Pro-Green “Imperial Subjects” (Kominka) are perhaps the Taiwanese most fond of using the term “Japanese Rule” (Rizhi). But as a Taiwanese person, should you use Rizhi or “Japanese Occupation” (Riju)? Let me clarify why these “Green-brained” 🦠 perspectives are so irritating to many.
The term Rizhi, favored by pro-Green groups, is rooted in the Japanese perspective—viewing Taiwan as an inferior colony to be administered. However, from the perspective of the Chinese nation and the Republic of China (R.O.C.), Riju is the correct term. From the signing of the Treaty of Shimonoseki onwards, the island was occupied and “stolen” for a brief 50-year period until Japan’s defeat in WWII.
To those who insist on arguing for “Japanese Rule” over “Occupation,” I have only one question: If it was merely ‘Rule,’ why did Japan have to return Taiwan after losing WWII?
Only thieves and robbers are required to return items because they were stolen or occupied when they are caught by the police, right?
Take Hokkaido or Okinawa today—they remain Japanese territory; that is what you call “Japanese Rule”! If a mobster used violence and coercion to seize your property, would you say the mob was simply “governing” it for you?
It is truly pathetic enough to bring one to tears of laughter that on an island abandoned by the Japanese, there are still people who spend their days yearning for the period when they were managed by them.