South Korean Nationalism and the Legacy of Park Chung Hee: How Nationalism Shaped Park’S Agendas and the Future Korean Sociopolitical Landscape Brandon L
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Chadron State Graduate Theses Nebraska State College System 2018 South Korean Nationalism and the Legacy of Park Chung Hee: How Nationalism Shaped Park’s Agendas and the Future Korean Sociopolitical Landscape Brandon L. Santos Chadron State College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/chadron Part of the Asian History Commons, Cultural History Commons, Education Commons, and the Political History Commons Santos, Brandon L., "South Korean Nationalism and the Legacy of Park Chung Hee: How Nationalism Shaped Park’s Agendas and the Future Korean Sociopolitical Landscape" (2018). Chadron State Graduate Theses. 1. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/chadron/1 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Nebraska State College System at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Chadron State Graduate Theses by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. South Korean Nationalism and the Legacy of Park Chung Hee: How Nationalism Shaped Park’s Agendas and the Future Korean Sociopolitical Landscape Brandon L. Santos A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment for the MAE – History program Chadron State College Academic Advisor: Dr. Kurt E. Kinbacher i SOUTH KOREAN NATIONALISM AND THE LEGACY OF PARK CHUNG HEE: HOW NATIONALISM SHAPED PARK’S AGENDAS AND THE FUTURE KOREAN SOCIOPOLITCAL LANDSCAPE Brandon L. Santos, MAE: History Candidate Chadron State College, 2018 Adviser: Kurt E. Kinbacher, Ph.D. Park Chung Hee (presidential term: 1961-1979) is, arguably, the most significant leader in the Korean Peninsula’s modern history. His governance has many trademark elements that have been thoroughly analyzed. These include his economic plans and violent dealings against his political opposition. One often overlooked variable, however, is the significant traces of early Korean nationalism (1890s-1930s) that defined his regime. Park employed these ideas, although controversial, to completely change a nation that was teetering on the brink of destruction into what is now, one of the most well- known republics in the world – economically, technologically, and culturally. It is important, therefore, to investigate how early nationalism affected and shaped Park’s tenure, and more importantly, how it still affects South Korea today. There are two main nationalist ideologies that affected Park’s rule. First are the teachings of early nineteenth century Korean nationalists, most prominently Sin Chaeho and Choe Namson. These philosophies gave Park the foundations to base his eventual ii regime upon. Specifically, Sin and Choe’s take on the Tan’gun creation myth promoted that the Korean people are entitled to a prosperous and homogenized land. This was also one element of their minjok tenet – minjok loosely translating to “the Korean people.” It is an ethnonationalist philosophy implying that all Koreans and the lands from where they originated are bound together by blood. Second, Park took those theories and mixed them with a Social Darwinist, Neo-Confucian ideology, one modeled after what he learned from his brief Imperial Japanese military career; this is otherwise known as bushido. When fused together, these elements created a unique institution that was evident throughout every aspect of a Park-era South Korea. It was not until the 1980s onwards that an affluent South Korean citizenry sought a more advanced republican-like polity. From this time on they out grew their need for Park-styled autocracy and nationalism. Through intense and daily mass protests, many of which ended in bloodshed, South Koreans infused old minjok nationalist themes with dissent; this union was called minjung. Minjung loosely translates to “mass people”, however during the protests the term was solidified under the definition of “the will of the [Korean] masses.” Therefore, minjung is now synonymous with South Korean-styled democracy. As a result, the end of the decade finally saw the last relic of Park’s governance. His successor, Chun Doo-hwan, was ousted as South Korea ascended into the pantheon of highly developed democracies. iii 뜻이 있는 곳에 길이 있다 iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank all members of my committee, Dr. Kinbacher, Dr. Smith, and Dr. King, for taking the time to evaluate my thesis and portfolio. The information and feedback I received from their courses have expanded my critical analysis skills and teaching methodologies. Special thanks to my adviser, Dr. Kinbacher. Thank you for taking the time to help with my writing and early drafts. This made what should have been a long and strenuous project into one that was memorable and enjoyable. Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends at home and in Korea. Thank you for giving me the motivation to finish. v TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................. 1 TIMELINES .................................................................................................................... 6 CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW – NATIONALISM BEFORE AND DURING PARK’S TENURE (1910-1979) .................................................................... 11 CHAPTER II: ANALYSIS – NATIONALISM BEFORE AND DURING PARK’S TENURE .......................................................................................................................... 61 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 100 CHAPTER III: LITERATURE REVIEW – NATIONALISM AFTER PARK’S DEATH (1980-1988) ..................................................................................................... 101 CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS – NATIONALISM AFTER PARK’S DEATH .......... 133 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 148 CHAPTER V: LITERATURE REVIEW – PARK’S LEGACY AND NATIONALISM TODAY (1989 ONWARDS) .......................................................... 149 CHAPTER VI: ANALYSIS – PARK’S LEGACY AND NATIONALISM TODAY (1989 ONWARDS) ........................................................................................................ 215 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 242 FINAL CONCLUSION ................................................................................................ 243 BIBLIOGRAPHY AND REFERENCES ................................................................... 255 1 Introduction South Korea’s third president, former general, and strongman Park Chung Hee (1917-1979) is one of the most controversial figures in Korean history. Common opinions of the former president (term: 1961-1979) range from veneration to critical scorn with little to no middle ground. The former general was no stranger to controversy since his forceful takeover (coup d’état) of the presidency in 1961. Park’s frequent use of brutal totalitarian measures, such as discarding due process of law and frequent torture of alleged dissenters, garnered him an infamous reputation. To add further antipathy, in 2016 his daughter and former president, Park Geun-hye, was impeached on corruption charges. Ultimately, a significant portion of modern Korean historians and younger generations aptly label the elder Park a power-hungry “dictator” who instilled a “reign of terror.”1 Park’s fiscal accomplishments, however, receive praise by older generations and international spectators, especially in the developing world. Before Park’s coup, South Korea came out of a civil war (1950-1953) in terrible shape economically, physically, and psychologically. Its position was so bleak that most global powers, including the US, labeled the South as “a hopeless case of poverty, social anomie, and political instability that was destined to lose in the inter-Korea competition to become the sole legitimate government of the entire Korean peoples.”2 Indeed, this is not an easy reputation to overcome. 1 Jinwung Kim, A History of Korea: From “Land of the Morning Calm” to States in Conflict (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2012), 471. 2 Taehyun Kim and Chang Jae Baik, “The Taming and Tamed by the United States,” in The Park Chung Hee Era: The Transformation of South Korea, ed., Ezra F. Vogel and Byung-Kook Kim (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2011), PDF e-book, 60. 2 The situation domestically was so dire that Park enacted swift, decisive, and efficient reforms – through side-stepping democratic procedures and habeus corpus rights – that resulted in international admiration. Within a generation, Park’s governance brought a war-torn and destitute Korea into global prosperity and prestige; and, therefore, it may be palpable to see why developing and emerging markets, such as BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) countries, are attracted to Park’s autocratic, yet rapid, “developmental state” system.3 Sentiments about Park’s legacy are bipolar, and both Korean and international scholars have extensively examined the matter. Park’s leadership, economic programs, and contemporary sociopolitical perceptions are popular subjects for many historians, political scientists, and economists. The alleviation of poverty, the skillful navigation of Cold War politics, and the creation of a technocratic culture are trademarks of the Park Era. However,