Week 3 (HIEA 112)
Discussion Questions: Think about the relationship between post-World War One capitalist crisis (elaborated by Young), transformations in colonial policy (lecture 6), and new conflicts that emerged between colonial subjects and ordinary Japanese people as a result. Does thinking in these terms help us make sense of the 1923 massacre of 6,000 Korean people living in mainland Japan by a combination of police and vigilantes who took it upon themselves to kill the “unsacrificeable” (Ryang’s ‘homo sacer’) people in their midst?
The 1923 Kanto Earthquake was historically significant, not only because of the catastrophe itself but also due to the direct aftermath. The massacre of over 6,000 Koreans stemmed firstly from unjustified rumors following the widespread damage caused by the earthquake and secondly from the cumulation of tensions between the Korean and Japanese people.
Firstly, there was a noticeable shift in Japan’s economy during the post-World War One period. As Young explains in Beyond the Metropolis, the unparalleled economic growth caused significant changes such as urban expansion — as the Japanese started to equate cities with their economic base. This resulted in price increases that were collectively unfavored by the Japanese citizens. “In 1918 newspapers everywhere reported the ‘violent rise’ in prices, and […] the alarming increase in the cost of living” (19). In addition to this being one factor in the escalating tensions between social groups in Japan, there is another component to consider. That is, the 1923 Earthquake itself and the fires that ensued resulted in the destruction of widespread sections of the Japanese capital. This meant that there would be profound economic losses that would affect the Japanese citizens, which would only contribute to the socioeconomic inequality among groups and fuel rising tensions.
Secondly, following the Tapani Incident in 1915, the Japanese government had to make serious changes to its colonial policy. The incident demonstrated the Taiwanese people’s discontent towards Japanese rule and the general suppression that accompanied it. It is reasonable to presume that others under Japanese colonial rule also felt this way. Although the colonial government shifted from ‘gradualism’ to ‘cultural rule’ as a form of assimilation, it was clear that Japan’s colonial subjects (the Korean population) would still be seen as separate from the Japanese people. As Caprio explains in Post-March 1st Policy Reform and Assimilation, some Japanese citizens argued that the Korean people were unworthy of assimilation (114).
Thinking in these terms helps us make a bit more sense of the 1923 massacre of Koreans. In the event of the 1923 Earthquake, tension within the Japanese people boiled over when unfounded rumors of Korean people intending to do harm to the Japanese people began circulating. Ordinary Japanese citizens viewed themselves as the ‘Emperor’s children’ and felt empowered enough to temporarily act as sovereign (lecture 6). They viewed the Korean people as ‘homo sacer’ — that is, “humans who have no life within the existing political order and religious realm” (Ryang, 738). The Japanese people viewed the killings of Korean people as justified. As Ryang explains, “Each individual killer of Koreans acted as sovereign who killed homo sacer that did not belong to the political order and hence, killing of them did not violate anything” (742). This, in addition to the other factors that contributed to tensions between the Korean and Japanese people, helps somewhat explain the motive behind this horrific massacre.
