(Hat tip to The Marmot's Hole for this one.)
Well, as much a I ride the Ministry's ass about many of their other policies, sometimes you gotta give them credit.
For all the problems that go along with having a centrally-controlled and managed school system and curriculum, it has its own powers – there are some benefits. One of the downsides of the American way of doing things is that the Department of Education has no overreaching power to force any kind of reform – the federal government can lead with a carrot, but can't force the states to do anything they don't want to do when it comes to education funding, administration, or curriculum. The Constitution's a great thing, but it makes education reform in the US a major bitch.
Enter the Korean system, where everything happens from the top. When a policy sucks, it sucks for everybody. When a textbook is full of unequaal gender roles or assertions of pride in alleged racial "purity", everyone is learning it. And that's been the subject of many a post of mine (here and here and here and here).
But when a decision is made to make a long-needed change, it's done. Like that. "Two snaps up in a circle," and textbooks are all different.
And for those who said I was just seeing what I wanted to see, or that the work "minjok" absolutely, can never be translated as "race", or that I was being too hard on Korea and am a "Korea-basher" – well, eat crow.
From the Hankyeoreh article quote in the link right above:
"Additionally, expressions that reinforce discrimination against those of mixed-race backgrounds and immigrants, as well as excessive emphasis on Korea as a nation of "one blood," will disappear from textbooks."
So that means the government acknowledges that there indeed was material that did indeed "reinforce discrimination against those of mixed-race backgrounds and immigrants, as well as excessive emphasis on Korea as a nation of 'one blood.'"
And since I'm giving the Ministry kudos, you can't say I am "just negative," right? Sure, there's more critical stuff on this blog than "대~한민국!" – but that's what you get with a social criticism blog, right? If you want hand-clapping and "대~한민국", just pick up any tourist brochure, book in English published in Korea, or Seoul Magazine.
Here, you get reasonable social critique – and if and when there's "positive" headway made on an issue I otherwise critique, I am more than happy to point that out. But signs of such progress, as is true for any society with certain social problems kept locked in by social inertia and the interests of the powerful, doesn't come easily or often.
But when it does, I'm as eager to point that out as criticize it. Otherwise, what would be the value of making the critique in the first place?
