In this sweeping intellectual and cultural history of the minjung ("common people's") movement in South Korea; Namhee Lee shows how the movement arose in the 1970s and 1980s in response to the repressive authoritarian regime and grew out of a widespread sense that the nation's "failed history" left Korean identity profoundly incomplete.The Making of Minjung captures the movement in its many dimensions; presenting its intellectual trajectory as a discourse and its impact as a political movement; as well as raising questions about how intellectuals represented the minjung. Lee's portrait is based on a wide range of sources: underground pamphlets; diaries; court documents; contemporary newspaper reports; and interviews with participants. Thousands of students and intellectuals left universities during this period and became factory workers; forging an intellectual-labor alliance perhaps unique in world history. At the same time; minjung cultural activists reinvigorated traditional folk theater; created a new "minjung literature;" and influenced religious practices and academic disciplines.In its transformative scope; the minjung phenomenon is comparable to better-known contemporaneous movements in South Africa; Latin America; and Eastern Europe. Understanding the minjung movement is essential to understanding South Korea's recent resistance to U.S. influence. Along with its well-known economic transformation; South Korea has also had a profound social and political transformation. The minjung movement drove this transformation; and this book tells its story comprehensively and critically.
#1321708 in Books 2009-03-17Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.40 x .82 x 6.32l; 1.06 #File Name: 0801447658232 pages
Review
7 of 7 people found the following review helpful. More for less? More secure with less?By George FulmoreCurrently; there is a great debate over the difference between military spending and defense spending. This book gives the reader some valuable insight on this debate. The thesis of the book is that we have been spending way more than we should have on our military; and that we have been taking on much more world responsibility that we have been asked to take on. It would be better for our country and we would be more secure if we were to reduce our military power and commitments.Sarah Palin would have done well to have mastered this book before being asked about the "Bush Doctrine" by Katie Couric; as there is a great deal of documentation about the road to the military policy eventually adopted by President George W. Bush.With hindsight; it is relatively easy to agree with the author on what the policy of our country should be relative to our military and its power and responsibilities: "We should deploy forces abroad only when there are vital U.S. security interests at stake; when there is a clear and attainable mission; when there is broad public support; and when there is a clear understanding of what constitutes victory; and; therefore; when our forces can leave."But; as it is; and by our choice; via our ex-President George W. Bush; today; our military is clearly superior to any competitor in the world. If nothing else; we have the numbers: nearly 300 naval vessels; including submarines; more than 1;100 aircraft just under the Navy; about 336;000 men or women in the active-duty Air Force; more than 186;000 in the Marines; and nearly 600;000 in the Army. And; in 2008; we spent more just in "research; development; testing; and evaluation" than the total amount spent by several other developed countries on their entire defense budgets.It did not have to be this way. After the Cold War; the U.S. defense budget was cut about 25%; but building war materials had become a lucrative business that attracted those who could get projects approved in Congress. The military-industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned us about became entrenched. By the 1990s; the U.S. was the sole superpower in the world; and; in effect; it was haunted by the Spiderman comic book theme of "with great power comes great responsibility."The author sees defense secretary Dick Cheney and a document begun in 1992; entitled; "The Defense Planning Guidance;" as essential to the development of the military policies of the U.S. after the Cold War. The document said that U.S. power was crucial to the functioning of the world order. The U.S. would be the "global hegemon." It would be ready to be involved any time; any place. It would strike preemptively; if need be. It would view all other countries with suspicion. And the thrust of our policy would be "to dissuade potential adversaries from pursuing a military build-up in hopes of surpassing; or equaling the power of the United States."All this can go well; if one can afford it. But; per the author; the U.S. clearly can no longer do this. He pegs the total military costs in 2008 as about $800 billion. The Joint Strike Fighter (Jet) costs about $122 million per plane. Each F-22 Raptor cost about $356 million. And those who prosper from the sales of these planes know how to spread the business around. Per the author; for the engines of these F-22 planes; "more than 1;000 subcontractors in at least 44 states are involved in the program."Navy ships; of course; cost huge amounts of money to maintain. And there are always new ships being built and/or planned. Then; there are the costs of military personnel. Not in the book; but well-reported is the $1 million per year cost for each soldier sent to fight in Afghanistan.The point made by the author is that the United States has chosen to make this monetary commitment; while it has neglected things back home. For this; the author uses the term "opportunity costs." And his thesis; again; is that the U.S. military has too much power for its own good and for the good of the nation. "If we focused most of our attention on our own security; we would need less power; and we would use it less." He argues that the U.S. has little or no authority to be the sheriff of the world. He quotes George W. Bush in a 2002 address to West Point Cadets: "In the world we have entered; the only path to safety is the path of action. And this nation will act." Per the author; the U.S. has treaty agreements with at least 60 countries. Any of these treaty agreements could obligate us to act.Per the author; this decision of being the strongest nation on earth; militarily; is not shared by the American people. He cites a survey that found only 13% of Americans "said the United States should be the single most important leader in the world." So; the author thinks that; over time; we should shrink our military forces in the pursuit of becoming more secure than before.This does not mean that we become complete pacifists. What it means is that we "only engage in such operations when truly vital national interests are at stake; when the object is clear and obtainable; and only after we have exhausted all other options." A "right-sized" navy might have no more than 200 ships. "For the most part; Americans want to be engaged in the world without being in charge of it." The less we use our power; the greater it will be. We need to end the fool's game that we have been pursuing.As for our dependency on oil; Preble points out that about 35% of our supply is from domestic sources; 25% is from Canada; and another 20% is from Mexico and Venezuela. Only about 20%; he would argue; of the oil consumed in the U.S. is from the Middle East.20 of 20 people found the following review helpful. Fabulous bookBy James T. RanneyAs a long-time peace activist; I was amazed that a person who is both a Navy veteran and a member of the somewhat conservative Cato Institute could write such a thoroughly stirring indictment of excesses of military spending. Moreover; it is not only a cogent and timely update of the classic work of the likes of Seymour Melman; it is also; more importantly; a very thoughtful larger argument against our "out there" posture all over the world. While those who are big on R2P (responsibility to protect) may have a basis to argue with his conclusions in this area (I might also); this is just too great a book to pass up. I wish it could be read by everyone in congress.16 of 16 people found the following review helpful. Sound ThinkingBy Lawrence A HainesA clearly written and clearly explained discussion of the problem of being the world's policeman. The USA has in fact become such and is spending its resources curiously without any compensation from the rest of the world. A sad state of affairs that needs correcting.
