Showing posts with label Rumi. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rumi. Show all posts

2018/03/29

Brené Brown 2] Rising Strong: How the Ability to Reset Transforms the Way We Live

Rising Strong: How the Ability to Reset Transforms the Way We Live, Love, Parent, and Lead: Brené Brown: 9780812985801: Amazon.com: Books

Amazon.com Review

An Amazon Best Book of August 2015: You may be someone who looks at Rising Strong and says, “oh, that’s not really for me….” Translation: I don’t read or need that self-help stuff, give me a good novel and go away. But Brené Brown isn’t a spiritual guru, or someone who’s risen from the ashes to tell us how to live our lives. She’s a researcher. And Rising Strong isn’t some feel-good-get-over-it regimen; it’s more investigative reporting on the common denominators of people who whole-heartedly get back up and go another round after getting their asses handed to them in big and small ways. In her straightforward Texan voice, Brown sets the table for us to get curious about life’s sticky moments and invites us to serve ourselves a plate of what she’s learned in over a decade of research. I don’t know about you, but I’m not trying to be famous or come up with a cure that will change the world, I just want to live happily and keep getting back in the arena whether I’ve been rocked on my heels, knocked to my knees, or gone face down in the dirt. For my money, seeing how I can do that better is worth reading about. – Seira Wilson--This text refers to the Hardcover edition.

-------------
Review

“[Brené Brown’s] research and work have given us a new vocabulary, a way to talk with each other about the ideas and feelings and fears we’ve all had but haven’t quite known how to articulate. . . . Brené empowers us each to be a little more courageous.”—The Huffington Post

“With a fresh perspective that marries research and humor, Brown offers compassion while delivering thought-provoking ideas about relationships—with others and with oneself.”—Publishers Weekly

“It is inevitable—we will fall. We will fail. We will not know how to react or what to do. No matter how or when it happens, we will all have a choice—do we get up or not? Thankfully, Brené Brown is there with an outstretched arm to help us up.”—Simon Sinek, author of Start with Why and Leaders Eat Last

----
About the Author

Dr. Brené Brown, PhD, LMSW, is a research professor at the University of Houston where she holds the Huffington Foundation-Brené Brown Endowed Chair at The Graduate College of Social Work.

She has spent the past sixteen years studying courage, vulnerability, shame, and empathy and is the author of three #1 New York Times bestsellers – The Gifts of Imperfection, Daring Greatly, and Rising Strong. Her latest book, Braving the Wilderness: The Quest for True Belonging and The Courage to Stand Alone, will be released Fall 2017.

Brené’s TED talk, "The Power of Vulnerability," is one of the top five most viewed TED talks in the world with over 30 million views.

In addition to her research and writing, Brené is the Founder and CEO of BRAVE LEADERS INC - an organization that brings evidence-based courage building programs to teams, leaders, entrepreneurs, change makers, and culture shifters. Brené lives in Houston, Texas, with her husband, Steve, and their children, Ellen and Charlie.

----
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.


One

The Physics of Vulnerability

When it comes to human behavior, emotions, and thinking, the adage “The more I learn, the less I know” is right on. I’ve learned to give up my pursuit of netting certainty and pinning it to the wall. Some days I miss pretending that certitude is within reach. My husband, Steve, always knows I’m mourning the loss of my young-­researcher quest when I am holed up in my study listening to David Gray’s song “My Oh My” on repeat. My favorite lyrics are:

What on earth is going on in my head?

You know I used to be so sure.

You know I used to be so definite.

And it’s not just the lyrics; it’s the way that he sings the word def.in.ite. Sometimes, it sounds to me as if he’s mocking the arrogance of believing that we can ever know everything, and other times it sounds like he’s pissed off that we can’t. Either way, singing along makes me feel better. Music always makes me feel less alone in the mess.

While there are really no hard-­and-­fast absolutes in my field, there are truths about shared experiences that deeply resonate with what we believe and know. For example, the Roosevelt quote that anchors my research on vulnerability and daring gave birth to three truths for me:

I want to be in the arena. I want to be brave with my life. And when we make the choice to dare greatly, we sign up to get our asses kicked. We can choose courage or we can choose comfort, but we can’t have both. Not at the same time.

Vulnerability is not winning or losing; it’s having the courage to show up and be seen when we have no control over the outcome. Vulnerability is not weakness; it’s our greatest measure of courage.

A lot of cheap seats in the arena are filled with people who never venture onto the floor. They just hurl mean-­spirited criticisms and put-­downs from a safe distance. The problem is, when we stop caring what people think and stop feeling hurt by cruelty, we lose our ability to connect. But when we’re defined by what people think, we lose the courage to be vulnerable. Therefore, we need to be selective about the feedback we let into our lives. For me, if you’re not in the arena getting your ass kicked, I’m not interested in your feedback.

I don’t think of these as “rules,” but they have certainly become guiding principles for me. I believe there are also some basic tenets about being brave, risking vulnerability, and overcoming adversity that are useful to understand before we get started. I think of these as the basic laws of emotional physics: simple but powerful truths that help us understand why courage is both transformational and rare. These are the rules of engagement for rising strong.

1. If we are brave enough often enough, we will fall; this is the physics of vulnerability. When we commit to showing up and risking falling, we are actually committing to falling. Daring is not saying, “I’m willing to risk failure.” Daring is saying, “I know I will eventually fail and I’m still all in.” Fortune may favor the bold, but so does failure.

2. Once we fall in the service of being brave, we can never go back. We can rise up from our failures, screwups, and falls, but we can never go back to where we stood before we were brave or before we fell. Courage transforms the emotional structure of our being. This change often brings a deep sense of loss. During the process of rising, we sometimes find ourselves homesick for a place that no longer exists. We want to go back to that moment before we walked into the arena, but there’s nowhere to go back to. What makes this more difficult is that now we have a new level of awareness about what it means to be brave. We can’t fake it anymore. We now know when we’re showing up and when we’re hiding out, when we are living our values and when we are not. Our new awareness can also be invigorating—­it can reignite our sense of purpose and remind us of our commitment to wholeheartedness. Straddling the tension that lies between wanting to go back to the moment before we risked and fell and being pulled forward to even greater courage is an inescapable part of rising strong.

3. This journey belongs to no one but you; however, no one successfully goes it alone. Since the beginning of time, people have found a way to rise after falling, yet there is no well-­worn path leading the way. All of us must make our own way, exploring some of the most universally shared experiences while also navigating a solitude that makes us feel as if we are the first to set foot in uncharted regions. And to add to the complexity, in lieu of the sense of safety to be found in a well-­traveled path or a constant companion, we must learn to depend for brief moments on fellow travelers for sanctuary, support, and an occasional willingness to walk side by side. For those of us who fear being alone, coping with the solitude inherent in this process is a daunting challenge. For those of us who prefer to cordon ourselves off from the world and heal alone, the requirement for connection—­of asking for and receiving help—­becomes the challenge.

4. We’re wired for story. In a culture of scarcity and perfectionism, there’s a surprisingly simple reason we want to own, integrate, and share our stories of struggle. We do this because we feel the most alive when we’re connecting with others and being brave with our stories—­it’s in our biology. The idea of storytelling has become ubiquitous. It’s a platform for everything from creative movements to marketing strategies. But the idea that we’re “wired for story” is more than a catchy phrase. Neuroeconomist Paul Zak has found that hearing a story—­a narrative with a beginning, middle, and end—­causes our brains to release cortisol and oxytocin. These chemicals trigger the uniquely human abilities to connect, empathize, and make meaning. Story is literally in our DNA.

5. Creativity embeds knowledge so that it can become practice. We move what we’re learning from our heads to our hearts through our hands. We are born makers, and creativity is the ultimate act of integration—­it is how we fold our experiences into our being. Over the course of my career, the question I’ve been asked more than any other is, “How do I take what I’m learning about myself and actually change how I’m living?” After teaching graduate social work students for eighteen years; developing, implementing, and evaluating two curricula over the past eight years; leading more than seventy thousand students through online learning courses; and interviewing hundreds of creatives, I’ve come to believe that creativity is the mechanism that allows learning to seep into our being and become practice. The Asaro tribe of Indonesia and Papua New Guinea has a beautiful saying: “Knowledge is only a rumor until it lives in the muscle.” What we understand and learn about rising strong is only rumor until we live it and integrate it through some form of creativity so that it becomes part of us.

6. Rising strong is the same process whether you’re navigating personal or professional struggles. I’ve spent equal time researching our personal and our professional lives, and while most of us would like to believe that we can have home and work versions of rising strong, we can’t. Whether you’re a young man dealing with heartbreak, a retired couple struggling with disappointment, or a manager trying to recover after a failed project, the practice is the same. We have no sterile business remedy for having fallen. We still need to dig into the grit of issues like resentment, grief, and forgiveness. As neuroscientist Antonio Damasio reminds us, humans are not either thinking machines or feeling machines, but rather feeling machines that think. Just because you’re standing in your office or your classroom or your studio doesn’t mean that you can take the emotion out of this process. You cannot. Remember those badasses I referenced in the introduction? One more thing they have in common is that they don’t try to avoid emotions—­they are feeling machines who think and engage with their own emotions and the emotions of the people they love, parent, and lead. The most transformative and resilient leaders that I've worked with over the course of my career had three things in common: First, they recognize the central role that relationships and story play in culture and strategy, and they stay curious about their own emotions, thoughts, and behaviors. Second, they understand and stay curious about how emotions, thoughts, and behaviors are connected in the people they lead, and how those factors affect relationships and perception. And, third, they have the ability and willingness to lean in to discomfort and vulnerability.

7. Comparative suffering is a function of fear and scarcity. Falling down, screwing up, and facing hurt often lead to bouts of second-­guessing our judgment, our self-­trust, and even our worthiness. I am enough can slowly turn into Am I really enough? If there’s one thing I’ve learned over the past decade, it’s that fear and scarcity immediately trigger comparison, and even pain and hurt are not immune to being assessed and ranked. My husband died and that grief is worse than your grief over an empty nest. I’m not allowed to feel disappointed about being passed over for promotion when my friend just found out that his wife has cancer. You’re feeling shame for forgetting your son’s school play? Please—­that’s a first-­world problem; there are people dying of starvation every minute. The opposite of scarcity is not abundance; the opposite of scarcity is simply enough. Empathy is not finite, and compassion is not a pizza with eight slices. When you practice empathy and compassion with someone, there is not less of these qualities to go around. There’s more. Love is the last thing we need to ration in this world. The refugee in Syria doesn’t benefit more if you conserve your kindness only for her and withhold it from your neighbor who’s going through a divorce. Yes, perspective is critical. But I'm a firm believer that complaining is okay as long as we piss and moan with a little perspective. Hurt is hurt, and every time we honor our own struggle and the struggles of others by responding with empathy and compassion, the healing that results affects all of us.

8. You can’t engineer an emotional, vulnerable, and courageous process into an easy, one-­size-­fits-­all formula. In fact, I think attempting to sell people an easy fix for pain is the worst kind of snake oil. Rising Strong doesn’t offer a solution or a recipe or step-­by-­step guidance. It presents a theory—­grounded in data—­that explains the basic social process that men and women experience as they are working to rise after falling. It is a map meant to orient you to the most significant patterns and themes that emerged from the research. In my interviews with others and my own experiences, I’ve seen the process take twenty minutes, and I’ve seen it take twenty years. I’ve seen people get stuck, set up camp, and stay in one place for a decade. While the process does seem to follow a few patterns, it presents no formula or strictly linear approach. It’s a back-­and-­forth action—­an iterative and intuitive process that takes different shapes for different people. There is not always a relationship between effort and outcome in this process. You can’t game it or perfect it so it’s fast and easy. You have to feel your way through most of it. The contribution I hope to make is to put language around the process, to bring into our awareness some of the issues that we may need to grapple with if we want to rise strong, and to simply let people know that they’re not alone.

9. Courage is contagious. Rising strong changes not just you, but also the people around you. To bear witness to the human potential for transformation through vulnerability, courage, and tenacity can be either a clarion call for more daring or a painful mirror for those of us stuck in the aftermath of the fall, unwilling or unable to own our stories. Your experience can profoundly affect the people around you whether you’re aware of it or not. Franciscan friar Richard Rohr writes, “You know after any truly initiating experience that you are part of a much bigger whole. Life is not about you henceforward, but you are about life.”

10. Rising strong is a spiritual practice. Getting back on our feet does not require religion, theology, or doctrine. However, without exception, the concept of spirituality emerged from the data as a critical component of resilience and overcoming struggle. I crafted this definition of spirituality based on the data I’ve collected over the past decade: Spirituality is recognizing and celebrating that we are all inextricably connected to one another by a power greater than all of us, and that our connection to that power and to one another is grounded in love and belonging. Practicing spirituality brings a sense of perspective, meaning, and purpose to our lives. Some of us call that power greater than ourselves God. Some do not. Some people celebrate their spirituality in churches, synagogues, mosques, or other houses of worship, while others find divinity in solitude, through meditation, or in nature. For example, I come from a long line of folks who believe that fishing is church, and one of my closest friends believes that scuba diving is the holiest of experiences. As it turns out, our expressions of spirituality are as diverse as we are. When our intentions and actions are guided by spirituality—­our belief in our interconnectedness and love—­our everyday experiences can be spiritual practices. We can transform teaching, leading, and parenting into spiritual practices. Asking for and receiving help can also be spiritual practices. Storytelling and creating can be spiritual practices, because they cultivate awareness. While these activities can be spiritual practices, it appears that rising strong after falling must be a spiritual practice. Rising demands the foundational beliefs of connection and requires wrestling with perspective, meaning, and purpose. I recently came across this quote on Liz Gilbert's Instagram feed—and I think it sums this up perfectly: “Grace will take you places hustling can’t.”

----

Two

Civilization Stops at the Waterline

I once made a map of my heart, and smack-­dab in the center of that map I drew Lake Travis. Nestled in the gorgeous Texas Hill Country, right on the western edge of Austin, the lake is a sixty-­five-­mile-­long reservoir of the Colorado River. It is a place of rocky banks, breathtaking cliffs, and mesquite trees, all surrounding cold turquoise water.

I spent every summer of my childhood at Lake Travis. It’s where I learned how to fish for perch and largemouth bass, run a catfish trotline, whittle, build tree houses, and set a proper table. My great-­aunt Lorenia and her husband, Uncle Joe, had a house in Volente. Back then the area around the lake was rural, home to country folk with trucks and fishing poles who didn’t consider themselves residents of Austin—­they just lived “at the lake.” Today the same area is considered a suburb of Austin and studded with mansions and gated neighborhoods.

Aunt Bea lived next door to Aunt Lorenia, and Ma and Pa Baldwin lived in the next house down with their daughter and son-­in-­law, Edna Earl and Walter. Edna Earl and Aunt Lorenia were best friends until they died. I spent hours running barefoot from house to house, screen doors slamming behind me. I’d play cards with Aunt Bea, then run back to Aunt Lorenia’s to bake a pie. I would collect rocks and catch fireflies with Ma and Pa. Edna Earl loved to listen to my knock-­knock jokes.

Aunt Lorenia was the local Avon lady. Helping her pack up the goods and “work her route” was the highlight of my summers. From the time I was in fourth grade, we’d jump in the pickup, her on the driver’s side and me in the passenger seat with my Red Ryder BB gun, the bags of cosmetics, perfumes, and creams piled between us. I was in charge of the lipstick samples—­a shiny vinyl box filled with what seemed like hundreds of tiny white tubes of lipstick in every imaginable color and formulation.

We’d travel down long gravel roads, then park at a customer’s metal gate. Aunt Lorenia would get out first to open the gate and check for wild animals and rattlesnakes. Once she’d made her assessment, she’d yell back, “Bring the lipstick. Leave the gun.” Or “Bring the lipstick. Grab the gun.” I’d slide down out of the truck, lipstick and sometimes Red Ryder in hand, and we’d walk up to the house.

After long mornings of delivering Avon, we’d make sandwiches, pack them up, and grab a handful of worms from the worm farm Uncle Joe had made in a converted 1930s Westinghouse Coca-­Cola ice chest in their backyard. With our lunch and bait, we’d head down to the dock to fish and float in inner tubes on the lake. I was never happier anywhere in my life than I was floating around on Lake Travis. I can still close my eyes and remember what it felt like to drift along in my tube, feeling the warm sun on my skin as I watched dragonflies skip along the water and kicked away perch nibbling at my toes.

The Big Door Prize

Lake Travis was magic for me—­the kind of magic you want to share with your own kids. So, when Steve and I were planning our 2012 summer vacation, we decided to rent a house about half an hour from Aunt Lorenia and Uncle Joe’s. We were excited because it was the first time we had blocked out such a long stretch for a vacation—­we’d be gone for two whole weeks. Lawless one-­week vacations are fine, but our family functions better with a few limits in place. So we decided for this vacation that we’d monitor technology with the kids, keep reasonable bedtimes, cook and eat relatively healthy meals, and work out as often as possible. Our siblings and parents were coming to spend time with us over the course of the vacation, so we put everyone on notice about the “healthy vacation” plans. Flurries of emails detailing meal planning and grocery lists ensued.

The rental house was tucked away along a deepwater cove on the lake and had a long stretch of stairs leading down to an old dock with a corrugated tin roof. Steve and I committed to swimming across the cove every day of our vacation. It was about five hundred yards each way. The day before we left, I went out and bought a new Speedo and replaced my goggles. It had been a long time since Steve and I had swum together. Twenty-­five years, to be exact. We met when we both were lifeguarding and coaching swimming. While I still swim every week, it’s more of a “toning” endeavor for me. Steve, on the other hand, was a competitive swimmer in high school, played club water polo in college, and is still a serious swimmer. I gauge the differences in our current abilities this way: He still does flip turns. I touch and go these days.

Early one morning, before any of our tribe was up, Steve and I headed down to the dock. My sisters and their families were visiting, so we felt comfortable leaving the kids up at the house. We dove in and started our trek across the cove. About halfway across, we both stopped to perform the basic open-­water swimming check for boats. As we treaded water and looked for lake traffic, our eyes met. I was overwhelmed by gratitude for the surrounding beauty and the gift of finding myself swimming in my magic lake with the guy I met in the water some twenty-­five years ago. Feeling the intense vulnerability that always accompanies deep joy for me, I let my sentiments roam free, tenderly telling Steve, “I’m so glad we decided to do this together. It’s beautiful out here.” Steve is so much better at putting himself out there that I prepared myself for an equally gushing response. Instead he flashed a noncommittal half smile and replied, “Yeah. Water’s good.” Then he started swimming again.

We were only about fifteen feet apart. Didn’t he hear me? I thought. Maybe he just heard something other than what I said. Maybe my unexpected touchy-feely-ness took him off guard, and he was so overwhelmed with love that he was rendered speechless? Whatever the case, it was weird and I didn’t like it. My emotional reaction was embarrassment, with shame rising.

----


dinglefest
VINE VOICE
5.0 out of 5 stars
A bold call to fall, get up, and try again
July 12, 2015

This book definitely works as a standalone piece, but it's meant to build upon her prior works. As Brene shares in the first chapter, the progression of her works is that the first book, http://www.amazon.com/The-Gifts-Imperfection-Supposed-Embrace/dp/159285849X, has the message "Be you," while the next one, http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1592408419/, is a call to "Be all in." This book? "Fall. Get up. Try again."

This isn't another book telling you it's okay with fail. No, the assumption is that you have failed or will do so in the not too distant future. What will you do when it's time to get back up? In the author's words, "my goal for this book is to slow down the falling and rising processes: to bring into our awareness all the choices that unfurl in front of us during those moments of discomfort and hurt, and to explore the consequences of those choices." In this book, she uses stories and research, but unlike previous books, many of the stories in this one are her own personal ones. That makes it feel a little less like a book and a little more like an encouraging yet tough-love conversation with a trusted friend or mentor.

Truth and Dare: An Introduction
This part of the book got me a little nervous, if I'm honest. It was here I realized that this book was all about drilling down deep into the most difficult and uncomfortable moments in our lives, getting honest, and holding ourselves accountable to move forward in the after. I wasn't sure I wanted in on all of that. It seemed hard and dirty and messy and, well, uncomfortable. For starters, she dives into the idea that failure is painful, poignantly pointing out that our celebration of redemption often skips over the real hurts that needed redemption in the first place. We're guilty of "gold-plating grit," she writes, as we make failure seem fashionable without acknowledging the inherent desperation, shame, and dismay. Then enters my favorite Brenéism from this book: "the [awesome] deficit." What we need - and lack - is "a critical mass of [awesome people] who are willing to dare, fall, feel their way through tough emotion, and rise again" instead of just glossing over the pain or stuffing it down deep or taking it out on other people. (The bracketed word above isn't what she wrote, but Amazon's review guidelines won't publish a review with the real word. It's bad plus a synonym for donkey.)

Chapter 1: The Physics of Vulnerability
Here, vulnerability is presented as courage rather than weakness. Just as I remember the laws of physics from high school, Brené offers a new twist: if we are brave enough often enough, we will fall. That's what the physics of vulnerability is. Being brave and falling changes us for the better, while the individual path can be isolating and the need to ask for help challenging. As she writes about our being wired for story, I couldn't help but think of two powerful books (both from a Christian perspective, FYI, in case that's not your thing): Nish Weiseth's http://www.amazon.com/Speak-Your-Story-Change-World/dp/0310338174/ and Annie Down's http://www.amazon.com/Lets-All-Be-Brave-Everything/dp/031033795X. The most powerful point from this chapter, though, is that comparative suffering is detrimental: hurt is hurt, and love is needed in response without ration.

Chapter 2: Civilization Stops at the Waterline
The title of this chapter comes from a Hunter S. Thompson quotes. But the waterline is also a call to a powerful story Brené uses to open this chapters, about her husband and a morning swim and a vulnerable conversation for both of them. Then she lays out a story-telling paradigm - borrowed from Pixar - to apply to our lives in how we deal with the conflict parts in our real-life stories. This is where the meat of the book emerges. The rising strong process is (1) the reckoning, as we walk into our story, (2) the rumble, as we own our story, and (3) the revolution as we transform how we live as a result of our story. That's how we can rise strong from our failures.

The next several chapters build on that process...

Chapter 3: Owning Our Stories
This is where Brene challenges us as readers to accept or turn down the invitation to own our stories, rather than minimizing, compartmentalizing, hiding, or editing them. Owning our stories also means we're not defined by them or denying them. They are ours. Then to do so, the three steps begin...

Chapter 4: The Reckoning
As we reckon our stories, Brené pushes readers to feel and recognize our emotions and then get curious enough about them to dig a little deeper. Doing so, she writes, keeps us from offloading our hurts in a variety of unproductive ways: lashing out our hurts, bouncing our hurts away as if they don't matter, numbing our hurts through one or more methods, stockpiling our hurts by keeping everything inside, or getting stuck in our hurt. In this chapter, she also offers amazing strategies for reckoning with emotion, and I know I'll botch them if I even attempt to summarize them.

Chapter 5: The Rumble
In this chapter, we reexamine our stories, diving deeper to mine for truths, including errors in our own first retelling of the failure tale.

Chapter 6: Sewer Rats and Scofflaws
This chapter takes the rumble a bit further with discussions of boundaries, integrity, and generosity.

Chapter 7: The Brave and the Brokenhearted
This chapter as a whole is too meaty to succinctly summarize in this review beyond the subtitle: "rumbling with expectations, disappointment, resentment, heartbreak, connection, grief, forgiveness, compassion, and empathy." On a personal note, my heart jumped and then sank and then fluttered when I got to this chapter. For reasons not relevant to this review, I'm finding myself to be the brave and brokenhearted this week, and it's hard. I saw the title and my heart jumped as I thought, This is the one for me, my current faceplant situation. Then I read the subtitle and my heart sank as I thought, But Brené isn't going to make this easy, because it isn't easy and I'm sure there aren't shortcuts, plus she's been telling me to feel and I don't really want to right now. Finally, my heart fluttered, knowing this was part of my rumbling. I needed to drive forward to rise strong.

Chapter 8: Easy Mark
This chapter continues to expand on the concept of the rumble - which makes sense, because Brené states in chapter 2 that the second day/stage/point is the most important in the process. In her reckoning-rumbling-revolution paradigm, then, it makes sense to dissect rumbling the most. This chapter's subtitle also describes much of the content: "rumbling with need, connection, judgment, self-worth, privilege, and asking for help."

Chapter 9: Composting Failure
In this chapter, Brené dives deeper once more into the rumble, this time with the subtitle: "rumbling with fear, shame, perfectionism, accountability, trust, failure, and regret."

Chapter 10: You Got To Dance With Them That Brung You
Yep, another dive deep chapter on rumbling, this time "rumbling with shame, identity, and nostalgia." This one had a lot of gut punch for me, and Brené - at the risk of looking like a brat - shared a vulnerable story that helped me get vulnerable with myself in return in much needed ways.

Chapter 11: The Revolution
The revolution is what comes after the rumbling. It's the act of rising strong, but it can't be done before all the prior work. Revolution is the act of intentionally choosing authenticity and worthiness as an act of resistance in this world. With this the last chapter, Brené closes it out with a poem by Nayyirah Waheed, ending with "we are rising strong."

This book is a bold call to fall, get up, and try again. May we all rise strong.
Read less
Comment| 381 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
----


AmazonCustomer

3.0 out of 5 star
I'm a Fan, But This Book Missed the MarkAugust 28, 2015
Format: Hardcover

I have loved Brene Brown's books but this one didn't resonate. Too many personal anecdotes and examples that didn't apply. I got tired of her "cussing" and while I appreciate that she's proud of being from Texas, a list of why she's a Texan didn't apply to this book. I felt it was something that would have worked better on her blog. Brown's other personal examples of people around her "making up" things, her hatred of some poor woman she had to room with at a conference, and her drawn out story about a vulnerable moment with her husband seemed like a stretch she used to try and illustrate a point. They fell short.

The same is true for the "from the research" stories she told. They were long, drawn out, and overly forced to fit into her point. This PAINS ME to say this, because I have loved just about everything else she's done or written. In fact, I'd probably give this two stars if it wasn't her. I appreciate this effort but it really seemed like she didn't have enough material to make this book a helpful, practical reference. If you're looking to really "rise strong" and start again I would recommend Daring Greatly instead.
Comment| 351 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
----


Kelly

2.0 out of 5 starsDisappointedJune 8, 2016
Format: Hardcover|Verified Purchase

I love Brene and was inspired to buy this after watching her Oprah interview about this. Pretty much everything I needed to know was in the interview. This book seems to just say the same thing over and over. It seemed like she tried to stretch out what could have been a blog topic into a book. There was no need for a book. Very hard to get into. Her other books are much better.
Comment| 10 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
----


Taylor Ellwood

VINE VOICE
5.0 out of 5 starsHow to reset and rise strongDecember 16, 2017
Format: Paperback|Verified Purchase

In Rising Strong, Brene Brown explores how to reset your life when you've experienced adversity. This book was very timely for me to read because of some tough experiences I've had n this last year. Reading through it gave me valuable techniques to draw on as I work through those experiences. It's helped me work through some tough emotions and behavior patterns and provided me a way forward. I'd highly recommend this book to anyone dealing with some life changing struggles, who needs some guidance on how to move forward, but also to anyone who wants to improve how they work through difficult situations.
Comment| One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
----


Kleinhaus

4.0 out of 5 stars
Brene Brown is one of my favorite authors. This is the third book I have ...January 20, 2018
Format: Paperback|Verified Purchase

Brene Brown is one of my favorite authors. This is the third book I have read by her. While I do recommend this book, it is very different from some of her others. I found that some of her other books I could pick up for 10 minutes a day, read a short bit, and pick it up again the next day. This book has longer stories in it, so I have to read an entire chapter in one sitting, which takes longer than the 10 minutes I have every morning before work. I still recommend it, but I like her other books better.
Comment| 2 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
----


K. Boddy

5.0 out of 5 stars
Great reading for anyone.September 25, 2015
Format: Kindle Edition|Verified Purchase

Everything about Brene Brown has pulled at me since I first heard her speak on TEDX HOUSTON. I have re-watched her 2 talks multiple times. I have read or listened on Audio most of her books. I took 2 e-courses that she offered and hope she will have one for this book too.
In this book she examines the issues that we all have and I assume, like me you will see yourself in the details. She gives us ideas that will help us deal with the tough moments in our lives. The arguments with your spouse or your children often cause us to ruminate and come up with the wrong reasons why we were having that argument.
I cannot recommend this book to any person willing to examine themselves and their actions. This book is helpful and full of great examples (stories.)
Comment| 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
----


A. Sun

5.0 out of 5 stars
Depth of SoulDecember 7, 2015
Format: Hardcover|Verified Purchase

Rarely does a book speak to me enough that I would feel compelled to write a review. This book speaks to me on such a deep level, I feel I must. The concept that grief is connected to forgiveness was the missing key for me in respect to some major hurts I've yet to be able to let go. After sobbing to the recognition, I was able to find the relief and understanding that had previously eluded me. Thank you, Dr. Brown!
Comment| 15 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?
----

2017/08/07

김종군::교수상세보기::

::교수상세보기::




교수명 : 김종군

직위 : 통일인문학연구단 HK교수

세부전공 : 한국고전서사문학

연구실 : 문과대학 연구동 611호연락처 : 02-450-3328이메일 : k870010@hanmail.net홈페이지 : -




논문 / 저서

1. 저서
김종군(공저),『분단 트라우마 치유를 위한 고통의 공감과 연대』, 한국문화사, 2016.
김종군(공저),『생명·평화·치유의 DMZ 디지털 스토리텔링 : 인문학적 통일 패러다임』, 한국문화사, 2016.
김종군(공저), 『새로운 산합혁력모델 인문브릿지 통일문화콘텐츠 희스토리』, (주)박이정, 2016.
김종군, 『탈북청소년의 한국살이 이야기』, 경진출판, 2015.
김종군(공저), 『역사가 우리에게 남긴 9가지 트라우마』, 패러다임, 2015.
김종군(공저), 『우리가 몰랐던 북녘의 옛이야기』, (주)박이정, 2015.
김종군(공저), 『분단체제를 넘어선 치유의 통합서사』, 선인, 2015.
김종군(공저), 『청소년을 위한 통일인문학』, 알렙, 2015.
김종군(공저), 『탈북민의 적응과 치유 이야기』, 경진출판, 2015.
김종군(공저), 『구술로 본 코리언의 역사적 트라우마』, 선인, 2015.
김종군(공저), 『식민/이산/분단/전쟁의 역사와 코리언의 트라우마』, 선인, 2015.
김종군(공저), 『고전문학을 바라보는 북한의 시각(고전시가)』, (주)박이정, 2015.
김종군(공저), 『민족공통성과 통일의 길』, 경진출판, 2015.
김종군(공저), 『분단 트라우마와 치유의 길』, 경진출판, 2015.
김종군(공저), 『새로 풀어쓴 해동명장전』, 도서출판 박이정, 2014.
김종군(공저), 『시집살이 이야기 집성』(전 10권), 도서출판 박이정, 2013.
김종군(공저), 『시집살이 이야기 연구』, 도서출판 박이정, 2012.
김종군(공저), 『코리언의 분단 통일의식』, 도서출판 선인, 2012.
김종군(공저), 『코리언의 생활문화』, 도서출판 선인, 2012.
김종군(공저), 『코리언의 역사적 트라우마』, 도서출판 선인, 2012.
김종군(공저), 『코리언의 민족정체성』, 도서출판 선인, 2012.
김종군(공저), 『고전문학을 바라보는 북한의 시각(고전산문2)』, 도서출판 박이정, 2012.
김종군(공저), 『조선신가유편』, 도서출판 박이정, 2012.
김종군(공저), 『고난의 행군시기 탈북자 이야기』, 도서출판 박이정, 2012.
김종군(공저), 『고전문학을 바라보는 북한의 시각(고전산문1)』, 도서출판 박이정, 2011.

2. 논문
"A Research on North Korea's Modern Way of Accepting the Tale Chinegaksi", 『S/N Korean Humanities』 2, The Institute of Humanities for Unification, 2016.
「<강도몽유록>을 통한 고통의 연대와통합서사의 사회적 담론화 모형」, 『문학치료연구』 40, 한국문학치료학회, 2016.
「북한의 현대 이야기문학 창작 원리연구-금수산기념궁전 전설집(1~5권)을 중심으로-」, 『통일인문학』 65집, 인문학연구원, 2016.
「탈북민 구술을 통해 본 북한 민속의례의 변화와 계승」, 『한국민속학』 62, 한국민속학회, 2015.
「코리언의 혼례 전통 계승과 현대적 변용」, 『통일인문학』 63집, 인문학연구원, 2015.
"Division Trauma of Koreans and Oral Narrative Healing", S/N Korea Humanities 1(2), The Institute of Humanities for Unification, 2015.
「분단체제 속 통합서사 확산을 통한 사회통합 방안」, 『한국민족문화』 56, 부산대학교 한국민족문화연구소, 2015.
「통합서사의 개념과 통합을 위한문화사적 장치」, 『통일인문학』 61집, 인문학연구원, 2015.
「분단체제 속 사회주의 활동 집안의 가족사와 트라우마」, 『통일인문학』 60집, 인문학연구원, 2014.


「북한지역의 상장례(喪葬禮) 변화 연구 — 1960년대 민속조사 자료를 중심으로」, 『온지논총』 39, 온지학회, 2014.
「전쟁체험 재구성 방식과 구술 치유 문제」, 『통일인문학논총』 56집, 건국대학교 인문학연구원, 2013.
「한국전쟁 체험담 구술에서 찾는 분단 트라우마 극복 방안」, 『문학치료연구』 27집, 한국문학치료학회, 2013.



「구술생애담 담론화를 통한 구술 치유 방안: 고난의 행군시기 탈북자 이야기를 중심으로」, 『문학치료연구』26집, 한국문학치료학회, 2013.


「북한의 민족전통 계승의 실제와 의미」, 『동방학』 22집, 한서대학교 동양고전연구소, 2012.
「<진주낭군>의 전승 양상과 서사의 의미」, 『온지논총』 29집, 온지학회, 2011.
「가족사 서사로서 시집살이담의 성격과 의미: 박정애 화자를 중심으로」, 『구비문학연구』 32집, 한국구비문학회, 2011.
「구술을 통해 본 분단 트라우마의 실체」, 『인문학논총』 51집, 건국대학교 인문학연구원, 2011.
「<만파식적>설화의 다시읽기를 통한 통합의 의미 탐색」, 『온지논총』 27집, 온지학회, 2011.
「북한의 구전설화에 대한 인식 고찰」, 『국문학연구』 22집, 국문학회, 2010.
「북한의 고전문학 자료 현황과 연구동향」, 『온지논총』 25집, 온지학회, 2010.

김성민::교수상세보기::



::교수상세보기::
교수명 : 김성민

직위 : 철학과 교수, 
통일인문학연구단 단장
세부전공 : 서양철학
연구실 : 문과대학 연구동 513호
연락처 : -이메일 : -홈페이지 : -
학력 및 학위

1. 저서
김성민(공저), 『분단의 아비투스와 남북소통의 길』,경진출판, 2015.
김성민(공저), 『분단의 트라우마와 치유의 길』,경진출판, 2015.
김성민(공저), 『민족공통성과 통일의 길』,경진출판, 2015.
김성민(공저), 『역사가 우리에게 남긴 9가지 트라우마』,패러다임북, 2015.
김성민(공저), 『통일담론의 지성사』, 패러다임북, 2015.
김성민(공저), 『통일인문학-인문학으로 분단의 장벽을 넘다』, 알렙, 2015.
김성민(공저), 『청소년을 위한 통일인문학-소통 치유 통합의 통일이야기』, 알렙, 2015.
김성민(공저), 『우리가 몰랐던 북녘의 옛이야기』, 박이정, 2015.
김성민(공저), 『민족과 탈민족의 경계를 넘는 코리언』,선인, 2014.
김성민, 『통일과 인문학』,통일부 통일교육원, 2014.
김성민(공저), 『코리언의 민족정체성』,선인, 2012.
김성민(공저), 『코리언의 역사적 트라우마』,선인, 2012.
김성민(공저), 『코리언의 역사적 트라우마』,선인, 2012.
김성민(공저), 『코리언의 생활문화』,선인, 2012.
김성민(공저), 『코리언의 분단·통일의식』,선인, 2012.
김성민(공저),『통일에 대한 인문학적 패러다임』,선인, 2011.
김성민(공저), 『인문학자의 통일사유』,선인, 2010.
김성민(공저), 『소통·치유·통합의 통일인문학』,선인, 2009.

2. 논문
「통일학의 정초를 위한 인문적 비판과 성찰」,『통일인문학논총』제56집, 건국대 인문학연구원, 2013.
「분단극복의 민족적 과제와 코리안 디아스포라」,『대동철학』, 2012.
「인문학적 통일담론과 통일인문학: 통일패러다임에 관한 시론적 모색」,『철학연구회』, 2011.
「분단의 장벽을 녹이는 소통 치유 통합의 통일인문학」,『철학과현실』, 2010.
「분단의 트라우마에 관한 시론적 성찰」,『시대와철학』, 2010.
「인문학적 통일담론에 대한 비판적 성찰」,『범한철학』, 2010.
「분단과 통일, 그리고 한국의 인문학」,『대동철학』, 2010.

정진아::교수상세보기::

::교수상세보기::



교수명 : 정진아
직위 : 통일인문학연구단 HK교수
세부전공 : 한국현대사
연구실 : 문과대학 연구동 209호
연락처 : 02-450-3343이메일 : mimicool@empas.com홈페이지 : -

논문 / 저서

1. 저서
정진아(공저), 『통일문화콘텐츠 희希스토리』, 박이정, 2016.
정진아(공저), 『역사가 우리에게 남긴 9가지 트라우마』, 패러다임북, 2015.
정진아(공저), 『탈북자의 적응과 치유이야기』, 경진출판, 2015.
정진아(공저), 『코리언의 생활문화, 다름의 공존』, 선인, 2015.
정진아(공저), 『청소년을 위한 통일인문학』, 알렙, 2015.
정진아(공저), 『통일담론의 지성사』, 패러다임북, 2015.
정진아(공저), 『코리언의 생활문화, 일상의 울타리』, 선인, 2015.
정진아(공저), 『코리언의 생활문화, 낯섦과 익숙함』, 선인, 2014.
정진아(공저), 『코리언디아스포라 연구목록』, 선인, 2013.
정진아(공저), 『냉전과 혁명의 시대 그리고 《사상계》』, 소명출판, 2012.
정진아(공저), 『코리언의 분단-통일의식』, 선인, 2012.
정진아(공저), 『코리언의 생활문화』, 선인, 2012.
정진아(공저), 『코리언의 역사적 트라우마』, 선인, 2012.
정진아(공저), 『코리언의 민족정체성』, 선인, 2012.
정진아(공저), 『문화분단』, 선인, 2012.
정진아(공편), 『고난의 행군시기 탈북자 이야기』, 박이정, 2012.
정진아(공저), 『북한생활문화 연구목록』, 선인, 2011.
정진아(공저), 『인문학자의 통일사유』, 선인, 2010.
정진아(공저), 『동아시아 언론매체 사전』, 논형, 2010.
정진아(공저), 『역사학의 시선으로 읽는 한국전쟁』, 휴머니스트, 2010.

2. 논문
북한 사회주의 농촌테제의 등장 배경」, 『사학연구』 제123호, 한국사학회, 2016.9
"A Study Comparing the Living Cultures of South Koreans and North Korean Defectors",S/N Korean Humanities』 volume 2 Issue 1, The Institute of the Humanities for Unification, 2016.
「사회주의가 북한 어민의 풍습과 노동관행에 미친 영향」,『사학연구』 제118호, 사학연구회, 2015.
「고려인․사할린 한인과 한국인의 역사연대와 문화통합」,『통일인문학』 제61집, 건국대학교 인문학연구원, 2015.
「경제성장제일주의와 일하면서 싸우는 국민의 탄생」,『조선대학보』, 일본 조선대학교, 2014.
「국내 거주 고려인, 사할린 한인의 생활문화와 한국인과의 문화갈등」, 『통일인문학』 제58집, 건국대학교 인문학연구원, 2014.
「코리언의 민족어 현실과 통합의 미래」, 『겨레어문학회』 제51집, 2013.
「남한주민과 북한이탈주민의 생활문화 기초 조사-서울·경기지역을 중심으로」, 『역사문화연구』 제48집, 2013.
「1950년대 후반~1960년대 초반 ‘사상계 경제팀’의 개발담론」, 『사학연구』 제105호, 2012.
「《학해》를 통해 본 일제 말기 지성계의 단면」, 『한국독립운동사연구』 제40집, 2011.
「북한이 수용한 ‘사회주의 쏘련’의 이미지」, 『통일문제연구』 제22권 2호, 2010.

박영균::교수상세보기::

::교수상세보기::

교수명 : 박영균
직위 : 통일인문학연구단 HK교수세부전공 : 
사회철학연구실 : 문과대학 연구동 413호연락처 : 02-2049-6277이메일 : dudrbs99@naver.com홈페이지 : -
논문 / 저서

1. 저서
박영균(공저), 『통일을 상상하라 : 통일에 관한 13가지 색다른 상상력』, 한국문화사, 2017.
박영균, 『생명·평화·치유의 DMZ 디지털 스토리텔링 : 인문학적 통일 패러다임』, 한국문화사, 2016.
박영균(공저),『민족과 탈민족의 경계를 넘는 코리언』, 선인, 2015.

박영균(공저),『탈북민의 적응과 치유이야기』, 경진출판, 2015.
박영균(공저),『역사가 우리에게 남긴 9가지 트라우마』, 패러다임, 2015.
박영균(공저),『통일인문학-인문학으로 분단의 장벽을 넘다』, 알렙, 2015.

박영균(공저), 『청소년을 위한 통일인문학』, 알렙, 2015.
박영균(공저), 『코리언의 민족정체성』, 선인, 2012.
박영균(공저),『코리언의 역사적 트라우마』, 선인, 2012.
박영균(공저), 『코리언의 생활문화』, 선인, 2012.
박영균(공저),『코리언의 분단-통일의식』, 선인, 2012.
박영균(공저), 『통일에 대한 인문학적 패러다임』, 선인, 2010.
박영균(공저),『인문학자의 통일사유』, 선인, 2010.
박영균(공저),『분단극복을 위한 인문학적 성찰』, 선인, 2009.
-----
2. 논문
「통일의 녹색비전과 남북의 생태도시협력」, 『사회연구』 28-1호, 한국철학사상연구회, 2017.
「한반도의 분단체제와 평화구축의 전략」, 『통일인문학』 68호, 건국대 인문학연구원, 2016.
「인문학적 통일 패러다임의 사회적 적용: 하나의 사례로서 'DMZ 디지털스토리텔링'」, 2016.
「'포스트 통일'과 민족적 연대의 원칙」, 『시대와 철학』, 한국철학사상연구회, 2016.
「위험사회와 통일한반도의 녹색비전」, 『시대와 철학』, 한국철학사상연구회, 2015.
「통일의 변증법과 민족적 연대의 원칙」,『통일인문학』 제61집, 건국대 인문학연구원, 2015.
"Thoughts of Song Du-Yul, a Unification Philosopher, on the Border of the South-North Division", S/N Korean Humanities Vol.1 No.1, 2015.
「통일의 인문적 비전: 소통으로서 통일론」, 『시대와 철학』, 한국철학사상연구회, 2013.
「민족정체성 연구의 양적/질적 대립과 해체-소통적 연구방법론」, 『시대와 철학』, 한국철학사상연구회, 2013.
「분단의 사회적 신체와 심리 분석에서 제기되는 이론적 쟁점」, 『시대와 철학』, 한국철학사상연구회, 2012.
「코리안 디아스포라의 민족공통성 연구 방법론」, 『시대와 철학』, 한국철학사상연구회, 2011.
「분단의 아비투스에 관한 철학적 성찰」, 『시대와 철학』, 한국철학사상연구회, 2010.
「분단을 사유하는 경계인의 철학: 송두율의 통일담론에 대한 비판적 검토」, 『철학연구』, 대한철학회, 2010.

2016/12/11

The Japan-Korea Solidarity Movement in the 1970s and 1980s: From Solidarity to Reflexive Democracy | The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus

The Japan-Korea Solidarity Movement in the 1970s and 1980s: From Solidarity to Reflexive Democracy | The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus









The Japan-Korea Solidarity Movement in the 1970s and 1980s: From Solidarity to Reflexive Democracy 1970年代、80年代の日韓連帯運動 連帯から自己変革を目指す民主主義へ
Misook Lee
September 21, 2014
Volume 12 | Issue 38 | Number 1





Introduction

The Japan-Korea solidarity movement to support the democratization of South Korea was active throughout the 1970s and 1980s in Japan among Korean residents (Zainichi1) and Japanese intellectuals and activists. Korean activists in the democratization movement have recalled the widespread international support of that era (Chi 2003, 2005; Park 2010; Kim 2010; Oh 2012), and Zainichi and Japanese activists have written about their activities in numerous books and memoirs (Chung 2006; Tomiyama 2009; Shouji 2009; Chung 2012). However, the Japan-Korea solidarity movement has been relatively neglected in both Korean and Japanese scholarship. The few academic articles that mention the movement mainly focus on the activities of Zainichi (Cho 2006) and Christians (Lee 2012). This article extends analysis of the solidarity movement to show how its activities led to a process of self-reflection and self-transformation within Japan.

In order to understand the movement, we need to examine its historical context. Although the mass anti-US-Japan Treaty movement of 1960 (Anpo Tōsō) pivoting on tightly organized ideological sects ultimately failed, it paved the way for a new type of civic activism based on independent, self-organizing, and voluntarily participating individuals.2 This new type activism came to the fore in the subsequent anti-Vietnam War movement, which began to reconsider the relationship between Japan and Asia (particularly Vietnam). While denouncing US imperialism and aggression in Vietnam, many public intellectuals and activists came to question Japan's own past imperialism in Asia and its contemporary role in supporting the war under the US-Japan military alliance. This questioning led to “a shift from a comfortable mythology of national victimhood to a new morality founded on individual responsibility for both the past and the present” (Avenell 2010, 122). In other words, the sense of responsibility for Asia that emerged during the anti-Vietnam War movement extended to Japan’s previous misdeeds as a colonial power.

The first part of this paper examines the international political and economic conditions surrounding South Korea and Japan in the postwar era and societal reactions to these conditions. It then traces the development of the movement through four stages: 1) from a support movement toward a process of self-questioning; 2) from self-questioning to recognition of the need for self-reformation through solidarity; 3) expansion of networks within the solidarity movement, and 4) evolution of the solidarity movement toward reflexive democracy. These phases were identified through analysis of publications and documents published by, and interviews with, key participants. By illuminating the evolution of the Japan-Korea solidarity movement and its role in Japanese society’s turn toward reflexive democracy, I hope to contribute to the understanding of Japanese social movement history, particularly transnational activism studies in Asia.

Background of the Japan-Korea Solidarity Movement

1) International political-economic structure and the Japan-Korea Treaty of 1965

U.S. occupation, the Cold War and the division of Korea defined the economic and political situation of post-colonial South Korea. Following liberation from Japanese rule in 1945, South Korea experienced U.S. military rule and was heavily dependent on the United States for aid and political direction. As part of the U.S.-led anti-communist bloc in northeast Asia, the governments of South Korea and Japan opened talks in 1951 for establishment of diplomatic relations amidst the Korean War. Given the huge gap in perceptions of the two governments concerning the colonial era, the talks stalled. However, after Park Chung Hee seized power in South Korea in a military coup in May 1961, the talks eventuated in the Treaty on Basic Relations between Japan and the Republic of Korea in 1965. The treaty adopted the language of “economic cooperation” instead of “apology” and “reparations” for the colonial past, as shown by its name: “Agreement between Japan and the Republic of Korea concerning the Settlement of Problems in regard to Property and Claims and Economic Cooperation.” The Japan-Korea Treaty established political-economic ties between the two U.S. allies under the Cold War system, rather than normalizing relations between the former colonizer and the former colonized. In the wake of the Japan-Korea Treaty, the politics and economy of South Korea became more dependent on Japan as well as the United States. In the context of this hierarchically linked three-party political-economic structure, Korean activists struggled, not only for human rights and democracy domestically, but also against U.S. and Japanese support for the military regime in South Korea.

Korean intellectuals and students, in particular, criticized the Japan-Korea Treaty for failing to obtain Japan’s apology and reparations for its colonial past. Korean thinkers and activists denounced the subordinate economic relationship between South Korea and Japan as “neocolonialism,” arguing that the Japan-Korea Treaty and Japanese economic advances in South Korea marked the “re-establishment of a high degree of influence and control by the colonial power whose depredations are so vividly remembered – Japan” (McCormack and Selden 1978, 9). Thus, in order to democratize Korean society and improve human rights and labor rights, Korean activists protested not only against their own government, but also against the Japanese government and Japanese corporations. However, in part because of the military regime’s control of the media, the harsh critiques leveled by Korean activists against Japan’s colonial past were little noted in Japanese society.

2) Information networks amplify the voices of struggling Koreans

Most Japanese activists in the 1960s were scarcely aware of the nationwide movement of 1964-65 opposing the Japan-Korea Treaty movement in South Korea (Takasaki 1996). However, the anti-Vietnam War movement in Japan provided a pool of Japanese activists, many of whom would become interested in the anti-government movement in South Korea. The anti-Vietnam War movement increased interest in Third World liberation movements in Asia. Specifically, it raised questions about the relationship between Japan and Asia, and the nature of the Zainichi, who comprised 88 percent of foreign residents in Japan in 1965.3 In the late 1960s and the early 1970s, Zainichi had launched an anti-ethnic-discrimination movement with the cooperation of principled Japanese intellectuals and students. As Japanese became more interested in the voices of Zainichi, the Zainichi movement for the democratization of South Korea also caught the attention of some Japanese activists.4 Increasing awareness of Asia and the Zainichi led to growing interest among some Japanese in learning about the Korean democratization movement.

At the same time, Korean activists sought to raise international awareness of and support for their movement. In late 1972, when the Yushin Constitution5 strengthened Park’s grip on the presidency and blocked domestic opposition, Korean opposition leaders like Kim Dae Jung tried to pressure the military regime by criticizing it from outside, and by building solidarity among overseas Korean compatriots. In addition, in 1973 in Tokyo, Oh Jae Shik, the secretary of the Urban Industrial Mission of the Council of Churches in Asia, established a Documentation Center for Action Groups in Asia to collect and translate information about and for South Korean activists (Lee 2012; Oh 2013). The effort to collect and share the voices of Koreans internationally became more systematic with the cooperation of Japan’s leading progressive opinion magazine, Sekai, and with the close relationship between Japanese and Korean churches.

The monthly magazine Sekai played an important role in introducing the voices and thoughts of Koreans. Sekai published “The Korean Student Movement in the 1970s” by Nakagawa Nobuo, a Zainichi intellectual. Nakagawa introduced the argument of Korean students who held that Japan was an obstacle to the democratization and reunification of Korea, and that students should therefore advance the anti-Japan movement (Nakagawa 1972). In an interview with the editor in chief of Sekai, Yasue Ryōsuke, Kim Dae Jung criticized the Japan Socialist Party and the Japan Communist Party as well as progressive social groups for aligning themselves with North Korea while neglecting movements for social change in South Korea. He called on conscientious Japanese to “correctly recognize” South Korean democracy movements (Kim 1973: 118). Moreover, “Letters from South Korea,” written by T.K Sei, a pseudonym of Chi Myung Kwan, was serialized in Sekai soon after the Kim Dae Jung kidnapping incident in August 1973. This series (1973~1988), made possible by messengers who secretly carried underground information from South Korea to Japan, provided detailed information on the Korean struggles in the face of the Park regime’s repression (Chi 2003, 2005; Lee 2012).

International Christian networks operating between Japan and South Korea played an important role in sharing information. Many Korean Christians had studied at Japanese theological seminaries during the 1950s and the 1960s and had met Japanese Christians in other countries where they had gone for study or for international conferences and workshops. These networks linking Japanese and Korean Christians, especially progressive Christians, were strengthened in the context of the world ecumenical movement. In the early 1970s, the National Council of Churches in Korea (NCCK) and the National Council of Churches in Japan (NCCJ) institutionalized annual meetings; the first was held in Seoul on July 2-5, 1973. The participants discussed (1) Japan’s economic advance, (2) the legal status of Zainichi, (3) Koreans in Sakhalin, (4) Japan’s immigration law, (5) Korean victims of the atomic bombing, (6) the YasukuniShrine, (7) sex tourism, and (8) history textbooks. The meeting produced a resolution calling for further cooperation (NCCK 1987). In short, Christian networks started to discuss and share their mutual criticisms of the Japanese government and mainstream Japanese society, Japan-Korea relations and the Park dictatorship.

These religious, social, and media pathways linking activists created a discursive political space for a transnational “imagined community” (Anderson 1983). Koreans and Japanese intellectuals and activists, who indirectly and directly communicated with each other, started to construct a common understanding and interpretation of Japan-South Korea relations. This was the background of the Japan-Korea Solidarity movement in Japan.

Development of the Japan-Korea Solidarity Movement

1) “Saving” in the early 1970s: from “helping” to “self-questioning”

In the early 1970s, when information infrastructure was not yet systematized, several groups formed a support movement for Korean prisoners of conscience. These prisoners included Kim Chi Ha, a poet with a strong anti-authoritarian stance, and the Suh brothers (Suh Sung and Suh Joon-sik), Zainichi who had come to South Korea for education and were arrested and sentenced as spies. The groups were formed in the context of growing interest in revolution and activism in Asia and Zainichi issues.

Poet Kim Chi Ha was one of the earliest Korean democratic figures to gain prominence in Japan. The movement to support Kim Chi Ha was formed upon his arrest under the anti-Communist Act6 for his poem “Groundless Rumors” (Piŏ), published in the Catholic magazine Changjo in April 1972. Two advocacy groups formed in Japan: one was founded by artist-activist Tomiyama Taeko, and the other by Oda Makoto, novelist and spokesperson of the Citizen’s League for Peace in Vietnam (Beheiren 1965-1974). The former group7(organized on April 19, 1972) mainly sought to convey Kim Chi Ha’s ideas through paintings and plays8 (figure 1 and 2).




Figure 1. Postcard of AI Japan. Tomiyama’s painting is based on Kim Chi Ha’s poem “Bronze Yi Sun-sin”


The latter group (organized on May 9, 1972 and headed by Oda) organized a “group to visit South Korea” to hand the Korean government a petition demanding the release of Kim Chi Ha (Tsurumi and Kim 1975). With little information on Kim or the Korean democratization movement, meeting him at the prison hospital came as a shock for the group. According to writer Tsurumi Shunsuke, when he presented Kim with the petition “for which we collected signatures from all over the world to demand that you not be given the death sentence,” Kim replied, “Your movement cannot help me, but I will add my voice to help your movement” (Tsurumi et al. 2004, 337). Tsurumi recalled his surprise at Kim’s strong statement, having expected gratitude. However, this response made him reflect on his naivety concerning a distant sufferer like Kim Chi Ha. As an activist opposing the Japan-Korea Treaty during 1964 and 1965, Kim had problematized the emerging collaboration between the Korean military regime and the former Japanese colonial power. Kim’s reaction to Tsurumi and the support movement enabled Japanese activists to that they should support the struggles of Korean activists through their own movement to question Japan’s role in Korea (Wada 1975a).

The arrest of the Suh brothers (Suh Sung and Suh Joon-sik) presented another important issue in the early 1970s. The Army Security Command of South Korea arrested fifty-one people in the “Zainichi students spy incident” on April 20, 1971, just one week before the presidential election in South Korea. Suh Sung was singled out as the leader of the alleged spy group. During interrogation, he underwent torture severe enough to make him attempt suicide, and he was sentenced to death.9In respondse to the arrest and the court proceedings, the Suh brothers’ family, classmates, and friends, as well as Zainichi organizations and various Japanese activists organized a movement supporting the Suh brothers.

The Committee to Save the Suh Brothers (organized on October 23, 1971) was an umbrella organization intended to unify activities in Tokyo and Kyoto. Shoji Tsutomu, a Protestant pastor and representative of the committee, was almost entirely ignorant of the historical relationship between Japan and South Korea and of the conflict resulting from the division of Korea at that time (Shoji 2009, 28). Initially, the call to save the Suh Brothers was based on a humanitarian approach and their “Japanese-ness.” The death sentence appeal, published in the Committee’s first bulletin (October 1971), ended by noting: “these Zainichi Korean brothers were born in Japan and spent their youth in Japan. When they face death in the severe political situation, how can we Japanese remain silent?”10 By emphasizing the “Japanese-ness” of the Suh Brothers, the committee tried to attract sympathetic attention from Japanese citizens.




Figure 2. Leaflet from theatrical performance based on “Bronze Yi Sun-sin”


However, the humanitarian initiative calling for support of the Zainichi brothers, who were born and raised in Japan, soon developed into more reflexive questioning of Japan’s role in their suffering. Shoji reflected that Suh Sung’s final statement in court11provided the movement with a turning point; they started to question Japanese policies that supported the military regime of South Korea and prevented the unification of Korea (Shoji 2009, 62-63). Thus, commitment to the support movement led activists to greater awareness of the Zainichi perspective, and to question Japan's relationship with South Korea.

The movement began with a small number of Japanese intellectuals and activists as a support movement based on helping the distant other, the Japanese-like Zainichi. However, it soon evolved into a questioning of Japan’s role in shaping Japan-Korea relations and the division of Korea. This critical attitude emerged with direct contact and communication with Kim Chi Ha, Suh Sung and others, as well as a growing atmosphere of civic activism that questioned Japan’s role during the global anti-Vietnam War movement.

2) “Self-reformation” through solidarity in the mid-1970s

On August 8, 1973, Kim Dae Jung, South Korea’s opposition leader, was kidnapped in Tokyo by the Korean Central Intelligence Agency (KCIA). This incident made even ordinary Japanese aware of opposition to the military regime in South Korea. Right after the kidnapping incident, Zainichi dissident groups became active to support Kim Dae Jung and made efforts to raise awareness among Zainichi and Japanese citizens about the Korean democratization movement.

The first Japanese group to respond to the kidnapping incident was from the anti-Vietnam War movement (Aochi and Wada eds. 1977, 62-63). Triggered by the kidnapping and the ensuing protests and demonstrations in South Korea,12 anti-Vietnam War and other activists in Japan held a series of meetings to organize an umbrella group to bring together the disparate support groups that had emerged earlier. They called the new group the Council for correcting Japanese policy on South Korea and for solidarity with the democratization movement of South Korea (日本の対韓政策をただし、韓国民主化闘争に連帯する日本連絡会議), for short, the Japan-Korea Solidarity Council (organized on April 18, 1974).

As their formal name suggests, solidarity implied changing Japanese foreign policy, which, by supporting the military regime in South Korea, obstructed democratization and unification. In the November 1975 issue of Sekai, Wada Haruki, general director of the Japan-Korea Solidarity Council, wrote:


The democratization movement of South Korea is teaching us the meaning of pursuing democracy and human rights. Moreover, it teaches us what Japan has done in South Korea. From our current situation, we still need to learn more. This is the meaning of solidarity (Wada 1975a 53-54).

Solidarity was understood as a process of listening to and learning from the voices of the struggling others toward the goal of self-reformation. This attitude was also found among Japanese Christians.

Japanese Christians organized a solidarity group called the Emergency Christian Conference on Korean Problems (ECC, on January 15, 1974). Responding to harsh critiques from Korean Christians and activists, progressive Japanese Christians formed the ECC to address Japan's colonial past as well as ongoing neo-colonialism, both of which structured the relationship between Japan and Korea. In its founding statement, the ECC explained how it was inspired by Korean activists to begin a process of self-reformation:


We were shocked to receive such harsh critiques and demands, born from their fearless faith-based struggles. That is, the Korean political situation in which people are risking their lives is related to Japan’s past colonization and current economic invasion. This problem is what we Japanese have to be responsible for before God.13

At its founding meeting, the ECC decided to investigate Japanese corporate encroachment in South Korea, as well as sex tourism and other issues between Japan and South Korea. In other words, through solidarity activities, the ECC tried to learn not only about the situation of others, i.e. Koreans, but also the cause of their suffering structured by the Japan-South Korea relationship. This learning process was the basis for a new imagined community linking activists beyond borders.




Figure 3a. Cover Photo of Asian Women’s Liberation. From the first to third issues, covers depicted Korean women’s struggle for democracy and labor rights.


3) Enlarging networks among Zainichi, women, and laborers in the mid-1970s to the early 1980s

Cooperation among Zainichi and Japanese activists, including Christians, was remarkable, especially on the issue of Zainichi prisoners of conscience who were held in South Korea on charges of espionage. Zainichi family members organized the family association in May 1975 and fifty-four groups of Japanese activists formed the National Council to support Zainichi Political Prisoners in June 1976. These groups worked together to raise public support, both domestically and internationally, and to promote activities such as visiting and sending letters and cards to–prisoners of conscience in South Korea. In addition, representatives working for Zainichi prisoners of conscience visited the United Nations and Amnesty International in London to appeal for global support for the Zainichi prisoners.14

The growing networks among solidarity groups extended to the women’s movement. The women’s solidarity movement was born out of the issue of sex tourism, called Kiseng15 Kankou. The Japanese and the Korean National Council of Churches met together officially for the first time in July 1973; responding to a special request by the Council of Korean Christian women, the problem of sex tourism was placed on the agenda. Korean Christian women inspired Japanese Christian and non-Christian women to organize the group Women against Kiseng Kankou. At that time, anti-sex tourism movements sprung up not only in Korea but in Taiwan as well. Matsui Yayori, a well-known Asahi Shimbun foreign correspondent, played an active role in the anti-sex-tourism movement in Japan and in forging bonds with women activists throughout Asia.

On March 1, 1977, Matsui, Tomiyama Taeko, and several other women activists, most of whom had participated in the anti-sex tourism movement, organized the Asian Women’s Association. The founding statement declared their opposition to economic invasion and sex-exploitation. Reacting to the voices of Korean and other Asian women and “learning” from them, these Japanese women activists also formed a solidarity movement dealing with such issues as human rights, labor rights, and the colonial past, all of which were pertinent to East and Southeast Asian women.

Korean women’s struggles were the primary focus of the Asian Women’s Association. The cover photo of Asian Women’s Liberation, the bulletin of the Association, showed Korean women fighting against the repressive military regime (figure 3). In later years, the members of the Asian Women’s Association focused more specifically on war crimes committed against women, particularly the wartime “comfort women.”16




Figure 3b. Cover Photo of Asian Women’s Liberation. From the first to third issues, covers depicted Korean women’s struggle for democracy and labor rights.


The solidarity movement further broadened to include organizations devoted to the labor movement, which had long shown great sympathy toward North Korea. In the late 1970s, responding to the increasingly wide-ranging solidarity movement among Japanese activists, Christians, and Zainichi, Japanese labor-movement activists also joined in solidarity activities.17 The involvement of the General Council of Trade Unions of Japan (Sōhyō) in the Japan-Korea solidarity movement was triggered by the Kwangju Uprising and the Kim Dae Jung crisis in 1980.18 Responding to the arrest of Kim, Zainichi dissident groups, civic solidarity groups, Christian groups, and even Sōhyō joined the solidarity movement. In order to coordinate their activities, a Meeting of Representatives to Free Kim Dae Jung was held on July 11, 1980 by Sōhyōand other groups; progressive political parties and the Council for Japan-Korea solidarity also joined. At this meeting, the participants organized the Japan Council for Saving Kim Dae Jung and set a goal of collecting ten million signatures.19According to Watanabe Tetsuro, the secretary for political affairs of the Tokyo office of Sōhyō, the campaign to collect ten million signatures on behalf of a foreign national was “the first and might be the last time”20 such an effort was undertaken in Japan. With Sōhyō’s participation, the number of people who attended the rallies and signed petitions dramatically increased21 compared to previous solidarity activities based on mainly civic participation (Figure 4).

The Japan-Korea solidarity movement peaked when Kim Dae Jung was sentenced to death on September 17, 1980. The movement quieted down when his sentence was eventually commuted to life imprisonment, and he and his family left for the United States at the end of 1982. Although the mass movement subsequently declined, it continued to work on specific issues, such as Zainichi prisoners of conscience, while responding to new issues that arose in the 1980s.

4) Reflexive democracy in the 1980s

By the early 1980s, Japan’s initial support movement based on humanitarian ideals developed into a more reflective phase of self-reformation (自己変革) through listening to and learning from the voices of others. Self-reformation involved questioning Japan’s role in Korea and rectifying Japanese foreign policy concerning Korea. After the intensity of the Kwangju Uprising and the life-threatening crisis for Kim Dae Jung, solidarity movement activists broadened their agenda to include such issues as history textbook treatments of Japanese colonialism and war and the movement protesting the fingerprinting system that singled out Zainichi, while continuing to call for solidarity with the South Korean democratization movement.

In 1982, China and South Korea challenged the revision of Japanese history textbooks, which softened the description of Japanese aggression in Asia as mere “advance.”22 The Emergency Christian Conference on Korean Problems (ECC) and the Council for Japan-Korea Solidarity demanded that the Japanese government “correct the wrong descriptions of Korea, … learn from the critiques by Koreans,” and “apologize for past colonial rule and strive to relax tensions on the Korean peninsula” (Leaflet, August 6, 1982). In addition, the Tokyo local of Sōhyō raised the history textbook issue in a document titled “Call for Japan-Korea Solidarity Actions” (October 16, 1982) and sent to their affiliated labor unions. Solidarity movement activists started to speak out about unsettled issues of the colonial past, demanding that the Japanese government accept responsibility for thirty-six years of colonial rule in Korea.23




Figure 3c. Cover Photo of Asian Women’s Liberation. From the first to third issues, covers depicted Korean women’s struggle for democracy and labor rights.


On September 4, 1984, a collective meeting to protest the visit to Japan by South Korean president Chun Doo Hwan brought together the Japan Socialist Party and Sōhyō24 with groups associated with Wada Haruki (general director of the Japan-Korea Solidarity Council), Tomiyama Taeko, and Yoshimatsu Shigeru (general director of the National Council to Support Zainichi Political Prisoners). The meeting issued the following resolution:


The genuine resolution of the colonial past should begin with an apology to all Korean Minjung expressing the will of the people, including a resolution in the Diet. … With today’s meeting opposing the visit of Chun Doo Hwan, we strive to establish true friendship between Japan and Korea and will work to achieve the civil rights of Zainichi, including abolition of the fingerprinting system, and promote the peaceful unification of Korea.

As shown, the Japan-Korea solidarity movement turned to issues that directly addressed Japan’s internal concerns. Thus, while committing to the solidarity movement with Zainichi activists and sharing the cause of struggling Koreans, Japanese conscientious intellectuals and activists reflected on Japan's unsettled colonial past and on discrimination against Zainichi.

During the 1980s, the cooperation between Zainichi and Japanese intellectuals and activists broadened to include the “anti-fingerprinting system”, which resulted in the abolition of the system in 1992. Subsequently, efforts related to unresolved colonial problems came to the fore in both South Korea and Japan after the democratization of South Korea. The Kono Statement (1993) on the recognition of and apology for comfort women and the Murayama Statement (1995), which apologized to Asian victims of Japanese imperial rule for the first time at the level of the Diet, may be seen as accomplishments due in part to the Japan-Korea solidarity movement.

While the Japanese sense of responsibility and attitude of self-questioning began to emerge as early as the 1960s with the anti-Vietnam War movement, concrete proposals and actions toward “self-reformation” did not become central to civic activism until the Japan-Korea solidarity movements of the 1970s and 1980s. The Japan-Korea solidarity movement provided an opportunity to listen to and learn from others’ viewpoints. With direct voices of the others, Japanese society became more sensitive to issues of war crimes and the human rights of Zainichi and other minorities. Thus, solidarity with “others” (Korean activists and Zainichi) simultaneously spurred a movement for reflexive democracy.

Conclusion




Figure 4. Japanese protesters rally under the banner, “Don’t Kill Kim Dae Jung!” on Nov 27, 1980 (photographed by Hashiguchi Jōji, February 1981, Sekai). According to Wada (1982), 7,000 people attended this rally.


The anti-Vietnam War movement touched off public questioning in postwar Japanese society on the nature and history of its relationship with Asia. This self-questioning of Japan’s role evolved into self-reformation with concrete agendas and actions during the Japan-Korea solidarity movement, ranging from rectifying Japanese support for the South Korean military dictatorship to calls to settle the colonial past and cooperate with Zainichi’s anti-ethnic discrimination movement. Ultimately, Japanese citizens pushed for internal change toward a more reflexive democratic system. This evolution toward reflexive democracy through the Japan-Korea solidarity movement should be understood not only in the context of the worldwide anti-Vietnam War movement, but also as a product of the growth of formal and informal networks among Koreans, Zainichi, and Japanese.

Through the Japan-Korea solidarity movement in the 1970s and 80s, progressive Japanese and Korean activists and intellectuals constructed an imagined community by sharing issues and concerns about democracy, peace and social justice in Asia. However, many critics have noted that these networks, which transcend national borders, peoples, and sectors, have faced increasing challenge in public discourse since the mid-1990s. Over the last twenty years, Japanese society has witnessed a counteroffensive to erase and deny Japan’s war crimes, including the sexual exploitation of women. Recently, hate speech vilifying Zainichi has found a new younger audience and mobilizing force through the Internet.

World geopolitics and political economy have changed dramatically since the end of the Cold War with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the demise of the Communist bloc. The counteroffensive, including hate speech against Zainichi, could be interpreted in part as a Japanese reaction to neoliberal globalization intensified by the collapse of the Japanese bubble in 1990 and subsequent economic crisis. However, just as principled Korean, Zainichi, and Japanese activists countered the Cold War political economic system that structured the relationship between Japan and South Korea in the 1970s and 80s, the question remains whether new forms of transnational solidarity will emerge to give voice to those who have been silenced and to promote peace in Asia today.

Misook Lee is Project Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, University of Tokyo.

Recommended citation: Misook Lee, “The Japan-Korea Solidarity Movement in the 1970s and 1980s: From Solidarity to Reflexive Democracy,” The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 12, Issue 38, No. 1, September 22, 2014.

Notes

1 Zainichi are Korean residents of Japan who trace their roots to Korea at the time of Japanese colonial rule and who remain Korean citizens, including those born in Japan. The Zainichi community was politically divided between Sōren, established in 1945 and affiliated with North Korea, and Mindan, established in 1946 and affiliated with South Korea. However, many Zainichi did not align with either Sōren or Mindan, and some who were originally affiliated with Mindan separated from that group and espoused solidarity with the democratization movement of South Korea.

2 The Anpo Tōsō was “a moment remembered by academics and activists alike as the birth of independent citizen protest in postwar Japan” (Avenell 2010, 13).

3 Data from Statistics Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication.

4 The movement was led by several groups: the Korean Student Coalition, the Korean Youth Coalition, and the Mindan Tokyo office, which were critical of Mindan. Basically Mindan is affiliated with South Korea. However, when Park Chung Hee came to power with a military coup in South Korea, several groups within Mindan opposed its decision to support the military regime and separated from Mindan. See Miyata (1977) and Cho (2006).

5 President Park Chung Hee consolidated and systematized his power through the Yushin Constitution, which stipulated that the president would be elected for a six-year period with no limitation on the number of terms. See Dewind and Woodhouse (1979).

6 The act was passed in 1961, just after Park Chung Hee’s military coup. It “provides that persons who belong to, are affiliated with, praise or in any other way encourage or benefit a communist organization may be punished by imprisonment at hard labor for five to seven years” (Dewind and Woodhouse 1979, 15). The act was abolished in 1980, when it was integrated into the National Security Law.

7 In 1973, this group was dissolved and was absorbed by Amnesty International in Japan’s newly formed group “Kakyō” (架橋).

8 Theatrical performance based on Kim Chi Ha’s “Bronze Yi Sun-sin.” The original Korean title is Kuri Yi Sun-shin. Yi Sun-shin was a naval commander in the Chosŏn dynasty, famed for his victories against the Japanese navy during the Imjin War; he became a national hero. In this play, Kim Chi Ha criticized the Korean power elites who enjoyed wealth and power from collaboration with imperial Japan and exploited the poor and powerless people.

9 For more details, see Suh (1994). Suh Sung spent 19 years in the prison.

10 The Committee to Save the Suh Brothers (1992, 11).

11 See, Suh (1994). In his final statement, Suh Sung articulated that he would keep struggling for the Unification of Korea and pursuing positive nationalism. See, also, The Committee to Save the Suh Brothers (1992, 166).

12 The Seoul National University students’ uprising on October 2, 1973, the one-million-person petition movement in December 1973, and a series of student uprisings in early 1974 had occurred in South Korea.

13 ECC statement, January 15, 1974. See, ECC (1976).

14 See Kim (1986). Representatives working for Zainichi prisoners of conscience visited international organizations eleven times from the beginning until 1985.

15 The term Kiseng was originally made and used in pre-modern Korea, meaning a female entertainer and courtesan. The same term was also used to describe the sex tourism of Japanese businessmen in the 1960s and 1970s.

16 Matsui Yayori established the Asia-Japan Women’s Resource Center in 1994, organized the Violence against Women in War Network (VAWW-NET) in 1998, and proposed the Women's International War Crimes Tribunal on Japan's Military Sexual Slavery, which was held in Tokyo in 2000 with international cooperation. For more about Matsui Yayori, see the Women’s Active Museum on War and Peace.

17 Interview with Watanabe Tetsuro (November 9, 2011).

18 On May 18, 1980, in Kwangju, a city in southwestern South Korea, pro-democracy students and citizens demonstrated against martial law in Kim Dae Jung’s political base. The military regime sent in the army to crush the uprising. The result was a massacre. The government accused Kim Dae Jung of leading the Kwangju Uprising in an attempt to overthrow the government.

19 The number of signatures they had been able to collect by April 1981 was 5,258,819 (Wada 1982).

20 Interview with Watanabe (November 9, 2011).

21 The number of people who attended the national rally was approximately 15,000 on August 8, 17,000 on September 17, 6,000 on November 13, 7,000 on November 27, 7,000 on December 5, and 15,000 on December 22 (Wada 1982).

22 On the dispute concerning Japanese textbooks, see Nozaki and Selden (2009),

23 See Wada Haruki, Ishizaki Koichi, and the Sengo Gojunen Kokkai Ketsugi o Motomerukai, eds. (1996).

24 The Japanese government chose to compensate the victims through a private Asian Women’s Fund collected by voluntary Japanese citizens. Because the Japanese government did not accept national responsibility for compensation, many South Korean victims refused to accept monetary compensation from the Asian Women’s Fund. See Kim (2006), Morris-Suzuki (2007).



References

Aochi, Shin and Wada Haruki, eds. 1977. Nikkanrentai no Shisō to Kōdō [Thought and Actions of Japan-Korea Solidarity]. Tokyo: Gendaihyōron-sha.

Avenell, Simon A. 2010. Making Japanese Citizens: Civil Society and the Mythology of the Shimin in Postwar Japan. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Chi, Myong Kwan. 2003. “Tokubetsu Intabyū: Kokusai Kyōdō Purojekuto toshite no Kankoku kara no Tsūshin [Letters from South Korea as international united project: special interview to Chi Myong Kwan].” Sekai September: 49-67.

____. 2005. Kyōkaisen o Koeru Tabi [Travel crossing the border]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.

Cho, Giun. 2006. “Zainichi chōsenjin to 1970 nendai no kankoku minshuka undō [Zainichi and the Korean democratization movement in the 1970s].” Language, Area and Cultural Studies No. 12: 197-217.

Chung, Kyung Mo. 2010. Sidaeŭi Pulch’imbŏn [Night watch of the era]. Seoul: Han’gyŏre Publisher.

Chung, Jae Joon. 2006. Aru “Zainichi” no Hansei: Kim Dae Jung Kyūshutsu Undō Shōshi [Half life of a Zainichi: A short history of the saving movement for Kim Dae Jung]. Tokyo: Gendaijinbun-sha.

Dewind, Adrian, and John Woodhouse. 1979. Persecution of Defense Lawyers in South Korea: Report of a Mission to South Korea in May 1979. Geneva: International Commission of Jurists.

ECC. 1976. Kankoku minsyuka touso siryosyu 1973~1976 [Collection of materials of the Korean democratization movement 1973~1976]. Tokyo: Sinkyo syupansya.

Hein, Laura, and Rebecca Jenninson, eds. 2010. Imagination without Borders: Feminist Artist Tomiyama Taeko and Social Responsibility. Ann Arbor: Center for Japanese Studies, the University of Michigan.

Human Rights Committee of NCCK. 1987. 1970 nyudae Mijuwha Undong: Kidokgyo Undong ul jungsimuro [Democratization movement in the 1970s: Christians’ Human Rights Movement] (five volumes). Seoul: NCCK.

Iijima, Makoto. 2003. “Kankoku Minsyuka no Dotei to Watashi [Democratization of South Korea and me].” Kyozo June: 13-22.

Kim, Dae Jung. 1973. “Kankoku Minshuka e no Michi [The way for Democratization of South Korea]” Sekai September: 102-122.

—. 2010. Kimdaejung chasŏjŏn [The Biography of Kim Dae Jung] Seoul: Samin.

Kim, Jung Ran. 2006. Ilbon’gun wianbu undongŭi chŏn’gaewa munjeinsige taehan yŏn’gu: chŏngdaehyŏbŭi hwaltongŭl chungsimŭro[A study of the development and the viewpoint of the “Comfort Women” issue in Korea: focusing on the Korean Council for the Women Drafted into Sexual Slavery by Japan]. Doctoral Dissertation, Department of Women’s Studies, The Graduate School of Ewha Womans University.

Kim, Tae Myung. 1986. “Zainichi Kankokujin Seijihan no jūgonen: Kakehashi toshite no Zainichi Kankokujin Seijihan [15 Years of Zainichi Korean Political Prisoners: Zainichi Korean political prisoners as the bridge],” Sekai June: 214-231.

The Committee to Save the Suh Brothers. 1992. Suh kun kyōdai o sukuu tame ni: kaihō gappon [To save Suh Brothers: the collection of the bulletins]. Tokyo: Kage Shobō.

Korea Democracy Foundation. 2008. Han’guk Minjuhwa Undongsa 1 [History of Korea democratization movement 1] Paju: Dolbegae.

____. 2009. Han’guk Minjuhwa Undongsa 2 [History of Korea democratization movement 2] Paju: Dolbegae.

____. 2010. Han’guk Minjuhwa Undongsa 3 [History of Korea democratization movement 3] Paju: Dolbegae.

Lee, Misook. 2012. “Kankoku Minshu ka Undōni okeru Chika Jōhō no Hasshin [Dissemination of underground information in the democratization movement of South Korea].” Contact Zone Vol. 5: 145-172.

Lie, John. 2008. Zainichi: Diasporic Nationalism and Postcolonial Identity. Berkeley: University of California Press.

McCormack, Gavan, and Mark Selden, eds. 1978. Korea, North and South: the deepening crisis. New York: Monthly Review Press.

Minaguchi, Kōzō. 1968. Anpo tōsō shi: hitotsu no undōronteki sōkatsu [The Anti-US-Japan Treaty movement: roundup of movement theory]. Tokyo: Shakai Shinpō.

Moon, Katharine H.S. 2012. Protesting America: Democracy and the U.S.-Korea Alliance. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Morris-Suzuki, Tessa. 2007. “Japan’s ‘Comfort Women’: It’s time for the truth (in the ordinary, everyday sense of the word).” Japan Focus, March 8, 2007.

Nakagawa, Nobuo. 1972. “1970 nendai no Kankoku Gakusei Undō [Korean Student Movement of the 1970s]” Sekai April: 190-199.

Nozaki, Yoshiko, and Mark Selden. 2009. “Japanese Textbook Controversies, Nationalism, and Historical Memory: Intra-national conflicts.” The Asia-Pacific Journal Vol 24-5-09, June 15.

Ōe Kenzaburo and Yasue Ryōsuke. 1984. “Sekai” no 40 nen: sengo o minaosu, soshite, ima [40 years of Sekai: reflection on the postwar period and today]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.

Oguma, Eiji. 2002. Minsyu to Aikoku: Sengo Nihon no Nasyonarizumu to Kokyosei [Democracy and Patriotism: Japan’s nationalism and the public sphere in the postwar period]. Tokyo: Shinyo-sha.

—. 2009a. 1968 vol.1: Wakamono tachi no Hanran to Sono Haikei [1968 vol. 1: The youth revolt and its background]. Tokyo: Shinyo-sha.

—. 2009b. 1968 vol.2: Hanran no Shuen to Sono Isan, [1968 vol. 2: the end of the youth revolt and its legacy]. Tokyo: Shinyo-sha.

Oh, Jae Shik. 2012. Naege Kkodŭro Tagaon Hyŏnjang [Presence appearing like flowers for me]. Seoul: Taehan’gidokkyosŏhoe.

Park, Hyung Gyu. 2010. Naŭi Midŭmŭn Kil wie Itta [My faith is on the street]. Paju: Changbi.

Sibuya, Sentaro. 1971. “Yakusha Kōki [Postscript by the translator],” Kim Chi Ha, Nagai Kurayami no Kanata ni [Far away in the long darkness]. Tokyo: Chuokoronsha: 270-273.

Shoji, Tsutomu. 2009. “Kankoku Minshukaundō to Nihonshimin no Kakawari [The Korean democratization movement and its relation to Japanese citizens],” “Chōsen o Mitsumete [By staring at Korea].” Kōrai Hakubutsukan: 27-89.

Sohn, Hak-kyu. 1989. Authoritarianism and Opposition in South Korea. London and New York: Routledge.

Steinhoff, Patrichia G. 2003. Shi e no ideorogī: Nihon Sekigunha [Ideology concerning death: Japan’s Red Army]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.

Suga, Hidemi. 2006. 1968. Tokyo: Chikuma-syobo.

Suh, Sung. 1994. Gokuchū 19 nen: Kankoku Seijihan no Tatakai [19 years in prison: the struggle of a Korean political prisoner]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.

Takahashi, Kunie. 1974. “Kisen Kankō o Kokuhatsu suru” [I’m denouncing sex tourism]. Sekai May: 144-148.

Takasaki, Sōji.1996. Kenshō: nikkan kaidan [Examination of talks between Japan and Korea]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.

Tanaka, Akira. 1975. “Kei to Henken to: ‘Kikan Sansenri’ Sōkan ni yosete [Respect and prejudice],” Sansenri 1: 142-149.

Tōdai hō Zenkyōtō ed. 1971. Kokuhatsu nyūkan taisei [Denunciation of the immigration system]. Tokyo: Aki Shobō.

Tomiyama, Taeko. 2009. Ajia o idaku [Embracing Asia]. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten.

Tsurumi, Shunsuke, and Kim Dalsoo. 1975. “Taidan: Undō ga umidasu mono [Talk: What is learned from Activism].” Sansenri 1: 12-31.

Tsurumi Shunsuke, Ueno Chizuko and Oguma Eiji. 2004. Senso ga Tsubusita Mono: Tsurumi Shunsuke ni Sengosedai ga Kiku [What the war destroyed: Postwar generation’s interviews with Tsurumi Shunsuke]. Tokyo: Shinyo-sha.

Wada, Haruki. 1975a. “Nikkanrentai no Shisō to Tenbō [Thought and prospect of Japan-Korea Solidarity].” Sekai November: 52-28.

—. 1975b. “Kim Chi Ha o Tasukerukai no imi [The meaning of the Committee to save Kim Chi Ha],” Sansenri 1: 52-61.

Wada, Haruki, Ishizaki Koichi, and the Sengo Gojunen Kokkai Ketsugi o Motomerukai, eds. 1996. Nihonwa shokuminchi shihai o do kangaete kitaka [How Japan has reflected on its colonial domination]. Tokyo: Nashinokisha.

Yonekura, Masakane. 1977. “Kankoku kara no Tsūshin o Enshutsu shite [Directing ‘Letters from South Korea’].” Sekai August: 342-246.

Yoshimatsu, Shigeru. 1986. “Zainichi Kankokujin Seijihan no jūgonen: Jūgonenkan kara miete kita mono [Fifteen years of ZainichiKorean Political Prisoners: from fifteen years’ experience].” Sekai June: 232-241.