Subscribe
E-Paper
 |
A noted political theorist of the mid-20th century, Ken Minogue (Australian but no relation to Kylie), likened this pursuit of glory to that of St. George and the slaying of dragons. The liberal wields his sword and advances on that which terrorizes and threatens society and its inhabitants: despotism, religious bigotry, slavery, racism, xenophobia, and corruption.
The liberals thus live to fight the dragon: Their position, their power, their methods, and their very nature of being are all defined in opposition to their antithetical opponent. Christopher Nolan explored similar territory in his depictions of the Batman and Joker in his 21st century trilogy.
But while this seems like a clear and comprehensible narrative digestible in the modern world, Minogue took this metaphor and made it both allegoric and didactic. What happens, he asked, if the sword-wielding liberal St. George continues on the quest unopposed?
St. George will initially free society from despotic kingship and emancipate the people, liberating souls and providing salvation to serfs. He will then turn his blade unto religious intolerance.
This will provide the hero some time to rest. And yet, as time passes, up will rise the problems of slavery and prison conditions, the societal role of the working class, the championing of human rights, and the emancipation of women.
Once again, she will unsheathe her weapon and slay dragons. This time the attacks need to be more refined and sophisticated for the problems, while still of vital importance, are more nuanced and present inside a complex structure which is otherwise deemed beneficial or necessary.
The fire-breathers once more sent packing, the hero puts her feet up. But she just can't get it out of her head. Even with her hand on her heart, this is not a case of better the devil you know: this is where the wild roses grow.
And so once again, the liberal hero takes up his sword and now advances on the latest enemies. As society progresses, the dragons become even more camouflaged in the very fabric of the system―now they are vested interests, privilege, and insolence.
The point Minogue was trying to make was that the liberal does not know when to rest. There will always be dragons standing in the way of that desired heaven as a place on earth (yes, that's admittedly a Belinda Carlisle reference rather than the other Kylie ones above).
And so the sword never gets put away. Bewitched by utopian thoughts and intoxicated by previous success, the liberal continues to fight. A normal life, a social life, is simply no longer enough. The Batman cannot simply be Bruce Wayne no matter how hard he tries for there will always be a villain to overcome.
In an existential world in which actions define one's self and one's purpose, the hero can only live by fighting for the poor and the oppressed. The dragons keep him alive just as it is rumored does the whisky of Keith Richards: to stop now would surely be fatal.
But the dragons become smaller and smaller. Even non-existent! We are presented with an image of Cervantes' ingenious knight of La Mancha, Don Quixote, tilting at windmills with his loyal servant Sancho Panza.
It is of course a most honorable pursuit; chivalrous to the core. But at times society will simply look at these acts and chuckle at the absurdity. In more unpleasant situations, the innocent bystanders will be inadvertently cut down by the charging knight and his weapon.
Minogue of course meant this talk of dragons and saints to be applied to politics, and so what of this allegory and its relation to South Korea?
The ruling party members proclaim themselves as the rightful and legitimate continuation of the dragon slayers of yore. It is their group that opposed, in turn, Japanese colonial rule, American imperialism, domestic military rule, and suffocating neo-liberal economic conditions.
They are the group that have freed Korean society from tyranny and oppression and have rightfully claimed the seat of power. Theirs is the position of saintliness.
But what now that they have assumed the mantle? Is it possible they are still wielding a mighty sword despite a great many of their foes having been vanquished? Is it not the case that the warrior now needs to become a diplomat or a philosopher in order to foster the long-term stability of the state and prevent further collateral damage?
The ruling party has a majority in the National Assembly that allows it to pass bills unopposed but is witnessing falling public support due to a series of scandals and policies enacted that have failed to live up to the expectations of the people.
It speaks of its commitment to "eradicate deep-rooted evils perpetrated by those in authority" and "deep-rooted evil in everyday life."
There will always be dragons for some people, and thus there will always be a sword. For everyone else, we toil and suffer with the realities of life. Our backs broken like the proverbial shrimp as we remember that ever apt phrase from Matthew 26:52, "Put your sword back into its place; for all those who take up the sword shall perish by the sword."
Ultimately, is it not time for Korean politicians, on both sides of the aisle, to put the sword away?
Dr. David Tizzard (datizzard@swu.ac.kr) has a Ph.D. in Korean studies and is an assistant professor at Seoul Women's University. He discusses the week's hottest issues on TBS eFM (101.3 FM) on "Life Abroad" live every Thursday from 9:35 a.m. to 10 a.m.
