[KS] Egypt and Gwangju 1980

[george katsiaficas]

To say "Kwangju as an uprising was essentially confined and isolated" may
have been true if considered solely within the framework of May 18 to May
27, 1980 (although even then, it not fully accurate as the armed uprising
spread to at least 17 other cities and towns in South Jeolla). Such a time
frame does not consider longitudinal impact of the Gwangju Uprising over the
following years and decades.
 
Gwangju was one of the key motivating reasons for the June Uprising of 1987
that won democracy as we know it in South Korea--as well as for a continuing
16-year long effort to bring to justice Chun and Roh (as well as the US--do
not forget the occupation of the Seoul US Cultural Center leading up to 1987
nor the parliamentary hearings after June). Na Kahn-chae's work about the
Gwangju Uprising considered over time is immensely important here.
 
Gwangju's impact was also present in the Philippines through DJ's
connections to Ninoy and Cory Aquino in the US (I have corroboration of at
least one breakfast in Newton, MA during their coterminous tenure at Harvard
as well as DJ's name with three phone numbers in Washington DC in Aquino's
address book in the family museum outside Manila). Gwangju inspired
activists in Tiananmen Square. At least one photo book was circulated among
student leaders during the occupation by a Korean student then studying at
Beijing U. 
 
I could give many other specific examples of the impact of Gwangju over
time. I refer interested people to my forthcoming two-volume study, Asia's
Unknown Uprisings.
 
George
 
 



> From: don kirk <kirkdon at yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: Korean Studies Discussion List <koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws>
> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 18:14:48 -0800 (PST)
> To: Korean Studies Discussion List <koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws>
> Subject: Re: [KS] Egypt and Gwangju 1980
> 
> This analysis leaves out the tremendous regional influence that played into
> Kwangju -- the sense in the Cholla region, southwest Korea, of dominance by
> the 
> crowd from in and around Taegu and the southeast as led by Park Chung Hee and
> then Chun Doo Hwan and Roh Tae Woo. In all these posts, there's not been a
> word 
> about that. Yes, I was in Kwangju and Seoul at the time. The sense of unrest
> spread to Seoul in enormous demos, but Kwangju as an uprising was essentially
> confined and isolated -- and does not fit into any of these models or
> continuums 
> so readily.
> Incidentally, I don't recall describing the crowds that surged through Kwangju
> as "mobs." That's not to say that I didn't -- just that I don't recall. If you
> could remind me of the reference, I'd appreciate it.
> Don Kirk
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> From: Frank Hoffmann <hoffmann at koreaweb.ws>
> To: koreanstudies at koreaweb.ws
> Sent: Tue, February 15, 2011 10:51:37 AM
> Subject: Re: [KS] Egypt and Gwangju 1980
> 
> Rüdiger, sure!
> 
> Marx called me up recently to say he had made some mistakes, after finally
> having read Rudolf Bahro. Kwangju 1980s is a perfect example for a growing
> middle class "revolution" using pre-Marxist and later also Marxist terminology
> mixed with nativist agendas that were developed in reaction to both the
> pre-colonial area and the American dominance. (One then wonders, of course, if
> there ever was in history anything like a proletarian revolution.) The "mob"
> -- 
> as Don Kirk refers to the people protesting in the streets of Korean cities --
> interesting choice of terminology -- and as he noted this with some good
> insights (earlier link posted) -- were then mostly not part of the proletariat
> and aren't now either, or at the very least, the proletariat is not what Marx
> anticipated that it would become. This is no news. This was a classical "new
> middle-class" revolution: is this not also the interpretation the majority of
> historians agree on? I really think we have nicely incorporated the Marx
> brothers in all newer theories. So I was looking at a little more 'upgraded'
> concept or theory that would connect the history of colonialism, post-war
> economic development, the China-First success, and all those 1980s to 2000s
> changes we see into some sort of new history, new historical perspective ...
> some addendum to Weber and Wallerstein. Thanks.
> 
> Frank
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> PS: Frank, as far as I know Marx provided a model that you might find useful.
>> He asserted that societies develop continuously; however, most of the time
>> they 
>> do so quantitatively. Then, if a certain threshold (das Mass - not die Mass,
>> by 
>> the way) is reached, society gets ready for a qualitative change (from one
>> quality to another). All it takes is a spark that ignites the fuse, so to
>> say. 
>> This is called a revolutionary situation. Such a situation can last for a
>> rather 
>> long time without any change; but then suddenly - boom. It is hard to predict
>> the exact time when that explosion happens, which can be frustrating for
>> analysts like us. So if in country A there is a revolutionary situation, and
>> country B has an actual revolution, the latter's example could indeed become
>> the 
>> trigger for country A to finally act. I have speculated that KJI's death
>> could 
>> fulfill such a function in case economic reforms keep sharpening the
>> contradictions in NK's society, to remain with Marx' terminology. Note that I
>> used the subjunctive.
> 
> --
> --------------------------------------
> Frank Hoffmann
> http://koreaweb.ws