Contact the organizers: Asian Studies Conference (ASCJ)
c/o Institute of Asian Cultural Studies, International Christian University 3-10-2
Osawa, Mitaka-shi, Tokyo 181
1999 June 26 conference
4. Individual Papers on Ethnicity
and Cultural Categories
Chair: Professor Motomitsu
Uchibori, Professor of Anthropology, Tokyo Gaigo University
1) Ed Friedman, University of Wisconsin-Madison. "Transcending the East-West
This paper seeks to show that all great cultures contain all the things that are usually
othered as east or west (depending on who is doing the othering), and that indeed the
intended target is often some internal tendency that another wishes to label alien, and
therefore, both for better and for worse, we are all in this together and can learn much
from each other. Indeed we all do best when we are open to learning from each other.
Therefore, the best way ahead is to explode the east-west opposition.
2) Wayne K. Patterson, St. Norbert College. "Futei Senjin: Japan and
'Rebellious Koreans' in Hawaii, 1905-1925"
When Japan established the Protectorate over Korea in 1905, the 7000 Koreans who had
emigrated to Hawaii began what was to be a forty-year movement for Korea's independence
from Japanese colonial rule.Japan kept a close watch over the activities of this
nationalist movement because it had the potential for terrorism against Japanese interests
and also because it had the potential to garner the sympathy of the government of the
United States. These two potentialities mirrored to a certain extent the cultural
nationalist and the radical nationalist approaches found inside Korea at that time.
These two also provided the impetus in part for the splintering of the nationalist
movement in Hawaii.For two decades, as Hawaii's Koreans actively opposed Japan, the
Japanese Consulate-General in Honolulu spied on the Koreans to assess the strength of the
movement.This effort increased markedly after the outbreak of the March First Movement in
1919 (Korean:Samil Undong;Japanese:Sannichi Undo). But by the end of the Taisho period,
the Japanese had become convinced that it had little to fear from Hawaii because of the
factional divisions between the Kungminhoe and the Dongjohoe.The United States also came
to a similar conclusion, and as a result refused to recognize a Korean government in
exile.While in this sense, the nationalist movement, of which Hawaii's Koreans played a
major part, was a failure, it did serve to energize thenationalist sentiments of Koreans
against the Japanese.
3) Igor R. Saveliev, Niigata University,"Immigrants and Guerrillas: Japanese
and Korean Diasporas in the Early Twentieth Century Russia"
This paper examines documents recently gathered in the Historical State Archives of Russia
and the Japan Diplomatic Records Office in order to analyze the place of Japanese and
Korean diasporas to Eastern Siberia in the Far Eastern Policies of Russian and Japanese
Empires. It gives a short overview of the seasonal sojourn and migration of these ethnic
groups to the territory of Amur and Maritime Districts in 1860s - 1920s and focuses on
Korean ethnic associations. Some of these associations were supporting the struggle of
Korea's guerilla armies against Japanese colonial regime in Korea. Their attacks on
Japanese troops from the Russian territory became a matter of diplomatic negotiations of
Russia's and Japan's Foreign Offices in 1912-1914. The Russian Government, interested in
the maintaining the status quo with Japan, promised to fulfill Japan's requests for the
deportation of Korean guerillas. However, Priamur Governor-General Gondatti, who was aware
ofthe Korean immigrants' riots in Siberia, contradicted the measures by the Russian
Foreign Minister Sazonov, directed towards the prohibition of guerilla activities.
Finally, the negotiations between Japan's Foreign Office, Russian Government and the
Priamur Governor-General, analyzed in the paper, resulted in the prohibition of the
activities of Anti-Japanese associations and deportation of their leaders.
4) Zha, Daojiong, International University of Japan, "'Chinese Capitalism'
and Globalization: Competing Paradigms in Studying Asian Political Economy
"Chinese Capitalism" as a
research paradigm has gained acceptance in the academic community for explaining the
political-economic dynamism in East and Southeast Asia. But it tends to overlook the
structural elements of global capitalist development and Asian governments' public policy
factors that are probably as important as the cultural (i.e., Chinese or
Confucian) determinants. An alternative explanation can be established by sorting out the
juxtaposition of globalization, regionalism, and interdependence in the postwar period.
Furthermore, ethnic Chinese business networks may not post as much of a governance problem
for the various Asian nation-states as literature on "Chinese Capitalism" seems