Framing multiple others and international norms: the migrant worker advocacy movement and Korean national identity reconstruction

Abstract

This paper analyses the discourse of the migrant worker advocacy movement in South Korea to examine how activists' strategic framing can expedite the mobilisation of international norms despite significant cultural barriers. Korean activists argue on behalf of migrant workers that adopting international norms will help the Korean nation gain more respect from other nation-states and that international norms are not antithetical to the true nature of the Korean nation. These framing strategies have enabled Korean activists to mobilise international norms despite cultural barriers. However, such a framing strategy does not cultivate a truly inclusive nationhood; Korean activists have circumvented cultural barriers, but have not overcome or transformed them.

Multicultural Education Policy in South Korea: Current Struggles and Hopeful Vision

“…Castle (1998), Ho (2009), Kang, (2010, Kim (2009), and Yamanaka and Piper (2005) report that this is because of South Korea's and Japan's colonial histories, post-colonial experiences, and strong nationalism. In addition, Kim (2008), Kim and Oh (2011) and Martin (2009) report that while most countries welcome high-skilled immigrants, in the relatively homogenous societies in East Asia, including Japan and South Korea, highly-skilled immigrants are preferred over white foreigners with high-level skills.…”

Facing multiculturalism’s challenges in Korean education and society

“…Rather, official policy appears to envision merely a more tolerant society that is no longer homogeneous because it includes non-Koreans, not because it has expanded its definition of what ''being Korean'' means. As Kim (2009c) Han (2007b) has concluded that ''[t]he idea of multiculturalism is inherently subversive to the nationstate'' (p. 27). 16 It is a contradiction that migrant groups and their organized supporters have protested.…”

“…Previously excluded groups are included insofar as they participated in landmark historical events or exemplify dominant national values. In Korea, such dominant values, invoked to justify multiculturalism, include global competitiveness (Kim 2009b;Lee 2010b), societal advancement or seonjinhwa (Seol 2010), national consciousness and pride, and being a ''civilised nation'' (Kim 2009c).…”

“…Having experienced criticism from the United Nation's Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination for its celebration of ethnic homogeneity, eager to proffer modern, progressive, and democratic credentials to a global audience, and eager to capitalize on cultural diversity to enhance global competitiveness (Han 2007b;Jun 2011), Korean policymakers have found in multiculturalism an authoritative rubric through which to comprehend, communicate about, and act toward ethnic diversity in society and schooling. At the same time, activists have found in multiculturalism a rubric under which to mobilize national sentiment in support of fair and humane treatment of migrant workers (Kim 2009c).…”

Human rights NGOs in Israel: collective memory and denial

“…In this sense, a multicultural Korean nation constructed in the Korean activists' discourse still remains nationalistic and exclusive'. 150 In the context of Egypt, Abdelrahman explains how the human rights activists' choice of some of the issues and positions was 'motivated by their wish to avoid further criticism of being agents of the West and their hope of appearing to the public as patrons of nationalist concerns'. 151 Thus, most human rights NGOs shied away from addressing the increasing criminalisation of homosexuality, as well as pressure from Islamists to ban certain books and to prosecute their authors.…”