Newsletter

Park Chan-seung (Professor, Department of History at Hanyang University)

He graduated from Seoul National University and received his Ph.D. from the same graduate school. He has studied history of ideas, social history, and independence movement. He has served as chairman of the Association for Korean Historical Studies and the Korean Social History Association. Currently, he is the director of the Research Institute of Comparative History and Culture at Hanyang University.

Q. The theory of colonial modernization in Korea was introduced in the 1990s. Is there a background for this theory to emerge, or a similar theory?

A. The theory of colonial modernization is the claim that Korea is modernized only after the Japanese rule. Similarly, the theory of civilization in Joseon by Japan is a theory that has been in the Japanese colonial era since the liberation of Korea, and it is also a theory that Japanese right-wing politicians and intellectuals have been claiming ever since the liberation of Korea.
As the Soviet Union and other socialist rights collapsed from the late 1980s to the early 1990s, and the Korean economy developed greatly, some economists in the country argued: “Korea is now entering advanced countries beyond the middle-class countries, and in the background of these possibilities, there was colonial rule by Japanese imperialism.” This is a claim that colonial rule by Japanese imperialism laid the foundations ahead of the Korean self-sustaining economic growth efforts.
Since then, they have collaborated with scholars in the field of economic history in Japan and have developed this logic further, and finally have come to claim that Korea has achieved considerable economic growth in the Japanese colonial era. This shows that the so-called colonial theory, which is the claim of the imperialist era, which is 'the colonial control makes the colonies civilization and enlightenment', still has strong power.

Q. Those who argue for this theory say that the objective figure of economic growth rate proves that the economy has grown even under the colonies. What should we be aware of when we identify the statistics and figures related to this?

A. They claim that the economic growth rate in the colonial period is about 3% per annum, which may be true when calculated by statistical figures. However, it should be noted that it is the economic growth rate of the entire colonial Joseon. At that time, it was the Japanese and Japanese capital that took control of the economy of Joseon. Most Koreans were excluded from economic growth, so even if there was a 3% annual growth, it is not meaningful for Koreans. Statistics from the colonial period are often summed up regardless of Japanese and Korean people. It does not make sense to claim that Koreans lived as well as Japanese at the time with such statistics.

Q. Since the emergence of theory of colonial modernization, many deepening studies have been published on colonial times over the past 20 years. Based on these studies, there seems to be a lot of data to refute that theory of colonial modernization is nothing more than a logic to beautify and rationalize the colonial rule of Japan.

A. Yes, there are many data that reflect reality better than the statistics made by the Japanese imperialists. Especially, the newspaper articles at that time show how the Koreans were living. Even the data on the economic situation of farmers, such as the 'survey on the living conditions' created by Japanese Government General, show the reality of Joseon.
The economic situation of the Korean farmers continued to fall. Most farmers in the 1930s were in debt, and in the spring, 50% of those who had to starve because of food shortages. Also, the number of farmers emigrating to Manchuria and the slash-and-burn farmers continued to increase. If the farmers of Joseon were more abundant and well after the colonial rule of Japan, such a situation would not have occurred. So looking at various data showing concrete realities rather than abstract statistics or numbers is a way to understand the situation at the time.

Q. There are discourses on the nature of Japanese rule policy such as 'Theory of Colonial Exploitation', 'Theory of Colonial Modernization', and 'Critical Theory of Colonial Modernity'. What differences do these discourses make? What should be taken care of when understanding these discourses?

A. ‘Theory of Colonial Exploitation’ is an argument that Japanese landlords and capitalists have taken land, food, underground resources, and labor from Joseon. Theory of Colonial Exploitation is an argument that Japanese landlords and capitalists have taken land, food, underground resources, and labor from Korea. ‘Theory of colonial modernization’ is the claim that colonial Joseon developed and economically under the Japanese rule. On the other hand, 'Critical Theory of Colonial Modernity' is the claim that modern institutions and organization introduced by the Japanese imperialism were the mechanism of control and oppression against Korean.
‘Theory of Colonial Exploitation’ is a theory that focuses on land deprivation during the past Joseon Land Survey, which was hit hard by the fact that there were few private land deprivation at the time. Therefore, in this case, we think that it is necessary to focus more on the rice exploitation through the plan to increase rice production or the resource exploitation through underground resource development. ‘Theory of Colonial Modernization’ has a problem that it does not distinguish between Japanese, Japanese capital, Korean, and Korean capital. ‘Critical Theory of Colonial Modernity’ focuses on repression, which is a characteristic of modernity, and it can be said that there was not enough interest in colonity.

Q. You have studied ‘The Movement for the Strenuous Efforts of Korean People at the end of Joseon’, ‘The Capacity Training Movement under Japanese rule’, and ‘The March 1 movement’, and have translated 『The 25 Years History of Administration』 and 『The 30 Years History of Administration』, compiled by the Japanese Government General of Joseon, in Korean: 『Korean version of the 30-year history of the Japanese Government General of Joseon』. I think that there is a relatively lack of research on the history of the Japanese Empire's governance policy compared to the study of independence movement history. So where is the area that should be particularly focused on in this study?

A. As Korean academics studied the Japanese colonial era focusing on the history of independence movement, the research on history of Japanese Ruling Policy on Colonial Joseon was relatively insufficient. So it is true that the researchers are not enough and the basic data arrangement is not done properly.
The first priority to focus on research is to see what kind of organization, through which legislation, the rule of Japanese imperialism was done. This field is the basis of research on history of Japanese Ruling Policy on Colonial Joseon, but there is not even a basic research yet.
As a rule mechanism of Japanese imperialism, there has been no study on Residency-General, Japanese Government General, and Cheoksikgook and Cheokmooseug, which were the organizations within the Japanese government dedicated to colonial administration. There is little research on the enacting system, such as edicts, ordinances, executive orders, etc., as a law.
The Japanese colonial rule over Joseon is linked to the control over Taiwan, Sakhalin, etc. So we need to compare and study what similarities or differences there are with the governance policies for these regions. But such comparative studies areo hard to find. In addition, the Japanese rule over Joseon was based on the so-called 'assimilationism', but there is still insufficient research on what the nature and goal of the policy was and how it was developed specifically.

Q. We believe that the discussion of the Ruling Policies of Imperialist Japan is inseparable from the ‘pro-Japanese’ problem. Why is the discourse of ‘excuse’ about ‘pro-Japanese’ still reproduced?

A. I think that the expression 'collaboration for Japanese Imperialism' is more accurate than 'pro-Japanese'. It means that it is better to specify that they cooperate in the colonial rule of the Japanese Empire and cooperate in carrying out the war. Of course, some people were forced to cooperate by the Japanese Empire's coercion and intimidation at the time.
But ‘People who have followed and collaborated with Japan Imperialism’ was not coerced into co-operation. They didn't necessarily cooperate. They only actively cooperated to gain their own interests, health, and Honor. The people around them released most of the People who have followed and collaborated with Japanese Imperialism by creating the logic that 'they only cooperated inevitably' in the investigation of BanminTeugwi(Special Committee for Investigation of National Traitor), which was organized immediately after liberation, and still reproduces and continues to spread this logic.

Q. You are chairman of the compilation committee for the NAHF's research book and source book series on Japan invasion history publication. 75 years after liberation from colonial rule of the Japanese Empire, what is the background and significance of promoting this project?

A. Korea has been liberated for 75 years. Although the study of independence movement history has progressed to some extent, the history of colonial era or colonial rule by Japanese imperialism has not been studied yet. Research Book and Source Book Series on Japanese Invasion History, which NAHF planned this time, will mean that it will organize the history of colonial rule by Japanese imperialism for the first time and properly.
We will consolidate the results of the studies that have been conducted since liberation. In particular, we are trying to gather researchers from fields that have been poorly studied and encourage them. So research books are about publishing 50 books, and source books to support these studies are about publishing 100 books. In order to compile the contents of this book series, we have been working on each compilation committee since last fall, and we are cruising to date.

Q. Tell us about the characteristics of the research book and the source book that you are currently compiling.

A. Research Book Series has divided the subject into four areas: politics, economy, society, and culture. It's a topic that has not been well covered in academia, but we've been trying to trigger important studies that we think must be done. We will also focus on issues that are currently being discussed, such as forced labor and conscription, women forced into sexual slave by Japan, which occurred after the Sino-Japanese War.
In the pandect of this book, we will cover all the characteristics and all aspects of Japanese colonial rule against Korea and organize them in a comparative history. In addition, appendix will also deal with Japan's responsibility for colonial rule, and the liquidation of colonial remnants in Korean society.
In the case of the Source Book Series, 35 topics have already been set that cover the colonial rule of the Japanese colonial rule as a whole, but in the future, free topics will also be included. Source Book Series, which is scheduled to be published in 100 volumes, also helps to write Research Book Series and hopes to take the study of academia on Japanese colonial rule to a new level in the future.
But what is a little worrying is that there are not many researchers in this field, so we can do this vast work in a short period of about three years. Fortunately, many people are interested in this project and join in, but I hope you will show more affection and actively participate in the future.