Talk:Korean independence movement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Korea (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Korean history working group.

Remove Fake Names[edit]

Hi, I just want to be sure before deleting a lot of content, but IP Address added names like Lee Kang-to and Yang Baek from the K-drama series Gaksital. I doubt very strongly that these are real people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:51, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Citations Needed[edit]

The way the article is written, most of it is simply unsubstantiated claims. Someone should provide citations, even if in Korean, for peer review. Dare0021 (talk) 03:02, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

POV Issues[edit]

The term "genocide" is clearly misleading, as Korea's population grew rapidly during the colonial era, the average life span increased by over ten years, and there were no Japanese massacres of Koreans on the peninsula after the March 1 uprising in 1919. This nationalist Korean historiography only ends up giving pro-Japanese historiographers ammunition for their own distortions.

While the article is fine overall, I think it could use some touching up for POV. While the Japanese did many horrible things in Korea, tossing around accusations like that of mass genocide is starting to push this. I make this comment not because I'm trying to hide Japanese atrocities on the Korean peninsula but because I feel that wild distortions only give fuel to those who attempt to whitewash historical crimes.

The portion on the role religion is also a bit confusing as well.

I agree. Eugeneccampbell 05:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

There are some implications that the initial missionaries had attempted to undermine and despose of the old Yi Dynasty, but I have yet to see any historical evidence supporting such claims. Talk of Japanese funding of missionaries is also without any real merit. At most, the Japanese attempted to court an already existing Korean church in hopes of using it as a tool to maintain control, but that had quickly fallen apparent within the first few years. The vast majority of churches, both Catholic and Protestant, took a neutral stance with a passive acceptance of what most viewed as an inevitable Japanese occupation.

During the early part of the century the Japanese government corralled most Protestant churches in Japan under a single organization and maintained some degree of control over any political activity. I don't think the Catholics had anything to do with it, and there were some independent Protestants. There may have been some attempts to control the Christians. The Korean Presbyterian and Methodist churches, the two largest groups, had been fully independent of that. What you say was true, I believe, at the start of the occupation, but as it progressed there came to be very heavy Japanese persecution of Christians do to heavy participation of Christians among the opposition. There's documentation on that...lemme get back. Eugeneccampbell 05:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Koreantoast 07:41, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah this article is way too POV, which means the legitimacy of the article suffers. The facts of the Japanese occupation speak for itself. -Taco325i 17:17, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. The article "March 1st Movement" is better balanced. Also, this article comes up from the link listed under K in "Declarations of independence," supposedly the "Korean Declaration of Independence." That would better link to "March 1st Movement" than to here, but best would be to the content of that document itself and have that link both to "March 1st Movement" and to this article. I have the English translation of the original document...will upload to its own article when I get time, and rationalize the links. Overall, however, this article has plenty of good content; it simply needs POV edits and better documentation. Eugeneccampbell 05:15, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I heavily edited the prelude to this article, for a start. I'm sure the writer meant well, but statements like "almost 500 years of uninterrupted peace" and "largely benevolent administrative Confucianist bureaucracy" just left a bad taste in my mouth. Joseon's Yi dynasty began with a soldier's coup d'etat against his own king in deference to the foreign Ming dynasty, and since then settled into an effective yet repressive bureaucracy that was extremely resistant to change.

Sure, Joseon had its share of greatness as well, but almost without fail the ruling bureaucracy, suspicious of any possible threat to their power, repressed such innovations. The invention of the Korean writing system, Hangul, is an achievement deservedly hailed as one of the greatest in our history. Yet it was derided by the male Confucianist ruling class as "Eun-mun," the woman's letters. Pioneering mapmaker Kim Jeong-ho traveled extensively to map the peninsula. For his troubles he was imprisoned and tortured under accusation of being a spy. Naval admiral Lee Sun-shin won victory after brilliant victory against the Japanese invading forces during the Imjin wars. Also imprisoned and tortured. And so on. Sometimes I think the only reason the creator of Hangul wasn't imprisoned and tortured was because he was a king himself. Oh well.

To be fair, the imprisonment and torture routine was fairly common over the whole region in those days. And it wasn't without occurrence in the West, either. Eugeneccampbell 05:48, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

As a people, we are still trying to overcome some of the Joseon dynasty's worse legacies; authoritarianism, sexism, regionalism... It just doesn't help to gloss over Joseon's serious flaws, which constituted much of the reason it was so helpless in the first place.

Nor to exaggerate the atrocities. Eugeneccampbell 05:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I should edit some of the other parts of the article, I don't know.

I think you should. I will too, when I get some time. Eugeneccampbell 05:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm certainly no historian.

I am a budding one -- and I agree with the following. Eugeneccampbell 05:35, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I do agree words like genocide shouldn't be thrown around lightly; that only cheapens the word. Some of the Japanese atrocities would probably count, however. Japan's largescale conscription of young women for military prostitution (the "comfort women," a tragicomedic example of the Japanese propensity for euphemism) exactly suits the criteria set forth by the ICTR in its decision to convict Akayesu for genocide.

--Eldir, a.k.a. Jee Hyung Lee

Won't be able pin the term genocide on the Japanese for their atrocities. Massacres, yes, and some really big ones which can be documented. But the Japanese did not attempt to wipe out the Koreans as a people -- in fact Korean population and life-expectancy may have even increased under Japanese rule (the Japanese govt. stats here are hard to interpret, but definitely those two figures did not decrease). The treatment of the "comfort women" also was not an attempt to wipe out the Korean people. That said, another term "cultural genocide" could well apply, and I noticed a source saying some scholar in a Japanese university admitting to that. Gotta dig back and find it. But the Japanese did attempt to wipe out Korean language and much of Korea's unique cultural features. Note that "cultural genocide" is a controversial term: some people say, one, its usage denigrates the meaning of genocide itself and, two, there's nothing wrong with trying to remove harmful aspects of a culture (debatable, anyway clearly not the case between Japan and Korea). Language, though -- the Japanese government made a well-documented attempt to nullify the Korean language. Eugeneccampbell 01:22, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

1. The sentences are worded in a way that they are difficult to understand, as observed by the tag. 2. The section implies that Christian missionaries deliberately tried to help the Japanese occupation of Korea using unwitting Korean converts, and succeeded. 3. The whole article looks like it's been written by an anti-Christian anti-Japan fanatic. 4. The article throws around words with little concern. Ex. Legendary 5. Translation of proper nouns. Ex. Righteous Army

I would say the whole article needs to be rewritten by someone who knows the subject and is NOT some fanatic. 13:49, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree with all five of your points. Actually, there is some truth behind each of the exaggerations this article presents -- but that's often the nature of POV-centric writing. For example, some Christian writers have admitted that the early missionaries made some mistakes. The Japanese did commit atrocities in Korea, though there are balancing points of view about this that are brought out fairly well elsewhere on WP. But this article is the first time I ever read of the Japanese having attempted to use Christianity in their overthrow of the Joseon dynasty and system. Not that there may not have been such attempts, or motive, but if it's true then they need to be documented. On the other hand, I found a couple of good sources that describe how the Japanese openly used Confucianism in their quest -- and if one tries to stand in both Korean and Japanese shoes it makes sense why. I'll try to work on this when I get some time.

Eugeneccampbell 00:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Sennen goroshi's blanking of the lead section.[edit]

Sennen goroshi blanked the lead with no rationale or attempt to reword it. [1] This is a very sensible thing to do as a Wikipedian? --Caspian blue (talk) 14:52, 21 August 2008 (UTC)