ed Historians should not brainwash students
.jpg?w=728)
By Lee Chang-sup
An ideological dispute is brewing over Korea’s modern history. Conservative historians reportedly present key historical facts differently in the revision of a high-school textbook.
The National Institute of Korean History (NIKH), the government agency in charge of screening textbooks, may allow Kyohak Publishing Co. to reflect conservative historians’ view on key historical events in the revision of a history textbook. If the book passes the institute’s screening on Aug. 31, it will be available to students starting next year.
Liberal groups have started a campaign to boycott the textbook, claiming Kyohak reflects the one-sided view of historians picked by the conservative Lee Myung-bak administration (2008–2013).
The dispute lies in the conservative’s view of two presidents, Syngman Rhee (1952–1960) and Park Chung-hee (1963–1979); the April 3, 1948 Jeju Uprising; and Japan’s colonization of Korea.
Conservative and liberal historian groups have different views of the legacies of Rhee and Park. According to liberals, conservatives glorify the two leaders. They say conservatives credit the two former presidents with defending South Korea from the North and achieving rapid economic growth during the Cold War, respectively, but de-emphasize their authoritarian rule and disregard for democracy through election frauds and oppression of dissidents.
Rhee had unsuccessfully manipulated the Constitution to seek his third term in 1960. For this reason, liberals say Korea’s first president does not deserve to be called the “founding father of the Republic of Korea,” a name coined after Rhee won the free election in 1948.
Liberals also say former President Park and his army generals organized the May 16, 1961 military coup not as a revolution to save the country from the perceived social and economic chaos but to take over the country illegally.
Similarly, according to liberals, Kyohak reportedly portrays the April 13, 1948 Jeju Uprising as a revolt led by Communists. This view contradicts that of former liberal President Roh Moo-hyun, who in 2003 apologized to Jeju residents for the government’s wrongful decisions during the uprising. According to the government, up to 30,000 innocent people were killed during the military operation. In 2000, the liberal Kim Dae-jung government introduced a special law that restored the honors of the victims and compensated their family members. In contrast, many conservatives view the incident as a necessary act by the military to crush Communists on the island. Currently, historians under the conservative Park Geun-hye administration are trying to scrap the liberal view.
Kyohak also reportedly states Japan’s colonization of Korea (1910–1945) has helped moderniz Korea. This view contradicts the public sentiment that Japan’s 36-year rule was oppressive: most people believe Japan forced Koreans to adopt a Japanese name, mobilized people for its war and performed inhumane medical experiments on living people. Worst of all, Japan refuses to apologize for its misdeeds. Recently, it had falsely claimed it owns Dokdo, Korea’s easternmost islets.
An NIKH spokesman admitted the validity of these issues but refused to elaborate. He said neither the institute nor textbook publisher is authorized to discuss details of the issue until the institute finishes screening the textbook.
Ideological disputes about history between conservatives and liberals extend to other media. For example, conservative Internet sites and cable TV channels had incorrectly portrayed the May 18, 1980 Gwangju Movement as an anti-state revolt by citizens in alliance with North Korean spies. Channel A, which is a subsidiary of Dong-A Ilbo, later apologized for the misleading broadcast after receiving lawsuits from citizens in Gwangju.
This is not the only history-related dispute Korea is involved in. For instance, Japan has distorted modern East Asian history, including its erroneous claim to Dokdo. Similarly, China, through the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, claimed Korea’s three ancient nations — Gojoseon, Goguryeo and Balhae — as part of its territory. These false claims have strained diplomatic tensions among the three countries.
If the dispute has a silver lining, it’s that it will facilitate a healthy process that will reveal to Koreans historical truths. It will force liberal and conservative historians to see each other’s differences, and hopefully make them realize their one-sided view will not set historical errors straight.
Korean historians, both conservative and liberal, should get over their ideological bias and portray Rhee and Park objectively. Rhee is South Korea’s first president. He defended South Korea from the Communist North but also broke democratic principles in his election fraud. On the other hand, Park engineered a military mutiny to take power, but also helped create the foundation for the country’s economic development. He led the people in the creation of the “Miracle on the Han River,” an unprecedented feat in the world’s modern history.
Historians could continue to research on the events that led to the Jeju Uprising. However, the massacre of up to 30,000 civilians is undisputed. They should not portray all Jeju residents as Communist sympathizers because doing so is neither truthful nor fair.
Historians should remember that textbooks should portray facts objectively because they are the main media through which students learn history and develop critical thinking. Subjective interpretation or analysis of history amounts to brainwashing the young generation.
Lee Chang-sup is the executive managing director of The Korea Times. Contact him at editorial@ktimes.co.kr.