Under the Japanese colonial regime, Korea suffered a great deal which resulted in the reluctance of acknowledging Japan’s influence that evolved Korea into a bigger country. In addition, Korea still believes that after the inheritance of independence, Korea designed their own systems that led to the maintenance of the country we have today. On the other hand, as Kim mentioned, Korean historians fail to notice and recognize Japan’s efforts that helped Korea to become the country it has become. As Kim states, “such an acknowledgement can lead to a constructive step forward in the direction of Korean legal scholarship, shifting away from justifying and defending Korea’s tradition by using the very colonial discourse …”
Akaha, T. (2008). The nationalist discourse in contemporary japan: The role of china and korea in the last decade.Pacific Focus, 23(2), 156-188. doi:10.1111/j.1976-5118.2008.00009.x Breen, J. (2004). The dead and the living in the land of peace: A sociology of the yasukuni shrine. Mortality, 9(1), 76-93. doi:10.1080/13576270410001652550 Breen takes a different approach to the controversy by asking the question “what makes Yasukuni Shrine different from other war memorials?” She then takes the reader step by step through the various processes and rituals of spirit and shrine rituals, honoring the dead, and remembering the past.
This essay will analyze Japan 's rise and influence as a superpower that put it in opposition to the United States. To understand why this rivalry occurred, I will examine Japan 's industrial development history, strategic intentions, and different regime types throughout its time, as well as point out how certain variables might have prevented it. The combination of all these factors shows the contentious nature of the inevitability of conflict between both states, and if stopping this course from proceeding was possible in any way. The factors that shaped Japan 's actions contain various instances that suggest that conflict would inevitably occur between the states directly involved in foreign relations in Asia. In fact, Japan 's pathway toward industrialization became the driving force for its pursuit of domination.
As you know, after the Declaration of Independence is released, Britain and America waging war which is called the Independence War. Then America achieved their Independence and become a country not a colony anymore after declaration their rights. However, after the Korea Declaration of Independence and 1919 Independence movement nothing happens! Although it showed everyone’s willingness, but it is not effective much for independence. Korea became a country in 1945, and cunningly after the Korea Declaration of Independence was released, Japan changed the way of management into peaceful that many Korea scholars abandon their homeland like 최린 who signed up the Korea Declaration of
For a more holistic assessment of Korea’s modernity, we also have to analyze Korea’s social and economic modernity during this period. Henceforth, this alternative viewpoint refers to the ‘modernization theory’. The ‘modernization theory’ challenges the ‘exploitation theory’ as it addresses the impacts which the Japanese occupation had on Korea, namely educational and social aspects. The ‘modernization theory’ assesses historical developments based on facts and data, as opposed from a specific nation’s viewpoint. This theory evaluates exploitation and development without a Manichean concept.
During the World War II from 1912 to 1945, Japan had an ultimate goal to be supreme in the “four corners of the world”, starting with the colonization of Asian countries. Although Japan’s dream of being ruling the world wasn’t realized, it left notable consequences on the nations that were under the colonial control of Japan. Japanese colonization of the Asian nations had a significant impact politically, socially, and economically because of the suppression and limitation of freedom to rule their own country. A typical example of the Asian nations that experienced these political, social, and economic impacts is Korea, Guam, and Taiwan. As a result, the governments of these countries had to get support from other powerful nations, developed a strong nationalism among the people, and had both positive and negative effects on the economies of the colonized countries.
Political scientists and historians have always been on the opposite sides on the subject of how a decision is made. Political Scientists claim that by knowing a few details into the major players prior preferences that all future actions can be predicted by using that Rational Actors Model. However, historians refute this theory arguing that without knowing the context or the environment of the player, one can never truly understand the decision making process. By using the events which led to the internment of Japanese Americans I hope to show that any event can fit the model in hindsight but at the time of the actual decision there could have been many options for Japanese Americans short of internment. On December 7-12, 1941 President Franklin Delano Roosevelt met with the Department of War, Secretary of War, and the Justice Department.
Many countries had bad impression about Japan and there was an anti-Japan perception occurred at that time. ( Iwabuchi 419). This means that Japan can no longer uses any kinds of hard power to persuade other countries to do what they want at that time. Therefore, Japanese government then seek to the use of soft power in order to return its dominant and its popularity not only among Asia’s countries but also among western’s countries. Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) start to participate in the development of cultural diplomacy: public diplomacy and soft power, in order to enhance the better understanding of Japan’s position to the foreign countries.
Starting from the forced opening of ports induced by the Kangwha treaty with Japan in 1876, Korea entered a period of gradual decline until, from a protectorate in 1905, it became a colony of the Japanese empire in 1910. Many consider these events as the kick-starters of modernization in the peninsula, which poses great conflicts in the historiography of the peninsula. Indeed, if modernization in itself is always looked upon with great positiveness, imputing its inception to Japan implies some sort of legitimization for said colonization, as if one might have to be grateful, when this period is universally disavowed. As might be, these developments are either considered as not worth mentioning, or negated and regarded as a parenthesis in the
He concluded that the combinatory usage of Japanese with some other European language serves to appeal to people’s emotions and not to communicate some information to the readers. However, as Haarmann’s research took place three decades ago, it might no longer fully reflect the current sociolinguistic environment and the audience’s proficiency