Kwon, Jinkwan
Many
people in Korea say that minjung has disappeared or receded from the historical
stage of 21st century Korea. It is said that the minjung is no longer an agent
of historical change in Korea. The Minjung movement has receded, while the
citizens' movement has emerged as a major player in social change and reform in
Korean society over the past 20-plus years. However, due to the ever-increasing
effects of global capitalism and neo-colonialism/imperialism, even the civil
movement seems to be weakening in Korea today.
Before
I continue, I would like to first explain the meaning of the term minjung.
Minjung consists of two characters min (i.e. common people under ruling rulers)
and jung (i.e. multitude). The term minjung gradually acquired a new meaning to
denote politically conscious people from the lower class, such as the
proletariat in the socialist movement, and played the role of one of the key
discursive concepts for understanding Korean history and society.
As a
long-time participant in the minjung theological movement, I encountered the
term subaltern through my Indian friends and colleagues whose main interest was
Dalit and tribal affairs. For my fellow Indians, the subaltern includes various
lower classes and oppressed people such as Dalits, tribals, aborigines,
adivasis and poor women. It instinctively occurs to me that the idea of
subaltern might be a good counterpart to minjung for dialogue, and that
minjung and subaltern are the same in connotation. Both minjung and subaltern
refer to various lower classes and oppressed peoples, although each, as a
historically loaded term, has evolved differently in its situation. The concept
of the subaltern has evolved and is discussed today in the context of India and
its neighboring cultural regions. I think we minjung theologians can also learn
from the concept of the subaltern because it has different implications for
Korean minjung theologians. I am quite sure that the concept of minjung also
shares some aspects of the subaltern. The subaltern refers to people who are
more oppressed and alienated than anyone else "to the point of being deaf
and not being." The subaltern may be analogous to the suffering servant of
God depicted in Isaiah 53:3 ("He was despised and rejected by men; a man
grief and familiar with sorrow; and as a man from whom men hide their faces, he
was despised and we did not esteem him." and public arenas. "They are
outside the mainstream. In society they are presented and exist, but they are
considered non-existent ; they are not well represented because their voices
are not heard by the mainstream elite classes. This is not always the case if
layers are not mentioned by definition. They may be silenced by force and
oppression, or they are mute by choice. But they have been a major force in the
struggle against imperialist and colonial powers, as clearly reflected in
Korean history.
At this
point I would like to show how I use two terms in this essay, presentation (or
self-presentation) and representation. Minjung present themselves as actors at
a certain point in history. Sometimes in history they present their desires and
interests. A frequent historical phenomenon in Korean history was the active
presentation of their interests and aspirations. But they are mostly not
considered normal members who belong to the structure of the situation; they
are treated like nothing. However, when they encounter certain events, they
become active speakers and make their presence known in society. In such
historical events they appear as active and constitutive elements, even though
they are mostly forced to remain mute and mute. As a result, minjung
representation was lacking. Upper-class elites more often than not frustrated
the minjung's participation and self-presentation in history. If we use the
terms to describe the following situation, it lacks both self-expression and
representation. Although they are present in society, in reality they are
considered as nothing and non-existent. They—especially Dalit women—are
considered subhuman, i.e., non-members of human society. I am interested here
in showing how presentation and representation can become essential elements in
analyzing the dynamics between the actors involved in the historical process of
colonial and post-colonial Korea.
Indian-American
Professor Spivak argues that the subaltern cannot speak for herself and thus
needs some representation. I wonder if Spivak would end up perpetuating her
subjugation. My answer is that representation for the minjung and the subaltern
is necessary, but not enough to change the situation. I believe that the
situation of the minjung and the subaltern cannot be changed by mere
representations, but by the collective voice and collective participation and
presentation of the minjung and the subaltern themselves. The minjung and the
subaltern are commonly regarded as "nothing" in the situation of our
society. They are, as the apostle Paul indicated, "lowly and despised in
the world, even the things that are not in our society (1 Corinthians 1:28). ).
normal members of society. Their chances of presentation in society therefore
become. Null. A society that treats minjung and subordinate fairly will be
encouraged to present their interests and aspirations in the public sphere of
life, and there will be It can be said that such a just society would see to it
that both the self-presentation and the representation of these alienated
people are ensured.
So my
argument is that the balance and dialectic between 'representation for' and
'presentation', the minjung and the subaltern must be maintained in order to
achieve justice in society. I believe that good representation with
responsibility and benevolent intentions is essential, and that good
representatives must have loyalty and the courage to risk their own safety. But
representation is still difficult and even negatively effective if it is made
by uncritical and ignorant intellectuals and elites. The presentation of the
subaltern and the minjung in the historical and social process of change is
therefore necessary for a better future, which most radical and thoughtful
thinkers agree on. Both representation and participation are essential in the
interactive relationship between low and alienated groups and elite groups in
society.
0 Comments