Political Economist

Changing society and determination to study abroad

During these professional experiences, I could not at all throw away academic concerns. I decided to host regular seminar groups in order to read many political economy classics which were frequently neglected in contemporary academia regardless of their significance.

We focused on modern economic thinkers ranging from Adam Smith, David Ricardo, John M. Keynes and others. Through this reading group activities, I was able to read classical masterpieces such as An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, The principles of political economy and taxation, and The general theory of employment, interest, and money, The formation of English Working Classes by E.P. Thompson, Modern World System by I.M. Wallerstein, and finally The Distinction — Social Critique of the tastes by Pierre Bourdieu and so on.

This intensive reading experience gives me better opportunity to broaden my knowledge about the history of economics and modern social and political thoughts. I think these broad reading experiences can be cited as a firm basis of my academic aptitude.

Of course, basic motive behind these studies comes from changing socio-economic realities. Korean society is on the verge of rapidly changing politico-economic order. As a peripheral, divided country located in highly competitive and unstable North East Asian region, Korean society has to cope with outer blows in a bare face. Historically inherited U.S-Korean relations have set a series of structural constraints over autonomous decision-making of Korean society. When it comes to the realm of economic policies, there seems to be no alternative developmental strategies different from those of U.S driven financial market-oriented model.

Since 1992, especially after Asian Financial Crisis of 1997-98, this narrowest economic policy with long lasted bureaucratic administration of the government have aggravated Korean economic situation. International financial capital inflows and monetary organizations have badly influenced on Korean economy. Unlike advanced countries which are facilitated with various types of social welfare system and security net, these short-sighted financial market-oriented decision-making mean death-like chronic unemployment, increasing job instability, aggravation of quality of life, inveterate deflation, increasing income discrimination, and finally relative sense of deprivation to most of the population.

These Korean economic circumstances made me realize following significant theoretical problems: Are not there any alternative solutions to international financial volatility? Are not there any alternative resolutions to the problem of economic efficiency? Is not there any rational line into which sustainable economic development and democracy can be converged? What is the nature of, and how did transformation process of international monetary organizations occur? What are synthetic approaches with which social scientists can articulate various exogenous factors including “world system” (international industrial division of labor and interdependence) with endogenous elements affecting specific government’s policies?

I think these questions require studies of comparative political economy and Economics. However, I could not find any appropriate academic curricula and official educational institutions in Korea to solve these theoretical concerns. That is why I decide to study abroad. I hope I had opportunities to continue my academic interest, and absorb various interdisciplinary approaches of social sciences.

Re-enrolling in graduate program and writing M.A thesis

My relatively short (compared to others) yet ‘longer’ military experience was finished after being released from prison under the Court of appeal’s decision. I could re-enroll for graduate program. The time when I was trying to be accustomed to academic atmosphere again, Korean society was on the verge of radical political change. Prominent political leader Kim Dae-jung, who had been leading national opposition party for a long time, won the presidency against equally long-lasted authoritarian political structure. I could restore my honor after Kim Dae-jung’s presidential inauguration.

However, this amnesty had nothing to do with my daily life as a graduate student. I did want to concentrate on my M.A thesis. It should not only reflect on my own experiences but also be more excellent than others in the academic perspective, because the thesis was not a formal ritual for graduation but a cause itself for me to uphold, with and to which I had devoted my whole undergraduate life.

My thesis was to explore the true meaning of Karl Marx’s socialist political economy. Underlying motive of my research was to ask what Marx’s socialist economic theory was, and whether there was any possibility of alternative interpretation to conventional vulgarization. Through logical analysis of Marx’s major political economic works, I have questioned commonly believed notion that Marx’s socialism was based on state-ownership and direct product-distribution system by the ‘Central board of Planning.’

Of course, because there were logical flaws or antinomies in Marx’s position toward alternative economic system, I had tried to reconstruct his main concepts and ideas. Furthermore, I should have considered various alternative feasible socialist models which were suggested by a series of market socialist theorists. As the result of one year of my intensive theoretical analysis, I bore fruit and finally completed my M.A degree thesis, entitled “A Critical study of Karl Marx’s socialist economics.”

This thesis has some merits both in theory and practice; the concrete analysis of Marx’s theory of property rights provides us useful insights with which political economists can appreciate economic developmental processes and realities of the old USSR and eastern European communist countries, not to mention modern China and North Korea’s industrialization process. Furthermore, by focusing on the significance of self-governing structure of modern business corporations, my thesis could be utilized as a firm basis for promoting economic theory of ‘participatory’ and ‘industrial democracy.’ My thesis brought me the first prize for excellent thesis of the year in social science fields by Graduate School of Sogang universtiy.

Newly acquired experiences and theoretical questions

Even after graduation, my career was characterized by continuous efforts to broaden my knowledge in social science areas. Meanwhile, I also want to involve in more practical social activities. At first, I got an internship program at a non-governmental organization (NGO), “Hankyoreh Unification Foundation,” which was founded by Hankyreh daily newspaper in order to encourage independent interchanges among peoples in the North and South Korea.

Main purpose of this organization was to aid North Korean children suffering from famine. While I was working at this NGO, I planned a series of educational programs for college students and volunteers, especially focusing on theoretical approaches to build peaceful inter-Korean relations and cooperation among North East Asian countries.

This humanitarian activities and my commitment to this NGO for 8 months brought me closer to recognize a tremendous pile of severe social problems deriving from the divided country. Unlike EU countries, North East Asian countries, especially, China, the Korean peninsular, and Japanese, have had quite a lot of conflicts in terms of their diplomatic relations since Japanese imperialist occupation and World War Ⅱ. Contrary to European countries, North East Asian countries have long been suffering from their ignorance and prejudice against each other. The serious problems of Japanese sexual enslavement of Korean women and ceaseless political instability arising from North Korea can be reduced to North East Asian countries’ distressing historical background.

All of these concrete and serious social problems posed me significant theoretical problematic; how to promote cooperative relationship among North East Asian countries; what is the role of government and business corporations as well as individuals in restoring rapprochement among these countries.

In August 1999, I entered a publishing company. I worked for about 3 and a half year as an editor and then chief editor at Paek-Ui publishing company, one of the most well- known publishers in social science fields. As an incipient editor, I enrolled for “Korean Publishers Academy” for 5 months to absorb complex procedures and methods for book editing and publishing. At a time when I finished the course, I won an honor prize and commendation for my excellent aptitude and positive participation in the program.

However, the most representative achievement showing my academic performance and perseverance was the publication of the Korean version of the great social science classics such as Grundrisse – Foundations of the critique of political economy by K. Marx, and the contemporary internationally influential journal, Le monde Diplomatique.

As for the Grundrisse, the first translation of the Grundrisse remained forgotten for last ten years. I organized seminar groups consisting of young scholars, who majored Economics, modern social and political thoughts, to edit this book as perfectly as possible. We compared the English version of Grundrisse with the German and the Japanese editions to reduce any errors that translators might make during translation process. After about two years of enduring efforts, the first Korean version of Grundrisse was published in 2001 in 3 volumes. Almost all the independent book reviews and review corners of some major newspapers turned the spotlight on our work.

In the course of editing this book, I had chances to meet various types of scholars and intellectuals who devoted their lives to exploring their own research questions. And I also learned the significance of meticulous attitude toward theoretical problems and the significance of perseverance. These invaluable virtues will surely be conducive to my future intellectual endeavor.

As a chief editor, I had planned to publish new series-books containing significant values in our society. After 1 and a half year of ongoing efforts to appreciate Korean society’s academic trends, I finally published a book entitled “Beyond Privatopie” in a bid for many Korean scholars and government officials to rethink their narrowest financial market-oriented reform model.

Most articles of this anthology of Le monde Diplomatique were originally written by internationally famous scholars such as Noam Chomski, Pierre Bourdieu, Eduard Galeano, Benjamin Barber, etc., to pose some serious global agenda such as international financial market volatility, environmental issues, international human right movements, main cause and detrimental consequences of widespread of mass destructive biological weapons and the problem of terrorism, on which all of international community members should deliberate for the permanent development of (wo)mankind.

The time when I firstly projected and published this book, Korean society was driven forcefully by neo-liberalistic foreign openness under the fantasy of globalization. However, there seemed to be no scholars and intellectuals who warned against devastating consequences of myopic financial market openness. Thus, it is necessary for some intellectuals to introduce another interpretation of the world.

During the course of publication, I devoted my daily life enthusiastically to review and select various articles with helps of some scholars who studied in European countries. This experience was so exciting and gave me great opportunity to reflect myself and our society as well as international surroundings in which I live with other communities.

I was born in Gwangju city located in Gyunggi province in 1971 as my parent’s fourth son. My mother lived in the countryside with her sons and two daughters engaging herself in agriculture while her husband worked as supervising lawyer for the U.S army stationed in Seoul.

I was brought up in the countryside with my parents’ loving care until when I transferred middle school. From then on, I lived with my father and one of my elder sisters until other family members moved to Seoul when I was a junior high school student.

I was brought up as an introverted child who liked to read books. After I change middle school, there were no special challenges or adversities until I was admitted to prestigious private high school and university. When I entered Sogang university, I got scholarships for my excellent records in CSAT(College Scholastic Aptitude Test). I could take advantages of winning scholarships due to my distinguished academic records for the first two academic semesters.

In the university, between academy and social activities

When I entered university in 1990, the atmosphere of campuses was dominated by democratic student movements fighting against the military regime. At first, I did not get involved in such radical student movements because I thought there must be much more fundamental value or truth of human life in academic fields. I devoted my freshman’s year to finding this self-defined ‘ultimate essence of life’ in the philosophical point of view. In retrospect, my soul was filled with various phrases and concepts quoted from French existentialists and one of the greatest German philosophers, G.W.F. Hegel’s process of phenomenology of mind.

However, peruse of modern European philosophical masterpieces brought me no closer to ultimate goal of discovering the meaning of life. By the time I became a sophomore, there were tragic incidents; one university student who participated in demonstration requesting for freedom of speech and political democracy was killed by riot police. Furthermore, many university students made attempts to burn themselves to death calling for social justice. I could not keep ignoring all miserable situations because I found my existence was placed under the authoritarian military regime. I thought the true meaning of life and the essence of human-beings might be pursued in the positive participation in social movements seeking to realize ‘social and historical objectives,’ as one of the greatest French philosophers, J.P. Sartre once did after the World War Ⅱ. From then on, I started to get involved in democratic student movements. I worked for Sogang Herald — English campus newspaper — as a reporter as well as a constructive director of student academic association doing research on history and contemporary reality of the third world and political economy of Korea.

When I was a junior student, I organized national student movement organization called “National Student Solidarity” longing for achieving social democracy. The main goals of this student body was to fight against the military regime and unjust laws, to criticize corrupted collaboration between political regime and Chaebol, Korean conglomerates, and finally to propagandize progressive social thoughts such as critical theories about Third world inequality, various kinds of western Marxism, and international labor movement history in the name of “alternative university movement.” I dedicated my last undergraduate years as the chairman of this student organization.

Through these student activities, I could learn various approaches of political theories ranging from western political thoughts to modern critical theory, and have high moral sensitivity of inequality and social discrimination in Korean society.

Determination to enter graduate school, and new experiences as a military officer

After graduating from university, I made up my mind to enter the graduate school of Sogang University to study political science. The main motive and personal goals of graduate courses was to reflect my undergraduate student activities.

My academic curiosity was not circumscribed by any particular fields. I organized open forums to read philosophical and political masterpieces ranging from classical western political thoughts such as Plato, Aristotle via modern social contract theorists (Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean-Jacque Rousseau, James Mill) to modern and contemporary German philosophers such as Immanuel Kant, G.W.F. Hegel, Juergen Habermas, etc.

And I was also fully engaged in Graduate Student Association as a research fellow for 1 and a half year hosting academic conferences on a regular basis; one of the most representative outcome of these activities was to hold a series of conferences entitled “Modern French Philosophies and its implication on Korean society,” and “Rethinking Social Formation Debates in 1980s”, either of which were academically sophisticated enough to be published as a series of journal articles and books.

After 1 and a half year of studying as a graduate student, I had to enlist Korean army. In the course of military service, however, I had to face another kind of adversity which influenced me thereafter; I was arrested by military police in charge of violation of “National Security Law” when I was serving the army as a platoon commander.

The main cause of military prosecutor’s accusation was related with my undergraduate student’s activities. They indicted me of making “national security” and “social order” in peril. Military court sentenced me to 1 year’s imprisonment. However, I could not accept the court’s decision because I did nothing potentially harmful to “national security.” Rather, my undergraduate activities were bridging democracy into the political and economic areas of Korean society. I think the law does not have any juridical and moral legitimacy without making reference to the strong urges of Human Right Commission of the UN.

I was able to be released from military prison after being sentenced to put on probation by the Court of appeal. However, my unique experiences under military jails were deeply ingrained in my mind. Past seems to last forever forming one’s personal history. I could meet a lot of soldier-prisoners who were suffering from lack of legal facilities and aids. The only fault of a group of youth who were sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment was their firm belief that armament and taking military training were considered serious violation of God’s rules.

When I was in another military jail, notorious for its frequent violation of basic human rights for a long time in South Korea, I met many intelligent soldiers who were sentenced to life sentence. Most of them were suffering from their own chronic diseases. However, they could not receive any appropriate medical treatments. Some soldiers were sentenced to several years’ imprisonment only because they had violated anachronistic military conventions.

I don’t want to stay here to depict these painful experiences any longer. However, I could learn invaluable lessons from those experiences: I should live the rest of my life for the interest of miserable victims of mainstream society as a social scientist.

The following is an essay that I wrote for English Writing class. Most debates related with gay and lesbian marriage in the United States are based on the concept of morality derived from Christian religious principles. That is why the debates sometimes become over-politicized. In this essay, I approached the issue not from religious perspective, but from civil rights.

Those who oppose same sex marriage claim that gay and lesbian marriage will bring about the collapse of the traditional concept of family and marriage, thereby leading to moral decadence. However, their concept of morality is based on prejudice against social minorities and may lead to the violation of basic human rights. In this essay, I will address this issue focusing especially on the concept of the traditional family and marriage, morality and future implications of same sex marriage.

Firstly, most opponents of same sex marriage are inclined to draw their argument based on the traditional concept of marriage and family. They argue same sex marriage will bring about the deconstruction of the traditional family and the concept of marriage. But it is not so easy to understand what their images of traditional family and marriage are. Sometimes, they seem to be based on the idealized image of the monogamous family which is composed of one male husband/father and one female wife/mother and their children. Admittedly, this type of marriage and family can be justifiably attributed to the traditional concept of family because it has a long history in the modern world.

However, it is also true that this traditional family is becoming obsolete due to various socio-economic changes; the number of single parents with children, and those who want to live alone among adult persons are increasing in the most advanced capitalist countries partly because of high divorce rates and various economic reasons. For example, those who are worried about the deconstruction of the traditional family should consider the fact that only 15% of the whole U.S family can be categorized as traditional family. If it is true, the main threat of so-called traditional family is not same sex marriage itself but various socio-economic changes of the society. Then why should same sex marriage be blamed for the collapse of traditional family value?

Secondly, another critique of same sex marriage is based on the narrow concept of morality. Those who do not want to accept same sex marriage claim that the homosexuality is the violation of morality of the society. But I cannot understand what they are talking about morality. The homosexuality is just about the difference of sexual preferences of individuals. It has nothing to do with morality.

If they really want to argue that the homosexuality is the violation of the underlying principle of morality, then they should offer their own definition of morality. Whatever they say, however, their own concepts of morality will turn out to be different from those of the advocates of same sex marriage. From this juncture, the collision between different moralities can become a legal issue.

In other words, the homosexuality should not be judged by the narrowest concept of self-righteous morality of the opponents. The homosexuality is about different sexual preferences, and same sex marriage is about the legal protection for the minority. There is no such a thing as privileged moral authority in discussing the issue of the homosexuality and same sex marriage.

Finally, those who oppose same sex marriage argue that the legal protection for gay and lesbian couples would open the door to various kinds of heterosexual couples, thereby in extreme cases leading to the polygamy. Thus, the Massachusetts Supreme Court’s ruling on the rights of same sex marriage should be banned by the Federal Supreme Court of Justice.

However, there is no logical causal relationship between same sex marriage and the polygamy in the first place. The argument that same sex marriage is a sort of slippery slope leading to polygamy is an extreme argument without any substantial evidence.

Furthermore, even though we admit this unsubstantial assumption that allowing legal protections for gay and lesbian couples may induce polygamous family, there is no legal legitimacy for the Court to ban same sex marriage in advance if that marriage does not do any harm to public health, safety and welfare. It is common sense that any legal and political authorities can only be justified or legitimatized when they protect civil rights based on an appropriate legal framework.

Finally, the polygamy is another traditional type of marriage based on individuals’ own moral, sexual judgment like the monogamy. It is a quite common phenomenon even in certain states of the U.S. If it causes sexual abuses, discrimination against gender, then it should be punished by appropriate laws. But there is no rational reason to ban the polygamy in the name of the conservation of traditional family values. Nobody can justifiably argue that the monogamy is superior both morally and sociologically to the polygamy.

Most ordinary Americans seem to be over-politicized over the same sex marriage issue. But once they recognize the fact that the homosexuality is not a moral issue but a different sexual preference, they will realize that same sex marriage is a simple matter of legal statement. And if so many gay and lesbian couples are really suffering from lack of proper legal protection, then this issue should be viewed as a serious violation of basic human rights. In sum, those who have homosexual preferences deserve to have their own family and should be protected by the same laws like heterosexual family.

Comment 1 (from one of my friends) I like your essay organization. It was clearly divided. But I did not understand your concept of morality and are you pro-polygamy? I am not sure but maybe you should talk about ‘civil right’ instead of ‘human right.’ If you are pro-same sex marriage, you should not bring up the polygamy issue that is very polarizing.

Comment 2 (from the instructor): The problem with the argumentation is that we know what the idea of morality is based on. It is based on the Bible which rejects polygamy and homosexual relations – the question is whether this is what should define morality rather than what morality is based on.

The following essay was written for my personal heurstical purpose. It is about human stem cell research. Even though current debates associated with stem cell research have been usually accompanied by religious, moral assumptions, I tried to exclude those metaphysical aspects of the debate. I hope you will have a good chance to think about the issue while reading this essay.

Stem Cell Research, Human Cloning, and then What?

Scientific research on human stem cell has been developing rapidly for the last decade or so. Since the cloned sheep Dolly appeared in the world in the late 1997, another pioneering research on embryonic stem cell engineered by a group of Korean scientists started to decorate news headlines nowadays. However, those who propose human cloning research should consider the potentially detrimental repercussions of the research on human dignity, the danger of the polarization of a society by genetics and various other unknown consequences of the research.

One of the most frequently cited examples for the human stem cell research is its potentially positive contribution to the longevity of human life. It is also argued that scientists can prevent probable diseases in advance due to the broadened knowledge of human stem cell. However, it will be possible only at the expense of the violation of human dignity.

Firstly, until now the most dangerous human disease does not originate from the mutation of human cell itself but from various infectious diseases. It is widely known that at least 3,500 children are still dying in every 10 minutes from chronic malnutrition due to persistent poverty and various contagious diseases such as typhoid fever, measles and AIDS in South Asia and most African countries. Talking about extended longevity of life expectancy and the necessity of preemptive medical care cannot be justified in the name of human dignity once we consider these nonsensical deaths.

Secondly, there is another aspect of human dignity in this matter. Suppose that you can produce one part of the human body due to stem cell research. Imagine that David can buy one eye and one left leg from a university hospital refrigerator. With these supplemental organs, suppose that David can replace his weak or problematic organs whenever he wants, then how can he define himself as a human or an individual? How do we know whether David is still David if he has replaced every part of his body with a stronger or younger head, hands or heart? How, then, is it far from the callous story of humanoid? Can we still talk about human dignity in this new brave world?

In this sense, the problem is not about technology or our lack of sufficient medical knowledge, but about the political and social structure in which those who are suffering from various infectious diseases do not have access to proper medical treatment. Thus those who argue that stem cell research is necessary for human beings’ welfare are misleading the reality. We are suffering not from sufficient medical knowledge but from lack of proper ways to distribute this knowledge.

We should also consider the demographic aspect of stem cell research. Let us suppose that there are no serious technological barriers to human cloning. In other words, suppose that it is perfectly possible to produce another human body with the same genome. By this juncture, it will be also likely that scientists can differentiate potentially problematic gene from healthy and intelligent gene. From this stage, it is not so great a leap to imagine various situations where every parent competes to transplant better or perfect gene into their test tube babies.

Since it is quite natural to think of a society where most human beings are not totally different from those of the society today, in other words, there is no guarantee that future society will be filled with more moralistic and egalitarian citizens, it is also plausible to imagine endless competition among people to achieve perfect genome for their children. Like the present days, this endless competition among citizens of a future society will be determined by uneven economic and political powers in the end.

If that is the case, nobody can guarantee that the society will not be divided into two or three groups of people; those who have superior gene and those who do not have. From this stage, society will be burdened not only with unequal income distribution, which has been the main determinant of social classes, but also with unequal genome distribution, which will be an advent of the “brave new world,” genetically divided new caste system. In this way, another serious socio-political problem will be derived from seemingly scientifically neutral stem cell research.

Someone may argue that the government can control the goals and objects of stem cell research or at least will succeed in channeling the direction of the research; The government can protect the society from potentially detrimental negative side effects of the research through its active policy intervention. For example, the government can ban human cloning even though it allows cloning itself on animal experiments; It is also possible to imagine that the government will pass a law encouraging medical researches based on the knowledge of human stem cell but banning commercial trades of human embryo and genome and so and so forth.

However, we do not have to be economists in order to see how the government has been misguided by the myth of free market fundamentalism, and how various social institutions have shown their lethargy in protecting public goods in front of market forces. We do not have to be nuclear physicians to see how previous scientific researches on atom have brought unexpected catastrophes to society. The idea that the government or more abstractly speaking ‘society as a whole’ can draw clear lines between positive potentials and usages of the stem cell research and its probable abuses is hardly convincing. There is no such an omnipotent institution or a spiritual mighty which can easily overcome this slippery slope.

Thus, if we have to decide to do something about stem cell research, it is not about whether we should ban or allow the research; it is about when we should prohibit this potentially detrimental play which is still being committed by arrogant ‘as-if-God-human creatures.’ All arguments on the potentially beneficial effects of stem cell research such as extended human longevity, preemptive medical care are based on a total ignorance of the political and socio-economic complexities of human society.

The Differences between Political Science and Economics

When I was in Korea, some of my friends and younger students sometimes asked me why I had chosen to study political science. They wanted to know whether there were special reasons for me to choose that particular area of study in social science. I have been asked the same question since I studied economics in the U.S.

Personally speaking, I studied political science as my undergraduate and graduate major for about 6 years in Seoul. Recently, I am studying economics in New York. Due to this personal experience, I am in a better position to draw big pictures of two major social science research areas.

In this essay, I would like to introduce some similar aspects and major differences between political science and economics for those who are about to choose either of two area of study in social science.

Historically, political science dates back to classical Greek’s philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle. They tried to provide us with general principles of and foundations for good commonwealth in their major works.

Compared to political science, the history of modern economics originated from J.M. Keynes’s General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money published in 1939. In his book, Keynes paved the ways for modern macroeconomic analyses of capitalist economy.

Even though, some economic historians argue that the history of economics can be traced back to the date earlier than Keynes’ era, it is widely accepted that before 1939 any economic analysis could been incorporated into other social science disciplines such as politics and sociology. Thus, the origin and history of each study are different from each other.

Secondly, both political science and economics have their own distinctive goals and objectives. While political science has been oriented to offer normative rules and principles for desirable community, economics has limited its roles only for the predictable analysis of economic phenomena. Thus, while political science has normative and idealistic properties, economists usually have circumscribed their roles to mathematical data analysis and policy recommendation.

Admittedly, it is also true that there has been a certain level of convergent tendency in both methodology and area of interest between two studies; if you have chances to take one or two classes in a political science department related with comparative politics and international relation, you would easily find these subfields of political science have been highly influenced by modern economics’ methodology.

Similarly, if you are planning to study macroeconomics for your major area of study in economics, you will also have to delve into the role of government and bureaucracy in the economic development process and public policies. In other words, various political foundations for economic development are one of the most significant areas of study not only in political science but also in economics.

However even when we consider this similarity, there are enough reasons for economics to be called economics, not political science. Most of all, economists are all interested in macroeconomic phenomena and economic indicators such as inflation, unemployment and international trade (deficit) even when they take the role of government and bureaucracy into account. In other words, even when they analyze a particular government’s economic policy, they usually focus on the policy with its economic consequences, not on the party politics or the decision making process in which most political scientists are interested.

Finally, due to these different academic orientations, economics has traditionally developed highly abstract mathematical methodologies for its analysis. Recently, contemporary economists especially those who are influenced by the U.S-dominant academic trend have attempted to incorporate human needs and subjective desires into their mathematical equations.

Compared to recent trends of economics, political science mostly employs logical inference as its main approach. Even though there are various political scientists who are ready to borrow mathematical data analysis from economics, who eagerly use anthropological observations as their powerful methods, these trials are still in their incipient stage.

In sum, both economists and political scientists try to offer scientific analysis of certain social phenomena. However, their methodology and area of interest, not to mention their respective objectives are significantly different from each other. Thus, those who want to learn the history of political philosophy, and want to know how the society as a whole works will surely prefer political science. By the same token, for those who are interested in the dominant roles of economy in society, for those who want to know how the economy grows in historical perspective, I would like to recommend them to choose macroeconomics for their major area of study.

* English has become one of the most dominant languages in the world. English is not only a tool for understanding different cultures but also barrier or social pressure in Korea. I wrote this essay for my own reflection and heuristic purpose. I hope that you wil have chances to think about the role of English in this society while reading this essay.

I started learning English when I became a middle school student. Since then, English used to be not a simple language but a complicated and contradictory substance; English has not only been the object of my affection but also the barrier to overcome for various purposes.

In principle, learning foreign languages is to understand different cultures. Because the language contains various aspects of its users, we can easily understand a different culture by its language. English is no exception. By learning English, it is expected that we will learn various social phenomena and the culture of English speaking countries. In this sense, English studies should be regarded as powerful tools, not goals as such, with which we can communicate with native English speakers.

However, this point seems to be frequently ignored by many school teachers as well as students most of the time. In retrospect, there has been a certain level of social pressure related with English studies in Korea. In my case, English studies have always come to me as uneasiness or stress. For example, when I entered one of the most prestigious universities in Seoul, I had to show good grades on English tests. When I was about to get a high-paying and relatively stable job, I also had to pass a very difficult English examination with a certain level of proficiency. Even when I decided to continue my post-graduate studies abroad, I had to take various standardized English tests such as TOEFL and GRE, etc. in order to show my application qualification. In this way, English has always reminded me of standardized tests and stresses.

Furthermore, I thought that English language was not only a language but also a political weapon. If there are certain types of institutionalized social pressures related to English studies, there must be good reasons for these social contradictions. In this way, I once thought that English was not a simple language containing a particular culture, but a powerful weapon for Western imperialists. I still remember my undergraduate days; wrapped up with passionate nationalist spirits, I thought that every intelligent university student should contemplate their privileged social status critically, and in doing so they should protest not only against the rationalized structural inequality in world political orders but also the English-dominant cultural realities of Korea. At that time, English language seemed to have another symbolic meaning, namely one of cultural decorations of the strongest, representing world hegemonic powers against which I had to protest.

I was not able to put aside this mistrust toward the English language even after I graduated from the university. After graduation, I worked as a book editor at a social science publishing company for 3 years. My main job was to do some social science research and translate various English books and articles into my native language. At that time, I could not think much about English. It might be because I thought of English language as a simple way of living. It is not surprising to see that something uneasy once becomes your ordinary chores, it should no longer be a trouble.

However, English language as a complicated subject-matter exerted itself when I decided to study abroad in English speaking countries. All of a sudden, I was reminded of every complicated aspect of English language. The most difficult thing that I had to overcome was that I had to answer to my various questions in my own ways: Was English a pure language? Were not there any imperialist or mystifying aspects in English? Why should I study English or why should I prepare the TOEFL and the GRE?

At any rate, I passed various standardized English test with good grades. And, fortunately, I am in New York studying what I really want to. Of course, there were so many troubles and frustrations before I came to New York. However, since I continued to study, I have tried to communicate only in English. And I have been expected to read huge volumes of articles and books written in English, to write research papers succinctly in English on time. Unnoticeably, the language has become my official means of living.

But I can’t still cease to think about the role and socio-political status of English language in this hierarchical world order. Sometimes, the language approaches me as one of the most influential imperialist weapons covered with rosy fantasy called ‘global standard.’ It is also true that sometimes English became an ambivalent complexity itself. Even though I know that the English language is as such much more practical and simpler than any other languages such as German and French, I will not stop thinking about these multi-faceted characteristics of English for the time being.