Looking back to South Korea some 10 years ago, individualism was nowhere to be discussed. Influence of the famous Asian Confucianism emphasizing cooperation of individuals for better results of a group, merged with South Korea’s successful development from a developing country into a developed country based on economic revival after the IMF Crisis based on social collectivism, naturally led Koreans to believe in and be more used to collectivism rather than individualism.
The development of Korean “we-ness” could be, and still can be, seen in many parts of our everyday lives. Different types of connectivity including blood, region, and school relations lead to unconditional friendship. Koreans tend to care about how others would think about themselves rather than what they really want or think is right when making decisions and raising arguments, sometimes in a more than needed way. The Korean language tends to replace other languages’ “my” with “our,” examples being “our team,” “our school,” and “our country.” Traditionally, Koreans collectively call this jeong, similar to camaraderie, or something like being warm hearted, sentimental, and emotion, but difficult to exactly translate into any other language due to its illogical nature.
However, in the recent five to ten years, the trend in Korean social relationships and perspectives has shown some change. With the introduction of Western culture, the impact of globalization, and development of the country itself, people have started to pursue individualism rather than groupism. Some say Koreans these days lack jeong, and with the trend most prevalent in younger generations, some from older generations tend to group these traits as those of the “MZ generation,” which includes both Millennials and Generation Z. The newly rising “individualism” in South Korea has been problematizing and building walls between generations and as a result, sometimes even leading to generation conflicts.
At this point, we need to raise the question of, whether the recent individualism seen in South Korea is “actual” individualism. There are a range of definitions and interpretations to individualism presented by different philosophers and experts, but I personally do not believe that Korean “individualism” adequately fits into any of the definitions. The current phenomenon will be better described as egoism.
Of course, social problems always exist, and problems seem to be more prominent when living in the present and being at the state of experiencing it. However, again, I believe the main cause of many current South Korean social problems is egoism, especially that of the younger generations, sugarcoated as individualism.
To be honest, to find this type of sugarcoated individualism, we do not even have to go as far as, or as serious as to social problems. Just looking at the school’s online community, various fights related to so many complex problems occur on a daily basis, simply because people only try to raise their own thoughts under the excuse of individualism. That is not individualism, but it is rather egoism: none of them have made any effort to carefully read or understand some counter opinions.
Some may think that these are simply the problems of some problematic individuals, and I do think it may be the case for some, and I am simply talking about the overall trend in the country. Maybe the reason why I must clarify my thoughts and opinions to make sure my Editorial does not become viral on the school’s online community is also a result of the overly “egoistic” social trend, which is not “individualism,” as those who do not agree with me may not even make the effort to read this article.
In the Korean society where development has happened quite rapidly, people may have only learned to be individualistic and make their own arguments, without the chance to understand the significance of respecting others’ arguments. Not many have had the chance to learn that just as much as I have the right to speak, it is important to listen to others. Along with the right to make my own arguments follows the responsibility, or implicit need, to take in others’, and this may be the road to individualism rather than egoism.