Minjok ; the past and the future
The concept of ‘Minjok’ is deeply rooted in our lives as Koreans. We use this idea to describe and explain Koreans’ unity in many different circumstances from sports events to Korean literature. Yet, not so many people fully understand the concept of ‘Minjok’ or Korea’s ethnic nationalism. This lack of understanding might prove to be disastrous. Only by understanding how the concept of ‘Minjok’ came about and by scrutinizing its relevance to contemporary Korea are we able to fully understand and to successfully apply the concept to our past, present, and future.
The best starting point of our analysis would be to consider the meaning and the history of the term ‘Minjok’. In essence, Korean ethnic nationalism (Minjok) is a sense of Korean identity based on the belief that Koreans are whole and unified through several important factors such as common bloodline and a shared, distinct culture. Simple as it seems, the background of the term is much more complex.
 |
| Identitiy |
The concept of ‘Minjok’ started to emerge among Korean intellectuals in the early 20th century. During this time, Korea was under Japanese colonial rule. Before the Korean-Japanese treaty of 1905, when Korea’s right to govern was mostly taken away, Japan went through a period of significant modernization. Under the newly established ‘Meiji’ government, Japan followed the footsteps of Germany and adopted many of its political and economic strategies. By the early 20th century, Japan became an Asian superpower and started to expand its borders through colonization. Japan used the term ‘Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere’ to justify its actions against other countries, claiming that Japan is promoting the cultural and economic unity and progress of the East Asian race. The underlying purpose was to bring people under Japanese nationalism. Korean intellectuals rejected this notion and tried to promote Korean ethnic nationalism, making use of the newly phrased term ‘Minjok’ in their efforts to do so.
 |
| The Japanese Empire |
Some of the main figures of the Korean independence movement who used the concept of ‘Minjok’ are Shin-Chae-Ho and Lee-Gwang-Soo. The reason behind their importance is not solely based on their usage of the term, but their method of utilizing the concept and the significant impact of their works, even to our present-day. The main approach they took trying to promote the notion of ‘Minjok’ was by using historical figures in Korean history.
 |
| Shin-Chae-Ho |
 |
| Lee-Gwang-Soo |
For example, the scholar Shin-Chae-Ho published a book, <Ul-Ji-Mun-Duk (을지문덕 乙支文德) >where he wrote about an historical event where the Chinese Sui invaded Goguryeo. Here, Shin-Chae-Ho described Ul-Ji-Mun-Duk’s heroic act that was a key factor in winning the Sal-Su-Dae-Chub, a historical battle that brought Goguryeo-Sui war to an end for Goguryeo’s victory. He particularly emphasized the general’s character such as his courage and his sacrifice to the nation from foreign invasion. Another scholar named Lee-Gwang-Soo wrote a book called <Lee-Soon-Shin-Jun>, a story of a famous general during the Korean-Japanese war (1594), also a Korean Minjok Leadership Academy figure. Lee-Gwang-Soo similarly praised Lee-Soon-Shin for his heroic acts. There are also lots of other scholars who wrote stories of historical figures, but they all have in common that by emphasizing the patriotic side of the great men in Korean history and tried to define the characteristics of the Korean people under the concept of one Minjok. By trying to emphasize and define the Korean ‘Minjok’ as hard working, patriotic, etc, they were able to make great contributions to strengthen and specify the already existent concept of Minjok in the Korean society.
 |
| Lee-Soon-Shin |
Up to this point, this act of Korean ethnic nationalism wasn’t so special inside the global community. Other countries such as France, Germany, and Japan also had this sense of unity in their nation. However, as time passed and WWII came to an end, the sense of nationalism weakened. This was presumably because their fundamental belief was based on a single community, not a strong bloodline like the Koreans. Furthermore, the foreign countries concept of Ultra-nationalism and Nazism crumbled through the defeat of the WWII, while our concept of Minjok remains solid for our belief as mentioned before is focused on the bloodline and culture.
.jpg) |
| Collapse of Nazism |
The idea of ‘Minjok’ reaches its peak in the 1960s during president ‘Park Chung-Hee’’s term in office. President ‘Park-Chung-Hee’ emphasized the concept of ‘Minjok’ in order to legitimate his foreceful ruling. To be more specific, he stressed the loyalty of the citizens to their nation, which meant that the people of Korea had to take in sacrifices meant for development and a promising future of Korea. This was done by bringing all people under the idea of ‘Minjok’.
 |
| Statue of Lee-Soon-Shin |
Still, in present day Korea, there are many traces that we can find of his dominant authority and his emphasis on the concept of ‘Minjok’. For example, the statue of Lee-Soon-Shin in Gwang-Ha square in Seoul was built during the Park-Chung-Hee era. The president emphasized Lee-Soon-Shin as he was a key symbol of Korean history concerning one’s sacrifice to Korea. He died in his last battle against the Japanese marines. Furthermore, every school that was built during this period has a statue of Lee-Soon-Shin or Dan-gun, one who is said to have established the first Korean nation. My middle school also has a statue of Dan-gun and this also stresses the loyalty and sacrifice for the country as we all gather and salute to the flag and the statue every Monday. Other examples are the Korean National Pledge that was created in 1968. The pledge says that one must sacrifice everyday for the nation and the glory of our people. So as you can see, during this period, a sense of Korean nationalism or ‘Minjok’ was enforced into the modern day Korea.
[1] 신선희(Sun-Hee Shin), <근대 초 위인전을 통해 본 한국인의 정체성 형성 방법>, 3-5
http://congress.aks.ac.kr/korean/files/2_1357707735.pdf
(Korean National Pledge)
This is where the ‘Necessary Illusion’ can be added into the context. The emphasis on sacrifice to the country could be said as a ‘Necessary Illusion’ used in order to cover up the real problem. In this case, the real problems during the Park-Chung-Hee era were labor and democracy problems. By stressing the unquestioning obedience and sacrifice of the Korean people, the urgency and importance of labor and democracy problems were covered-up. So, the ‘Necessary Illusion’ could be said as a crucial factor that blocked democratic development of the Korean society. To rephrase, the concept of ‘Minjok’ was used as a ‘Necessary Illusion’ by the government at that time to cover up the pressing matters such as democratic policy adoption and labor rights.
 |
| Jeon Tae-il |
So this is where we face a very important and difficult question. Does the end justify the means? While the forceful development of the past has ignored the human rights, there aren’t so many people who are angry with the amazing economic development we have gone through in half a century. However, we cannot say that end justifies the means. To back this argument the situation of labor in the past and present could be used. In the 70’s the working environment of the labors was in a serious state, where the sanity and the safety of the workshops were not properly protected by the government. Angry about this situation a worker called Jeon Tae-il commits a suicide by burning himself in order to notify the situation of the workers in Korea in and out of the nation. This problem between the employees and the employers is still eminent today. The labor problems happening inside companies such as 쌍용(Ssangyong), and 현대(Hyundai) is the consequence of such problems not solved in the past, specifically the excessive emphasis on the concept of ‘Minjok’ and the sacrifice required by the government. Therefore, the end does not justify the means. The Necessary Illusion is only covering up the problem for now, but not really solving the problem.
The concept of ‘minjok’ could not be said that is meaningless in the present Korean Society. There are certainly some elements of the concept that could be considered positive to our society, such as in times where our nation became one, cheering for the national team in the 2002 world cup, etc….. However, the concept of ‘Minjok’, can be said to be incompatible in many areas in today’s situation. There are two main folds to why I think this concept is incompatible; it does not fit into the trend of globalization, and it effects negatively to the problem of Korean unification.
 |
| 2002 World Cup |
Of course I am not saying that the globalization is always a good thing. There are certainly needs for the concept of nationalism as it can filter what to take in or not. However, a successful and a more idealistic globalization is when every other race, culture and people can coexist peacefully inside one society. The concept of ‘minjok’ in Korea is disturbing such coexistence for we emphasis to our children from a very young age that we are a single race and that we have a unified bloodline. These factors of ‘Minjok’ is creating disharmony between the Koreans and foreign labors, which means that we are losing valuable potential human resources which could haul our economy to a more developed state. The disharmony extends to foreign cultures, foreign ideologies, etc. Another example of such disharmony is the way Koreans treat to foreigners when some accidents happen to our citizens. In 2002, two female students were killed by a tank from the US army, by accident. Outraged by this accident, the citizens of Korea began to show their anger by assaulting random foreigners whom weren’t even Americans. Looking at these past incidents, it is clear that the concept of ‘Minjok’ and unity is causing disruption for a peaceful relationship with foreign countries, cultures, and people, and it is certainly against the ideals of a successful globalization. Korea should modify their concept of ‘Minjok’ as a strong, unified, distinct group. Realizing that this stubborn concept is incompatible to our present day, we should try to open up the concept of ‘Minjok’ to other people who share the same sense of belonging to Korea.
 |
| The increase of foreigners in Korea |
Secondly, the concept of ‘Minjok’ is actually preventing the unification of North and South Korea. It is true that the ‘peaceful minjok unity’ is the fundamental principle for peaceful unification. However as 60 years have passed since both Koreas got divided, there are not much factors to find in common between these two countries nowadays. Language, culture, idea is becoming different every day. Considering this fact, the ongoing efforts of unification under the theme of ‘Minjok’ could be somewhat meaningless. While the concept of ‘Minjok’ in both Koreas is focused on the fact that North and the South Korea are the same as we share the same bloodline, the reality is not. So rather than just stressing this incompatible concept of ‘Minjok’ as a key to reunification, trying to focus and develop on what little is left that can be said as common to the two Koreas, it would be more efficient to analysis the differences between the two countries and try to overcome these differences. Overall that solution would be more suitable for the present situation.
 |
| Efforts for Unification |
To put it into a nutshell while the concept of ‘Minjok’ started as a mere motive to resist the treachery of Japanese – Empire, it has caused much more fundamental impacts to our history and the Korean Society. Though the concept of ‘Minjok’ might have been effective in the past, it is beginning to show signs of problem in our modern society as the necessary illusion only covers up the problems, not solving it. Such example is the problems of labor rights. Now the time has come for us Koreans to rethink about the term ‘Minjok.’ Of course I’m not saying that we should completely rebuild the meanings of the term, but to cut out the parts that is lacking today’s trend in the globalized society. In addition to add factors that could lead to a more harmonious relationship between the foreign society and Korea. Everything resembles Janus, there are always some factors that might benefits or otherwise harm the society. This logic could also be applied to the concept of ‘Minjok’, while the term ‘Minjok’ has both sides of benefit and harm it is the job of today’s people to minimize the harms and to maximize the benefits.
.jpg) |
| Janus |
