Weekly discussions

Week 4 Discussion

What do you think prompted so many Koreans into direct action against Japanese colonial rule? How much of it do you think was the language of the March , 1919 Declaration of Independence, and how much were other factors that Shin mentions? Answer this question by thinking about what might prompt you into actions at some moments and not at others. Have you ever felt compelled to act in ways that surprised you?

I think that the great and obvious mistreatment against the Koreans, as well as the dehumanizing treatments that people were able to see so clearly prompted so many Koreans into direct action against Japanese colonial rule. The language of the March, 1919 Declaration of Independence helped bring upon the realization that there were many others who felt the need for change and rebellions out there, which greatly pushed other individuals to join in and take action against the Japanese. However, the individuals felt the need to stand up for themselves, as the Japanese clearly distinguished between the Japanese and Koreans, dehumanizing the Koreans under colonial rule. They deprived individuals of their families and resources, as well as depriving them of human rights that they should enjoy as a human being. The clear differences in the treatment of the two ethnicities, I believe, played a huge role in pushing Koreans to stand up for themselves. If I was treated unfairly just because of my ethnicity, I would stand up for myself, especially if the decisions or treatments are clearly made based on ethnicity alone. Losing their loved ones as well would have given many individuals reasons to fight for them and go against the Japanese colonial rule, as a revenge or in order to protect their other loved ones from such treatments and fates. When my close family members are attacked verbally for any reason, I would get very defensive, which is unusual for me since I am usually composed and try to avoid arguments, and this surprised me greatly.

Week 5 discussion

Why do you think Kawashima insists on focusing on the suppression of Korean workers in Japan by the Soaikai, a Korean welfare organization in his piece? What questions does his analysis raise about the way we might think about both the Taki Seihi strike and the love story between Mr. Kim and Matsuo Shina discussed in the lecture? What are the ways that you might think about their relationship beyond its representation as an interracial love story as stated in the newspaper account?

I think that Kawashima insisted on focusing on the suppression of Korean workers in Japan by the Soaikai in order to make the readers understand that it was not just the Japanese forces that the Koreans had to face. Under the colonial rule, Koreans were greatly disadvantaged and treated unfairly, often becoming low-class workers. However, the unfair treatments did not just come from the Japanese. The low-class Korean workers also faced mistreatments and restraints from their own ethnic group, called the Soaikai, who oppressed Korean workers. This brings up the question whether or not the strike brought differential treatment due to race into light and cause division in the two different ethnicities, or did it actually help bring the two ethnicities together by uniting them under the common cause, as shown in the story between Mr. Kim and Matsuo Shina. The love story between Mr. Kim and Matsuo Shina might not actually be a love story, but more of a collaboration in order to run away from the factory. The factory workers were treated harshly, and maybe the two individuals had traits that made running away more possible, which could have led to them working together.

Week 6 Discussion

What do you think are some of the impacts of being labeled as spies, or national traitors by the state and military for internal relations within Okinawan society? How do you think this impacted Okinawans’ treatment/views toward Korean women who were brought to the islands as “comfort women” beginning in 1941?

I think the impacts of being labeled as spies, or national traitors by the state and military for internal relations within Okinawan society, would cause one to become a social outcast and be more careful with whatever they do. Being labeled as a spy, other civilians would not want to approach that individual in fear of getting labeled a spy as well, which would deprive these individuals of social interaction. They would also be more mindful and overthink their every move because the government and the military officials would be keeping their eyes on them, and the feeling of being watched very closely would definitely cause them to act more carefully. On the other hand, if a group of individuals are labeled spies, then this might actually cause one to be more active in fighting for the Okinawan society since they are already labeled. Being labeled, the individuals might feel that there is nothing to be afraid of, and this could cause them to be more outspoken. I think the first impact that I mentioned impacted Okinawans’ treatment/views toward Korean women who were brought to the islands as “comfort women” to be that of a suspicious nature. They doubted and was suspicious of the comfort women because they were foreign, and they likely avoided having too much personal interactions with the Korean women to avoid suspicions.

Week 7

How do you think the trauma that Okinawan women experienced during the Battle of Okinawa impacted their responses to the military base construction that the US military Occupation authorities enacted during the early 1950s that we see in the Isahama struggle? What traumas have to be dissociated from the Battle of Okinawa and understood as new to the time of US military occupation?

During the Battle of Okinawa, men were fighting in the frontlines, while women were left in the households with children to take care of. As women were having a hard time keeping children safe and alive, as well as trying to avoid the battle field, women supported each other and found comfort in helping one another, building a community collectively during this time. This impacted their responses to the military base construction that the US military Occupation authorities enacted during the early 1950s, as the women, like during the Battle of Okinawa, felt the responsibility to group together and support one another, fighting together against the unfavorable conditions, as the U.S. military tried to take their lands to turn into military bases and undercompensate them for their lands.