Session 1 (July 9) - 1945-1994: Kim Il Sung

[Juana Evink]

One of the reading for the first session is extremely difficult to process, its titled, "U.S. Policy and Korea: A Korea Policy..." yet it's very informative. When I think of the Korean War, I usually thought of the soldiers involved in both sides of the war, I hardly thought of the devastation it caused to familes and the land. War is a horrible thing, that has lasting consequences, the Korean war still affecting people today. The Korean war, destroyed villages, separated families, millions of civilians dead, millions  of soldiers dead  and may million became refugess. A quote from the reading, "Virtually every Korean is either part of a separated family or knows someone who is...," express the devastation of the Korean war and its lasting consequences,

[Kathy Keffeler]

It starts with the cultish adoration of a person. The throwback to a revered idol like Confucius-making the uneducated believe the new cult leader is like the revered historical person. Then the indoctrination of children in the schools. This is how Kim Jong Un insinuated himself into the people of North Korea. Other forces divided the two Koreas during the The Korean War and the Cold War- without much input from the people themselves. i can't help but think they would have chosen another path.

[Tom Mueller]

Jane - yes the continued grassroots support for democracy was surprising.  I believe the US backed Rhee because he was pro - Western.  The world was a chess board and it seemed countries were a US piece or USSR piece.  The US backed the Shah of Iran and he was an authoritarian leader and did not want democracy.  I think the continued push for democracy shows the strength of the Korean people.  After the Korean War, I wondered if the people just wanted peace and security.  However in South Korea as development slowly started to take shape and people (and the country) started to improve, I wonder if Koreans felt… I am doing better economically - what else is there?  They wanted more - more freedom, more voice in their country. 

 

[Tom Mueller]

Alyssa after reading your post.  I started to think about the Century of Humiliation in China - (Foreign powers occupying China).  I wonder if Korea felt the same way.  They were a colony of Japan and before that they paid tribute to China.  Did they feel they were now free under Rhee and Kim?  I read a few books on the Korean War and I thought Kim had to get permission from Stalin to attack the South initially.  He also received an okay from Mao.  Stalin was unsure because he was afraid the US would intervene.  However after a policy maker did not mention South Korea as a major strategic location, then Stalin felt that we would not be involved.  On the other side MacArthur felt the Chinese were too weak to stop them from crossing the Yalu River.  It always made me wonder if Stalin or MacArthur thought differently how the Korean War would have played out differently (or even started). 

 

[Meghann Seril]

Hi Tom- You bring up an important tactic or strategy of cultivating group think around a specific belief by grouping people as a "unified evil object" or idea rather than seeing individual people. It's scary and disheartening to realize how this tactic is used over and over to create division but I'm hopeful that through our work as teachers when can help students see through that kind of rhetoric.

[April Wallace]

These are all great points. Certainly, creating a cult of personality for Kim II Sung starts early and in a child's education. There is a National Geographic documentary out there that follows an Nepalese eye doctor that is allowed to enter the country and perform cataract surgery for over a thousand North Koreans. I remember by the end of the film, some had gone almost blind or had their eyesight seriously imparied, and now they could see again. Rather than praising the doctor, they repeatedly praised the leader (I believe it was Kim-Jong-il at the time) for restoring their eyesight. One eldery man even claimed he would take up arms and kill every American that he could. The reporter made a point that after generations of indoctrination and authoritation rule - that there might not be a difference between true belief and fear. 

[April Wallace]

Jane, I'm in the same boat. I hadn't realized the sheer numbers in terms of the devestation. It's also no wonder that North Korea could spread such anti-American sentiment and distrust after America leveled its cities. And the long term human consequences that are attached to these numbers are so critical in understanding. 

I also hadn't realized that North Korea bounced back quicker than South Korea. And maybe this is because of only studying the Korean War through the lens of US History, as you stated. I have always just had in my mind South Korea being the much more technologically and economically advanced of the two countries. But that obviously hadn't always been the case. 

[Maria Cardenas]

How did Kim II Sung establish a communist monarchy?

Kim II Sung was able to establish a communist monarchy because of how the government had been set up in North Korea. North Korea is about the overall good of the people.  The propaganda used in order for Kim II Sung to be the leader and seen as the one that helped saved them from the “American” gives him an advantage as to what is published. He can get people to follow what he wants with is words or with force. “Kim II Sung could see what happened in the Soviet Union, where immediately after Stalin’s death the late strongman came to be bitterly criticized by the people who were once seen as his most trusted lieutenants. (Lankov, Real NK, pg.71).” He also didn't want what happened in China to happen to him so he decided that his son Kim Jong II would be his successor. This is the monarchy where the son takes over after the father dies. Kim II Sung probably thought his fate wouldn’t be the same as the Soviet Union and Chinese leaders because the next person in power was going to be his son. So Kim II Sung was able to establish a communist monarchy because he was already in power and who was going to go against what he wanted. Kim II Sung could always get rid of that person and say that person was an American Spy. He was able to create a communist monarchy I want to say through fear and propaganda because from an early age children already new what Kim II Sung had done or how great he was.  

 

How did the Korean War and Cold War shape the two Koreas through 1994?

Korea was divided into North Korea and South Korea after Japan surrendered in WWII. Soviet Union was responsible for North Korea while the United States was responsible for South Korea. The Korean War separated families and civilians were killed during this time period.

North Korea beliefs were Communists and the Korean War and the Cold War shaped North Korea into the country it is. They had land reform, propaganda that portrays Kim II Sung in good light. They make it seem as if he was the one that created the Korean Communists Party. North Koreans suffered during the Korean War because they were air bombed during the War by the Americans. They received aide after the Korean War from China and the Soviet Union, unlike South Korea they were able to remove Soviet Union from their country and take over control of their country. The unique thing about North Korea is that they were able to keep their country isolated or they have a blockade regular citizens do not know what is going on in the world.

South Korea though wanted to be democratic and the Korean War separated them from communism. South Koreans suffered during the Korean War because they were occupied by North Korea and many civilians were killed.  South Korea has had more than one constitution, they have had a military leader like a dictator, other leaders have made it possible for them to serve longer than the year intended as president. The people have had protests for change. Unlike the North, the United States still has military bases in South Korea.

[Maria Cardenas]

Jasmine, I agree. The fact that the North was doing better than the South, that Kim II Sung wanted to reunite Korea, and the fact that he would give guidance to the people are factors that allowed him to create his communist monarchy. People wouldn't complain neither because he was doing things for their benefit.

I have learned about the Korean War but I never really thought about teh Korea Diaspora that happened becuase of this. I knew that the country had been divided into two because the United States feared the Soviet Union's communism spreading. I never really thought about the fact that families were separated when the Soviet Union and United States came into the country with the 38th parallel division. The fact that it was two Americans that decided on the line to divide Korea doesn't surprise me. It's so sad the fact that many people were massacre becasue of the fear that communism was spreading in the south.  

[Jonathon Allen]

As I was doing the readings and watching the video presentation, I was making so many different connections in my mind to other world history events during the period from 1950-1994.  It occurred to me (and this will help me more easily remember the years) that Kim Il Sung's reign between 1948-1994 is the exact same timeframe as South African apartheid, for example.  Or that the massive displacement of people before and during the Korean War reminded me of the largest displacement in human history that took place between India and Pakistan in the late 1940s.  This doesn't answer the question but it will help me as I ask my students to make larger connections in AP World History.

I agree with many of the statements above:  Kim Il Sung's success in establishing a communist regime in North Korea is due in large part to the fact that, after the complete and utter devastation of the war, the population at large was on an even playing field.  What more could an ideology like Communism ask for as a basis upon which to build a faithful government?  The fact that not only the Party but the general populace of DPRK had adapted a "bunker mentality" and that the fierce and visceral enmity towards the United States remains a continuity in 2020 just as it had been 70 years ago is a statement towards an effective, unwavering ideology.

What I perhaps found most interesting was the criticism of how the Korean War is covered.  This was brought up somewhat in the required readings but, going a little further in the Beyond Numbers document, I came across some really interesting (and brief) readings that don't pull their punches when it comes to the U.S. narrative ... how the Koreans, themselves, have been left out of this war.  Bruce Cuming's A Murderous History of Korea from this same packet is absolutely going to be on my student reading list for the Spring since he explicitly discusses how Western treatment of North Korea has been both "ahistorical and one-sided."  He claims that "Americans like to see themselves as mere bystanders in postwar Korean history" and I can see my students really digging into the various interpretations of history by using the Korean War as a prime example.

 

[Jonathon Allen]

Below are several questions I had while reading:

* It mentioned that "brainwashing" among other terms, became common euphemisms during the Korean War.  Is this simply referring to the propaganda published from both sides or was there something more sinister occurring on either side of the parallel?

* One of the readings cites a final problem in 1953 was the issue of repatriation and how the ROK wanted prisoners of war to choose which side they'd return to whereas the DPRK insisted upon prisoners returning to their country of origin.  The reading did not specifically state what was decided upon when the truce was signed ... or did this issue remain unresolved?

* This is more a question of terminology and language:  is there a preference when using Busan / Pusan?  Are DPRK and North Korea interchangeable?  Why do some articles use ROK and others use South Korea?

[Deborah Whetstone]

*I'm still finishing the last article, so sharing my initial response from the video and first 2 articles, then general thoughts / questions from the other 2 . . . 

How did Kim Il Sung establish a communist monarchy?

Kim Il Sung established a communist monarchy by creating a Cult of Personality in which everything good was because of him, and everything bad was because of others.  He managed to unite traditional Confucian ideals of the Five Relationships and organization with Communist ideology of sacrificing for the good of all.  However, what struck me most strongly was that he took his name from a dead independence activist – seemingly in opposition to his own ideals???

 

How did the Korean War and Cold War shape the two Koreas through 1994?

It is striking how similar South Korea’s modern history is to so many other Newly Independent Countries.  So while the Cold War and the world-wide struggle between Authoritarian Communism and Democratic Capitalism of course played a definitive role in shaping the Two Koreas, it was more notably a factor for North Korea, especially bordering both the PRC and USSR.  South Korea on the other hand seems to have been shaped more so by the Imperialist rule of Japan.  Their decades-long battle to create an actual democracy, against power-hungry and corrupt rulers has more in common with almost all of the other “Third World” countries during the Cold War.  Some that come to mind are Ghana, Congo, Algeria, Chile, Argentina, Myanmar, Vietnam, Cambodia, etc.   South Korea didn’t even instigate any of the tension events between them and North Korea.  Was that because they were too busy trying to figure out what they were doing, so they had little time to worry about North Korea?  Based on the troubled history of South Korea, I am more astonished that South Korea survived to become what it has.  It seems like North Korea could have easily taken over at any point in time, were it not for the US and other democratic allies. 

Now, after completing the first reading, it makes more sense why NK did not overrun SK, and as well as instigating terror attacks against SK, and still hate the US to this day.  It also gives context to how Kim Il Sung was able to establish his Cult of Personality so completely.  If everything was leveled as explained, just as with Germany after the Weimar Republic, the people will turn to whoever can make it better.  The degree of destruction meant they had nowhere to go but up, and because of that, KIS would receive the credit for improving the country.

And  “. . . anti-communism became the litmus test for all in politics, . . . the … justification for authoritarianism from above, . . . “ – again, sounds like almost every NIC I’ve studied, including those for whom the litmus test was the opposite.

And the description of SK after the division of the peninsula sounds similar to the US after our Civil War, re: industry.

~ interesting that the bombing campaign of NK actually helped the people buy in to KISs vision

~ the Confucian angle – head of the family / family is the nation . . . “father-figure” taken to an extreme

~ abusive relationship: from the parent, “do what I want/say, and everything will be fine, . . . don’t make me hurt you, . . . if I do hurt you, it’s because you messed up and need punishment/correction

~ I re-read the paragraph a couple of times, but am still struggling to see the connection between the National Cemetery and Kim’s Cult of Personality

~ confused by the inclusion of Intellectuals – contrary to many emerging communist societies (e.g., Cambodia)

~ I’m struggling with the ‘barrel of a gun’ being a symbol of loyalty and fidelity . . . cultural familiarity I guess – I’m more accustomed to the ‘staring down the barrel of a gun’ trope re: threatening / danger

~ why was there SO much bombing of NK by the US?

[Juana Evink]

Professor Kim's discuss how Kim II Sung was able to establish a Communist Monarchy in North Korea. He had been a guerilla fighter in Manchuria and belonged to the Chinese Communist party. Yet he later was receiving aid from the Soviet Union. Kim II Sung became the supreme commander of the Korean People army. Also, he made him self love by the Korean people, he would go visit people at work and in their farms, to offer guidance. Sung and his family were revere in North Korea like the sun, he maintain Confucianism ideas in his communist monarchy. Like most communists leaders he was against capitalism and Anti-American. Kim II Sung was able to establish a communist monarchy and be loved by the Korean people.

 

The Korean war and the Cold War shape the 2 Koreas differently. North Korea was occupied by the Soviet Union and received aid from them for years. They favored the priviledge elite, their economy was better off than South Korea's until 1970. Whereas South Korea was occupied and received aid from the United States, it was also tuled by dictators like Syngman Rhee and underwent to 6 constitutions. South Korea's had  students protests demanding reunification withn the north and went to a road to democratization. Their economy took off after 1970, with the export of steel during the Vietnam war.

[Heather Butler]

Kim Il Sung united the suffering of the people in North Korea after the Korean War through major social reforms and pushing towards economic recovery. Since so many had suffered such great losses during the war, he used glittering generalizations, such as “We are the General’s Family” and “comradely love” to create a sense of unity among the population, while creating distrust by vilifiying the United States and capitalism. He set up organizations that controlled all the information that the people received and set up land reform. His administration infiltrated every aspect of North Korean life from the bank notes reading “We have nothing to envy” to preventive healthcare to beginning every published piece of literature with a quote from his family. Since Kim Il Sung sat at the head of this family or body, it would only be natural that his descendants would follow in his leadership. By reinforcing the concept of Juche, North Koreans were led to believe through propaganda, that they could be taken care of through hard work and support of the leadership, that esteemed to protect them from the pollution of the US, who had decimated their homes, industries and infrastructure during the Korean War.

 

The Korean War basically placed North and South Korea at odds with each other because of where their support came from and due to the inability of leadership on either side to reunify at that juncture under one governmental format. Since the USSR and US were in the Cold War during this time, they were each pushing for their political agenda in divided Korea. Although the US was supporting South Korea economically, they were not willing to interfere with protests and government leadership, so that led to lots of violence and Anti-American stances. South Korean leadership was able to build up the economy through capitalism and industrialization

 

North Korea wanted to present themselves as being self-reliant in the areas of economy, politics and military, but in reality they were receiving backing from the USSR. So therefore when Soviet Union fell, they lost support causing their economy to stagnate. As a result of the Cold War, and the aftereffects of the Korean War, North Korea pushed towards ramping up the military and military industry while South Korea worked towards stabilization through an economic boom in industry. North Korea and South Korea seem to have very opposing results of the Cold War, but in reality, both are two sides of the same coin. Both sides suffered immensely during the Korean War largely due to the other countries that were backing them, but each side chose a different path to recover. In the meantime, there was loss of family and breaking of Korean identity.

 

[Julie Wakefield]

Based on the re-reading of the Andrei Lankov's book, The Real North Korea, there are some ideas that have developed in an attempt to respond to this week's questions. I read this book a couple years ago along with a couple others by the same author. They are all very informative and highly recommended.

The Communist Monarchy - I refer to it my class as the Dynastic Dictatorhsip. I am not sure there are many differences in these two ideas. I think the introduction and influence of the Juche ideology is a key reason as to why this generation leadership was possible.

Juche as an idea of self-reliance and self-independence manifested in many ways in the decades of the mid-50s to the 70s. The institutionalization of this ideology is what give it the strong hold it has. The idealogy was taught in school, in society, and seen in all parts of North Korean life - in addition to how North Korea interacted with the rest of the world. As a combination of influence from Stalin, Lenin, Nao and Confucius, the juche propaganda included ideas that lacked democratic ideas, saw the outside world as various levels of evil and above, encouraged and influenced its followers to be put one's national interests above all else. The textbooks in schools were written by the leaders of the country. All information dispersed whether news or other must begin with a quote from the leaders. Innovation was not encouraged (although in more contemporary North Korea we see the North Koreans are very innovative.) All education is to be pursued and achieved with the intention of furthering the nation - not the individual. 

There are references to outside aid and 'trade' deals. There are stories of doctors coming in to offer medical care that is not readily available to the commoners in North Korea. The National Geographic documentary with Lisa Ling was mentioned in the class on Thursday - although dated, the idea of juche is evident when those who receive the surgery thank the Great Leader for their sight being returned, not the doctor. There are many other more recent stories of non-profits, NGOs and other service groups being allowed into the country to provide services not easily obtained by commoners yet heavily monitored while there so visitors can also experience the self-reliance and success of North Korea. 

So in creating this common ideology and now having a few generations living in this ideology, it is difficult to break this within North Korea. Jumping to more current stories, North Korea is not as isolated as the world would like to think they are. They is a very active (and economically successful, yet also dangerous) black market of goods from China. A small flashdrive can expose North Koreans to hours of K-Pop and K-Dramas. As long as the state holds the tight fist of Juche, the Dynastic Dictatorship has the potential to continue for at least one more generation (in my opinion!)

 

 

[Author]

Posts