Anarchist Korea (1920s)

[Forward Union]

Kim Jwa-jin (December 16, 1889 – January 24, 1930), sometimes called the "Korean Makhno" or by his pen name Baekya, played an important role in the Korean Anarchist Movement and in the development of Korean nationalism.

Kim was born to a wealthy family of the Andong Kim lineage in Hongseong County, Chungcheong province. His father was Kim Hyeong-gyu. When Kim was 18, he released 50 families of slaves when he publicly burned the slave registry and provided each family with enough land to live on. This was the first emancipation of slaves in modern Korea.[1]

http://hongseong.go.kr/english/image/hs/hs_04_045.jpg

He left his position of authority after setting up numerous science school in the poorest areas of Korea.

By this time the Korean Anarchist Federation was so large, it had formed an alliance with the anti-imperilist (nationalist) forces and formed a Rebel state in Japenese Manchuria, called Shinmin. Kim supported this revolutionary force and was ellected to be the millitary commander of it's forces in 1929.

The Anarchist Federation waged war on the Japenese imperialists in Korea for years (before kims leadership), and even worked with the Soviet Union in doing so.

The Japenese Government officially blamed the Anarchists for an Earthquake in Tokyo during this war.

Kim Jwa Jin was assasinated by Stalinist agents in 1930, whilst doing repairs to a Grain Mill built by the Korean Anarchist Federation. The Japenese Government then launched a massive assult Shinmin and eventually managed to destroy the Anarchist state.

:star:

http://www.kimjwajin.org/

[Forward Union]

Anarchists and anti-imperialists defending the state of Shinmin
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/3032/image3gk9.jpg

[RedStarOverChina]

Korea had slaves???
edit:


Korea

Indigenous slaves existed in Korea. Slavery was officially abolished with the Gabo Reform of 1894. During the Joseon Dynasty (1392–1910) about 30% to 50% of the Korean population were slaves.[189] Slavery was hereditary, as well as a form of legal punishment.[190] There was a slave class with both government and privately owned slaves, and the government occasionally gave slaves to citizens of higher rank. Privately owned slaves could be inherited as personal property. During poor harvests and famine, many peasants would voluntarily become slaves in order to survive. In the case of private slaves they could buy their freedom.[191][192][193][194]

wow.

[Everyday Anarchy]

Very interesting, William Everard! I love reading tidbits of history like this. Thanks for posting this, I'm going to do some research of my own into this.

Edit:
This site (http://hongseong.go.kr/english/hs/hs_05_04.html) completely leaves out anything relating to Shinmin or the Korean Anarchist Federation. Typical, I believe .go.kr is the equivalent of a .gov website.

[Leo]

Kim Jwa-jin (December 16, 1889 – January 24, 1930) ... played an important role ... in the development of Korean nationalism.

How is this anything positive if not something to be completely ashamed of?

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by Leo [email protected] 12, 2007 11:07 pm

Kim Jwa-jin (December 16, 1889 – January 24, 1930) ... played an important role ... in the development of Korean nationalism.

How is this anything positive if not something to be completely ashamed of?
Depends. I'm not sure exactly what development he made. It may have been an overall positive one. Either way, that wasn't his only achievement, and probably happened after he died.


Very interesting, William Everard! I love reading tidbits of history like this. Thanks for posting this, I'm going to do some research of my own into this.

Post what you find there's really nto a lot out there about this Anarchist Movement. But it seemed fucking important!

[Everyday Anarchy]

Originally posted by Leo [email protected] 12, 2007 05:07 pm

Kim Jwa-jin (December 16, 1889 – January 24, 1930) ... played an important role ... in the development of Korean nationalism.

How is this anything positive if not something to be completely ashamed of?
The way I read it was not that he was specifically nationalist, but led the fight against the Japanese occupation... something that is seen as a major achievement for Korean nationalism.

[gilhyle]

Hard to find much on Korean anarchism...strangely anarchists rarely write about it

[Everyday Anarchy]

Originally posted by [email protected] 12, 2007 05:28 pm
Hard to find much on Korean anarchism...strangely anarchists rarely write about it
Actually, I found a good piece of information on the Korean anarchist movement on flag.blackened.net. Here's the link: http://flag.blackened.net/revolt/talks/korea.html


In the 2,000 years of Korean history there arose movements fighting for peasants rights and for national independence. Within these movements there were tendencies that may be seen as forerunners of modern anarchism, in the same way as we might view the Diggers in the English revolution.
^ There's a reference to the Diggers, for ya William Everard :)

[PRC-UTE]

Originally posted by Leo [email protected] 12, 2007 11:07 pm

Kim Jwa-jin (December 16, 1889 – January 24, 1930) ... played an important role ... in the development of Korean nationalism.

How is this anything positive if not something to be completely ashamed of?
Even if said nationalism was what it took to put an end to slavery?

[Leo]

Even if said nationalism was what it took to put an end to slavery?

Considering that:


Slavery was officially abolished with the Gabo Reform of 1894.

And that:


Kim Jwa-jin [was born in] December 16, 1889

And that he:


played an important role ... in the development of Korean nationalism.

The nationalism he played an important role within did nothing to do with the abolishment of slavery. Slavery was abolished when this guy was five.

[Ismail]

Well if he could in any way cause an earthquake then certainly ending slavery at 5 should be possible. :P

Also this was 1920's Korea and I'm willing to bet that not many people (and 99.9% of Korean peasants) understood concepts like "nationalism is evil" and "everyone is equal" especially after being ruled by Japan. Did it help end Japanese colonialism? Then for fucks sake stop complaining. If he advocated genocide against the Japanese or advocated Korea conquering other nations for the glory of the Korean people then I can see a reason for condemning him, but I seriously doubt this.

[Forward Union]

There is an unusual void in Anarchist literature and study about this. Yet it's probably as significant as Spain 1936 and Ukraine 1917... :unsure:

I'd like to read stuff written by Kim himself. but doubt I'll be able to find anything.

[Devrim]

Originally posted by William [email protected] 10, 2007 05:42 pm
Anarchists and anti-imperialists defending the state of Shinmin
[img]http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/3032/image3gk9.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' class='attach' />

Anarchists defending the state, and fighting under a national flag.

Devrim

[lvleph]

Originally posted by Devrim+December 13, 2007 09:33 am--> (Devrim @ December 13, 2007 09:33 am)
William [email protected] 10, 2007 05:42 pm
Anarchists and anti-imperialists defending the state of Shinmin
[img]http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/3032/image3gk9.jpg' border='0' alt='user posted image' class='attach' />

Anarchists defending the state, and fighting under a national flag.

Devrim [/b]
I don't think they meant State in that way. If it was meant that way...

[Devrim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 02:42 pm
I don't think they meant State in that way. If it was meant that way...
Of course they didn't, and that is not a Korean national flag in the picture either.

Devrim

[RedStarOverChina]

Originally posted by Devrim+December 13, 2007 10:06 am--> (Devrim @ December 13, 2007 10:06 am)
[email protected] 13, 2007 02:42 pm
I don't think they meant State in that way. If it was meant that way...
Of course they didn't, and that is not a Korean national flag in the picture either.

Devrim [/b]
Yeah it is. It's the Korean flag designed by Korean nationalists in exile in China in the beginning of 1900s.

What's the big fuss about working with nationalists anyway? So what if they decided to ally with nationalists to fight against the brutal Japanese occupation? It was the only sensible thing to do.

[Devrim]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 07:00 pm
Yeah it is. It's the Korean flag designed by Korean nationalists in exile in China in the beginning of 1900s.

What's the big fuss about working with nationalists anyway? So what if they decided to ally with nationalists to fight against the brutal Japanese occupation? It was the only sensible thing to do.
Yes, I knew it was. It is anarchists ditching class politics in a cross class alliance with nationalists.

Even if you have no idea what is wrong with it, I suspect that at least some of the anarchists on here have.

Devrim

[RedStarOverChina]

Originally posted by Devrim+December 13, 2007 02:06 pm--> (Devrim @ December 13, 2007 02:06 pm)
[email protected] 13, 2007 07:00 pm
Yeah it is. It's the Korean flag designed by Korean nationalists in exile in China in the beginning of 1900s.

What's the big fuss about working with nationalists anyway? So what if they decided to ally with nationalists to fight against the brutal Japanese occupation? It was the only sensible thing to do.
Yes, I knew it was. It is anarchists ditching class politics in a cross class alliance with nationalists.

Even if you have no idea what is wrong with it, I suspect that at least some of the anarchists on here have.

Devrim [/b]
Geez, what's your problem?

Japan was occupying Korea and butchering Koreans like sheep and you are condemning them for being nationalists? Korean nationalism today is both pathetic and dangerous but back then? It was the main motivation to struggle against Japanese imperialism---without which Japan would have occupied all of Eastern Asia. That was the real danger that Asians were dealing with---not some rhetoric about maintaining anarchist or communist theoretical "purity".

All resistence movements (anarchist or communist) in Asia (and pretty much the rest of the world) are mixed with nationalist sentiments. At the same time they were the ones who really brought positive change to the continent.

Would you say that the Spanish Anarchists during the civil war had no nationalistic sentiments? Of course they did, that's why they coped with the Spanish Bourgeois state instead of abolishing it outright.

[Everyday Anarchy]

Nationalism is something to be fought against, however anti-colonialism is to be supported. It is exactly true that we should not glorify nationalists, we should not be apologetic towards them... however this does not make Kim Jwa-Jin much less respectable and inspiring. Many revolutionaries that we respect today had racist or nationalist tendencies. It's something we need to be aware of and to criticize.

[gilhyle]

Two interesting things in the WSM talk that was linked to this discussion:

He writes that

The main source I have used in Ha Ki-Rak's A History of the Korean Anarchist Movementwhich was published in 1986 by the Korean Anarchist Federation. Apart from beingpoorly translated and chronologically confusing, it is written from the perspective of the more nationalist and reformist tendency in the Korean movement.

This reemphasises that little is written about this by Anarchists.

The second is the following, which may explain why, writing about this is rare:


By August 1929 the anarchists had formed an administration in Shinmin (one of the three Manchurian provinces). Whether this was a government is still a point of contention among anarchists. Organised as the Korean People's Association in Manchuria it declared its aim as "an independent self-governing cooperative system of the Korean people who assembled their full power to save our nation by struggling against Japan". ........ We would expect that the organisation would start at village level and then federate upwards. However the EAPM believed that the war situation made this impossible to apply the principle immediately. In the interim they appointed the staffs and appointed them from the top down.

and this:


The older anti-Japanese guerillas around Kim Jwa-Jin (sometimes called the Korean Makhno) thought it was enough to state their support for anarchism but that they could ignore the Stalinists until national independence was won because only then would real politics come to the forefront.

The point of both quotes is they show 'anarchists' compromising on their ideology in the context of war. These are the kinds of 'anarchists' who systematically get written out of the selective hagiography of anarchism, less concerned as it is to write up the history of compromise and the exercise of revolutionary authority that runs through the past of anarchism and more interested as it is to write only the history of purity.

[bcbm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 13, 2007 06:18 pm
These are the kinds of 'anarchists' who systematically get written out of the selective hagiography of anarchism, less concerned as it is to write up the history of compromise and the exercise of revolutionary authority that runs through the past of anarchism and more interested as it is to write only the history of purity.
Or most anarchists don't know Korean or Korean history. There's plenty of ink spilled on the historical fuck-ups of anarchists by anarchists.

[Devrim]

Originally posted by RedStarOverChina+December 13, 2007 09:03 pm--> (RedStarOverChina @ December 13, 2007 09:03 pm) All resistence movements (anarchist or communist) in Asia (and pretty much the rest of the world) are mixed with nationalist sentiments. At the same time they were the ones who really brought positive change to the continent.

[/b]
Let's look at what happened in the most prominent example in Asia in the 1920s. First the 'Communists' proclaimed an alliance with bourgeois nationalism. The working class was politically disarmed, and led of to die for the nation, and then the nationalists turned on the working class resulting in the massacres of 1927.

Is this what you mean by positive change?


Originally posted by [email protected]
Would you say that the Spanish Anarchists during the civil war had no nationalistic sentiments? Of course they did, that's why they coped with the Spanish Bourgeois state instead of abolishing it outright.

I wouldn't put the reasons down to nationalist sentiments, but the CNT certainly betrayed the working class.


Everyday Anarchy
Nationalism is something to be fought against, however anti-colonialism is to be supported. It is exactly true that we should not glorify nationalists, we should not be apologetic towards them... however this does not make Kim Jwa-Jin much less respectable and inspiring. Many revolutionaries that we respect today had racist or nationalist tendencies. It's something we need to be aware of and to criticize.

What sort of liberal nonsense is this?

Devrim

[Forward Union]

Devrim, national flags are used all the time as resistance flags. One of the first examples of Communism and Anarchism, The True Levellers movement in England, used the St Georges flag. Mexican pesants regularly use the Mexican flag whilst fighting the state and capitalism. The IWW used to have american flags on its marches. It's meaningless. I don't care if the Anarchists used the Korean flag in the war.

There seems to be concern over whether they set up a state, that's of far more interest to me than whether they had an alliance with a faction that had the same immediate goals.

But I can't find any serious infomation on them. A temporary alliance with progressive, anti-imperialist nationalists is in my view, regretable, but shows a form of moderate pragmatism neccisary in times of war. This is particularly acceptable, if in doing so, anarchist organisational ideas, and class analysis are brought into the nationalist movement.

Also, on entirely millitary terms, the anarchists were probably not capable of attacking the Japenese, or defending the gains they had made through their project.

What is interesting, is there seems to have been no revolution from which this giant anarchist movement formed. Kim Jwa Jin seems to have just hijacked the class conciouss section of the Anti-imperialist movement, after making various reforms from above. I'd love to hear in his own words what he thought of the idea of working class revolution, across national borders, and the dangers of working with national liberation movements. Perhaps he saw no danger, perhaps he was incredibly uncomfortable with the situation.

[Devrim]

Originally posted by William Everard+December 14, 2007 12:00 pm--> (William Everard @ December 14, 2007 12:00 pm) A temporary alliance with progressive, anti-imperialist nationalists is in my view, regretable, but shows a form of moderate pragmatism neccisary in times of war. This is particularly acceptable, if in doing so, anarchist organisational ideas, and class analysis are brought into the nationalist movement.

[/b]
So what you are saying here is that in times of war it is 'acceptable' for socialists to advocate that the working class join with the bourgeoisie in defence of the nation.

We reject this idea completely. For us internationalism is the corner stone of communist politics. It is not something that can be abandoned in favour of a form of 'moderate pragmatism'.


William Everard
There seems to be concern over whether they set up a state, that's of far more interest to me than whether they had an alliance with a faction that had the same immediate goals.

It seems to me that there is some fetishism of the word 'state' here. The reason that communist are opposed to nationalist organisation is because they divide the working class, and ultimately send the working class off to kill other workers in defence of national capital, not merely because they want to set up a state. The working class can not make alliances with the bourgeoisie, and struggle for the interests of the bourgeoisie while maintaining its independence.


What is interesting, is there seems to have been no revolution from which this giant anarchist movement formed. Kim Jwa Jin seems to have just hijacked the class conciouss section of the Anti-imperialist movement, after making various reforms from above. I'd love to hear in his own words what he thought of the idea of working class revolution, across national borders, and the dangers of working with national liberation movements. Perhaps he saw no danger, perhaps he was incredibly uncomfortable with the situation.

I know nothing at all about these events, but I would be surprised if there was any class base at all to his anarchism. I imagine that he would be some sort of 'Maoesque' bourgeois revolutionary.


national flags are used all the time as resistance flags. One of the first examples of Communism and Anarchism, The True Levellers movement in England, used the St Georges flag. Mexican pesants regularly use the Mexican flag whilst fighting the state and capitalism. The IWW used to have american flags on its marches. It's meaningless. I don't care if the Anarchists used the Korean flag in the war.

I would say that it is a symbol of the nation. I think that the English revolution belongs to a very different period than we live in today. With regards to the Mexican example, I think that you should look again at its class base. No sort of oppertunism surprises me from the IWW.


How would you feel if people came to a demo in England calling on you to rally around the union jack in defence of Britain?

Devrim

[gilhyle]

Originally posted by black coffee black metal+December 14, 2007 01:08 am--> (black coffee black metal @ December 14, 2007 01:08 am)
[email protected] 13, 2007 06:18 pm
These are the kinds of 'anarchists' who systematically get written out of the selective hagiography of anarchism, less concerned as it is to write up the history of compromise and the exercise of revolutionary authority that runs through the past of anarchism and more interested as it is to write only the history of purity.
Or most anarchists don't know Korean or Korean history. There's plenty of ink spilled on the historical fuck-ups of anarchists by anarchists. [/b]
That is the point....the history of anarchism is written from the perspective that these exercises of authority were all 'fuck-ups'. Actually, I think the history of anarchism contains many very salutory lessons of anarchists in struggle realising again and again that the purist approach is just wrong....and then getting written out of the history of anarchism or written off as 'fuck ups'.

Thats very easy to do given that all revolutionary struggles in the 20th century ended in failure (whether involving anarchists or not). But its not very substantial. If anarchists in struggle go through the same process again and again of either collapsing into bourgeois poltical positions, standing to one side from struggle, or joining communists, that tells a lot.

Of course you can write it off since it was invaraibly part of a revolutioon that was defeated. But the detail often tells a more interesting story. Im with william everard in wishing there was more available on what the experience of these anarchists was.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 15, 2007 11:56 am
So what you are saying here is that in times of war it is 'acceptable' for socialists to advocate that the working class join with the bourgeoisie in defence of the nation.

No but then again, The Korean Anarchist Federation didn't do that


The Korean Anarchist Federation in China was formed in April 1924. and published the "Korean Revolution Manifesto". It was militantly anti-imperialist "we declare that the burglar politics of Japan is the enemy for our nation's existence and that it is our proper right to overthrow the imperialist Japan by a revolutionary means". It went on to stress the to do more than merely exchange rulers, pointing out the difference between a political revolution and a social revolution. It had no doubts about the role of anarchists, it laid emphasis on the leading role of the anarchists in a revolutionary situation. The Federation began to produce papers like Recapture and Justice Bulletin.

By 1928 the spread of libertarian politics allowed the Korean Anarchists to organise the Eastern Anarchist Federation with comrades from China, Vietnam, Taiwan and Japan - which published a bulletin, Dong-Bang (The East). The "Manifesto" was adopted by the Eastern Federation as its formal programme.




I know nothing at all about these events, but I would be surprised if there was any class base at all to his anarchism. I imagine that he would be some sort of 'Maoesque' bourgeois revolutionary.

Who knows. According to the WSM "By November 1929 there had been a huge growth and the Korean Anarchist Communist Federation was formed as a national organisation. As part of the anti Japanese resistance it was a totally underground body. This should not lead anyone into thinking that it was small or lacking in widespread support." and also they had drawn a lot of members from the 3.1 movement, which was a mass workers movement. Also:

"In Kwanseo and Kwanbul province I have found mention of at least eight more groups. Almost all the groups around the country were involved in a mixture of producing leaflets & papers, oranising trade unions and engaging in resistance to the occupation.

By this time we know that most areas could boast of an active group. There were also organisations in Manchuria and amongst exiles in China and Japan."


I would say that it is a symbol of the nation. I think that the English revolution belongs to a very different period than we live in today. With regards to the Mexican example, I think that you should look again at its class base. No sort of oppertunism surprises me from the IWW.

Does Korea in teh 1920s not also belong in a very different period? The class base of the Mexican example is largely prole, and peasentry. I am of course talking about the EZLN and the APPO.


How would you feel if people came to a demo in England calling on you to rally around the union jack in defence of Britain?

Well I have prejudices about such people. England is after all, not in any immediate danger as a nation.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by gilhyle+December 15, 2007 03:46 pm--> (gilhyle @ December 15, 2007 03:46 pm)
Originally posted by black coffee black [email protected] 14, 2007 01:08 am

[email protected] 13, 2007 06:18 pm
These are the kinds of 'anarchists' who systematically get written out of the selective hagiography of anarchism, less concerned as it is to write up the history of compromise and the exercise of revolutionary authority that runs through the past of anarchism and more interested as it is to write only the history of purity.
Or most anarchists don't know Korean or Korean history. There's plenty of ink spilled on the historical fuck-ups of anarchists by anarchists.
That is the point....the history of anarchism is written from the perspective that these exercises of authority were all 'fuck-ups'. Actually, I think the history of anarchism contains many very salutory lessons of anarchists in struggle realising again and again that the purist approach is just wrong....and then getting written out of the history of anarchism or written off as 'fuck ups'.

Thats very easy to do given that all revolutionary struggles in the 20th century ended in failure (whether involving anarchists or not). But its not very substantial. If anarchists in struggle go through the same process again and again of either collapsing into bourgeois poltical positions, standing to one side from struggle, or joining communists, that tells a lot.

Of course you can write it off since it was invaraibly part of a revolutioon that was defeated. But the detail often tells a more interesting story. Im with william everard in wishing there was more available on what the experience of these anarchists was. [/b]
Platformist!!!! :P

[Devrim]

Originally posted by Korean Anarchist Federation+--> (Korean Anarchist Federation)we declare that the burglar politics of Japan is the enemy for our nation's existence [/b]

This sounds like the language of national defence to me.


Originally posted by William [email protected]
Who knows. According to the WSM "By November 1929 there had been a huge growth and the Korean Anarchist Communist Federation was formed as a national organisation. As part of the anti Japanese resistance it was a totally underground body. This should not lead anyone into thinking that it was small or lacking in widespread support." and also they had drawn a lot of members from the 3.1 movement, which was a mass workers movement. Also:

"In Kwanseo and Kwanbul province I have found mention of at least eight more groups. Almost all the groups around the country were involved in a mixture of producing leaflets & papers, oranising trade unions and engaging in resistance to the occupation.

By this time we know that most areas could boast of an active group. There were also organisations in Manchuria and amongst exiles in China and Japan."

So you are admitting to not knowing about it. I really would be more careful who you bigging up when you don't really know what they were doing.

What for example does 'engaging in resistance to the occupation' mean?


William Everard
]Does Korea in teh 1920s not also belong in a very different period?

No I don't think that it does. I think that it belongs to the same period that we are in today.


The class base of the Mexican example is largely prole, and peasentry. I am of course talking about the EZLN and the APPO.

I wasn't actually talking about their sociological base, I was talking about the class base of their politics. Nevertheless, I don't think even in sociological terms the EZLN is a proletarian organisation. Its politics certainly aren't, but it is a bit off the point, so I would rather leave it to another thread.

Devrim