Good Comments on the Yongsan Tragedy

by Robert Koehler on January 21, 2009

Tom Coyner on yesterday’s fire in Yongsan:

Sigh! Here we go again. A travesty, a tragedy, and candle lit demos surely to follow.

The immediate irony is the demonstrators ultimately caused their own demise. But to put this into proper perspective, we must recognize the underlining issue of urban redevelopment, which has become an euphemism for thuggery by the rich and powerful at the expense of the weak.

Redevelopment ordinances and laws meant to replace squatter huts with modern and safe buildings during the 1960’s have been cynically misapplied by wealthy development companies and corrupt city officials to destroy communities where often only a small percentage of the buildings qualify as justifying redevelopment. Furthermore, the original residents are almost never given fair compensation to the degree they can live in their communities once more, or generally not enough to buy new homes elsewhere.

In other words, much of today’s residential redevelopment is nothing less than naked land grabs, with street thugs employed to intimidate, sometimes using violence, homeowners into signing petitions that validate this form of systemic government and chaebol swindling.

An interesting parallel to this tragic fire is that of the Namdaemun blaze. That conflagration, too, was ignited by paint thinner, and by a homeless man who had been cheated out of his home by redevelopers.

Only in December 2008, for the first time, have residents been able to beat back the redevelopers in court. Meanwhile, hundreds if not thousands of families have been and continue to be displaced from their communities. Commonplace are bogus promises and residency certificates good for future apartment ownership that normally end up being of inadequate value to allow the certificate holders to move into the new buildings.

Consequently, if indeed the candle lit parades take place once more, for once I am going to be a sympathetic with the demonstrators.

UPDATE: More outstanding comments, courtesy of Gusts of Popular Feeling:

I’d have to say I’m in total agreement with Tom Coyner’s comment here, and would add that while you can’t agree with the violence the squatters used, little is said about the violence the construction companies use regularly to intimidate and force people to leave their homes. If you look at the rest of Jon Dunbar’s photos of the Yongsan area to be redeveloped, you’ll see the disturbing graffiti and the smashed storefronts left behind by the gangsters hired by the construction companies. This is no secret, and has been going on for decades – it was documented in Kim Dong-won’s “Sanggye-dong Olympic” and has been shown in feature films like Holiday, for example. That people might choose to match violence with violence isn’t surprising – it’s not for nothing that Cho Se-hui’s celebrated book The Dwarf opens with the murder of a developer (in the story “Mobius strip”). If the government is going to give construction companies free reign to raze vast sections of Seoul without paying fair compensation or listening to the voices of people living in these neighborhoods, it shouldn’t be surprised when groups who learned to use violence under the thugocracy of Park Chung-hee and Chun Doo-hwan find desperate people to populate their ranks and lead to tragedies like yesterday.

{ 22 comments… read them below or add one }

1 oranckay January 21, 2009 at 7:07 am

Well said.

2 globalvillageidiot January 21, 2009 at 8:45 am

Excellent comment. A little more balanced, considerate, and informed than some of the commenters on the previous Yongsan post. (For example, the ones suggesting protesters got what was coming to them or that we should pray for and think of the police officer’s family, but presumably not the families who lost loved ones who happened to be demonstrators. Disturbing.)

I generally don’t agree with violence, but what are people to do when they’re being kicked out of their homes in mid/late-January and have no other recourse? The police officers sent to do the job are following orders and are themselves victims in this sad scenario, but where are the authorities when, as Tom Coyner points out, people are being threatened and bullied out of their homes by thugs and greedy corrupt officials?

I haven’t seen a mass housing eviction, but every year I see the gangsters – complete with tattoos, grapling gloves, matching track suits, and the requisite gangster haircuts – move into the area in front of Bucheon Station to evict unlicenced vendors by force (i.e. beating the shit out of them and trashing their carts) while the local police stand in front of their station, smoke and drink instant coffeee, and enjoy the mayhem as bystanders. It isn’t right.

3 Mizar5 January 21, 2009 at 9:55 am

Sigh. This happened right down the street from where I used to live (at Samsung Le Mi An Apt in Yong San’s Yong Maru Kogae).

I second Tom Coyner’s and globalvilliageidiot’s commentaries, but I couldn’t have said it better.

I hope, but in vain I suppose, that this doesn’t just fuel the anti 2MB partisanism. Instead, I would hope that the President does the right thing in response to this tragedy.

4 hamel January 21, 2009 at 11:52 am

Am I the only foreigner who has had visions of forming a foreign gang to take on some of these slow-witted hooligans for once? I have seen the thugs loading unlicenced vendors onto trucks and taking them away, because they were blocking access to a building that held a Sea Story gambling place. They did this at least twice, and the last time they set down container boxes to prevent the vendors moving back in. Within months the Sea Story was closed and the vendors were back and the container boxes gone!
Ha! Bloody ha!

5 gern January 21, 2009 at 12:15 pm

I’ve been told by co-workers that the protesters were not owners of any land, but shopkeepers who paid rent. They were given their key money back and paid 3 months “profit” by the developers to vacate. They wanted more money of course. Also, they were not alone on the rooftop. They were coached by the professional union of eviction protestors that go around the country to help people protest evictions. So this was really premeditated as seen by their arsenal (per KT),

“The ralliers fired 700 marbles and golf balls with slingshots and threw 150 Molotov cocktails, 40 bottles of hydrochloric acid and 1,000 bricks at police and nearby buildings, causing fires and destroying passing cars.”

Not really a peaceful “sit-in” was it?

6 gern January 21, 2009 at 12:18 pm

I’ve been told by co-workers that the protesters were not owners of any land, but shopkeepers who paid rent. They were given their key money back and paid 3 months “profit” by the developers to vacate. They wanted more money of course. Also, they were not alone on the rooftop. They were coached by the professional union of eviction protestors that go around the country to help people protest evictions. So this was really premeditated as seen by their arsenal (per KT),

“The ralliers fired 700 marbles and golf balls with slingshots and threw 150 Molotov cocktails, 40 bottles of hydrochloric acid and 1,000 bricks at police and nearby buildings, causing fires and destroying passing cars.”

Not really a peaceful “sit-in” was it?

7 globalvillageidiot January 21, 2009 at 6:28 pm

“Not really a peaceful “sit-in” was it?”

Certainly not – and I have a great deal of sympathy for police officers and bystanders who are hurt or otherwise inconvenienced – but were it not for blatant corruption, greed, and thuggery, these conflicts might be avoided in the first place. Come a certain point – once the peaceful protest options have been exhausted – your can either bend over and take it up the hoop, or you can stand and fight even knowing that you’ll still probably lose.

I just feel that were these Americans or Canadians, for example, getting forced out of their homes or businesses – through the combined and coordinated action of corrupt officials, money-hungry developers, and criminal gangs – that there might be a little more sympathy for them. Standing up against being evicted by force isn’t the same as bitching about perfectly safe American beef or an island you’ve owned/occupied for more than half a century.

Largely peaceful protests ended dictatorship and helped usher in democracy in Korea – a remarkable accomplishment, and the subsequent progress has been very impressive – but some the residual effects remain. Referring to my own earlier post (#3) in this thread, when you see a uniformed force of hired goons set on people while the police stand by doing jack shit, it becomes pretty clear that something is fundamentally very wrong.

8 Haksaeng January 21, 2009 at 8:35 pm

gern, of the 35 protestors that were arrested, only seven were people who had lived and/or worked in the area. The others were members of the Squatters League and professional protestors.

9 Seth Gecko January 21, 2009 at 10:04 pm

“Am I the only foreigner who has had visions of forming a foreign gang to take on some of these slow-witted hooligans for once?”

I think about it all the time!

10 cm January 22, 2009 at 12:31 am

I sympathize with those who died in the last stand. But their methods were wrong. They weren’t totally blameless either. It was their own flammable materials that did them in. Is your business that valuable to lose your life over? They were also offered compensations but they were too greedy to take them. They wanted more money. The police also handled this badly. All in all, this incident illustrates the what is wrong with the Korean society – a society bent on solving problems through mass protests, assaults, and violence.

11 Haksaeng January 22, 2009 at 6:51 am

I don’t see how the police handled this badly. The squatters were there illegally and they were endangering the lives of passing motorists as they flung golfballs and rocks at passing cars. If the police sat on their hands and did nothing, a traffic accident likely would have happened with a possible loss of life. As it was, it was lucky that the people who did have their windshields broken were able to pull over safely. If the squatters were just sitting quietly and being peaceful, then the police could have waited them out. The police have a duty to ensure the safety of the people, and the squatters were threatening the lives of passerbys. The police had to act.

12 cm January 22, 2009 at 9:26 am

The police handled this badly by:

1) Not calling the fire department first before they lead the assault. They knew full well the explosive nature of the fire bombs.

2) They kept spraying the squatters with high pressure water – a complete recipe for disaster when some of the squatters got their fire bombs knocked off their hands – engulfing the building in fire. Water just inflames the flammable liquids.

3) No ambulances were called, as the injured (some who jumped off the building) laid there gravely injured for almost an eternity.

13 gern January 22, 2009 at 9:39 am

cm, Your info is not what my parents-in-law say happened. She lives only 2 blocks away and was there to witness it all. She was really pissed at the coverage since the protesters were NOT SQUATTERS as you claim, but paid protesters there to do nothing other than fight with the police and cause mayhem.

14 Turbo January 22, 2009 at 10:04 am

Victimization is a lucrative industry here that is empowered by a pervasive, deep-seated lack of any sense of personal responsibilty. I say pervasive becasue you can see in many different forms at all levels of this society. One of the most ubiquitous examples (albeit a rather unsophisticated one), and one that stands as a good anaolgy to what happened in Yongsan, is the belligerent drunk who starts trouble, gets pounded, and then goes into victim mode and screams bloody murder at the police station. The sad thing is this ruse works more often than not.

15 cm January 22, 2009 at 11:31 am

#13, gern, do you have any credible links to show us that these protesters were paid professionals? That’s really interesting, I’d like to read more on this.

16 gern January 22, 2009 at 11:41 am

cm,

I know most be don’t get along with the in-laws, but I do. They were there and have lived in the neighborhood for 20 years, so they know everyone around there. They said they were not local to the area, and were paid to do this.

17 hamel January 22, 2009 at 1:39 pm

gern: I am sure your parents-in-law are good and honorable people, however extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

I remember when I was at uni, and the right-wing commentazzi would say that student demonstrators were “rent-a-crowd” bussed in and paid to fight with police. I don’t believe anyone has the money to pay people to do something they don’t want to do by themselves, and there are plenty of people who will go to bat against police voluntarily without receiving more than a free meal, at best.

Maybe some of all of these demonstrators were not locals. But I would be they were not paid to do it either.

I agree with cm that fire and ambulance should have been on hand from the get-go. Gern, did your in-laws see fire and ambulance there on site?

18 bulgasari January 22, 2009 at 5:01 pm

According to the Joongang Ilbo:

The police operation resulted in arrest of 25 squatters, and the prosecution is investigating if the National Alliance of Squatters systemically planned the violent demonstration. Of those arrested, only seven actually live or own stores in the area and are eligible for compensation. The rest were members of the group.

The Joongang also says that only 6 of the 24 injured were squatters (and that the rest were police). I’m not sure if those six are included in the 25 arrested.

The Korea Times gives biographical information on 3 of the dead and one of the injured, all of whom lived in Yongsan.

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2009/01/117_38237.html

A question remains: At what point were the squatters throwing objects onto the street – before or after the police arrived to remove them?

19 bulgasari January 22, 2009 at 6:17 pm

Oh, but then a commenter at ROK Drop says that the Joongang said this (no link though):

“It appears that the people who used to work in other development areas instructed the Yongsan squatters,” Jeong said. He said 12 out of 22 nabbed at the scene Tuesday do not live in the area.”

It seems then that there are different numbers floating around.

That ROK Drop post is worth checking out for the aerial view of the fire:

http://rokdrop.com/2009/01/21/investigation-into-deadly-building-fire-continues/

20 cm January 22, 2009 at 9:57 pm

According to Chosun, they prepared very well with provisions to last them 3 months.

http://news.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2009/01/22/2009012202072.html?Dep0=chosunmain&Dep1=news&Dep2=topheadline&Dep3=top

I think most of them were hired to protest. They were professional protesters. They’ve done these before and they expected another long seize and subsequent negotiations as so many times in the past. They got an unexpected surprise when the police moved in much more quickly than before.

21 cm January 22, 2009 at 10:03 pm

60 million won (about 50K US dollars) were collected to organize this squatting with fire bombs, according the article above.

I wonder why they didn’t use that money to help the people who were being forced out of the building instead of engaging in violent acts? Maybe because they were expecting a bigger windfall if there’s a sit in and a subsequent renegotiation for compensations?

22 gern January 23, 2009 at 7:24 am

#17, I think cm’s link will answer your question about them being paid or not.

cm, Thank you for coming to the rescue of the Honor of my parent-in-laws and their extraordinary claims.

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: