|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Typhoon
Joined: 29 May 2007 Location: Daejeon
|
Posted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 9:54 pm Post subject: Anti-American/Pro-North Korea High School Textbooks |
|
|
Well, here is some more proof of the anti-American text books in the Korean school system. I have been writing about this for a while here and am met with doubters who want more proof. Well here is some more. I have seen this books before and wrote about them, but here is a newspaper article dealing with it for all the doubters out there.
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200809/200809120026.html
Quote: |
We Need a Balanced View of Modern History
Left-leaning high school textbooks of our country's modern history are once again causing controversy. At the center are modern history textbooks by Kumsung Publishing, which half of all high schools teaching modern Korean history have chosen. In describing the U.S. military presence in Korea following the end of World War II, the book says that it was not the Korean flag that was hoisted after independence from Japanese colonial occupation, but rather the Stars and Stripes. The books claim that the U.S., which ended colonial domination of Korea, and Japan, which occupied Korea by force, are the same in that they both blocked the independence of Korea. This stereotypical "foreign invasion" theory supported by leftwing factions is being indirectly instilled in the minds of our students. Out of 167 references to the United States and the U.S. military in the text, 164 are said to be critical.
The May 10 election of assemblymen, which formed the basis of our nation's founding, is described by the text as having been "unilaterally" pursued in order to create a separate government in the South against the wishes of the public and many political groups seeking to set up a unified government. The book is saying that an election in which 48 political groups took part and where 95.5 percent of eligible voters took part went against the wishes of the public. By contrast, the text describes former North Korean leader Kim Il-sung as having the ideological justification for creating a socialist country and had received the support of the masses.
Regarding the deaths of innocent civilians during the Korean War, the text says mass executions of suspected communist sympathizers took place in the South after the outbreak of the war, while residents were labeled as the enemy and killed in many areas, including South Gyeongsang Province and Nogunri in North Chungcheong Province. But while it specifically provides the locations of the killing of civilians by South Korean soldiers, it fudges the killing of civilians by North Korean soldiers by saying they took place in "Daejeon and other areas."
The textbook refers to the "Samaeul" rural development movement pursued by former president Park Chung-hee as a measure to justify his regime by buying the support of the public. On the other hand, it describes North Korea's "Chollima" movement as being designed to motivate �the passionate energy of the North Korean people� and playing �a huge role in the development of a socialist economy.� Since it was first unveiled in 2003, certain parts of the book�s content were revised last year following mounting criticism. But nothing has changed in terms of the pro-North and anti-American slant. We have been teaching our children about our modern history with this book; it makes it rather clear how they must view the Republic of Korea.
A nationwide council of education superintendents said it would try its best to ensure that a balanced textbook for high schools is chosen out of the six that have been submitted. A national federation of school management committees and the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education also plan to hold special lectures on modern Korean history at each school. This is a positive development.
At the same time, we must be wary of the fact that movements to rectify this left-leaning view of our modern history may flow to the opposite end of the spectrum, which says Japanese colonial domination stimulated Korea's economic development and exposed it to modern civilization. What we need is a balanced view of our history that reasonable Koreans can accept.
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
billybrobby

Joined: 09 Dec 2004
|
Posted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 9:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
At the same time, we must be wary of the fact that movements to rectify this left-leaning view of our modern history may flow to the opposite end of the spectrum, which says Japanese colonial domination stimulated Korea's economic development and exposed it to modern civilization. |
Wouldn't want that, would we? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Gollywog
Joined: 14 Jun 2008 Location: Debussy's brain
|
Posted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting editorial. Thanks for that post, Typhoon.
But Koreans still can't get it right, even at their best.
Quote: |
At the same time, we must be wary of the fact that movements to rectify this left-leaning view of our modern history may flow to the opposite end of the spectrum, which says Japanese colonial domination stimulated Korea's economic development and exposed it to modern civilization. What we need is a balanced view of our history that reasonable Koreans can accept. |
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200809/200809120026.html
Apparently, they view history like Koreans view auto insurance; both sides are always at least partly right and partly to blame.
So the paper is advocating a little truth from Column A and a little truth from Column B, and a little bit of falsehood from Column A and a little bit of falsehood from Column B, just enough to make both sides happy - a "balanced view." That's what the editorial's headline reads:
Quote: |
We Need a Balanced View of Modern History
|
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200809/200809120026.html
That is not how history works. History is based on facts and truth. You can't pick and choose which facts and which lies you want to teach in a history class based on your personal or country's biases.
So, what the paper is saying is we need to be a little friendlier to the United States, but not too friendly, and we certainly don't want to get carried away and say something nice about Japan.
Quote: |
which says Japanese colonial domination stimulated Korea's economic development and exposed it to modern civilization.. |
Ever think that just maybe there might be some truth to that? Or at least Japan tried, initially, to modernize Korea and stimulate its economy, but the Korean power elite blocked it?
Sorry, maybe they should be teaching the truth about Japan, too.
And while you're at it, perhaps Korea should teach the truth about how Korean leaders and demagogues lied to the Korean people, over and over and over.
And maybe they should stop calling people who hate the U.S. "the left." What does that make people who like the U.S., right wing fascists?
Even if they sanitized the textbooks a little, it would make virtually no difference because it wouldn't change what the adults teaching the class believe. They were brainwashed with this same stuff, and will continue teaching it till they die. Nothing an American can say will change their mind.
Just ask any of your co-teachers about the Korean War. Their heads are full of lies, 180 degrees from the truth. Your co-teacher might smile to your face and be polite, but the truth is most Koreans are taught to hate the United States. And if you are white, it doesn't really matter whether you are an American or not, in their minds.
Ask your co-teacher how many countries fought to defend South Korea. Ask any Korean how many foreigners, and particularly Americans, fought in the Korean War. Ask them how many died. They haven't a clue. And they don't care. They think the Korean War was America's fault.
Koreans are not grateful for the UN coming and saving their butt. They are not grateful to the United States for saving them from starvation by sending them tons and tons of the Spam that they practically worship as sacred during their Chusok holiday. If Korea was grateful, you would not have seen them teaching little children to chant anti-American slogans under the lies that America was trying to kill Koreans with poisoned beef.
Changing a few words in a school history textbook wouldn't change a thing. They would just say it was part of the conspiracy by the United States to brainwash Koreans with lies.
Koreans simply do not understand what the word "truth" means. The word "truth" does not appear once in this editorial.
Sorry, it's not "history" if it is not based on historical truth. It's just a new, improved national mythology.
Here's how the editorial's headline should have read:
Quote: |
We need the truth; Koreans can take it. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
tfunk

Joined: 12 Aug 2006 Location: Dublin, Ireland
|
Posted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 11:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Gollywog wrote: |
That is not how history works. History is based on facts and truth. You can't pick and choose which facts and which lies you want to teach in a history class based on your personal or country's biases.
|
History is never presented in schools without bias of some type. First, there is selection of material to cover. Then, there is the perspective and length of time to focus on this material they decide to focus on. History is a narrative of events that excludes some facts and includes others. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
endo

Joined: 14 Mar 2004 Location: Seoul...my home
|
Posted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 11:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
But it should never be presented in a way to sooth the feeling of the readers.
It should be as honest as possible, even if you don't want to hear it initially.
This honesty and realness is how people grow and mature. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
Posted: Thu Sep 11, 2008 11:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just don't mention the Chinese. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Gollywog
Joined: 14 Jun 2008 Location: Debussy's brain
|
Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 12:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's how to write about history:
If it's true, print it. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
wylies99

Joined: 13 May 2006 Location: I'm one cool cat!
|
Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
I have been writing about this for a while here and am met with doubters who want more proof. |
Typhoon, everyone knows this is happening. Some just want to use textbooks to further their political agenda. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
jkelly80

Joined: 13 Jun 2007 Location: you boys like mexico?
|
Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 1:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Print the legend. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
tfunk

Joined: 12 Aug 2006 Location: Dublin, Ireland
|
Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 1:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
...
History is a lesson in socializing on a national level. You learn where you stand and why you stand there. An integral part of knowing where you stand in a society is to be able to put yourself into the eyes of those around you, with their prejudices, biases etc. So why shouldn't history be prejudiced, if it is a method through which we harmonize in our society? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
wylies99

Joined: 13 May 2006 Location: I'm one cool cat!
|
Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 1:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
I wonder why Korean parents let the brainwashing of the left go on for so long. Shouldn't the reality of potential communist invaders and the required military servce be some clue as to what is really going on? Clearly the enemies are the political leaders in NK, Beijing, and Moscow. Otherwise there'd be peace on the Korean peninsula with freedom to to vote and worship as you choose.  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
wylies99

Joined: 13 May 2006 Location: I'm one cool cat!
|
Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 1:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
jkelly80 wrote: |
Print the legend. |
A quote from "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance."  |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
ESL Milk "Everyday
Joined: 12 Sep 2007
|
Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 1:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Uhhh... for obvious reasons, I'm not big on North Korea-- but really, talking to some of the people who were here in the 80's, you realize that the North was independent much sooner than the south was, and the Americans did support a series of military dictatorships that probably did a lot of harm... even if a lot of good came out of it. ROK wasn't even a democracy until the 90s... and the Americans had been here for over forty years. So the Americans really can't claim that they are responsible for Korea's prosperity... if they could really just magically make Korea rich, then why didn't it happen earlier???
I'm not going to resort to the whole 'it's their country and you have to follow suit' argument, but when you think about it, even if we as Westerners think that America is here for ROK's own good, and even if America is a huge military country and a solid ally for any country with troubles, America does tend to force itself onto other countries. It means more stability globally, as well as maintaining America's 'top of the world' status, but really... claiming that America's presence here is a wholly altruistic act is pretty absurd. If anything, they're here because of American paranoia.
I am all for less American military presence in South Korea... personally, I think it would go a long way towards easing some of the tensions between the North and the South, as well as between the North and America. It sort of serves the same function as Dokdo-- that whole feeling of 'we're not whole' or 'something is still wrong'. I think that a lot of Koreans in both the North and the South believe, and with good reason, that most of the tension that exists between North and South is because of America... the North sees itself as the true independent Korea and sees the South as American slaves. Given the minimal amount of USSR influence in North Korea, it's hard to imagine South Koreans saying the same about the North... it's a brutal, oppressive dictatorship that is probably over fifty years behind most of the rest of the world, but at the same time it's a wholly Korean dictatorship.
Honestly-- how would you feel if your country had another country's military bases within its capital city? Like say a Japanese military base in Ottawa, or a Chinese base in Washington? How about an Iranian base in New York? And all of it spreading Iranian culture into America. I'm using these examples because they are cultures very different from our own, not because they are our enemies or whatever. And what if you had to watch as your sister turned to prostitution because you were poor and under despotic rule, and the Iranian G.I.s gladly took advantage of that, laughing as they did it, because it's all in good fun??? And then add onto that that they could help you at any time, but don't out of fear that it would mean instability and a lapse in an ideology that directly opposes their own.
A Korean history textbook without any 'anti-American' statements is going to be a hard sell... the Americans stood by and did very little except back the wrong people during some really hard times because they were afraid of communism taking over the world, and now they want to act like the Koreans owe them their freedom. They were definitely better than the Japanese, but calling them Korea's saviors is beyond absurd. Korea saved itself, and the Americans stood by and watched, getting ready in case the change would mean another political enemy... in which case they would have gladly stepped on ROK's prosperity ASAP. Luckily, it didn't happen, and everything turned out fairly well.
What they really need to teach these kids is that there's a HUGE difference between the American military and the average American citizen... and that most people in America don't realize exactly what happened here after the war. They also need to stop telling these kids things like Kim Il-sung supported the Japanese, and that Westerners are genetically inferior to Koreans... that's the kind of shit that makes people get nasty. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
wylies99

Joined: 13 May 2006 Location: I'm one cool cat!
|
Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, I understand that the USA and ROK of the past have been ruled by leaders who made mistakes.
Remember, the communists GUARANTEED a slave state while the USA, of the past, was indifferent to some abuses of power by the dictator. That was a choise of 1961-1987.
The question NOW is what option offers a better future- closer ties to the USA or closer ties to a communist NK. The USA offers a free choice while the communists threaten to impose a nightmarish future for everyone. The Koreans who choose NK should move there, NOW.
Didn't think they would. Hypocrites. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
endo

Joined: 14 Mar 2004 Location: Seoul...my home
|
Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
ESL Milk "Everyday wrote: |
Uhhh... for obvious reasons, I'm not big on North Korea-- but really, talking to some of the people who were here in the 80's, you realize that the North was independent much sooner than the south was, |
Independent in that they no other foreign troop presence on their soil.
However, simply put, the regime could not have existed without Soviet economic aid. Plus they had the Chinese across the Yalu, so I wouldn't really call them independent.
Quote: |
and the Americans did support a series of military dictatorships that probably did a lot of harm... even if a lot of good came out of it. ROK wasn't even a democracy until the 90s... and the Americans had been here for over forty years. |
Obviously it would of been ideal if the South Koreans had democratized much faster.
But again, which dictatorship was worse; Kim Il-sung's rule or President Park?
I would go with the former.
Quote: |
So the Americans really can't claim that they are responsible for Korea's prosperity... if they could really just magically make Korea rich, then why didn't it happen earlier??? |
Are you serious? South Korea basically had the living standard of a 3rd world country following the Korean War and the infastructure was destroyed and they literally had to start from scratch.
Without American economic aid (and Japanese), loans, a security umbrella, and a favorable trade relationship, South Korea would never have been able to get off its feet.
The Americans cannot claim that they were fully responsible for South Koreas prosperity (because the South Korean people did work very hard and their government wisely keyed into a few important industries), but the Americans still played a major role.
So important that South Korea simply wouldn't exist today without them.
Quote: |
I'm not going to resort to the whole 'it's their country and you have to follow suit' argument, but when you think about it, even if we as Westerners think that America is here for ROK's own good, and even if America is a huge military country and a solid ally for any country with troubles, America does tend to force itself onto other countries. It means more stability globally, as well as maintaining America's 'top of the world' status, but really... claiming that America's presence here is a wholly altruistic act is pretty absurd. If anything, they're here because of American paranoia. |
I agree with a lot of your points here.
All acts are self regarding, especially in international politics.
However, you can't deny that while America gains a lot from their interventions abroad, they have in a number of cases, boosted up and improved the quality of life for millions of people around the world from Japan to Germany, to Itatly and France, to Taiwan and even South Korea.
Of course they've also mad a huge mess in Afghanistan (1980s), much of Latin America and the Middle East as well.
Quote: |
I am all for less American military presence in South Korea... personally, I think it would go a long way towards easing some of the tensions between the North and the South, as well as between the North and America. |
Then why does the South Korean government throw a hissy fit every time the Americans threaten to reduce their forces on the pennensula?
You're forgetting one major actor at play: China!
Quote: |
It sort of serves the same function as Dokdo-- that whole feeling of 'we're not whole' or 'something is still wrong'. I think that a lot of Koreans in both the North and the South believe, and with good reason, that most of the tension that exists between North and South is because of America... the North sees itself as the true independent Korea and sees the South as American slaves. Given the minimal amount of USSR influence in North Korea, it's hard to imagine South Koreans saying the same about the North... it's a brutal, oppressive dictatorship that is probably over fifty years behind most of the rest of the world, but at the same time it's a wholly Korean dictatorship. |
I don't understand.
The American presence serves as a defence mechanism for the South Koreans.
They don't run the countries economic or social policies.
I undestand that you see the situation from a popular standpoint. But I think the leaders see it much differently.
They are aware that because of the division among the Korean people, they have ventured along different paths, and although they share the same blood, their fram of thought is at different ends of the spectrum.
Therefore when reunification occurs, you're going to have two different groups of people comming together creating a whole host of social problems.
South Koreans will abuse poorer, less educated North Koreans and this will cause a lot of resentment. We see small samples of this in regards to some of the North Korean defectors living in the south.
You also have a South Korean public which is fully opening up to the global community and you have a North Korean public that has been living in a box. This will cause a lot of tension from everything from mixed marriages, women's liberation in the workplace and in public, pop culture, ect...
Finally the economic disaprities are too great and the real threat of class warfare will cause major problems.
Quote: |
Honestly-- how would you feel if your country had another country's military bases within its capital city? Like say a Japanese military base in Ottawa, or a Chinese base in Washington? How about an Iranian base in New York? |
You're examples don't take into account the unique geography and history of the Korean pennensula.
This is a unique situation and you can't really compare it to hypothetical realities.
Quote: |
And what if you had to watch as your sister turned to prostitution because you were poor and under despotic rule, and the Iranian G.I.s gladly took advantage of that, laughing as they did it, because it's all in good fun??? |
Yet it would befine if your sister sold herself to her own people instead?
You have Americans based in plenty of other countries in the world, and yet prostitution isn't really an issue there. Kuwait for example.
Prostitution didn't begin in this country with the American military presence and it will certainly continue long after they're gone.
Quote: |
And then add onto that that they could help you at any time, but don't out of fear that it would mean instability and a lapse in an ideology that directly opposes their own. |
Again living in a land of hypotheticals. Perhaps the American should have interviened in Gwangju. But then what? That intervention could have cause a host of other problems.
Quote: |
A Korean history textbook without any 'anti-American' statements is going to be a hard sell... the Americans stood by and did very little except back the wrong people during some really hard times because they were afraid of communism taking over the world, and now they want to act like the Koreans owe them their freedom. |
Who were the alternatives that the American should have backed?
I want names!
South Korea was and is still at a state of war. The threat seems minimal at the moment, but during the 1960s and 1970s it was much more substantial.
You had regular cross border raids, secret tunnels, assinations, kidnappings, ect.. I think you're forgetting your history.
Quote: |
They were definitely better than the Japanese, but calling them Korea's saviors is beyond absurd. |
Simple question: take away the American presence and would South Korea exist today? You know the answer to this, thus your own comment is the absurd one.
Quote: |
Korea saved itself, and the Americans stood by and watched, |
Yup, they just stood by and;
(1) injected billions of dollars in the South Korean economy
(2) stationed tens of thousands of troops allowing South Korea to build it's industries and economy without the threat of invasion from the North.
this troop presence also allowed the South Koreans to spend less on their own security (to the tune of billions of dollars) and instead revert this money into their own economy
(3) created conditions which granted South Korea favorable trade allowing them to sell their ships, automobiles, electronics, to the largest economy in tthe world
Yeah, buddy, the Americans just stood by
Quote: |
What they really need to teach these kids is that there's a HUGE difference between the American military and the average American citizen... and that most people in America don't realize exactly what happened here after the war. |
I don't mind calling out the Americans for some of the mistakes they made during their presence in Korea. But it shouldn't be the main focal point.
Typical Korean mindset, in that it's so much easier to blame others as opposed to looking at oneself.
Last edited by endo on Fri Sep 12, 2008 2:23 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|