If history is based on historian's interpretation of facts, then how far can history be used as a valid argument?
Many times in this territorial spats, countries like to use history to "prove" that this island, or this territory belongs to them. They will also like to use history to justify their claims, For example, recently China has used their history with Japan to claim the Diaoyu islands and often times use history to provoke nationalistic feelings.
I am a slightly anti-Japanese in terms of history (not the girls) but in this case, I feel that Korea really deserved the islands. Personally, in seeing 'spat' as a title, I think this is a very deregulatory word to use when it comes to condemnation. News and media should become more neutral to certain situations or else as Nathalie said, provoke nationalistic feelings.
Does language use determine/fuel nationalistic emotion?
1. Read the article. 2. Write your thoughts. 3. Begin your post with a Knowledge Issue (KI). 4. See me or Mr. Jones if you need help with your KI.