Historians say that Silla unified
the Korean peninsula when it made both Goguryeo and Baekjae surrender in front
of its army. Isn't it that Silla merely conquered its neighbors? Regarding
what historians say, do you think Silla, Goguryeo, and Baekjae were originally a
family? Which is correct—unify or conquer?
Attempts to clarify the history of the concept
during the past few decades were successful, and revealed the somewhat
inconvenient truth of how the term Minjok was introduced. It was coined during
the Japanese rule of the Korean peninsula by several intellects, including
Shin-Chae-Ho—who was interested in the history of the Han-Minjok as seen from
his academic works. Shin introduced this
term as he felt a strong necessity to integrate the Chosun people against the
Japanese colonial regime. By expanding his academic field to the origins of the
Han-Minjok—as exposed from ‘Chosun SangGoSa’(History of Chosun)— he managed to codify
the Dan-Gun myth, which basically asserts how holy Han-Minjok is. Along with Shin, Yi-Kwong Su also contributed to the construction of the concept. He stated that Han-Minjok is an extremely pure ethnic group in terms of bloodline, culture, and personality. Due to
Shin, Yi, and other outstanding figures like Kim-Gu, numerous patriotic individuals
(or groups) sacrificed their convenience or lives to protect the sacred minjok
which they were a part of. Indeed, Shin’s attempt—differentiating the
Han-Minjok from other ethnic groups by incorporating the Tangun myth and other
materials—was successful. It must be acknowledged at this point that Shin’s concept
of Minjok included a large sense of exclusiveness against other groups.
Blood as an ultimate discriminator
In fact, some tools are very attractive. Look at the book below. It is easy to guess what that book is about, isn't? I read that when I was 13 years old. I was literally facinated in the whole Minjok thing.
Oh, those funny Chinese characters mean 'Tae Baek San-Maek', a mountain which is believed to represent the soul of the Han-Minjok.
To help your understanding about how this book makes you hyper, let me quote a few sentences from it.
"It was midnight. Kim then turned his head, looking at the mountains. They were plain black. Suddenly, he could see the peaks of them burning. There were people on the peaks, waving their torches! He was not seeing an illusion. The people were Kim's fallen friends and families during the war. There was even Park, his beloved wife. They were not dead! They were alive, right in the heart of Kim. He could feel them burning his heart. Kim was alive."
The book is recognized as one of the best books in modern Korean literature. Interestingly, although it is all about Minjok-Minjok-Minjok, it was banned during President Park-Jung-Hee's regime. The novel does suggest that we should embrace North Korea (which tried to assasinate Park at 1968), but it really makes the hearts of readers 'boil'. Why? Aren't North Koreans also supposed to be a part of Minjok, according to Shin-Chae-Ho?
Unarguably, leaders distorted the concept whenever they wanted to. Silla's King did, Shin-Chae-Ho did, and Park did. It was meant to be like this from the beginning. Indeed, the concept of Minjok is an illusion.
This type of ethnic nationalism existed in other regions of the world also, although it slightly differs from place to place. France and Germany were fond of using it, and they call it 'Romantic nationalism'.
Then, have you ever thought that 'Cinderella' actually advocates the German ethnic group? In fact, it does. 'A Good Bargain' is another piece written by Brothers Grimm which was meant to affect the way children think about people outside their community. Doesn't this immediately strike you? Yes, it is me reading 'Tae-Baek San-Maek'!
Obviously, the history of ethnic nationalism is quite long. So is it in Korea. It was Shin-Chae-Ho who introduced the term Minjok, but that "all Koreans are originally one" is also mentioned in Sam-Guk-Sa-Gi, which discusses the history of Silla, Goguryeo, and Baekjae. (History around the 9th century)
Due to repetitive modifications by modern Korea’s leaders, the idea of Minjok has become an awkward mixture of political propagandas and exclusiveness. By emphasizing the sacredness of the Han-Minjok, political leaders managed to inject totalitarian idea of ‘one for all’ into Koreans. Incorporating this into, say, commercial movies, was carried out by the government to spread this idea to the public. Chomsky’s ‘Necessary Illusions’ and Niccolo Machiavelli’s ‘II Principe’ can be referred for theoretical reasons why the administration did so. Feeling a sense of responsibility for his or her Minjok, people sacrificed their personal interests for national interests—which brought Korea immense economic development. Representatively, President Park-Chung-Hee, being famous for his contribution to Korea’s economy, was in favor of using this illusion. The goals of his administration were clear: economic development and national security. He used the concept of Minjok to emphasize that an individual has to sacrifice him or herself for the sake of Minjok, for their brothers and sisters. People who did not cooperate were punished for treason of nation, and President Park’s propaganda justified these unjust actions. Hence, the modern concept of Minjok inherited the totalitarian ideas and exclusiveness from that of the Japanese colonial era.
War & Battlefield.
These are entirely different concepts. A war is somewhat cool and awesome. A battlefield is horrible and wretched. Who declares war? The leaders of a nation do. Who fights in the battlefields of the war? Poor, innocent soliders do. Then, who made the concept of Minjok? Who were sacrificed under the name of it? Does the end justify the means? That truly is a big, difficult question which I will have to figure out the answer from now on.
But some people just go too far. Several critics urge that any kind of bond in Korea should be completely terminated, and Koreans should go for cosmopolitanism. However, effacing community spirit will not lead to globalization and multiculturalism. A catalyst that can fuse individuals is necessary, especially in
this era of globalization. As a counterexample, France regrets indiscriminately
embracing other ethnic groups, who are left out of society and effacing French
cultures—according to the media and president Nicolas Sarkozy. Reserving
the heritage of ancestors is a prerequisite of globalization, and if this is
not satisfied, individuals will no longer feel obliged nor a sense of belonging.
As a result, they may feel more alienated from the social contract—then what
would happen if foreign people poured in? A pivot that is not offensive to others but protects the ethnic identity at the same time is what Korea needs. That would prevent the vague idea of 'global community’ invade substantive communities and hinder social order.
What should be reconsidered is the specific type of community created in the idea of Minjok. What should be retained is an alternative pivot that recognizes the Korean community and embraces others at the same time. That clarification would be expedient in figuring out the role of the concept of Minjok in contemporary Korea. The nation is currently in the middle of globalization. As Professor Shin-Gi-Wook suggests in his essay ‘The Contradiction of Korean Globalization’, many Koreans do not think their identity would perish even if Korea becomes more globalized. That they wish Korean identity and global culture to coexist is definitely desirable. Surely, globalization without national identity would do no good—if so, it would be nothing more than a strawberry smoothie full of frozen strawberry pieces. A new pivot in accordance with urgent demands as a firm axis may accelerate concord between different ethnic groups. Remember, it is much easier to make a smoothie when all you have to do is grind a few strawberries into a smoothie that already exists.
Actually, Minjok has provided several benefits, too. Do you know how fast Koreans donated their golden rings during the IMF crisis? That was possible due to the strong bond among Koreans. A community spirit itself is desirable. What we have to do is control that bond so that it does not step over the line.
“Dreams Come True” along with a gigantic
white star was the slogan for the Korean Football team during the 2002 World
Cup. However, after the ardor of the World Cup cooled
down a little, remarks about this surprising phenomenon—how people suddenly gathered
at the Seoul City Hall square for days—subsequently indulged, some along with
critical remarks about Minjok. For example, that the government promoted ethnic
nationalism to hide social problems (The U.S. Jeep incident which killed two Korean high school girls) or people’s extreme obsession with it
alienated those who were not a part of that bond, thus impeding real social
harmony. At the incipient stage, such ideas were only accepted among the ‘NewLight’
community (an extremely progressive group) but are now embraced by the general
Korean society also. Nevertheless, that a bond of some kind must not completely perish for the sake of contemporary Korea in the
era of globalization should be acknowledged.
Attempts to clarify the history of the concept
during the past few decades were successful, and revealed the somewhat
inconvenient truth of how the term Minjok was introduced. It was coined during
the Japanese rule of the Korean peninsula by several intellects, including
Shin-Chae-Ho—who was interested in the history of the Han-Minjok as seen from
his academic works. Shin introduced this
term as he felt a strong necessity to integrate the Chosun people against the
Japanese colonial regime. By expanding his academic field to the origins of the
Han-Minjok—as exposed from ‘Chosun SangGoSa’(History of Chosun)— he managed to codify
the Dan-Gun myth, which basically asserts how holy Han-Minjok is. Along with Shin, Yi-Kwong Su also contributed to the construction of the concept. He stated that Han-Minjok is an extremely pure ethnic group in terms of bloodline, culture, and personality. Due to
Shin, Yi, and other outstanding figures like Kim-Gu, numerous patriotic individuals
(or groups) sacrificed their convenience or lives to protect the sacred minjok
which they were a part of. Indeed, Shin’s attempt—differentiating the
Han-Minjok from other ethnic groups by incorporating the Tangun myth and other
materials—was successful. It must be acknowledged at this point that Shin’s concept
of Minjok included a large sense of exclusiveness against other groups. In fact, some tools are very attractive. Look at the book below. It is easy to guess what that book is about, isn't? I read that when I was 13 years old. I was literally facinated in the whole Minjok thing.
Oh, those funny Chinese characters mean 'Tae Baek San-Maek', a mountain which is believed to represent the soul of the Han-Minjok.
To help your understanding about how this book makes you hyper, let me quote a few sentences from it.
"It was midnight. Kim then turned his head, looking at the mountains. They were plain black. Suddenly, he could see the peaks of them burning. There were people on the peaks, waving their torches! He was not seeing an illusion. The people were Kim's fallen friends and families during the war. There was even Park, his beloved wife. They were not dead! They were alive, right in the heart of Kim. He could feel them burning his heart. Kim was alive."
The book is recognized as one of the best books in modern Korean literature. Interestingly, although it is all about Minjok-Minjok-Minjok, it was banned during President Park-Jung-Hee's regime. The novel does suggest that we should embrace North Korea (which tried to assasinate Park at 1968), but it really makes the hearts of readers 'boil'. Why? Aren't North Koreans also supposed to be a part of Minjok, according to Shin-Chae-Ho?
Unarguably, leaders distorted the concept whenever they wanted to. Silla's King did, Shin-Chae-Ho did, and Park did. It was meant to be like this from the beginning. Indeed, the concept of Minjok is an illusion.
This type of ethnic nationalism existed in other regions of the world also, although it slightly differs from place to place. France and Germany were fond of using it, and they call it 'Romantic nationalism'.
'La Marseillaise'.
Sacred love of the Fatherland, | |
| Conduis, soutiens nos bras vengeurs | Lead, support our avenging arms |
| Liberté, Liberté chérie, | Liberty, cherished Liberty, |
| Combats avec tes défenseurs ! (bis) | Fight with thy defenders! (repeat) |
| Sous nos drapeaux que la victoire | Under our flags, shall victory |
| Accoure à tes mâles accents, | Hurry to thy manly accents, |
| Que tes ennemis expirants | That thy expiring enemies, |
| Voient ton triomphe et notre gloire ! | See thy triumph and our glory! |
Then, have you ever thought that 'Cinderella' actually advocates the German ethnic group? In fact, it does. 'A Good Bargain' is another piece written by Brothers Grimm which was meant to affect the way children think about people outside their community. Doesn't this immediately strike you? Yes, it is me reading 'Tae-Baek San-Maek'!
Obviously, the history of ethnic nationalism is quite long. So is it in Korea. It was Shin-Chae-Ho who introduced the term Minjok, but that "all Koreans are originally one" is also mentioned in Sam-Guk-Sa-Gi, which discusses the history of Silla, Goguryeo, and Baekjae. (History around the 9th century)
Of course, it is scientifically proven that the concept of pure blood does not exist. According to 'Korea Genetics Society', the DNA of the Han-Minjok is drawn from various places. The northern ethnic DNA composes about 60~70% of it, and the southern ethnic DNA forms the rest. The same logic would apply to the Germans, sorry for Brothers Grimm.
Due to repetitive modifications by modern Korea’s leaders, the idea of Minjok has become an awkward mixture of political propagandas and exclusiveness. By emphasizing the sacredness of the Han-Minjok, political leaders managed to inject totalitarian idea of ‘one for all’ into Koreans. Incorporating this into, say, commercial movies, was carried out by the government to spread this idea to the public. Chomsky’s ‘Necessary Illusions’ and Niccolo Machiavelli’s ‘II Principe’ can be referred for theoretical reasons why the administration did so. Feeling a sense of responsibility for his or her Minjok, people sacrificed their personal interests for national interests—which brought Korea immense economic development. Representatively, President Park-Chung-Hee, being famous for his contribution to Korea’s economy, was in favor of using this illusion. The goals of his administration were clear: economic development and national security. He used the concept of Minjok to emphasize that an individual has to sacrifice him or herself for the sake of Minjok, for their brothers and sisters. People who did not cooperate were punished for treason of nation, and President Park’s propaganda justified these unjust actions. Hence, the modern concept of Minjok inherited the totalitarian ideas and exclusiveness from that of the Japanese colonial era.
War & Battlefield.
These are entirely different concepts. A war is somewhat cool and awesome. A battlefield is horrible and wretched. Who declares war? The leaders of a nation do. Who fights in the battlefields of the war? Poor, innocent soliders do. Then, who made the concept of Minjok? Who were sacrificed under the name of it? Does the end justify the means? That truly is a big, difficult question which I will have to figure out the answer from now on.
Then what should be its stance in contemporary Korea? Above all, this demands a neutral view on Minjok. Indeed,
the concept was coined by Shin for a political purpose, and should be discarded. Shin and many Minjok-fighters from other countries crammed
political propagandas in the concept of Minjok, which stipulated it as a sacrosanct
idea full of problematic exclusiveness. Of course, there were previous attempts which indirectly spoke of it. Starting from the Silla dynasty, who called its victory over Goguryeo and Baekjae a brilliant reunification in accordance with Dangun's wishes in order to gain control of the people of the fallen nations, the concept of Minjok was distorted from the very beginning. Nowadays, over-emphasizing Minjok has led to controversy, especially considering the U.N.CERD (International Convention on Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination) suggestion. "Highlighting ethnic homogeneity of Korea may hinder foreigners from joining the community."
But some people just go too far. Several critics urge that any kind of bond in Korea should be completely terminated, and Koreans should go for cosmopolitanism. However, effacing community spirit will not lead to globalization and multiculturalism. A catalyst that can fuse individuals is necessary, especially in
this era of globalization. As a counterexample, France regrets indiscriminately
embracing other ethnic groups, who are left out of society and effacing French
cultures—according to the media and president Nicolas Sarkozy. Reserving
the heritage of ancestors is a prerequisite of globalization, and if this is
not satisfied, individuals will no longer feel obliged nor a sense of belonging.
As a result, they may feel more alienated from the social contract—then what
would happen if foreign people poured in? A pivot that is not offensive to others but protects the ethnic identity at the same time is what Korea needs. That would prevent the vague idea of 'global community’ invade substantive communities and hinder social order. What should be reconsidered is the specific type of community created in the idea of Minjok. What should be retained is an alternative pivot that recognizes the Korean community and embraces others at the same time. That clarification would be expedient in figuring out the role of the concept of Minjok in contemporary Korea. The nation is currently in the middle of globalization. As Professor Shin-Gi-Wook suggests in his essay ‘The Contradiction of Korean Globalization’, many Koreans do not think their identity would perish even if Korea becomes more globalized. That they wish Korean identity and global culture to coexist is definitely desirable. Surely, globalization without national identity would do no good—if so, it would be nothing more than a strawberry smoothie full of frozen strawberry pieces. A new pivot in accordance with urgent demands as a firm axis may accelerate concord between different ethnic groups. Remember, it is much easier to make a smoothie when all you have to do is grind a few strawberries into a smoothie that already exists.
Actually, Minjok has provided several benefits, too. Do you know how fast Koreans donated their golden rings during the IMF crisis? That was possible due to the strong bond among Koreans. A community spirit itself is desirable. What we have to do is control that bond so that it does not step over the line.
The concept of Minjok shall be discarded or thoroughly revised, considering its problematic origin and controversial usage. Korea needs a new pivot that is not exclusive to other ethnic groups. Considering this, Koreans should be open to other ethnic groups, meaning that anachronistic ideas like pure blood should not be an obstacle for foreigners to get along.
Nonetheless, its heritage and spirit must not be damaged, and this is what the new pivot is supposed to guarantee to Koreans. To
avoid the unfortunate cases of France and the natives of the Pacific islands,
the ideal is that new axis embracing different ethnic groups in
Korea but allowing Koreans to be the center of it, since it is their land after all. The resulting harmony would be a model to other nations suffering from
ethnic problems. The Korea dynasty (918-1392) can be the model of Korea here. The
Korea dynasty was open to different ethnic groups and cultures, for example, Buddhism,
and even the Islam, while relatively autonomous at the same time. What enabled them was not the concept of Minjok. Korea dynasty's advanced culture, as proved in the Tripitaka Koreana (a complete collection of Buddhist Sutras) enabled Koreans to have a sense of belonging. It served as a pivot in the midst of foreign cultures while not hindering integration.
What Korea needs is not an abstract idea of ‘global
citizens’ gathering in the Korean peninsula. Order must exist. However, the concept of Minjok will not contribute to the order, as it was not meant to be from its origins. It needs a lot of revision. Nonetheless, mercilessly
criticizing and even terminating any kind of bond among Koreans is not an advisable
option. Korea does need a pivot that embraces others and unites Koreans at the same time. Harmony has been the all-time dream of Koreans, despite the sporadic controversy over its identity.
