|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 6:50 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| The result of Japanese aggression was utter destruction. They paid, forget about it. Also we have countries like China who are on the road to starting problems of the same magnitude. It is with regret that I pronounce the fatal truth: China must die that peace may live. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rainman3277
Joined: 13 Sep 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| earthquakez wrote: |
| rainman3277 wrote: |
| To continue asking for an apology for the sins of the father seems pointless to me. Actions speak louder than words anyway. I think the biggest f-you is the visiting of the shrines of the war criminals. And lets be honest, anyone who's spent time in Japan can attest that they are a pretty skilled bunch at smiling to your face (or in this case apologizing), and giving you the bird when you turn your back. |
I don't think the Japanese see their behaviour as 'giving us the bird' when our backs are turned.
. |
Yes, that wasn't the best analogy. I guess a more accurate comparison of my point can be seen in North American aboriginal relations. Most non-natives know the history, but have no emotional connection to it, so are not inclined to do anything about it. When presented with it they will show remorse, but in private have a "Why are they making such a big deal about it? or "I didn't do it" attitude. However, if I was educated about the individuals involved in the atrosities, I sure wouldn't recognize them each year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cave Dweller
Joined: 17 Aug 2014
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My understanding of that particular issue is that Canada has paid billions upon billions for those crimes against a people and have seen no results. They have paid way more than Japan has paid out to every country they wronged.
The money to the natives is not meant to be a lifetime pension. It is for people to improve themselves. Some use it well and end up in a great position. Most squander it and then whinr for more.
| rainman3277 wrote: |
| earthquakez wrote: |
| rainman3277 wrote: |
| To continue asking for an apology for the sins of the father seems pointless to me. Actions speak louder than words anyway. I think the biggest f-you is the visiting of the shrines of the war criminals. And lets be honest, anyone who's spent time in Japan can attest that they are a pretty skilled bunch at smiling to your face (or in this case apologizing), and giving you the bird when you turn your back. |
I don't think the Japanese see their behaviour as 'giving us the bird' when our backs are turned.
. |
Yes, that wasn't the best analogy. I guess a more accurate comparison of my point can be seen in North American aboriginal relations. Most non-natives know the history, but have no emotional connection to it, so are not inclined to do anything about it. When presented with it they will show remorse, but in private have a "Why are they making such a big deal about it? or "I didn't do it" attitude. However, if I was educated about the individuals involved in the atrosities, I sure wouldn't recognize them each year. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
earthquakez
Joined: 10 Nov 2010
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2015 8:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rainman3277 wrote: |
| earthquakez wrote: |
| rainman3277 wrote: |
| To continue asking for an apology for the sins of the father seems pointless to me. Actions speak louder than words anyway. I think the biggest f-you is the visiting of the shrines of the war criminals. And lets be honest, anyone who's spent time in Japan can attest that they are a pretty skilled bunch at smiling to your face (or in this case apologizing), and giving you the bird when you turn your back. |
I don't think the Japanese see their behaviour as 'giving us the bird' when our backs are turned.
. |
Yes, that wasn't the best analogy. I guess a more accurate comparison of my point can be seen in North American aboriginal relations. Most non-natives know the history, but have no emotional connection to it, so are not inclined to do anything about it. When presented with it they will show remorse, but in private have a "Why are they making such a big deal about it? or "I didn't do it" attitude. However, if I was educated about the individuals involved in the atrosities, I sure wouldn't recognize them each year. |
I think the entire question of compensation for colonised, dispossessed and abused peoples is a thorny one. The way the post colonial western English-speaking nations have dealt with it has covered a number of angles.
White people in the UK can quite rightly argue that the citizens of Pakistan and India among others from Africa and the Caribbean have received access to live in what was Britain and now is the UK for over 40 years or so and have the benefits that come with it.
Meanwhile the white descendants of the English/Scots/Welsh who often had to leave Britain in the 18th and 19th centuries through lack of opportunities or indentured servitude for political opposition have no right to return to the land of their ancestors unless they have a grandparent born in the UK.
The '40 acres and a mule' promises by certain Northerners in the American Civil War never came to fruition. Should that compensation have been paid by ordinary people in the south including those whose homes were razed and families burned alive by General Sherman and his troops? I don't agree.
The Northern authorities could have worked out a system to compensate former slaves that was derived from those who benefited directly from owning slaves. From the rich plantation owners. It didn't happen and today you read and hear many African Americans claming that the white population of the USA owes them compensation for slavery but the fact is, the North industrialised effectively and the South didn't. The North didn't need slaves, the South's economy was labour intensive and of course the plantation owners and their political allies argued they 'needed' black slave labour.
The USA economy was not built to the extent on slave labour by blacks from Africa that we are always hearing from people who go with emotive themes rather than take the time to research what actually happened.
So why do ordinary people who never owned slaves, never owned the ships to transport them, never were involved in the slave trade owe African Americans who are descended from slaves and other people descended from African slaves? The logical and honest approach is to make sure that the appropriate people/organisations/families pay any debts from the past.
I know these examples don't cover the issues of native Americans/Canadians, Aboriginal people in Australia, Maori people in New Zealand who defeated the British in a big war, signed a treaty and still got stiffed by the British colonisers.
Again those people whose ancestors went to those countries and didn't participate in the wars, massacres, didn't use the natives for cheap or unpaid labour, didn't own the pastoral properties that were obtained through killing the natives etc etc should not be targeted. When they are, all that does is leave the elites slipping out of their responsibilities. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EastisEast
Joined: 29 May 2014
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
So why do ordinary people who never owned slaves, never owned the ships to transport them, never were involved in the slave trade owe African Americans who are descended from slaves and other people descended from African slaves? The logical and honest approach is to make sure that the appropriate people/organisations/families pay any debts from the past.
|
I think the idea of paying these debts to be idiotic! I remember the Canadians paying out meaningless sums to a few chinese families for the railroad discrimination and denying entry to Canada (in the 1900's).
Small measly amounts called 'shut up money' and 'you can't come back and put that on us' money lol
Who do you apologise to? Who does the apologising? They are ALL dead! In War, how does this dynamic happen? Don't we kill the losers? Hang them? Install a new government? That should be the end of it all. Anything that drags out and on is political hatred used by politicians. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lefil
Joined: 06 Nov 2013
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 5:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Koreans hate to admit but the fact is that Japan ruled Korea, replacing their backward, repressed society under the yangban with a modern, industrialized one. Statistics of infant mortality, longevity, public health, education etc, show that there can be little doubt that a living standard in Korea improved far more under Japanese rule than it had under Choeson.
The Koreans are proud of Samsung, but they don't even know Lee Byung-chul originally founded Samsung in 1938 and made fortune selling rice to Japan through the Governor-General. Lee went to the Japanese college and basically pro-Japan. The Korean governemnt has been trying to “punish” pro-Japanese collaborators by seizing property from descendants of Koreans who were pro-Japan prior to 1945, but they are conveniently ignoring the fact that a Samsung founder was a pro-Japanese collaborator. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EastisEast wrote: |
Who do you apologise to? Who does the apologising? They are ALL dead! In War, how does this dynamic happen? Don't we kill the losers? Hang them? Install a new government? That should be the end of it all. Anything that drags out and on is political hatred used by politicians. |
These are not personal apologies. A government is an entity, the same way a corporation or estate is. In a company, if the CEO dies, the company is still liable for any past and pending claims. An estate is similar to that as well. This is why "they're all dead" is not exactly applicable.
Think if you had been the victim of negligence due to some product at a company causing you injury. If you sued the company and they said "Our CEO quit and the design team was fired. You can't collect", would that be acceptable? Obviously not.
Also, if anyone here's grandmother or aunt was turned into a forced sex slave by the Japanese, and they reacted the way they have, I'm pretty sure you'd be hooting and howling up a storm. I mean after all, people here flip out over spitting, staring, and slurping. I can only imagine how'd they take to repeated forcible rape of a family member. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lefil wrote: |
The Koreans hate to admit but the fact is that Japan ruled Korea, replacing their backward, repressed society under the yangban with a modern, industrialized one. Statistics of infant mortality, longevity, public health, education etc, show that there can be little doubt that a living standard in Korea improved far more under Japanese rule than it had under Choeson.
The Koreans are proud of Samsung, but they don't even know Lee Byung-chul originally founded Samsung in 1938 and made fortune selling rice to Japan through the Governor-General. Lee went to the Japanese college and basically pro-Japan. The Korean governemnt has been trying to “punish” pro-Japanese collaborators by seizing property from descendants of Koreans who were pro-Japan prior to 1945, but they are conveniently ignoring the fact that a Samsung founder was a pro-Japanese collaborator. |
Interesting way to twist Lee. He wasn't pro-Japanese, he was just a businessman of the times, and had no choice but to do business with the Japanese. Just like the tons of students that went to study in Japan. Most weren't pro-Japanese, but if they wanted to advance their studies, they obviously wanted to go to the best universities at the time available to them. And all of the best universities were in Japan.
On top of that, it would have been extremely stupid of the government to punish businesses that did business with the Japanese. Would have wiped out the business class pretty quickly, just like a few African countries did with the Indians in the last few decades. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lefil
Joined: 06 Nov 2013
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 8:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jvalmer wrote: |
Interesting way to twist Lee. He wasn't pro-Japanese, he was just a businessman of the times, and had no choice but to do business with the Japanese. Just like the tons of students that went to study in Japan. Most weren't pro-Japanese, but if they wanted to advance their studies, they obviously wanted to go to the best universities at the time available to them. And all of the best universities were in Japan. |
Lee never got involved in the Korean independence movement. And he collaborated with the Imperial Japanese government. He was pro-Japanese.
| jvalmer wrote: |
On top of that, it would have been extremely stupid of the government to punish businesses that did business with the Japanese. Would have wiped out the business class pretty quickly, just like a few African countries did with the Indians in the last few decades. |
Sorry, but Korea is stupid enough to punish descendants of pro-Japanese collaborators for their ancestors' actions.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
chickenpie
Joined: 24 Dec 2008
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 8:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Remember Samsung became so powerful for being a *beep* to the japanese. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jvalmer
Joined: 06 Jun 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 8:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Lefil wrote: |
| jvalmer wrote: |
| Interesting way to twist Lee. He wasn't pro-Japanese, he was just a businessman of the times, and had no choice but to do business with the Japanese. Just like the tons of students that went to study in Japan. Most weren't pro-Japanese, but if they wanted to advance their studies, they obviously wanted to go to the best universities at the time available to them. And all of the best universities were in Japan. |
Lee never got involved in the Korean independence movement. And he collaborated with the Imperial Japanese government. He was pro-Japanese. |
A lot of Koreans weren't involved in the Korean independence movement. It doesn't make them collaborators. Also, Lee was born in 1910. And he took over his father's rice business, which failed. He didn't start the precursor to Samsung until 1938, and it was a small business until the 1945. Claims that he was a Japanese collaborator is pretty thin at best. During Korea's colonial era, if you wanted to run something more than a food-stall you'd need to get permission from the Japanese authorities. That hardly makes Lee a collaborator. The ones that went above, and beyond, business were punished though. And Samsung wasn't one of them.
| Lefil wrote: |
| jvalmer wrote: |
On top of that, it would have been extremely stupid of the government to punish businesses that did business with the Japanese. Would have wiped out the business class pretty quickly, just like a few African countries did with the Indians in the last few decades. |
Sorry, but Korea is stupid enough to punish descendants of pro-Japanese collaborators for their ancestors' actions.
|
You do realize the last two governments aren't pursuing the named 'collaborators'. It is highly political, and only the Korean 'left' had input on it.
Again, just because you did business during the colonial era, doesn't make that business a collaborator. Every business needed the stamp of approval from some Japanese administrator. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2015 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I need to emerge from CE more often, this is a fantastic and informative thread. I will have to reserve my opinion until I have read every post. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2015 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
These are not personal apologies. A government is an entity, the same way a corporation or estate is. In a company, if the CEO dies, the company is still liable for any past and pending claims. An estate is similar to that as well. This is why "they're all dead" is not exactly applicable.
Think if you had been the victim of negligence due to some product at a company causing you injury. If you sued the company and they said "Our CEO quit and the design team was fired. You can't collect", would that be acceptable? |
Like before, this is a poor analogy, as the reparations have already been paid out, leaving the only potential complaint to be that of an apology. What makes this apology of significantly different character to other apologies, such that a non-participant is able to - not even 'should,' mind you, but simply able to - offer anything greater than condolence? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EZE
Joined: 05 May 2012
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2015 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Koreans had a horrible reputation for brutality during WWII, even more so than the Japanese. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EZE
Joined: 05 May 2012
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2015 5:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| A government is an entity, the same way a corporation or estate is. |
Japan lost the war. Its government in 2015 isn't even the same one from Imperial Japan. It's like comparing the government of Egypt today to a Pharaoh. Just because they can both rightfully be referred to as "the Egyptian government" doesn't mean they're one and the same.
If the Japanese government would've apologized immediately after the war, then it would've been Douglas MacArthur who owed Korea the apology since he was the ruler of Japan from 1945-1951. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
