UPDATE #3
Another Hitler appearance sent in by a reader, along with a significant update that actually adds another needed element to my argument that I should have included earlier. If you want to, scroll down to the picture of the Hitler bingo character and read from there.
UPDATE #2
More Hitler pictures keep coming in. If you have them, I'll add them. Looks like this post has become the de facto "Hitler Bar" gallery. Added to the latter part of this post.
UPDATE #1
Note: This post has been significantly updated. If you've already read it, you might be interested in the new bottom section. Also, thanks to RG for pointing out my brainfart in looking at this image. Makes sense now. The red text symbolizes my virtual blush.
As I mentioned before, I haven't had much to say about Hines Ward's actual visit, because it is pretty much as I expected. Lotsa photo shoots, a little bit of talk about the condition of Korean mixed-race kids, visit to an orphanage, Mom speaks her mind a bit, Koreans do a bit of hand-wringing and public regretting, more photo ops, meet the president, get honorary citizenship, etc.
But leave it to the Hangyeoreh to put it together into the best political cartoon I've seen on this issue so far (thanks Marmot and GI Korea). Conceptually, it's pretty badass and smart; one of the best satirical images I've ever seen, for several reasons.
First off, the artist's concretization of such an abstract concept as "pure race" (the words 단일민족 that are printed on the sign hung off the castle corner) into the walls guarding what the caption at the top right refers to as the "castle" or "palace" of Korean group membership – it's a really good way of talking about the exclusion that mixed-race Koreans suffer as a matter of course here.
This conceptualization makes it easy to contrast their existence, portrayed by the kids waiting in limbo on the edge of the castle of "purity", with that of Hines Ward, who stands in the sunlight/spotlight, with Koreans making a rare run outside of the confines of the concept of racial purity to greet him, even as they seem to be frozen in a cult-like bow of worship.
But what is even more interesting to break down is how the kids are portrayed. One has to first note that the words at the top of the page could be translated as Korean "Coming outside the castle for a little bit..." or perhaps more directly, "A short trip outside the castle." The two kids on the right are seemingly waiting, staring off into space; the kid the the far left, however, is wistfully looking up at the sign that defines the limits of where they can "go" in Korean society. The door of the castle is open, so ostensibly they could go in, especially since Hines Ward is around and now is "their" time in the spotlight, but the fear of venturing into the off-limits, forbidden inside is expressed well through both the kids' faces and the fact that they are unable to walk past the threshold of what would seem to be an open, beckoning door.
One question raised by the political cartoon is, "What the hell are the origins of the danil minjok concept anyway?" As an historian, I've found that the best way to deal with constructed concepts is to simply shine the light of history upon them. What one finds is usually quite shocking.
ORIGINS
Both Korea and Japan began to fetishize ideologies of “purity” and “tradition” in the reconstruction of new, nationalist identities in the interest of fostering national unity and homogeneity in patriotic thought and action; it makes sense that the ideal of purity in racial terms began to hold a particularly strong appeal as well.
The French philosopher Etienne Balibar asserts that "racism is a genuine mode of thought," as opposed to a simple manifestation of group prejudice, or the result of bad social breeding. It embodies a "desire for knowledge" that comes in the shape of a desire to know who you are in the social world not only as an individual, but as a member of "sets of similar individuals." Balibar describes the rise of racialist ways of thinking in Europe as the result of the Enlightenment. Here, it is useful to think about his words in the context of Asia, especially the cases of Korean and Japan, both countries that explicitly considered Western models in their national development, especially in the case of Japan; in Korea's case, the Japanese model was the dominant model until the time of colonial annexation. Balibar says, “Various historians and philosophers have shown how deeply rooted in the notion of mankind, the human species, the progress of human culture - as they were elaborated in that great blossoming of universalism, the Enlightenment - were anthropological prejudices concerning races, or the natural basis of slavery, and indeed the very notion of race, which at that period first acquired its modern meaning." (Balibar, Racism as Universalism) Considering the worldviews of many East Asian nations whose history and consciousness have been informed by the concepts of western notions of "civilization," as well as belief in the idea of teleological "progress," and the ultimate goal of "enlightenment" – as expressed in the Korean expression of the modern Japanese concepts "문명개몽" (civilization and enlightenment) – the parallels between common aspects of Asian and Western national, racial, and developmental ideals become startlingly clear.
Universalism, the teleological notion of progress, as well as ethnocentric notions of “civilization” itself are important shared elements between many Asian and European societies, especially in Asian countries which have taken up development, industrialization, and modernization as goals and ideals. Indeed, the question for countries like Korea and Japan becomes one of “Who are we?” as rapid development and modernization occurs in a world in which the influences of the West are as palpable and real as they are difficult to isolate and control. Japan underwent this crisis of identity first, beginning in the Meiji Restoration of 1868. Ideologies of racial purity superiority eventually played a large part in an ideology that would justify Japan’s bloody wars of conquest and empire.
Again, it is informative to invoke Balibar’s interpretation of nationalism, which he describes as something which "boldly inscribes the national character,” and forms the "ideal entity," which develops into an "ideology of the elect nation," a way of thinking which clearly delimits the boundaries of the who, what, where, and why of the nation and the people inhabiting it. It is this “ideology of the elect nation” which Balibar defines as one of the two things that makes nationalism universalistic, the other being the idea that "nationalism fosters formal equality." This "ideal entity" becomes the "imaginary core of the nation," which necessitates a belief in the myth of purity, as well as the conviction that this "ideal entity" comes "long before the nation and goes far beyond it in space and time." (Balibar, Racism as Universalism)
This is the sort of ideology that began to emerge soon after Korea’s liberation from the Japanese in 1945, when the task of creating an independent, modern nation-state was at hand. This is most clearly reflected in the modern Korean state by Yi Pom Suk, a right-wing nationalist who rose to prominence after 1946. The idea of 'one people' was becoming more central to the idea of the fledgling nation. According to Bruce Cumings, “in the 1930s, Yi had studied European corporatist and Fascist youth groups,” and upon returning to Korea in 1946, began organizing youth into groups around the slogan “Nation first, state first.”
The German pedigree of his extreme ideas about the relationship between race and nation were clearly expressed in his polemical work Nation and Youth, written in 1948. His central organizing principle was that of hyeol-tong/혈통 (“blood”) as the “racial essence” that would be the backbone of Korean identity. (Bruce Cumings,”The Corporate State in North Korea,” in State and Society in Contemporary Korea) Here, it is worth quoting Cumings directly, where he describes Yi’s dogmatic thinking:
He urged a pan-national Korean solidarity based on racial purity: “the Nation is the race and the race is the nation.”... Talk of “Racial essence” and “blood-lines”... for him was the key characteristic defining Korea, and the essential element in its corporate and organic unity. As for the mind and spirit, he thought only the strongest national consciousness (minjok uisik) could save Korea from predatory great powers. He lived in the era of “the masses,” he said, and therefore leaders must know “understand and love” the masses, always be among them and never separate from them. One race, one blood, one nation, one state, and inseparable unity between leaders and led would create “a great family” that would endure. (Cumings, ”The Corporate State in North Korea")
In Yi’s writing, it is easy to see the way the universalism of “racial consciousness” (as I have translated it here, slightly differently than Cumings’ translation of “national consciousness”) indeed rings true with Balibar’s statement that “nationalism fosters formal equality,” for it is obvious that he sees “racial consciousness” as a fundamental part of a “national consciousness” that will act as the glue which forms the basis for a new, egalitarian society. It is an ideology for a modern Korea that is useful towards ideological ends, especially in a state founded on ostensibly democratic ideals, but which found it difficult to maintain the patience to allow into actual practice. The metaphysics of conformity and obedience finds its origins in the type of dogma Yi preached at the beginning of its Korea’s existence as an independent, modern state; it is a dogma which is alive and well still today.
Usually, when I make comparisons to Korean notions of the "danil minjok" and the racial dogma of the Nazis, people always say that I am "going too far" and that I "don't really understand" how the Korean case is different. Ironically, it is people who make this defense who do not truly understand the identifiable, specific links that notions of racial purity have to now-discredited Western concepts that include Social Darwinism, eugenics, anti-Semitism, and fascism. It is not just my American notions twisting around "good" concepts of national unity in Korea; take a deeper look at the conceptual origins of some of Korea's most foundational thinkers, Shin Chae Ho and Yi Pomsok. Here, you will find all the evidence one needs.
I do not think it coincidence that such important founders of a modern Korean identity have almost universally never been directly read by Koreans. It is doubly ironic that the sources that one could easily find in most academic bookstores in America – namely people such as Andre Schmid, Michael Robinson, or Bruce Cumings – are all Western scholars who have read all the pertinent primary sources. What's the reason behind this? I think that if most Koreans today actually directly read what some of the founders of their modern identity had to say about other nations, cultures, and races, they would be shocked.
On top of that, if more Korean historians would do honest research about the painful formation period of the Korean state - rather than quibble over meaningless, politically-loaded questions of who was a "traitor" and who was a "patriot" – perhaps there would be more Koreans who would like to break off ties with the scientific racism and nationalist fascism of the early 20th century and build a newer, more positive notion of Korean identity. As it is, watching nationalist displays of Korean "pride" and listening to incessant stories of Korean superiority and purity no longer even irritates me; I am simply embarrassed for Korea's sake. Is it really still so stuck in late 19th century thinking?
With this in mind, one should not think that the type of thinking exemplified by Yi was confined to the mind of a single, extreme right-wing nationalist, and not representative of Korean ideology in general. In the present-day, Korean ideology is actively taught and instilled into the minds of youth, the school being the most powerful and effective vessel for the delivery of this ideological belief system. The message asserting the relationship between blood and culture remains just as articulated and clear as when Yi Pom Suk first began writing his theories down in 1946.
Click image to enlarge.
In the same first-year middle school ethics textbook I talked about in previous articles (see articles 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6), the writers from the Ministry of Education continue along the lines of Yi’s argument from decades past. The following passage speaks volumes about the persistence of essentialist thinking about race in present-day Korea:
How have we come to have such sentiments? The reason is that the idea that we are a single people sharing the same bloodline has been passed down to us in our shared racial consciousness. Today, while the many races on the earth live within their different, respective environments and histories, they are all struggling for sake of their respective race’s development and prosperity. A race/group shares the same blood and uses a common language, while sharing a history and culture. Based on that, the communal consciousness embodied in the word “we” constitutes the meaning of the group. A race/group can share a common name, race, or area, and in the same way, because we share the same bloodline as our ancestors, we can sometimes even call race “a big family.”
The book continues on, establishing the innate nature of race and national identity:
In a family, even if one member moves far away, one cannot say that that person is no longer part of the family. In the same way, if a person born as a member of our race/group lives in another country, and even acquires citizenship there, one cannot come to the conclusion that the person is no longer a member of our race. (Ethics, 1994)
The problematic aspect of such a conception of racial/ethnic identity is obvious – race, nation, and culture becomes conflated into a single, irreducible aspect of identity. Yi Pom Suk's aforementioned concept of 민족의식/minjok uisik (“national/racial consciousness”) is actively used in the textbook in the sections that follow the previously quoted passage.
Such is the way ideology is distilled down into a single, easily comprehensible concept and term to memorize. Children learning this conception of identity, combined with the inherently negative and ethnocentric construction of other races’ representations which are predicated on this type of reductionist thinking about race, can never conceive of themselves in relation to other parts or peoples of the world in anything other than a hierarchy.
Especially in states busily reconstructing their national cultures to serve specific, concrete agendas – such as building a national economy – this conception of national identity becomes extremely useful, as the hard times requiring conformity, obedience, and sweat take their toll on the people. When race, nation, and culture become one and the same, this makes all the more convenient a dangerous ideological sleight of hand.
So are people surprised to see how mixed-race children are treated? Considering that the Ministry of Education has been teaching terms and concepts that find their origins in the scientific racism and European fascism of the early 20th century, I certainly am not.
Am I going too far ending with a translation of the first verse of "The Song of the German People", which was the Nazi's national anthem, the third verse of which is the present-day German national anthem? Am I just being an ass here, or is there some meaning to be found in the that Korea's present-day conceptions of "race" and "national unity" was constructed by a man who modeled his theories on fascist ones, or the fact that the 1994 printing of the Ethics textbook was still lauding German "group consciousness" as a desirable trait responsible for their national success, or that I have personally had dinner in a "Hitler" bar in Suncheon in the mid-1990's, and that most Koreans didn't seem to see what the "big deal" was in having one smack in the middle of Shinchon until very recently (thanks, Hater Depot)?
"Sieg, Heil!" in Shinchon
Dear reader Sungwon sends an old picture of his local Hitler place in Daejeon.
Springtime for Hitler – in Pusan, 2002. Thanks, Matty!
The picture I should have taken was of another Hitler bar, this one way down on the coast in Sunchon, and which I ran across in 1994 – doesn't exist because I was simply in too much shock at the time to have the foresight to take a picture. I tend to think, though, that since many trends in the big city get followed by small towns – and not the other way around – I tend to think that there were more Hitler bars peppered across the peninsula. And given that many other expats have told me stories of "their" Hitler bar from their own cities, I'm actually pretty sure of this. So that's at least 3 we got proof of – anyone got any more to report?
Hitler as a part of a bingo game for kids. If get bingo, call out "Sieg, Heil!"
(Thanks, "Hater Depot!")
Now, I know many of you think I'm being a little too harsh with my sarcasm, but seriously – how crazy would it get in the Korean media if a place in the US had a "Hirohito Hall" or hung the Imperial rising sun flag on its walls. I know of some Korean students in my university years who protested some frat boys hanging that flag out their window and sparked a controversy by wanting to file a harassment complaint with the university. They rationalized – and rightly so – that if someone had hanged a Nazi flag out of their window, Jewish students would be appalled and it might make national news; for Koreans, it had a similar meaning, yet since the flag was hung largely out of ignorance, the problem just sort of solved itself. Are Korean folks actually arguing that they don't know the import of Nazi flags and beer mugs with swastikas and waiters wearing black SS uniforms? Personally, I don't know if it would be better to plead ignorance or simply say you don't care and do it anyway.
And from a commenter, who echoes the experiences of many people who have been to Korea's own place of remembrance of their own "Holocaust" (well, the Chonan Independence Hall, where the docents will berate you until they get red in the face if you ask anything slightly outside of the party line, such as "Do you really think these exhibits are the proper thing to show to early elementary students?" A friend of mine asked that question when she went a few years ago, when she saw little kids being exposed to horribly violent pictures of torture, rape, and death; the docent literally went crazy on her, to the point where she left early because he was literally about to pop either a vein or her. Here's a comment a reader just left who apparently had another problem with the place:
Well, I wish I had a camera with me when I went to the Chonan Independence Hall in the late 90's. Greeting visitors in the first exhibition hall was something that sent a shiver up my spine: a text written in English and Korean on a large panel in which the authors made use of eugenics, more precisely the encephalization quotient (the ratio of brain and body weight), to argue that people of the 'Korean race' have the highest mental capacity in the world.
I'm not surprised, since Korean academia's long-term love affair with Social Darwinism and similar eugenics arguments are still alive and well in the present day. In a book called The Korean Face (한국의 낯) that I picked up after having to basically rewrite an article submitted to the UNESCO Korean Studies journal I help edit, it literally goes on and on about the origins of certain Korean racial character traits, how they're related to the size of certain areas of the cranium – I shit you not – and why the Korean education system has to pick up the slack to compensate for the inherent deficiencies that Korean genetics dictates – especially the tendency to be "overly irrational" and "emotional" while "western" skulls make for the success of the West itself, in terms of "civilization" and spreading that around to other parts of the world.
Of course, of course, being the researcher that I am, I looked in the back for the bibliography, which such pseudo-academic works in Korea tend to rarely have, and as per my assumption, most of the major sources were nihonjinron-genre (click the link – I'm tired) works from Japan, mostly published in the 1960's and 1970's. It was my thesis notions in motion, baby!
I would love to get into what works those books based their research on, as I am willing to bet my left kidney that the list of works would be "getting a little German on it," as Chris Rock once put it. But that's not my thesis directly; would someone out there do an article on it so I can quote it and use it as another part of my own thesis? Man, there are a lot of interesting questions out there.
One of my assumptions about a more pervasive and ongoing link between pre-National Socialism ideas – as well as perhaps some from National Socialism itself – is that they had a heavy influence on Japanese thinking about race, nation, and culture; the link between Korean national ideology and nihonjinron is so strong, obvious, and ongoing that it will be somewhat of an academic exercise (literally) to establish the links between the two. So if there are links between western racism, eugenics, Social Darwinist thinking, nihonjinron (very likely), and then a link between nihonjinron and Korean national ideology (nearly indisputable, if you check the references of nearly any minjokhak ("Korean national studies," loosely and liberally translated) work, you'll get even more links back to the times we're talking about.
And this brings in the interesting explanatory fact that yes, there might be an additional degree of separation between any Nazi ideology (or what became Nazi ideology) and Korean ideology (vis a vis Japan), which may make the connection less deliberate, but not any less real.
Ya'll feel what I'm saying?
So these pictures and other images inspired something in me, something that might tie all this together. So I substituted the words "Korea" for "Germany" and four Korean places close to the nationalist heart for the German ones in the original German work. And whaddya know? It works really well! Another thing that works better than I had thought before doing an A-B comparison are styles of the national anthems themselves. Compare the Korean orchestral rendition to the German one – the Teutonic tones are more overtly martial in the latter tune from the land of beer and Nazism, but the simplistic, easy-to-sing, scale-like, melodic progressions are strikingly similar. Is it a coincidence that the melody was written by a Korean smack-dab in the middle of Spain in 1937? (source: Wikipedia) Who knows?
I think it's worth thinking about. I know, I know – for those of you who accuse me of being just being purposely controversial for the sake of being so – guilty as charged. Here's my cynical little adaptation of the original German national anthem:
Hanguk, Hanguk über alles,
über alles in der Welt,
wenn es stets zu Schutz und Trutze
brüderlich zusammenhält.
Von der Tonghae bis an Baekdusan,
von der Manju bis an Tokdo,
Hanguk, Hanguk über alles,
über alles in der Welt!
Here's the English translation of that slightly altered German national anthem.
Hanguk, Hanguk above everything,
above everything in the world,
if we always stand together as brothers
for protection and defense.
From the East Sea on to Mount Baekdu,
from Manchuria to Tokdo Isle,
Hanguk, Hanguk above everything,
above everything in the world.
Here's the original Korean national anthem, followed by English translation of the first verse.
동해물과 백두산이 마르고 닳도록
하느님이 보우하사 우리나라 만세
남산위에 저 소나무 철갑을 두른 듯
바람서리 불변함은 우리 기상일세
가을 하늘 공활한데 높고 구름 없이
밝은 달은 우리 가슴 일편단심일세
이 기상과 이 맘으로 충성을 다하여
괴로우나 즐거우나 나라 사랑하세
무궁화 삼천리 화려강산
대한사람 대한으로 길이 보전하세
"Until the East Sea's waves are dry, (and) Mt. Baekdusan worn away, God watch o'er our land forever! Our country forever!"
("Mansei!" are the same characters as the Japanese "Banzai!" and is literally translated as "10,000 years!" but is often yelled during an attack, whether on the soccer field or the field of battle.)
Rose of Sharon, thousand miles of range and river land! Guarded by her people, ever may Korea stand!
Like that Mt. Namsan armored pine, standing on duty still, wind or frost, unchanging ever, be our resolute will.
In autumn's, arching evening sky,crystal, and cloudless blue, Be the radiant moon our spirit, steadfast, single, and true.
With such a will, (and) such a spirit, loyalty, heart and hand, Let us love, come grief, come gladness, this, our beloved land!
Noooooooo. No fascist sentiment here at all. Move along, now. Nothing to see here...
