Re: Amsdem on Korea

[john gulick <jlgulick@xxxxxxx>]

What's your diagnosis of the recently-formed independent trade union-based
political party in S. Korea ? (I forget its name or acronym). From what I
understand it is pitching a cross-class appeal and is more or less social
democratic in its platform. If the financial crisis spells crisis for each
and every of the chaebul-state bureaucrat oriented parties, does this open
up some room for maneuver for this new party (e.g. recruiting members of the
middle
class whose jobs will dry up and savings will disappear when IMF-imposed
austerity takes hold) ? Does this new party have any ecological dimension to
its platform (i.e., the much-awaited red-green synthesis) ? As far as I know,
there is a long history in developmentalist S. Korea of the chaebol parlaying
their state subsidies into land speculation, inflating land rents and leading
to a nasty hyper-developmentalist built environment. Is the coming austerity
going to force a reassessment amongst the S. Korean populace of the folly of
their hopes for S. Korean Fordism and attendant lifestyles, or are the hopes and
aspirations of the S. Korean people going to remain fixed upon two Hyundais in
every parking lot towered over by high-rise apartments ?



John Gulick
UC-Santa Cruz


At 08:09 PM 12/12/97 -0800, you wrote:

>No, I did not meant a greater North Korea.  North Korea is certainly not
>my model of socialism.  But I do think a process of reunificaiton that is
>shaped by progressive forces looking for a way out of the crisis in both
>North and South could well open up possibilities for the creation of a
>dynamic working class-led socialist movement and the building of an
>economy that is generally responsive to working class aspirations.  I
>should add that at present the governments of both North and South Korea
>would probably stand opposed to the development of such a movement but
>that the crisis on both sides of the border do open up new possibilities.
>
>I do think that Korea is a very important country to study.  There is a
>very strong set of socialist traditions underlying both South and North.
>And I think that the working class movement in the South is very
>exciting in terms of its democratic orientation and political
>motivation.
>
>If I can do a bit of self promotion, my own thoughts on all of this
>(including the North and reunification), are spelled out in my forthcoming
>book (probably February) from Monthly Review: The Imaginary Line: A
>History of Korea and US Foreign Policy from division to reunification.
>This book builds upon my earlier work, the Rush to Development:  Economic
>Change and Political Struggle in South Korea (Monthly Review, 1993).
>Neither of these will be found in book stores in South Korea where books
>critical of the "system" are not carried.
>
>Marty Hart-Landsberg
>On Fri, 12 Dec 1997, Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>
>>
>> Marty wrote:
>>
>> >    And it is hard to see how greater freedom for
>> > domestic and foreign capital to move money and operations is going to
>> > promote a more domestically centered, nationally controlled, worker
>> > centered, stable economy.
>>
>>
>> Do you mean by a "nationally controlled, worker centered, stable economy"
>> Stalinism with a human face--that is, "socialism in one country" (sic)?
>> Hasn't this ideal already been realized by North Korea? Is the argument
>> here that the North Korean model would achieve dynamic economies of scale
>> if the market were enlargened by reunification?
>>
>> rb
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
John Gulick
Ph. D. Candidate
Sociology Graduate Program
University of California-Santa Cruz
(415) 643-8568
jlgulick@xxxxxxx