Cuban Communism Essay, Research Paper

Japan s imperial experience was different from that of the West in Asia and Africa in several fundamental ways. (Bruce Cummings) Is it a valid categorisation of Japanese rule in Korea? Identify some of the main differences between Japanese colonialism and Western colonialism. Illustrate your answer with examples.

Imperialism has existed for many years and has displayed many differing forms. It is a naturally occurring event that has a vast and complex history. Major world powers have been striving to expand their relative power and at the same time provide for their people. From the earliest civilizations groups of individuals set out to improve their well being at the expense of others. When examining more modern imperialism there is little variation from this view. Countries all over the world depend on their colonies to meet the needs of their nation. The world has become transformed and many changes have occurred based on situations resulting from imperialism. There are processes towards basic imperialism that can be labelled as fundamental. Japan s imperial experience in Korea, for example, differs from what the West experienced in Africa and Asia in several ways. The 19th and 20th centuries displayed a great amount of expansion and the countries of the West were heavily responsible for this experience. Japan, however, played a key role in the history of imperialism as they joined in the fight for world power. First of all, Japan s experience is different from the West s in that it was more of a reactionary decision to expand, while the West had strong, rational motives to do so. Secondly, Japan s choices in altering Korea s society by such drastic measures are more powerful than how most of the West approached controlling their many colonies. Thirdly, the West did not have to deal with the outside interference and resistance that Japan was accustomed to near the end of their rule over Korea. Fourthly, Japan and Korea are two closely related countries. Their societies are similar and their geographical locations are very close to each other. The West, on the other hand, does not typically have this attachment with its colonies and the effects are noticeable. Lastly, because Japan had a history of Emperor worship the ways in which the country approached imperialism is affected in ways not applicable to the West. These differing aspects of rule displayed by Japan and the West clearly promote Bruce Cummings take on the matter of imperial experiences in the modern era.

Imperialism and colonialism can be explained fundamentally to be able to better observe the differences between the methods and reactions that Japan and the West encounter. Imperialism is generally defined as a system of constraint and control exercised over the people and territories. It can be politically controlled or not depending on the need of the nation. Colonialism varies from imperialism in that it does not necessarily impose rule over the tributary countries, but merely controls trade and foreign relations. Alteration of the local political structure often occurred if the ruling country deemed it necessary. For example, expansion in India, where the state was taken over, was quite different from that in China, where the state was maintained but society was influenced. Whatever the differences, the main goals of establishing a colony by imperial or colonial means is to better the home country by exploiting others. There are many motivations towards expanding the reach of a country. Desire for new knowledge, the spread of religion, and the search for allies are all desired components of expansion. However, economic motives seem to lead the group. Imperialism is seen as an integral component of global capitalism. By the 1900 s imperialism was driving the capitalist world economy and expanding it tremendously. The search for new sources of wealth was key to the West. Japan differed from the West in this respect. Japanese society in this period bore very little resemblance to Western capitalist societies, regardless of the basic economic imperialist theories. Economic motivation was not completely disregarded, but it was simply not the main reason for the decision to expand in the case of the Japanese. The West wanted to take complete advantage of all of the opportunities expansion can provide. They wanted a cheap supply of consumer goods and of raw materials, a new market for their exports, a way to avoid taxing tariffs (especially in the Orient where spices and luxury items were a premium), and a new and rich supply of natural resources. Imperialism offered those aspects of economic returns and the West demonstrated just how beneficial it could be.

Japan and the West seemed to have different purposes behind expanding their country s reach on the world. The West developed an imperial experience relatively naturally. As they got more modernized the West realized the potential for expanding their economic market. Other areas of the World offered new opportunities that the West was interested in. The West realized the potential that Asia and Africa presented and wanted to reap some of their wealth to better themselves. To do so they had to incorporate the foreign country into their economy by beginning to establish foreign relations. They looked to exploit the countries as much as possible and could do so because of how powerful they were. It was the West s goal to implement spheres of influence all over the world where they could gain all of the advantages that other countries could provide. It was a natural process over a period of time for the countries of the West. New benefits were witnessed year after year. Japan, in contrast, chose to expand for defensive reasons. There was a certain level of fear in the Japanese political and economic systems. The Japanese were reacting to the rest of the world by expanding the power of their country. They were in fear of the West and were in danger of becoming another China, an area of exploitation by contending foreign powers. When the West was colonizing countries in the Pacific, South East Asia, and the Far East, and instability was apparent in the periphery, Japan was running the risk of losing any of the power they had in Asia. The Japanese elite realized the world was being separated into colonizers or colonies and committed the Japanese to take action to prevent them from becoming a colony. Therefore, Japan believed fundamental changes had to be made in order to strengthen themselves against other nations. There was also a fear of revolutions and of the collapse of Japan s political and social organizations near the end of the 19th century that promoted their expansion. The population was under pressure. Japan wanted to reproduce the results that many countries of the West experienced through earlier imperial experiences by expanding themselves at the same time as challenging their power. Any further withdrawal on behalf of the Japanese would seriously hurt their chances of competing globally, so they chose to gain some foreign territory, and this territory was Korea. The Meiji Restoration of 1868 succeeded in changing Japan into more of an aggressive nation.

The ways in which Japan and the countries of the West went about expanding into their respective colonies are in contrast. The Japanese were more demanding and altered Korea more than most of the Western colonies. This was because of the pressure that the Japanese elite and government felt at the time of expansion. They needed results that the West did not view as detrimental to continual success. The West varied in the way they approached modifying the occupied country. Because the West is so varied, and different situations call for different courses of action, some countries were more harsh and unforgiving than others, but not in the same conduct as the Japanese. The Japanese did not conceive the other Asian peoples as civilized or as capable of self-government and believed they constituted the highest form of oriental civilization. Therefore, Korea was integrated politically and economically with the systems of the Japanese. Japanese imperialism was responsible for the replacement of Korea s traditional systems with state capitalist forms of social organization. Japan s goal was to structure a democratic, unified socialist Korea. The Korean Governor General, who was always a Japanese military leader, was in charge of all Korean affairs. The Japanese created revolutionary land policies that affected the whole country. The Korean economy was also changed based on the needs of the Japanese at the time. They shaped and directed Korea by using their own institutions and logic of their own industrial system. Nearly 42% of all of the Japanese in Korea were government related employees. Japan had certain policies they followed in running the Korean society. They developed a basic model based on military power, state direction of economic activity, production administered by large family-owned conglomerates called the Chaebols, and an immense amount of exploitation of workers (especially towards the women). They declared Japanese as the official language of Korea, the schooling systems were transformed to meet the wishes of the Japanese, the newspapers of Korea were altered to appease the Japanese, and basic Korean rights of personal identity were infringed upon. Where the approach of the Japanese was very abrupt and severe, the West took it more gradually. Most of the time the West simply began globalization for trading purposes. Requests for trade were followed by demands for land rights and forts and later for concessions to exploit the natural resources. Governmental and military leaders then pressured the local leaders. Ultimately, direct rule was established in most cases, such as in Iran and China. The West was not as forceful as Japan. Western penetration was limited differently in different circumstances. In China, the correlation can only be found at the political level; socially, economically, and intellectually the Chinese traditions remained. The West acted merely as a catalyst in the change and modernization of the country. In India, the English set up a government, but there was limited importance of the state at the time, so the overall effect was singular. The Dutch experience in Indonesia varied from the normal strategy of the West. They incorporated not only Dual Rule, but Dual Economy as well. It affected the Indonesian society in uncommon terms of population growth, monetary economy, internal migration, and communication. Generally, most imperialists built railroads, canals, roads, and schools to develop the country. The colonies gained some advantages from this modernization, but the profits from trade all went to the West. There was some investment back into the colony, but for the benefit of the West primarily. The West did, however, integrate some less than moral practises. The experience with the slave trade of Africans to the Americas and Europe was a major fault during the imperial experience of the West. The opium war that existed in China was an example of the West going overboard with greed and a disregard for the populace. Also, during the period of expansion Westerners brought over many diseases that wiped out many unsuspecting foreigners. Without the West s inquisitive nature, the deaths would not have occurred. The way in which the experience in India just kept dragging on was questionable. Gandhi s fight for independence was ultimately successful and their privileges were returned, but after much strife. These examples of Western imperial abuse are small in number to that of the relatively positive experiences they encountered.

During Japan s imperial experience they encountered foreign resistance and intervention that most of the West did not. Because Japan s practises towards Korea and Manchuria were not looked favourably upon, they received confrontations from other powers. The Japanese were forced to attack the Russians in 1904 in what was called the Russo-Japanese War. The United States intervened because, along with England, they had their own spheres of influence in the Asian region and did not want Japan to gain additional power in the Far East. The West contains so many powerful countries that Japan had a difficult time defending their rule. Near the end of World War II the allies were again forced to take action. Two atomic bombs were dropped in Japan in a blatant attempt to stop Japan and their plans of domination. The pressure ensured Japan would renounce their rule over Korea, while the United States and Russia took over partial control of the country for an agreed upon twenty to thirty years. At that point, Korea would become free.

Japan s imperial experience with Korea was more familiar in nature than that of the West s. The societies of Japan and Korea were much more similar than any European countries with any African countries, for example. One would think that when Japan implemented their ideologies into the Korean society they would have been more widely accepted or complimentary, but that was clearly not the case. The amount of public movements from groups ranging from students, to the working class, to the churches, displays the negative response. The West also had difficulties in adjusting to the new societies. Britain clearly had little idea towards the needs and rights that the people of India should have received. That is why they were forced to end their rule. In addition, the relative geographical distances between Japan and Korea and the West and their colonies played a strong role in their experiences. The short distance that Japan was faced with (Figure 1) allowed them to hold a stronger grip on the Koreans. They could quickly intrude on any events they feel necessary and could easily incorporate their ways of life into the Korean society. Korea had trouble trying to stay independent from Japan as a result. Korea s activity was closely linked to Japan because of the geographical locality between the two. Most of the Western powers had a more difficult time with controlling their colonies because of the travel necessary from Western Europe to India or China, for example, (Figure 2). The fact travelling in the early 20th century was very tedious gives explanation to this position. European expansion ultimately evolved through and was based on naval power. It would have meant the West would have been forced to establish permanent outposts. Therefore, the general relationships, geographical and traditionally, between the colonizer and the colony played a small, but important role in how the imperial experience concluded.

Figure 1:

Figure 2:

One of the major features of Japanese nationalist sentiment that radically departs from that of the West is Emperor worship. Even though the Meiji Restoration replaced the shogunate with ruling monarchs the Emperor s role remained an important symbolic one. Japan was a stable society and effectively shielded themselves from other powers. The Emperor was considered to be a father to the people of Japan at the time. His overall visions of Japanese development had an impact in what courses of action were undertaken. All moral decision-making regarding expansion was dependant on its relation with the Emperor. Not until the outside world influenced and pressured the Japanese to take action did the structure of rules and beliefs change. The Japanese army played a very significant role in the execution of the Emperor s objectives of expansion. The army was associated closely to Japan s nationalism push and imperial occurrences. The West on the other hand did not necessarily have the same sort of historical importance in their societies. Their views were somewhat reliant on religion, but not to the extent of the Japanese. Many European countries based their imperial experiences on the inscription on a tombstone expressed in Westminster Abbey, for the honour of God, the glory of our country and our commercial interests in those regions, . The West felt the commitment to expansion was an integral part of their society. They did not think about the exploitation of the tribal Africans, for example, because they believed it was for the good of all (under God) and their country. These contrasting approaches to imperialism reveal how the foundation of Japanese imperialism differs from the West in how they went about expanding.

In conclusion, Korea experienced a different type of rule from the Japanese then India, China, or any African countries experienced from the Western powers. As well, Japan experienced different struggles and results than the West because of the differing fundamental strategies and practises. Japan s drive to empire appears to be not a consequence of rational planning designed to achieve objectives, such as the provision of national security or material advantages, as was the case with the West. Japan s decisions regarding imperialism were more reactionary to outside pressures than any planned out strategies and the resulting outcomes were a consequence of such. The West had certain motivations that were their driving force to expand, but the Japanese simply entered Korea to increase the amount of power they had and did not have regard for the Korean society. The West had such a major hold over the world that it was not particularly necessary to focus on exploiting one country. Japan s fundamental practises were much different from the West s gradual plans partially because of the nature of the Japanese society. Such ruthless changes to Korean traditions was an aspect where the West stayed relatively safely from. Japanese imperialism directed a harsh capitalist reform of Korea where intervention was necessary from other observing world powers. Otherwise, complete domination would have existed for some time. Therefore, it is a valid categorization to view Japan s rule over Korea as different from what the West experienced with their expansion.