Taiwan and South Korea, which have experienced Japanese rule, will continue in parallel forever.
2022-01-16
Category:South Korea I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
If there are two pasts, there are two future
Parallel worlds are hypotheses in science fiction and quantum mechanics, not proven stories.However, if you look at the difference between Taiwan and Korea, it looks like a parallel world.At some point in the parallel world, two pasts are born.The branches do not intersect, but are positively parallel worlds that will last forever.
Taiwan was incorporated into Japan after the Sino-Japanese War and came under Japanese rule.It lasted ５０ years from １８９５ to １９４５, longer than the Korean Peninsula.The annexation of Japan and South Korea lasted from １９１０ to １９４５.Taiwan continues to thank Japan for its development under Japanese rule, saying, "Taiwan's national character and independence have been learned from Japan."In the wake of the Great East Japan Earthquake, it was also the world's largest donor country.
A very different historical perception of countries that have experienced Japanese rule
It is said that South Korea was trampled down by Japan, Japanese comfort woman was used as sexual slavery, and recruiters were like slaves, and most of the Koreans were slaughtered by Japan.There are two worlds, the past.In this sense, Taiwan, the world's leading pro-Japanese country, and Korea, the world's leading anti-Japanese country, have emerged.The parallel world is now underway in East Asia.Of course, Japan is in the same space-time as Taiwan.Does this mean that space and time do not intersect?
POINT Korea criticizes Japan for not learning history, but many countries in Asia appreciate Japanese rule.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Yun Seok - yue's manifesto aims to attract and circulate capital through a free economy.Will the National Assembly become a burden that hinders this?
South Korea is wavering between pro-China and pro-US
Original regime change through social policy
A country that thinks about what is better
Yin Seok-yue promotes free economy
Promoting free competition within the country and moving towards CPTPP
Legal development by the Diet is hopeless
Is South Korea wondering whether it should join China, which has achieved growth in recent years, or join the camp of free nations such as Japan, the United States, and Europe? I guess it's a question of which is better, but it seems like a very polarizing choice.
The Moon Jae-in administration completely abandoned its pride as a democratic country without hesitation and spent five years desperately trying to join China and North Korea, a country that violates human rights at its worst, but unfortunately there was no result. Ta.
The new president, Yun Seok-Yeol, has the exact opposite policy, aiming for Korea to be a member of the Japan-U.S. and liberal camp. This seems to be the composition of the right-wing and left-wing forces in South Korea.
The left tends to seek the enhancement of social institutions, while the right tends to seek free competition and liberal democracy. This is a question of the balance between social welfare and liberal economics, and a debate about competition versus distribution. This is an issue to be debated within a democratic country, and can be said to be a universal frame.
America's two-party system is very easy to understand. Republicans and Democrats can be broadly divided on the question of whether taxes should be primarily used for public welfare, or whether they should reduce taxes in the first place and increase competitiveness in a free economy. It is also expressed in the framework of big government and small government.
The choice of domestic social policy is not a question of which country will benefit you by following, but rather a matter of foreign policy. Prior to Japan's annexation of South Korea, there was intense conflict between pro-Russian and pro-Japanese factions on the Korean peninsula. Is nothing different from that era? Another characteristic of South Korea is that its foreign policy is also its domestic policy.
Looking at Yun Seok-Yue's manifesto from the perspective of economic policy, his economic policy is to bring back the capital that fled South Korea under the Moon Jae-in administration.
In particular, the focus is not on where to focus investment and foster industry, but rather the policy appears to be aimed at attracting investors by abolishing regulations and promoting a free economy and free competition.
It appears that the plan is to aim to join the CPTPP and other liberal nation frameworks based on this liberal economic frame, but in order to realize this, it will be necessary to obstruct the various free competitions that exist within Korea. Legislation must be put in place to abolish the regulations that apply.
This is the job of the National Diet, the legislative branch, but the opposition Democratic Party of Japan still holds nearly 60% of the seats. In other words, there are many hurdles for the time being in the economic policy advocated by Yun Seok-Yeol and cooperation with liberal countries. In other words, we will have to wait for the 2024 general election.
Candidate Lee Jae - myung said that America was to blame for the division of the Korean peninsula - a victim mentality lacking in historical understanding.
What is this person saying? South Korean presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung told U.S. Senator Jon Ossoff that the Korean peninsula was divided without Japan being divided. It is America's fault that the Korean peninsula was divided into north and south. On top of that, it's a statement that says Japan should have been divided.
Losing a war does not always result in division. The former East and West Germany was divided into East and West by the socialist Soviet Union and liberal countries. Since the Soviet Union was largely responsible for Germany's defeat, the Soviet Union gained control of Eastern Europe, and Germany itself was divided into East and West. In multilateral wars, when the victorious nations were unable to come to terms on their merits and interests, the method of partition was adopted. Germany is a perfect example.
So what about Japan? Although it is still a multilateral war, Japan has won against all Western countries except the United States. Only America lost. The Soviet Union had nothing to do with the Japan-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact. The Soviet Union entered the war on August 9, 1945, just before the end of the war. How could the Soviet Union claim its interests against the United States?
So why did the Soviet Union claim interests in the Korean Peninsula? This is said to have been determined by the Yalta Secret Treaty, which determined the division along the 38th parallel. The question is at what point in time should a return to the status quo be made, based on the principle of restoration to its original state in post-war settlements. At the Yalta Conference, Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin discussed how to deal with the aftermath of World War II.
The fact that the San Francisco Peace Treaty recognized the return of Taiwan dates back to the Sino-Japanese War. On the Korean Peninsula, Gojong, the Emperor of the Korean Empire, negotiated with Russia to sell the interests of the Korean Peninsula. The Soviet Union built the transcontinental railroad and began colonizing East Asia. The theory is that if Japan had not interfered in the Russo-Japanese War, the Korean Peninsula would have belonged to the Soviet Union. In other words, they are claiming rights dating back to before the Russo-Japanese War.
Why is present-day South Korea a democratic country? This is based on the premise that the Korean Peninsula belonged to Japan, and it was the United States that forced Japan into defeat, so the United States claimed its rights. Therefore, Korea came under the control of GHQ. Based on this premise, the 38th parallel was established as a compromise line with the Soviet Union, dividing the country into north and south.
The preamble of the Constitution lies at the root of South Korea's anti - Japanese sentiment.The reason for affirming anti - Japanese sentiment and excluding pro - Japanese sentiments is found in the
The preamble of the Korean Constitution states that 3.1 the legal system of the provisional government of the Republic of Korea will be inherited. Then, what is the March 1 Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea? It is an organization that called itself the Provisional Government and was established in 1919 as an anti-Japanese force. Looking at the contents of the charter, we see that the oath is strongly anti-Japanese: ``We will fight to the last man to indoctrinate Japan from barbarism.''
The preamble of the constitution describes the principles that govern the entire constitution. The structure of this idea is to inherit the legal structure of the March 1 Charter of the Provisional Government of the Republic of Korea. If we interpret these without contradiction, Article 21 of the latter part of the Korean Constitution states freedom of speech and Article 22 states academic freedom, but if we read it based on the preamble of the Constitution, we can see that 3.1 Legal framework of the provisional government It can also be interpreted as allowing freedom of speech and academics on the premise of inheriting the law. This is actually the case in Korea today.
If you look at the oath of the provisional government quoted in the preamble of the constitution, it clearly states anti-Japanese ideology. In the first place, the constitution should not quote anything or include language that assumes other countries.
In any case, as long as South Korea is under this constitution, anti-Japanese activities are always legitimate, and on the contrary, pro-Japanese activities are criticized as acts that destroy the legal system of the March 1 Provisional Government Charter and the Constitution. If members of the Diet follow the principle of adhering to the Constitution, then anti-Japanese members are conducting legitimate parliamentary activities. This is the main reason why it is said that #anti-Japan is South Korea's national policy.
How can the preamble of the Constitution be consistent with fundamental human rights such as freedom of speech, thought and belief, and academic freedom? There appears to be no case where a legal interpretation has been obtained in the Constitutional Court through a lawsuit or controversy that has raised this point. The Korean government is free to expand its interpretation as much as it wants. This is the case now, as seen in the No Japan movement, where anti-Japanese activities are legitimate activities, and pro-Japanese speech is denounced as ``traitors.'' Is this an exception to basic human rights, with speech affirming the era of Japanese rule being suppressed, or is anti-Japanese a duty of every Korean citizen as written in the Provisional Government's oath?
Provisional Government OathOathTo my 2,000,000 fellow citizens whom I respect and loveMarch 1st year of the Republic of Korea One day, since the Korean nation declared its independence, men and women, young and old, all classes, and all sects, of course, have come together to fight under the inhumane violence of Japan, the Germany of the East. The sympathy of the world is now suddenly focused on our people because they have expressed the character of a nation that is extremely patient with fairness, longs for independence and freedom for its people, and loves truth, justice, and humanity. It was at this time that the government was organized with the mandate of all the people of the country. I hereby swear that this government, together with all the people of this country, will work wholeheartedly to fulfill the great mission of restoring the nation and establishing its identity as a nation, observing the provisions of the provisional constitution and the principles of international society. My fellow countrymen, be inspired. Every drop of blood we shed is the gift of freedom and fortune to our descendants. It is the precious foundation for building God's kingdom. The way of our people will surely edify Japan's wild horses. Our justice truly trumps Japan's violence. My brethren, rise and battleto the last man.
3.1 The provisional government was the result of an anti-Japanese movement that occurred on March 1, 1919 under Japanese rule, and after that, Syngman Rhee established a provisional government in Shanghai, where he was in exile. This provisional government is considered the legitimate root of the Korean government, and Syngman Rhee became the first president of Korea after Japan's defeat. In other words, the Korean government itself is based on anti-Japanese organizations. Therefore, the Constitution will inherit the legal system of the Provisional Government Charter.
It is no wonder why this story has not been reported in Japan, but it seems safe to assume that there are almost no members of the Korean Diet who are not anti-Japanese. On the contrary, he says that it is impossible to become a member of the Diet while advocating pro-Japan policy. Rather than saying, ``Many South Korean parliamentarians are anti-Japanese,'' it seems more accurate to say, ``South Korean parliamentarians exist because they are anti-Japanese.'' South Korea will never become a pro-Japanese country. That future will never come. Will the South Korean government or National Assembly propose a constitutional amendment and delete the text written in the preamble? If that happens, the roots and identity of the Korean government will disappear.
Anti-Japanese activities are legitimate activities that are affirmed by the Korean Constitution. Depending on the interpretation, it can also be considered to be outside the scope of freedom of speech. We need to think about South Korea with this in mind.
The ''North-South division issue'' and the future aimed at by Kim Gu - Lee Jae-myung's assertion is an unrealizable hypothesis.
South Korean Democratic Party members Moon Jae-in and Lee Jae-myung cite Kim Gu as the politician they most respect. Kim Gu was a person who served as the president of the provisional government of the Republic of Korea. He rejected the postwar state of US-Soviet trust between North and South Korea and proposed a plan to unify the peninsula among the Korean people, but this idea was rejected by Kim Il-sung of North Korea. It was an unrealizable idea that would be denied by the United States as well. After a political dispute, Syngman Rhee, who was recommended by the United States, became president, and Kim Gu was subsequently assassinated.
Lee Jae-myung recently told a US senator that the North and South were divided because of the US. I guess he is trying to say that if he had done what Kim Gu said at that time, there would have been no Korean War or division between North and South. However, there is absolutely no basis for this "if". At that time, there were no people in Japan or abroad who supported this idea.
Kim Gu's ideas did not produce any results in the environment of the time. Based on this premise, there are no objective facts in history; all that exists is the existence of South Korea and North Korea since the founding of the nation more than 70 years ago. North Korea established the current state of North Korea without paying any attention to Kim Gu's claims.
In other words, it is logically impossible to trace back to Kim Gu's assertion what the basis for the unification of North and South is advocated by the No. 1 and No. 2 members of the Democratic Party of Japan. They are the most pro-North Korean and pro-China faction in the South Korean National Assembly. Even now, that claim is not appreciated at all by North Korea, the United States, or even China.
