Is there an impartial (mostly) source of information regarding the living conditions of Koreans during the Japanese occupation of Korea and how different it was compared to Taiwan? By "impartial," I obviously mean no Japanese nationalist whitewashing and no Korean nationalist blackwashing.I've read that the mass violence and brutality of the Japanese forces started at Showa and that Taisho was "relatively normal," but the March First protests, which were supressed by the Japanese government obviously, first occured in 1919 during Taisho and resulted in the end of the military rule and the beginning of the cultural rule as a form of compromise.
>>18537070What occupation? It legally (& rightful) part of Japan.
>>18537086It was supposed to be a protectorate under the terms of the Taft-Katsura agreement and Eulsa treaty. Even within Japan itself direct annexation was not unanimous. Making Korea a puppet kingdom like they later did to Manchuria was probably a better option in the long run, unlike Okinawa, Sakhalin and Taiwan Korea was just too big and and had too much pride in it's national identity to be properly absorbed by Japan.
Seconding request. At the very least, it was more personal as unique to korea they were attempting to assimilate with them and by way of such breed them out as they evidently saw them as a close enough proximate to be acceptable; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissen_d%C5%8Dsoron . So given said motive I would imagine the rule there was more forgiving and less demanding of labour/property-concessions but more suffocating in it's own ways,
>>18537219It was indeed protectorate but christcucks assassination of Itō change all that.
>>18537642Soon...https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peninsular_Japonichttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zainichi_Korean_language
Was Korea as industrialized as Manchuria by the time the nips were done?
>>18539205They built some railways but that's not impressive.
>>18537070It was actually pretty brutal in Taiwan as well. The stark difference is because the Taiwanese basis of modern nationhood has a stark separation from Qing history despite the later forming large and sensible amounts of early resistance against the Japanese. Both Taiwan and Korea were subject to extermination campaigns perpetrated by the Japanese during the turn of the century. However the basis of revolt on the Korean side continued particularly because ex imperial forces had direct connections in the Hamyong Barony that allowed the conflict to transfer in a sort of a violent tide from the South of Jeolla to the North of the Yalu until 1912. The basis of revolt was pretty simple in that any one in familial relation of pre annexation forces was in contempt of opposition and hence the butchery was also transferred to the civilian settings. It was also weirdly ironic and telling that the ridiculous racial treatment of korean personnel in the IJA previous to the pacific war spiked recruitments for the Exile forces in China. There's actually quite a plenty of personal records from both the korean government in Exile and the Chosen Shotoku that goes into motivations of ethnic separation if you have knowledge in Japanese or Korean.
>>18537070>Japanese occupation of Korea Korea was not occupied by Japan. Korea was legally annexed into the Empire of Japan in 1910. This was widely supported by the Korean people who served in the Imperial Japanese Army.
>>18540083Never trust CCP, broshttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26SuNxq679A
