- The history of Jeju’s feebleness against state power
Hwang, Kyung-soo (Jeju National University)
In tracing the history of Jeju, one would discover a host of suffering that the Jeju people endured but could speak of only with difficulty. In chronological order, there was the deplorable conquest of Tamna [an ancient name of the island now called Jeju] by the Goryeo Dynasty to suppress the rebellion of Mokho [Mongolian horse ranch managers sent from the Yuan Dynasty]. (Specifically, Goryeo subjugated Tamna during King Gongmin’s reign while subduing the insubordinate Mokho whose number reached 1,700.) Secondly, Jeju people suffered excessive taxation and exploitation committed by state-appointed governors during the Joseon Dynasty. The third suffering would be the ban on Jeju residents’ exiting the island (1629-1825) and the poverty they experienced in the Joseon era. The fourth suffering was caused by Jeju 4∙3 and Cold War-ideology. Other historical examples include battles against Japanese raiders, oppression by Imperial Japan’s Kwantung Army (58,320 soldiers stationed on Jeju alone in 1945), and the preventative arrests of Jeju residents before and during the Korean War with regard to Jeju 4∙3 (the tracking down and imprisoning those who were thought to harm government-friendly forces by sympathizing with the enemy in wartime). Jeju also suffered pain due to the guilt-by-association system concerning the pro-Pyongyang Chongryon (General Association of Korean Residents in Japan). With respect to the Chongryon, there were cases where new cadets were not accepted into the military academies after passing their exams because of the background check. In other cases, some Korean citizens who had lived in Japan were wrongfully accused of being spies (The Hankook Ilbo, dated Oct. 11, 2009, “Chongryon ‘spy’ now aged over 80 finally acquitted after 45 years”).
In the history of Jeju, it was difficult to secure freedom from state power as is taught in books. Jeju was the most oppressed place in Korea. Rather than a place of freedom, Jeju was an island of exile and a harsh place to live.
- The Jeju people who needed a community of cooperation
The Jeju people needed the most primitive tool of cooperation to surmount the Japanese raids, the Mongolian invasion, the tax extortion by state power and governors, the disasters, and the destitution. Even revolutionary naturalist Charles Darwin would have trouble explaining the conditions of Jeju Island. When looking at the Jeju residents, he would find them competing when viewed as individuals, while cooperating when viewed as a group. As the villages on Jeju were not a community that existed as a combination of individual people, but a community of people who were all poor and persecuted, Pyotr Alekseyevich Kropotkin’s framework of cooperation (2015) would be more convincing when explaining Jeju’s conditions.
Animals would not compete with each other or wield violence in their family communities. There may be special cases where an old male lion leaves its family or where nomads leave elderly people in the fields due to the difficulties of migration. Normally, however, a family community is premised on cooperation.
Residents of Jeju’s villages had to live a communal family life. It is connected with the Gwendang [kinship] culture. However distant, they consider all of their relatives as somebody to rely on. They even call all of their elderly neighbors “Samchun” [uncles], be they neighbors inside or outside their kinship network, regardless of their gender. This is called the “Gwendang culture.” When two people introduce themselves to each other and notice even the slightest connection, they would say, “Oh, we’re Gwendang!” The in-laws and the most distant of relatives also had to be united in a cooperative framework of Gwendang. It was an inevitable tradition in order for Jeju people to survive.
The Jeju people tried to exclude selfish elements in order to protect the cooperative community. As Choi Jung-kyu (2009) indicates, an altruistic society is unstable. This is because when the selfish elements — that is, the free riders — appear, an altruistic society would begin to crack and most people would try to lead a selfish life.
Traditionally, Jeju residents made innumerable efforts to keep their society altruistic. One example is “separately provided mutual assistance” (e.g. contributing to one’s funeral by giving money to each of their children in condolence). If a Jeju resident fails to provide mutual assistance to each and every relevant person, they will be regarded badly. In another example, Jeju haenyeo, women divers, have maintained very strict qualifications and penalties in order to protect Haenyeo Badang, the sea areas used by the haenyeo. The strong rules protect the shared space.
Historically, each village agreed upon their respective Hyangyak [communal rules] and made sure that every villager followed them. It would not be an exaggeration to say that violating Jeju’s Hyangyak was more terrifying than violating actual laws. Jeju residents are criticized for being exclusive. This is because there was a strong in-group tendency to abide by Hyangyak and protect the community. In order to solve problems that are difficult for a single family to handle, they developed the culture of Sunureum [exchange of labor] through the practices of Gye and Jeop, which are communal fraternities. The custom was necessary in order for Jeju residents to survive. The ceremonial occasions of coming of age could be also addressed through Gye and Jeop. Gaining a paid membership to Gye and Jeop would help the residents cope with large family events. That was how they survived. Non-members or non-contributors were not allowed to participate in the distribution of fruit. Although the custom is criticized for being exclusive, it should be seen as the solidarity of the weak.
- Jeju’s village autonomy as a result of democracy, along with cooperation
Jeju’s village autonomy could be presented as a form of adding the framework of cooperation to democracy as is described by Greek philosopher Aristotle. None of Jeju’s villages expelled members by voting. It was also not a republic where power was transferred to a single person through democracy. Jeju’s system was much better than Athenian democracy, which sugarcoated bad deeds with fluent, easy-on-the-ear speeches. This is because Jeju’s system was created by adding cooperation to democracy.
In an interview on July 7, 2021, Prof. Go Chang-hun said: “Jeju’s village autonomy was a democracy in which decisions were made through continuous meetings. It was a way to overcome difficulties by working together, and a structure of unavoidable compliance with the decisions made within the group. The villages were not large, and the residents had to live a life of face-to-face relationships, getting to know each other.”
There may have been a form of aristocratic government where community leaders discussed. However, given the mechanism of gathering public opinions through village meetings, activities of self-supporting groups, and associations by vocation and age, the government featured democracy.
- An Asian mode of co-production based on the sharing economy
Village autonomy in Jeju is a sharing economy system. In the context of Western economic history, it was an Asian mode of co-production before slavery or feudalism. It is proven in the systems of Haenyeo Badang and the common meadows. Even now, these rules are obeyed in the yearly adjustment or distribution of profits from the management of common meadows and the group activities of haenyeo.
Village autonomy should be interpreted that the commons have been used as a tool for maintaining community, rather than interpreting it within the framework of the tragedy of the commons or the comedy of the commons. The system would have the ultimate purpose of maintaining the health of the community, rather than pursuing economic logic. Co-distribution required a strict compliance with norms. Selfishness, free-riding, immorality, untrustworthiness, lack of shared responsibility, and, especially, incapable leaders (e.g. Sanggun haenyeo [highly accomplished haenyeo] lacking work capabilities) were subject to condemnation and penalties in the co-distribution process. These were efforts for the continuity of village autonomy.
- Village autonomy in Jeju: resident autonomy rather than group autonomy
In the system of village autonomy, the villagers became the center. It was no different from the mentality that man is equal to heaven. People in need were constantly cared for, respect was continuously shown for the elderly, and efforts were made for fair distribution. It would have been possible as the communities were based on a village unit. To cite my childhood experience, when the neighborhood was celebrating something, we used to give away Tteokban, rice cake and boiled pork prepared to be shared, to the neighbors over a certain age in the evening. Then we reported on the reason for sharing the food. The elderly members of the community asked who we were and shared the joy with us. It was a custom that allowed us to play various roles at once, including sharing, reporting, checking on the health of the elderly, and providing enjoyment.
In this sense, village autonomy in Jeju features resident autonomy, rather than group autonomy. Apparently, the national government still struggles to accept Jeju’s village autonomy as a new system of autonomy in the Local Autonomy Act. This is partly because it is difficult to determine the scope of the activities by law, but also because village autonomy coexists with the practice of co-production and distribution, which are difficult to regulate with Korean laws and institutions.
- Hyangyak: The standard and norm for peace in villages
Hyangyak has provided a framework for building peace in the village. All 172 sub-districts called Li, the sub-districts composed of Eup and Myeon, in Jeju have established their respective Hyangyak. Mostly, Li communities directly elect their leaders called Lijang, or appoint them through recommendation. Li communities also appoint their office managers. The sub-districts also receive membership fees from the residents. (Some sub-districts secure the operational costs using the profits from their own assets and properties, without collecting membership fees.) These villages manage their own properties, while receiving and executing Li-related subsidies. They also form self-supporting groups to make collective decisions. These activities shape the standards for village economy and the essence of the village.
Hyangyak induced peace while serving as a norm for villagers to follow. It played a role in managing conflicts as well as serving elderly villagers. It also laid the groundwork for village development decision-making. It served as a basis for managing the commons, managing spring water and piers, and inducing investment in social overhead capital. It served as a norm in performing Maeulje [village rituals] and providing scholarships to village youth. In the process of following these rules, peace was guaranteed in the villages.
Hyangyak led the peace-building process by creating a public forum for the villagers. On communal matters, villagers consult with the Lijang first, rather than with provincial councilors or town heads. In an interview on July 5, 2021, Dr. Kim Il-soon said: “Hyangyak provided the foundation for the village’s role as a small government to encourage its members to directly participate in village affairs and solve them. It even motivated the self-supporting groups to take the role of a parliament.” In the interview on July 7, 2021, Prof. Go Chang-hun said: “The mechanism of the meeting played a significant role in keeping peace. However, it was also used as a negative tool. For example, as meetings were instrumentalized for decision-making, they were reduced to a mobilization system. The challenge for the future is to prevent the meetings from being instrumentalized so that the democratic style is properly applied.”
Hyangyak realized peace through a mechanism similar to governance. Dr. Kim Il-soon said in the interview: “Jeju has the governance system of village autonomy, which enabled the residents to secure peace through the roles of self-supporting groups. Cooperation was achieved within the self-supporting groups such as the development committee, youth association, women’s association, elderly association, fishing village cooperatives, farmers’ association, and property management committee. Profits from the village activities are distributed fairly, while part of the money is provided every month to the elderly over a certain age. Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, some villages distributed relief grants to each household.”
- Thinking of peaceful village autonomy that embraces diverse values
Jeju’s village autonomy should embrace diverse values. From a geopolitical perspective, Jeju Island is the center of East Asia. Cruise ships enter the island’s ports more than 500 times a year (507 times in 2016, with recent changes concerning the THAAD deployment and the COVID-19 pandemic). In Jeju villages, not only multicultural families but also refugees coexist with locals. (484 Yemenis applied for refugee status in Jeju in 2018, and 414 of them currently live in Jeju.) Jeju is a representative region with a net increase in the number of immigrants, which surpasses the decrease in the population. These diverse values should be embraced by the villages. Just as Jean Monet in France tried to embrace Germany after World War II, it is necessary to achieve coexistence and a resonating village autonomy.
Attention should also be paid to women’s engagement in village autonomy. In Jeju villages, discussions have been increasingly active concerning gender equality. This is because the autonomy’s membership qualification of being the head of the household limits the participation of women in village affairs. An increasing number of villages have had such discussions. It may be a reflection of the island’s traditional feature of Yeoda, the phenomenon of women outnumbering men.
The direction pursued by village autonomy must also change. My idea is that cultural and artistic needs should also be reflected. We are living in an era where village autonomy is not all about responding to tyranny and destitution as it did in the past. Village autonomy should allow us to pursue leisure, healing, and the fun of life. Therefore, village autonomy should reflect the current culture and art. I also believe that more attention should be paid to environmental protection. Recently, village autonomy has begun to take an interest in environmental protection through such efforts as the community building campaign. There is growing interest in the environment, which involves the management of common meadows, Haenyeo Badang, and spring water, as well as the prevention of groundwater pollution.
I conclude this article by thinking about Jeju’s village autonomy, which leads people and nature to peace even after times have changed.
□ References
Darwin, C. The origin of species. Translated by Chul-yong Song. Seoul: Dongsuh Press, 2009.
Kropotkin, P. P. Mutual aid: A factor of evolution. Translated by Hoon Kim. Seoul: Summer Hill, 2015.
Choi, J. K. Emergence of altruistic man. Seoul: Puriwaipari, 2004.
Choi, J. S. Economic history of the west. Seoul: Seomoondang, 2018.
Hwang, K. S. Cartoon: Understanding of the science of public administration. Jeju: Guide Book Publishing, 2008.
Kim, Y. C. Bargaining for Advantage. Seoul: Humanist, 2016.
Hwang, Kyung-soo | B.A. in Public Administration (Department of Public Administration, Jeju National University); M.A. in Urban and Regional Planning (Graduate School of Environmental Studies, Seoul National University); Ph.D. in Transportation Engineering (Graduate School of Urban Science, University of Seoul); former researcher at the Jeju Research Institute (two years); current professor in the Department of Public Administration, Jeju National University. Authored “Cartoon: Understanding of the science of public administration” and co-authored “Understanding of Jeju Special Self-Governing Province.” Lecture titles include: Public Administration, City and Transportation, Negotiation, Theory of State, Cultural Administration.