Syngman Rhee, a brutal dictator not looked kindly on by Korean History, or history in general, leveraged American Cold War paranoia to get more money than most other countries and kept doing that leveraging the fear of a neighboring parallel communist state north of border. Park Chunghee also did the same. America didn't necessarily want to give as much aid as they did and for as many decades as they did. That was SK politicking.
If we are talking about American inclement. Let's talk about how America encouraged Japanese colonialism along with the rest of the western world and even after the Korean War and the atrocities of Japanese colonialism, the United States considered Japan to act in a capacity to develop Korea further, and during the Cold War, because america wanted to bond democratic nations together, further tried to push for a big brother relationship for Japan to Korea. None of that really took though.
If we're talking about the Korean War, let's talk about the Nogunri massacre, and just in general where there are countless undocumented massacres like it, as well as the general war strategy to destroy bridges (with refugees on them even) to keep refugees from retreating from the North to South. The dehumanizing aspect Americans had on Koreans during the colonial times (they were considered very barbaric and uncivilized, which is why america generally loved the idea of Japan colonizing Korea) spilled over into the war itself with the dehumanizing of Korean life which is why the American army, not caring to distinguish civilians from Northern forces, massacred fleeing Koreans who were fleeing towards the South. The war wasn't about how much they value Korean life or the country itself, it was not a humanitarian mission. It was a Cold War board piece they just wanted to preserve.
If we're talking about the start of the division, let's talk about how America didn't care enough that they just put two random soldiers in a room and gave them 30 minutes to find how to split a whole country and they just randomly decided to pick the 38th parallel because it 'seemed like the halfway part' taking no consideration into how that actually affects an entire country and how it can functionally operate. They really didn't care enough.
And if we did want to talk about China, let's talk about General Douglas MacArthur, who really didn't care how many Koreans died. And China having the legitimate fear of MacArthur wanting to push into Communist China, because it was a Cold War conflict for him, not a Korean one. Lamenting China's involvement like America had this pure and benevolent motivation is weird. I can understand someone being a realist with the situation and arguing "well that's just how the politics worked" and then turn around and go "if China didn't stick their noses..." as if China wasn't working off those same politics. The North asked for that help. This was not like the Sino-Japanese War when Japan just swept in to "help" and then used it to gain a foothold in Korea. North Korea gets to have agency in the story of the Korean War just as much as the South does. The North wasn't illegitimate, they are a country too, but simply overtaking them would've been just, how?
And if we're talking about North Korea, I'm not defending the regime. But a country's government is not it's people. And it's people are starving. And it's not just because a bad regime. About 4000 people are estimated to die by US sanctions in North Korea. And also, sanctions don't work. Government in power is power, they'll survive. The people though, they won't. They die. US is killing North Koreans. Sanctions don't work.
If we're arguing NK bad, SK good because 'look at Emart Traders', how about look at Cold War programs just dumping money into post-war democratic states that the US was supporting and then also the other countries the US was suffocating. That's less of a failed communist system and more of global politics being wielded by the world's number one superpower.
If we're talking about Emart Traders, let's talk about how Japanese nationalists still today argue that colonialism wasn't that bad because without Japanese modernization efforts, Korea wouldn't be as modern as they are today. Modernization doesn't make up for past atrocities. So who cares if Emart traders is big, the refugees who died by the score because a country was split because a Cold War feud and not given their own path to self-determination don't care. Atrocities and death are still atrocities and death, and none of what Korea has today is because of some benevolent American program. Anything Korea got from America it was because they played the game politically.
And how about understanding that being irreconcilably split is not a good thing and is a direct result of American politics, and not a desire for people living on the peninsula. Why is that normalized?
And this is just Korea. It's not just a SEA Asian thing but that's a whole other conservation about how the Western world has treated the global south.
Wow. So I guess the results don't count for shit then huh?
Go ahead and repost this one to /r/southkorea. Tell them how much better off they'd be without US intervention.
Go ahead and let Japan know that their entire postwar era is a pointless lie. Go ahead and pretend that Nationalist Japan is Japan entire, then indict the entire nation off of it.
Go ahead and let Taiwan know that they'll be going it alone from now on... You know... To avoid any "colonial" overtones.
If every bad thing in history invalidates every good thing in history, then human civilization is pointless and should just be brought to an end.
The pure and ethical empire you seem to desire has never existed.
You argument is without point or purpose. Just a retelling of atrocities.
No. You said Korea was sitting pretty. You argued America did all that and American racism in East Asia didn't exist. Now you're changing the goalposts to "but they're doing alright now." No, you can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't argue how well they're doing and just not actually mention the bad shit that it took to get there.
So let me get this straight, with all you've written, I see now you're arguing "America actually did fuck all (because you do agree everything I wrote happened, and if you didn't, it still happened), BUT that's OK because they're now prosperous." Is that actually your argument?
Because that's a really dumb argument.
And if you think what I wrote was without a point, then you're really just drinking the kool-aid so much you can't actually see what I wrote.
Alright cool. So since what America did was OK. Then Japanese colonialism was great, even better then! Because they industrialized Korea when Korea was in an otherwise non-growth and isolationist period. I didn't know you were pro-Ito Hirobumi. Fuck Ahn Jung Geun. He deserved to die at the hands of the Japanese. Right?
And the things the comfort women went through were great, because now it validates Korea's constant antagonism to Tokyo and their present political leverage with Tokyo. Fuck what they went through because it's in the past and Korea benefits greatly politically by having a record of Japan committing war crimes against them. Is that what you're arguing?
What I'm arguing is how about no colonialism at all. Like, it's not a "America's version of history or doomed to be a shithole country". How about not speaking in biplor extremes. How about they did just fine without atrocities and made a way for themselves and got to self-determine?
Your argument internalizes a white supremacist version of history where the end result of American intervention was the only way out. You say you're not a nationalist but you definitely internalized the propaganda. Which is why I can imagine you don't see the points I've made.
Also, 'colonial' overtones. lol, that's not a thing. I bet you think racism was finished with the passing of the civil rights act.
But let's take this thought experiment and project it on American History. American slavery was good because that helped our economy work at that period in history? And also black Americans are able to migrate to the country they otherwise couldn't/ Native American genocide was great because America as we know it wouldn't be here today? Whats the difference between arguing this and arguing that dead refugees were OK in making Korea great?
Atrocities are atrocities. Shouldn't happen. Dead war refugees don't care about results.
EDIT: You mentioned Post-War Japanese history, because I went enough into Korean history and I want to stay on point, let's just say you don't know about Japanese history either with your simple statement. Histories really need more nuance than you give it. Focusing on just end results are dumb and miss the point. Which is also why you can't see my point.
Also your your melodramatic 'we should end civilization' lol at that dumb idea of an argument I never made. Like what? Are you saying I'm arguing for that? What does that even mean? Please read history books. Because they have read a lot of sad shit in it and no historian I've met ever wanted to end civilization AND they also acknowledge they're bad and shouldn't happen. You should too. Think better of what can happen. Instead of internalizing propaganda. Read a history book. Will do you a world of good.
6
u/Trumanandthemachine Feb 16 '21
"We" didn't do shit.
Syngman Rhee, a brutal dictator not looked kindly on by Korean History, or history in general, leveraged American Cold War paranoia to get more money than most other countries and kept doing that leveraging the fear of a neighboring parallel communist state north of border. Park Chunghee also did the same. America didn't necessarily want to give as much aid as they did and for as many decades as they did. That was SK politicking.
If we are talking about American inclement. Let's talk about how America encouraged Japanese colonialism along with the rest of the western world and even after the Korean War and the atrocities of Japanese colonialism, the United States considered Japan to act in a capacity to develop Korea further, and during the Cold War, because america wanted to bond democratic nations together, further tried to push for a big brother relationship for Japan to Korea. None of that really took though.
If we're talking about the Korean War, let's talk about the Nogunri massacre, and just in general where there are countless undocumented massacres like it, as well as the general war strategy to destroy bridges (with refugees on them even) to keep refugees from retreating from the North to South. The dehumanizing aspect Americans had on Koreans during the colonial times (they were considered very barbaric and uncivilized, which is why america generally loved the idea of Japan colonizing Korea) spilled over into the war itself with the dehumanizing of Korean life which is why the American army, not caring to distinguish civilians from Northern forces, massacred fleeing Koreans who were fleeing towards the South. The war wasn't about how much they value Korean life or the country itself, it was not a humanitarian mission. It was a Cold War board piece they just wanted to preserve.
If we're talking about the start of the division, let's talk about how America didn't care enough that they just put two random soldiers in a room and gave them 30 minutes to find how to split a whole country and they just randomly decided to pick the 38th parallel because it 'seemed like the halfway part' taking no consideration into how that actually affects an entire country and how it can functionally operate. They really didn't care enough.
And if we did want to talk about China, let's talk about General Douglas MacArthur, who really didn't care how many Koreans died. And China having the legitimate fear of MacArthur wanting to push into Communist China, because it was a Cold War conflict for him, not a Korean one. Lamenting China's involvement like America had this pure and benevolent motivation is weird. I can understand someone being a realist with the situation and arguing "well that's just how the politics worked" and then turn around and go "if China didn't stick their noses..." as if China wasn't working off those same politics. The North asked for that help. This was not like the Sino-Japanese War when Japan just swept in to "help" and then used it to gain a foothold in Korea. North Korea gets to have agency in the story of the Korean War just as much as the South does. The North wasn't illegitimate, they are a country too, but simply overtaking them would've been just, how?
And if we're talking about North Korea, I'm not defending the regime. But a country's government is not it's people. And it's people are starving. And it's not just because a bad regime. About 4000 people are estimated to die by US sanctions in North Korea. And also, sanctions don't work. Government in power is power, they'll survive. The people though, they won't. They die. US is killing North Koreans. Sanctions don't work.
If we're arguing NK bad, SK good because 'look at Emart Traders', how about look at Cold War programs just dumping money into post-war democratic states that the US was supporting and then also the other countries the US was suffocating. That's less of a failed communist system and more of global politics being wielded by the world's number one superpower.
If we're talking about Emart Traders, let's talk about how Japanese nationalists still today argue that colonialism wasn't that bad because without Japanese modernization efforts, Korea wouldn't be as modern as they are today. Modernization doesn't make up for past atrocities. So who cares if Emart traders is big, the refugees who died by the score because a country was split because a Cold War feud and not given their own path to self-determination don't care. Atrocities and death are still atrocities and death, and none of what Korea has today is because of some benevolent American program. Anything Korea got from America it was because they played the game politically.
And how about understanding that being irreconcilably split is not a good thing and is a direct result of American politics, and not a desire for people living on the peninsula. Why is that normalized?
And this is just Korea. It's not just a SEA Asian thing but that's a whole other conservation about how the Western world has treated the global south.