GREGORY HENDERSON. Korea: The Poli-tics of the Vortex. Pp. xiii, 479. Cam-bridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press,1968. $11.95.
This is an ambitious study of Korean his-tory, politics, psychology, and sociology-all in a single volume, and, essentially, witha single analytical theme. The pattern of&dquo;the vortex&dquo; constitutes, according to theauthor, &dquo;the single magnet&dquo; of the Koreanpolitical culture, both past and present.Selected highlights of Korean developmentare seen through the pattern of this &dquo;vor-tex,&dquo; meaning the powerful, centripetal, andvertiginous updraft that sucks &dquo;all com-ponents&dquo; of a &dquo;mass society&dquo; toward thepower apex. Government is the &dquo;greatvortex summoning men rapidly into it,placing them briefly near the summit ofambition, and then sweeping them out&dquo;(p. 31).The book is largely a historical analysiswith refreshing insights and bold, detachedinterpretations which one might not expectfrom Korean historians. In fact, theauthor often differs from them: &dquo;Regional-ism, despite the importance Koreans at-tribute to it, is weak&dquo; (p. 35). Most factspresented by the author are not exactlynew to those with a scholarly interest inKorea; numerous old and new books, dis-sertations (including this reviewer’s), theses,and even term papers are extensively uti-lized and synthesized.In many of his historical interpretations,eloquent generalizations, and hyperboles,Mr. Henderson goes so far as to make hisstatements sometimes seem far-fetched.For instance: in the 1940’s the KoreanDemocrats &dquo;expected to rule in a cabinet-council system with him [President Rhee]playing the role of Yi monarch&dquo; (p. 291).Elsewhere, he touches on practices under&dquo;the ’dictatorial’ monarch, Sejo (ruled1455-1468),&dquo; and other political tendencies.He then continues: &dquo;The same sort of hos-tility toward authority was expressed inthe twentieth-century National Assemblyagainst Syngman Rhee and, to a lesser ex-tent, Park Chong-hui&dquo; (p. 250).In view of the author’s colorful back-ground, which included seven years of for-eign service with the United States Embassyin Korea, one might be justified in lookingfor valuable new insights into, and somenew documentations concerning, the Amer-ican involvement in Korean affairs. Theauthor succeeds, in a frustrated and agitatedmanner, in creating a vivid and critical pic-ture of the United States, literally, &dquo;mud-dling through&dquo; in Korea, or having had nopolicy at all toward Korea. There remainsa gap between this position and that &dquo;warhad vanquished American inattention toKorea&dquo; (p. 352), unless, of course, the lat-ter phenomenon was also viewed as a prod-uct of muddling through.This reviewer notes with interest andsatisfaction that Mr. Henderson still positsdemocracy as an ultimate goal for Koreanpolitical development. The reviewer is inagreement with him, as may be seen in thereviewer’s book, Korea: Democracy onTrial (1968).A misgiving that remains about this veryreadable contribution to an understandingof Korea is that a single-magnet theory ofthe vortex might not be adequate to achieveproper understanding of a country’s longand multiphased historical development-particularly when that theory is appliedsingle-mindedly. JOHN KIE-CHANG OHAssociate Professor of Political ScienceMarquette University
===
GREGORY HENDERsoN
Korea
Hellmuth Hecker
The Politics of the Vortex - Harvard
University Press - Cambridge,
Massachusetts 1 968, XIII + 479 Seiten.
Der Verfasser gibt als erstes eine ge
drängte, eingehende und einprägsame
koreanische Verfassungsgeschichte der
Neuzeit. In ihr entdeckt er zwei, wie
er glaubt, unheilvolle Züge koreanischer
Sozialität - "centralism on a homoge
nous society" (1 93). Das zweite, daß
das erste möglich macht, meint die
gänzliche Abwesenheit gesellschaftlicher
Gebilde mit Ausnahme allenfalls der Fa
milie. Er führt sie zurück auf eine einge
wurzelte anti-pluralistische Mentalität,
die jede Besonderheit einschließlich Spe
zialistentum und Arbeitsteilung ver
wirft (vgl. hierzu aufschlußreich S. 235
"The Generalist Bureaucrat"). Statt sol
cher Gesellschaft entdeckt der Verfasser
eine Unzahl isolierter, machthungriger
Individuen, die mit allen Mitteln in
einem vernichtenden Konkurrenzkampf
nach Teilhaberschaft an der einen zen
tralen Staatsgewalt streben, so daß sich
eine Art von Malstrom ("vortex") vom
Grund zur Spitze bildet, der das ge
samte Leben beherrscht und verdirbt
(vgl. 1 68 : " . . . the pattern of atomized
mobility toward central power" ; und
269 : " . . . the upward streaming of the
homogenous society".). Um diesen Hun
ger sättigen zu können, hat man ver
hängnisvolle Lösungen nicht gescheut.
Einmal ist hier zu nennen eine geradezu
groteske Kurzfristigkeit der Amtsinne
habung (237), damit "jeder einmal dran
kommt", verbunden mit der Auffas
sung, daß Langfristigkeit der Amtsinne
habung unanständig ist. Vor allem aber
ist in diesem Zusammenhang zu nennen
ein Phänomen, das der Verfasser "coun
cil government" nennt (265). Zu solcher
Räteherrschaft ist man gelangt, indem
man die Staatsfunktionen so weit wie
möglich aufspaltete und möglichst viele
kollegiale Institutionen schuf. Da keiner
dieser Räte seine Zuständigkeit auf
eines dieser Partikel beschränkte, viel
mehr ein jeder Rat eine Allzuständigkeit
für sich in Anspruch nahm ; da ferner
diese Räte ihre Aufgabe darin gesehen
haben, sich gegenseitig, insbesondere
aber auch die Regierung in ihrer Tätig
keit zu "hemmen", konnte es vorkom
men, daß man selbst nach einer, über
200 Jahre (sic!) fortgesetzten Diskus
sion einer wichtigen Frage noch nicht
zu einem Entschluß gekommen war.
Helfen konnten hier nur noch Autokra-
tie oder fremde Eroberung, wie sie denn
auch Korea erlitten hat.
Alle diese Übel, vor allem das " council
government" wuchern, wenn auch in
anderer Gestalt, nach Ansicht des Ver
fassers weiter ( 1 9 3 ff., 269). Gesundung
erwartet er allein von einem Entschluß
zur Dezentralisation, der die Bildung
von kohärenten und spezifischen gesell
schaftlichen Gruppen bewirkt, also einen
Pluralismus, der sowohl dem Zentralis
mus wie der zentripetalen sozialen Ten
denz ein Ende bereitet.
In jeder Hinsicht handelt es sich um
eine Arbeit ersten Ranges, die von
Scharfblick und Ernsthaftigkeit zeugt,
ohne deswegen für ihre Thesen An
spruch auf unbedingte Gültigkeit zu erhe
ben (269). Vielleicht ist manches zu ein
seitig gezeichnet. Aber gerade deswegen
bereichert die Arbeit die Typologie der
neuen Staaten um ein, wohl einzigarti
ges Muster : Nicht wie überall mehr,
sondern weniger monistische Einheit ist
hier die Forderung, insbesondere also
weniger Homogenität und mehr Hete
rogenität mit Integration der Indivi
duen weniger im Allgemeinen als im
Besonderen.
Darüber hinaus enthält das
Buch zahlreiche wertvolle Einzelheiten,
so daß die Lektüre in jeder Beziehung
Gewinn bringt. Herbert Krüger
4 1 5https://doi.org/10.5771/0506-7286-1970-3-414, am 12.02.2025, 02:12:34
Open Access – - https://www.nomos-elibrary.de/agb
===
English translation
===
The author is the first to give a detailed
pressing, in-depth and impressive
Korean constitutional history of the
It's modern day. In it he discovers two, as
he believes in the disastrous features of Korean
Socialism - "centralism on a homogeneous
==References== The second is that
the first possibility, says the
the complete absence of social
Formations with the exception of the Fa
the millie. He introduces them back to one
rooted anti-pluralist mentality,
every particular feature including Spe
and division of labour.
==References== ==References== 235
==References====External links== Instead of sol
the author discovers that the company
an innumerable isolated, power hungry
individuals who, by all means, have been
a destructive competition
after participation in the one zen
of the government, so that it is possible for the
a kind of "vortex" from the
to the top, which is the reason for the
rules and spoils all life
(cf. 1 68 : " . . . the pattern of atomized
mobility towards central power"; and
269 : " . . . the upgrade streaming of the
==References====External links==) To this Hun
to be able to satisfy the needs of the
not shy away from suspicious.
Once there is to be called an almost
grotesque short term of office
(!!!) so that "!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
in conjunction with the Auffas, the
that the long-term nature of the Office
is indecent. Above all, however,
is to be mentioned in this connection
a phenomenon which the author "coun
cil government" (265). To such
Council rule has been achieved by
the state functions as far as
split as possible and as many as possible
created collective institutions. There's no one
its competence on the part of the Board's
limited to one of these particles, much
more one each council a omnipotence
used for itself ; furthermore,
these councils saw their task in it
to each other, in particular, to each other's
but also the government in its work
to "inhibit", it could happen
that even after one, one can, over and over again,
200 years (sic!) continued discussion
an important question has not yet been resolved.
the decision had been reached.
Only autocrats could help here.
or foreign conquest, as they do
==References====External links==
All these evils, especially the " council
government", even if in the case of
other form, in the view of the
==References==, 269). Health care
he expects only from a decision
to decentralization, which is responsible for the
of coherent and specific society
social groups, i.e. a large number of social
pluralism, which both the centralist and the
like the centripetal social ten
the end of the end.
In every respect, it is a matter of
a work of first rank, which is carried out by
sharp-sightedness and seriousness,
without for this reason for her theses
claim for unconditional validity
==References== Maybe some things are too much
==References==
No comments:
Post a Comment