I came back this evening after I ran into Professor Lee In-ho, former Korean ambassador to Finland and Russia and lecturer, whose lecture “Rewriting Korean History” explained just how South Korea’s flawed political and educational systems have led to the anti-Americanism in South Korea and the glorification of the North Korean state by South Korean teachers and students.
Dr. Lee, however, stated tonight that she now realizes that the situation is much worse than she originally described in her lecture and, sure enough, when I come home and look at the Joongang-Ilbo, one sees the KTEWU (Korea Teachers and Educational Workers Union) at work again, protesting lectures given at Seoul High Schools because their version of Korean history is not presented.
Naturally, the KTEWU mentioned the Japanese as a pretext for protesting.
{ 100 comments… read them below or add one }
What I always say about these unthinking “useful idiots”:
If everything about North Korea is so gawdamned glorious, then they deserve a one-way trip to the worker’s paradise!
I never caught the original lecture and I can’t get to it via the Korea site. Anyone know where else it’s linked?
How can I view the original lecture?
Apparently korea.com has taken the RAS lectures off even though they still have a link. I wonder if “sanshinseon” would know how to view this material(?)
Would really like to see this. If anyone has another link, please post
Unfortunately, he doesn’t — that was up to korea.com
Templar:
Geesh, just go to RASB:
http://raskb.korea.com/raskb/e.....an-History
Yea, thanks for the link “sperwer”. It looks like the RASKB site has a problem with spambots leaving comments too.
It an undeniable fact that Korea became more ‘modernized’ (I hate to use this term because of its connotation) from 1905 to 1945… Regardless of what KTEWU seems to be alluding to, I’d be willing to bet that these historians understand that any and all of Japan’s contributions to Korea’s development in those years were made in order to meet its own imperialistic ambitions, to better exploit the Korea’s natural resources and citizens.
Rhee Syngman not only taught Koreans to hate communists; he also taught them to hate the Japanese. His policy slogan was “Anti-Communist, Anti-Japan” (반공반일), and the slogan was posted on the walls of Korea’s classrooms across country. Just as no one was allowed to speak in favor of communism; no one was allowed to speak in favor of Japan, either.
People should ask themselves the following question: “If the colonial period was so bad, why was it necessary for Rhee Syngman to adopt a policy to teach Koreans to hate Japan?”
Professor Lee mentioned the backlash of Korea’s strict, anti-communist brainwashing from the late 1940s to the early 1980s, but she did not say much about Korea’s anti-Japanese brainwashing, which continues even today.
In the above quote, notice how upset the teacher’s union is by the fact that some Korean history professors are starting to acknowledge that Korea’s colonial period did have benefits. They are upset because they see such statements as cracks in the dam of anti-Japanese brainwashing. They fear that the cracks may lead to a collapse of the dam and result in a flood of truth.
Well, I think the sooner Korea is engulfed by the flood the better because Koreans are choking on the contradictions of their history.
Thanks for the new link Sperwer. I had the Korea.com vid on my website but its gone now
Btw, anyone else having problems with the latest link? Keeps trying to crash my browser. Also, any nerds out there happen to know how I can embed it (assuming it starts working properly?)
Thanks spewer
#9 – “People should ask themselves the following question: “If the colonial period was so bad, why was it necessary for Rhee Syngman to adopt a policy to teach Koreans to hate Japan?””
It wasn’t that times were good under the Japanese. I think the general consensus was that life remained pretty rotten, not unlike it had been for most Koreans before the Japanese took over. A “flood of truth” is not going to reveal the colonial period to have been a time of great happiness and prosperity. There were some aspects of modernization that may have been positive – increased life expectany, for example – but they, along with all the negatives (i.e. cultural genocide) – were imposed by a colonizing power that most Koreans weren’t, to put it mildly, terribly fond of.
I don’t think Rhee felt that Koreans would feel especially nostalgic for the colonial period, so much as he feared his corrupt, inept, and despotic regime might be come to be looked at as being even worse than the Japanese period in the eyes of many of Korea’s suffering people. Most dictators feel the need to demonize both external enemies and the previous leadership to somehow legitimize their rule and rally the population around them. Promoting the hatred of both Japan and North Korea served this purpose. And, one could argue, has continued to serve a similar purpose.
The continued anti-Japanese brainwashing is unfortunate – and I’m not going to defend the sorry state of history education across East Asia – but along with an appreciation for King Sejong and perhaps Kim Gu, it is ultimately one of the few things historical that most Koreans – southern or northern – seem to agree on.
gbevers,
Japan invaded Korea. They usurped Koreans of their sovereignity amd tried to absorb Korea into the Japanese Empire. Regardles of whatever economic benefits they might have bequeathed, what they did was fundamentally wrong, and at the end of the day they caused far, far more harm than good.
Where were you educated, Hoju_saram?
Tis a wonderous thing when “educators” scream and yell
at other “educators” because they don’t agree with one another.
I can’t tell you how many times this happened in my high school or university–
teachers protesting each other before class.
This is how education should be!
Don’t like another’s point of view?
Try throwing a rock at them . . . that might help them see things your way.
Politicians can’t agree? Do the noble thing and push him around, stomp on
his head as you climb over him and his colleagues.
Ah . . . Korea . . . Land of Education and Diplomacy.
(If any of you a-holes on this blog disagree with me?
I’ll track you down and teach you a lesson . . . Korean style!)
Have a nice day ^^
#14 Could you please explain the “far far more harm”?
(Sorry, you can’t say these things:
–Comfort Women
–Japanese Names
–Japanese Language
–Stolen Natural Resources
–Dokdo
–Seodaemun Prison
–J. secret police
–Queen Min)
Thanks.
–Comfort Women
Often recruited by Korean pimps, prostitution and human trafficking still exist in Korea today.
–Japanese Names
Was not mandatory. Koreans under the Chosun dynasty were mainly slaves without names, they had numbers.
–Japanese Language
Hangul was not used in the Chosun dynasty and was unknown in Korea until 1945.
–Stolen Natural Resources
Korea does a good job destroying its own resources.
–Dokdo
What does that mean?
–Seodaemun Prison
How was that different from the public beheadings of the Chosun dynasty?
–J. secret police
And Korea now has a hard-working, ethical and effective police force?
–Queen Min
May have been murdered by Koreans.
Well, for starters, because besides the communists, and everyone else it was in Rhee’s interest to smear as a Communist, on the left, Rhee’s biggest political opponents – and arguably ones with more potential clout, were various conservative factions – more able to cooperate with one another than the usual two Koreans in a room – whom (with more or less justification) Rhee could smear as collaborators (assuming he could get enough other people to conveniently “forget” their own lesser acts of active or passive collaboration).
Where were you educated, Hoju_saram?
Not sure if that’s a weak riposte or if you are actually curious. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the latter:
In regard to Korean history, I educated myself, by reading.
exit86 (and gbevers, probably):
Just for kicks I’ll the points you’ve asked me not to mention.
The Japanese occupation wasn’t as brutal as Koreans like to paint it; not even close. But equally, Japan was not the benevolent overseer they styled themselves at the time (and in many quarters, continue to style themselves). At the end of the day Japan invaded Korea for Japan, and they were very shrewd and cynical in the way they went about the business of occupation, right through from the Taft-Katsura agreement to the end of WW2.
1. They pitted Koreans against Koreans, fracturing the national psyche and causing domestic problems that persist through to the current day.
2. The Japanese unwittingly sowed the seeds of communism on the peninsular. The communists gained much of their legitimacy by tapping into the popular support for independece; the worker’s party was at he forefront of the struggle for self-determination and the largest business operators were collaberators; without the Japanese to act as a lightning rod for their cause, the communists couldn’t have gained such strength. By the time the US rolled into Korea (re-instaling hated Japanese administrators to their posts) that tidal wave of discontent crystalized into the regime that would eventually take control of North Korea and subsequently invade the south.
There are lots of other poblems, mainly social, that resulted from the occupation. Forced mobilization of Koreans, many to Japan, was a big one, so was the restructuring of the land tenancy system.
At the end of the day Korea had a right to its own self-determination, however inept the Yangban and other rules of the time were. Japan took that right by force, causing problems that still endure.
Telegraph lines and railroads (built by the Japanese to exploit Korea’s resources) don’t balance that sum.
That’s nonsense. The Independent (Tongnip Sinmun), published between 1895 and 1899 was printed almost exclusively in Hangul (the exceptions being negligible), and the movement for the use of Hangul was an important part of the Korean cultural nationalism movement that got underway at the same time, was promoted by The Independence Club and outlasted the demise of the Club and its paper. See generally Robinson’s book on Korean cultural nationalism. If Hangul didn’t find wider favor after 1905 until 1945, it was because of active Japanese efforts to suppress it.
–Stolen Natural Resources
Korea does a good job destroying its own resources.
–J. secret police
And Korea now has a hard-working, ethical and effective police force?
–Seodaemun Prison
How was that different from the public beheadings of the Chosun dynasty?
Mr Mao, you show a remarkable lack of appreciation for the idea of self-determination. No country is perfect in the way they treat each other or manage their resources. But that doesn’t mean other countries have a right usurp said country’s sovereignity and apply their own particular economic/social/govermental models as it suits them.
What’s your country, if you don’t mind my asking?
MrMao is a Japanese propagandist. Anyways, I dont see how raping women is justified by the existence of rape today. Most Koreans who were slaves ran off the Japan, its well documented in the census records of feudal Korea.
These lectures/book look like left over garbage from the Roh administration. This is why I find Korea so interesting, although not the greatest place to live. We have the Confucian sect in the south, who actually believe the North are neo-Confucian as well due to their communist state. The truth is the North from what I understand was absolutely against Confucian culture since they were already rooted in a military/war culture.
Roh actually maybe pro-Japanese or atleast doesn’t hold negativity towards them. He did scream this and that during is presidency but it was mostly for domestic purposes. I say this because he comes from a neo-Confucian family and province and he most likely knows about the persecution and slavery of the people from Baekche.
Forgot to add, that Roh it seems, is desperate to maintain some kind of confucian based or atleast rooted society and he feels like the North is his last hope for a Korean society of Confucian values.
This is pure speculation but he may believe that the ongoing repression in the North may already set in place the necessary social mechanisms for a Confucian society.
gbevers
“”"Rhee Syngman not only taught Koreans to hate communists; he also taught them to hate the Japanese. His policy slogan was “Anti-Communist, Anti-Japan” (반공반일), and the slogan was posted on the walls of Korea’s classrooms across country. Just as no one was allowed to speak in favor of communism; no one was allowed to speak in favor of Japan, either.
People should ask themselves the following question: “If the colonial period was so bad, why was it necessary for Rhee Syngman to adopt a policy to teach Koreans to hate Japan?”
“”"
====
Sorry but thats the dumbest excuse ever. All nations at war or at conflict with another nation, tend to post nationalist propaganda/rhetoric. The US did it, the Germans, Brits, French did it. And so did your beloved Japan. You proclaiming that the Korean government had to post anti Japanese propaganda just to make the country hate them is just laughable. Koreans sure as heck did not enjoy 35 years of brutal and ruthless Japanese colonization.
Oh gee, Koreans sure were sad during independence day when the Japanese were kicked out. Despite all contrary evidence.
Mr. Bevers I suggest YOU follow logic and common sense. The OVERWHELMING MAJORITY and I mean +99% of Koreans who lived during colonization do not have a particularly fond memory of the time. In fact most abhor it. Now tell me. Are you a Korean person who lived during those turbulent times? If not I suggest you shut up and quit posting. Im not even saying this in anger, im just giving you advice so that you wont humiliate yourself further. You have no authority to comment and judge the lives of people who actually lived during that dreaded time period. You look more and more foolish every time you try paint a picture contrary to what Koreans actually endured. As if you were some kind of heavenly authority on the subject which you are not. Go back to your little closet and stay there.
Often recruited by Korean pimps, prostitution and human trafficking still exist in Korea today.
Recruited to serve Japanese soldiers thanks to a Japan who invaded Korea and put Korea in such a precarious situation.
===
–Japanese Language
Hangul was not used in the Chosun dynasty and was unknown in Korea until 1945.
Wrong again, Hangul was increasingly used later on. As someone else mentioned, Hangul newspapers were being printed before Japanese colonization.
===
–Stolen Natural Resources
Korea does a good job destroying its own resources.
Mind giving examples of Koreans destroying their own natural resources? My biggest complaint is that those resources belonged to the Koreans. Japan had no right meddling in what was rightfully Korean.
Mind you that Japan was a parasite that latched on to Korea. Stealing more and more resources. Which you for some odd and bizzare reason find amiable.
===
–Dokdo
What does that mean?
Pass.
–Seodaemun Prison
How was that different from the public beheadings of the Chosun dynasty?
Because it was a foreign country who did all the killings. Lets not forget all those freedom fighters, students, activists who were killed by Japanese soldiers for merely protesting.
===
–J. secret police
And Korea now has a hard-working, ethical and effective police force?
Funny how youre comparing the Imperial Japans secret police to Koreas police today. Really funny.
===
–Queen Min
May have been murdered by Koreans.
A Korean might have helped but it was mostly a Japanese operation. Served in the interest of the Japanese.
===
You and Bevers should never reply here again.
Hoju_Saram,
What I meant was what country were you educated in? Since you said you educated yourself on Korean history by reading, I assume you were not educated in Korea. What Korean history book did you read?
Here are a few questions:
1) What was Japan’s invasion route into Korea?
2) What forces did the Korean government send to meet the Japanese invasion force?
3) How did the Japanese pit Koreans against Koreans?
4) How did the Japanese change the land tenancy system?
5) Did the Japanese also unwittingly plant the seeds of communism in China, Japan, and the United States, as well?
6) Rhee Syngman was an anti-Japanese, anti-Communist nationalist. How do you explain that?
7) There was no forced mobilization in Australia and the United States in World War II?
Sperwer,
The pro-Japanese are the ones who pushed for the Gabo Reforms and used hangeul in official documents. When Japan annexed Korea in 1910, hangeul was made a compulsory subject in school. Books, magazines, and newspapers were published in Korean up until 1942. From what I understand, hangeul was quite popular in colonial Korea.
CMC wrote:
Rhee Syngman’s anti-Japanese propaganda was before, during, and after the war.
CMC wrote:
My Korean mother-in-law liked the Japanese and said she did not see any of the brutality that you say Koreans had to endure. She said that Korea was much worse and more dangerous after liberation, when different political factions were fighting with each other.
After liberation, my mother-in-law told me that she and other women used to post political notices on walls in Busan because the opposing political party were less likely to kill a women for doing it. Nevertheless, she did say that some women were beaten and killed.
Also, here is a funny story. I met an old Korean man in a park in Incheon a few years back. He said he used to work for the US army in Daegu after the Korean war. Then I took the opportunity to ask him what life was like under the Japanese during the colonial period. He just looked down and said, “It was a bad time.” Then, I told him that my mother-in-law had said she had liked the Japanese and did not see any of the brutality that the Japanese were supposed to have done. The man then looked up at me and smiled. He then said, “Actually I liked the Japanese, too.” He then pulled out a Japanese book from his inside coat pocket. It was a monthly literary magazine that he subscribed to. He told me that he always came to the park to read it.
Presidents Kim Yeong-sam and Kim Dae-jung both searched out their old Japanese teachers from the colonial period. Why did they have such fond memories of those teachers?
Koreans were taught to hate the Japanese after liberation. Some may have not needed much instruction, but many others were forced to keep their feelings about the colonial period a secret.
The Koreans who are most anti-Japanese these days are the young Koreans who did not live through “those turbulent times.” Here is a quote from a BBC News article that reported on a Sumo wresting match in Seoul in February 2004.
Did you live through the colonial period, CMC? Or were you spoon-fed your anti-Japanese propaganda?
If you’re trying to convince the Japs were good for the country you’re gonna be there a while.
We’re talking about mass rape, murder, active cultural genocide.
You have your head up your ass nicely though.
1) What was Japan’s invasion route into Korea?
2) What forces did the Korean government send to meet the Japanese invasion force?
What’s your point?
Clearly Korea folded without a fight. The annexation process took place via a series of forced and/or colluded treaties, beginning with Ganghwa and ending in the eulsa and anexation treaties.
That doesn’t make the annexation ok; it just makes it clever. Why use force when the threat of force is sufficient? Or put another way, is it ok to rape a woman at knife-point, if you don’t use the knife? And I think rape is a fair analogy, when you’re talking about the soveregnity of your country being taken away from you.
3) How did the Japanese pit Koreans against Koreans?
Divide and Conquer.
1. First, sections of the Korean political elite were co-opted into the new system of colonial rule; they were invested into the machinery of oppression.
2. The new “state” forged alliances with the Korean properties classes. The Japanese, both directly and indirectly, also ended up with large shares in land at the end of this process. Answers question 4. (Incidentally, Koreans with any sort of capital – not just landowners – were not in ay position to oppose colonial rule. Some got by without totally co-operating, many benefited)
3. Third, through education, the Japanese facilitated propaganda and political resocialization. Which answers your last question
Yes, schools were used as part of the process of breaking down Korea’s sense of independence, one of the worst forms of exploitation I can think of.
5) Did the Japanese also unwittingly plant the seeds of communism in China, Japan, and the United States, as well?
Clearly you entirely misunderstood my point.
The Japanese didn’t occupy China Japan and the US for 35 years. Communism came about in Korea as a result of dissafection with the occupation. The comunists stood against the Japanese and their Korean collaborators. Because independence was such a popular notion, many people turned to the only people who were actively fighting for it – the reds.
6) Rhee Syngman was an anti-Japanese, anti-Communist nationalist. How do you explain that?
We’re all different
But really, what’s your point? Most people were anti-Japanese, at least half the people in the south were anti-communist, and Rhee happened to win the favor of Uncle Sam. Go figure.
7) There was no forced mobilization in Australia and the United States in World War II?
Forced mobilization by a self-elected, autonomous government in the face of naked aggression by a foreign state. Spot the difference?
Now my turn to ask questions:
1. Do you believe in a country’s right to independence and self-determination?
2. Do you value the independence of your country more than personal material gain?
2. As an American (or Canadian, or whatever you are) would you willingly abide by a foreign power taking over your country, even if a large part of the populace apeased the occupiers and they brought in material benefits for you and your family?
For the record, I also disagree with CMC. Many people do remember the colonial period with fondness, largely because the later period was so turbulent and unstable. The Japanese were not the brutal mass-murdering rapists that young Koreans like the think they were.
But that doesn’t excuse their occupation, or change the fact that Koreans had a right to their own self-determination, or that it ultimately led to the calamity of Kim Il Sung.
As for the books I’ve read recently (cut and paste from bib);
The Developmental State, Meredith Woo-Cumings
The Korean War, Max Hastings;
The Korean War, Stanley Sandler
Korea in the Sun, Bruce Cumings;
The Aquariums of Pyongyang, Kang Chol-Hwan;
Under the Loving Care of the Fatherly Leader, Bradley K.Martin;
The Two Koreas, Don Oberdorfer;
A troubled Peace, Chae-Jin Lee;
South Korea: A Country Study, Savada & Shaw
And more ive forgotten.
Too simple, Gerry. Only some of the Gabo Reformers were more or less sympathetic to the Japanese. Many were not, e.g., So Jae Pil and Yun Ch’i-Ho and the faction of which the latter’s father was a member. Even those who were, e.g., Pak Hyung-ho, were not pro-Japanese so much as they saw the Japanese as a useful instrument for effecting reform within the context of continued Korean sovereingty(they were sadly mistaken).
The Japanese at best had a very complicated attitude towards Hangul, but except during the cultural policy period were not particularly well-disposed to what was one of the principal means for cultivating a resistive nationalist movement.
Rhee Syngman’s anti-Japanese propaganda was before, during, and after the war.
And why was he and the majority of Koreans anti Japanese again? Youre not really helping your cause.
My Korean mother-in-law liked the Japanese and said she did not see any of the brutality that you say Koreans had to endure. She said that Korea was much worse and more dangerous after liberation, when different political factions were fighting with each other.
After liberation, my mother-in-law told me that she and other women used to post political notices on walls in Busan because the opposing political party were less likely to kill a women for doing it. Nevertheless, she did say that some women were beaten and killed.
And my cousins uncles roomates coworkers brothers nephews fathers grandsons jewish wife said that Germany under Hitler was good for the jews. See, I can use the same “evidence” as you.
Face it, the majority of Koreans who lived during colonial times did not like or wanted the Japanese in their country. Ever heard of the March 1st movement? If Koreans truly loved the Japanese, why did that occur in the first place? Why did people like Syng Man Rhee, Kim Il Sung and other fighters exist if the Japanese were so beloved. You can argue otherwise but the proof is in the pudding. Koreans did not enjoy Japanese colonialship as demonstrated by independence day.
Any sane historian would disagree with your whacko statement. It was so bad prior to Rhees ascent that the US government had to request the Koreans not to massacre the Japanese who were fleeing the peninsula once the war was over. Granted some Koreans did enjoy Japanese colonialship. Those “Koreans” also had a common insult name- traitors or chinilpa.
Also, here is a funny story. I met an old Korean man in a park in Incheon a few years back. He said he used to work for the US army in Daegu after the Korean war. Then I took the opportunity to ask him what life was like under the Japanese during the colonial period. He just looked down and said, “It was a bad time.” Then, I told him that my mother-in-law had said she had liked the Japanese and did not see any of the brutality that the Japanese were supposed to have done. The man then looked up at me and smiled. He then said, “Actually I liked the Japanese, too.” He then pulled out a Japanese book from his inside coat pocket. It was a monthly literary magazine that he subscribed to. He told me that he always came to the park to read it.
I find it funny that youre trying to counter the obvious fact that most Koreans who lived during that time period despised the Japanese, by using personal stories that cannot be verified and are probably stories you made up on the spot. You are no different from a white supremecist defending slavery by claiming that he met an African American who thought slavery was good.
Presidents Kim Yeong-sam and Kim Dae-jung both searched out their old Japanese teachers from the colonial period. Why did they have such fond memories of those teachers?
Ask President Kim Yeong-sam and Kim Dae-jung if they both enjoyed the rape of their country by the Japanese and both will say say NO in the harshest of tones.
You truly are bizzare. You somehow equate an individual teacher(whom might be good person) to the brutal and murderous Japanese empire. Oskar Schindler was a Nazi who saved several jews. He is respected, admired and was even honored by the Jewish people. I guess that means the Jews actually liked the Nazis. Since they respected Oskar who was Schindler.
Afterall isnt that what youre doing? Equating a single teacher to the entire Japanese empire? I cant believe im arguing with you.
Koreans were taught to hate the Japanese after liberation.Some may have not needed much instruction, but many others were forced to keep their feelings about the colonial period a secret.
The Koreans who are most anti-Japanese these days are the young Koreans who did not live through “those turbulent times.” Here is a quote from a BBC News article that reported on a Sumo wresting match in Seoul in February 2004.
Because we all know the March 1st movement, Communist, Korean freedom fighters, Independence day celebrations and Korean government in exile were all myths.
Why do you still argue? You did not live during colonial times. Nor do you have an accurate understanding of Korean history. And last but not least, your ability to debate is seriously lacking(as demonstrated by your feeble attempts to provide “evidence”). The MAJORITY of Koreans who lived during those times despised the Japanese and do not have a rosy memory of colonization. This fact is unrefutable.
What makes you think your arguments are more credible and accurate then the countless number of Koreans who lived during those times? Did you live with them? Did you experience those moments yourself? Im willing to bet the majority of sane Japanese historians(non ultra right wing) would agree that Koreans did not enjoy Japanese colonization.
Did you live through the colonial period, CMC? Or were you spoon-fed your anti-Japanese propaganda?
No, but the Koreans in their 70s, 80s, 90s and up did. And they certainlly disagree with your laughable statements. Who are YOU compared to those Korean elderly who actually experienced those moments?
Another fact you fail to realize is that your beliefs are within the fringe. No one, and I mean no one other than Japanese right wingers take your version of history seriously. Theres a reason why most historians pain Japanese occupation in a negative light.
Who are YOU compared to the countless proffessional historians from all over the world who disagree with your radical fringe version of history? Face it, the evidence is against you.
CMC, you can’t compare what the jews went through in the holocaust with the colonial period. The magnitude of suffering is not even in the same balpark. The jews were exterminated in ovens. Koreans had their sovereignity taken away.
I’m not comparing colonization to the holocaust. Not even close. Read carefully next time before commenting.
I’m using the Nazis and Schindler to counter his ridiculous assertion that a Korean president wanting to meet some Japanese person from his childhood somehow equates to said president having favorable views on Japan’s colonization of Korea.
I’m using Schindler as an example of gbevers’ faulty logic. Schindler was a Nazi who saved many many Jewish prisoners, and as a result became respected and admired by many Jews (even though he was a Nazi). But that does not mean the Jewish people respect Hitler or Nazism as a whole much like how Koreans do not respect Imperial Japan over some childhood teacher.
deleted (off-topic)
deleted (offensive)
#36,
I’m not sure he ever joined the #38,
Wouldn’t a Canadian say ‘You should blow me, please’?
Just wondering because I’m still learning about my new home country.
deleted (off topic, offensive)
Japan invaded Korea. They usurped Koreans of their sovereignity amd tried to absorb Korea into the Japanese Empire. Regardles of whatever economic benefits they might have bequeathed, what they did was fundamentally wrong, and at the end of the day they caused far, far more harm than good.
***
But why did Japan invade Korea? It is sort of funny that Koreans forget that the Chosen Dynasty was a “vassal” state of the Chinese. That the invasion was a “war” between the Qing Dynasty and Japan over Korean territory.
The Koreans did not oppose Japan, because the Koreans expected their masters, the Qing, to defend them.
The Korean people were grossly mistaken regarding the Chinese at the time.
Furthermore, Koreans tend to forget that their Queen was killed not because she wanted some so called glorious “Korean independence”. Rather, she wanted Korea to remain a firm vassal of the China. Something, the Japanese would not allow.
In addition to “Rewriting Korea History” this one is also well worth listening to/watching. The two of them do a nice job of explaining some of those things about Korean society that just makes a person go “Hummmmmm.”
http://raskb.korea.com/raskb/e.....Propaganda
I think a great deal of Korean anger/hatred of the Japanese comes
from the ambivalence in regard to the Occupation.
CMC, I think you are taking the standard extreme of “Japan=BAD;
Korea=Good.” I think–as was said already–the Occupation was bad for some and (let’s be honest here) it was good for others. If we were to play the “Let’s find the collaborators” game here, we’d be really busy for the next decade
making our list. Koreans are extremely prone to “majority rule” group behavior. At present, it is BAD to like Japan. Could we honestly say that
the majority of Koreans actually felt this way in the past? How could
anti-Japanese sent have always been this strong when SO MUCH of Korean culture IS Japanese? Koreans are and always have been a conflicted people lacking any sense of strong unity–its been this way since people first set fot on this peninsula. There were pro-Japanese and anti-Japanese during
the Occupation. There was no real unity in this regard (CMC, I’m aiming this at you here).
How can you account for the fact that roughly 50% of the Occupation police force comprised Koreans? This includes the torturers at Seodaemun friends.
How about the Koreans who served for the Japanese in WWII–esp. torturers/
executioners in the POW camps (see Breens old article about this back when Korean War Criminals were pardoned a few years ago)?
Like it or not, the Japanese paid well and offered some folks attractive
“career” opportunities. Talk about being caught between a rock and a hard place: crappy living conditions as a “patriot” vs. improved living conditions with the new government. If a new government was in power for several decades in your country, wouldn’t many people sort of think it might be around for a while? We can’t take today’s nationalism and project backwards, saying all Koreans could anticipate their liberation, then division. People are people. Most only give a real shiit about the here and now. For example, the March First Movement: Please give me a rough percentage of the Korean population at the time who actively engaged in this.
(Hint: multi-millions vs. thousands). Why weren’t there 10 million freedom fighters? Why not 1 million? Why not half a million?
Yup, I think most of us would agree the Occupation wasn’t a picnic, nor was it a torture chamber (would any group of people stand for such conditions?) Maybe, the Japanese made life seem nice enough to folks so that they really wouldn’t have too strong of an opinion about it. People are people–farmers are farmers. I think it is inaccurate to paint the standard K. nationalism
portrait of every Korean as a freedom fighter.
But why did Japan invade Korea?
Greed obviously. Quit trying to excuse Japans abhorrent behavior.
—
It is sort of funny that Koreans forget that the Chosen Dynasty was a “vassal” state of the Chinese. That the invasion was a “war” between the Qing Dynasty and Japan over Korean territory.
Theres a BIG BIG difference between a vassal state and a slave colony. Korea as a vassal state had autonomy and its own government, officials, kings and customs. A vassal state was nothing more then a country that recognized the legitimacy of the Chinese emperor. The Chinese emperor in return acknowledged and gave favorable relations and trade to nations that acknowledged him. A vassal state was more of a older brother to younger brother relation in which both sides benefited.
A slave colony on the other hand is what Japan turned Korea into in 1910 when they invaded and enslaved the populace. Its more of a master-slave relation which resulted in the disintegration of the Korean government and automony.
The fact that you compare autonomy and trade relations with China to Japanese imperialism and colonialism is laughable and downright scary.
—
The Koreans did not oppose Japan,
Koreans opposed the Japanese. Why do you think Queen Min was assassinated? Why did the Donghak revolution occur? Why did the Sino-Japanese war occur? Why were Korean freedom fighters and guerillas formed as soon as Japan annexed Korea?
I suggest you read a history book. You understanding of history is laughable. Are you gbevers on a different account?
—
because the Koreans expected their masters, the Qing, to defend them.
The Korean people were grossly mistaken regarding the Chinese at the time.
Actually, the Chinese did come to their aid. Ever heard of the first Sino-Japanese war? No, you obviously havent. Which explains your poor grasp of history.
—
Furthermore, Koreans tend to forget that their Queen was killed not because she wanted some so called glorious “Korean independence”.
Korea was already independent during Queen Mins rule.
Queen Min was assassinated BEFORE Japan colonized Korea genius.
—
Rather, she wanted Korea to remain a firm vassal of the China. Something, the Japanese would not allow.
You do not understand Koreas relations with China. It was a mutual relation in which both sides benefited. Queen Min advocated relations with China and Russia to counter Japanese imperialism who did not seek a beneficial relation as demonstrated by various unfair treaties.
Japanese colonization of Korea was parasitic. Mutual and Parasitic = two entirely different things.
I think a great deal of Korean anger/hatred of the Japanese comes
from the ambivalence in regard to the Occupation.
CMC, I think you are taking the standard extreme of “Japan=BAD;
Korea=Good.” I think–as was said already–the Occupation was bad for some and (let’s be honest here) it was good for others. If we were to play the “Let’s find the collaborators” game here, we’d be really busy for the next decade
making our list. Koreans are extremely prone to “majority rule” group behavior. At present, it is BAD to like Japan. Could we honestly say that
the majority of Koreans actually felt this way in the past?
My argument rests solely on gbevers ridiculous notion that Koreans enjoyed Japanese colonialship. If you have a problem with what im writing, then go read the garbage he wrote. He is not only excusing Japan for its actions but even claiming that Koreans enjoyed it and wanted the Japanese to enslave them.
And for the record, some Koreans did indeed enjoy colonial times(a large number of them were also collaborators who were either A. executed, B. Jailed, C. Fled to Japan once the war was over). But that completely ignores the majority of the Korean population who despised them.
===============================
How could
anti-Japanese sent have always been this strong when SO MUCH of Korean culture IS Japanese?
So much of Korean culture is Japanese? You mean things like anime and playstation which are relatively recent inventions that have no bearing whatsoever to the time period we’re discussing?
Prior to 1945, Japanese culture had little if anything to do with Korean culture. In fact it was the opposite with culture flowing from Korea to Japan. Japan during this time was busy copying the west rather than “seeding” their culture to Korea.
Much of Koreas culture was destroyed by the Japanese as well the mass scale rape and theft of cultural treasures by the Japanese.
===============================
Koreans are and always have been a conflicted people lacking any sense of strong unity–its been this way since people first set fot on this peninsula. There were pro-Japanese and anti-Japanese during
the Occupation. There was no real unity in this regard (CMC, I’m aiming this at you here).
What you state is true for every country, including your beloved Japan.
=====
How can you account for the fact that roughly 50% of the Occupation police force comprised Koreans?
Ever heard of money, food, lack of education or more precisely a Japanese propaganda based education?
=======================
This includes the torturers at Seodaemun friends.
How about the Koreans who served for the Japanese in WWII–esp. torturers/
executioners in the POW camps (see Breens old article about this back when Korean War Criminals were pardoned a few years ago)?
Like it or not, the Japanese paid well and offered some folks attractive
“career” opportunities. Talk about being caught between a rock and a hard place: crappy living conditions as a “patriot” vs. improved living conditions with the new government. If a new government was in power for several decades in your country, wouldn’t many people sort of think it might be around for a while?
I dont know what point youre trying to make. But Koreans working in POW camps do not excuse Japan at all. The fact of that matter is, a poor, hungry and desperate person with no education other than ruthless propaganda by a bloodthirsty government and training in torture is bound to become a violent prison guard. Not because Koreans enjoyed or respected the Japanese. Not because they wanted to help the Japanese. But because they didnt know better and had to make a living. Its no different from ordinary Japanese teenagers being brainwashed into dieing for the emperor. Another example would be the Okinawans. The imperial army told the Okinawan natives that the Americans would rape their women and barbecue their children. All lies of course, which the Okinawans tragically believed.
—————-
We can’t take today’s nationalism and project backwards, saying all Koreans could anticipate their liberation, then division. People are people. Most only give a real shiit about the here and now. For example, the March First Movement: Please give me a rough percentage of the Korean population at the time who actively engaged in this.(Hint: multi-millions vs. thousands). Why weren’t there 10 million freedom fighters? Why not 1 million? Why not half a million?
I suggest you and bevers follow your own advice on this subject matter. Just leave it as is and acknowledge that colonization wasnt a joyous occasion. That being said the Japanese shot and killed the protesters of the March First movement before it could get any bigger. Which is indefensible because they were protesting in their own country against a foreign occupying power.
————
Yup, I think most of us would agree the Occupation wasn’t a picnic, nor was it a torture chamber (would any group of people stand for such conditions?)
The Koreans didnt stand for it. And celebrated when they were liberated.
Requesting #45 be deleted. I italicized some of my arguments.
Ok, sorry about the off-colour stuff.
>>because the Koreans expected their masters, the Qing, to defend them. The Korean people were grossly mistaken regarding the Chinese at the time.
Actually, the Chinese did come to their aid. Ever heard of the first Sino-Japanese war? No, you obviously havent. Which explains your poor grasp of history.
—
That is exactly what I am talking about. the first Sino – Japanese war. The war was about who controlled Korea. It was not about the Chinese “defending” the independence of Korea. It was about the Qing making sure their control and influence in Korea was not replaced by the Japanese. Amazingly, the same situation is mirrored by the present relationship between Communist China and North Korea today. North Korea government would not survive without the watchful eye of the Chinese protecting it.
>>Furthermore, Koreans tend to forget that their Queen was killed not because she wanted some so called glorious “Korean independence”.
Korea was already independent during Queen Mins rule.
Queen Min was assassinated BEFORE Japan colonized Korea genius.
***
Due to the first Sino-Japanese war, the Chinese lost power on the peninsula. The Japanese came in to fill the vacuum. Being independent means you have control over your own political, social, and economic affairs. How could Korea be independent when the Koreans did nothing to stop the Japanese and Chinese from fighting for control?
Oh! Korea did. The Korean King sent a letter to the American President begging for his help because the Chinese would not “protect” him.
Instead of trying to glorify the so-called past, why not look seriously into the causes of why Korea fell under the control of both the Qing and the Japanese. Instead of blaming the Chinese, Japanese or Americans for everything going bad from 1985 – 1910, I suggest Koreans look at themselves for the reasons why they allowed both the Chinese and Japanese fight over Korean land.
Hoju_saram,
Yes, not only did Korea fold without a fight, she signed the treaties that made her a protectorate of Japan and later a colony, so “invasion” is the wrong word to describe what took place.
On November 15, 1905, Emperor Kojong told Ito Hirobumi that he was not refusing to transfer control of Korea’s diplomacy to Japan, but that he just did not like the idea of putting it into a formal treaty. Ito Hirobumi asked Kojong how diplomatic control could be transferred without putting it into a treaty. Ito warned Kojong that unless it was made clear that Japan controlled Korean diplomacy, another war could break out in Asia.
Kojong said that since this was such an important decision, he could not make the decision on his own and should first get the opinion of his ministers (past and present), scholars, and the people. Ito asked since when have you asked the opinion of your people? Ito reminded Kojong that Korea was an absolute monarchy, not a constitutional government, and, therefore, while Kojong could seek the advice of his advisers, there would be no need to ask the people. Ito warned that by asking the people, it would be seen as instigating resistence to Japan. He said that if public opinion built against what we (Kojong and Ito) want to do, then force would have to be used to suppress it.
The meeting ended with Kojong saying he could not approve the treaty since it would destroy the country, and that he would have to get the opinion of his ministers before making a decision.
As you can see, Emperor Kojong wanted Japanese protection, but he was reluctant to put it in the form of a formal treaty. Kojong seemed to want Korea to have the same ambiguous relationship with Japan and she had had with China. Ito seemed to have been saying that it was such ambiguous relationships that caused wars.
Yes, Kojong he did seem to want to sign the treaty, but he did not completely refuse, either, since he said he first wanted to discuss it with his ministers before making a decision.
On November 17, 1905, after hearing of the plans to sign the treaty, Korea’s Iljinhoe issued a statement supporting the treaty and also organized street demonstrations in support of it. On the same day, five of Kojong’s seven ministers agreed to the treaty and signed it into law.
I have not really studied this period of Korean history very well, and am not sure what role Emperor Kojong played in the treaty, but it looks like he gave responsibity for the treaty to his ministers. Also, on November 22, Kojong supposedly sent a secret letter to the United States saying that the treaty was forced on Korea. I do not know if he was having second thoughts or if he just wanted to further remove himself from the responsibility for the treaty. Anyway, he did not get any support from the United States or any other countries because I think they all thought it was for the better. They seemed to think of Korea as a failed country and Japan as its possible savior. Many Koreans felt the same way.
On August 22, 1910, Korean Prime Minister Lee Wan-yong signed the annexation treaty with Japan. When the treaty was proclaimed to the Korean public on August 29, Choi Rin wrote about what he saw in downtown Seoul that day. He lamented that the public seemed to act as if nothing had changed. He considered what would explain such a reaction. He reasoned that the average Korean probably did not see it as the ruin of their country, but as the ruin of the despotic Joseon government, which had used an aristocratic class system to oppose them. It guessed that the average Korean probably saw it as an opportunity to escape oppression, while the middle class and above probably lamented the nation’s ruin (亡國之恨).
By the way, Choi Rin was an independence fighter who first opposed Japan, but later supported her.
Therefore, can it really be called an invasion when treaties are signed with so little resistance and with so many people hoping that the treaties will improve their lives?
If I were living a slave-like existence in a floundering country, I would not be opposed to another country coming in and taking over management. I do not think it is much different from the many immigrants who leave the corruption and despair in their homelands to seek a better life in another country.
Correction: Yes, Kojong did not seem to want to sign the treaty, but he did not completely refuse, either, since he said he first wanted to discuss it with his ministers before making a decision.
I think that it is worthy of note here that this thread–originally about
the lack of open, rational, and logical historical discourse in Korea and among its “educators”–has taken just such a turn. CMC, I’m aiming this at you again. Please take the time to read, think about, and really consider what is being said here. You’ve been at your computer all morning, hot to trot and ready to fire away at any individual who points out the not-so-negative aspects of Japanese Colonial rule. It is obvious that you feel very strong emotional ties to this issue; but I wonder to what extent you are allowing this passion to cloud your reason, judgement, and perceptiveness. You have raised some good (though not wholly unheard-of) points here, but you seem not to be able (or willing) to process any of other strong points others have made here. If you are ethnically Korean, we feel for the pain of your people; if you are of a different ethnicity, we feel for you feeling the pain of the Korean people 60-100 years ago. I would like to think that you sir are an intelligent individual with a genuine interest in history, and who therefore understands the strong need for a multiplicity of views on such distant subjects.
I wasn’t there, you weren’t there, Bob wasn’t there; but we all have a great deal of intellectual experience in the matter and definitely could help each other as we strive for a clearer picture of this long-gone historical period. This is the main point of intellectual discourse: to strive for clarity
by taking into account a variety of factors. This is what this thread originally sought to discuss and consider in regard to a very obvious lack of open-ness and honesty in Korean historical research and education. (Case in point: the non-Korean visiting professor last summer who mentioned that Kim Gu employed terrorist tactics in his classroom. Why is it that all of Korea knows about this man’s statement, spoken in what should have been the (relative)privacy of his classroom? Absolutely insane. How can intellectual discourse and development occur in such an incredibly stifled environment? Voices must be heard, all voices.) I apologize for my directness friend, but you really need to 86 the anger in your responses in this issue; such unbridled emotion has no place in rational and logical intellectual discussion. Further, you may want to refrain from the overt insults you enjoy throwing at people who do not feel the same way you do in this matter of the Occupation. From what I’ve seen, you are just another misguided individual throwing rocks in the name of
education.
To everyone else, I’d just like to say “thank you” for all of the great input on this very interesting topic. I know I have learned a great deal from this
discussion, and I plan on investigating it more so that I can improve my understanding of the matter in its entirety. Thanks!
gbevers
Strange you paint a scenario which seems to totally support Kojongs secret letter of 22 November, rather than your own argument. In your own words Ito points out when did you ever seek the opinion of the people as an absolute monarch, and it can only be seen as instigating resistance. i.e Ito’s picked up on Kojongs desparate floundering to try to found a way out of signing a formal treaty legitimising Japan’s role in korea. Ito carefully points out that not signing a formal treaty may lead to war in the region. What more do you need to establish coercion. Sign or war? Kojong appears very much to be trying to avoid signing whilst at the same time avoiding a war he couldn’t win.
exit86 has done an excellent job of summarizing the more important issue of this thread and that is should a group as the KETWU be picketing, physically threatening people and engaging in questionable, if not illegal acts, instead of the intellectual participation in or sponsoring of a factual discussion of Korean history?
Remember, these people are supposedly made up of teachers and educators, so just what does that say about the quality and nature of any discussion of Korean history, inside South Korea?
As was posted earlier about the American Civil War on this site, there is still some anger and misunderstanding about the aims of the South during that conflict, yet, despite some public protest at certain statue or museum events, there is still a reasonable ongoing debate and discussion of this fractious moment in American history — which is almost completely lacking in any discussion of South Korean history at this time.
Should these sort of educators and teachers, who can not encourage or take part in any meaningful intellectual debate be allowed to shape the intellectual life and minds of future generations of Koreans with this sort of thuggery?
IMHO, absolutely not.
“Often recruited by Korean pimps, prostitution and human trafficking still exist in Korea today.
Recruited to serve Japanese soldiers thanks to a Japan who invaded Korea and put Korea in such a precarious situation.”
===
Korea put itself in a precarious situation by not chaning for 600 years. And the Korean military, and all Korean men in general, continue to get serviced regularly in red-light district concentrated in transfer point and camp areas of South Korean troops.
“–Japanese Language
Hangul was not used in the Chosun dynasty and was unknown in Korea until 1945.
Wrong again, Hangul was increasingly used later on. As someone else mentioned, Hangul newspapers were being printed before Japanese colonization.”
I am not wrong. The types of Korean used before and after 1945 are not the same. It was written differently, and children born today cannot read it anymore.
“===
–Stolen Natural Resources
Korea does a good job destroying its own resources.
Mind giving examples of Koreans destroying their own natural resources? My biggest complaint is that those resources belonged to the Koreans. Japan had no right meddling in what was rightfully Korean.
Mind you that Japan was a parasite that latched on to Korea. Stealing more and more resources. Which you for some odd and bizzare reason find amiable.
===”
The only thing funnier than a Korean standing up for “food safety” is a Korean standing up for “environmentalism.”
“–Dokdo
What does that mean?
Pass.”
Why pass? You just throw the word out there like it’s going to instantly cause a conflation of nationalism and I’m asking you why you think the name of an island is inflammatory. Why so hostile?
“–Seodaemun Prison
How was that different from the public beheadings of the Chosun dynasty?
Because it was a foreign country who did all the killings. Lets not forget all those freedom fighters, students, activists who were killed by Japanese soldiers for merely protesting.
===”
Activists? You mean assassins. Because it was a foreign country? Don’t you types also like to go on about how Korea actually started Japanese culture? Doesn’t that kind of make you the same as them?
“–J. secret police
And Korea now has a hard-working, ethical and effective police force?
Funny how youre comparing the Imperial Japans secret police to Koreas police today. Really funny.
===”
Why is that funny? The Korean police are pretty good at torturing people to death during interrogation right now, today, in 2008. It is however funny to watch them sleep in their police cars at intersections.
“–Queen Min
May have been murdered by Koreans.
A Korean might have helped but it was mostly a Japanese operation. Served in the interest of the Japanese.
===”
Perhaps. It served in the interest of a few Koreans, the Jeonju Yi family.
“You and Bevers should never reply here again.”
Why not? Because it offends the “national pride?” Do you know what objectivity is?
Well, you WERE wrong before; changing the terms of reference (from “there was no Hangul” to “there was a different sort of Hangul before ‘45″ doesn’t change the fact you were wrong.
You also grossly overstate your new claim. Yes, the appearance of Hangul before creation of the South (and North) Korean states postwar was different from what it is today. Its orthography was still in flux, and was not fixed until the competing Korean states exerted control over standardization. Still, the Hangul of the late 19th and early 20th century is recognizably Hangul. And it’s not hard to figure it out; in fact it’s quite easy. I can read it.
Your style of argumentation does not do much to improve your already compromised credibility.
Also, on November 22, Kojong supposedly sent a secret letter to the United States saying that the treaty was forced on Korea. I do not know if he was having second thoughts or if he just wanted to further remove himself from the responsibility for the treaty. Anyway, he did not get any support from the United States or any other countries because I think they all thought it was for the better. They seemed to think of Korea as a failed country and Japan as its possible savior. Many Koreans felt the same way.
***
Yeah, a lot has been made by critical Korean historians about the “American” betrayal of Korea. However, President TR set the tone indicating, if a people, culture, or race were not going to protect or defend themselves, we will not do it for them.
Sadly, these things were not learned by certain American Administrations that have followed.
Well, you WERE wrong before; changing the terms of reference (from “there was no Hangul” to “there was a different sort of Hangul before ‘45″ doesn’t change the fact you were wrong.
I’m going on an anecdote: a number of Koreans I have seen in documentaries about WWII and the Korean war have talked about how it was only after the Japanese left that they started seeing Hangul. It’s not as if they were all using Hangul at home all the time but keeping the streets clear of it out of fear of the Japanese. Another anecdote: the Chosun dynasty didn’t start issuing government documents in Hangul until 1895 or something (Check wiki). The government managed to function without Hangul for 99 percent of its existence. Did Koreans really all use Hangul all the time in the early 20th century? I doubt it. I did change the point of my reference, but you pulling out the Seoul Shinmun as proof that all Koreans wrote in Hangul at that time is specious.
Still, the Hangul of the late 19th and early 20th century is recognizably Hangul. And it’s not hard to figure it out; in fact it’s quite easy. I can read it.
And I’m not talking about the Hangul itself, I’m talking about the type of Korean that was spoken in the colonial period. How many kids today use hanja? I’m no Asiaphile and I don’t speak Chinese so I will leave that to you today. I see a generational gap in communicative ability and it seems, um, manufactured. If Baekje really founded Japan, or part of it, aren’t we splitting hairs?
Well, Mr. Mao, you keep digging yourself deeper into a hole of shit, so I guess you must enjoy it. I’ll leave you to it.
Except to correct your misrepresentation of what I said:
But that’s not what I did. I simply pointed out the Tongnip Sinmun’s use of Hangul to correct your unqualified assertion that Koreans did not use Hangul before ‘45; I never claimed that everyone used it. In fact all govt business, all other newspapers, and all serious written discourse among most of the educated elite was conducted in Hanja; probably a large percentage of the non-elite didn’t write at all.
It is a bit of a nice surprise to see Dr Lee’s incredible lecture of so many months ago being resurrected here.
As an officer of the RAS, not only did I attend her lecture but I also set into motion an effort to ask her to put her lecture down on to paper so that the RAS Korea Branch may print her presentation in our annual collection of white papers, Transactions.
Alas! our efforts were to no avail. She dismissed her talks as “not being good enough” for publication.
Frankly, I was a bit flabbergasted. Her performance that night, speaking without a single note, was an amazing delivery of erudition – and in a second language, of course.
I cannot wonder that even she may be intimidated by some forces in academia from publishing her wise insights. Or, quite possibly, she may have not been simply up to taking the time to write it all down and edit the same for publication. I have no idea.
But while you can, by all means treat yourself to a truly original tour of modern Korean political thought by visiting the RAS web site. You will only thank yourself for taking the time and effort to download and view this important video.
Dr. Lee’s lecture not only gives remarkable insight into the Korean political landscape, but it also serves as a parable for other societies to be aware of the dangers that loom when those who know better holding their tongues in the face of intellectual dishonesty — until it is too late.
Spewer wrote:
I do not understand why you think the Japanese had a complicated attitude towards Hangeul. It was the Japanese colonial government who published the first set of spelling rules for hangeul in 1912. It was called 보통학교용 언문 철자법. Then there was the 보통학교용언문철자법대요 in 1921 and the 언문철자법 in 1930. See HERE. They also plublished a Korean dictionary (조선어사전) in 1920. It was the Japanese who helped popularize hangeul by making it a compulsary subject in school. It seems they wanted Koreans to be literate. Hangeul was also used in books, newspapers, and magazines published during the colonial period up until the “The Korean Language Society” (조선어 학회) incident in 1942. That incident also resulted in Korean being banned in school and at public meeting. However, you must remember that Japan was at war at the time and had security concerns. Also, they wanted to assimulate Koreans into being full-fledged Japanese citizens.
Were there no English-only rules in places like England, the U.S., and Australia in 1942?
By the way, Sperwer, mixed hangeul and Chinese were used in Korean newspapers and magazines, just as they were used in Korean newspapers after “liberation.”
I’m not surprised “Tom”, that Dr. Lee rejected the idea of publication. Dr. Lee was pretty no-nonsense in expressing herself. She also is politically astute enough to realize that she does not want phone calls threatening her life either, as had occurred when she was asked to consider taking the post of Minister of Education by Kim Young-sam, under the agenda of reform (she declined taking the post). She discovered that certain people wanted to protect their education-driven commerce and ideology, which has corrupted the system, and it is the same to this very day.
As a side thought, this also reminds me of the president of KAIST, Suh Nam-Pyo, who recently warned that the quality of Korea’s university-level instruction cannot improve under the present system and that if there is no overhaul of the whole educational structure, the system will fail. Naturally, the Ministry of Education will be in control of this slow-motion failure every agonizing step of the way too.
Anyhow, perhaps a simple transcription of Dr. Lee’s speech, on the site, would be sufficient.
Let’s go back to point #1 — about hangul (a writing system) not being used before 1945. Bzzert! Wrong. Plain wrong. As someone who’s worked in the Asian Library in Paris, Korean Dept., I have manipulated, read, and classified dozens of documents that were written in hangul, way before 1945, including the 독립신문 (獨立新聞), as mentionned by Sperwer in point #2
And please let’s not make the same mistake as non-linguist Koreans do: hangul is not the Korean language. Hangul is a set of characters. So yes, point #1 is plain wrong.
As for point #3, it mixes two things, and makes a misrepresentation. First, it confuses the Korean language (한국어/한국말) and the script (한글). A script is not a language. If you don’t understand this sentence, please go back to school, or don’t discuss linguistics. Then it says that children born today cannot read it. In-fucking-deed, Toto. I am ready to bet that babies born YESTERDAY won’t be able to, either. My full salary for December too.
However, as far as high-school students go, should they see an interest in doing so — read passing an exam, avoiding the professor’s wrath, or any such nuisance — they will reconnect their brain cells and detach themselves (very temporarily) from Warcraft, read, and, given a text that doesn’t require lots of contemporary background (usually the case in newspapers), will understand it. Whether they’d enjoy it, would like to speak/write like that, or be sent back in time with a Wonderful Hyundai™ Time Machine, if such a thing exists, is doubtful…
Heck, when I unearthed our Library’s collection of 독립신문 I was a lowly student who’d spent 6 months at best in Korea, and could understand most of it.
To paraphrase a phonetics professor who told us once in class, about sound patterns that were hard to identify, the fact that *you* can’t understand it doesn’t mean the rest on the world is on par with you.
“Well, Mr. Mao, you keep digging yourself deeper into a hole of shit, so I guess you must enjoy it. ”
You’re the one who chose to live in it.
63. R. Elgin, actually our original proposition to Dr. Lee was for us to transcribe the video and then for her to edit it to her satisfaction. Anyway, I don’t blame her for declining for whatever reason she had. We were just incredibly lucky to have the chance to take in her perspective that special evening.
Regardless, transcribing, even a slowly articulated speech, that lasts an hour is a lot of work. Any volunteers out there?
gbevers,
You’re not making a very good argument here. My original point, which you contested, was that the colonial period did more harm than good. The exact manner of the annexation (which you point out yourself sidelined the general Korean populace) is irrelevent (aside from the interesting fact that Ito knew full well the Korean people would oppose it). Also, the position of the US regarding the Japanese occupation has nothing to do with whether or not they thought it would benefit the Korean people – to understand the US motives, go and read up on the Taft Katsura Agreement, which was signed at the time of Kojong’s acsendency.
You assert that many Koreans felt the Japanese would be saviors, and that the treaties would improve their lives, but you don’t show me any evidence. This is your only relevent point, and all you come up with is an opinion – yours. Show me the proof.
BTW Choi Rin is one man. Who knows what his motivations were? Compare his comments to the actions of the 2 million people (the most common figure I can find) who took part in the March 1st movement
(http://www.britannica.com/EBch.....t-Movement
http://www.nationmaster.com/en.....t-Movement
That’s alot of unhappy campers. Wonder why?
Now back to my other point about the occupation leading to the communists gaining strength:
Kim Il Sung began his life in the Anti-Japanese Army. He was supported by the Chinese communists, and he won widespread popular support in Korea for the part he played (it was trumped up) in the fight against the Japanese. On Kim Il Sung’s initiative (not China’s, not the Soviet’s) the South was invaded.
Discontent with Japanese rule paved the way for the rise of Kim Il Sung and ultimately resulted in the Korean War.
As far as I’m concerned, that’s a big price to pay, and it’s the main reason I think the colonial period caused much more harm than good.
If I were living a slave-like existence in a floundering country, I would not be opposed to another country coming in and taking over management. I do not think it is much different from the many immigrants who leave the corruption and despair in their homelands to seek a better life in another country.
It’s very different; just ask the Irish.
No surprise that Waegooks confuse the terminology of the language and the alphabet when Koreans do it, too, even in the media.
Hoju_Saram,
As I said, there were Koreans who opposed the annexation, but there were many who did not. As I wrote, Korea’s Iljinhoe supported the Eulsa Treaty with a street demontration and a proclamation, and that organization had a lot of members. Also, five of Kojong’s seven ministers supported it. Why didn’t those five ministers opt out the way the other two ministers did?
Yes, Choi Rin was one man, but he was against Korea’s annexation when he wrote about the people’s reaction in Seoul. As I wrote, he was surprised that there was no reaction by the people of Seoul to the annexation. He assumed that the lack of reaction was due to the fact that the average Korean probably did not see it as a lost of their country, but rather as an end to corrupt, aristocratic Joseon government. He guessed that Korea’s underprivileged classes supported the treaty because it offered them hope while the privileged classes were against it.
The US, Great Britain, and other’s support for the Eulsa treaty went beyond their fears for their own colonies in Southeast Asia. They saw Korea as a backward, failed state and saw Japan as new hope for the region. The proof is in the pudding. No one responded to Emperor Kojong’s letters for help.
As for the March 1st Movement, Cumings said there were “at least a half million people,” not 2 million. Cumings also said the 7,500 killed and 45,000 arrested figures was according to “Korean nationalist sources,” which cannot explain how they got the numbers. Japanese officials counted 553 killed and over 12,000 arrested. Anyway, even if we assume there 2 million Koreans participated in the protests over several months, then what were the other 15 million Koreans doing during that time?
The March 1st Movement was not a just peaceful demonstration. The demonstrators attacked police stations and government facilities and policemen were burtally killed. They set fires to and vandalized pro-Japanese homes. Kang U-gyu throw a bomb at Namdaemun Station when the new Japanese Governor-General’s train arrived on September 2, 1919. Thirty-seven people were injured in that attack, including Americans. What would Korean or American authorities have done?
The exaggerated numbers of the March 1st Movenment remind me of the 1980 Gwangju Uprising, where the Korean government said 170 people were killed in just ten days, including 22 troops and 4 policemen, but other sources put the deaths at over 2,000.
During the Jeju Uprising, which started on April 3, 1948, between 14,000 and 30,000 people were killed by the Korean military, and the Cheju governor privately told American intelligence that 60,000 had died. Are the Japanese to be blamed for that, too?
If you blame the Japanese for Kim Il-seong and Korean communism, do you also blame them for all the peasant uprisings during the Joseon period? Are Koreans not to be blamed for anything?
Are the Japanese also to be blamed for what is happening in North Korea more than sixty years after liberation?
If you don’t understand this sentence, please go back to school, or don’t discuss linguistics.
Be a little more condescending, chumpy. It looks good on you.
Bevers asked:
Gerry:
I’m disappointed that you would revert to the sort of “Johnny did it too” justification that is the hallmark of knee-jerk Korean apologists to excuse every action by Korea that can be critiqued on the basis of some principled rationale. Especially in the face of the obvious distinction that can be drawn between coercive measures taken within a national homeland and those implemented against a colonial population. It smacks of arguing that the internment of Japanese nationals in concentration camps by the US during WW2 is justified because the Nazis also similarly interred those they perceived as their enemies.
I’m even more dismayed by your inability to see Japanese attitudes towards the language question in Korea as being complicated.
In this case, you are trying to preach to a member of the choir about the positive aspects of Japan’s modernization of Korean society, economy and culture during the colonial period. Of course, the Japanese had an interest in improving the basic literacy and education of its Korean subjects in order to break the hold of Chinese civilization on Korea and to produce subjects capable of providing labor in the new industrial and commercial order the implementation of which in East Asia Japan spearheaded. This not only served Japanese interests, narrowly conceived, but benefited Koreans as well – although, even at best, not without the sorts of serious costs associated with the destruction of traditional societies (and which also have ensued even if Korea had been left to modernize according to its own lights).
Japan’s support for the spread of hangul-based literacy was thus a part of its overall strategy but a tightly circumscribed one. They consistently tried to co-opt all indigenous efforts, and when they failed, suppression of indigenous efforts ensued – often justified by specious claims that the resisters were fomenting violent rebellion. The extent and intensity of suppression varied with the circumstances. It was pervasive and particularly oppressive at the outset, climaxing with the arrest, torture and trial in 1913 of the group of Korean dissident group of which Yun Ch’i-ho was a member; more relaxed during the cultural policy period, when there was a sort of proliferation of Korean-language publications; and then again gathered oppressive and repressive momentum as the East Asian War geared up, climaxing again (at least in respect of the Korean linguistic movement, with the Korean Language Association Incident of 1942). Thus the Japanese did not inexorably and utterly suppress Korean language (as preposterously claimed by many Koreans; but neither did they either simply promote it or let it alone to develop of its own momentum.
Oh great — we’re left with arguing over which of the incorrigible liars, Bruce Cumings or “Korean nationalist sources”, should be believed.
As for me, unless the statement is “I’m in the closet”, I’m dubious of everything coming from Bruce Cumings.
Ah, mud-slinging. The last refuge of dimwits without anything substantial to say. Keep going, cutie pie. But when you get out of your pre-pubescent phase, come back with a real conversation. In between, you’ve been added to the wankers list…
One might expect from people coming from broader horizons to be a little more enlightened about the subject of language. Especially from people coming to teach language… Just a thought.
Superfluous use of “from”.
Just a thought.
Gee gbevers, you are providing excellent proof that Koreans did not like Japanese rule at all. The amount of violence you are describing shows how resentful Koreans are about the occupation. If the Japanese were truly civil to us would there be any need for people to demonstrate at all.
You say that Japanese officials counted 553 killed and over 12,000 arrested. But these are numbers set forth by the Japanese, the oppressors, any objective person should be able to assume that the numbers were downplayed.
When people demonstrate against an oppressing force, it is usually the bold and brave that step forward. Just because the rest of the population didn’t join in doesn’t mean they liked the Japanese. Isn’t it possible to assume many of them were afraid to join, after all the Japanese were the ones with guns.
Andrei, I beg to differ. But whatever
Sperwer (#71)
Well, why is it that the Japanese always seem to be blamed for cultural destruction rather than Johnny? For example, why is so little mentioned these days about what the United States did when she colonized the Philippines, where hundreds of thousands of Filipinos were killed and English was made the official language? What is wrong with comparing numbers and methods used? I think the Koreans got a much better deal than the Filipinos, Indians, and Africans, not to mention native Americans. Do you think the United States should return Hawaii to the Hawaiians or Texas to the Mexicans?
I know you are part of the choir, in some regard, but I just wanted to point out that Japan helped propagate the use of Hangeul and the Korean language during the colonial period by making it a required subject in schools and by printing books on the subject, which were done before the March 1st Movement.
Yes, the Japanese had an interest in teaching the population to read and write, but every society usually has such an interest. Yet, the Joseon government was not bothered by such things. If the cost of literacy is the destruction of traditional, illiterate, superstitious societies, then I think it is worth it. And I think few Koreans regret the loss of their illiteracy and superstitions.
Jewook,
Do you know the meaning of the phrase “at all”?
How many Koreans have attended anti-US demonstrations? And among those Koreans, how many really hated the US, and how many were just there for the thrills? Also, how many of them were “bold and brave,” and how many were just stupid, silly kids?
If you think 2 million Koreans participated in the March 1st Movement, can you tell me how that number was calculated? Also, how did they come up with the 7,500 dead and 45,000 arrested figures?
Whether or not you believe the Japanese police figures of 553 dead and 12,000 arrested, it was the police who were keeping records and had the means to do so.
There are two Korean-speaking kids at my house, ages 11 and 8, who are quite proficient with hanja, and I would imagine that we’re not alone, given that we use mass-market Chinese-character educational materials purchased at Korean bookstores.
gbevers, you are entitled to your own interpretation of the evidence you have gathered. some of what you say are reasonable statements which show up the unreasonable nature of hot headed koreans.
however, as a young korean, i would like to point out that i am also aware of a lot of old korean people who admit there were some good things about the days of the japanese occupation, especially the efficiency and systematic ways in which things were handled.
however. i have not come across a single person who actually say that they “prefer” those days, and would rather live under the japanese rule, or that korea would have been a better place to live today as a korean under japanese rule, no matter how they hate each other, or how much they f**d the country up themselves.
i am sure you are aware of the expression “throwing the baby out with the bath water”. in your arguments, some which are reasonable, you seem to miss the bigger picture that koreans didn’t like the occupation period for whatever reason, whether this is because they could not abide by living as persecuted second class citizens,or they are just generally a bunch of difficult and wild so and so’s in their characters, who cannot stand anyone ruling them let alone someone not koreans.
one point i would like to make is that rather unfortunately, the real and worthy efforts of the korean independence fighters and the student protesters against the dictatorship in the 70’s 80’s are being grouped into the same category of pro-dokdo and anti-american mad cow disease protesting lot of today.this is really unfortunate and slighting interpretation of korean history, which i find the people who have come to know about korean affairs only recently tend to make. one should distinguish that the people in the past were fighting for a worthy cause like independence of a country and they were ready to face tortures and execution, unlike the mad cow candlelit lot you see today who do not want to eat american beef(interpreted as american spunk, by the extreme anti-american sentiment which refers to the original post).
i guess this is also koreans’ own doings.
To the extent that is true Yuna, the primary responsibility lies with those Koreans (i) who conflate the two for their own partisan purposes, and (ii) who do not contest those who perpetrate number (i).
good point, sperwer, i am guilty of (ii) because it’s a subjective judgement like the sort made equally often by gbevers and koreans alike which will only be exacerbated by any additional contest which involve links to wikipedia entries.
Yuna,
You make some good points. I do not see any reason why South Koreans today would want to go back to the colonial period since South Koreans have built themselves a very nice society. However, I would say that the North Koreans were better off under the Japanese.
What bothers me is all the anti-Japanese propaganda that does not seem to serve any constructive purpose. Koreans and Japanese need each other and should put the past behind them and stop making history an issue. For example, both Korea and Japan claim Dokdo, but South Korea has possession, so she should just shut up about it and stop using it to fuel hatred for Japan. How can that possibly help Korea? The two countries should just agree to disagree, which is what I think Japan wants to do.
As for the demonstrations in the ’70s and ’80s, I came to Korea in 1977 and do not remember seeing any demonstrations between ‘77 and ‘79, but that may have been because I was in the Pyeongtaek area. I also did not sense much anti-Americanism then, but I do remember hearing a story of two Americans being killed and their heads being hung on the perimeter fence of the army base I was at. Supposedly, they were killed for going into a village outside one of the gates that was off-limits to the US military at the time. I do not know if the story was true, but that was what I heard.
I did see a lot of anti-Americanism in the 1980s, when I came back to Korea in 1981, and it was almost as silly as it is today. I remember, for example, a Korean I worked with at the Academy of Korean Studies telling me his greatest achievement in life had been to lead a student demonstration. He also told me he hated America for three reasons: “guitars, chewing gum, and blue jeans.” He claimed that those three things were destroying Korean society.
In 1981 and 1982, I was attending Korean language classes at Yonsei’s Korean Language Institute, when it was in the old building. I also taught English at the Yonsei Foreign Language Institute in the same building from 1982 to ‘83. There were many a day I had to run through tear gas and climb over fences to get to and from classes and work. I sometimes asked students why they were demonstrating, but no one seemed to know. There were probably some serious demonstrators out there, but many students were just doing it because it was tradition, and they seemed to enjoy the excitement of it.
During the 1980s, Freshmen went through an indoctrination that included anti-government and anti-American propaganda. I was often called names by strangers as I walked on campus because Korean students at the time blamed the United States for Gwangju and other evils in Korean society. That was also the time when “Mr. Monkey” was very popular, even with grade school children.
Average Korean adults did not seem to support the student demonstrations in the early eighties because they did not seem to have any clear purpose. However, that changed in 1987 when Chun Doo-hwan tried to hand over the presidency to his buddy, Roh Tae-woo. That was the straw that broke the camel’s back, and those demonstrations did something worthwhile.
I left Korea in 1987 and came back in 1991, and have not experienced the kind of anti-Americanism I experienced in the 1980s, not even during the time of the demonstrations over the accident involving the two school girls.
Yes, the demonstrators these days are really hard up for causes, but they continue to demonstrate. One difference I have noticed is that it was young college students demonstrating in the 1980s, but now it seems like old men are leading the demonstrations today. Maybe, some of the old men demonstrating today are the same “no-guitar, no-chewing-gum, no-blue-jean nutjobs from the 1980s?
Bevers,
A few points before I wrap this up.
1. Cumings puts the number of Samil protestors at at least 500,000. Considering that most other sources put the figure at 2 million, I think it’s a safe bet to assume it was somewhere around the 1 mill mark.
He also writes that Japanese national and military police could not contain the protests, and had to call in the army and navy.
The number of dead was somewhere between 500 (Japanese figure) and 7500 (Korean figure). Lets average it and put it at, say 2000.
Now lets consider the population of Korea at the time: about 15 mill. 1 million protestors out of 15 million people. That’s already one of the largest mass protests per capita in modern history.
Now consider the particular hardship Koreans faced at the time, which would have precluded millions from attending, and which make the numbers even more astonishing:
They were desperately poor; the protests took place during spring planting when most able bodied rural folk are needed in the fields; travel in Korea to the population centers at the time was an incredibly difficult business owing to the condition of the roads and the means of transport (walking?); the very young, the very old, the infirm, the disabled, the diseased, could not have attended the protests at all, or at least not in any significant numbers; and finally, the Japanese were killing people.
Jewook was spot on when he said the bold and brave attended, and you’re a fool if you think people went for “thrills”.
Lastly:
Are Koreans not to be blamed for anything?
Perhaps we should turn that question around: Are Koreans to be balmed for everything? After all, I’ve not shy about criticing Korea, particularly for it’s attitude towards Japanese of the present day and Americans since ww2. If you don’t believe me, read my letter to the Gwangju News here (2 and 5):
http://www.ghosttreemedia.com/?p=99
You on the other hand unswervingly take any position contrary to the Korean one, regardless of the issue at hand, whether it be comfort women, dokdo, the colonial period, et al ad nauseum.
Why?
I do think the March 1st number is highly suspect and misleading.
This is the standard number–2 million–which is given for “participants”
in the gatherings over the months following the actual 3/1 incident.
This is not 2 million in a day, but in a series of days counted (depending on the historian/text)anywhere from one month to twelve months after 3/1.
How could a reliable figure possibly be derived from such an unspecific time period? Who would have been counting every day following 3/1? How can we know the same folks weren’t counted twice or three times? If a person protests on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, are they counted as three diffeent “participants”? What about the folks out there every day for the year? 12 people?
Further, what exactly is a “participant”? An onlooker? Someone who shouts something? The kid walking by who stops to see what is going on?
The gathering in Jong-Ro downtown by Tapgol Park is reported to have
(depending on the source) several thosand to ten thousand “participants.”
Once again, who were these folks and to what extent were they actively participating in the event? (We are talking the busiest street in Seoul back then and today). How can we be certain passers-by weren’t included in this head count? I still want to know who was out there with pencil and notebook trying to count the moving black-haired heads in the crowds.
Were such counters a part of a counting network so that they could get together and add up their numbers? How exactly was this Korea-wide
“participant” count done????????
It is a hard matter to really reconcile, because all sources reporting at the time were highly biased: the K. nationalists claiming higher numbers to bolster their cause (please note they did state that 20 million Koreans were behind their movement–when just over 14 million people had been counted by the latest census. Yes, the census had traditionally been done for the purposes of taxation, and many folks dodged the count, but could 1/3 of the population have done so? maybe the nationalists just exaggerated their numbers??) Of course the Japanese figures can’t be relied upon, because they sought to downplay the whole incident. Korean newspapers can’t be relied upon, as was/is also the case with foreign correspondents in Seoul/Korea at the time–we all know sensationalism sells papers.
So who the heck can we trust? How can we agree upon a fair estimation of the numbers?
Good question. One thing is for certain: we must be very suspicious of any number and the person who offers it.
I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that
1. The 2 million figure is 100% wrong
2. The actual March First Movement had tens of thousands of active, angry-as-hell participants and a lot more willy-nilly onlookers who wouldn’t have minded being “participants” as long as they could make it home in time for dinner.
3. There is no way to possibly figure the number of participants over the ensuing year, therefore there is no sense in agruing about it. Lets just say “lots” of people were involved.
Weird French Guy,
“wankers list”
Ironic, isn’t it, that this thread is supposed to be about the nature of hatred.
“To paraphrase a phonetics professor who told us once in class, about sound patterns that were hard to identify, the fact that *you* can’t understand it doesn’t mean the rest on the world is on par with you.”
Yes, and I can hack my way through Shakespeare and John Donne with a Latin, Greek and Old English dictionary but it doesn’t mean he spoke the same language as me. The assertion that the Japanese destroyed the Korean language as we know it is wrong because it isn’t the same as it was in 1895. The Korean government didn’t see a need to communicate in Hangul until 1895 after being in existence for centuries. Just how essential to the development of Korea up to that point had Hangul been?
“Then it says that children born today cannot read it.”
Today means these days as well as today. Maybe you should have spent more time reading English instead of French or Korean or whatever you really think you speak.
Mr. Carr,
“There are two Korean-speaking kids at my house, ages 11 and 8, who are quite proficient with hanja, and I would imagine that we’re not alone, given that we use mass-market Chinese-character educational materials purchased at Korean bookstores.”
Fine, but they don’t write it and read it all day long. It isn’t their main mode of communication and they sure don’t seem to like talking to Chinese people (let alone Japanese). As part of an exercise in class, I asked a 22 year old today which country he would NOT like to visit and he said China because the Chinese students on campus don’t wash and smell bad. You know, I kinda believed him but I realized that I was dealing with a culture that didn’t understand when they were crossing lines of polite behaviour.
Hoju,
I know this wasn’t to me, but I think it could have been.
“You on the other hand unswervingly take any position contrary to the Korean one, regardless of the issue at hand, whether it be comfort women, dokdo, the colonial period, et al ad nauseum. Why?”
I do, too. I think it’s because I am usually confronted or ignored here and I don’t really like Korea anymore. I gave it a bit of effort but it just disappoints me more than it lifts me up. I guess I’m getting older and don’t care about it anymore but years of, I dunno, living in a slum teaching English to students that either don’t care or think they know more than me has been, um, difficult. I have basically developed a deep mistrust of Koreans, particularly when money is involved, and a profound sense that the English teaching game is just a charade. This year, this has been coupled with a collapse of the Korean economy after a summer of utterly asinine behaviour by every Korean. I really feel that Korea sabotaged its own economy to show anger at the world, particularly Ronald McMurderburger. And they can’t even back it up, they’re buying US beef in truckloads. I wasn’t assaulted in a riot or anything but I am taking a step back from a place that would behave that way. Hoju, I don’t really know whether or not you are white, brown or purple but I have been reflecting on just how bad the tone of discussion has gotten when the first two angry refutations of my posting, inflammatory as it was, included the question “What country are you from?” and the threatening statement “You should never post here again.” Are you with the Thought Police? If perhaps you are ethnically Korean, this line of questioning fits well with a lot of my recent perceptions of South Korea. I find it hard to articulate them, but few of them are positive.
Hoju_saram (#84) wrote:
Well, at least, you have come down from your original claim of 2 million to 1 million by using a sloppy, divide-in-half estimate. I find it a little funny that your new estimate just happens to be very close to the 1.06 million that the Japanese estimated the number of demonstrators to be. And where did that 2 million figure come from? I would guess that someone used the same sloppy logic you did and just doubled the Japanese figure. By the way, in his book, “A New Look at Korean History” (한국사 새로 보기), Konguk University Professor Sin Bok-ryong (신복룡) said that the number of participates did not exceed 460,000.
Hoju_saram wrote:
I see you are using your sloppy logic, again. That 7,500 figure came from Bak Eun-sik’s (박은식) “The Bloody History of the Korean Independence Movement” (한국독립운동지혈사). Bak Eun-sik was rabid anti-Japanese and was not even in Korea at the time of the March 1st Movement. He wrote his “bloody history” in Singapore more than a year after the March 1st Movement. He was also one of the founding leaders of the “Daehan Citizens Old Men Alliance” (대한국민노인동맹단), which was the group that sent Kang U-gyu (강우규) to Namdaemun Station to throw the throw the bomb at Governor-General Saito’s party when it arrived on September 2, 1919. As I mentioned above, the bomb injured 37 people, including Americans. Do you really think Bak Eun-sik’s numbers were objective?
Hoju_saram wrote:
The Korean population was was approximately 17.5 million in 1919, not 15 million.
Hoju_saram wrote:
It was not just one big demonstration. There were small to large demonstrations all over the country for about three months, so people had the opportunity to participate if they wanted to. And all you had to be able to do was raise your arms above your head and say “manse” three times.
There were violent protesters and non-violent protesters, and I doubt the Japanese were shooting the non-violent protesters. Protesters were also killing, burning, and detroying.
Hoju_Saram wrote:
I simply want to see prove rather than just believe wild accusations. I have seen Koreans exaggerate and lie too much to just take their word for it, anymore. Maybe you should keep in mind something that Brendon Carr and a Korean lawyer once say in THIS ARTICLE:
What do you think would happen in a situation where it is Koreans versus Japanese?
Correction: Bak Eun-sik wrote his “bloody history” in Shanghai, not Singapore.
I just got up and noticed there are a lot of stupid grammar and spelling errors in my above post, but I am not going to bother to correct those since people can probably figure out what I was trying to say. It was late last night when I decided to respond to Hoju_Saram.
By the way, here is a link to the New York Times article on the September 2, 1919 bomb explosion: LINK
Regarding:
As an off-topic note (I apologize), I have noticed that there is something of the same problem often in signing contracts with Koreans too. For example, I would sign a contract for a certain Korean fellow but, weeks later, he would call me up, telling me he could not honor the contract because his “friends” suddenly wanted him to do work for them and because they were his “chin-gu”, he felt obliged to work with them instead of honoring their commitment to me.
I have had this happen more than once as well and in all the cases, the Korean party ends up losing because it kills all future opportunities for them to do business with me and gets them black-balled if they venture into American circles because they get a bad reputation for being unreliable (yes, word of mouth works). This also means these same people lose opportunities to grow and learn because their sense of ethics is impaired by this counter-productive, tribal obligation. This is especially why it is important, in many instances, for the more capable Koreans to leave Korea and work elsewhere or else they will never get past a certain level of ability, IMHO.
Perhaps Korean teachers and historians need to take a hiatus from living in Korea so that they can do a better job in understanding their own history or role in society.
Perhaps we all do.
R. Elgin,
I am not sure if your example falls in the same category lying, but it is an example of how Koreans seem to view contracts differently than Westerners.
My first experience with the Korean concept of tribalism was in 1981, when I came to study Korean at the Yonsei Korean Language Institute. The institute told me about a homestay opportunity with the family of a wealthy construction company president in the Bangbae-dong area of Seoul. They lived in a huge house, and I had a room to myself. All I had to do for free room and board was to speak English with their high-school-aged son in the evenings and chitchat in English with the father when the occassion arised. They were all very nice to me and would invite me into the family room in the evening to share fruit with them. That was until we went out to eat Chinese food on evening at the Yongsan Army Base in Seoul.
One evening the father decided that he was going to take us all out to dinner at the Yongsan Army Base, where he knew a Korean guard that would let him onto the base. The father decided that he was going to drive us there, himself, even though he did not really know how to drive, which I did not know at the time. He always had a driver take him to and from work. Anyway, by some miracle, we managed to make it to the base without getting into a traffic accident; however, we were not as lucky on the way home.
I was scared to death of the father’s driving and offered to drive, instead, but he would not let me. Anyway, I was very nervous and was just watching and waiting for the accident to happen. Traffic was stopped on the bridge as we were going home, and I saw that the father was going to run into the back of the car ahead of us, at least, three to five seconds before he actually did. I yelled for him to stop, but he just kept going and plowed into the back of the car in front of us.
What did the father do next? He got out of the car and started yelling at the two men in the car he had hit, blaming them for the accident. The son and mother urged me to get out of the car and support him. I did get out, but I just stood beside him while he kept telling them that it was all their fault. Finally, they all agreed to go to a police station on the other side of the bridge to sort it out.
We followed the car ahead of us across the bridge and down a couple of streets, but when the car ahead of us turned right to go to the police station, the father slammed on the gas and sped straight through the intersection. The father, the mother, the son, and the daughter in the car all started laughing as we went zooming down streets away from the police station. They noticed that I was not laughing, and by the time, we got home, they had determined that I was a traitor. I was no longer invited into their living room for fruit in the evening, and I was served all my meals separately. I was no longer a part of the tribe.
It was probably less than a week later that the mother came to me and said I had to leave because the live-in housekeeper needed a bigger room. The son and I had become very close, so he was very sorry about the whole thing, but there was nothing he could do even if I had wanted him to. The atmosphere was poisoned. The father would not even be in the same room with me, and the mother had gone from being a smiling housewife to being a real bitch.
That was my first experience with Korean tribalism.
interesting story, Mr. Bevers. I believe it is a true story.
Many Koreans think all’s well as long as I am well. My experience in Korea was that, the land was overpopulated in such a small space, that there was more competition for anything and everything relative to the US.
Here’s a Korean guy basically mouthing your thesis. PS: I don’t think it’s true. Enjoy.
★ 일제시대 한국인도 살기 좋았다
조회
1552
공감
25
비공감
49
작성일시
2008.12.02. 07:22
아이디
아이디
sjwnrdmadlek
다른글보기
다른글보기
차단하기
차단
관심선택
관심
IP
122.34.xxx.222
신고하기
신고하기
1920년대나 30년대 태어나신 분들 말로는
그 시절엔 독립군은 극소수였고, 국민들은 독립군에 신경도 안썼다 그러드라.
대부분의 국민들이 자기 스스로가 일본인이라고 생각했다고 그러드라
조선말이나 조선이름 쓸사람은 자유럽게 썼고
반대로 일본말이나 일본이름 쓸사람도 맘대로 일본이름,일본말 쓰면서
우리가 생각한것처럼 강압적이고 착취하고 그러지 않았다고 글더라
한번쯤 들어봤겠지만
심지어 일제시대가 가장 살기는 좋았다는 할아버지들의 말도 있고…
할아버지들 말로는
일제시절에 극장에서 상업영화를 상영했단다…
꽉 들어찬 극장 손님 대부분이 한국인이었다더라.
근데 영화 상영하기 전에 우리 지금 극장에서 광고 내보내듯이
그시절엔 광고대신 일본전쟁 뉴스를 짤막하게 틀어줬덴다
뭐 지금 전쟁 상황이 어쩌고 저쩌고 했겠지..
근데 일본군이 어딜 점령했다더라, 무슨 나라 군대를 물리쳤다더라..이런 뉴스 나오면
극장안 한국사람들이 박수치고 소리지르고 난리였다더라.
니들 할아버지,할머니도 99% 그 시절에 다 저랬다.
누가 강압적으로 시켜서 한게 아니라, 자신이 스스로 일본인이라고 생각하는게 자연스러운 때였다.
물론 정신대 할머니들 생각하면 맘 아프지만,
그 할머니들 대부분은 직업 알선 브로커에 속아서 넘어간거다
이건 사실이다. 일본 군부나,정부가 할머니들을 직접 데려갔단 증거는 지금 없다,
대부분이 한국인 브로커에 속아서 좋은 직업 구해준다 꼬셔서 일본에 넘긴거다.
아무튼, 그 시절 대한민국 국민의 90% 이상이 만족하며 살았다는건
그 시절을 살아봤던 나이든 분들의 말들을 들어봤을때 어느정도 사실인듯 하다.
조선말기 때 한국 인구보다 일제시대 한국 인구가 폭발적으로 늘어났다는것도
풍요로왔고 살기 좋았다는 증거 중 하나다
일제시대에, 현대,삼성이 생겼고, 한국인이 사장인 극장,은행,공장,소설가,음악가 등등
심지어 한국어학당 까지 일본은 인정해 줬다.
우리는 지금까지
뭔가에 속았다는걸 한번쯤은 의심해볼 내용이다
하지만 위안부 할머니일은 정황이 어떻든 일본이 공식적으로 사과했으면 한다
PS. That stupid “theKorean” claims Chosun, JoongAng, Dong-A doesn’t get any space on naver. What a douche. Naver is Korea’s google. They don’t play politics.
news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LS2D&mid=sec&sid1=103&sid2=245&oid=025&aid=0001984536&m_view=1&m_url=%2Flist.nhn%3Fgno%3Dnews025%2C0001984536%26sort%3DgoodCount
#48
That is exactly what I am talking about. the first Sino – Japanese war. The war was about who controlled Korea. It was not about the Chinese “defending” the independence of Korea. It was about the Qing making sure their control and influence in Korea was not replaced by the Japanese. Amazingly, the same situation is mirrored by the present relationship between Communist China and North Korea today. North Korea government would not survive without the watchful eye of the Chinese protecting it.
That was not what you were talking about. You stated that China never helped Korea which turned out to be false. China did not control Korea. What the Japanese did was pry Korea away from its favorable relations with China by weakening the Qing dynasty so that it could no longer help Korea. Which lead to eventual annexation. If it was about controlling Korea from Chinese country, then the Japanese would have officially annexed Korea right after the Sino-Japanese war rather than many years later. If that were the case the Korean-Empire would have never formed.
A vassal state is different from a slave colony. A vassal state in east asian/Chinese terminology was a mutual relationship of respect, trade and relations. A colony on the other hand exists solely for one country to exploit and control the other.
Due to the first Sino-Japanese war, the Chinese lost power on the peninsula. The Japanese came in to fill the vacuum. Being independent means you have control over your own political, social, and economic affairs. How could Korea be independent when the Koreans did nothing to stop the Japanese and Chinese from fighting for control?
Ughhh you have no idea what youre talking about. China did not control Korea. If it did, then Korea the nation wouldnt exist. And its language, culture and customs would have dissapeared centuries ago. What you are stating is similar to what would have happened if the Soviets invaded the US, defeated them and then took control of the South. That because the US was on friendly terms with the South and was willingly to help defend them, that the South was a colony of the US. Absolutely ridiculous.
China helping Korea(whom both countries had favorable relations with one another) does not denote a slave relation. Much like how the US helping another country does not denote a slave relationship. Seriously, do you enjoy twisting historical fact with biased interpretations?
Oh! Korea did. The Korean King sent a letter to the American President begging for his help because the Chinese would not “protect” him.
How could Korea protect itself against a Japan who was fully modernized and had a good 40-50 year head start in industrialization. Spears cannot bean guns genius. Please make some sense.
Instead of trying to glorify the so-called past,
I did no such thing.
why not look seriously into the causes of why Korea fell under the control of both the Qing and the Japanese.
Because Japan modernized earlier. Your logic is pitiful. Youre basically stating that its Koreas fault that it was invaded by a fully industrialized nation and couldnt stop them.
Instead of blaming the Chinese, Japanese or Americans
A. I did not blame China once in this topic.
B. I did not blame American once in this topic.
C. I think its right to say that Japan is to blame for colonial period. You know because THEY ACTUALLY WERE RESPONSIBLE.
D. You have a victim complex.
E. Youre the one twisting arguments and acting as if Im blaming China and America which ive yet to do.
for everything going bad from 1985 – 1910, I suggest Koreans look at themselves for the reasons why they allowed both the Chinese and Japanese fight over Korean land.
Because we all know that Africans are to blame for slavery. That the jews are to blame for the holocaust. And the native americans are to blame for their genocide. .
Since gbevers has ignored me entirely, im going to go on to #51
I think that it is worthy of note here that this thread–originally about
the lack of open, rational, and logical historical discourse in Korea and among its “educators”–has taken just such a turn. CMC, I’m aiming this at you again.
You are dead wrong. Gbevers stating that the overwhelming majority of Koreans enjoyed and loved Japanese occupation. And that Koreans had to be brainwashed by Rhee Syng Man in order to hate the Japanese does not equate to being open minded. It equates to being completely ignorant of history.
I am all for open mindedness and rational debates. But when someone makes such ridiculous comments as- (”Koreans enjoyed being slaves to the Japanese”). Thats when civility is thrown out the window. I suggest you take a good look at yourself and see what youre defending. Its clear cut in stone that Koreans did not like the Japanese after the colonial period.
Please take the time to read, think about, and really consider what is being said here. You’ve been at your computer all morning, hot to trot and ready to fire away at any individual who points out the not-so-negative aspects of Japanese Colonial rule. It is obvious that you feel very strong emotional ties to this issue; but I wonder to what extent you are allowing this passion to cloud your reason, judgement, and perceptiveness. You have raised some good (though not wholly unheard-of) points here, but you seem not to be able (or willing) to process any of other strong points others have made here. If you are ethnically Korean, we feel for the pain of your people; if you are of a different ethnicity, we feel for you feeling the pain of the Korean people 60-100 years ago. I would like to think that you sir are an intelligent individual with a genuine interest in history, and who therefore understands the strong need for a multiplicity of views on such distant subjects.
Fair enough, but before I comment any further. Mind telling me exactly what rational and supported arguments gbevers has made so far? I called out his ridiculous and historically innaccurate comments on Koreans enjoying Japans rape of their country. As well as his claim that Koreans had to be brainwashed to hate the Japanese. I am very open minded, but its next to impossible to be open minded when youre arguing with someone like Gbevers. His arrogance lies in the fact that he believes his own make believe views and theories of Korea trump the views of countless Koreans who actually lived during those times. Hes stating that hes right and that the people who endured colonial times are somehow wrong.
I wasn’t there, you weren’t there, Bob wasn’t there; but we all have a great deal of intellectual experience in the matter and definitely could help each other as we strive for a clearer picture of this long-gone historical period. This is the main point of intellectual discourse: to strive for clarity
by taking into account a variety of factors. This is what this thread originally sought to discuss and consider in regard to a very obvious lack of open-ness and honesty in Korean historical research and education.
You sugar coat and defend bevers arguments but its clear to the naked eye that gbevers has no idea what hes talking about. Do you agree with his arguments? Do you believe that Koreans as a whole enjoyed being slaves? Or their country being raped and taken over by a foreign power? Or that the Koreans just loved the Japanese right after the war? Theres a difference between being open minded and correcting someones grossly innaccurate view of history.
(Case in point: the non-Korean visiting professor last summer who mentioned that Kim Gu employed terrorist tactics in his classroom. Why is it that all of Korea knows about this man’s statement, spoken in what should have been the (relative)privacy of his classroom? Absolutely insane. How can intellectual discourse and development occur in such an incredibly stifled environment? Voices must be heard, all voices.) I apologize for my directness friend, but you really need to 86 the anger in your responses in this issue; such unbridled emotion has no place in rational and logical intellectual discussion. Further, you may want to refrain from the overt insults you enjoy throwing at people who do not feel the same way you do in this matter of the Occupation. From what I’ve seen, you are just another misguided individual throwing rocks in the name of
education.
I am not angry. I am frustrated. Frustrated by the the arrogance and innaccurate views of history by some individuals. Being open minded is one thing. Why do they have to lie or make stuff up on the spot without providing evidence?
#54
Korea put itself in a precarious situation by not chaning for 600 years. And the Korean military, and all Korean men in general, continue to get serviced regularly in red-light district concentrated in transfer point and camp areas of South Korean troops.
Oh, so its Koreas fault that a nation with a fully modernized army and weapons invaded them. Yeah, that makes sense. Its Africas fault that they didnt invent spaceships and plasma cannons to fend off the Europeons. Its the Native Americans fault that they didnt genetically engineer super soldiers to defeat the colonists. And its Koreas fault that Japan began modernizing in the 1850s while Korea did so in the 1890s. Yeah its entirely Koreas fault. Japan is not responsible one bit for bringing its armies and ships to Korea and telling them to hand over their country with threat and coercion. Its entirely Koreas fault.
Much like how its every rape victims fault that she put herself in such a situation. Id hate to be you.
I am not wrong. The types of Korean used before and after 1945 are not the same. It was written differently, and children born today cannot read it anymore.
The English used during the Civil war is different from the English used today. Your point? It still doesnt change the fact that Hangul was being used, rather than Chinese characters only as you claim. Quit arguing otherwise.
The only thing funnier than a Korean standing up for “food safety” is a Korean standing up for “environmentalism.”
So you cannot support your arguments so you resort to childish antics like this? Whatever Korea does with their resources is their own buisness. That being said, Koreas food safety and environmentalism is still lightyears ahead of Chinas-the country of your dear leader Mao.
You dont even make sense. Its ok to rob someone in broad daylight because they are not spending their money properly? How old are you?
Why pass? You just throw the word out there like it’s going to instantly cause a conflation of nationalism and I’m asking you why you think the name of an island is inflammatory. Why so hostile?
Pass because you know nothing about Dokdo and because gbevers throws a fit everytime Dokdo is mentioned. Oops now hes heard me lol.
Activists? You mean assassins.
Japanese assassins. A few years ago the descendents of said japanese assassins even apologized and fully acknowledge their part. Got anything left to say? Cause assassinating the head of state of another country simply to later invade said country is indefensible.
Because it was a foreign country? Don’t you types also like to go on about how Korea actually started Japanese culture? Doesn’t that kind of make you the same as them?
You dont even make any sense. Korea and Japan are two entirely different countries. Your arguments are so lacking that you again and again resort to childish antics.
Why is that funny? The Korean police are pretty good at torturing people to death during interrogation right now, today, in 2008. It is however funny to watch them sleep in their police cars at intersections.
Youre comparing todays democratic and free Korean police to the brutal, ruthless, uncaring, fascist and authoritarian imperial Japanese secret police of nearly a century ago? Very smart. Very very smart. Youre hurting yourself more and more with each word.
Perhaps. It served in the interest of a few Koreans, the Jeonju Yi family.
Or the motives of the Japanese.
Why not? Because it offends the “national pride?” Do you know what objectivity is?
No, because you might say something foolish. Oh wait, too late.
No-one knows how many protestors there were; not you, not me, not the Koreans, not the Japanese. At the end of the day, any estimate that is given is going to be “sloppy”, as you put it.
What’s interesting, however, is that where I revised down to an estimate much closer to the lowest than the highest figure available, for the purposes of the argument, you’ve stubbornly refused to budge an inch from the one that suits your position best. Tells me alot about your bias.
I find it funny too, because it clearly shows you how low an estimate it is, when it’s in line with the Japanese figure. The irony is delicious, that I’ve extended the olive branch so far I’ve actually stumbled into your camp, and you’re still crying foul. And don’t tell me the Japanese were objective. Here’s a good post at popular gusts showing exactly how desperate the occupiers were to downplay the seriousness of the protests (as well as the worst aspects of their forced rule):
http://populargusts.blogspot.c.....ns-of.html
(Go ahead and read it all. I particularly liked this quote from Francis Schofield, a Canadian doctor and missionary, who witnessed first hand the horrors of Seodaemun prison and saw Japanese troops burning down Korean villages.)
Since its occupation of Korea, Japan has been saying that materially it has done much for Korea, but I want to raise a question, Has it been solely for Koreans? The duty of the government is to make the majority of its people happy. Only then, the government can be said to be doing the right thing. The duty of a government is not just to provide the people with material comforts, education, and strength, but to make them happy and secure as well.
The Japanese government must realise that the reason as to why Korean people have risen against it with what must seem like foolish courage. The Japanese government must do deep soul searching and recognize that what the Korean people want is not material things but real freedom.
Touche.
But I thought Koreans weren’t to be trusted? Or are they only to be trusted when they support your position?
Here’s a picture of two women were were tied up and sent to prison (fate unknown?) for saying “Manse!” The jury’s still out on whether they said it once or thrice. What a hoot those protests must have been! Thrill a minute!
http://bp0.blogger.com/_lxap4y.....prison.jpg
More pics here. Some nice ones of people getting tortured and executed as well:
http://populargusts.blogspot.c.....-1919.html
“Oh, so its Koreas fault that a nation with a fully modernized army and weapons invaded them. ”
-Like Koreans respect Africans.
“Much like how its every rape victims fault that she put herself in such a situation.”
-In Korea, it often is.
“The English used during the Civil war is different from the English used today. ”
-I do not for one second believe anyone who tries to convince me that the same university students that I watch drool on themselves in English class every day are actually fluent in Korean AND Chinese.
“Whatever Korea does with their resources is their own buisness. ”
Actually, that isn’t entirely true. You are certainly breathing a lot of yellow dust from China. Korean newspapers refer to it as Chinese “Terrorism.” Should they just tell you to mind your own business?
“That being said, Koreas food safety and environmentalism is still lightyears ahead of Chinas-the country of your dear leader Mao.”
Now that Korea is dependent upon China for most of its food, it doesn’t matter how safe the food produced in Korea is. You eat food from China every day.
“you know nothing about Dokdo ”
I know nothing about Dokdo? I reckon I’ve been closer to it than you have. In fact, I saw it on the horizon on a sunny day from the top of Song In Bong. Just sitting there. It didn’t make me angry at anyone.
“A few years ago the descendents of said japanese assassins even apologized and fully acknowledge their part.”
Well, seeing as we’re dealing with totally unsourced anecdotes again, tell me more. I can’t find anything about that on wiki. Anyway, I was referring to the bomb-throwers and the pistol wavers. Sort of the Asian Gavrilo Princips. Except, um, Korea never went to war with anyone.
“Korea and Japan are two entirely different countries.”
-Um, that’s not how it looks to me. You guys are like separated conjoined twins.
“todays democratic and free Korean police”
Really. Whose interests do they serve? They don’t do much to protect the average Korean on their way to work in the morning.
“Or the motives of the Japanese.”
Or the motives of the Stay Puft Marshmallow man. I actually met one of the pretenders to the Korean throne, if he had his way the whole country would still be under martial law. I think you got off lightly.
I can no longer see the Lee, In-ho video. I guess the S. Korean Democrats forced RASKB to do away with it?
No “tbonetylr”, the video is up at:
http://www.raskb.korea.com/ras.....an-History
You must log in to post a comment.