Week 5 Discussion

It is ironic that an article poised at bringing better living conditions to the Koreans is based upon attacking a Korean welfare organization. It really is a very good example of how something founded to be just can just as easily be manipulated. By having the organization that is in support of a cause how could it be the antagonist of said cause? This is the facade that Kawashima exposes in his article regarding the Soakai.

I believe that attacking a specific institution that is exacerbating a problem is far more beneficial at improving a situation than aimlessly blaming a system and making complaints of a current state of being.

Not only were the Soaikai not working in favor of the working class Koreans but abusing them tirelessly throughout the early 20th century. His article attacks a system that was so broken fundamentally it classifies a people's dirty vs clean. Such a standpoint can never be the basis of an organization that is tasked with bringing peace.

The article gives the impression that the Soaikai were quite militant. we see yet again that there is a ruling consumer class and a class created solely to do the work deemed below the common man. This separation inevitably breeds disdain against a class of people that inevitably fill a less than desirable place in the social heirarchy.

The article gives perspective to the newspaper story about Mr. Kim and Matsuo Shina. While there were atrocities in the region that can never be disregarded, there always fosters community. whether it is at the barracks the workers lived at where families Japanese and Koreans mixed to make dinners for their working husbands or an interracial love story that happened in a newspaper. It is no doubt room in al the articles about all the hate, but it is foolish to leave out how in the most dismal conditions, the community will grow. Whether that be into an established people or a revolution.