IMF Bailout of Korea During East Asian Financial Crisis (Part IV)

[Series Index]

The earlier parts of the series, written by Wangkon936, discussed the international forces that led to the East Asian Financial Crisis and the IMF bailout of Korea. This part, by the Korean, will discuss the social impact of the East Asian Financial Crisis on Korea.

Domestic Economic Impact

The impact of East Asian Financial Crisis on Korea was simply devastating. It is faster to count the large Korean corporations that did not file for bankruptcy. (Here is a decent list of the companies that died versus the companies that survived.) Every day there was a new large company going under. Even those who managed to survive had to face the scalpel of Korean government, as ordered by IMF. On June 18, 1998 alone, Ministry of Finance ordered 55 large companies to shut down. The coup d'grace -- almost in its literal sense, given that the French word signifies the "blow of mercy" that finally kills off the tortured prisoner -- was the disappearance of Daewoo in 1999, at the time the second largest company in Korea. At the time, Daewoo's automobile division was every bit as good as Hyundai's; its electronics, every bit as good as Samsung's and LG's; its shipbuilding, among the world's best along with other Korean shipbuilders. No matter -- Korean government had to show serious resolve that no company was too big to fail, and Daewoo disappeared into history.

One dead big company does not simply mean the employees of that company lost their jobs. A bankruptcy of a big company causes massive ripple effects, causing cascading bankruptcy to other smaller companies that depend on the big company. This is particularly true in Korea, whose economy revolved around a handful of huge conglomerates. (For example, Samsung makes everything from shoes to cars.) Even the companies that managed to stay alive had to undergo massive layoffs -- something that never happened in Korea. Unemployment rate skyrocketed. Previous to East Asian Financial Crisis, the unemployment rate of Korea was 2 percent. By the end of 1998, unemployment rate was 6.8 percent, creating the unprecedented number of 1.6 million jobless people in Korea. Property value plummeted also, with house prices dropping 12.4 percent in 1998.

(More after the jump)

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.


The Changed Economic Life

It must be said that as far as economic crises in history go, the East Asian Financial Crisis was far from the worst. In fact, Korean economy, taken as a whole, made a full recovery in relatively short order. Korea managed to pay back its loan from IMF in its entirety in August 2001, three years ahead of schedule. Korean economy shrank by 5.7% in 1998, but again grew by 10.7% in 1999 and 8.8% in 2000. Within four to five years since the IMF's bailout, Korean economy was back on track, growing at the rate that most developed nations would envy. There are also well-reported cases of savvy investors who struck gold by counter-cyclically investing in real estate when the property values plummeted. Compared to, for example, the Great Depression for the United States or the Lost Decade for Japan, one might be tempted to say that the East Asian Financial Crisis was not too bad for Korea.

But undergoing the East Asian Financial Crisis put Korean society on a fundamentally different track. For better or for worse, Korea simply was not the same country after the East Asian Financial Crisis, and a fair argument can be made that most post-crisis changes in Korean society were for the worse.

Arguably the most significant social impact of the East Asian Financial Crisis on Korea was that the fundamental change in how Koreans perceived their economic lives. Until 1997, Korea's roaring economy nearly guaranteed a decent life for anyone who tried. As the 2 percent unemployment signified, anyone who wanted a job could get one, and large corporations constantly complained of being unable to find enough skilled workers. As most Japanese companies did in the 1980s, large Korean companies provided what might be called a "full service" employment for their employees -- the employees were given free housing; their children attended the company-provided schools and receive tuition subsidies for colleges; few people were ever fired and everyone's salary rose with seniority until the retirement age; after retirement, there was pension and medical care from the company. South Korea was, in a sense, a better "workers' paradise" than what North Korea could ever achieve.

(Aside: If you want to have a glimpse of what this might have looked like, visit Ulsan. With its huge Hyundai Heavy Industries presence, Hyundai employees still enjoy a semblance of the old school working life in Korea, with subsidized apartments, free top-notch medical care, company-sponsored intramural sports leagues played on grass fields that are nice enough for World Cup teams to practice on, heavily discounted hotels and resorts uses, private cultural events for company employees, etc.)

All of this came to a sudden halt during the East Asian Financial Crisis. Nobody was safe, not even the people who worked for big companies. As discussed above, even the second largest company in Korea vanished into thin air. In the short term, the hardest hit were the people in their 50s, in the management positions -- generally considered the most expendable in a corporate structure. They were given the cruel choice between getting their salaries drastically slashed and their job responsibilities reduced to triviality, or receive a lump sum in exchange for an "honorary retirement" [명예퇴직]. And they had to count themselves as lucky, as even more people witnessed their company and jobs simply ceasing to exist.

For a time, there was a period of true anomie. Hiking trails around Seoul were suddenly filled with middle-aged hikers in a suit and dress shoes with a briefcase. Because these men were laid off but could not quite let their families know, they dressed up in the morning and decided to take a hike instead. Parks similarly filled up with able-bodied men, sitting around with nothing to do. Suicide rate spiked up, as some people simply could not take it any more. In 1995, 11.8 people out of 100,000 died from suicide. In 1998, the same number increased to 16.1.

Over the longer term, the unemployment rate abated. Bu in a key area, the crisis-level unemployment rate still persists -- that is, youth unemployment. Currently, Korea's unemployment rate is at 3.3%, but among young Koreans between the ages of 15 and 29, the unemployment rate stands at 7.6%. In addition, more and more young Koreans delay entering into job market by studying abroad or attending graduate school. Having seen researchers at large companies losing their jobs in droves, young Korean college students avoid majoring in science and engineering to an alarming degree.

Another major change (per IMF's demands) was a major deregulation of the finance industry. Specifically, Korean government substantially deregulated the credit card business in order to boost the domestic consumption. For instance, restrictions on who may receive a credit card and the restrictions on the amount of cash advance disappeared. The result was that even the homeless could take out a credit card. For a time, cash service under the credit card constituted more than half of the credit card use -- for which credit card companies duly charged nearly usurious rates. In 1997, approximately 500,000 Koreans were individually bankrupt. In 1998, understandably, the number increased to 1.93 million. But even in 2004 -- when Korean economy as a whole made full recovery from the crisis -- 3.82 million people were individually bankrupt, and two-thirds of the bankrupt individuals were so because of credit card debt.

All this led to something with which current-day Americans should be very familiar -- income polarization. According to Bank of Korea, Koreans in the top 20% income bracket increased their savings by 13% in 1998, while the bottom 20% income bracket decreased their savings by astounding 426.8%, i.e. became heavily indebted.  In 1997, Korea was one of the most egalitarian nations in the world, with the Gini coefficient percentage of 28.2. (0 means everyone has exactly the same amount of income; 100 means only one person has all the money.) By 2009, Korea's Gini coefficient percentage was 32.5, and the increasing wealth gap in Korea shows no signs of slowing down regardless of the overall state of Korean economy.

Accordingly, the middle class squeeze is on. "Middle class," defined as those who earn within 50 to 150% of the median income, decreased from 75.4% to 67.5% in the 20 years from 1990 to 2010. In the same 20 years, the average age of the middle class head of household increased from 37.5 to 47 years old -- in other words, it is taking nearly a decade longer to accumulate enough wealth to qualify as a middle class. Also, in the same 20 years, the proportion of middle class households with negative cash flow went from 15.8% to 23.3%.

Political Unity and Disunity

These economic changes, in turn, exerted significant influence on Korean politics. Perhaps the most obvious of such changes is the rekindling of Korean nationalism. Korea's economic rise from the ashes of Japanese Imperialism and Korean War has been a great source of pride for Koreans. This made the bailout by IMF extremely humiliating. Some Koreans went so far as to hatch conspiracy theories that essentially said the currency speculators, IMF and American private equity funds were working in coordination to choke the lifeblood of Korean economy, devalue Korean companies and scoop them up in a speculative bid. Even though the conspiracy theory did not survive for very long, IMF's harsh austerity demands (which, recall, IMF later itself recognized to be excessive and unnecessary) reminded many Koreans of Imperial Japan's invasion of Korea. News media did not hesitate to call the day of the bailout as "the second National Day of Shame" [국치일], a term usually referring to the day when Korea officially fell to the Japanese rule. Although the official term for the East Asian Financial Crisis in Korea is 외환위기 [foreign exchange crisis], the more commonly used term is IMF 사태 ["IMF crisis"].

This rise in nationalism was indispensable for Korea's relatively smooth recovery from the East Asian Financial Crisis. The perception (held rightly or wrongly) that foreign forces were threatening Korea awakened what is perhaps Korea's greatest national strength -- a gritty sense of unity that accepts bone-cutting sacrifice for the greater good. Corporations and labor unions, usually prone to extremely bitter disputes, came together to form a super committee along with the government, termed 노사정 위원회. ["Labor-Corporation-Government Committee"] In just 20 days after formation, the LCG Committee came out in a grand bargain encompassing large-scale corporate reforms, greater flexibility in labor market (i.e. mass layoffs and the end of tenured employment) and new policies for the jobless.

Korean nationalism also minimized the social unrest that inevitably follows an economic turmoil. Despite the harsh austerity plan, Korea faced very few anti-austerity protest like the kind that happened in Italy, Greece or other parts of Europe. Instead, Koreans voluntarily organized a gold collection drive, for which people lined up to donate their wedding rings, medals and family heirlooms made of gold so that they may be sold and used to repay Korea's national debt. Not surprisingly, the organizers were inspired by an earlier gold collection drive in 1907, when Koreans donated gold to pay back Korea's national debt owed to Imperial Japan as colonization loomed on the horizon.

Over the long term, however, the stress from the economy would translate to Korea's politics as well. The most significant political buzzword in Korea for the last decade was "polarization" and the means with which to alleviate it. Every aspect of Korean society -- including income, educational opportunity, retired life, etc. -- was critically re-examined for the signs of polarization. Currently the main political discourse in Korea revolves around establishing a more universal welfare system, in response to the concern over the polarization. Very recently, Seoul's mayor resigned over a political dispute about providing free school lunch to Seoul's school children. Next year's presidential election will almost certainly revolve around the debate about the proper level of welfare program in Korea going forward.

Systemically, the most significant political effect was a formation of political group comprised of pissed-off young people, who found themselves jobless despite undergoing the famously grueling Korean educational system. Reflecting their station in various aspects, these young people (more young men than women) are intelligent (almost to the degree of being sophistic,) tech-savvy, activist, and above all, really freakin' angry. As Korea has turned itself into the most wired country in the world in the late 1990s, this group of the young began to wield an influence over Korean politics that is quite disproportionate to their numbers. They would become the "keyboard warriors," lashing out at any convenient target that appears to have caused their deprivation. This group achieved its height in the infamous candlelight protests against importing American beef in 2008, in which it played a crucial role in fanning the public fervor.

The Psychic Impact

Personally to the Korean, the most interesting aspect in the fallout from the East Asian Financial Crisis is the psychic influence in Korean minds. By the beginning of 1990s, Korean society was already engaged in a self-reflection about what it was losing by driving itself so hard in order to achieve its miraculous economic growth. The title of the one of the best selling movies in 1989 declared, "Happiness is not in the order of [school] grades." [행복은 성적순이 아니잖아요.]  The lyrics of a hit song "Anti-Green Life" [敵 녹색인생] in 1992 pointed out, "In the apathy and selfishness that we threw away, we can no longer breathe clean air." After all, a generation had passed from the war and poverty of the 1960s. Was it so necessary to study so hard in school, work till death in the offices, chasing money over happiness?

Just as a substantial fraction of Korea was ready to say "No" to that question, the tempest of East Asian Financial Crisis swept the nation and crushed the budding idea. It seemed that, after all, it was too early for Koreans to relax and rest on their achievements. All the wealth that Koreans have built could be instantly destroyed by currency speculators, and then the IMF -- a foreign body over which Koreans had no say -- could swoop in and demand Korea to essentially cut of its limbs and reduce millions of people into the same poverty that they just escaped. The bad memories of the dire poverty came rushing back. Anxiety set in the minds of Koreans. The survivalist drive, which appeared to be finally subsiding, came back with a vengeance.

A survey conducted in April 1998 is very interesting for the purpose of getting a glimpse at this anxiety. The survey gave a series of statements to young people between the ages of 16 and 20, who would reply with 5 for "Very much so" and with 1 for "Not at all." Here are some of the results:

- "I am concerned about how I will make a living after graduation" (received 3.91).
- "It is difficult to find a full time job." (4.1)
- "It is difficult to find a part time job." (3.92)
- "Only the talented will get a job." (3.93)
- "Stability is an important factor for a good job" (3.84) versus "Prestige is an important factor for a good job." (2.85)
- "To be promoted, you have to have a good resume." (3.71)
- "High positions go to those who went to good colleges." (3.45)
- "Most people who lost the job are middle class people who have worked diligently." (3.63)
- "To live a life, there is nothing more important than money." (3.59)
- "There is nothing that can't be done with money." (3.38)
- "One needs money to live like a person." (4.37)
- "People work diligently in order to earn money." (3.38)
- "Parents want their children to attend good colleges in order to get a job that pays well." (3.64)
- "Dating a rich person entails an expectation for monetary help." (3.47)
- "Wealth is an important consideration for selecting a spouse." (3.53)

These young people have seen their parents swiftly driven into ruin, which resulted in the trends easily identifiable here -- fear of the collapsing economic life, anxiety over the possibility of earning a living, the perceived necessity to survive in a competitive economy with more education, and most importantly, a rise of vulgar materialism. It has been a little over a decade since the East Asian Economic Crisis, which means this generation of young Koreans are now in their late 20s to early 30s, forming the mainstream culture of Korean society -- which means the fear and anxiety formed in their formative years now constitute a strain within contemporary Korean culture.

The Korean remembers the East Asian Financial Crisis to be the moment when suddenly, everything in Korea became a lot more vulgar. Traditionally, Koreans avoided discussing money in a polite company. At no time in the Korean's childhood did the Korean Parents spoke of money in front of him. (Even to this day, the Korean hates talking about money.) But all of a sudden, Korean people were comfortable -- too comfortable -- talking about earning and spending money. The traditional New Year Day's greeting, 새해 복 많이 받으세요 [May you receive much new year's fortune], gave way to the new phrase, 부자 되세요 [May you become a rich person]. Women's skirts and shorts get shorter, and plastic surgery craze went into overdrive. It might yet take another generation of sustained prosperity before Koreans began asking themselves the same questions they asked 20 years ago.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

How do You Grow Hair Quickly?

Dear Korean,

I've been an English teacher working here in Korea for 7 months. The other day I was casually remarking to a friend of mine about how quickly my hair grows and that it's almost a nuisance getting it cut every 3 weeks. She then said there's a Korean myth about people whose hair grows quickly but she wouldn't tell me exactly what it is. Do you know what she's talking about or is she just making it up?

T


She is not just making it up. In fact, she is being rather polite by not telling you.

Here is the myth in Korea about quickly growing hair -- thinking about sex all the time makes one's hair grow faster. Although not explicitly stated, this applies mostly to men.


Instead of Nogaine, maybe just watch a lot of porn?

But how could it be possible that thinking about sex leads to hair growth? The only theory that has even a whiff of plausibility is that thinking about sex leads to increased level of testosterone, which leads to hair growth. At any rate, Koreans generally recognize this as a myth -- just something funny to say. If anyone tried to make a serious case for the myth, Koreans would also point out the countervailing myth: i.e., baldness is a sign of male sexual prowess.

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

Ask a Korean! News: Making Batteries with Koreans

New York Times had a very interesting article about a new governmental project to promote lithium-ion battery manufacturing in Michigan, which also had a great deal to do with Korea. A few excerpts (all emphases added by the Korean):
Over the last two years, the federal government has doled out nearly $2.5 billion in stimulus dollars to roughly 30 companies involved in advanced battery technology. ... By almost any account, the White House has fallen woefully short on job creation during the past two and a half years. But galvanized by the potential double payoff of skilled, blue-collar jobs and a dynamic clean-energy industry — the administration has tried to buck the tide with lithium-ion batteries. It had to start almost from scratch. In 2009, the U.S. made less than 2 percent of the world’s lithium-ion batteries. By 2015, the Department of Energy projects that, thanks mostly to the government’s recent largess, the United States will have the capacity to produce 40 percent of them. Whichever country figures out how to lead in the production of lithium-ion batteries will be well positioned to capture “a large piece of the world’s future economic prosperity,” says Arun Majumdar, the head of the Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E). The batteries, he stressed, are essential to the future of the global-transportation business and to a variety of clean-energy industries.
(More after the jump)

Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.



(Continued)
Repatriating a high-tech manufacturing plant to the United States is not simply a matter of hiring the local talent. It requires good-old foreign know-how. “We call it ‘copy exact,’ ” Forcier said. “We bought a company in Korea that had the technology around this type of battery and had developed the manufacturing process there. We basically brought that here, copied it exactly and scaled it up.” A123 also brought a team of six Korean engineers to help transfer the technology to the U.S. and sent a team of Americans to Korea to learn.

I heard a similar story at LG Chem Power — a battery start-up and an American subsidiary of LG Chem, a Korean firm. LG Chem is building a factory in Holland, Mich., to make batteries for the Chevy Volt. Production depends on replicating the company’s lithium-ion plants abroad, down to the smallest detail. “In fact, we’re making it like a copy — cut and pasted from Korea to here,” Prabhakar Patil, the C.E.O. of LG Chem Power, said.

...

Federal agencies like the Department of Energy have long financed scientific research — through university grants, for instance — on technologies like lithium-ion batteries. But a basic feature of government policy is to allow corporations and entrepreneurs to pick through the results of that research, commercialize the promising ideas and let the market sort things out. In other countries, it often works differently. Governments are more willing to help companies pool information about a new industry or technology and (especially in Korea and China) assist with the early-stage commercialization of products, including the construction of plants. While Patil was getting booted from executive offices at Ford, companies in Asia, in some cases with a boost from their governments, focused on streamlining the manufacturing process. Battery performance steadily improved, and costs dropped. By the mid-2000s, it was clear that if the lithium-ion battery continued to get better at the same rate, the product might soon be suited for automobiles.

...

It is a curiosity of modern life that information companies can create extraordinary social disruptions and vast shareholder wealth but relatively few jobs. Facebook has about 2,000 employees worldwide. Google has about 29,000. Even in its new, slimmed-down state, General Motors, a decidedly less valuable company, has about 200,000 employees. What’s more, that number represents only a fraction of the people behind the production of a G.M. car. ... The most punishing effect, however, may be the one that can’t be measured — the technologies and jobs that aren’t created because the industrial ecosystem is degraded. The semiconductor industry, for example, led to the LED-lighting and solar-panel industries, both of which are mostly based in Asia now. “The battery is another fascinating example,” Pisano told me. “The center of gravity is Asia. But why?” If you go back to the 1960s, he says, the American consumer-electronics companies decided they were better off in Japan, and then Korea, where costs were lower. “And then you have to ask: Who had the incentives to make batteries smaller or more powerful or last longer? Not the car industry. The consumer-electronics industry did.” This explains why the U.S. is now playing catch-up with lithium-ion batteries. It also underscores the vulnerability of an economy with a shrinking manufacturing sector. “When one industry moves,” Pisano says, “there can be other industries in the future that follow it that you couldn’t even anticipate.”

...

Even in the battery industry, there are skeptics. Menahem Anderman, a California-based consultant, says that transforming 10 percent of the world’s automobiles into either plug-in hybrids or electric vehicles by 2020 is a pipe dream. ... Anderman still sees the dilemma Patil faced at Ford in the ’90s, when he questioned whether consumers would pay $10,000 more for an inferior car. As Anderman puts it: “Has there ever been, in the modern history of capitalist countries, a new product for which the mainstream customer paid more for less?” By his math, gas prices have to reach about $7 a gallon to make plug-in electric-hybrid vehicles attractive to consumers. To create demand for fully electric vehicles, gas prices would have to rise even higher.
Does America Need Manufacturing? [New York Times]

A few scattered thoughts by the Korean upon reading this article:

- Despite all the hype about the "creative economy" based mostly on information / technology companies that might possibly invent the next iPad, the Korean is yet to encounter a forceful case that a national economy can survive as a "creative economy." In fact, the available indications point to the opposite direction -- info/tech companies may create a massive amount of wealth, but such wealth is very concentrated among the few who manage to work for such companies, or the few who have the money to invest in such companies. (For example, did you know that Facebook shares are on sale, but only a select few people can buy them?)  Info/tech companies create relatively few jobs, and ordinary people can't even invest in them. Then is it a good idea for a national economy to be dominated by such companies?

Please feel free to make a countervailing case, but as of now, the Korean is convinced that a healthy economy must be largely based on manufacturing, preferably the type with high value addition such as automobiles and electronics.

- The Korean chortled at the analyst who thought electric-hybrid cars will not be attractive to customers because gas prices have to reach about $7 a gallon. There are many places in which gas prices are about $7 a gallon -- it is called the rest of the world. Just take a look at this chart. In places like Netherlands and Norway, the gas costs over $6 per gallon. In places like France, Germany and Great Britain, the gas costs over $5.50 per gallon. (In Korea, it's about $5.85 per gallon.) Is it such a stretch to think that, in a few years, the gas price will reach around $7 a gallon in parts of the world that are populated and wealthy enough to purchase these vehicles? Global perspective, please.

- It was a frequent charge leveled against the Japanese, and later Koreans, that they lack creativity based on the fact that much of their industrial beginnings involved a straight copy/paste of an existing technology. From there, many derivative arguments flowed, e.g. how Asian educational system produced mindless robots incapable of innovation, how Confucian hierarchy stifled creativity, etc.

Now, to venture into a new industrial field, American companies are employing a "copy exact" strategy. That was worth a smirk.

- Lastly, witness the horror of the big government! Big government tells companies what to do! Big government forces companies to share information! Big government... makes the nation the world leader in the industrial field that it took over?

The Korean will never truly understand the appeal of libertarianism.
    Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

      Philosophy of Plastic Surgery

      New York Times had a very interesting column about a possibility of philosophy behind plastic surgery, with Brazil as an example. The Korean recommends reading the whole article, as it is a terrific column with a lot to chew on. Here are some excerpts:
      I assumed that the popularity of cosmetic surgery in a developing nation was one more example of Brazil’s gaping inequalities. But Pitanguy had long maintained that plastic surgery was not only for the rich: “The poor have the right to be beautiful, too,” he has said. ... Pitanguy’s remark raises yet another issue: Is beauty a right, which, like education or health care, should be realized with the help of public institutions and expertise?

      ...

      [Pitanguy] argues that the real object of healing is not the body, but the mind. A plastic surgeon is a “psychologist with a scalpel in his hand.” This idea led Pitanguy to argue for the “union” of cosmetic and reconstructive procedures. In both types of surgery beauty and mental healing subtly mingle, he claims, and both benefit health. ... We might ask: if you’re psychologically suffering, why not have psychological treatment? One doctor had this response: “What is the difference between a plastic surgeon and a psychoanalyst? The psychoanalyst knows everything but changes nothing. The plastic surgeon knows nothing but changes everything.”

      ...

      Beauty is unfair: the attractive enjoy privileges and powers gained without merit. As such it can offend egalitarian values. Yet while attractiveness is a quality “awarded” to those who don’t morally deserve it, it can also grant power to those excluded from other systems of privilege. It is a kind of “double negative”: a form of power that is unfairly distributed but which can disturb other unfair hierarchies. For this reason it may have democratic appeal. In poor urban areas beauty often has a similar importance for girls as soccer (or basketball) does for boys: it promises an almost magical attainment of recognition, wealth or power.

      In Brazil’s favelas many dreams for social mobility center on the body. N.G.O.’s offer free lessons in fashion modeling. Marriage is often seen as an out-of-reach luxury; seduction a means of escaping poverty. Powerful attractions that cross class lines are a favorite theme in telenovelas. And working class women face long lines at public hospitals to have cosmetic surgery. These social facts stem from the lack of other opportunities for many women. Yet, they also reflect an accurate, not deluded, perception of the role of physical attractiveness in consumer capitalism.

      For many consumers attractiveness is essential to economic and sexual competition, social visibility, and mental well being. This “value” of appearance may be especially clear for those excluded from other means of social ascent. For the poor beauty is often a form of capital that can be exchanged for other benefits, however small, transient, or unconducive to collective change.
      A ‘Necessary Vanity’ [New York Times]

      Much of the "plastic surgery philosophy" discussed in the article is applicable to Korea, the world's leader in plastic surgery. As the Korean discussed previously, the most important philosophy to understand modern Korean society is not Confucianism or any Eastern philosophy, but what might be termed "survivalism" -- the ruthless mindset required to ensure the survival over the next person in the continuously harsh conditions under war and poverty. Everything Koreans do, they do with a tinge of desperation, because war and poverty are really that scary.

      As the article correctly notes, beauty promises near-magical attainment of recognition, wealth and power, especially when opportunities for women are limited in other areas. Korea, more so than Brazil, is a rising economy in which people have the money to change the unfair circumstances in which they are born. So Koreans do everything they can do better their stations -- they desperately throw their children into more education, and they spend gobs of money in plastic surgery. If you ever wondered why there is so much plastic surgery in Korea, this is why.

      -EDIT 8/27/2011- Sure enough, the Economist has an article that explains exactly how much beneficial it is to be more attractive:
      A Chinese study confirms that the husbands of unappealing women earn about 10% less than those of their dishier counterparts. Attractive people also have an easier time getting a loan than plain folks, even as they are less likely to pay it back. They receive milder prison sentences and higher damages in simulated legal proceedings. In America more people say they have felt discriminated against for their appearance than because of their age, race or ethnicity.
      The line of beauty [The Economist]

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

      Ask a Korean! News: Korea's Role in Libyan Economy

      Democracy is not just a supreme value for human freedom -- it also does a great deal for wealth and prosperity. Korea's role in rebuilding post-Gadhafi Libya is a nice example of this. Some excerpts:
      As the regime of Moammar Gadhafi crumbled, the value of South Korean construction firms rose.

      When rebel forces swarmed into the dwindling Tripoli strongholds of Moammar Gadhafi Tuesday, investors in distant Seoul pushed the stock value of companies like Daewoo Engineering & Construction and Hyundai Engineering & Construction up nearly 10%, betting that the new rebel regime will mean lucrative reconstruction contracts.

      ...

      Libya is a major business partner to South Korea, and trade has been hard hit by the Libyan conflict. While exports to Libya reached $1.4 billion last year, exports dove nearly 88% the first seven months of the year, according to the Korea International Trade Association.

      Korean companies account for one-third of all foreign business in Libya according to the Korea Trade-Promotion Agency, KOTRA, working on projects worth some $36.4 billion at the start of this year.

      When violence first erupted, the South Korean government helped with the evacuation of almost 1400 workers working on 300 different building sites.

      ...

      KOTRA estimates the market for rebuilding Libya could be as large as $120 billion. Given the market share Korean firms had before this year, KOTRA estimates Korea's share of reconstruction could be as high as $40 billion.

      Rebuilding projects could include repairing oil refineries, electricity power lines, ports and houses as well as new road construction.
      Korea stakes claim in post-Ghadafi Libya [CNN]

      Many of Korea's major construction companies cut their teeth by building massive projects in the Middle East during the 1970s and 80s. By early 1980s, Korea trailed only America in the amount of money earned from construction projects abroad, and over 90 percent of such revenue came from Middle East, particularly Saudi Arabia and Libya. In 1991, Dongah Construction finished building a massive pipeline to carry water from one end of Libya to the other, which was the largest construction project at the time.

      Like Korea, Libya went from a dictatorship to democracy. Here is to hoping that Libya finds prosperity as Korea did.

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

      Looking for "Lee Michelle"

      The Korean is putting out an APB -- does anyone know this woman's story? From what the Korean could tell, she goes by the name of "Lee Michelle", and teaches vocal in Korea. Also, she appeared as a backup chorus in the hit show "I am a Singer" (나는 가수다), where the Korean first spotted her.

      Given the number of questions that the Korean receives from non-Koreans about wanting to be a K-pop star, her story can potentially be very instructive. If you somehow know her, please email the Korean. Thanks!

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.
      Only in America would serious people even wonder about whether there is too much learning going on. Luckily, most panelists on the New York Times responded in the negative, and a few did point out that the question itself was stupid (in gentler words, of course.) But the fact that this question even appears on the New York Times is itself a troubling sign.

      Ask a Korean! Wiki: Are Korean Men Into Black Women?

      Dear Korean,

      I'm 19 and live in the United State and very attracted to korean men such as TOP and Taeyang form big bang,Kim Bum, Kim Hyun Joong, ant etc., I thought of moving to South Korea after college. I've been learning the language but I wonder do korean like black girls. My features are european for the most part and I am light skinned such as Lee Hyori and Park Shiyeon but I and black. So I'm asking you for and answer...please don't give me it depends on the person it crap!

      Sheena



      Dear Korean,

      I just have this attraction towards Asian men. And some seem to like me too. But ive never dated one. So would they feel insecure dating a black girl? Well would you?

      Debbie



      Dear Korean,

      I actually have several questions, but all of them revolve around the "Blasian" relationships. I just want to know why Asian men don't approach Black women. You know how the trend is now: White women w/ Black men, Asian women w/ White men... etc, that leaves Black women and Asian men alone...... I'm personally attracted to Asian men but I can't get them to notice me. I've been 'hit on' by every ethnicity except Asian men. They either stay within their own ethnicity or date white women. I know that me being African-American maybe somewhat of a disadvantage, yet I'm not like most black women, I'm not loud, "ghetto" or vicious , I enjoy watching anime< esp. subbed>, listening to Kpop / Jpop music and studying Asian cultures. I don't have many black friends because they can't appreciate my unique, non-Black interests. Are Asian men just not interested? Is it true that Asians are scared of Black women? What can I do? What do Asian guys look for in girls?

      AW


      The most frequently received question for this blog is some variation of "Do Korean guys go for non-Korean [white, black, Latina, South Asian, Southeast Asian, Martian] girls?" And each time, the Korean points them to this old post, which has been the most popular post on this blog for a long time until the dog meat post overtook it this month. (But, for the record, the third most popular post is about what the word "oppa" means -- which is another mainstay for those infatuated with Korean men.)

      But over the course of receiving hundreds of such questions, the Korean noticed a trend: by far, black women were dominating the number of questions about whether Korean/Asian men would find them attractive. So the Korean figured this is a good topic for a separate discussion. Why do black women have such yellow fever? Was Ninja Assassin somehow much more culturally influential than people give it credit for? Are black women into small eyes? Or is it just that black women are more inquisitive? More insecure? And on the flip side, for Korean/Asian men -- are you interested in dating a black woman? Do you talk to black women when you go out?

      Here is the only reliable bit of research about black-Asian relationship that the Korean knows of. (If you know more, you are obviously welcome to pitch in.) Among all Asian Americans, Korean American men (who are raised in America) are actually the most likely to marry a black woman. This, however, is not really saying much, as only 2.1% of Korean American men (raised in America) are married to black women.

      Personally, back when the Korean was still dating, he was an equal opportunity dater. But he always did have a soft spot for black women. To the Korean, the most beautiful woman in the world (excluding, of course, the Korean Wife) is Beyonce. (Yes, the Korean knows Beyonce is biracial. Let's not get too technical. He also cannot stop staring at Alicia Keys whenever she is on TV. That good enough?) He also asked out a decent number of black women during the course of his dating life -- only to be rebuffed each time. God, it's great being married so I won't go through that shit again. Wait, did I say that out loud?

      At any rate, let's talk about this. Black women, Asian men, now is your time.

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

      IMF Bailout of Korea During East Asian Financial Crisis -- Interlude

      [Series Index]

      How ironic is it that as this blog discusses the IMF bailout of Korea during the East Asian Financial Crisis of 1997-98, U.S. and Europe are undergoing similar problems? The Economist captures very well a sentiment of schadenfreude among some Asian commentators:
      These sundry calamities in the West have provided Asian commentators with an unmissable chance to unveil Western hypocrisy. Many Asian leaders have vivid memories of the lectures they endured in 1997-98 over their thriftless, incompetent economic management, and of the harsh medicine they were forced to swallow in return for IMF assistance. So some must enjoy the reversal of roles: emerging Asia as the model of steady, consistent economic policy and sustained growth; America, Europe and Japan mired in debt and slow growth or even recession. Mr Mahbubani, now dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy in Singapore, says “every piece of advice that the Asians received has been ignored” in the West.

      A few weeks ago, China’s prime minister, Wen Jiabao, rebuked Britain for its obsessive harping on human-rights abuses in its dealings with his country. How he must have relished hearing his British counterpart, David Cameron, say this month that his government would not let “phoney human-rights concerns” get in the way of hunting down rioters and looters.
      What’s Schadenfreude in Chinese? [The Economist]

      Please do read the rest of the article, as it nicely discusses why the West's problem is also Asia's problem.

      Part IV of the IMF Bailout series, which will discuss the social impact of East Asian Financial Crisis on Korea, will come out soon. The Korean has always said that in many ways, the events of Korea presages the events in America. In all likelihood, the lessons learned by Korea a little more than a decade ago will be directly applicable to the United States.

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

      Ask a Korean! News: AIDS in Korea

      Here is a short piece of news about AIDS in Korea. Thankfully, most people with AIDS are alive:

      Reports showed that the man and woman who were found to be the first AIDS patients in Korea in the 1980s are still alive. According to the Center for Disease Control, Korea's first official AIDS patient was 55-year-old Mr. A, who contracted the disease in 1985. Mr. A discovered that he contracted AIDS from abroad when he was getting tested for donating blood in Korea. Mr. A has been undergoing treatment, and has been living a healthy life.

      Ms. B, the first Korean female AIDS patient who contracted the disease through sexual contact, also is in relatively good health. Ms. B lives with her son, who is in late 20s and born before she contracted the disease in 1988. The son does not have AIDS, exemplifying that living with an AIDS patient is not problematic.

      The officer from the CDC said: "As long as an AIDS patient continues to undergo treatment, he can live out his expected life expectancy," and added "American NBA basketball star Magic Johnson has been living for 20 years since he contracted AIDS in 1991, thanks to effective management of the disease."

      To date, there have been 7656 Korean AIDS patient. 82 percent, or 6292 patients, are still alive.

      국내 에이즈 첫번째 환자 26년간 생존 [Dong-A Ilbo]

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

      Technical Proficiency and Creativity

      The Korean always enjoys reading Anthony Tommasini's take on classical music on the New York Times. His recent article regarding the increasing technical ability of classical musicians (specifically pianists) is quite interesting:
      Ms. Wang’s virtuosity is stunning. But is that so unusual these days? Not really. That a young pianist has come along who can seemingly play anything, and easily, is not the big deal it would have been a short time ago.

      The overall level of technical proficiency in instrumental playing, especially on the piano, has increased steadily over time. Many piano teachers, critics and commentators have noted the phenomenon, which is not unlike what happens in sports. The four-minute mile seemed an impossibility until Roger Bannister made the breakthrough in 1954. Since then, runners have knocked nearly 17 seconds off Bannister’s time.

      Something similar has long been occurring with pianists. And in the last decade or so the growth of technical proficiency has seemed exponential.
      But will this focus on technical proficiency kill creativity and expression? No, Tommasini says -- just the opposite:
      But more recently younger pianists have not been cookie-cutter virtuosos. Technical excellence is such a given that these artists can cultivate real personality, style and flair: artists like the Ukrainian pianist Alexander Romanovsky, whose 2009 recording of Rachmaninoff’s “Études-Tableaux” for Decca is wondrously beautiful, or the highly imaginative Polish-Hungarian pianist Piotr Anderszewski, an exceptional Bach interpreter.

      ...

      Martha Argerich can be a wild woman at the piano, but who cares? She has stupefying technique and arresting musical ideas. I would add Krystian Zimerman, Marc-André Hamelin and probably Jean-Yves Thibaudet to this roster. There are others, both older and younger pianists. Again, lovers of the piano can disagree about the musical approaches of these tremendous artists. But that they are all active right now suggests that a new level of conquering the piano has been reached.
      Virtuosos Becoming a Dime a Dozen [New York Times]

      This conforms with the Korean's long-standing belief about true creativity:  to be truly creative, one has to be really, really technically good at something first. Only after there is a foundation of ability to actualize one's vision can there be a materialization of creativity.

      (More after the jump.)

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.


      For another example, check out this beautiful reverse lay-up by NBA Hall of Fame player, Julius "Dr. J" Erving:


      It should be obvious that Dr. J's reverse lay-up is an exhibition of supreme creativity. The challenge that Dr. J faced was the same challenge that every basketball player ever faced -- put the ball in the hoop, against the defenders who try to stop you. Dr. J found a new (and gorgeous!) way of addressing that challenge, the reverse layup that every aspiring basketball player would attempt to emulate. That is why people still talk about this particular shot 30 years after it happened. That's creativity.

      (Aside: Here is Hall of Fame center Bill Walton making the same point in an interview -- "Basketball is ultimately a game of creativity, imagination, and expression, and you play it at the highest level and you become the best and it becomes an emotional outpouring of who you are.")

      It should also be plain that Dr. J's creativity could be unleashed in the world because Dr. J was good at jumping. Dr. J's athleticism was a history-changing force for the NBA -- he was a Michael Jordan before there ever was Michael Jordan. Only with Dr. J's technical ability to leap, balance, twist and focus could Julius Erving achieve this monument of creativity.

      Surveying across all areas in which creative minds shine, the conclusion is the same. Before becoming a composing genius, Mozart was an incredible pianist. Before being known a visionary of a new type of painting, Picasso attained a level of technical proficiency held by few others at the tender age of 14. Before ushering in the new era of computing, Bill Gates had expertise in computers that few others in the world did. For each creative mind that shaped the course of human knowledge, one can always identify his or her area of technical expertise in which he or she had few rivals.

      *                 *                 *

      Creativity is important. It is, in fact, one of the most important qualities in human life. But in emphasizing creativity, many tend to discount the need for technical excellence, positing that technical excellence is something that gets in the way of creativity. "What good is being a good technician," the common argument would go, "if one cannot innovate? The technician can only follow; the innovators lead. And if you focus too much on the techniques, you lose the ability to innovate."

      This is a stupid argument, because it does not recognize the crucial fact that technical excellence is a necessary condition for innovation. There is no innovator who is not a technician first. And ironically, to build the technical skill required for an exercise in creativity, one must engage in a decidedly droll series of repeated drills and practices.


      This irony confuses people who, frankly, never attained a truly outstanding level of either creativity or technical proficiency. It becomes so easy for these people to buy into this misguided idea, because they never observed firsthand the process of how outstanding technical proficiency leads to magnificent creativity. As a result, instead of recognizing technical proficiency as a necessary condition for creativity, technical proficiency is frequently blamed as the cause for the lack of creativity.

      Addressing the popular stereotype that young Asian American musicians may be technically superior but robotic in creativity, one reader of this blog gave the perfect rejoinder:
      I used to be a violin teacher. In my experience, it wasn't that Asian kids were robotic; rather, their skill level was higher than their talent level relative to other kids. Highly talented Asian kids would of course play very well. But even moderately talented Asian kids would play fairly well -- well enough to sit at the back of the second violins in all-state orchestra, instead of first chair.

      Meanwhile, moderately talented white kids wouldn't put in the work necessary to compete with Asian kids at their talent level. It's true that moderately talented Asian kids would tend to sound rather "drilled," but on the other hand, moderately talented white kids would play out of tune, suffer memory lapses and miss shifts. And they would do all that with phrasing and pacing just as boxy as those of the "drilled" Asian kids. Meanwhile, the truly talented Asian kids would eat everyone's lunches and outplay less hardworking kids on every metric: phrasing and musicianship, intonation, bow control, articulation, whatever you could name. That's what you get when you have both skill and talent. Drill alone isn't sufficient for playing like Cho-Liang Lin or Kyung-Wha Chung or Nobuko Imai. But it is necessary, and anyone saying otherwise is dreaming.
      Please do not get distracted by the introduction of racial terms here, because the point here is not about those terms. (This should not matter, but if this matters to you, the reader who emailed this comment to the Korean was white. But again, that should not matter.) The point here is to dispel the stupid notion that technical skills somehow "crowd out" creativity. This is as dumb as the popular belief among the linguists of the 1960s that bilingualism is bad for brain development, because two languages were too much for a single brain to hold. (We now know how ludicrous that notion was.) Uncreative but technically proficient people are not so because their technical proficiency gets in the way of their creativity -- they are uncreative because they are untalented. Removing their technical proficiency will not somehow make them more creative. Can you seriously believe the claim that Mozart would have been a better composer if he was worse at piano? (Because, instead of practicing piano, he would have had more free time to focus on composing!) Yet that is precisely the kind of idiotic argument made by the people who think technical proficiency damages creativity.

      Creativity is not the same as the ability to make an off-the-cuff observation or a witty remark -- the abilities which are far too often mistaken as indicators of creativity. True creativity requires technical proficiency. Without technical proficiency to actualize the creative vision, creativity amounts to nothing more than hot air and idle imagination. The lazy people may delude themselves about their supposed creativity all they want. But when Dr. J swoops by and drops one of the most beautiful shots in NBA history, all they can do is to gape and blink, dumbfounded by the magic of true creativity.

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

      Baekseju, the "100 Year Wine"

      Dear Korean,

      What is the deal with 'bek sae ju'? I am told that drinking this 'hundred-year-wine' can help you live longer. Are there any actual health benefits to drinking this beverage? How did it get its reputation/name?

      Andi


      Dear Andi,

      You inadvertently stumbled onto a highly interesting example of how a Korean product manages to recall Korea's tradition and repackage it for modern day customers.

      First, the name. "Baek Se Ju" [백세주] literally means "100 year wine." The first reference to it came in a 17th century book called Jibong'yuseol [지봉유설], which was a type of encyclopedia, written by a scholar named Yi Su-Gwang [이수광]. The book tells the following tale about baekseju:
      A traveler was walking by a road, when he saw a young man had an old man stood up with his pants sleeves rolled up, and was whipping the old man with a switch. The traveler became indignant with the young man's insolence, chastised: "How dare you lay your switch on this old man's leg!"

      The young man replied: "This here is my precious only son, whom I had at age 80. And he is turning old like this because he did not drink this wine like I told him. So I am trying to teach him a lesson."
      This is a cool story reflective of the kind of ironic humor commonly found in traditional Korea. But the real story is how the modern baekseju appeared in the market.

      Baekseju is made by a company called Kooksoondang [국순당] Brewery Co., a company that focuses on brewing traditional wine. Before Kooksoondang decided to mass produce baekseju, the wine was no more than a moonshine recipe available only in small pockets of Korea. Importantly, although Kooksoondang made its baekseju based on the traditional recipe, it added plenty of its own adjustments to come up with what would sell in the broader market. The company put out the wine in the market in 1992, and advertised it with a nifty poster re-telling the story from Jibong'yuseol.


      Notice the old man getting hit by a young man

      The result was a huge success. In the early 1990s, there were pretty much only three types of alcohol available in Korean market -- beer, soju and whiskey. Baekseju was perfectly positioned to hit the market for people who wanted to drink but not get shitfaced. (For those who wanted something a bit stronger than baekseju, a popular alternative was quickly hatched -- "osipseju" ("50 year wine"), made by mixing soju and baekseju one-to-one.) The good-for-your-health was a nice narrative to accompany the product, enforcing the message that if you want to avoid hangover the next morning, go with baekseju. Thanks to baekseju, Kooksoondang grew 100 times in terms of revenue since 1992, and has now become the dominant market leader in traditional Korean wine of all kinds. One can fairly say that baekseju opened the door for the rediscovery of Korean traditional wine, although baekseju itself might not be particularly authentic.

      Is baekseju actually good for your health? It might be possible -- it is not particularly strong (about 13 percent alcohol), and its ingredients do include many herbs used in traditional medicine. The company does claim that, based on its own experiments, baekseju is just as good as red wine in cancer prevention, and also protects the stomach lining. But at the end of the day, alcohol is alcohol -- it can only be so good for one's health. Instead of thinking too much about the supposed health benefits, one should drink baekseju as a toast to how tradition, a solid product and nifty marketing combined to create one of the most successful products in Korean alcohol market.

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

      Ask a Korean! News: "War criminals are not really war criminals"

      The Korean previously wrote that the Japanese government is unable to make a truly meaningful apology and reparation because the Japanese people, as a whole, do not think their country did anything wrong in World War II and the occupation of Korea. And sure enough, Noda Yoshihiko, Japan's finance minister and the most likely candidate to be the next prime minister, confirms this view:
      On August 15th [Noda] aroused the ire of South Korea, a country that [current prime minister] Mr Kan has steadfastly and sensitively courted, by reaffirming a nonsensical argument he aired six years ago. It claims that Japan’s 14 Class-A war criminals who are buried at the Yasukuni Shrine in Tokyo were not, in fact, war criminals.

      Some legal commentators have made a similar point in the past, arguing that Japanese law does not recognise the verdicts of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, which convicted them. Legal hair-splitting aside however, Japan’s government accepted the verdicts as part of the 1952 San Francisco peace treaty, Article 11 of which begins: “Japan accepts the judgments of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East and of other Allied War Crimes Courts both within and outside Japan, and will carry out the sentences imposed thereby upon Japanese nationals imprisoned in Japan.”

      The bizarre part of Mr Noda’s argument is that he says the San Francisco treaty “restored the honour” of all Japan’s war criminals. When he made this point to Junichiro Koizumi in 2005, in response to the then-prime minister’s controversial visit to Yasukuni, even Mr Koizumi said he did not know what Mr Noda was talking about.
      Be careful whom you wish for [The Economist]

      The Korean will reiterate his previous position:  despite the occasional nationalistic spasms, Koreans are ready to love Japan. Koreans already consume Japanese products in droves despite incredibly high tariffs. Japanese cartoons are so popular in Korea that they essentially merged in as a part of Korean culture. You cannot have a conversation with hipster Koreans without watching the latest Japanese movies and dramas. Koreans provided a huge outpouring support when Japan suffered the massive damage from the recent earthquake and tsunami. The only thing – literally, the last possible thing – that is holding Koreans back from completely embracing Japan is that Japan is constantly provoking their nationalist sentiments that Koreans are generally happy to ignore otherwise.

      This is doubly disappointing because  it is not as if Noda is Shintaro Ishihara, a governor of Tokyo and certifiable right-wing nutjob who famously claimed that Rape of Nanking was a Chinese fiction. Noda belongs to the same party as Kan Naoto, the left-over-center Democratic Party that has been more willing to accept Imperial Japan's war crimes.

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

      Do Naturalized Koreans Get Drafted?

      Dear Korean,

      If I apply for the Korean citizenship before 35 years old, do I need to serve the military service?

      Roman


      Short answer -- you do not have to, but you can volunteer.

      Long answer --

      First of all, starting from 2011, the duty to serve is in effect until age 37, not age 35, if you were born after January 1, 1980. Be careful here, however -- the draft eligibility does not expire on your 37th birthday. Instead, it expires on December 31 of the year that you turn 37.

      When a male under 37 years of age naturalizes and obtains Korean citizenship, he is eligible for the draft like everyone else. If he does nothing, he will soon receive a draft notice. But a naturalized male Korean citizen can actually file a form and be exempt from military service, except in times of war when he will be drafted for labor mobilization. More about Korea's military service can be found in this series.

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

      Ask a Korean! Wiki: Mixed Koreans?

      Dear Korean,

      As an 18 year old male of mixed Korean/British race, what is modern Korea's outlook to an "unpure" Korean?

      Jonathan L.


      Dear Jonathan,

      The only answer that the Korean could give is: it wildly depends on the individual. In the 1950s and the following years, there definitely was a strong discrimination against mixed raced Koreans, because they were generally assumed to be the products of an American G.I. and an unchaste Korean mother. (Which, actually, was in general not too far off from the truth.) The decisive turning point happened in 2006, when Hines Ward, a biracial Korean American won the Super Bowl MVP trophy. As Koreans rushed to celebrate Ward, they also engaged in a national soul-searching about the treatment of biracial Koreans. Fast forward to 2011, and there is now a girl group with three out of five members being biracial poised to debut. The number of biracial Korean children is exploding, increasing by 92.8 percent in the last three years. Officially Korean government is encouraging multiculturalism, but individual attitudes are all over the place. If you are of mixed heritage, some Koreans might shun you. But some Koreans might find you interesting and easier to approach than 100 percent foreigners.

      The Korean will give a caveat, however: race does not have THAT big of a place in Korean people's mind. A lot of foreigners (loosely defined, since people in Jonathan's situation are both Korean and foreigner) particularly Westerners, tend to overrate Korean racism. Pay close attention to the word choice here -- the opposite of "overrate" is "properly rate". As the Korean stated over and over again on this blog, racism in Koreans is real, and it is a serious issue. But at the same time, it is not as if it is the primary, or even secondary or tertiary concern in the minds of Koreans. Foreigners tend to overrate Korea's racism because they worry about it as if their race will be the sole determinant of how Koreans perceive them. They seriously send questions fearing for their safety in Korea, as if Koreans were the white slave owners of the antebellum South. Relax. There are many things that Koreans value over race. For example, regardless of race, Koreans will respect you if you went to an Ivy League school. Regardless of race, Koreans will respect you if you come from a good family, with parents engaged in respected professions. Again, racism in Korea is real, but its application is subtle -- it is not like anyone is facing a Jim Crow rule in Korea. How a non-Korean is treated in Korea depends a lot more factors than race alone.

      Having said all that, the Korean will present this Wiki question for all the hapa Koreans. Do you live in Korea, or have you visited Korea recently? How was your impression of your life/stay in Korea? What kind of experiences did you have? The Korean would like to encourage a good, meaty discussion -- the Korean would love to supplement this post with well-written observations.

      -EDIT 8/20/2011- To the idiots who keep claiming that the Korean is somehow trying to defend Korea's racism:

      In addition to inviting a dialogue, characterizing racism in Korea as "real" and "serious," and linking to posts in which the reality and gravity of Korea's racism are discussed, the Korean bothered to put up an emailed comment that describes Korea's treatment of Amerasian people as "atrocity" and "ethnic cleansing." Yeah, that's some serious kimcheerleading right there.

      Please, give only relevant comments to the post. This post is about biracial Koreans. Say something about how biracial Koreans are treated in Korea -- either your personal experience, or based on outside materials. As long as the comment is relevant, the Korean really does not care how harsh a word Korea's racism is characterized by. For once in Internet's history, let's try to have a focused, intelligent discussion.

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

      Guns and Riots

      Recently the traffic at this blog spiked up, apparently because apparently some people found this picture from this post to be inspiring in light of the riots in London:


      The commentary accompanying this picture usually goes along the lines of: "Hey, look at these Korean Americans! They protecting their own with guns! I bet their stores were not looted at all! Londoners should be able to do the same!"

      -EDIT 8/16/2011- Excellent example of this line of thought expressed by an NBC news editor in London, courtesy of the commenter thursdaynitelive:
      As everyone in the newsroom debated the use of force – whether to use rubber bullets, tear gas, water cannons, Tasers, even bean-bag guns – I wondered why they were wasting their breath. “If your cops had guns, day number 2, 3, 4 and 5 of this, it would NOT have happened!” I said at a recent meeting.
      Funny, because the Korean does not find the picture to be inspiring at all -- he finds it dispiriting. The Korean has been a consistent advocate of very strict gun control, partly because he knows what happened to Korean Americans during the riot. Although Korean Americans constituted only 2.5 percent of Los Angeles residents as of 2000, Korean Americans suffered the estimated property damages of over $350 million, or approximately half of the riot's total property damage. So much for the idea that guns will stop property damage.

      (More after the jump)

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.




      On top of not stopping property damage, presence of guns arguably caused more deaths in the Los Angeles riot compared to the London riot. The Economist put it succinctly:
      To an American visiting London, one of the more striking aspects of last week’s riots was how few people died. Not including the police shooting death that touched off the original disturbance, five deaths have been attributed to the riots and looting. By contrast, 53 people died in the rioting that followed the acquittal of police officers in the beating of Rodney King in Los Angeles in 1992.

      At least part, if not most, of the difference is down to the fact that Americans are armed to the teeth: the criminals, the cops and the shopkeepers all have guns, whereas Britain has one of the lowest rates of gun ownership in the world. The result is a low homicide rate: just 2 per 100,000 inhabitants in 2002, compared with 5.62 in America. Murders in Britain are much less likely to be committed with a gun. Its firearm murder rate, at 0.02 per 100,000, is a fraction of America’s, at 3.25. Three of the riots’ victims were run down by a car while guarding a petrol station and one died of injuries after being beaten. The fifth was a looter who is believed to have been shot by another looter.

      Britons are not more law-abiding than Americans. Their rates of car theft, robbery and burglary are all higher, some substantially. But strict gun-control laws and borders that are more impervious to smuggling than, say, America's border with Canada, mean that guns are less likely to be used in crimes. That may also cut down on firefights: British police generally do not carry guns, in part because they worry less about being shot at. 
      The right to compare arms [The Economist]

      Numbers in the LA riot bears out this point. 32 out of the 53 dead in the LA riot were killed by getting shot. Take a look at this list detailing the manner of death for each dead person during the LA riot, and how guns were involved for those who were shot dead. And then ask yourself how many of those deaths would have still happened if no one but the police had guns. If you'd like, replace guns in the hands of the looters with knives, and think about how effective at killing a drive-by stabbing would be compared to a drive-by shooting, or if the police would be quicker to shoot someone who is pulling a knife out of his pocket instead of a gun.

      Guns do not stop riots. Social order, established through law, ethics, morality and collective identity, does.
      For a recent example, the way the Japanese people handled themselves after the catastrophic earthquake clearly shows that even under conditions that are eminently ripe for indiscriminate looting, civilized societies find a way to maintain order without degenerating to the level of naked brute force. (By the way, don't think this happened because the Japanese people are angels. In 1923, in the aftermath of a massive earthquake, there was a riot that ended up killing as many as 6,600 ethnic Koreans who were living in Japan.) Even in the U.S., indiscriminate looting could have broken out in the massive blackout in 2003 that left 55 million across the northeastern United States and Canada without electricity. Despite the widespread concern over looting, actual incidences of looting were few and very far between. And as any New Yorker who went through the blackout can attest, it was not the guns that prevented the looting that everyone feared.

      *               *               *

      In response to this post, the Korean predicts that there will be a lot of outraged gun advocates on the comment board -- over the years, the Korean found that the only rivals of gun advocates in terms of zealotry are anti-dog meat people and fan death deniers. The Korean welcomes them, as he welcomes all comers as long as they keep up with the Comments Policy. (For the record: The Korean respects the Second Amendment. But just like the freedoms guaranteed in other parts of the Bill of Rights are not unlimited, he believes that there should be sensible regulations on firearms, such as license and registration, and steep penalties for illegal sales.) But the Korean will conclude by addressing one of the common rejoinders, because he is yet to see it forcefully rejected in the public discourse about this issue.

      Gun advocates frequently argue: "Who cares if the looters get killed? They are looters! They deserve it, and we have a right to defend ourselves!"

      The lack of civilized mindset in this statement is astounding. The looters deserve prison time and payment of restitution. But they plainly do not deserve to die. It is one of the most fundamental principles of justice that the punishment should be proportionate to the crime. We don't cut off the hands of the thieves, and we don't break every part of the body of a murderer on a breaking wheel, because such punishments are deemed wildly disproportionate to the crimes in a civilized society. Our nation's constitution, in the Bill of Rights, guarantees that punishment will be proportionate to the crime. Our nation's law clearly states that people who commit certain types of crime under certain circumstances deserve to die, and looting is not one of those crimes. The law is also clear that self-defense should be proportional to the perceived threat. Deadly force can only be used against a deadly threat -- unless the looter also looks like he is trying to kill you, you cannot try to kill the looter either. Not even the police is allowed to brutalize a suspect, even though the suspect might be clearly in the middle of committing a crime. That is the law, and that is also justice.

      The idea that we should be allowed to kill whoever remotely threatens us is repugnant to law and order. When people say they want to be able to shoot down the looters, what they really want is not law and order. What they truly want is anarchy, a war of all against all, and the biggest guns with which to survive that war.

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.

      50 Most Influential K-Pop Artists: 26. Jaurim

      [Series Index]

      26.  Jaurim [자우림]

      Also known as:  紫雨林 ("purple rain forest")

      Years of Activity:  1997-present

      Members:
      Kim Yoon-Ah [김윤아] - Vocal
      Lee Seon-Gyu [이선규] - Guitar
      Kim Jin-Man [김진만] - Bass
      Gu Tae-Hoon [구태훈] - Drum

      Discography:
      Purple Heart (1997)
      Lover [戀人] (1998)
      The Wonderland (2000)
      04 (2002)
      All You Need is Love (2004)
      Ashes to Ashes (2006)
      Ruby Sapphire Diamond (2008)
      Conspiracy Theory [陰謀論] (2011)

      Representative Song:  I'm a Fan [팬이야] from 04. (Parts that are originally in English are marked in blue.)



      팬이야
      I'm a Fan

      아무렇지 않은 표정으로 애써 웃음지어 보여도
      Even though you try to smile like nothing happened
      나는 알고 있어 때로 너는 남들 몰래 울곤 하겠지
      I know you will sometimes cry when no one else is around
      특별할 것 없는 나에게도 마법 같은 사건이 필요해
      I am nothing special, but I too need a magical incident
      울지 않고 매일 꿈꾸기 위해서
      So that I can dream every day without crying
      언젠가의 그 날이 오면
      When that day comes someday
      Oh let me smile again in the sun
      Oh let me smile again in the sun

      내보일 것 하나 없는 나의 인생에도 용기는 필요해
      Even my life with nothing to show for requires courage
      지지않고 매일 살아남아 내일 다시 걷기 위해서
      So that I don't lose, survive every day and walk again tomorrow
      나는 알고 있어 너도 나와 똑같다는 것을
      I know that you are just like me
      주저앉지 않기 위해 너도 하늘을 보잖아
      You are also looking at the sky, so that you won't fall.
      언젠가의 그날을 향해
      Toward that day that will come someday
      I see the light shining in your eyes
      I see the light shining in your eyes

      I'm my fan
      I'm my fan
      I'm mad about me
      I'm mad about me
      I love myself
      I love myself
      매일 거울 안의 내게 말하곤 해
      I tell that every day to myself in the mirror
      I'm my fan
      I'm my fan
      I'm mad about me
      I'm mad about me
      I love myself
      I love myself
      매일 거울 안의 내게 말하곤 해
      I tell that every day to myself in the mirror

      어디론가 남들 몰래 사라져 버릴 수만 있다면
      If only I could just disappear without anyone else knowing
      어디에도 존재하지 않은 없었던 사람인 것처럼
      As if I never existed anywhere
      내보일 것 하나 없는 나의 인생에도 용기는 필요해
      Even my life with nothing to show for requires courage
      지지않고 매일 살아남아 내일도 내일도
      So that I don't lose, survive every day, and again tomorrow, and again tomorrow
      언젠가는 그날이 올까
      Will that day come someday
      아직 어둡게 가려진 그날
      That day that is still darkly obscured

      I'm my fan
      I'm mad about me
      I love myself
      Day after day I'm saying same prayer for me
      I'm my fan
      I'm mad about me
      I love myself
      Day after day I'm saying same prayer for me

      I see the light shining in my eyes
      I see the light shining in my eyes
      I see the light shining
      I see the light shining
      I see the light shining in my eyes

      Translation note:  Jaurim is one of the few bands of Korea whose English lyrics are not awkward. This time, the Korean tried a more natural translation instead of a more precise translation. Comments are welcome.

      In 15 words or less:  Queen of the indies, Korea's greatest modern rock band.

      Maybe they should be ranked higher because... Without Jaurim, will people have noticed what was happening at Hongdae?

      Maybe they should be ranked lower because... Did they ever totally capture the public's imagination as did some of the artists ranked lower than them?

      Why is this band important?
      When it comes to K-pop history, the significance of the indie scene near Hong-Ik University -- more commonly known as its contraction, Hongdae -- cannot be overstated. Hongdae, with its prestigious art major, has attracted the most brilliantly creative minds of Korea since the 1980s. These creative minds have provided a ready audience for the types of music that did not shine in the mainstream. For a time, the live bandstands near Hongdae were the only islands on which one could avoid the tsunami of  corporatized idol group music.

      Jaurim is important because it is the reigning queen of the Hongdae scene. And it ascended to its throne on the strength of sheer talent. In fact, Kim Yoon-Ah may be the most talented woman in K-pop history. Yes, there have been better singers and there have been better song writers. But few women in the history of K-pop can match Kim Yoon-Ah's charisma and musical vision, AND translate that talent into a broadly accessible format. (Kim edges out Lee Sang-Eun in this regard.) Picking a representative song for Jaurim was a particularly difficult task, because of the vast range of music in which Jaurim comfortably resided -- no band in K-pop history could go from light to dark, chipper to serious quite like Jaurim could. Add Kim's particular talent for visual presentation (a must-have for pop singers in the 21st century,) and the conclusion that Jaurim might have saved Korean pop music no longer seems outlandish.

      Interesting trivia:  Jaurim has not changed its members in its 14-year history, making it the longest running intact band in Korea among those currently operating.

      Got a question or a comment for the Korean? Email away at askakorean@gmail.com.