house, but they do it in a style completely different from what you said you wanted. Even if they did a first-rate job and provided first-rate materials and craftsmanship, did they do something good for you? (This is something that happened to me and my apartment, by the way, and I berated the man for being just like Japanese colonialists and their self-serving educational policies!).
Yes, the Japanese military government may have gone in and built schools and had teachers trained, but so much of what they did had to be undone after the war (i.e., making the people literate in Korean instead of Japanese).
Also Nathaniel, I would say you are part right about when and what to compare in terms of schooling, but the Japanese authorities themselves begged the comparison of education standards in Korea to education standards in “mainland Japan” (since they considered Korea to be “outer Japan”). So it is by their own measure that they failed so miserably, with 25% in school in Korea versus 91% in school in Japan.
Educational policy had some serious issues that must not be overlooked. The Japanese military government was CLOSING schools that would have helped educate more and more Koreans, not because they were bad but because there was a fear they would undermine Japanese military authority in Korea. Not during World War II but in the first decade of Japanese military rule.
Opportunities for higher education in Korea were also extremely limited, which is why so many Koreans ended up going TO JAPAN to get a college education… they couldn’t in Korea because the universities were mostly set up to entice Japanese to settle in Korea and stay here (sounds a bit like New Songdo City, but for very different reasons). [Much of Japa