历史上如果日本一直控制着朝鲜会怎样？

Michael L. Best
B.A. in Psychology & History, University of Massachusetts, Boston (Graduated 2013)
Upvoted by Kevin Lim, lives in South Korea (2009-present)

迈克尔·L·贝斯特 马萨诸塞大学波士顿分校心理学与历史学学士（2013年毕业） 获居住在韩国的凯文·林点赞（2009年至今）

Yes, it would be very different indeed, primarily in that Korea would likely cease exist as a nation. Although its impossible to determine exactly what the Korean peninsula would look like today as a part of Japan, I think we can make a few educated guesses based on the situation in Korea during the 1930’s and 40’s.

答案是肯定的，情况将会截然不同，最主要的一点是韩国很可能不再作为一个国家存在。虽然无法确切判断如今作为日本一部分的朝鲜半岛会是什么样子，但我们可以根据20世纪30年代至40年代朝鲜半岛的局势，做出一些有依据的推测。


Most obviously, the peninsula would not have been bifurcated along the 38th parallel; north and south would remain united. Assuming that Japan either won the Pacific theater in WWII or (more likely) was simply allowed to maintain their imperial territories by the US in the name of holding back Communism, the US would have no reason to divide Korea and the USSR might have a tough time arguing their occupation of it. Ipso facto, there would be no Korean War either. Now, some might think that because of all this, Korea would have been in a much better situation and might be more prosperous in this situation than it currently is. But I don’t think would be the case.

最明显的是，朝鲜半岛不会沿三八线分裂，南北双方将保持统一。假设日本在二战太平洋战场中获胜，或者（更有可能的情况）美国以遏制共产主义为名，允许日本保留其帝国领土，那么美国就没有理由分裂朝鲜，苏联也难以辩解其对朝鲜的占领。事实就是如此，朝鲜战争也就不会爆发。如今，有些人可能会认为，正因如此，韩国的处境会比现在好得多，也可能更加繁荣，但我并不这么认为。

First, let’s assume that in this scenario, Japan still lost the war as it would have been next to impossible for them to continue to hold off against the US and USSSR without any more miraculous “what if” scenarios. Japan spent most of the 1940’s and 50’s rebuilding and required US aid to do so. Thus, much of the Japanese economy (include that of Korea’s as they would be a part of Japan) would have gone towards this. I think I’d be safe in assuming that Korea likely would not see any significant development during this period. Even more to the point, while the Korean War devastated the peninsula, it actually boosted the Japanese economy and thereby further helping with rebuilding. But with no Korean War in this scenario, it likely would have taken more time for Japan to completely recover.

首先，我们假设在这种情况下，日本仍然战败了——因为如果没有更多奇迹般的“假设”场景，他们几乎不可能继续抵挡美国和苏联的进攻。日本在20世纪40年代至50年代的大部分时间里都在推进重建工作，且这一过程离不开美国的援助，因此日本经济的很大一部分（包括作为日本一部分的朝鲜经济）都将投入到重建当中。我有把握推断，朝鲜在这一时期大概率不会出现任何显著发展；更关键的是，尽管朝鲜战争摧毁了朝鲜半岛，却实际刺激了日本经济，进一步推动其重建进程，而在这个假设场景中没有朝鲜战争，日本完全恢复可能需要更长时间。

This doesn’t even take into account that the Japanese economy still would have had to provide for the additional 30 million and growing Korean population that they would be responsible for. For a country that needed to completely rebuild, having their population increased by nearly 40% would have been a bit of a drag. So unless the US injected significantly more financial aid into the country, rebuilding might have been much slower had it held onto Korea. Ultimately, I don’t think Japanese Korea would be any more developed than that modern South Korea, and maybe even less so. Still, that’s good news for North Korea I suppose.

这还未考虑到，日本经济还需供养额外3000万且持续增长的朝鲜人口——这部分人口由日本负责管辖。对于一个需要彻底重建的国家而言，人口增加近40%会成为不小的负担，因此除非美国向日本注入更多财政援助，否则若日本继续控制朝鲜，其重建进程可能会慢得多。归根结底，我认为被日本统治的朝鲜不会比现代韩国更发达，甚至可能更落后，不过我想这对朝鲜来说或许是个好消息。

But what about Korean culture? One person wrote that Koreans would maintain their unique cultural identity as some US territories have. But that does not take into account the policies Japan had in place for Korea during the 1930’s and 40’s that likely would have continued. During that time period, the Korean language was not allowed to be used in schools nor in any official capacities. In fact, the Korean language and Korean history were treated as electives in schools at the time, with the use of Japanese language being mandatory and the curriculum being centered on Japanese history and culture in order to make Koreans better subjects of the Japanese empire.

那韩国文化又会面临怎样的境遇呢？有人写道，朝鲜人会像美国的一些领地那样保持自身独特的文化认同，但这一观点忽略了日本在20世纪30年代至40年代对朝鲜实施的政策——这些政策很可能会继续推行。在那段时期，朝鲜语被禁止在学校及任何官方场合使用，事实上当时朝鲜语和朝鲜历史在学校仅被列为选修课，日语使用则为强制性要求，课程设置也以日本历史和文化为核心，目的是让朝鲜人成为日本帝国更顺从的臣民。

Koreans were, for the most part, even forced to adopt Japanese names (or at least use the Japanese reading of the Hanja that made their Korean names). When my father-in-law was born, his parents were forced to give him a Japanese name (I think Seichi or something), with his name only being given a Korean reading following Korea’s liberation. Not only that, but even much of Korea’s historical sites might have seen further destruction or alteration that they saw during the period between 1910–1945. While Japan did restore some sites, such as Bulguksa temple, anything that was a symbol of Korea’s sovereignty or national heritage was large targeted for destruction.

在很大程度上，朝鲜人甚至被迫改用日本名字（或至少使用构成其朝鲜名字的汉字的日语读音）。我的岳父出生时，他的父母就被迫给他取了日本名字（我记得是诚一之类的），直到朝鲜解放后，他的名字才有了朝鲜语读音。不仅如此，朝鲜的诸多历史遗迹可能会在1910至1945年损毁的基础上遭到进一步破坏或改建，尽管日本确实修复了佛国寺等部分遗址，但任何象征朝鲜主权或民族遗产的事物都成为了主要破坏目标。

None are more famous than the destruction of Korea’s palaces. Gyeongbok Palace was largely destroyed, with the Japanese Government-General building built on top of it and the most of its grounds cleared out. Gyeonghui and Deoksung palaces were also largely destroyed and Changgyeong Palace was converted into a zoo. Only Changdeok Palace was generally spared by the Japanese. So if Japan maintained control of Korea beyond 1945, it’s possible Korean historic and cultural sites might have seen further dismantlement. A model of pre-Japanese Gyeongbokgung (upper area) based on old blueprints and paintings. Gyeongbokgung as a part of the Empire of Japan. Only 10% of the original palace was spared.

其中最著名的便是朝鲜宫殿的损毁：景福宫大部分被摧毁，日本总督府大楼建在其遗址之上，大部分宫苑被清理一空；庆熙宫和德寿宫也多遭损毁，昌庆宫则被改造成动物园；只有昌德宫基本未被日本破坏。因此，若日本在1945年之后继续控制朝鲜，朝鲜的历史文化遗址可能会遭到进一步拆除。（配图说明：基于旧图纸和画作还原的日据时期前的景福宫（上部区域）模型；作为日本帝国一部分的景福宫，仅有10%的原始宫殿得以保留。）

Ultimately, I think Korean culture would be in a very similar state of traditional Native American culture if Japan maintained control of it. It might be taught somewhat with some museums showcasing aspects of it, but I don’t think it would be a living, breathing culture by today. Korean culture survived annexation due to the effort of many independence activists who dedicated their lives to preserving what Japan tried to erase. Although I think there would be many in Korea would would likely continue to work for their independence and keep their culture alive, I think time would ultimately erode their efforts.

归根结底，若日本继续控制朝鲜，朝鲜文化的状态将与传统美洲原住民文化极为相似——或许会有相关课程教授，一些博物馆也会展示其部分内容，但到如今它绝不会再是一种鲜活的、富有生命力的文化。朝鲜文化能在吞并中幸存，得益于众多独立活动家的努力，他们毕生致力于保护日本试图抹去的文化遗产。尽管我认为朝鲜仍会有许多人继续为独立奋斗、维系文化活力，但时间最终会消磨他们的努力。

As many more generations would be born under Japanese rule, Japanese language and culture would only become increasingly ingrained in Koreans. Today, all younger generation Koreans would likely speak Japanese as a first language and would follow Japanese customs, though may have some Korean elements to them, with only the oldest generations using and being fully fluent in Korean. I think the easiest way to see what Koreans under Japanese rule might look like is to look at modern Zainichi’s in Japan (ethnic Koreans born and living in Japan).

随着越来越多世代在日本统治下出生，日语和日本文化只会在朝鲜人心中愈发根深蒂固。如今，年轻一代朝鲜人或许会以日语为母语，遵循日本习俗——尽管可能带有一些朝鲜元素，而只有最年长的一代才会使用并完全流利掌握朝鲜语。要了解被日本统治的朝鲜人可能的状态，最简单的方式便是观察日本现代的在日朝鲜人（在日本出生和生活的朝鲜族人）。

Even today, the group faces discrimination or exclusion by Japanese society, being treated as “others” or “foreigners” even if they only speak Japanese and are fully integrated into Japanese culture. To be accepted, many often hide their Korean heritage, while those who face the harshest discriminations often turn to crime (the Yakuza, in fact, welcome Zainichi with open arms as they technically view themselves as social rejects as well). I’m not saying Koreans under Japanese rule would face this exact situation, but this coupled with the fact that Koreans were treated as second class citizens in their own country by the Japanese during the annexation period, suggests that the social status of Koreans would not be equal to ethnic Japanese.

即便在今天，这一群体仍面临日本社会的歧视或排斥——即便他们只说日语、完全融入日本文化，也会被视为“异类”或“外国人”。为获得接纳，许多人常隐藏自己的朝鲜血统，而那些遭遇最严重歧视的人则往往走向犯罪道路（事实上，日本黑帮对在日朝鲜人敞开怀抱，因为他们在某种程度上也将自己视为社会弃儿）。我并非说被日本统治的朝鲜人会面临完全相同的境遇，但结合吞并时期日本在朝鲜本土将朝鲜人视为二等公民的事实来看，朝鲜人的社会地位绝不会与日本本土人平等。

Just so there’s no misunderstandings, I’ll conclude by saying that I don’t think Korea under Japan would be hell on earth or that it would have been terrible. As the world was decolonizing anyway, I assume Japan would become a bit more humane in their treatment of Korea. The peninsula as a whole would probably be at around South Korea’s current economic level, though I image most of the economy would still be focused on the Japanese archipelago rather than the peninsula. But as a culture, I don’t think Korea would really exist anymore.

为避免误解，我最后想说：我并不认为被日本统治的朝鲜会是人间地狱，也不会糟糕透顶。毕竟当时世界正走向非殖民化，我推测日本对朝鲜的统治会变得稍有人道。整个朝鲜半岛的经济水平或许会与现在的韩国相当，但我认为大部分经济重心仍会集中在日本列岛，而非朝鲜半岛；但作为一种文化，朝鲜将不复存在。

It would be no less distinct from Japan as Okinawa currently is as the Okinawan language is only spoken by the elderly and is classified, by the Japanese government, as a dialect of Japanese rather than a separate language. Furthermore, there is plenty of reason to suspect that ethnic Koreans would likely face some level of social discrimination by ethnic Japanese, though perhaps not necessarily to the same extent as seen in pre-1945. The lifestyle of many Koreans might see some improvement, but it all comes at the cost of their cultural identity and heritage.

它与日本的差异不会比现在的冲绳更大——冲绳语仅有老年人使用，且被日本政府归类为日语方言，而非独立语言。此外，有充分理由推测，朝鲜族人可能会面临日本本土人一定程度的社会歧视，尽管程度未必如1945年之前那般严重。许多朝鲜人的生活方式或许会有所改善，但这一切都要以牺牲他们的文化认同和遗产为代价。

Orlando Barrios A refugee from AH.com

奥兰多·巴里奥斯

Well, then we have a Japan fully invested in the affairs of continental northwestern Asia: this means a Japan far more militarized (no treaty with the US, rivalry with the USSR and China), and devoting quite a percentage of its GDP in the military. And that would mean a poorer Japan. Also, it would mean a policy of continuos Japanese investment in Korea, if only to keep the colonial infrastructure working and fortifying the peninsula against any Sino/Soviet advance.

那么，日本将全面投身于亚洲大陆西北部事务：这意味着日本的军事化程度会大幅提高（与美国无条约约束，与苏联、中国存在竞争），并将相当比例的GDP投入军事领域，而这会导致日本变得更贫穷。同时，这也意味着日本将推行对朝持续投资政策——至少是为维持殖民基础设施运转，并强化朝鲜半岛防御以抵御中苏推进。

The situation of Korea would be ‘interesting’, to put it mildly: would Koreans like to stay as part of Japan, no matter what? I doubt it: as Randy McDonald have already mentioned, this Korea would look suspiciously similar to French Algeria, nominally integrated into the metropolis but with most of its population disenfranchised except for an assimilated elite of pro-Japanese évolués. With a (revolutionary? Revanchist Nationalist?) China and the USSR right at the border, how much time would have to pass before a National Liberation / People’s War starts?

说得委婉些，朝鲜的处境会很“有趣”：无论如何，朝鲜人会愿意留在日本版图内吗？我对此表示怀疑。正如兰迪·麦克唐纳所言，这样的朝鲜会与法属阿尔及利亚惊人相似——名义上融入宗主国，但除被同化的亲日精英阶层外，大多数人口被剥夺公民权利。边境紧邻一个（革命性质的？复仇主义民族主义的？）中国和苏联，那么民族解放战争/人民战争多久后会爆发呢？

Orlando Barrios

奥兰多·巴里奥斯

I doubt there would be a Japanese Korea in 2019: I think sooner rather than later Japan would face its own Algerian War in the peninsula, with either the USSR and/or China supporting the pro-independence forces. Decolonization was big in the 50s and 60s, after all.

我认为2019年不会存在被日本统治的朝鲜：日本迟早会在朝鲜半岛面临属于自己的“阿尔及利亚战争”，苏联和/或中国将会支持独立武装力量。毕竟，非殖民化运动在20世纪50至60年代声势浩大。

But this Korea would be somewhat Japanized by then: the Korean language & scxt would recover (as it did in Poland after the Great War), but it would not be surprising to see plenty of bilingual Koreans and a very large Korean community in Japan: a Zainichi identity would not be as controversial as it is (was?) in our timeline.

但到那时，这个朝鲜会在一定程度上被日本化：朝鲜语言文字会得到恢复（就像一战后的波兰那样），但出现大量双语朝鲜人以及在日本形成庞大朝鲜社群的情况并不奇怪——在日朝鲜人的身份认同不会像我们这个时间线中那样具有争议性（或者说曾经具有争议性？）。

But influences are bi-directional, and kimuchi would have become very popular in Japan, together with horumon; and Koreans and Japanese will have endless flame wars about who had the idea of adding ssamjang to the yakiniku.

但文化影响是双向的，泡菜（kimuchi）会和牛杂火锅（horumon）一样在日本广受欢迎；而且朝鲜人和日本人会就“是谁先想到把蒜蓉辣酱（ssamjang）加到烤肉（yakiniku）里”这一问题展开无休止的激烈争论。

Randy McDonald A long-time fan of alternate history

兰迪·麦克唐纳（长期热衷于另类历史研究）

I don't think that the wholesale assimilation of Koreans into a greater Japan would have been likely. Korea could only have remained Japanese if Japan had avoided the excesses of the long wars in China and the Pacific.

原问题：如果朝鲜没有从日本解放，其命运会如何？ 我认为朝鲜人被整体同化进“大日本”的可能性不大。只有当日本避免在中国和太平洋地区长期战争中的极端行为时，朝鲜才有可能继续处于日本统治之下。

Before this, Japanese rule seems not to have aimed for the assimilation of Koreans. For instance, the shift from (broadly speaking) bilingual education to Japanese-only instruction occurred only very late in Japan's rule of the peninsula, just years before the Second World War and well into the conflict with China, with even Japanese students in Korea being encouraged to learn the Korean language.

在此之前，日本的统治似乎并未以同化朝鲜人为目标。例如，从（广义上说的）双语教育转向纯日语教学，是在日本统治朝鲜半岛的后期才发生的——就在二战前几年，且当时日本已深度卷入对华冲突；甚至在朝鲜的日本学生也被鼓励学习朝鲜语。

Even if Japan did try to assimilate Koreans and somehow managed to retain the peninsula, I question whether this would have been possible. Ukrainians have been subjected to concerted attempts by Russians to assimilate them into Russia politically for centuries, but these have failed.

即便日本确实尝试同化朝鲜人，且不知通过何种方式保住了朝鲜半岛，我也怀疑这种同化是否能成功。几个世纪以来，俄罗斯人一直齐心协力试图在政治上把乌克兰人同化为俄罗斯人，但这些尝试都以失败告终。

In the past, I've seen scholars of Korea compare the situation of that nation under Japanese rule to those of Ireland under Britain or Poland during the partitions. It works, inasmuch as these two nations were nations of long standing that lost their independence, owing to the greater strength of their neighbours, and ended up undergoing long and costly struggles to regain their independence.

过去，我看到研究朝鲜的学者将朝鲜在日本统治下的处境，比作英国统治下的爱尔兰或被瓜分时期的波兰。这种类比是合理的，因为这两个国家都是历史悠久的民族国家，由于邻国实力更强而丧失了独立，最终都经历了漫长且代价高昂的斗争才重新获得独立。

More recently, scholars have begun comparing the relationship of Japan with Korea to that of France with Algeria, with the territories of the colonized areas being seen as integral parts of the metropole but their populations less so. I would note that none of these situations--not Ireland, not Poland, not Algeria--ended very well, with occupying powers eventually withdrawing once the costs of occupation exceeded the benefits but only at great cost to everyone involved.

近年来，学者们开始将日韩关系比作法阿（法国与阿尔及利亚）关系——殖民地的领土被视为宗主国不可分割的一部分，但殖民地人民却不被同等看待。我想指出的是，这些情况最终都没有好的结局——无论是爱尔兰、波兰还是阿尔及利亚，当占领的成本超过收益时，占领国最终都会撤军，但这一过程却让所有相关方都付出了巨大代价。

Thijs De Visschere

蒂斯・德・维舍雷

The only situation in which this would have been possible was if Japan had negotiated a peace in which they have made conditions that were beneficial to them.
I think this could have only happened if the USSR didn’t join the war against Japan and in an alternative timeline where the atomic bombs didn’t drop on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

这种情况只有一种可能发生，即日本通过谈判达成和平协议，并在协议中为自身争取到有利条件。
我认为，只有在苏联没有对日宣战，且历史走向另一个分支——美国没有向广岛和长崎投放原子弹的情况下，这种假设才有可能实现。

So, Japan was at the later stages of the war busy with preparing their homeland for a defense to the last man, and if they had been succesfull in this they may have been able to negotiate a peace in which they could have kept Korea.
This wouldn’t have been very good for Korea, the whole mentality of Japan in its politicy of expansion was to gain land from which they could extract resources. Korea would have been reduced to a puppet state and they would have been required to supply the Japanese army with manpower, the output of their factories and other horrible things that the Japanese instilled on their occupied territories, like the practice of forcing women to serve the Japanese soldiers in every way possible. See Comfort women for more info on this. Comfort women - Wikipedia

事实上，二战后期日本正全力筹备本土“玉碎”防御计划。若该计划成功实施，日本或许能在和谈中保住对朝鲜的控制权。
但这对朝鲜绝非好事。日本的扩张政策本质是掠夺土地与资源，若朝鲜继续被日本掌控，很可能沦为其傀儡政权，被迫为日本军队输送人力、提供工厂产出，还要承受日本在占领区推行的种种暴行，例如强迫女性充当日军性奴隶的“慰安妇”制度，更多相关信息可查阅维基百科“慰安妇”词条。

Korea would maybe not been divided in a communist and a democratic part, but in a whole it would not have been better off.

或许朝鲜不会分裂为共产主义和资本主义两个阵营，但从整体来看，其处境并不会比现在更好。

Erick Moon 埃里克・穆恩 Korea would be different if it were still under Japanese occupation. The difference would be quite more substantil than now. They’re be no North Korea and no Communism and no North Koreans. The United Korea would be wealthy from japan’s powerful economy, and Japan at the time would still be modern japan in the 80;s 90;s and 2000’s and Kore a would be much more developed and much more affluent being part of a nation with a very strong economy.

若朝鲜仍被日本占领，其现状将与现在截然不同，这种差异会比我们想象的更为显著。世界上不会存在朝鲜这个国家，也不会有共产主义制度和朝鲜人民。一个统一的朝鲜或许能依托日本强大的经济实力实现富裕，而日本在20世纪80、90年代及21世纪初仍是现代化强国，作为日本的一部分，朝鲜会因依附这一经济大国而实现更高水平的发展，变得更加富足。

North Korea would just like South Korea and South Korea would be like South Korea as well. There a no more insecurities due to North Korea presence because North Korea doesn’t exist that time. Japanese. Korean people would still keep all their culture but be more Japanese influence unlike Today South Korea only has just American and even some Japanese influence but not as much as it would it stayed under Japanese occupation or colonialism.

届时既不存在朝鲜，自然也不会有因朝鲜存在而产生的安全隐患，所谓的“朝鲜”会和如今的韩国别无二致，而韩国也会维持现有的发展状态。朝鲜民众或许能保留自身的文化，但会受到日本更深层次的影响。反观如今的韩国，虽也受美国及部分日本文化影响，但这种影响程度远不及长期处于日本殖民统治下的情况。

Today some many Koreans in Both North and South Korea don’t know Japanese at all, especially the current generation and very well because Korea became independent from japan,m so the Japanese influence very much died out after Korea independence from Japanese rule. So Korea would have more Japanese influence if still under Japanese rule unlike South Korea and North Korea having less influence from japan due to their independence. If you see Korea under Japan and you see Korea now that’s very a big significant difference.

如今，朝鲜和韩国的许多民众，尤其是年轻一代，完全不懂日语。这主要是因为朝鲜早已摆脱日本殖民获得独立，日本的影响力在独立后大幅消退。因此，若朝鲜仍处于日本统治下，其受日本文化的影响会远超现在，这与朝韩两国独立后日本影响力减弱的现状形成了鲜明对比。无论是被日本统治的朝鲜，还是如今分裂的朝韩，二者之间的差异都是巨大且显著的。
Richard Hardy 理查德・哈迪

Not a chance: Roosevelt made it clear to both Germany and Japan that nothing less than unconditional surrender would be accepted.
Roosevelt died just before the war in Europe ended.

这绝无可能。罗斯福曾明确向德国和日本表示，同盟国只接受无条件投降。
而罗斯福本人在欧洲战场结束前夕便已去世。

After the two atom bombs were dropped on Japan, a new Japanese government let the allies know that they would surrender if they could keep their Emporer/God.
To save lives, the new USA President, Harry Truman agreed as long as the Emporer denied that he was a god. General MacArthur, in charge of the USA occupation forces in Japan, was probably the best Mikado that Japan ever had: for hundreds of years - because they were ‘gods’, Japanese Emperors stayed behind their palace walls (though the future Hirohito was educated in England).

美国向日本投放两颗原子弹后，日本新政府向同盟国提出，若能保留天皇的地位（当时天皇被视为神），日本便愿意投降。
为避免更多人员伤亡，时任美国总统哈里·杜鲁门同意了这一请求，但前提是天皇必须公开否认自己的“神”身份。负责日本占领事务的麦克阿瑟将军，或许是日本数百年来最出色的“天皇”——此前数百年间，日本天皇因被奉为神明，一直深居皇宫之中（尽管裕仁天皇曾在英国接受教育）。

Under MacArthur Hirohito came out to visit his people like a constitutional monarchy.

在麦克阿瑟的推动下，裕仁天皇开始像君主立宪制国家的君主一样，走出皇宫接见民众。