The Tempos of Decolonization

To what extent does revolutionary violence delay or accelerate the process of decolonization? In early-twentieth-century colonial Korea, anticolonial thinkers were divided over the temporal role of violence in decolonization. On the one hand, pessimists preferred waiting for the right moment to achieve decolonization without resorting to violence. On the other hand, optimists sought to bring about that moment through the uncompromising use of violence against the colonizer. This debate is evident in the writings of Lee Gwang-su (1892–1950) and Cho So-ang (1887–1958). For Lee, the colonized would eventually achieve decolonization by patiently awaiting the right moment for negotiations. He argued that reactionary violence would be counterproductive, as it would merely provoke the colonizer and eliminate the possibility of constructive dialogue. In contrast, Cho believed that the colonized must actively initiate decolonization through the use of violence against the colonizer. For him, a violent revolution would foster confidence and pride among the colonized, ignite solidarity with other colonized peoples, and ultimately compel the colonizer to reconsider their grip on power