Comment by yongjik | Hacker News Reader

Comment by yongjik | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Economic inequality is still a problem, but everything else you wrote is about twenty years out of date.

It's like how there are still white supremacist websites in the US even when a black guy is their president. Sure, there is at least one online community who show extreme hatred toward people from the Southwest region (I wouldn't name it, but it should be obvious to anyone who's been following South Korean news for the past several years[1]), but they represent the social norms of South Korea about as much as Youtube comments do of America. (They also tend to show extreme hatred of women, the liberals, the poor, the disabled, and North Korea.)

Also anybody who talks about "a couple millenia old feud" between these regions don't know what they're talking about. Case in point: in 1963, Southeast(Gyeongsang)-based candidate Park Jung Hee won the presidential election[2] thanks to the votes of both Southeast and Southwest regions. (He then went on to foster the regional discrimination we're talking about to secure his political base, and died a dictator, but that's another story.)

Even when it comes to economic inequality, the much more serious problem is that between Seoul (and its neighbor regions) and everywhere else. It was another social problem president Roh Moo-Hyun (2003-2008) tried to solve (by building a new capital city that specializes on administration, like Washington DC), but the constitutional court killed the plan by basically inventing "customary constitution" out of thin air. He was also widely supported by the Democratic Party (or several other names the party assumed in Korea's hectic climate), largely based on the Southwest region, but he himself was from Busan, the biggest city in the Southeast. So, there.

As for why these "island slaves" are always found in the Southwest region, I think there's a much simpler explanation: that's where almost all islands are. Look at the map of South Korea. Not all coastlines are shaped alike.

[1] By the way, if you know the site, admitting "I visit that site" will be about as beneficial to your online reputation as saying that you support Westboro Baptist Church.

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Korean_presidential_elect...

The feud is very much real and exists especially if you've ever been to South East part of Korea. It is not at all on par with white supermacist but it's a tradition of segregation that is regardless of how advanced or modern Korea is exist in some way or another. It may not be visible on the open but people from South East openly discriminate people from South West. The two regions were separate kingdoms couple thousand years ago and the beef still remains.

You can see clearly the disparity in income and economy between South West and South East which reflects the economic policies of the past. It may not be as explicit than before but you can see that there's a reason why South West voted for the 10 year for a leftist administration in Korea that brought much danger to the security of republic of Korea as a result of practicing sunshine policy.

The website is well known in Korea called ilbe.com and it's extremely popular right wing views gaining the attention of mainstream. IT has many entertaining articles written in non-honorifics and ton of swear words which is quite a departure from the mainstream media. It's common to see people spreading their hatred for Jeolla (South West) region and it's people often referring to them as some really awful stinky fish dish from that regioncalled Hong-uh (홍어, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocellate_spot_skate) and pictures of former presidents Kim Dae Jung and Roh Moo Hyun have become a sort of meme.

I'm sorry, I can't take serious any person who would describe Ilbe as "extremely popular right wing" site, talking about that (almost racist) epithet about that fish as if it's normal.

If you are Korean, shame on you. Otherwise, find a better source to learn about Korea.

(Also, 10 years of "leftist administration"? For heaven's sake, in both elections there were basically two choices. One party harbors those people who sent troops to murder their friends and families in 1980. So they voted for the other one. Turned out these two presidents were about as "leftists" as Obama, which in turn disappointed some of their supporters who wanted faster progress.)

And if you want to bitch about how they brought "danger to the security of republic of Korea", you might want to dig up on the whole "gun-wind affair (총풍 사건)" in 1997, where several government officers of the "rightist" regime met North Korean officers shortly before the presidential election, and basically asked them if they could start a border skirmish, to persuade South Koreans to not elect the "leftist" candidate Kim Dae-Jung (who later received a Nobel Peace Prize for the Sunshine policy that's so cheaply mocked these days).

There's lot of inaccuracies here. First, president Park Chung Hee was the only choice as a result of a military coup d'etat in May 16th, 1961. Democratic organs only acted to appease United States, they did not function at all. Yes, Park Chung Hee was from South East (Kyongsang) region. Kim Dae Jung was from South West (Jeolla) region. PCH tried to have KDJ killed many times for his pro-North views and viola, KDJ becomes president in 1998, billions of slush funds travel to Kim Jong Il despite the warnings from US, Kim jong il tests a nuclear weapon 5 years later, KDJ wins the nobel prize. This is why he is mocked in Korea, he traded the security of his country for a fucking medal. The fundings continue when Roh Moo Hyun executes his predecessor's "Sunshine Policy". Of course, KDJ and RMH were popular presidential candidates in South West because of promises of economic development PCH completely neglected (the prejudice against Jeolla region was far more blatant back then).

As you know Park Chung Hee was assassinated by his own intelligence director in fall of 1979 causing a major state of chaos. General Chun Doo Hwan seized power eventually. The timing of the Gwangju Uprising or Gwangju Rebellion is really peculiar as Chun had just begun to seize complete power after 7 months since the tragedy of PCH. A strong response was the only way to stabalize the country as there are reports that it was instigated by North Korean sleeper agents based on first hand accounts. The official case leaves this out but North Korean defectors admitted that North Korean agents in South Korea were placed strategically in cities to instigate armed rebellion should conditions allow it. Lot of pieces are missing with the official version that Gwangju civilians ran into a cache of guns and ammunition but they leave out the first hand reports that the people handing out the guns had a different dialect one that was closer to North Korea. This explains why an Air Force commandos, the military response because they were responding to a rebellion instigated by a foreign enemy country. We see this happening today in Crimea, Donetsk by Russia.

You might have heard that recently, a South Korean lawmaker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2013_South_Korean_sabotage_plot) was known to have been leading a similar armed saboteur group called RO (Revolutionary Organization) to assist North Korea in the case of a war by assassinating various figures, attacking vital infrastructure. The evidence against them was overwhelming including recordings and informants. He is sentenced to 12 years in prison.

총풍 사건, the "gun wind affair" was blown wildly out of proportion and is a popular topic for left wing elements to use in their arguments but in reality it was found to be groundless accusation and the presidential candidate would try to run for office 10 years later after winning a large defamation lawsuit.

I am Korean btw, and shame on you for attacking me and being flagkilled earlier. If you want to sound convincing please keep it civilized.

Completely agree with curiously.

Kim Dae Jung really brings shame to Nobel Peace prize and the term human rights with his COMPLETE silence on the human rights abuses in NK. The operating motto of all 'liberals' and 'human rights advocates' is about trying to get rid of the human rights abuses that are so rampant in NK. And yet you really cannot find much criticisms from him criticizing NK. WHY? Does he owe something to NK?

> I am Korean btw, and shame on you for attacking me and being flagkilled earlier.

That comment certainly deserved to be flagkilled, but your comment would also be better without this.

I have better things to do than try to argue Korean politics in Hacker News (and I have a hard time keeping my voice calm with this), so I'll just point out a few obvious points, for posterity.

Park Chung Hee was drinking whiskey with his aides, a singer, and a girl "recruited" by special services, while talking about rampant protests that were sweeping the country. One aide, Cha Ji-chul, had reportedly said a few days eariler: "Cambodia killed three millions. Is it a big deal if we kill a million or two?" Mind you, he was talking about the particular wave of protest that was sweeping Park's own political base, the Southeast (Gyeongsang) region[1].

Probably fearing that Cha and Park were serious, another aide, Kim Jae-gyu, shot them in the party scene (Oct 26, 1979), thus ending more than a decade of dictatorship.

South Koreans finally had a chance of democracy, which my fellow Korean here referred to as "a major state of chaos". Unfortutely, during the hectic moment, another general, Chun Doo-Whan, staged a coup on December 12th, gaining power.

Of course South Koreans throughout the country didn't like it a bit. There were massive protests everywhere, including Seoul, which is (somewhat poetically) called "Seoul's spring on 1980". This is what it looked like [2].

Nobody will know exactly what was in Chun's mind, but he might have thought that he should make an example, probably not Seoul itself (too dangerous: he probably didn't want to murder people right in front of the US embassy's eyes) but big enough that people would take notice. A "strong response" to "stabilize the country", indeed.

The rest, as they say, is history.

While Chun was in power, the May 18th massacre was officially called "Gwangju incident (광주사태)", and the official version was of course that communists infiltrated the city of Gwangju, started a revolt, and the soldiers put things back to order. Stories and gruesome pictures of people shot on the street and flattened by military vehicles slowly circulated, with angry whispers in low voices. When a university student, Park Jong-chul, was tortured to death in 1987, people finally decided they had enough, which ignited the June 10th movement [3].

"Bring Park Jong-Chul back to life!" they shouted. "Murderer Chun Doo-Hwan, step down!"

Sure, South Korea is a free country. If you want to claim these hundreds of thousands of people were mislead by communists, go ahead. But it's thanks to those people who stood against soldiers and militarized police, in the street of Geumnam-ro in Gwangju or in front of Myeongdong Cathedral in Seoul, that I or you can say what's in our mind without fearing imprisonment, torture, and death.

* There was no happy ending. On June 29th, the government finally relented, promising a popular election for the next president. Unfortunately, because of an age-long feud between two opposition leaders (Kim Young-Sam and Kim Dae-Jung), they both entered as candidates in the election, resulting in Chun's minion, Roh Tae-Woo, becoming the next president. Several years later, Kim Young-Sam did one of the worst about-face in South Korea's short political history, and joined Roh Tae-Woo's party, creating a mega-party that basically surrounded Kim Dae-Jung's Southwestern region, and basically cementing the Southeast region as the bastion of conservatism for decades to come.

(It's slowly changing these days, though.)

[1] http://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EB%B6%80%EB%A7%88%EB%AF%BC%EC%...

[2] https://www.google.com/search?q=80%EB%85%84+%EC%84%9C%EC%9A%...

[3] https://www.google.com/search?q=6+10+%ED%95%AD%EC%9F%81&&tbm...

So they are drinking beer and some comments were passed around, and the guy just shoots him? The only people who buy this crap are the pro-North koreans in South Korea. Everybody else who live in a sane reality don't believe this ludicrous story made to make Park Chung Hee seem like a monster.

The rift between Park Jong Chul (President's head of security) and Kim Jae Kyu (KCIA director) well preceded that evening when the president was assassinated. He premeditated the assassination by having the security detail paralyzed by his own loyal followers (who were all executed and jailed). The bullshit about how Kim Jae Kyu, the mastermind behind all the torture and brutal political suppression did it for democracy is laughable at best. The motive was simple, Kim Jae Kyu thought he could usurp power, he falsely mistook the American CIA's approval and repeatedly sought CIA's help after assassination. He was foolish because US fully supported PCH's dictatorship as a strong buffer against North Korea. They continued to support president Chun and Noh, both military generals and it was only until Kim Young Sam finally was elected through a democratic vote.

Was Park Chung Hee a dictator? Was he brutal in some of his methods? Of course. But he is also the reason why South Korea was allowed to thrive economically. Without the political stability brought on by a military rule with the backdrop of a serious security threat like North Korea (they were richer than South in 1960s), you'd have to be a hopeless romantic and naive to think that someone could've done a better job by "democratic" means.

Anyways, I think I'm done being trolled here. I suggest you to not try to twist and distort the post-Korean war history of South Korea with inaccuracies and ignorant statements.

I really cannot take Kim Dae-Jung or his party or his successors seriously. They rose to power with the call for honoring human rights, which is noble. However, when it comes to the human rights abuses in NK, they are silent.

Very very weird to me.

I think that it's just sheer naivety that you can get along with a crazed failed state based on ethnic unity, the idea of being the same race or 민족.

Another reason I think is Kim Dae Jung had a radically different vision of what Korea could be, anti-American, pro-socialist and one that is based on nazi like nationalistic views based on the purity and superiority of the Korean people.

What makes me remember that so many western democratic countries are silent about human rights when it happens at an military Allied country.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com