Male youth’s self-narrative and the discourse of meritocracy in South Korea

ABSTRACTIn South Korea, which has seen a drastic power transfer from a progressive to an authoritarian government, a new form of the ‘weak-victim’ narrative has emerged in recent years, and changes and ruptures in the discourse on the weak have occurred. Young men in South Korea claim that they have been excluded from institutions, policies and systems and denied equal opportunities compared to women. It is brought to the fore the discourse of fairness.This article notes that a sense of faith in meritocracy is one of the contributors that generated the discourse of fairness. It examines how seemingly progressive policies conflicted with and were left stranded by the logic of fairness and meritocracy and takes a close look at why this happened. In addition, it reconstructs the social conditions that brought up the issue of fairness, investigating how the discourse of fairness emerged and how the significance of ‘fairness’ was shifted and re-conceptualized. Meanwhile, as the idea of meritocracy has become prevalent in society, a critical analysis of it was also conducted from multilateral angles. This article analyzes various aspects of the criticisms of meritocracy, discussing how we should view these criticisms and we can find possibilities to overcome the problematics of meritocracy.KEYWORDS: Meritocracyfairnessjusticethe weak-victim narrativeauthoritarianismSouth Korea Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 For example, see Al-Ghazzi’s article, ‘We will be great again: Historical victimhood in populist discourse’ (Citation2021). Meanwhile, Nancy Fraser pays attention to the harms experienced by the working class, who are leaning toward right-wing populism, and reassigns it as a component of progressive populism. Fraser Citation2019. The old is dying and the new cannot be born. Brooklyn, NY: Verso, 35.2 The Tang Ping (or lying flat) movement went viral when a user named Kind-Hearted Traveller shared a post that said, ‘Lying flat is justice’ on Chinese search engine Baidu’s discussion forum on the Chinese population in April 2021. Tang Ping is an attitude toward life that chooses to lie down with no zeal instead of struggling to meet social expectations. The term was banned in China soon after spreading online. Strictly speaking, lying flat-ism is not a term limited to men, but most memes portray young men lying down, so it can be said that young men represent the vanguard of this movement. 好心的旅行家, 2022. 躺平卽是正義[online]. 白度中國人口吧. available from: https://gnews.org/articles/380156 [Accessed 17 November 2022]3 Korean newsweekly SisaIn and public opinion research firm Hankook Research conducted an in-depth survey of 1,000 Korean adult men and women aged 19 or older on the topic of the ‘men in 20s phenomenon’ from March 20 to 22, 2019. The large-scale web-based survey with a total of 208 questions found that the attitudes of Korean men in their 20s were peculiar, distinguished from those of any other generation and gender group. The survey findings created immense social reverberations, as they were reported through news outlets. Later, the findings were published as a book with original data: Cheon and Jeong Citation2019, Men in 20s: Birth of the self-awareness of a male minority (‘20대 남자: 남성 마이너리티’ 자의식의 탄생). Seoul: SisaIN Book4 To the first statement, ‘gender discrimination against men is more severe,’ 38.6% of women in their 20s, 35.7% of men in their 30s and older, and 22.8% of women in their 30s and older answered that it is more severe. To the second statement, ‘law enforcement is unfavourable to men,’ 11% of women in their 20s, 26.7% of men in their 30s and older, and 5.7% of women in their 30s and older agreed with the statement. Ibid., 20, 32.5 Regarding the difference in professional skills at work between men and women, of men in their 20s, 5.1% said that in general, women are competent; 43.8% said that in general, men are competent; and 44.8% said that there is no significant difference between men and women. Regarding social skills at work, within the same demographic, 6.8% found that in general, women are competent; 41.9% found there is no significant difference between men; and 48% found in general men are competent. Ibid., 41, 42.6 The aforementioned poll’s other questions highlight the unique perspectives of young South Korean men. For example, 75.9% of men in their 20s believed that the Korean government is doing a poor job when it comes to its gender equality policy, while 53.6% believed that law enforcement is unfavourable to men in South Korea. Cheon, Gwan-yul & Jeong, Han-wool, Ibid., 38, 32.7 Among men in their 30s and above, 7.7% showed a strongly negative reaction to feminism-related statements, 18.2% lower than the 25.9% of men in their 20s. Ibid., 66.8 With the statement, ‘men are more competent in professional skills at work,’ 12% of women in their 20s and 45.6% of men in their 30s and above agreed. 88% of women in their 20s and 74.6% of men in their 30s and above agreed with the statement, ‘In a fair society, income between men and women is similar.’ (Ibid.. 95. 89.) In the meantime, of the 25.9% male demographic at issue, 95.7% disagreed with the statement, ‘In Korea, women earn less than men due to gender discrimination.’ In contrast, 14.6% and 73.2% of women in their 20s disagreed and agreed with the statement, respectively, and 12.2% said they did not know. The proportion for men in their 30s and older was 51.2%, 43.8% and 3%, respectively. Even among men, the percentage of the respondents who disagreed with the statement was about twice higher among the 25.9% group than that of men in their 30s or older.9 Baek Seung-wook used the expression ‘punishment with a borrowed knife’ to give an account of the result of the last presidential election. Baek Citation2022, Misunderstanding of the candlelight movement, punishment with a borrowed knife, and the question of liberalism (촛불의 오해, 차도응징 그리고 자유주의라는 질문). Hwanghae Review, 115, Saeul Foundation of Culture.10 It is important that conservative forces controlled the signifying of the fairness even though it is an empty slogan. This point informs signal of need and direction of reconstruction of the progressive forces.11 Jo Littler closely examined the operation of neoliberal meritocracy through case studies. To understand meritocracy, she used two key formats: social systems and ideological discourse. Littler Citation2017. Against meritocracy: Culture, power and the myths of mobility. London: Routledge.12 This case proves that fairness and meritocratic ideas are not valid among young men only. Although the concept of meritocracy has been highlighted only recently, the mindset behind it has been garnering momentum among South Koreans for a long time. For details, see: Park Citation2021, K-Meritocracy, Idea Books13 One of main reasons behind the particular response of young men should be addressed in relation to the Korean military conscription system. This is also a problem to be dealt with along with the reality of the Cold War regime that still exists in Korea in the post-Cold War period. Due to the focus of the discussion, this article mentions it briefly. For the more detailed discussion, see: Choo Citation2020. The Spread of Feminism and the Silence of Gendered Militarism in the Neoliberal Era: Controversy over Military Conscription Among. Journal of Asian Sociology. 49(4).14 Some findings of the 2019 research ‘Survey on public perception of society, politics and gender (국민의 사회, 정치 및 젠더의식조사)’ are covered in the following report: Ma et al. Citation2020. Gender analysis of gender conflict within the younger generation and policy recommendations for an inclusive state (청년관점의 ‘젠더갈등’: 진단과 포용국가를 위한 정책적 대응 방안 연구). Korean Women’s Development Institute. 68, 130.15 Sociologist Kim Dong-choon defines the widespread idea among Koreans that tests are the only measure for one’s capability as ‘test meritocracy.’ In the following book, he critically analyzes the generalized belief among Koreans that it is not only fair but also just to grade rewards based on test results. Kim Citation2022. Test Meritocracy: How Korea’s unique form of meritocracy deepens inequality (시험능력주의: 한국형 능력주의는 어떻게 불평등을 강화하는가), Changbi Publishers.16 "It could be a trauma", three Yonsei University students file a lawsuit at gathering of cleaning workers, In: JTBC Newsroom, TV, JTBC, June 29 2022, Available from: https://youtu.be/J316StMXYCE [Accessed 01 Dec 2022].17 Those who imagine being disenfranchised in this process reposition themselves as the weak and the oppressed and occupy a sign of fairness.18 Cho Citation2022, Meritocracy, Breaking away from the paradoxical way of the word and discourses (능력주의, 말과 담론이 걸은 역설의 길을 벗어나기), Critical Review of History, 140.19 Ibid., 9, 24-25.20 Controversy over fairness reignited as the actual transition process began in 2020, three years after the plan was announced. Those who imagine being disenfranchised in this process reposition themselves to the weak and the oppressed and occupy a sign of fairness.21 This view can be referred to as ‘ideal meritocracy.’ Many criticisms of meritocracy in Korea, such as a study by Jeong (Citation2021) take this position. Michael Sandel’s related book, a bestseller in South Korea, also adopts a similar stance: He criticizes meritocracy but does not examine fundamental structural inequality. Sandel Citation2020. The tyranny of merit. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.22 Park, Kwon-il, Ibid., 8-9, 20.23 Park Citation2020. Four questions to dissect meritocracy (능력주의 해부를 위한 네 가지 질문). In: Park, Kwon-il, et al. Meritocracy and Inequality, Education Community But.24 For example, Markovits argues in his research that meritocracy is a mechanism that creates inequality and a new aristocratic system that perpetuates a class structure. Markovits Citation2019. The Meritocracy Trap. N.Y.: Penguin books.25 Kim Citation2020. Social theory of meritocracy: An attempt at explanation (메리토크라시의 사회이론: 하나의 설명 시도), Economy and Society. 125, 231-232.26 Ibid., 251.27 We can refer to some suggestions for replacing the discourse of fairness with the theory of justice. Shin Citation2021. Rewriting fairness within the context of a larger justice (더 큰 정의로 공정을 다시 쓴다). Creation and Criticism, 193.Kim Jeong Citation2022, A World after fairness (공정 이후의 세계), Changbi Publisher.