Why is Mongolia in and not Korea

[MisterBarca]

Korea certainly was subservient to one Asian power or another for a good proportion of the last millennium, usually as a vassal to various Chinese dynasties. It's only in the last 400 years that Japan has become more powerful than Korea to be sure though.

I do not contest the fact that China was the dominant power or hegemonic in East Asia--including vis-a-vis Korea. My problem has to do with a number of people presuming that Japan was often in the same hegemonic position prior to the Meiji reforms. And this is a common belief in the West, as some of the comments from presumably Westerners on this thread corroborate.

 

[usi]

I was actually responding a number of posts
...
So I do not think my original post on Japan's geopolitical position in East Asian history was unprovoked or inappropriately off-topic.

Yeah... unlike me who ignored these totally-off-topics altogether (though you changed my opinion later).

And you were the same as people whom you dislike, given that you did not provide any evidence either.
Unless the audience already think that your ideas are right, there is no way that the audience can think that your ideas are better than others'.

Also, it is a historical fact that Korea occasionally had to obey Asian Major powers (China, Mongolia, and then later Japan) though.

 

[MisterBarca]

Yeah... unlike me who ignored these totally-off-topics altogether (though you changed my opinion later).

And you were the same as people whom you dislike, given that you did not provide any evidence either.
Unless the audience already think that your ideas are right, there is no way that the audience can think that your ideas are better than others'.

Also, it is a historical fact that Korea occasionally had to obey Asian Major powers (China, Mongolia, and then later Japan) though.

Hold on. I am not ignoring you. I am responding to your long post, and chatting with a friend on Gmail at the same time, and I do not multi-task efficiently

And I never contested that Korea was not a major regional power (at least since the collapse of Koguryo). You keep arguing against strawmen. Again, I think part of the problem is that you assume I am a hardcore Korean nationalist like the original poster and reflexively--and unfairly--lump me with people of his ilk.

 

[Licinia Eudoxia]

I do not contest the fact that China was the dominant power or hegemonic in East Asia--including vis-a-vis Korea. My problem has to do with a number of people presuming that Japan was often in the same hegemonic position prior to the Meiji reforms. And this is a common belief in the West, as some of the comments from presumably Westerners on this thread corroborate.

As a Westerner, I will corroborate.

For others, I posted earlier in the thread explaining the possible reasons why the West, and United States in particular, has a tendency to overestimate the role Japan has played historically in East Asia.

And for Usi, not to continue an argument, but I understand MisterBarca's frustration. It's fine to ask for sources sometimes. Other times, all it really does it bog down a pretty fluid discussion over something non-serious. If we change from not posting sources for everything, to posting sources for everything, it becomes a much different type of discussion.

To complicate matters even further, some people will just ask for sources anytime they disagree with something, using it to disregard people.

So when someone enters a thread and starts asking for sources, it's worth it to try and decide whether or not they're just trying to agitate or invalidate you, or if they actually would like to read a source. Personally, if I wanted to cite sources, I'd go do actual work, instead of BSing back and forth on a message board.

 

[Thormodr]

I do not contest the fact that China was the dominant power or hegemonic in East Asia--including vis-a-vis Korea. My problem has to do with a number of people presuming that Japan was often in the same hegemonic position prior to the Meiji reforms. And this is a common belief in the West, as some of the comments from presumably Westerners on this thread corroborate.

No problem.

China has certainly been more powerful for a large part of recorded history vis a vis Korea.

Japan was certainly a more powerful nation in the past 400 years in regards to Korea and especially the last 200 years. Korea really stumbled badly in the 19th century due to a corrupt and inefficient government and a parasitic upper class.

 

[Licinia Eudoxia]

I just want to point out that Japan has played baseball for 120 years, and Korea has only been playing baseball for 20 years, and yet Korea thrashed Japan in the World Baseball Classic. Take THAT.

Even still, Ichiro is still awesome.

 

[Thormodr]

As a Westerner, I will corroborate.

For others, I posted earlier in the thread explaining the possible reasons why the West, and United States in particular, has a tendency to overestimate the role Japan has played historically in East Asia.

And for Usi, not to continue an argument, but I understand MisterBarca's frustration. It's fine to ask for sources sometimes. Other times, all it really does it bog down a pretty fluid discussion over something non-serious. If we change from not posting sources for everything, to posting sources for everything, it becomes a much different type of discussion.

To complicate matters even further, some people will just ask for sources anytime they disagree with something, using it to disregard people.

So when someone enters a thread and starts asking for sources, it's worth it to try and decide whether or not they're just trying to agitate or invalidate you, or if they actually would like to read a source. Personally, if I wanted to cite sources, I'd go do actual work, instead of BSing back and forth on a message board.

On the contrary, someone should be able to back up what they say with some sort of proof. Especially if they say something that is not commonly accepted knowledge.

In that way, we all can potentially learn something new or discover a new way of looking at something.

 

[Thormodr]

I just want to point out that Japan has played baseball for 120 years, and Korea has only been playing baseball for 20 years, and yet Korea thrashed Japan in the World Baseball Classic. Take THAT.

Even still, Ichiro is still awesome.

Take what exactly???

Who has won the first two World Baseball Classics?

 

[lovexylitol]

BTW, is it Korean way of debate that some people just say whatever they wanna say and then end with "I won't continue"?
Frankly speaking, that sounds very rude and uncivilized.

This is really getting irritating. If you really keep on going like this, it would really be only boring to other people. I was under the impression I was not in debate. What I did was mark your mistake.

Now I'm just saying this to uni specifically,

Would you like if I say "BTW, is it a Japanese way of butting in to any east-asian thread and jot down how Japan is almighty. Frankly speaking, that sounds very rude and uncivilized." You did get off topic. You did try to discredit other people by saying they were off topic. And now you are trying to discredit me because I just want to evade creating another off-topic post? That sure is mean and rude.

 

[Licinia Eudoxia]

Again, it entirely depends on what's being discussed, but seriously, there are some forums I've been to where every single discussion devolves into an argument about logical fallacies, technical details, citing sources, or the validity of citing sources.

It gets incredibly tedious. Some citing is fine, but this isn't exactly a thesis defense. If you want to learn more or check about what someone is saying, if you really want to, then you could try googling it yourself! Sorry, that is kinda offtopic but.

 

[Thormodr]

Again, it entirely depends on what's being discussed, but seriously, there are some forums I've been to where every single discussion devolves into an argument about logical fallacies, technical details, citing sources, or the validity of citing sources.

It gets incredibly tedious. Some citing is fine, but this isn't exactly a thesis defense. If you want to learn more or check about what someone is saying, if you really want to, then you could try googling it yourself! Sorry, that is kinda offtopic but.

Sometimes the source can be pretty obscure. I think it actually adds to the discussion since no one here is truly an expert on such matters.

People can be persuaded to your point of view easier if you can actually back up what you are saying. It adds credence to your argument or discussion point. That's all I meant.

 

[usi]

And for Usi, not to continue an argument, but I understand MisterBarca's frustration. It's fine to ask for sources sometimes. Other times, all it really does it bog down a pretty fluid discussion over something non-serious. If we change from not posting sources for everything, to posting sources for everything, it becomes a much different type of discussion.

At least, I want some good logical reasonings than just saying, "This is the true history!"
Otherwise debates will be full of childish talks like, "I know!" "No, you are an ignoramus! I know!"

Asian countries have long history, so there are records (e.g., old historical books).
While I am far from knowledgeable about history, I do know it is wrong that people can't provide sources, preferably primary sources.

I just want to point out that Japan has played baseball for 120 years, and Korea has only been playing baseball for 20 years, and yet Korea thrashed Japan in the World Baseball Classic. Take THAT.

Even still, Ichiro is still awesome.

Yeah, African countries are more developed than others, since they run fast.

 

[usi]

This is really getting irritating. If you really keep on going like this, it would really be only boring to other people. I was under the impression I was not in debate. What I did was mark your mistake.

Now I'm just saying this to uni specifically,

Would you like if I say "BTW, is it a Japanese way of butting in to any east-asian thread and jot down how Japan is almighty. Frankly speaking, that sounds very rude and uncivilized." You did get off topic. You did try to discredit other people by saying they were off topic. And now you are trying to discredit me because I just want to evade creating another off-topic post? That sure is mean and rude.

So at least you learned that you were rude.
And now you are making up a weird fantasy story because you got criticized by me...

 

[Thormodr]

At least, I want some good logical reasonings than just saying, "This is the true history!"
Otherwise debates will be full of childish talks like, "I know!" "No, you are an ignoramus! I know!"

Asian countries have long history, so there are records (e.g., old historical books).
While I am far from knowledgeable about history, I do know it is wrong that people can't provide sources, preferably primary sources.



Yeah, African countries are more civilized than others, since they run fast.

In the six years I lived in South Korea I have observed that South Koreans put way too much stock in athletic success and their worthiness as a nation. There's way, way too much nationalism going on in South Korea. It is a bit off putting for foreigners to be sure.

 

[andrewlt]

At least, I want some good logical reasonings than just saying, "This is the true history!"
Otherwise debates will be full of childish talks like, "I know!" "No, you are an ignoramus! I know!"

Asian countries have long history, so there are records (e.g., old historical books).
While I am far from knowledgeable about history, I do know it is wrong that people can't provide sources, preferably primary sources.

I would have to agree with Licinia on this one. Requiring one side in an argument to have a source while not requiring the other to have a source is ludicrous. I find it extremely irritating that people think that opposing arguments must always have a source while arguments for their side somehow doesn't require any in return.

 

[Licinia Eudoxia]

Eh, nationalism is one of the most destructive forces in the world. Not much good comes from it. And give me an hour or two, and I can give you a whole list of reasons you shouldn't be proud of your country, no matter what country you live in.

 

[Thormodr]

I would have to agree with Licinia on this one. Requiring one side in an argument to have a source while not requiring the other to have a source is ludicrous. I find it extremely irritating that people think that opposing arguments must always have a source while arguments for their side somehow doesn't require any in return.

I don't know where anyone got that idea.

I think it should be a two way street. Both sides should be able to back up what they say.

 

[MisterBarca]

It is a topic about Korea and Mongolia, not Japan.
The thing is, you just came in making off-topic comments and then later made ad-hominem attacks to me.

As I replied above, I do not believe my comments were off-topic, since I was specifically responding to a number of posts like this one:

Umm Korea has been a glorified colonial plaything of China and Japan for the majority of its history.

Now, I grant that I should have explicitly quoted those posts, but I was in a hurry, and I thought there was a sufficient number of posts making the same uninformed comments to make it obvious what I was referring to in my original post.

I concede that I made the ad hominem comments initially, and I have already apologized for it. Ordinarily, I would begin to ignore my online interlocutors when exchanges have already degenerated this much, but I will make an exception since 1) the degeneration of the exchange is at least partly my fault, and 2) we probably do not differ much on Korea-Japan relations as our initial disagreement would lead one to believe. And again I reiterate for the umpteenth point that I am not a Korean nationalist, and that I in no way support some of the outlandish claims that the original poster made. In fact, I have been highly critical of South Korea's lunatic nationalist fringe even in print, under my real name.

Then, is there any research articles that state how they estimated the population?

I am not trying to say Korea badly, but your number suggests that the Korean city > Rome, which sounds as weird as "Koreans invented Chinese characters."

Again, you are being unfair and borderline trolling and perhaps even ad hominem in comparing my numbers (which are often reproduced on Western demographers) to silly Korean nationalist claims like "Koreans invented Chinese characters." Comments like this will only make it difficult to seriously engage you.

As for the Kyongju population estimates, the Silla dynasty--just like many Chinese dynasties--was highly bureaucratized and conducted regular census. The precise household number of 178,936 is from Samguk Yusa--one of the two canonical histories of ancient Korea--that was compiled a few hundred years after Silla's fall during the Koryo dynasty. It is generally believed that the author took the household number from the actual census records, as most primary records are presumed to have survived at the time, esp. since Koryo's annexation of Silla was not violent and thus no burning and pillaging of the royal property.

I also do not understand how the fact that Kyongju was bigger than Rome around 750 AD is such a fantastic proposition that you try to pillory as it being. Rome had declined by then and was no longer so glorious. In fact, your Wikipedia source gives its population at 500 AD as 100,000.

Why don't you just write the page number?

Don't throw me the burden of reading the whole book whose title is as funny as "Made in Korea: Chung Ju Yung and the rise of Hyundai."

The link leads directly to the relevant page. You do not need to read the whole book.

If I argue against you, I'm a troll.

And because I aksed for sources, you took it as a "fight."

Again, I may have over-hastily judged you as a troll, though some of your subsequent comments remain in my opinion borderline trolling.

And this is probably akin to your hasty, reflexive mis-judgment in identifying me as a typical Korean nationalist. I wish I were that animal sometimes, because it would make living amongst Koreans much easier and conflict-free

 

[usi]

I would have to agree with Licinia on this one. Requiring one side in an argument to have a source while not requiring the other to have a source is ludicrous. I find it extremely irritating that people think that opposing arguments must always have a source while arguments for their side somehow doesn't require any in return.

I guess you didn't read my older posts, as I didn't even care about the other side.

But when I joined, I provided my evidence, and I said I can add more.
I just didn't add more because I was not asked to provide them.

 

[MisterBarca]

And for Usi, not to continue an argument, but I understand MisterBarca's frustration. It's fine to ask for sources sometimes. Other times, all it really does it bog down a pretty fluid discussion over something non-serious. If we change from not posting sources for everything, to posting sources for everything, it becomes a much different type of discussion.

To complicate matters even further, some people will just ask for sources anytime they disagree with something, using it to disregard people.

So when someone enters a thread and starts asking for sources, it's worth it to try and decide whether or not they're just trying to agitate or invalidate you, or if they actually would like to read a source. Personally, if I wanted to cite sources, I'd go do actual work, instead of BSing back and forth on a message board.

Precisely.