[KS] the case of Choi Jang-jip

[sungjong.paik at uni-tuebingen.de]

Hi all!

An interesting article on Professor Choi Jang-jip was published in Korea
Heral last week. Because I am sure that the article helps us, understand
the case more deeply, I send it to you all.

Best wishes,

Sungjong Paik

-----------------------
Dr Sungjong Paik
Seminar fuer Sinologie und Koreanistik der Universitaet
Tuebingen/Germany


-----------------------------------------------------
Cultural Dimensions Column for November 11, 1998

Title: Professor Choi's Precious Voice

By Robert J. Fouser

The small spat between the "Chosun Ilbo" and presidential advisor Choi
Jang-jip, a professor at Korea University, has now turned into a
full-fledged battle.  An article in the November issue of the "Wolgan
(Monthly) Chosun" accused Choi of supporting the North Korean view of
the
Korean War as a "war of liberation."  In response, Choi argued that the
article distorted his views and filed a libel suit against the newspaper
company.

The conflict has ignited strong emotions on both ends of the political
spectrum with conservatives demanding Choi's resignation and liberals
attacking what they see as a new McCarthyism.  The debate is as old as
the
conflict between right and left in modern Korean history, but the
outcome
will have important consequences for the future of academic freedom in
Korea.

The outcome of the debate will have a direct effect on academic freedom
in
Korea.  The "Wolgan Chosun" article accused Professor Choi of using the
word
Korean word "yoksajok" (historic, historical) to imply a positive view
of
Kim Il Sung's decision to attack South Korea in 1950.  Choi replied that
he
used the word to emphasize the importance and tragedy of the Korean War
in
history.

Such semantic nitpicking is detrimental to academic freedom because it
intimidates scholars from using words creatively to make clear arguments
that are supported by evidence.  Good writers often need to present a
number
of points of view to strengthen their argument.  By any standards,
Professor
Choi's writing is objective and clearly argued.  To interpret one phrase
as
a definitive statement of a scholars body of work is naive and juvenile.

Objective and clearly argued writing, of course, can be wrong, but
"wrong"
does not mean dangerous or useless.  Professor Choi's views of
post-liberation Korea have much in common with other revisionist
scholars
who, in the 1980s, challenged the knee-jerk anti-communist views of
modern
Korean history.  This interpretation recognizes the communist movement
in
post-liberation Korea as a salient indigenous political movement.  In
the
1990s, revisionist views have become more diverse and subjected to more
scholarly scrutiny.

To conservatives, these views are wrong, but they are useful in widening
the
range of discussion and thus contributing to a more balanced view of
history.  Scholars should entertain a wide range of ideas because
scholarship advances from competition among diverse ideas over time.
Scholars cannot entertain various ideas when academic freedom is subject
to
intimidation or prosecution.

Academic freedom has gained new relevance in Korea because the Ministry
of
Education has announced that all professors in Korea will be hired under
limited-term contracts starting in 2002.  The measure is designed to
increase competition among professors and prevent the egregious abuses
of
lifetime employment that Korean academia has become famous for.  For the
measure to work well, however, decisions about renewing contracts must
be
open and fair.

The conservative attack on Choi creates a climate that works against
fairness in evaluating the quality of academic work because it shifts
the
standard of evaluation from academic contribution to the field and
society
to the semantics of ideological conflicts.  Such a shift will undermine
the
goal of increasing the quality of higher education that the Ministry of
Education has set out to achieve with its recent reforms.

By the standard of "academic contribution to the field and society,"
Professor Choi is one of Korea's most outstanding scholars.  He sets a
standard of scholarship that should serve as a model for other
professors to
follow.  His research is provocative, well documented, and respected by
many
scholars overseas.  Few professors in Korea can claim so many
accomplishments.

The "Wolgan Chosun" article on Choi does indeed distort his background
because it only presents his views of the Korean War, which is not his
main
field of research.  The paper claims that it has the right to scrutinize
a
public figure, but it has failed to include a fair evaluation of Choi's
major field: political science.  To defend itself, the paper placed
Choi's
"problem papers" on its Web site so that readers could judge for
themselves.
If so, then why did it omit a list of publications and copies of Choi's
other papers?

As a political scientist, Professor Choi has focused most of his
research on
the issue of class in Korean society.  Through his writing in English,
he is
known overseas as one of leading scholars on class conflict in Korean
society.  During years of dictatorship, conservatives painted a
distorted
picture of Korea as a society where "uri-ness" leveled class
distinctions.
Choi was one of the first scholars to openly investigate the painful
differences in class that cut through Korean society.  In doing so, his
work
became a voice for workers and the poor when other scholars were afraid
to
approach such sensitive topics.

With workers and the poor bearing the brunt of an economic crisis not of
their making, Choi has much to contribute to national policy.  Compared
with
many countries, the elite in Korea is narrow.  Choi has a profound
understanding of the human and social costs of such a social structure. 
He
has a vision of a society in which taxi drivers don't have to tell their
children to lie about their father's job.  Agree or disagree, Professor
Choi's voice is precious and it must continue to be heard.


%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%