Jump to content

Talk:Korean ethnic nationalism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Objectiveye (talk | contribs) at 17:43, 17 August 2010 (→‎Obivous Contradictions in the article). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconKorea Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Korea, a collaborative effort to build and improve articles related to Korea. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject iconSociology Unassessed
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Sociology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of sociology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
???This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Template:WikiProject Genetics

original research? pure blood theory is a myth that doesn't exist in Korea?

Hi kuebie, you've put the tag to say the article is original research but you seem to be busy at giving more details. The article definitely needs more Korean-speaking Wikipedians to help improve it. Please use the talk page rather than just tags or reverts. --Winstonlighter (talk) 20:19, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Superior pure race

You guys can't make an article that states Koreans believe they are the superior pure race, then write contradictory informations stating they are subordinates. Either the Koreans believe they are superior and we add the references about pure race ideas and how they feel they are better, but once you add subordinate concept, it completely contradicts the article. You guys can reword my additions but please do not censor it (and keep in mind when you reword it, this article is about Korean superiority, so subordinate ideas will not work. Anyways reword my references but do not delete for censor please. I think this article should be deleted. --Objectiveye (talk) 04:43, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To vote: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pure blood theory in Korea --Objectiveye (talk) 04:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to kindly remind User:Objectiveye that he is nearing WP:3RR. -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 07:09, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, "To vote:" - hate to WP:ABF so soon, but it smells like you're trying to lead a trail for those following your WP:CANVASS. I find it suspicious that you're giving instructions here, when the AFD page is at the top of the main article. -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 07:11, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok that is it, LLtimes and winstonlighter and Oda Mari are communicating with each other, This whole article is contradictory without the clarifications of why they still believe they are superior. You guys resolve it, but keep in mind contradictory ideas only take away from this article. I've been on the discuss page with all the contradictory editors, but You guys should at least fix the contradiction. Please do not censor, but edit my additions. I'm done for tonight --Objectiveye (talk) 07:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"LLtimes and winstonlighter and Oda Mari are communicating with each other" - you can't make a bad faith accusation like that without a source. Are you still trying to garner people to your side? -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 07:25, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Not everyone that's against your obvious off-topicing inputs which contributes nothing to this article, are "working" or "communicating" together against you. As I've said, you can either create a new topic regard the purity of Japanese Royal Family bloodline, or put it in related articles that I've mentioned. --LLTimes (talk) 07:29, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually the first mention of people partnering up was by benlisquare on the voting section. I though he was referring to you guys because I noticed you asked Oda Mari to come vote. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Objectiveye (talkcontribs) 07:33, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Whether or not LLtimes had asked Oda Mari or myself or anyone to (quote) "come vote" is not relevant, because firstly, we were never told to !vote, but to take a look at something that has occurred, since we are editors that are familiar in that specific field. We made our own decisions, and were never ordered or asked to do anything in the first place, other than to see what was going on. Secondly, regardless of whether LLtimes informed me or not, I would have found out about the AfD anyway, as I watch China-Korea-Japan related articles and their WikiProjects, and I believe the same for the other editors mentioned. I would have gotten here sooner or later, so LLtimes' actions are completely irrelevant. -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 07:40, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually he put in a link for the article for deletion site on Oda Mari's talk page. Does this really matter, you were the one that brought it up first. --Objectiveye (talk) 07:47, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oda helps regulate Korea articles constantly, as you can see, I've ask him to come and offer his "perspective" on this case, not to vote. Even if he doesn't contribute to the discussion, then by all means ignore him as this is not a vote "game". However, seems that there were no "real" objections except "sudden" flood of "delete" follow by accuses of original researches and other various stupid reasons. --LLTimes (talk) 08:03, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to the possibility of forum shopping, given the sudden spring of activity overnight. Depending on the nature, off-wiki discussion regarding AfDs and the like are considered taboo and foul play. -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 07:49, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, let me clarify WP:!VOTE. AfDs are not the same as voting for the President of the United States. Numbers are irrelevant; WP:CONSENSUS is achieved through valid discussions. For example, currently the "!vote stacks" are Keep 10, Delete 7 (including the WP:SPAs), but that does not mean that Keep will "win". If Delete is capable of providing sound arguments supporting deletion, then the article will be deleted; similarly, if valid arguments are provided by Keep, then the article will be kept. Numbers are meaningless on AfDs, I cannot stress that any more. -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 07:53, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Obivous Contradictions in the article

If Koreans believe they are superior pure race, then they will need to explain why they still feel superior after WWII. By adding in the archeological info about Japan they can come to that idea. You guys can re-word it but you have to explain why Koreans would still believe they were still the superior pure race. The concept according to the article was introduced by Japan in the 20th century but they were suppose to be subordinate? That would not make any sense, why would this idea would still persist today. You have to clarify how research after the occupation lead to Koreans feeling superior by (and you can reword it how ever):

Historical evidence has pointed to Korea being the original bloodline for the Japanese Royal family from its inception. The constant tombs with Korean writing, clothes and artifacts have added to the idea that Korea's pure blood is Japan's elite. In 1976 Japan stopped all foreign archaeologists from studying the Gosashi tomb which is suppose to be the resting place of Emperor Jingu. Prior to 1976 foreigners did have access. Recently in 2008, Japan has allowed controlled limited access to foreign archaeologists, but the international community still has many unanswered questions. National Geographic wrote Japan "has kept access to the tombs restricted, prompting rumors that officials fear excavation would reveal bloodline links between the "pure" imperial family and Korea"[1]

With Japans elite being of Korean blood, it didn't matter that they occupied Korea because they were under a Korean Emperor or something like that. In addition:

As science progressed the Subordinate race appeared to be the Japanese. The Japanese elite appear to be of Korean origin. The Japanese pure royal blood line was of Korean origin with ancient buddhist school, artifacts, sculptures, architecture and writing, including the introduction of iron processing and horses all coming to Japan from Korea.[2][3][4]"[5][6][7] These scientific researches lead to Japan limiting the access of Japan's royal tomb from the international community.[8]

and

Borrowing from the Japanese theory of nation and race[9], Shin Chaeho located the martial roots of the Korean in Goguryeo[9], which he depicted as militarist, expansionist which turned out to inspire pride and confidence in the resistance against the Japanese[9]. In order to establish Korean uniqueness, he also replaced the story of Gija whose founder was the paternal uncle or brother of the Chinese Shang emperor Zhou with the Dangun legend[10] and asserted that it is the important ways to establish Korea’s uniqueness.[9] These are analogous to the Japanese establishing their Emperor Jingu to be from the 2nd century and replacing their Korean pure lines while limiting access for the international community to the Korean artifacts/clothes found in the tombs.[11]

You have to add this above section to show they think they are correcting Japans fabrications, etc otherwise why would they think they were superior.

Someone needs to fix this because a quick check on history of China states they are older than 2333 BC

After the independence in the late 1940s, despite the split between North and South Korea, neither side disputed the ethnic homogeneity of the Korean nation based on a firm conviction that they are purest descendant of a legendary genitor and half-god figure called Dangun who founded Gojoseon in 2333BC[12], making Korean the oldest civilization in the whole world based on the description of the Dongguk Tonggam (1485).[13]

If we add this (You guys can reword it)

This "oldest civilization in the whole world" reference is in obvious error considering the History of China section states that the Jiahu culture, Yangshao culture and the Longshan culture of China are all older with dates ranging from 6000 to 2500 BC compared to 2333 BC Gojoseon of Dongguk Tonggam. Considering Korea doesn't believe they are the oldest civilization in the world and Asians easily finding references to Chinese civilizations dating in back to the 6000 BC time frame, how the writer of this reference stated studying archeology of Gojoseon Korea the "oldest civilation in the whole world" is questionable.

Anyways we have to fix these obivous contradictions --Objectiveye (talk) 07:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

At least fix this obivous mistake of Chinese civilations which date to Jiahu, Yangshao culture and Longshan culture this is too obivous of a mistake for anyone who studied Asian history. Thanks --Objectiveye (talk) 08:15, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


This discussion seems to lead into two more issues regarding the origin of Japanese Emperor and the Gojoseon civilization. The arguments of these contested topics aren't relevant in this article but I agree that these two hypothesis are important to shape the pure blood theory in Korea in the modern days.
Instead of promoting these claims, the article should focus on how it helps to sharp the blood theory.
My question is:
1, when did the speculation on the Japanese origin raise? How it influence the pure blood theory?
2, The same question for the Gojoseon issue. When and Who proposed it first and who's the notable historians on it? --Winstonlighter (talk) 08:39, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Objectiveye, many users have also expressed that many of these points are irrelevant to the topic at hand. Things about the Japanese Imperial family belong in the Japanese Imperial Family article. Things about historical claims belong in the Korean nationalism article. This article should solely stick to the direct topic, and its effects on Korean society. I also don't see how the above listing represents "(obvious) contradictions in the article"; they don't seem obvious, nor contradictory to me. -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 12:08, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually they are related. We can just merge this with the nationalism in Korea article or we can correct these contradictions. No superior race will not explain why they are not subordinate. And even if Korea is 6000 years old they are still younger than China because of the 6000 BC culture would make them 8000 years old. See how this is a contradictory statement. This is highly analogous to the 600 BC or older claim in Japan. We should delete the article altogether or related to the Japanese fabricated history as well.

In either case 1. Superior race will not leave a contradictory idea of subordinate alone without explanation 2. Quick History of China search shows they have cultures dating back to 6000 BC 3. This probably shouldn't be lumped in with the Nazi era stuff, because the time period would be after WWII

We have to fix these contradictions, or this article will appear to be made by some Japanophile editor with too much time on his hands. --Objectiveye (talk) 17:43, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What is this I don't even...

It appears that most of this shitstorm (yes, shitstorm, it's a noun that correctly describes this current situation, see WP:NOTCENSORED) is due to the Pure blood theory in Korea#Fabricated History section. From the AfD page, nobody is talking about the actual topic. The shitstorm is all about, and I quote, This data is most people claim korean histroy is 6000 years. But, this isn't true. Only some people claim 6000 years...korean people isn't claim 'making korea' of Chinese character. This's claimed to Hwandan Gogi need people. They aren't directing their arguments to the main topic at all, which is this whole pure-blood racial theory business. This article is about 순혈주의; it's about how mix-bloods such as Hines Ward are perceived in Korea; it's about how Koreans see themselves from a racial point of view. But that's not addressed.

So, how's this. How about we just scrap the damn Pure blood theory in Korea#Fabricated History section, and leave everything else intact. It seems that section is the part that most of these people have issues with. I am just curious to see how the argument changes once that damn section is gone.

Just my two cents, -- 李博杰  | Talk contribs email 12:01, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i think that the section about history is actually the major reason that leads many to think about korean nationalism and pure blood theory. Instead of putting it aside, we just need more "Korean prospective" and more contributions to clarify the issues. ----Winstonlighter (talk)
  1. ^ http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080428-ancient-tomb.html
  2. ^ Korean Impact (2001), pp. 44-45
  3. ^ Korean Impact (2001), p. 46.
  4. ^ Korean Impact (1984)
  5. ^ NYT (2003): Japanese Art
  6. ^ http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9A05E0D91139E733A25754C0A9619C946097D6CF
  7. ^ http://www2.kenyon.edu/Depts/Religion/Fac/Adler/Reln275/Jap-Kor-art.htm
  8. ^ http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080428-ancient-tomb.html
  9. ^ a b c d Cite error: The named reference gries was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  10. ^ Andre Schmid, "Rediscovering Manchuria: Som Cj’aeho and the Politics of Territorial History in Korea," in The Journal of Asian Studies, 56, no. 1 February 1997
  11. ^ http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080428-ancient-tomb.html
  12. ^ Cite error: The named reference stanford was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  13. ^ Old Choson and the Culture of the Mandolin-shaped Bronze Dagger, Kim Jung-bae