A humorous comparison of the Kim Young-sam administration of 1998 (during the height of the so called “IMF Crisis”) and the current administration.
Here’s the translation of the comparison;
IMF Season 1 IMF Season 2
Church elder and President Church elder and President
Kim Young-sam Lee Myung-bak
Economy vice minister Economy minister
Kang Man-soo Kang Man-soo
Park Chan-ho active in Park Chan-ho resurrected
the MLB in the MLB
Park Seri, youngest winner Park Inbe, youngest winner
in the LPGA in the LPGA
Seo Taeji comeback Seo Taeji comeback, again
Starcraft released Starcraft 2 released
Lotte Giants goes to the Lotte Giants,
playoffs playoff favorites
Huh Jung-mu, head coach Huh Jung-mu, head coach
of the 1998 national soccer of the 2008 national soccer
team, and the winner of the team and the winner of the
1997 FA Cup 2006, 2007 FA Cup
Of course considering the latest abortive attempt to defend the Korean won, some people can’t help but wonder.
{ 44 comments… read them below or add one }
question to you, Mins.
Yes or No,
Is Lee Myung Bak doing good or bad?
Gomapsuemneeda.
How responsible was Kang Man-soo for what happened in 1997?
Well, wjk, IMHO, so far, bad.
That answer your question?
Must be the most horrendous transliteration I’ve seen in a long while…
That’s one damn spooky comparison. Is it time to Flee?
dda, it reads pretty good to me. Does the spacing bother you? Remember, it’s not spaced in the original language, either.
actually, it reads very well to me.
Mins, thank you very much.
I think the same.
actually, since you are French, I wanted to ask,
Isn’t road blocking-style protests rooted in France?
I think it’s hilarious and sad a looming economic recession is being called “IMF Season 2″. Taken literally, can this blogger see into the future and expect another IMF bailout ?
As for why it’s called “IMF” (the cure) and not “Asian Financial Crisis (AFC)” (the actual trigger of the crash in 1997), that speaks volumes about where the blame was and is being put.
If you repeat a falsehood enough times, it eventually becomes accepted as fact.
It’s because the IMF cure felt about as good to average Koreans as a chemotherapy cure does to a cancer patient.
Re: #6
“dda, it reads pretty good to me. Does the spacing bother you? Remember, it’s not spaced in the original language, either.”
Bullshit. Hangul has natural syllabic grouping. Compare this:
ㄱ ㅗ ㅁ ㅏ ㅂ ㅅ ㅡ ㅂ ㄴ ㅣ ㄷ ㅏ
Gomapsuemneeda
with this:
고맙습니다
Go-map-suem-nee-da
I remember the first IMF. I distinctly remember, very clearly, that US gyopos felt very little to none of the impact.
Motherland Koreans should continue to separate themselves from US gyopos. They do live in a very different world.
Actually, my mother’s side of the family got painfully whipped.
But, when I asked around gyopos, how’s your family with this IMF, most said, “uh, they’re fine, I think.”
Re: #9
I realize that, yes. But, do people who successfully undergo chemotherapy refer to their previous near-death experience as “chemotherapy” or as “cancer” ? If they then get cancer again, do they have “chemotherapy” or “cancer” ?
However, this “blame the last guy left in the room” logic is not unique to “AFC-cum-IMF”. Do Korean leftists blame the Chinese or the U.S. for dividing Korea ?
Mins, remember what Marx said: “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.”
Looking at the nightly protests over god knows what and the nutty antics over Dokdo, it looks like we’re well into the farce stage of history.
And Migooknamja is right, it wasn’t the “IMF crisis,” it was the chaebol greed and Korean government collusion crisis.
“Do Korean leftists blame the Chinese or the U.S. for dividing Korea ?”
They certainly blame the U.S. and do their damndest to get every student in Korea to believe that!
Michael, Migooknamja,
Actually that’s not entirely true. It is true that South Korea and other Asian countries suffered from some serious structural problems in their economies (overleveraged corporate expansion, lack of transparent corporate and bank governmance, undisciplined monetary expansion, etc). However, other problems were due to external entities (currency speculators, volatile “hot monies” influenced by rumors, etc).
Also, you cannot really say that IMF was the cure. Maybe in the case of South Korea (the only country to have fully recover from the 1997 crisis), it was the cure as it resulted in improved regulatory framework, revamped foreign reserve, greater transparency, and increased corporate efficiency through wage depression and the end of life-time employment).
For other countries that went through the IMF “cure,” their economies were actually pillaged by foreign investors through premature privatization of profitable state businesses that resulted in mass unemployment and asset stripping. The best example that comes to my mind is Argentina.
The best alernate view (shared by most Argentians and maybe Chileans) was articulated by Naomi Klein in her best-selling-book, “The Shock Doctrine.”
Benicio74, that’s actually very naive and simplistic view. The division of Korea into two seperate puppet regimes is actually more complicated than either of the theories.
One theory is that the US got the lower half as an afterthought. Russia migth have gotten the whole peninsula as a “gift” for helping the Allied foreces in WWII. But the US wanted an effective buffer against the communist neighbours up North, so brought in US-educated Rhee. This is similar to the division of Germany and setting up of various Soviet satellites in Eastern Europe.
Seriously, before spouting some very ignorant views about Korea and Korean economy, do some reading. Also before sprouting some ridiculous non-sense re Korean culture, do learn the language and talk to the local people (other than your students or the Korean girls you meet in an expat bar).
IMF part II?… uh… I disagree.
“I remember the first IMF.”
I faintly remember reading that Park Jung Hee requested aid from the IMF in order to stabilize the economy during or after the elections that many believe he had lost to Kim Dae Jung.
I won’t believe it until you find the passage where Nostradamus predicts the 2nd IMF.
Taken literally, can this blogger see into the future and expect another IMF bailout ?
Just because Koreans use the term “IMF Crisis” to describe the meltdown of 1997 doesn’t necessarily mean that they blame the IMF for the meltdown. It’s called that because the situation was so bad that it necessitated a bailout from the IMF. As for the blame itself, ask any Korean on the street, and they will blame Kim Young-sam and his underlings for mismanaging things to the point where the only way out was for the IMF to provide USD 20 billion in emergency loans.
In regards to the title of this post, I personally don’t see another IMF bailout coming, but the current actions of the BOK to defend the Korean Won by using the ROK’s foreign currency reserves does bring memories of the 1997 meltdown. During that time the YS administration used the nation’s foreign currency reserves to prop up its political support base, without obviously thinking things through. The same thing with the MB administration. It used its foreign exchange reserves to prop up the Won after letting it slide in an attempt to make Korean exports attractive without thinking about the consequences of the weaker Won, in the first place.
So people are asking, if the current administration is dumb enough to do something like that, then will it be dumb enough to repeat the mistakes of 1997?
That’s probably why the guy/gal who made the comparison in the first place coined the phrase “IMF Season 2″.
I believe the natives have said “life is worser than IMF era” during Roh Moohyun’s governance as well.
they pulled through.
Looks like Bush and Lee are friends in real life.
Ironically, both are not liked by the public.
Both, no matter what face they make, they are compared to animals. Bush with a chimp. Lee with a rat.
Both had econ degrees in college.
Both are accused of having evil mastermind plans.
Both are accused of working for the rich and the rich alone.
It’s a giant misperception, driven by the media with an agenda. This part is true.
the layman actually believes with his whole heart that he is smarter and more just than Bush in America, and that he is smarter and more just than Lee Myung Bak in Korea. False conclusion.
the foreigners in Korea are liberal at real-home, but they seem to prefer Lee versus the alternatives in Korea. Hypocrisy, but the Korean right is not a real political right. They’ve been accused of discarding Korean interests to cater to foreign interests. A relic of 1600 years of Sadae, but the less of the two evils.
however, Lee did a bad job in office from Feb to August, 2008.
“It used its foreign exchange reserves to lower the value of the Won in a futile attempt to make Korean exports attractive without thinking about the consequences of the above action.”
To devalue your currency against the dollar, you buy dollars and your foreign exchange reserve will increase. A good example is China. Last time I checked, its dollar reserve was No.1 in the world. OTH, foreign exchange reserve is used to elevate the value of your currency.
You are correct, squatch. The Korean government is now trying to revalue the won against the US dollar by selling the dollars out of their foreign exchange reserve. They think the current inflation primarily caused by increase in prices of imported raw materials hurts the economy. The problem is losing export competitiveness caused by revaluation of the won also hurts the economy.
Ok if you can’t find a verse out of Nostradamus how about a Baduk prediction. They seem to be on the money.
“It’s called that because the situation was so bad that it necessitated a bailout from the IMF. As for the blame itself, ask any Korean on the street, and they will blame Kim Young-sam and his underlings for mismanaging things to the point where the only way out was for the IMF to provide USD 20 billion in emergency loans.”
Mmm, and yet the hundreds of Koreans I spoke to in 1998 and the many more being interview on the news blamed the IMF.
“Mmm, and yet the hundreds of Koreans I spoke to in 1998 and the many more being interview on the news blamed the IMF.”
Why do so many expats still continue to believe in this myth?
@#20.
Squatch, you’re correct. Got mixed up back there. My previous comment has been edited accordingly.
Which myth you’d be referring to?
That, in combination with the previous sentence in the comment in question (#18) seems to suggest that the Asian Financial Crisis, Korean Division, was somehow causally connected with the expenditure of Korea’s then FX reserves. It was, of course, but only in the sense that spending the reserves to prop up the Won was caused by the factors that brought on the expansion of the Financial Crisis to Korea (because KSY and his boys couldn’t think of what else to do and, practically-speaking, there wasn’t much else they could do, especially in the short run.
@ MigukNamja re #12:
“However, this “blame the last guy left in the room” logic is not unique to “AFC-cum-IMF”. Do Korean leftists blame the Chinese or the U.S. for dividing Korea ?”
Do you think Korean leftists blame the U.S. because they are the last guy left in the room?
If history had been different and today we found the Chinese overlords were whipping their hand selected magistrate of Korea every day with bamboo sticks, Korean leftists would still blame the U.S. for whatever they wanted.
“Just because Koreans use the term “IMF Crisis” to describe the meltdown of 1997 doesn’t necessarily mean that they blame the IMF for the meltdown.”
No, Koreans generally just say “IMF.” Other Asian countries at the time (and since) of their own economic problems in ’97 and ’98 didn’t use the term “IMF Crisis” of “IMF” to describe these events.
Many here who didn’t blame the IMF itself (of course, many here didn’t/don’t know what the actual organization did/does) blamed the United States, Japan, or foreigners in general for conspiring to slow Korea’s rise to superpower status.
Not all blamed outsiders for bailing them out – many Koreans realized that their economy had serious problems at the time – but there was an obvious sense of shame, as well as a fear that Korea’s economic boom was gone for good.
I love the whole “IMF” thing. Typical blame game bullshit that Koreans engage in here.
“The IMF attacked us” is what one student said to me.
It’s just another case of foreigners coming to the rescue of Koreans…AGAIN!
Next time, let’s not help them. That’ll make them happier.
“Next time, let’s not help them.”
I don’t really know if I should take any credit. My participation in the IMF is actually pretty limited. What do you do with the IMF JohnT? The Korean’s should be thankful for you rescuing them AGAIN.
#27,
I was here, I spoke to people, I watched the news, I’ve experienced being insulted and spit at…It’s not a myth: there were many people who believed that the economic crisis was caused by an international conspiracy against South Korea, of which the IMF participated.
…there were also many who blamed the chaebols and the government, but the Korean media (which is owned and controlled by the government and cheabols) made sure to mention the ‘IMF’ as often as possible. It was an experiment in manipulation and ‘group think’.
@Tripod: You were spit at during the “IMF era”? Are you George Soros?
user-81, good one.
To nitpick, Starcraft 2 hasn’t actually been released yet. With Blizzard’s we’ll-release-it-when-we’re-good-and-ready policy, it could be a while before it finally hits the shelves.
have you noticed that the KT has picked up the comparison – and, with their use of very ambiguous phrasing, has made the claim that the marmot’s hole is a “blog opposing the imports of American beef”
It’s kinda cute in its ambiguity…
http://koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2008/08/113_28661.html
Shunyata, I don’t disagree with you on the other factors for Korea’s economic crisis, however the structural problems certainly exacerbated the situation and if the chaebol were sound, Korea might not have needed a bailout. And many people here called it the “IMF crisis” including the media–no myth. There was even a joke going around at the time: “How are you?” “I M F*cked.” It sucked for a lot of people, including yours truly.
As for the “two seperate puppet regimes,” Neither Syngman Rhee nor Kim Il Sung were puppets. Each had their own agenda (overthrow of the other) and manipulated their ostensible “masters” to foment war. Kim began the war although Rhee also wanted to attack the North. The U.S. did not want to go to war on the peninsula, and the Soviets and Chinese only went along with Kim reluctantly. This may not fit in with your victimization narrative but it’s the mainstream historians’ view and is backed by declassified Soviet and Chinese documents.
Re: #15 through #17
Are we talking about Argentina, other Asian countries or about Korea ?
As for:
I’ve never picked up a Korean woman (I’m married), I can’t remember the last time I went to “an expat bar”, I typically engage other Koreans in Korean (it’s not that great, but most Koreans are pretty tolerant) and nearly all of my friends here are male Koreans.
I’ll also go out on a limb and guess one or more of the following may apply to you:
- a gyopo with a “not feeling Korean enough so I have to defend Korea at all costs, even if my argument is bullshit”
- not writing this from Korea
- it’s been a while since your last visit to 우리나라
Re: #16
I’ll have to hand it to you. The level of bullshit you’ve ascended to is quite impressive.
If we look at other decisions the U.S. made in WWII to counter Russian territorial expansion, such as:
- Keeping West Berlin alive by a very expensive airlift supply operation
- Dropping the bomb(s) on Japan to force the Japanese to surrender to the U.S. ASAP before Russian troops had a chance to swoop in
- “Saving” half of Korea, despite the Russians having troops poised to walk right in whereas the U.S. was nowhere near to having enough troops or the logistics to do the same
…it’s pretty clear to see the U.S. was trying it’s hardest to keep the Russians out of as much of the world as possible. It’s also pretty obvious to those who do not have a (Korean) leftist blame-game agenda against the U.S. that the Russians and the rest of the Allies were very reluctant allies, brought together only by the “enemy of my enemy is my friend” mantra. Once Germany and Japan were defeated, the rivalry was back on.
…I’ll also cite the U.N. forces (mainly U.S. and ROK) near-unification of Korea in late 1950 as proof of the U.S.’s intention to unify Korea.
I’ve lived in Korea 2.5 years, but am still stumped as to how and why so many young Koreans are snookered by DPRK propaganda into believing the U.S. is the #1 enemy of Korea. It takes a tremendous amount of willpower to be that willfully ignorant of recent history.
You must log in to post a comment.