4 ms·
Was the Japanese occupation of Korea really justified in racial terms? I'm skeptical of parts of this article when it refers to Japanese imperial ideology as "
by mariojv 11y ago
Was the Japanese occupation of Korea really justified in racial terms?
I'm skeptical of parts of this article when it refers to Japanese imperial ideology as "fascism." It was most certainly extremely right-wing, but I think extreme nationalism + imperialism are more accurate descriptions, especially since Japan didn't join the Axis until decades after Korea was annexed.
I thought the motivation for the colonization of Korea was more resource scarcity in Japan and a desire to compete with Western powers through empire building. To justify their actions I think Korean society was portrayed as "less civilized" which is more a statement about cultural and political norms than race, although those portrayals can probably slip into a racist ideology pretty quickly.
It seems like the "official" policy was different, at least: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_Equality_Proposal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_Equality_Proposal
I'm not trying to portray devil's advocate at all, just actually asking whether what the article portrays is accurate. I think the early 20th century actions of imperial Japan were abhorrent, but it's important to at least try to understand the ideology of the time as it was discussed and understood.
- hitekker 11y agoI can't speak to all your points: but yes, the Japanese were racist against the Koreans. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Investigation_of_Global_Policy_with_the_Yamato_Race_as_Nucleus https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Investigation_of_Global_Pol... >A a family has harmony and reciprocity, but with a clear-cut hierarchy, the Japanese, as a purportedly racially superior people, were destined to rule Asia "eternally" as the head of the family of Asian nations. And also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_East_Asia_Co-Prosperity_Sphere https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_East_Asia_Co-Prosperit... >It explicitly states the superiority of the Japanese over other Asian races and provides evidence that the Sphere was inherently hierarchical, including the Japanese Empire's true intention of domination over the Asian continent and Pacific Ocean. > The militarists saw everything only in a Japanese perspective and, even worse, they insisted that all others dealing with them should do the same. For them there was only one way to do a thing, the Japanese way; only one goal and interest, the Japanese interest; only one destiny for the East Asian countries, to become so many Manchukuos or Koreas tied forever to Japan. These racial impositions... made any real understanding between the Japanese militarists and the people of our region virtually impossible. Interestingly, even Japanese propaganda asserting racial harmony itself was tinged with racism. Compare this picture of an imaginary pro-japanese chinese demonstration, http://chineseposters.net/gallery/e27-165.php http://chineseposters.net/gallery/e27-165.php with another picture of japanese soldiers rescuing the chinese: http://chineseposters.net/gallery/e27-166.php http://chineseposters.net/gallery/e27-166.php The faces of the Chinese are ugly; nowhere near as refined or as elegant as that of the depicted Japanese in the second. One could argue this is style, but in a work that's intended to be seen by huge volumes of people, this particular detail is one of many that points to overwhelming racism. Edit: made a content edit upon further research.
- emiliobumachar 11y agoGreat quotes, but, regarding the last point, I actually think the Chinese in the front, with more detail, look better than the pale Japanese in the other poster.
- mariojv 11y agoThank you for the information. I hadn't seen the article about the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity sphere. Quite informative.
- hitekker 11y agoThank you for reading. One of the unique things about the Hacker News that I like is that the introduction of new information doesn't always spawn resentment.
- heja2009 11y agoJapan after ~1900 very much flip-flopped in their policy between playing the anti-imperialist liberator of Asia and its first colonial power and equal to western colonial powers for some time. Of course there was a political power struggle within Japan about this direction. Defining moment was the victory in the Russo-Japanese war of 1905, which was the first victory of a "3rd world" country against a traditional colonial power. Likewise they partially treated Koreans as lost brothers that needed to be elevated and integrated into their empire and an inferior race that was to be exploited colonial style. Note that even the "integration" strategy showed some similarity to what the Nazis later (after 1938) did with their "Heim ins Reich" strategy (which included "reintegration" of ethnic Germans on foreign soil by territorial annexation). In practical terms both policies were put into measures sometimes simultaneously, but the colonialism supporters grew stronger over time. The famous "Greater Asian Welfare Sphere" rhetoric was a perverted remains of the "liberator"-style agenda. (I read a history book on the topic many years ago, but unfortunately can't find a reference, sorry.) Whether the Japanese empire of the time should be classified as fascist seems to be at least highly controversial among historians. I had the impression the majority see it as a nationalistic (and after the putsch 1936 also military) dictatorship.
- mariojv 11y agoI can definitely see the flip-flop, from looking at other comments here.