Why do you think Kawashima insists on focusing on the suppression of Korean workers in Japan by the Soaikai, a Korean welfare organization in his piece? What questions does his analysis raise about the way we might think about both the Taki Seihi strike and the love story between Mr. Kim and Matsuo Shina discussed in the lecture? What are ways that you might think about their relationship beyond the its representation as an inter-racial love story as stated in the newspaper account?
Kawashima insists on revealing the truth behind the Soaikai, an organization with the named intention of supporting the Korean people, but found itself causing harm instead. A classmate of mine mentioned that the best way for change to occur is not to make random complaints about the system and current state of life, but instead to specifically call out and target the institution responsible. What Kawashima does by focusing on the suppression of Korean workers in Japan by the Soaikai is he exposes the one to blame and informs people who the true guilty party is, allowing for progress to be made.
Concerning the Taki Seihi strike, Kawashima’s analysis provides an explanation of the emergence of Pro-Soaikai and Anti-Soaikai groups. Kawashima’s exposure of the true nature of the Soaikai and the suppression they enacted explains why, following the Taki Seihi strike, Koreans and Korean labor unions moved away from the Soaikai and instead worked against them. Without Kawashima’s analysis of Soaikai, this shift would seem baseless and potentially confusing.
The love story between Mr. Kim and Matsuo Shina on the surface level appears to be about an inter-racial couple. However, there are many different ways in which it can interpreted. It could be seen as an example of a coming together of the colonized and the colonizer, insisting that there is light at the end of the tunnel of the mess they were living through, that unification was possible. It could also be framed as another attempt to criminalize Koreans. If chosen to view in light of Mr. Kim took Shina, then it can be used as evidence for the Japanese of Koreans being criminals. Like any story, there are countless version, all sharing a different message.
What do you think are some of the impacts of being labeled as spies, or national traitors by the state and military for internal relations within Okinawan society? How do you think this impacted Okinawans’ treatment/views toward Korean women who were brought to the islands as “comfort women” beginning in 1941?
The consequences of being labeled as a spy within Okinawan society was execution, and it created ripples across the community. All impacts were negative and led to a distrust of outsiders as well as insiders. The Okinawans became even more careful and untrusting of their Japanese occupiers for fear that they could at any moment be labeled as a spy and end their life. This also led to a sense of distrust and disintegration within the Okinawan society. Schools enforced policies which prevented students from speaking their home dialect and criminalized it, leading to less and less speakers for fear they would be seen as a traitor or spy. The sense of distrust within the society is expected. Since the consequences were so severe, people were looking out for themselves and, as a way to protect their family, they turned on each other.
I think that the Okinawans’ treatment toward the Korean “comfort women” has two ends. One one end, there is reason to distrust them as they were brought in by the colonizers and any outsider posed a risk to their family and its safety. However, a sense of camaraderie was also formed and the Okinawans saw these women as victims of Japanese ruling and sympathized with them.
