[KS] even literature types

[Michael Robinson]

EP Thompson refers to History as the "ruthless discipline of context."  I
can see backward perhaps, but only vaguely forward.  And since the crucial
contextual pieces are unknown we historians are unfortunately in the same
position as the pundit and blatherers who unfortunately do all the
predicting.  Not even the scholarly political science types do much
predicting anymore as they were always wrong 50% of th time....they have
retreated to useless theory.  And If they are careful they always have some
small chance of being right if the questions are narrow enough.  What we can
do is to provide background for what I believe might be better guesses, but
no more than that.  So I think you have look elsewhere for crystal ball
gazers. And if I weigh in during the discussion as MANY of us historians ARE
doing, then it is as informed citizens whose counter statements and
alternate conclusions hopefully are more persuasive than the crap dished out
on the talk-shows.  No more, no less.

Mike R.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jay Lewis" <JayatAKS49 at netscape.net>
To: "Korean Studies Discussion List" <Koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws>
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 8:54 PM
Subject: Re: [KS] even literature types


> David, the `literary type', is willing to speak out; why not the rest of
> us?  Where the hell have we been?  Lest we forget, the success of evil
> is only dependent on the willingness of good men to say nothing.  We're
> pathetic, aren't we?
>
> Particularly the historians.  Where are we?  After all, historians study
> the past in order to predict the future, right?  And there are a lot of
> us, right?  Or, do I have some wires crossed about our disciplines and
> why we do what we do?  Is it for tenure or for the maintenance of
> civilization?
> The barking dogs (Wolfowitz, Rove, etc.) are a dime-a-dozen, but the
> trend is where?  Where are we going? Certainly, the `collapse soon'
> crowd are too stupid, since they seem to know nothing of Korean history;
> not even of the Korean War.  You know, the Korean people, north and
> south, are tenacious.  Forgot that one, didn't you George?  But maybe
> not.  Germany collapsed in a fortnight.  Would the DPRK?  Maybe the
> Mercedes Benzs and the fabulous parties will bring down the DPRK.  But,
> what do we say?  Do we leave this discussion to the CIA hacks and their
> idiot analysts?  The same fools who brought us Afghanistan and Iraq, and
> who are lining up to target Syria or Iran?  There option is bombing.
>  What do we do?  Where is the intellectual debate?  Are we spineless?
>  I'm nearly sick to my stomach at the
silence...............................
>
> Jay Lewis
> ____________________________________
>
> David McCann wrote:
>
> >Even literature types like me get asked about what's going on in Korea;
and
> >especially, what's up with the North; etc.
> >
> >In desperation, I ask those who want to know, what do you think is going
> >on?  And my interlocutors wonder, why hasn't the regime collapsed?  W and
> >his crowd seem to assume that it will, they add.
> >
> >Well, there you have it!  What more needs to be said, either way?  The W
> >House either knows or doesn't.  Who are we to be perplexed by difficult
> >amiguities?
> >
> >It could be added that people have been assuming the very same thing for
> >fifty years, ever since economic and political embargos were put in place
> >against North Korea at the end of the Korean War.  That's what such
> >embargos are designed to do; starve a regime into collapse. Or maybe as a
> >literature type I don't understand what an embargo is really meant to
> >accomplish.
> >
> >Observers held their collective breath when Kim Il Sung died.  Gotta
happen
> >now, they seemed to be thinking.  If Poindexter's little parlor had been
> >operating then, what a spike in the betting we would have seen!
> >Predictably.
> >And just a short while ago, during a 'state' visit to Seoul, one of the
> >White House terriers was barking about the North Korean regime .
> >
> >So?  If the Washington types think the collapse is going to happen,
> >prompted perhaps by the yapping of some minor official, and the think
tank
> >types do too, why not?  Here's where the literature type wanders off into
> >reflections on, of all things, history.
> >
> >The later kings of Choson:  we have forgotten their example.  Regime
> >collapse was constantly just around the corner, what with military
> >ineptitude, fiscal chaos, and the debilitating factional wars.  But with
a
> >deep and wide bureaucratic state apparatus, and an officialdom trained
and
> >indoctrinated to see state service as the highest good, there were none
of
> >the internal structural contradictions that would lead to a collapse of
the
> >regime.
> >
> >It all ended remarkably quietly when Japan started pushing from outside,
in
> >the last decade of the nineteenth century.  We recall, though, that the
US
> >failed to make good on  promises to come to Korea's aid when Japan began
to
> >pursue its colonial ambitions on the peninsula in earnest.
> >
> >Ah well, now I am in a muddle.  But I wonder if there are historical
> >examples, with a longer more complex narrative that might help to explain
> >either the puzzling resilience of the North Korean state, or the failure
of
> >outside observers and policy-makers to frame their questions and plans in
a
> >meaningful or productive way.
> >
> >Regime collapse?  That's what some dictionaries would define as
> >apocalyptic; an apocalyptic vision imposed from the outside.  It seems to
> >be, If the North Korean state collapses, then the US will lift its
> >embargos, and health will return to the body of the population.  One
> >contradictory aspect of the idea is that it provides a very handy cause
to
> >blame for all the internal difficulties in the DPRK--  namely, the United
> >States.  It is contradictory because it helps to support the very regime,
> >in terms of North Korean public opinion, that it is intended to hamper
and
> >weaken.
> >
> >What sort of response follows from the North?  Apocalyptic, but in terms
of
> >nuclear weapons.
> >
> >Are the W House pronouncements, locally or abroad, just rhetoric?  Might
> >there be efforts underway to avoid Armageddon?  One hopes so, encouraged
at
> >the moment by North Korean willingness to dismiss the barking dog and get
> >back to discussions of multilateral talks.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>