Whether the debate on the ability to attack enemy bases is a matter of propriety, possession is an issue, or start is an issue - possession is an issue.
2022-05-12
Category:Japan I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
What is the issue regarding the ability to attack enemy bases
The debate over the ability to attack enemy bases has led to confusion in public opinion regarding whether it is permissible to attack enemy bases, whether it is permissible to possess such weapons, and what stage refers to the initiation of an enemy attack. appear. Looking at the government's views so far, it has consistently been stated that the ability to attack enemy bases falls within the scope of defense, and the government has also made clear its views on launching such attacks. The question is whether or not to actually own it .
Issues regarding the ability to attack enemy bases
[Possibility] Is it okay to attack enemy bases (enemy territory)?
[Initiation] What is the initiation of an attack by an enemy country (activation conditions)?
[Holding] When and what to hold
Regarding the ability to attack enemy bases, Prime Minister Ichiro Hatoyama already answered in 1956 that in the event of a missile attack, ``It is inconceivable that the purpose of the Constitution is to sit back and wait for self-destruction.'' Since then, the Japanese government has continued to interpret it as constitutionally permissible.
1956 Ichiro Hatoyama
The purpose of the Constitution is that if an imminent illegal violation is committed against our country, and if a guided missile or other attack is carried out on our land as a means of such violation, we should sit back and wait for our own destruction. I don't think I can think of it that way. In such cases, take the minimum necessary measures to prevent such attacks, for example, as long as it is recognized that there is no other way to defend against attacks by guided missiles, etc. I believe that hitting bases with guided missiles is legally within the scope of self-defense and should be possible.
In 1999, Defense Agency Director General Norota responded that the Self-Defense Forces would use the necessary force if there was a threat of an armed attack.
1999 Yoshinari Norota
In situations that do not result in an armed attack against our country, police agencies are primarily responsible for dealing with the situation, but in cases where the general police force cannot respond, the Self-Defense Forces respond by dispatching public order, and are not responsible for suppressing the situation. It's possible. an armed attack against our country or the possibility of such attack, a defense operation is ordered, and the Self-Defense Forces will use the necessary force to defend our country. That's why .
In 2003, regarding the launch of an attack on Japan, Director-General of the Defense Agency Ishiba announced that he would turn Tokyo into a sea of fire, and stated that if Japan began injecting fuel, this would be considered the start.
Read it together
Geographically, the Korean Peninsula is covered by the Chinese continent, and successive Korean dynasties have become vassal states - What is Japan's position from the perspective of the continental p
Geographically, the Korean Peninsula is covered by mainland China
A vassal state of China since its founding
Korea continues to be invaded by China
China and Korea were ruled by different ethnic groups
Seeing history from the perspective of northern peoples
South Korea only denounces Japanese rule
The Korean Peninsula has a history that is inseparable from China, as the peninsula's geographical characteristics make it look like it is completely covered by the Chinese continent.
What exactly is this sense of victimhood and hostility toward Japan that Korean people have? The historical differences between China and Japan seen from South Korea are largely due to geopolitical reasons as seen from a map, but that is not the only reason. I would like to think about it in terms of the dominant ethnic group and the ruled ethnic group.
Legend has it that there were countries called Dangun Joseon and Minojo Joseon, but archaeologically it is said that they existed from the later Eishi Joseon.
The legendary Mino Korea is said to have been founded by the Mino of the Shang Dynasty in China, and the Wei Dynasty Joseon is said to have been founded by the Wei clan of the Yan Dynasty in China. Both were founded as vassal states of China.
After that, Goguryeo, Baekje, and Silla entered the Three Kingdoms period, and then the Sui Dynasty invaded Koguryo, and the Tang Dynasty invaded Koguryo.
Although Goryeo established a unified dynasty, it was placed under the control of the Later Tang Dynasty shortly after its founding. During the Yuan Dynasty, China was invaded by the Mongol Empire and became a vassal state. The Allied Forces of Mongolia and Goryeo invaded Japan twice, but failed.
Lee Seong-gye, who founded the Joseon Dynasty, is also known as the Jurchen people, and the Jurchen people were an ethnic group that lived in the Manchuria region, and later Hong Taiji founded the Qing Dynasty in China.
From China's point of view, the Korean people are recognized as a different ethnic group living outside the Great Wall of China, and these ethnic groups lived primarily as nomadic peoples, but due to the geographical relationship of the peninsula, the Korean people have decided to settle down. It seems that it has become.
Northern ethnic groups such as the Xiongnu, Xianbei, Khitan, Jurchen, Manchu, and Mongolians were a threat not only to the Han Chinese in China, but also to the Koreans.
Looking at the history of China, there have been only a handful of unified dynasties founded by the Han Chinese, who make up the majority of the country, and for most of its history, different ethnic groups have ruled the Chinese mainland.
When I look at world history, I have never seen a history centered on northern peoples, but if I dare to look at it from that perspective, both China and the Korean peninsula were invaded and dominated by northern peoples.
The Sui, Tang, and Yuan dynasties that invaded the Korean Peninsula mentioned above are different ethnic states in China if you consider them centered on the Han people. It is also a country of different ethnic groups when viewed from the perspective of the Korean Peninsula.
In addition to small-scale direct invasions by foreign ethnic groups, the majority of the history of the Korean peninsula is that they invaded the peninsula after taking control of mainland China.
In this composition, Japan is classified as one of China's peripheral ethnic groups. Geographically speaking, Japan is called Toi in contrast to Northern Yi. They are a neighboring ethnic group common to China and the Korean Peninsula.
If we look at the annexation of Japan and Korea in the above sense, it means that the Korean peninsula was ruled by a different ethnic nation that also shared China. It is also a foreign country to China.
Some people point out the contradiction in that Koreans do not complain about the fact that they were ruled by China for over 1,000 years, but they hold a grudge against Japan for 1,000 years only for 35 years, but in reality, the country of China itself is the same. I wonder if there is a complicated background to the history of a controlled area.
Historically, Japan may still be recognized as a common enemy of China and the Korean Peninsula.
It is said that South Korea's sense of victimhood is something that has been cultivated historically, but if you look closer at the globe, you can see that mainland China has also had a history of being invaded. Based on this, Japan should resolutely clarify its position.
2003 Shigeru Ishiba
Now, I have a question from the committee members: There has been a statement that Tokyo will be reduced to a sea of fire, that it will be reduced to ashes, and for that purpose, in order to accomplish that, in order to make it come true. If they started injecting fuel or did something like that, then their intentions would be clear. Tokyo to ashes," and then they just start pumping fuel, or they start making preparations, and they start taking action. Well, if you do that, wouldn't that be called a start?. That's true, because the intention is clear and that's what it is. Therefore, what I am saying is no different from what the Minister of Foreign Affairs is saying.
MEMO On February 16, 2022, Defense Minister Nobuo Kishi spoke at a subcommittee of the House of Representatives Budget Committee regarding the "capability to attack enemy bases" that the government is considering possessing. , stated that they would not rule out the option of bombing military bases, and acknowledged that it falls within the scope of self-defense.
As stated above, the government has already stated that the ability to attack enemy bases is within the scope of the right of self-defense. Regarding the next issue, ``retention'', there was a Cabinet decision in 1969.
1969 Cabinet decision
Possessing so-called offensive weapons, whose performance is exclusively used for catastrophic destruction of the enemy country's homeland, immediately goes beyond the minimum necessary range for self-defense. Therefore, it is not allowed under any circumstances.
This is the current argument for ``possession'' of the ability to attack enemy bases. In other words, the debate is whether it is a minimal weapon for self-defense or whether it exceeds it.
Read it together
Technology and knowledge of the Korean Peninsula at that time from pictures of unicycles on the Korean Peninsula.
This photo is often introduced as an interesting ride on the Korean Peninsula, but how about comparing it to the second one in terms of efficiency and cost?The second one is a Japanese rickshaw, but neither is a modern vehicle.The difference is whether it is one wheel or two wheels.
At that time, there was no technology to make wheels on the Korean Peninsula, so it was imported from China.The wheels were expensive, and even though they were aristocrats on the Korean Peninsula, they moved on one wheel.As a result, the biggest difference is the number of people driving the car.In the case of one wheel, it becomes unstable when people ride on top of it and requires two people in front and back.In the case of two wheels, it can be operated by one person for stability.It can be imagined that human costs were much lower than wheels.Or there was no concept of labor costs.If you think about transportation efficiency, you can say everything about agricultural work and transportation of goods.If you need twice as many people to transport things, production efficiency cannot be increased.
It is said that nearly half of the people were slaves at the end of Joseon.If you just order the slaves, there will be no labor costs.
According to Jeong Dong-yu, a Confucian scholar in the Joseon period, "The Sheep, the Car, and the Needle" is not available in Joseon.During the Joseon Dynasty, there was no technology to bend and round wood to make wheels, and there were no horse-drawn carts, cattle carts, rickshaws, or agricultural water wheels.Will this be effective in farming?The absence of needles indicates that metal processing techniques are extremely low.Needles must be made with the technique of sharpening metal and must not be broken.Also, it is necessary to make a hole in the rear part where the thread can be machined.During the Joseon Dynasty, wheels and needles were obtained from China.
You can't make things without those tools.In order to make the tool, we need the tool to make it.Japan's industrial revolution was made possible based on craftsmanship handed down over 1,000 years.They made production facilities and railways that they learned from the West in imitation.
In winter, the Korean Peninsula is cold and warm, but when Japan came to Korea, it was bare and bare.As soon as it rained on the bare mountains, a lot of water flooded the fields and destroyed the crops.Japan planted forests on the mountains of the Korean Peninsula.The number has reached 1 billion in 10 years since 1911.This is a problem unrelated to the Industrial Revolution.This is because it is a matter of improving the efficiency and planning of human resources.During the Joseon Dynasty, no progress was made due to the servitude of the people, and technology and knowledge were lost.
Korea cries out that it was taken away by Japan due to the annexation of Japan and South Korea, but there was nothing on the Korean Peninsula when Japan went there.
Since the current government opinion has interpreted it as falling within the scope of the right of self-defense, it does not fall under "offensive weapons used only for catastrophic destruction" and can be interpreted as something that can be possessed. . Until now, the government's position has consistently been that possessing the ability to attack enemy bases is within the scope of the right of self-defense, but it has not actually possessed it and has kept it ambiguous . All that's happening now is an effort to actually own it . Possession of the ability to attack enemy bases has already been deemed constitutional, and the launch of an attack by the enemy has been defined, so it would be unreasonable to now say that we are opposed to actually having the ability to attack enemy bases. The premise of the argument seems to be different.
POINT The cabinet decision defines weapons as those used only for the catastrophic destruction of the enemy's homeland, so it is clear that this does not apply to weapons used within the scope of the right of self-defense.
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Constitutional Democratic Party member Konishi continued to complain at ABEMA TV that there was no legal basis for former Prime Minister Abe's state funeral.
Opposition party member developing original theory
It is clear that the Cabinet decides on national ceremonies
Clearly answered in parliamentary questions
Opposition parties' opinions should be as good as their approval ratings
The media mass-produces inequality of speech
Congressman Konishi of the Constitutional Democratic Party continued to complain on ABEMA Prime that there is no legal basis for former Prime Minister Abe's state funeral. He developed his own theory that the ceremonies performed by the state in the Cabinet Establishment Act referred to the ceremonies performed by the imperial family.
Looking at the Cabinet Establishment Act, Article 4, Paragraph 3, Item 33 states, ``Matters related to national ceremonies and affairs related to ceremonies and events conducted by the Cabinet (excluding matters that fall under the jurisdiction of other ministries).'' It is written. The Imperial Household Ceremonies set out in the Imperial House Law are interpreted to be included in this, and Article 7 of the Constitution states, ``The Emperor, with the advice and approval of the Cabinet, shall perform the following acts in matters of state for the people.'' It becomes.
This is done with the advice and approval of the Cabinet under the Cabinet Establishment Act. In other words, nowhere does it say that the national ceremonies specified in the Cabinet Establishment Act refer only to ceremonies of the imperial family.
He asked a question in the Diet about the legal basis of the cabinet decision for state funerals, and Prime Minister Kishida clearly stated, ``Holding a state funeral, which is a national ceremony, based on a cabinet decision, means that the cabinet has decided to conduct a national ceremony.'' This is included in the function of administrative power, and Article 4, Paragraph 3, Item 33 of the Cabinet Office Establishment Act clearly states that the Cabinet Office is responsible for affairs related to national ceremonies. I think it is possible, as it is clear in the law that the performance of national ceremonies that include national ceremonies is included in the functions of administrative power.''.
I wonder what the media means by equality of reporting. It is said that reporting the voices of opposition parties equally means not reporting only the opinions of a particular political party, but is reporting the opinions of opposition parties in the same manner really equal reporting equality? . According to opinion polls, even though the largest opposition party is the Nippon Ishin no Kai, it only has about 6% of the vote, while the Constitutional Democratic Party has about 5%. It is hard to believe that these opinions are represented by the number of seats that stand against the ruling party, and it is far from possible that they represent the voices of the people. In other words, reporting should be around 5% to 6% of the total, which would also be consistent with the meaning of equality.
On the contrary, Japan's current media outlets report on the claims of these opposition parties more than they do on the claims of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party. Recently, the opposition parties have become weak and are making a fuss by simply making counterarguments and making a fuss as if it were a flaming tactic, and the media, whose audience ratings continue to decline, are taking advantage of this to make numbers, which seems to be creating this inequality. appear. The media should mainly report the opinion that the Cabinet decision to hold a state funeral based on the Cabinet Establishment Act is legal.
Is the Unification Church issue a problem of separation of church and state? - Abnormal public opinion that condemns people just by saying hello.
The problem started with the murder of the former prime minister
There is no law that says no to politicians getting involved in religion
What are the benefits of specific religions from the country
Incoherent media tone
The issue of the Unification Church has become somewhat incomprehensible in Japan. It is said that the mother of the person responsible for the incident in which former Prime Minister Abe was shot and killed was a member of the Unification Church, and that her past misfortunes related to this were the motive behind the incident. Former Prime Minister Abe reportedly gave a speech at the Unification Church. However, this is still just a statement before the trial. I don't even know if that's the real motive.
Politicians are often asked to attend and give speeches at meetings of various organizations. It can also be said that this is part of political activity. Some people refer to the constitutional principle of separation of church and state, but when interpreted as a law that prohibits the state from providing benefits to specific religious groups, it can be interpreted as a law that prohibits individual politicians from drinking alcohol, regardless of which religious group they greet at. It's not something I already know.
Facilitation by the state refers to the provision of advantageous systems and benefits to specific religious groups by law. Even if they say hello at the Unification Church, they will probably also visit Yasukuni Shrine, and if the Dalai Lama of Tibetan Buddhism visits Japan, will the Japanese Prime Minister meet him? He will probably meet the Pope when he visits Japan. Does this violate the principle of separation of church and state? We just met.
The problem with the Unification Church is simply a question of how to regulate large donations to religious organizations that violate public order and morals, as well as forced requests, and is far from an issue of the separation of church and state.
National debt is not the people's debt - The country is not a company - Breakdown of government bond holdings that still do not penetrate public opinion.
The image at the beginning shows the breakdown of Japanese government bond holdings. I sometimes see people say that national debt is the nation's debt or that it is the same as corporate debt, but national debt is the government's debt, not the people's debt. Even if a country is compared to a company, companies do not borrow money from their employees. Debt comes from outside the company, and in this case, it involves purchasing Japanese government bonds from overseas. If most of the debt is overseas, it is natural that the company will default if it cannot be repaid. Purchases of Japanese government bonds from overseas account for 7.3%.
If you really want to say that it is the same as a company, would you say that purchases in Japan are borrowed and borrowed within the company or within the group company? Yoichi Takahashi considers the Bank of Japan to be the same as a subsidiary of the government, and explains that it is the same in terms of consolidation, regardless of whether interest is charged. The Bank of Japan holds 53.2% of Japanese government bonds. He is well known for introducing BS to show that the country holds government assets equivalent to the government's debts (excluding the holdings of the Bank of Japan). The total amount of government assets ranks first in the world, exceeding both the United States and China. Below is the balance sheet (BS) of Japan.
Furthermore, Japanese government bonds are mainly traded in yen, which means that there is no change in value based on foreign currencies. In the case of foreign currency transactions, if the value of your home currency plummets, the face value of your debt will rise accordingly. Suppose your country's currency drops to half its value. Alternatively, if the foreign currency used when trading government bonds doubles, the debt will also double, but since the transaction is in Japanese yen, there will be no effect at all. In an extreme case, former Prime Minister Aso said that repayment would be possible by increasing the number of yen bids. In this case, there will be inflation and the value of the yen will fall, but the theory is that the debt can be repaid because it is the face value of the yen. This was actually said by Taro Aso, a former Prime Minister and former Minister of Finance.
Secondly, the Japanese government is also the world's No. 1 creditor country. In other words, they have foreign bonds and foreign assets. The fact that we are currently talking about national debt as a problem is actually making a fuss about only the debt part, and in fact, Japan has the most foreign assets in the world. This assumes that the government bonds are denominated in yen as mentioned earlier, and if more yen is printed, the value of the yen will fall and the yen will become weaker. If you do this, overseas assets purchased in dollars or euros will increase in value when converted to yen, so the difference will be a large income. Even with the current depreciation of the yen, a large profit margin was generated due to the increase in the valuation of overseas assets.
Representative Sanae Takaichi has advocated the ``Japanese Economic Resilience Plan,'' which calls for a temporary freeze on primary balance (PB) regulations and calls for industrial investment through the issuance of government bonds. She says that even if inflation were caused by printing more yen, it would not have a big impact if the inflation rate was less than 2%. Currently, the yen is depreciating due to the difference in interest rates due to the Fed's interest rate hikes, but the original goal is to induce a depreciation of the yen through the issuance of government bonds and increase the number of bonds, strengthen international competitiveness, and increase wages and tax revenues through rising prices. If the manufacturing industry returns to Japan due to the weak yen, GDP and tax revenue will increase, and government debt can be reduced. For now, this is just the effect of a weaker yen due to interest rate differences, but we are already seeing significant results.
In other words, those who claim that government debt is bad have the completely opposite idea. What ruined Japan after the bursting of the bubble was rather the primary balance discipline, the inability to focus on single-year income and expenditures and to make long-term investments. Japan tightened its finances in the most critical economic situation. If it is the same as a company, when the company is in crisis, the company's safe is closed like a shell, and for the past 30 years, the company has been operating in a state of poverty and not being able to make long-term investments. This is the so-called curse of PB by the Ministry of Finance.
How many natural resources are there in the waters near Japan? Possibility of Japan including EEZ.
Trauma of Japan, a country without resources
Japan's area is not small
Is Japan 52.4% of mainland China?
Rare earths, oil, these are just the beginning
Cabinet Secretariat “The Future of the Sea”
Are undersea resources a treasure trove to save Japan?
Japan is in a state where it can be said that marine resource development is almost untouched. As a country lacking in natural resources, it relies on foreign sources for many natural resources, including oil. During World War II, Japan was surrounded by ABCD as a country with no natural resources, and was in a situation similar to a food raid. They lost the war due to America's overwhelming amount of supplies. One cannot help but wonder why marine resource development did not progress after the war. Since we lost the war because we didn't have the resources, there may be many people who argue that searching for resources means starting another war, but this is a completely different story.
Japan's land area is 380,000 km2, ranking it 62nd out of 196 countries in the world. Japanese people tend to think of Japan as a small country because they tend to focus on top-tier countries such as the United States, China, and Russia, but Germany, Finland, and Poland are smaller in area. However, Japan is a maritime nation. When looking at the total of territorial sea, contiguous zone, and EEZ, Japan ranks 6th in the world in terms of ocean area with 4.47 million km2. And if you add the extended continental shelf, it is 4.65 million km2. If Japan's land area is added to this, the area that Japan can independently mine is 5.03 million km2.
China is covered by countries such as Japan and Taiwan, and there are few oceans that China occupies. That's why they dream of expanding into the ocean, but China's land area is 9.6 million km2, and in fact, including the sea, Japan has about 52.4% of mainland China. is. Because China has a large land area, natural resources and oil are mined. However, Japan's seabed resources are still unknown.
In 2018, researchers from Waseda University and Tokyo University discovered that hundreds of years' worth of global demand for rare earths, which are essential for manufacturing precision equipment, is found on the ocean floor around Minamitorishima in the Ogasawara Islands. This was discovered through the team's investigation. A research team from Ibaraki University and Hokkaido University has announced that one of the world's largest oil fields may lie dormant off the coast of Ibaraki Prefecture's Goura coast in 2020.
Cabinet Secretariat Ocean Policy Headquarters Secretariat “The Future of the Sea” Excerpt
The Basic Law on Ocean Policy was enacted in April 2007 and came into effect in July of the same year. The Basic Law on Ocean Policy outlines the basic philosophy of harmonizing the development and use of the ocean with the conservation of the marine environment, as well as the responsibilities of the national and local governments. It also stipulates that a Basic Ocean Policy Plan be established approximately every five years, and that the Ocean Policy Headquarters, headed by the Prime Minister, be established in the Cabinet. The current Basic Plan on Ocean Policy, which was approved by the Cabinet in April 2013, clarifies ``the vision of Japan as a maritime nation'' and sets out initiatives that should be prioritized in light of changes in the social situation regarding the ocean. and indicates the direction of ocean-related measures. It also specifically describes the efforts that the government should comprehensively and systematically implement over a period of approximately five years in the 12 areas specified as "basic measures" in the Basic Act on Ocean Policy. The existence of energy and mineral resources such as oil, natural gas, methane hydrate, and submarine hydrothermal deposits has been confirmed in Japan's territorial waters, EEZ, and continental shelf, and the possibility of Japan becoming a resource superpower is hidden.
The 2007 Basic Law on Ocean Policy was formulated during the first Abe Cabinet, and Japan's exploration of seabed resources went into full swing. What if Japan becomes a resource-rich nation? I would never have thought of that. Because Japan is a small country... No. There is a high possibility that there will be a breakthrough in undersea exploration. There may come a time when Japanese people don't have to work so hard.
Japan is the only country of color to successfully modernize (industrial revolution).
Japan is said to be the only country among people of color that succeeded in modernizing through the industrial revolution. So why was only Japan able to succeed?
Japan has been isolated from the rest of the world for over 200 years, and we are generally taught in school that modernization began with the opening of the country. What exactly is the industrial revolution? The industrial revolution can be thought of as a power revolution.
Watt in England improves the steam period and creates a machine that converts the power of steam into rotary motion. This was a revolutionary invention at the time. He will be able to transmit rotational motion to various gears and realize complex movements in various locations. So, what was the machine like up until then? It was similar to how humans and cows rotate their shafts, or when they step on a loom with their feet to obtain rotational motion.
This is the power of steam, and if you keep the fire burning, you can get an output many times greater than human power. What this achieves is mass production of products.
Until then, it was called a cottage craft industry, and as the name suggests, people made things by hand, but from now on, we will enter an era in which machines will be making large quantities of the same items.
This is the industrial revolution. Products manufactured in large quantities are cheaper and become popular among various classes. Steam locomotives also provided the infrastructure for transporting these large amounts of goods. From this era, the demand for coal to generate overwhelming thermal power increased explosively.
So, why did Japan succeed in the industrial revolution? Japan already had the technology to make these machines by watching and copying. During the Edo period, techniques were honed and improved as a traditional craft during the apprenticeship system, and the sword culture continued for a long time, making iron processing technology one of the best in the world. has in the metal processing field. Unlike human power, steam engines produce overwhelming power, so wooden machines would easily break. In other words, even the smallest parts of various machines must be made of metal and assembled. When Japanese people saw Western industrial machinery, they may have simply thought, ``Oh, I think I could make something like this.''
One reason is that Japanese people are good with their hands, but clocks were the most precise gear-based machines of the time. It is said that Japanese clocks were already created in Japan during the era of Tokugawa Ieyasu. Currently, Japanese clocks have a reputation for being the most accurate and unbreakable in the world, but these technologies were not invented yesterday.
■English subtitles
There is another thing that Japan achieved that was necessary for the industrial revolution. It is a departure from the feudal system. In the West, a civil revolution had already taken place, and the industrial revolution began more than 100 years later. Free citizens were already active during the Industrial Revolution, and their lives were not tied to feudal lords or land as in the feudal system.
In other words, when wealthy people at the time started a company that mass-produced products using industrial machinery, they could recruit and hire employees.
This is the proletariat, and a mobile labor force is essential to the industrial revolution. The Meiji Restoration was truly a revolution that destroyed the feudal Edo shogunate system and created a civil society.
The Japanese at the time were able to accomplish something that had never been seen before in the world: they simultaneously carried out an industrial revolution. Then, if you think about why other countries of colored people were unable to modernize, it can be said that it is because these two points were not met. One is metal processing technology. The other is the formation of a civil society, which means breaking away from feudal society.
In the first place, Southeast Asian countries and other countries of color were all colonized by the West from the latter half of the 15th century, so it is difficult to imagine that the countries under colonial rule would be able to achieve the industrial revolution that first occurred in the West in the late 18th century. It's impossible to say so. For example, what if we look at the neighboring countries of China and the Korean Peninsula?
China also has a sword culture, and has a long history of using iron tools. However, they were unable to break away from feudalism. As for the Korean peninsula, Korea did not have the technology to make needles and wheels, so they imported them from China. What this means is that the needle meant that people didn't have fine metalworking skills, and the wheel meant that people didn't know how to bend wood into rings, so they didn't know how to move things. It was carried on the back of a person, carried by a person, or placed on their head. In other words, it is impossible to improve the efficiency of infrastructure, and in the first place it is impossible to make the gears in industrial machinery or perform detailed metal processing.
What was fatal on the Korean peninsula was that the class system was exactly as it was before the Middle Ages, and it was a distorted society with 40% slaves, so talk of a mobile labor force was a thing of the future. . In order to firmly protect this old Korean society, the aristocratic class, the yangban, completely eliminated various reforms for modernization. It can be said that both were fatally lacking.
Only 27 years after the Meiji Restoration, Japan defeated the Qing Dynasty, which was considered a major power, and 10 years later defeated Russia. After World War I, Japan sat at the table at the center of the world as a permanent member of the League of Nations in 1919. This was only 51 years after the Meiji Restoration. In this way, Japan was the only people of color to achieve modernization, and the idea was to spread this wave to Asia.
Sun Yat-sen's Xinhai Revolution was made possible with Japan's support, and Sun Yat-sen, who founded the Republic of China, believed that Japan's Meiji Restoration was the cause of the Chinese Revolution, and that the Chinese Revolution was actually the result of the Restoration. I'm making a statement. During his exile in Japan, Sun Yat-sen took the name Sun Yat-sen and was a person who learned about Japan's modernization. There was a man named Kim Ok-gyun on the Korean peninsula, but the revolution in Korea ended in failure, and Kim defected to Japan. However, when he went to Shanghai, he was assassinated by an assassin sent from Korea. It is ironic that just four months after Kim Ok-gyun's death, the Sino-Japanese War began, resulting in the independence of the Korean peninsula and the beginning of reforms toward modernization.
As a result, China started the Xinhai Revolution in 1912, 44 years after the Meiji Restoration, and the annexation of Japan and Korea began 42 years after the 1910 Meiji Restoration. In fact, as Asian countries eventually achieved independence after the war, the process of modernization was necessary in any case, but it is worth noting that Japan was the only country of color to achieve this. However, it is clear that the modernization of Asia was derived from Japan's Meiji Restoration, and in this regard, China, the Korean Peninsula, and Japan, without exception, have recognized this important process within the theme of mod
Technology and knowledge of the Korean Peninsula at that time from pictures of unicycles on the Korean Peninsula.
This photo is often introduced as an interesting ride on the Korean Peninsula, but how about comparing it to the second one in terms of efficiency and cost?The second one is a Japanese rickshaw, but neither is a modern vehicle.The difference is whether it is one wheel or two wheels.
At that time, there was no technology to make wheels on the Korean Peninsula, so it was imported from China.The wheels were expensive, and even though they were aristocrats on the Korean Peninsula, they moved on one wheel.As a result, the biggest difference is the number of people driving the car.In the case of one wheel, it becomes unstable when people ride on top of it and requires two people in front and back.In the case of two wheels, it can be operated by one person for stability.It can be imagined that human costs were much lower than wheels.Or there was no concept of labor costs.If you think about transportation efficiency, you can say everything about agricultural work and transportation of goods.If you need twice as many people to transport things, production efficiency cannot be increased.
It is said that nearly half of the people were slaves at the end of Joseon.If you just order the slaves, there will be no labor costs.
According to Jeong Dong-yu, a Confucian scholar in the Joseon period, "The Sheep, the Car, and the Needle" is not available in Joseon.During the Joseon Dynasty, there was no technology to bend and round wood to make wheels, and there were no horse-drawn carts, cattle carts, rickshaws, or agricultural water wheels.Will this be effective in farming?The absence of needles indicates that metal processing techniques are extremely low.Needles must be made with the technique of sharpening metal and must not be broken.Also, it is necessary to make a hole in the rear part where the thread can be machined.During the Joseon Dynasty, wheels and needles were obtained from China.
You can't make things without those tools.In order to make the tool, we need the tool to make it.Japan's industrial revolution was made possible based on craftsmanship handed down over 1,000 years.They made production facilities and railways that they learned from the West in imitation.
In winter, the Korean Peninsula is cold and warm, but when Japan came to Korea, it was bare and bare.As soon as it rained on the bare mountains, a lot of water flooded the fields and destroyed the crops.Japan planted forests on the mountains of the Korean Peninsula.The number has reached 1 billion in 10 years since 1911.This is a problem unrelated to the Industrial Revolution.This is because it is a matter of improving the efficiency and planning of human resources.During the Joseon Dynasty, no progress was made due to the servitude of the people, and technology and knowledge were lost.
Korea cries out that it was taken away by Japan due to the annexation of Japan and South Korea, but there was nothing on the Korean Peninsula when Japan went there.