I am not sure this went out the first time so this is attempt #2. It is a response to Barkley's question on land reform in South Korea. Marty In terms of Korea, perhaps the following helps provide background to the question below on land reform in Korea, it comes from page 339 in Korea Old and New, A History (which is no radical book so read between the lines): "Economic and social reform under American military rule reflected USAMGIK's basic political orientation toward the right. Althought the Americans moved quickly to reduce tenancy rates from one-half to one-third of teh crop, land reform of any kind was continually postponed at teh urging of USAMGIK's conservative Korean adviosrs in teh KDP, many of whom were large landowners. It was thus not until March 1948, in the last months of military rule, that the Americans finally carried out a land reform, but it was limitd to those rental lands formerly owned by teh Japanese, less then twenty percent of the total." In short, even under Japanese colonialism, the majority of large landowners were Koreans, most of whom were active collaborators. When the war ended in 1945, in the North, Koreans carried out a comprehensive, fair, and quick land reform. In the south the U.S. stopped such a reform. In the south, the Koreans kept their land, the U.S. took the Japanese land. Finally in 1948 with massive opposition in the south to the southern regime that the U.S. was trying to create, the U.S. introduced a limitd land reform on Japanese land. The newly elected South Korean government refused to do the same. Finally under great pressure from South Koreans they passed but did not impliment a land reform in 1950. There is every reason to beleive that that reform would never have been implimented. Then came the Korean War and the North swept south and joined with leftists in the south making land reform as they went. They did not follow the southern model but went further. The Japanese past played a very small role, except to the extent that the large Korean landowners were totally discredited from their past association with the Japanese. The US and South Koreans felt that they could not resist the Northern initiated land reform and still fight the war so they did not oppose it and when the war ended they implimented their own more limited version. Marty On Thu, 10 Sep 1998, Rosser Jr, John Barkley wrote: > Marty, > I was under the impression that in both Korea and > Taiwan land reform was made easier because much of it > involved dispossessing Japanese landlords. > Barkley Rosser > On Thu, 27 Aug 1998 16:04:45 -0700 (PDT) Martin > Hart-Landsberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Just a quick response to Michael's comments below: I do not think that > > Japan left much of an education system. At least not one that Koreans got > > much out of. A more direct legacy however was their centralized state and > > development model. It was this model that Park Chung Hee (who although > > Korean served in the Japanese military) basically copied. As for land > > reform, I think we have to give primary credit to north Koreans. While > > South Korea passed a land reform bill, the landowning legislature was not > > in any hurry to pass it. When the Korean war began and northern forces > > moved south, they instituted a land reform. The U.S. and southern > > government could not afford to dismiss the results for fear of losing any > > remaining popular support. > > > > It has always interested me to hear the world bank praise the land reform > > in Taiwan and South Korea as models that other countries should follow. > > The experiences of both land reforms make clear that domestic ruling > > classes will not reform their own property structures. So in Taiwan the > > nationalist took property away from Taiwanese to undermine any challenge > > and in Korea it was the north during a revolutonary civil war that did the > > deed. > > > > So much for drawing the correct lessons from history, > > > > Marty > > > > > > On Thu, 27 Aug 1998, michael perelman wrote: > > > > > South Korea had several other advantages. Japanese imperialism did create a > > > decent educational system. In addition, to fight against communism, the U.S. > > > imposed Wolf Ladejinsky's idea that land reform would create a large class of > > > people with a loyalty to private property. Finally, the country is ethnically > > > homogeneous and had a relatively equal distribution of income. > > > > > > > -- > Rosser Jr, John Barkley > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
