Korea claims that the Korean Peninsula has been modernized even without the Japanese rule: Korea does not know the prerequisites for modernization
2023-10-23
Category:South Korea
Photo by Unknown (licensed under CC0 1.0 )
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Koreans say they developed without Japanese rule.
There was a YouTube video by a pro-Japanese Korean who showed South Korean youth photos of the country before and after the Japanese occupation, showing the state of development at that time. The performers were all surprised and said it was the first time they had seen it, and they were also surprised to hear that the population had doubled and lifespans had doubled.
However, they all said that although it is clear that the country developed during the Japanese colonial era, it is still true that Japan invaded. He was unable to explain the counterargument that the Korean Peninsula would have developed even without Japan.
Everything is in one picture.
The photo of a unicycle ridden by yangban (Korean aristocrats) is interestingly introduced as a photo of the time before development, but as I have posted in the past, this one photo explains everything about this answer. . At that time, there was no technology to make wheels on the Korean Peninsula. And four slaves are supporting a unicycle.
Gear required for industrial machine.
Modernization was triggered by the Industrial Revolution, and the Industrial Revolution was a revolution in power, and the steam engine was a mechanism and machine that transferred large amounts of energy to gears and converted it into another repetitive motion. If you can't make wheels, it's impossible to make any industrial machinery. However, this is a technical matter, and even if one were able to learn how to make one and create one, it would be impossible to modernize it.
the working class that underpins modern society.
A necessary condition for the industrial revolution is that a mobile labor force, the proletariat, must exist in society. Production becomes possible only when the labor force is replenished in industries that can develop. In the society of the time, where slaves were slaves to the yangban, this would have been impossible. These are things that always come up when explaining the industrial revolution.
The Korean Peninsula does not know the premise of modernization.
The Meiji Restoration abolished the shogunate system and liberated citizens from the land, creating a mobile labor force. It was Kim Ok-gyun who tried to achieve these goals on the Korean peninsula, but the Gashin Coup failed and Kim Ok-gyun defected to Japan, but was assassinated in Shanghai. Unless the class system can be abolished from within the Korean peninsula, modernization will never be possible.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Representative Yuko Obuchi appeared at the Japan - Korea summit meeting *A wedge telling South Korea not to forget what she said. A meeting and dinner was held between Prime Minister Kishida and President Yun Seok-Yeol, and a press conference was held without a joint statement.
What has been decided is the resumption of shuttle diplomacy and the lifting of restrictions on three strategic items. In reality, the matter falls under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, but the actual content is that the leaders met together to confirm the matter.
Regarding the lifting of restrictions on strategic substances, in reality there will be no major changes in distribution from Japan, and the 2019 restrictions will not reduce or stop exports, so nothing will actually change.
In particular, President Yun Seok-Yeol raised the issue of North Korea and showed South Korea's cooperative attitude toward Japan, but this has only confirmed that this is back on track. This is natural since the North Korea issue is being dealt with through the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty and the U.S.-South Korea Security Treaty.
At the very least, future shuttle diplomacy should ask what South Korea can do for Japan, rather than the diplomatic relations that have been the case in the past, where Japan did something unilaterally.
That's what makes for healthy diplomatic relations. I can't think of anything specific that South Korea has done for Japan. No one is looking for diplomatic relations that involve chatting at the table and asking for wads of money under the table.
The next day, the Japanese media focused on the meeting between Suga, president-elect of the Japan-Korea Parliamentary Federation, and President Yun Seok-yeoul, but what I wanted to draw attention to was the woman in the very edge of the photo.
She is Yuko Obuchi, a lawmaker, and the daughter of former Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi. The reason I wondered why she was in this seat was because I remember her not holding any government-related positions.
What really struck me was the 1998 Japan-Korea Joint Declaration. President Yun Seok-Yeol insists that Japan-Korea relations should return to the Japan-Korea Joint Declaration, but the question is how to return. And Japan complies with all of the Japan-Korea Joint Declaration. Returning would be a problem only for the Korean side.
The points of the 1998 Japan-Korea Joint Declaration are as follows.
Japan-Korea Joint DeclarationHolding of the 2002 FIFA World Cup
Promoting Japan-Korea economic cooperation
Opening of Japanese culture in Korea
Fisheries agreement around Takeshima in accordance with the new United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
Response to North Korea issue
The holding of the Japan-Korea World Cup and the influx of Korean Wave content all stemmed from this joint declaration.
The Japan-Korea Joint Declaration was signed by President Kim Dae-jung, but the Japan-Korea World Cup was said to be the worst tournament in FIFA history, and it became unclear whether it was an anti-Japan movement or a soccer tournament.
Less than two years later, the South Korean National Assembly passed a resolution to invalidate this joint declaration. Japanese people must not forget that the area around Takeshima was subsequently filled with Korean fishing boats again, resulting in the current state of Takeshima.
The Japanese representative who concluded this agreement was former Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi. South Korea has completely torn up not only the 1965 Agreement, but also the 1988 Agreement.
Was Representative Yuko Obuchi invited to this meeting as a symbolic icon? In other words, this seems to have driven a wedge that returning to the Japan-South Korea Joint Declaration is the goal of the talks. It's about not forgetting what I said. Does the Korean side actually understand the meaning of this? I don't think they understand.
In conclusion, returning to the Japan-Korea Joint Declaration would be a very high hurdle. This joint declaration was scrapped because of the Takeshima issue. Perhaps the Korean side only understands this declaration as a resumption of cultural exchange.
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.
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.
Tokyo Olympic Summit With the possibility that Suga's general election will be held in September, is Moon Jae In trying to shake up the situation by citing summit talks and participation in the Olympics?To put it bluntly, holding a summit between Japan and South Korea will only have disadvantages for Prime Minister Kan.Shigeru Ishiba, who has been considered a candidate for the next prime minister in last year's general election, was criticized by the people as a result of his appeal for reconciliation with China and South Korea.Prime Minister Suga probably does not want to get involved before the general election.
What are your expectations for President Yun Seok-yue? Twisted National Assembly is a thorny road - Should Japan approve or wait and see? - South Korea's general election will be held in 2024.
Positive theory of Japan-Korea relations and wait-and-see theory
Remains twisted until 2024
Will true speech be freed under the new administration
Korean society will be denounced if it affirms Japanese rule
A country where there is no freedom of speech about history
Looking at Japanese public opinion regarding the prospects for Japan-Korea relations since the inauguration of the Yun Seok-Yeol administration, there are some positive views toward improving relations and a wait-and-see view seen mainly on the right. As always, the affirmative opinion has no concrete content, and since the other party is asking for an improvement in the relationship, things will probably get better. It's just a matter of trying to get along because we're neighboring countries.
The wait-and-see theory is based on the points of the Korean unified local elections in June and the national election in 2024, and that the Democratic Party (a pro-China, anti-Japanese party) holds the majority of the Korean National Assembly.Twisted stateTherefore, unless the ruling party wins the power of the people in the 2024 general election, no bill will be passed, so nothing can be done. Until then, Japan should do nothing and wait and see.
The least I can say is that I don't expect Japan-Korea relations to deteriorate any further during the next five years of the next administration. Personally, I think that if things don't get any worse, there's no need for them to get any better. In other words, there is a necessary distance between Japan and South Korea. This may be the best distance relationship.
In the long run, it would be most effective if the speech of pro-Japanese groups was liberated, rather than if the anti-Japanese movement subsided on the surface. In addition to those who prefer Japanese culture in South Korea, pro-Japanese speech is another form of speech that has been suppressed regarding the annexation of Japan and South Korea and Japan's support for South Korea after the war. Japan has no choice but to wait for South Korea to change, but there is no sign of that happening at all. The appearance of calm on the surface is only a temporary phenomenon. The root of Japan-Korea relations lies within South Korea, where freedom of speech is not recognized regarding the past history of Japan and South Korea. It is impossible to publicly state the fact that the Korean Peninsula modernized under Japanese rule.
Under Japanese rule, slaves, who accounted for half of the population, were liberated, the class system was abolished, a school education system was established, food self-sufficiency increased, starvation deaths decreased sharply, sanitary conditions improved, and cholera and typhoid fever were reduced. The number of deaths due to such things has decreased dramatically. These are facts that do not exist in Korea.
In South Korea's historical perspective, those who affirmed Japanese rule were expelled from academia in order to make the history of being enslaved and violated by Japan into a fact. He was also expelled from politics and government, and media outlets were also blocked. This is an unobjective view of history that only accepts one opinion, and is not academic in the first place. At the root of Japan-Korea relations is this unilaterally created view of history and the education of history based on that view. Unless this changes, we can see that even if the government continues to work together as it has done in the past, it will crumble like a sandcastle. This is exactly what history has proven.
In other words, improving Japan-Korea relations means that South Korea itself will gain academic and speech freedom, that scholars who support Japanese rule will return to academia, that they will return to politics, and that South Korea will become a democratic country where people can have free discussions. . Without this, anti-Japanese education will never disappear. This is an issue that requires the process of South Korea maturing as a democratic country, so it will take a very long time. Therefore, Japan should continue to keep its distance and not approach them easily.
If we look at the past, we are skeptical that politics will improve Japan-Korea relations. This problem is that academic and freedom of speech have not been secured in South Korea in the history of Japan and South Korea.
