Confucianism in contestation: The may struggle of 1991 in South Korea and its lesson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article seeks to present an alternative approach to understanding the politics of East Asian democratization with a special focus on South Korea. Taking the May Struggle of 1991—the largest political upheaval since the June Uprising of 1987—as a case study, it examines how Confucian moral rhetoric and practices were peculiarly employed (or exploited) in a series of authoritarian–democratic confrontations. It argues that Confucianism was neither in itself an obstacle nor an unquestionable contributor to the democratization of Korea; rather, it furnished both authoritarian and democratic sides with symbolic weapons cultivated in the Korean tradition of “Confucian moralpolitik”. By seeing Confucianism as a set of semiotic practices, the article problematizes the contemporary discussion of “Confucian democracy” that heavily glosses over its contrasting dimensions by either idealizing or distorting it. In conclusion, it contends that democracy is a constant struggle and that the future of Korean democracy depends on how it identifies and promotes potentially democratic cultural practices while curbing anti-democratic ones.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)49-68
Number of pages20
JournalNew Political Science
Volume31
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009 Mar

Fingerprint

Confucianism
South Korea
democracy
democratization
gloss
semiotics
weapon
Korea
rhetoric
politics

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

@article{02d4a9a320fb4bb983665cb7584307bc,
title = "Confucianism in contestation: The may struggle of 1991 in South Korea and its lesson",
abstract = "This article seeks to present an alternative approach to understanding the politics of East Asian democratization with a special focus on South Korea. Taking the May Struggle of 1991—the largest political upheaval since the June Uprising of 1987—as a case study, it examines how Confucian moral rhetoric and practices were peculiarly employed (or exploited) in a series of authoritarian–democratic confrontations. It argues that Confucianism was neither in itself an obstacle nor an unquestionable contributor to the democratization of Korea; rather, it furnished both authoritarian and democratic sides with symbolic weapons cultivated in the Korean tradition of “Confucian moralpolitik”. By seeing Confucianism as a set of semiotic practices, the article problematizes the contemporary discussion of “Confucian democracy” that heavily glosses over its contrasting dimensions by either idealizing or distorting it. In conclusion, it contends that democracy is a constant struggle and that the future of Korean democracy depends on how it identifies and promotes potentially democratic cultural practices while curbing anti-democratic ones.",
author = "Sungmoon Kim",
year = "2009",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1080/07393140802693907",
language = "English",
volume = "31",
pages = "49--68",
journal = "New Political Science",
issn = "0739-3148",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "1",

}

Confucianism in contestation : The may struggle of 1991 in South Korea and its lesson. / Kim, Sungmoon.

In: New Political Science, Vol. 31, No. 1, 03.2009, p. 49-68.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Confucianism in contestation

T2 - The may struggle of 1991 in South Korea and its lesson

AU - Kim, Sungmoon

PY - 2009/3

Y1 - 2009/3

N2 - This article seeks to present an alternative approach to understanding the politics of East Asian democratization with a special focus on South Korea. Taking the May Struggle of 1991—the largest political upheaval since the June Uprising of 1987—as a case study, it examines how Confucian moral rhetoric and practices were peculiarly employed (or exploited) in a series of authoritarian–democratic confrontations. It argues that Confucianism was neither in itself an obstacle nor an unquestionable contributor to the democratization of Korea; rather, it furnished both authoritarian and democratic sides with symbolic weapons cultivated in the Korean tradition of “Confucian moralpolitik”. By seeing Confucianism as a set of semiotic practices, the article problematizes the contemporary discussion of “Confucian democracy” that heavily glosses over its contrasting dimensions by either idealizing or distorting it. In conclusion, it contends that democracy is a constant struggle and that the future of Korean democracy depends on how it identifies and promotes potentially democratic cultural practices while curbing anti-democratic ones.

AB - This article seeks to present an alternative approach to understanding the politics of East Asian democratization with a special focus on South Korea. Taking the May Struggle of 1991—the largest political upheaval since the June Uprising of 1987—as a case study, it examines how Confucian moral rhetoric and practices were peculiarly employed (or exploited) in a series of authoritarian–democratic confrontations. It argues that Confucianism was neither in itself an obstacle nor an unquestionable contributor to the democratization of Korea; rather, it furnished both authoritarian and democratic sides with symbolic weapons cultivated in the Korean tradition of “Confucian moralpolitik”. By seeing Confucianism as a set of semiotic practices, the article problematizes the contemporary discussion of “Confucian democracy” that heavily glosses over its contrasting dimensions by either idealizing or distorting it. In conclusion, it contends that democracy is a constant struggle and that the future of Korean democracy depends on how it identifies and promotes potentially democratic cultural practices while curbing anti-democratic ones.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044805890&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85044805890&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/07393140802693907

DO - 10.1080/07393140802693907

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85044805890

VL - 31

SP - 49

EP - 68

JO - New Political Science

JF - New Political Science

SN - 0739-3148

IS - 1

ER -