Let me second the Oranckay and link to Won Joon Choe’s op-ed on anti-Americanism in Korea in the Chicago Tribune (FREE registration required), partly because it’s an interesting piece, partly because I just got an email from Mr. Choe requesting that it be linked for discussion. Anyway, give it a read through, and if you’ve got any thoughts on it, my comments section is yours — I’m sure Mr. Choe would appreciate any praise/constructive criticism you might have.
And I’m sure I need not remind you fine ladies and gentlemen out there that civility is a virtue.
21 Comments
This is a very provocative and well-written piece but the wild hyperboles (granted DJ was disappointing but who really compares him to Suharto or Marcos?) and obvious biases of the author detracts from the piece’s credibility. I don’t know what kind of background Won Joon Choe has, but he really comes off sounding like he has a personal ax to grind when it comes to DJ. It is really shame because Choe does make some interesting points and could have done so without sounding like a raving ideologue.
Incidentally, I am surprised you didn’t pick up an equally provocative and yet hyperbolic and strange piece on the same issue of the Tribune by Chamberlain. The author is a former U.S. military officer who frequently pens unconventional thoughts about military matters on the peninsula, and he really goes overboard this time. He claims that the two Koreas are covertly collaborating on nuclear weapons (in preparation for their reunification–which Chamberlain thinks could happen any minute now) and that the recent explosion in the North was a nuclear test. Chamberlain must have read that popular novel about the two Koreas bullying Japan with nukes
First off, the average American doesn’t read/hear/care about Korea. In her mind, when you say “Korea”, images of nuclear weapons and Kim Jong Il wearing ridiculous sunglasses come to mind. Very likely theyll make a distinction between North/South, and think of the South as the happy US-helped land of color televisions, mobile phones, etc. Also very likely to have some knowledge of horrible famine and prison camps. By the way, I’ve met several Korean-Americans who think just the same (because they’re very Americanized).
Americans dont know about South Korea’s anti-Americanism, but they may become aware of it very soon. Americans are vaguely aware of anti-Americanism all over the world, and I can see in my own friends, they are starting to notice how much the continental Europeans dislike them. But in other places, the average American really just doesn’t know or care (virulent South-American and Mexican anti-Americanism for example). Normal people have jobs and families to worry about, not international relations.
South Korea is safe to hate America when we arent looking. Americans simply don’t care - for now. But if America ever needs to RELY on South Korea and South Korea shows its hatred of the US at that moment, then a snapshot of South Korea’s US-hating will be put on the front pages of newspapers and burned into the minds of an American generation.
I believe this is what has happened to Europe, particularly France/Germany in the run up to the Iraq War. Joe Sixpack is never going to trust backstabbing France and her pliant German lapdog again.
If South Korea pulls an anti-American stunt at a CRITICAL MOMENT - then Joe Sixpack will keep that image of irrational, unreliable America-hating South Korea for a lonnnnnng time. In the meantime, South Korea is safe to hate America because no one will see or care.
Jesus Christ, much of the world is sometimes “Anti-American”. Instead of focusing on perceived irrational anti-American bias, Americans would find more solace by giving themselves a self-congratulatory pat on the back by finding pro-Americans.
Amusing that you would call France a backstabber and Germany her pliant lapdog, Hawaii. France in the post world war 2 has never been willing to tow the American line willingly and it should have been obvious. All the “Cheese eating surrender monky” comments are nothing but petulant emotional outburts from people waking up to the obvious. Gaullism has been a major political trend in post war France and the underlying tennent is not neccessarily anti-Americanism but a restoration of French prestige via the creation of a unified European body-politic. President Chirac, as much as Americans would call him a weasel, is simply looking out for what he perceives as long term French interests. That Germany goes along with much of French policy isn’t because they are lapdogs, but rather because of the intricate web of arrangements following the end of the second world war. Nato and the entire political plan of Western Europe was not only to provide a foil against the Soviet Union, but just as importantly to bind Germany into iron-clad network of arrangements so that it never repeats the actions of the two world wars. Germany’s intimate integration with France provides with it a similar degree of influence and prestige in shouldering much of the economic muscle of the Franco-German + Benelux axis without leading to anxieties about a resurgent maverick Germany. I believe it was Zbigniew Brzezinski who said it best; that the creation of unified European political framework is about restoration for France, and redemption for Germany.
Pardon me for saying this but I believe this is true. That Americans, more than most people, are incredibly self-centered. It is extremely difficult to escape from the paradigm, whether one is proponent or an opponent of American power, that everything in this world revolves around America. I’ve said this before in other places, that American power while vast, is shallower than most people realize. America can influence events globally, but local preconditions always carry the risk that it will take events beyond either American control or expectations.
It does seem a bit harsh of an attach on President Kim Dae-jung. I believe a lot of the factors that lead to the wide spread anti-American attitudes copped about were already present even before President Kim came to power. We shouldn’t forget that the 88 Olympics saw a good deal of American bashing and when the President Chun sent troops in Gwangju this also lead to a great deal of anti-American sentiment. What is different now is that Koreans feel free to express it, and by doing so they are learning (hopefully) more the relationship the two great countries share. For so long the reality of the relationship was abused for narrow world minded needs, and now with Korea a wealthy export driven country with world reach, I hope Korea sees the value in maintaining the relationship and pushing it in new directions.
I tend to see a sliver lining in all of this, but that is my view.
We shouldn’t expect 1,000,000 Korean women to suddenly flock into the center of Seoul and demand equal rights. It requires YEARS to form that type of protest into just the right state as to make it seem as though it’s someone else’s fault - not the Korean male. Oh God no, we can?€™t have that!
Korean men and women are creating a scapegoat for that inevitable moment when Korean women demand equality.
I suggest all of this domestic anti-Americanism will have been developed to protect the Korean male from his social accountability.
The Korean man can rest knowing that in Korea he was always innocent and doing his best until foreigners attacked/invaded/annexed/occupied?€?..his nation and disrupted his family life. It was not his fault! He placed his wife below him to protect her from the horrible foreign experience. Sometimes he was so frustrated he even hit her, and God forbid, went out to room salons to ?€œrelease?€? his anger. He only wanted to create a boundary between her and the imperialists. It was not that he didn?€™t want her to have equal rights he was only trying his best to protect her!
They will gather together peacefully in downtown Seoul and seek equal rights for women. One by one every single Korean man will pass by the crowd with tears in his eyes and sob those words that we will all come to know, ?€œI did it for you ajumma?€?.
Later on in the evening Korean women will DEMAND that the ROK government recognize how it was manipulated by Japan, the USA and other western powers in allowing Korea to become a place of gender inequality.
Korean men will take the stage and sign over all of their possessions to their wives, they?€™ll burn their family registers and promise to never again give preference to their male children. The history of prostitution in Korea will be re-written to show the true origin of evil - the west!
Koreans are not anti-American, they just can?€™t be honest with one another.
Jing - I see what you’re trying to say, and I more or less agree. But I’m just saying that France has now been branded a “backstabber” by the average guy in the US, and its going to be remembered like that for a long time. But two points:
1) The US has had thousands of troops fight and die for France, guaranteed France’s security since WW2, and bailed France out of post-WW2 financial crises. What did the US get in return? A gleeful finger in Uncle Sam’s eye! Now I have a french friend who is fond of saying, “so what if the US did all that for France, does that mean France is obligated to AGREE with the US forever now?” No, France isn’t obligated to agree, but it would be nice if France didn’t try to build an anti-American coalition or try to position itself as an anti-American leader in the world… THAT is the backstabbing part. Does South Korea want this same reputation in the average American’s mind the next time South Korea asks for help? (and it needs more help than France!)
2) If countries that the US has tremendously supported start to be perceived as “ungrateful backstabbers” (like France, Turkey, South Korea).. do you think the average American is going to want to intervene in a major conflict to save one of these countries? Do you think the average American is going to want to pay for Turkey’s billion-dollar bailout next time they have a financial crisis? Do you think South Korea will be able to count on American goodwill forever?
The average American might develop a worldview that says “Country X can go to hell if it wants help… we saved it last time and they hated us for our trouble! Lets make an example of Country X and let them be free of “imperialist” American influence!”
hardyandtiny:
The next time you watch an anti-american demonstration, look around and see how many women there are in that crowd. You might be surpised to find out that there are lot more than you think. Oh I know, that can’t be possibly true when you live in a dream world where the white men are the knights in shining armor to the rescue of subjugated beautiful yellow women. We mustn’t let the evil yellow men get away with all this can we?
I’m with Kimbob — hardyandtiny’s contribution to this thread is a not only an abrupt and complete non sequitur (how did this anti-Americanism topic become war between the sexes?), it’s not even supported by any of the easily-observed facts.
The good news is, in those anti-American protest groups, there are in fact a lot of women — but all of them seem to be horrible pigs. No great loss there.
“The next time you watch an anti-american demonstration, look around and see how many women there are in that crowd. You might be surpised to find out that there are lot more than you think. Oh I know, that can?€™t be possibly true when you live in a dream world where the white men are the knights in shining armor to the rescue of subjugated beautiful yellow women. We mustn?€™t let the evil yellow men get away with all this can we?”
Surprised? You’re missing the entire point. anti-American Korean female protesters are growing because they want to assert their right to protest and eventually protest for equal rights. They are not concerned about America and are very concerned about being able to shout about their own domestic problems via anti-Americanism. They see anti-American protests and America as a chance to have equal rights by manipulating and not challenging their male counterparts. Korean males agree with this and encourage anti-Americanism among Korean females to alleviate themsleves from accountability.
“I?€™m with Kimbob ?€“ hardyandtiny?€™s contribution to this thread is a not only an abrupt and complete non sequitur (how did this anti-Americanism topic become war between the sexes?), it?€™s not even supported by any of the easily-observed facts.
The good news is, in those anti-American protest groups, there are in fact a lot of women ?€“ but all of them seem to be horrible pigs. No great loss there.”
Anti-Americanism in Korea is a part of this thread. I have offered you a reason for it that you may not have considered. What does “easily supported” mean?
Do you have a theory for the cause of anti-Americanism in Korea? What is it? Is it easily supported?
Nothing you have said counters my theory. Of course there are more women in protests these days and the numbers will grow. This is part of anti-Americanism in Korrea and why people not from Korea might find it odd when they see young Korean children holding up signs that the children themselves can’t even read.
hardyandtiny, no offense, but I think you had too much weed today. Better stop while you still have some logic left. Nobody is holding a gun to these women to participate in expressing their mmm.. opinions.
Marmot,
Thanks for the link! But does “seconding” Oranckay here mean that you agree with his observation that I say “some of the wildest things I’ve ever heard someone say about Korean society & politics”?
Kimbob,
I didn’t mean to imply that 100,000 protesters flood the streets literally every day to chant “Yankee, go home.” I meant to say that that was the case during the height of the protests concerning the military vehicle accident. I realize that my language was not so clear–mea culpa.
“hardyandtiny, no offense, but I think you had too much weed today. Better stop while you still have some logic left. Nobody is holding a gun to these women to participate in expressing their mmm.. opinions.”
You just don’t get it. Korean women in Korea are encouraged to join in anti-American protests. And the more they protest about things that are not supposedly related to Korean domestic problems the more likely they will find in those anti-American/western protests a way to solve their domestic issues without challenging Korean men.
Do you get it?
Talking about Korean women. Here’s something a bit unrelated to the current topic at hand. It’s Oprah Winfrey’s show concerning women of the world.
http://ucc.media.daum.net/uccm....._NewsImg=4
and here’s the English version
http://english.chosun.com/w21d.....30018.html
I don’t see where the fuss is. It is the truth that South Korea does a lot of plastic surgery. It is the truth, right? So why does this make the national news?
I haven’t seen the show but I may find couple of problems though. This is just from reading the aricles but one: Korean women don’t have plastic surgery to look like caucasions - fallacy. Two: Why would you have of all choices, a Chinese woman up there and no Korean woman? She’s the one to point and talk. China has now the largest growth rate of plastic surgery in the world (with plastic surgery hospitals going up fast and with it, illegal malpractices) and if they had the same disposable income as South Korea, they would be just as if nor more enthusiastic as the South Korean women to go under the knife. Third, they’re talking about positive contributions/aspirations women make in each country (I think), for Korea only, why would you focus on negative aspects like plastic surgery craze while all the other country women are portrayed positively? Bizzare.
God damn it, Kimbob, I was about to blog that
Actually, I had to do the Chosun translation, which was thankfully aided by a commenter over at Yahoo! Korea who posted the original English version. Nothing I hate more than than re-translating English quotes from Korean back into English.
“I haven?€™t seen the show but I may find couple of problems though. This is just from reading the aricles but one: Korean women don?€™t have plastic surgery to look like caucasions - fallacy.”
True, but Korean men DO convert to Islam to seem more like Muslims.
hardyandtiny, do you accept the fact that women can have flawed views? That is even if they are Korean women? I know it’s pretty hard to imagine that those purrrty dolled up Korean women deep down inside can harbor Anti-American sentiments. But you’ve got to stop defending the undefensible. From my personal experiences, I find that the more liberated ones that tend to lean more towards the left. It’s partially true that lower status of women in Korea do contribute toward some negative aspects of the Korean society (like plastic surgery craze). But that does not mean we should throw away all accountablity for Korean women.
?€œhardyandtiny, do you accept the fact that women can have flawed views? That is even if they are Korean women? I know it?€™s pretty hard to imagine that those purrrty dolled up Korean women deep down inside can harbor Anti-American sentiments. But you?€™ve got to stop defending the undefensible. From my personal experiences, I find that the more liberated ones that tend to lean more towards the left. It?€™s partially true that lower status of women in Korea do contribute toward some negative aspects of the Korean society (like plastic surgery craze). But that does not mean we should throw away all accountablity for Korean women.?€?
This is not a game dependent on what I do or do not accept. I have stated my theory as to why there is anti-Americanism in Korea. Your reluctance to view my simplicity is typical. You are finding it difficult to realize that anti-Americanism in Korea is caused by the inevitable change that must happen between Korean men and women
Mr. Choe, frankly, I think you raised a lot of excellent points that often get left out of the mix. Anti-Americanism didn’t start with Bush — Bush simply made it fashionable. I agree that the Sunshine Policy led to a significant rise in anti-Americanism, especially as it began to fail and DJs people needed someone to pin the blame on. Likewise, DJs decision to let the 2002 protests fester made good sense politically in terms of getting Roh elected, but it came at a cost in terms of the alliance. It was at that point that one really started to hear U.S. politicians and columnists — Republicans in particular — calling for U.S. troops to be withdrawn and the alliance downgraded. That being said, I think what some may object to is that the tone might be considered, well, exagerated to some extent. I’ve been to Gangnam quite a bit, and the only danger I’ve ever felt there was to my bank account, especially if my wife is with me. Even in 2002, when the flag burning season was at its zenith, it wasn’t exactly a bad day in Falluja. Yeah, it left a lot of bad feelings — especially for those of us who were here at the time — and probably caused considerable damage to the diplomatic relationship between the two countries, but the “hate” was of a completely different nature than what you might find in, say, major cities in the Muslim world. I mean, the worst incident that I recall was the one GI getting taken off the subway after an altercation with an agitator, taken by student radicals to Kyung Hee U. and forced to attend a remembrance ceremony/anti-American protest. Bad? Yes. But his mutilated corpse wasn’t strung up from any of the Han River bridges, which is what might very well have happened in a similar circumstance in Baghdad or Cairo. Saying nasty things about the Americans in a Starbucks in Gangnam and plotting suicide bombings in Cairo are not the same thing, so to speak. Even things like “the U.S. is a bigger threat to S. Korea than N. Korea” survey results have to be read in their proper context. What that means is that many Koreans are concerned that the U.S. might launch a war on N. Korea, NOT that N. Korea doesn’t represent a threat or that the alliance with the U.S. should be disbanded. Most Koreans still recognize that an alliance with the world’s only superpower is, in the final account, probably a good thing (especially in this neighborhood), and most of the bitching (albeit loud bitching) that goes on seems to be over relatively minor issues.
Actually, if anything is a real threat to the relationship, it’s not so much anti-Americanism in its noxious but ultimately harmless street variety. It’s that perceptions of national interests might differ to such an extent the alliance might rupture. For example, Seoul might decide it wasn’t worth trying to stop N. Korea from exporting nuclear technology if that meant risking a North Korean attack, or the U.S. might decide its interests in the region would best be served by evacuating the premises and allowing a remilitarized Japan to take over beat. At that point, I think it might be useful in discussing who lost whom, but I’m not sure if we’re quite there yet.
For what it’s worth, I lived in the heart of Jong-no Jonggak from Nov 2002 - Jan 2004. Right above the Holly’s copy (heh ‘coffee’ I mean). Pretty much every night I would walk by hundreds of drunk Koreans. I also had a Korean girlfriend for most of the time. Probably the worst thing that happened to me is that a restaurant I was interested in, Peppers and Garlic, had a sign banning Americans. Also, a guy at Popeyes told me he didn’t like Americans but then later apologized for his rude comment. Maybe I was lucky or low-key but I felt absolutly no danger or threat at all.
[...] ess toward stability in the region. Riiiiiiiiiiigght. But considering the recent South Korea-esque anti-Americanism in Greece and Powell&# [...]