Endgame with Gita Wirjawan - Gi-Wook Shin: How South Korea Deals with Brain Drain

Episode Date: April 7, 2023

Many have argued about the determining factor behind Korea's rapid development and miracle transformation. Some suggested due to their economic policy; some emphasized the country's democratization process. Enriching our understanding of Korea's unparalleled evolution, this conversation tries to cover from a different perspective—featuring a political and historical-comparative sociologist who has been teaching at Stanford University for more than 20 years Gi-Wook Shin. Prof. Shin highlights the undeniable influence of soft power and Koreans' competitive nature. Furthermore, he explores the potential threat that might turn the country's successful modern history upside-down: demographic and democratic crises. In addition, he also talks about his modified theory of brain drain and how this phenomenon has been playing a role in shaping two of Asia's hegemonies, China and India, as well as how we can learn from them. #Endgame #GitaWirjawan #GiWookShin ----------------- About the guest: Gi-Wook Shin is the Director of APARC, Senior Fellow of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies, and Founding Director of the Korea Program at Stanford University. About the host: Gita Wirjawan is an Indonesian educator, entrepreneur, and currently a visiting scholar at APARC, Stanford University. ----------------- SGPP Indonesia Master of Public Policy: [e-mail] admissions.sgpp.ac.id wa.me/628111522504 Other "Endgame" episode playlists: Global ThinkersWandering ScientistsThe Take Visit and subscribe: SGPP Indonesia Visinema Pictures

Don't be afraid of brain drain because for one thing you can, you cannot prevent everyone, right, from living country. Even if you are able to do, then you can only isolate yourself from the rest of the world. So take a chance, but think about how you can convert brain drain into something else, either circulation or linkage. Hi, friends and fellows, welcome to this special series of conversations involving personality, coming from a number of campuses, including Stanford University. The purpose of the series is really to unleash thought-provoking ideas that I think would be of tremendous value to you. I want to thank you for your support so far, and welcome to the special series.

Hi, today we're with Professor Giewok-Shin, who is the director of A-Park at Stanford University, but he's also a professor of sociology and also the founding director, of the Korea program at Stanford University. Puyuk, thank you so much for coming on to our show. Thank you. It's my pleasure and my honor to be here. Tell us a little bit about yourself, how you grew up and how you moved to the United States and all the way to Palo Alto. Okay, first of all, as you mentioned, I was born and grew up in Korea,

and I finished my college in 1983. And during my career, I was born. college year, you know, we are involved in like a political movement because I entered college in 1979. In the fall of the year, Korean President Park Jongi was killed by his intelligence chief. And in 1980 and 81, we are involved in political movement, fighting for democracy. And as I was graduating, I was really debating what to do. I mean, should I get a job and study more?

If so, then in Korea or go outside. But as I was growing up, I was influenced by United States quite a bit because my father was church and minister, and then he knew many American missionaries. So, at the time, you know, we were involved in anti-American movement in college. So I thought I was going to Germany. But then my father said, no, no, you should go to the United States if you want to study. So that's why I came to the U.S. in 1983 to University of Washington.

And at the time, I was quite sure that I would go back to Korea with my PhD. but I'm still here after 40 years. And what did you study and what did you pursue as soon as you finished your studies in Washington?

Right, so I went to a sociology program. Right. And initially I didn't think about studying Korea because, you know, why you're studying Korea in the States, right?

So you might study more theoretical issue or American society, politics. But then after a few years, I realized that there are very little study in Korea. So I don't know, maybe I was a little nationalistic at the time. So that, you know, I got out to study in Korea. That's why I came to write my dissertation on Korean social movement during colonization. rule by Japanese. So in a sense, maybe my experience in Korea during college influenced me to have interest in social movement, but also on Korea.

That's why I study Korea social movement, you know, nationalism, development. And then as I was finishing my PhD, as I mentioned, I was going back to Korea. But then, you know, my friends, my American friends, they are on the job market. And I said, you know, why not testing myself? Okay, I'm still, I was fairly young at the time. I think it was 30 or 31. So, okay, I said, okay, let's try.

I didn't expect, but I got a job offer from University of Iowa. And until then, I never been to Iowa. So when I mentioned Iowa to my Korean friends, they're saying they got confused, Iowa, Idaho, or Ohio, right? But, you know, it was good job. It's in the Midwest, you know, a very nice public college. And, you know, I had one child just born right before my graduation. So we spent, you know, three years at Iowa. So, you know, as you know, life doesn't.

evolve as you plan or intent, right? Because when I went to Iowa, I thought I might stay for a few years, getting experience and go back to Korea.

I think after two years or so, and I got an offer from UCLA. It's a nice, nice university. Yeah, warmer. In L.A. Much warmer. So,

So I moved to UCLA. Okay. And then still I was debating whether I should stay or I should go back. And then I got one child at Seattle, the second at Iowa, the third one in L.A. So every time I move, I got a child. And then I got tenure at UCLA in 1988, I think 98. So, you know, for some of you who don't know American academics, you know, tenure is very crucial because if you get tenure, then you have job security. In American University, there's no age of retirement.

Right. So once you have a tenure, then you can work until, you know, you want to retire. So especially now people are living longer. So it's a nice deal. But anyway, so going back to my UCLA, still are debating. and I got 10 years and I got three children. Then my wife kept telling me, you know, make up your mind. You know, go to, go back to Korea or stay here.

So I'll, you know, support your decision. But you got to decide. You just can debate, you know, every night, every day, right? Then I think late, I think 99 or 2000, I got a contact from Stanford saying, they want to establish a career program

then asking if I have any interest you can right you can talk to refuse yeah you can you can refuse so I got an offer from 2001 and then I

came here so at the time I was about to take over in a very large Korea center at UCLA right here I mean a lot of

promise a lot of potential, but still I have to start from the beginning. So I was joking that I'm leaving a large company for startup. So I came here

2001, establishing a career program. So now it's more than 20 years and I don't have any regret. I think it was a right decision. And I feel very lucky and very fortunate. I'm able to

teach and work here at Stanford. Well, the weather is perfect also. Yeah, weather is nice. I want to deep dive a little bit on. You've written more than 20 books and talk a little bit about how South Korea has become what it is. I mean, it is one of the very few countries that's really great at projecting soft power. Right.

And just talk about how that came about. Right. So, you know, 40 years ago, let me share you in a few episodes. Right. Because in 1980s, as some of you may know, it's all about Japan. You know, Japan was really developing fast. Right. And, you know, some people believe that Japan might take over United States in a few years. And but Korea, I mean, there are two things still.

stick to my mind one is in American TV they were still showing this kind of drama episode in a mesh Yeah Mesh is about Korea during

Korean War Right So very poor, a lot of orphans And it's a really bad situation That was Korea in 1950 and 60s

The other one Samsung just begun to exports as a TV. And if you go to Costco, at really the corner, a very small black, you know, Samsung TV. Right.

It's really at the bottom. And at the time, you know, many Korean students, my friends, their dream, when they go back to Korea, was to buy, okay, 25-inch color TV from Sony.

Okay, so, Samsung couldn't, there's no way Samsung could match, you know, Sony at the time. Right. Okay, so small, black Samsung TV, you know, very nice, large, color, Sony TV. So that was 1980s. But now things change a lot. Now, you know, not only economically, but also culturally, Korean drama, you know, K-pop, they became very popular.

I mean, not only here, but in the... In Asia, in Southeast Asia. It's a big change. Now, you know, Samsung LG are making the best electronic goods, right? And then, you know, people using Samsung, you know, phone along with iPhone. So I think over 40 years, you know, tremendous growth. I mean, in that sense, it may not be exaggeration to say it was a miracle for Korea. I mean, even for myself, because I experienced over the last 40 years,

I was able to see within my eyes how Korea was able to really take off. What made it possible? So I think there are many regions, but I think maybe I can say a couple of things. One is political leadership. I think that's very important, especially, as you know, President Park Jung, even though he was dictator. I mean, he really was able to take Korea to next level economically. But not only that, a lot of Korean people were fighting for democracy.

So, I mean, that's why Korea was able to develop economically and politically. So if you look at countries in the world after 1945, they had only a few countries. that were able to achieve both economic development and political democracy. I think that's one big factor. And the other one,

I just say, you know, human capital. Right. As you know, Korea has invested a lot in human capital. And sometimes it's too excessive. I think still they are spending a lot of money in educating their children And in the process, they sent a lot of people abroad like myself. Okay.

And then many of them, not me, but many of them came back to Korea with education, with experience. And then they really made a contribution to Korea. So, you know, unlike in Indonesia, you know, Korea is a fairly small country. Very small. You know, very poor in natural resources. But they really invest in human capital. And I think that's why they are able to develop quite fast and pretty well. Now even, you know, Korean universities are really doing quite well.

So I think they are leaders among Asian universities. So I think leadership, I think investment in human capital and maybe engaging the outside world, kind of openness. I think those are very crucial for Korean success. You know, in the famous words of the former leadership of Singapore, who talked about, Likuan Yu, who talked about how Singapore was steadfast in respect to selecting the top talents to teach. And he would occasionally make the comment that South Korea takes it to the next level

when you would select. teachers, you would select it actually from the top 5%. Singapore would try to do it from the top 20%. How did... I mean, you've seen a metamorphosis in a big way, right, in the last few decades, right? Aside from the political leadership, what else do you think made it possible?

Because it would have taken a very much collective effort, right, for everybody to basically subscribe to the idea that excellence is not to be underestimated. Excellence is not to be moderated or whatever. So, you know,

I'm not sure, you know, these days, but at least during, you know, curious takeoff, I'd say maybe sense of urgency. Maybe, you know, nationalism, you know, very important.

Because, you know, Korea is surrounded by big powers. You know, China, Japan, Russia, and also, you know, divided North Korean threat. So I think there's a big urgency that unless you can develop quickly and successfully, you know, you might become, you know, colony again or taken over by communism. So I think that was quite important. I think a lot of people were willing to sacrifice their own interests for national interests. So, you know, certainly, like, Bak Jong-i was very authoritarian, and then a lot of people sacrificed their human rights and political rights.

But still, you know, many people were willing to work and even sacrifice themselves for national interests. So I think that was very important, at least in 1960s through maybe 80s, if not now. Do you believe that South Korea will be able to maintain this competitive spirit, unlike what we might have seen with Japan? They kind of like, I think, started slowing down, relatively speaking here relative to what the Koreans have done. Do you see that as a possibility? happening with the Koreans? I think that's a big question for Korea because

you know, for the good or bad, Korea has been following Japan in many ways. So, developmental model basically came from Japan. And now Korea is having a demographic

crisis. I mean, like aging population, you know, very low birth rates. I think right now, Korea's birth rates like even less than 0.8. The loist

are in the world. So that they are really moving very fast and then working age in a population is declining. So I think a lot of concern

whether Korea will follow the steps that Japan has taken for last 20 years. So I think in other to avoid, in my view, there are a few things.

One is Korea needs to stay connected to the outside world. I think for Japan, as they will become more successful, I think they are somewhat becoming inward-looking, more detached from

global trends, like 90s and 2000. So even today, you know, you don't see many Japanese, you know, students in America universities. And I think

a lot of young Japanese just feel very comfortable living in their own place. And I know that Japanese government is really trying to promote young Japanese to go

abroad, have some experience in education. But oftentimes they just go for one week, two weeks. That's true. A study tour. That's true. Okay. So, but still, I think, you know, many Koreans still coming to U.S. and other countries.

So I think they should continue. And the other one, I think, you know, Korea should really embrace, you know, migration of skilled labor. As you know, Japan, Korea, they are very homogeneous, ethnically. And, you know, with all due respect, Korea or Japan is not good place. for foreigners. I mean, there's racism, there's ethnic discrimination. And I mean, last, you know, 20, 30 years,

Korea, Japan were taking unskilled labor from China and Southeast Asia because Koreans don't want to work anymore in what they call 3D industry are difficult, dangerous, and what's the other one? Difficult. Dangerous. Dangerous.

dirty. Yeah, dirty, right? So, I mean, that has been going on. But now, Korea needs to import, you know, foreign talent, skilled labor, because you know, population is aging.

You know, Korean government has been spending a lot of money to boost the birth rate. But they keep declining. I mean, think about like 0.7-something. That's incredible. That's really low.

So how you want to survive? So I think Japan came to realize this importance, and they are trying to attract more foreign talents. But a little too late. And then unless they open up socially, culturally, it's very hard. Because now, you know, Korea is about like top ten countries in the world. If you account for economic, you know, military, cultural power, maybe, let's say, 10 to 15, to be fair.

And then you got to compete with other other than country, attracting, you know, foreign talent. So whenever I go to Korea, Japan, or when they come to our place, I mean, you know, we are in Silicon Valley, and they say they like to emulate Silicon Valley in Korea, in Japan. I said, you know, unless you can embrace. foreign talent. Unless you can promote

cultural diversity, just forget it. Not going to happen. Because Silicon Valley was not built just by white Caucasian American. Indians, Chinese,

other immigrants, they all came, they were welcomed, they were working together to make innovation and build Silicon Valley. But then can global talents

come to to work and live in Korea or Japan? You have to think about, right? So, certainly, you know, Seoul has become global city. Tokyo has become a global city. And it's fun to visit there for short term, for tourism. But can they really come and work and leave with other Korean, Japanese people? It's still very hard.

And so unless you can embrace cultural diversity, embrace foreign global talent, it's very hard to survive. So can they make it? I think that's a big challenge and it won't be easy. But I think they should take it very seriously. Is this something that the political leadership is sensitive to? Right. Okay. So they might be taken a view on this, right?

So I think they recognize, but I think there are a couple of issues. One is politically, it may not pay off because, you know, there's some public concern that if we import foreign talents, they may take some jobs away from our young people. I don't think that's right in assumption. But still, that's a view. The other one, you know, Koreans, also Japanese in the same way, they're so used to just living with fellow Koreans, fellow Japanese. They just don't feel comfortable living with, you know, foreigners. And I mean, that's why, you know, education is very important.

And, you know, sometimes I give a lecture to, like, a Korean, like, a college student. And I'm asking, you know, what does it mean to be global? Yeah. I mean, does it mean having good English? I think a lot of people may live that way because, you know, Korea spent a lot of time and money in learning English. And now young people, their English is better than mine. No, seriously.

But then, you know, they don't really teach or spend money or time. in learning cross-cultural skills. So in my view, and this is what I'm telling to Korean people, to be global means understanding a different culture, having cross-cultural skills. These are more important than having good English. And I'm even joking sooner or later, Google can translate your language into English, right?

So, I mean, that's why they should teach more to young Korean people about the value of diversity and cross-cultural skills more than just English. You've been spending a lot of time talking

about brain drain. Give us a new definition of brain drain if there's any. Right. So you know as I mentioned, you know, I've been working on this topic for many years. Right.

And I wrote one book on global talent using Korea as a case and right now I'm writing a book

to compare Japan, Australia, China, India. I'm calling them as like a

talent giants because their talent strategies were very crucial to their

economic prominence and maybe you can compare now China and India for

moments because China and India, both of them suffered in a huge brain drain initially.

Right. Because as you know, a lot of talented Chinese Indian went abroad. Right. Okay. So from conventional perspective, their brain drain.

Okay. But it doesn't have to be permanent loss for their countries. Right. You can convert. brain drain into developmental assets through different policy.

So in our project, initially I thought China, India were very similar. But actually, they pursue different strategies. So for China, they sent a lot of Chinese then trying to bring back. Right. Okay, which I call you brain circulation.

And then this is what, this is what happened in Korea, in Taiwan. I think probably in Malaysia now they're trying to do more brain circulation. So, you know, you have to lose first to gain back later. But, you know, India pursue quite different strategy because a lot of Indians left after college, they never come back. Not intending to come back, yeah. So if you come to Silicon Valley, get a lot of

Indians in really executive level in big companies like Google we know in Sundar Pitcher is one example but there are so many high level

executives in the company companies so they never go back to leave in India but still they engage their home country okay in many ways

they still send money back to India too not only money but like you know know know how know how and then they are, you know, taking some Indian talent to university, to companies. So right now, as you may know, in the States, there's a visa called H-1 visa for skilled labor. Right.

Do you know what percentage of H-1 visa holders are Indian? 30-40 percent? No, more than that. It's almost like 75 percent. My gosh. Okay. Well, I'm not that shocked. Yeah, Chinese only like 10% or 12%.

Indonesia's probably less than 1%. Yeah. So I think one reason, of course, there are a lot of high-skilled qualified people, but also their networks. Okay. I think, you know, Indians in India, they know how to apply for HIV. How many percent are Koreans? Very small.

Five, ten? No, maybe less than then. Wow. So I think about India, like, 70, China, you know, 10. And that's 80, 85%. Right. The rest are like 15%. So, sure, I mean, you know, China, India, they had brain drain initially.

But eventually, they were able to gain back much more. You know, dividends much later. So in a sense, this is my own story because, as I mentioned earlier, I left Korea. And, I mean, Korea invested in me for 20 years. years, right? Up to college, right? And you're still going back to Korea to teach.

Right. So I never went back to Korea. So from conventional perspective, it's a brain drain. But from new perspective, I'm arguing it's not. It's more like brain linkage because I engage in Korean universities and I

engage in Korean policymakers, even business. And I'm trying to bridge between Korea and United States. So it can be, win-win for both home country and host countries. With globalization,

I think this is becoming more and more important. So that's why I'm saying that even like a developing country in Asia, don't be afraid of brain drain. Because for one thing, you cannot prevent everyone, right,

from living country. Even if you are able to do, then you can only isolate yourself from the rest of the the world. So take a chance, but think about how you can convert. Brain drain into something else, either circulation or linkage. So that's sort of main arguments on my project right now. It's a very powerful message. And it really depends on a time frame, right? If you put this in a long time frame, it all makes sense

in that it accrues to everybody. It's a positive sum game. But what's your sense on how this could be politicized in some countries as a net negative, the notion of brain drain. Right, so I think if you talk to, you know, I'm sort of working, you know, with ADB on a project. And I think for, you know,

international development community, there's a big debate. Whether we should invest in, you know, in higher education for a developing country. because, you know, one critic is that, you know, if you educate, you know, people, then they will leave. Right. So that you may be wasting your money and resource, right?

So that's why many people say that it better to invest in K to 12 for less developed country. But my argument, then they can never be, you know, developing their own country. They still remain, you know, forever as less than. developed, right? So still invest in higher education. Let them go out. And once again, then figure out how you can convert

possible brain drain into circulation or linkage. I mean, once again, that's why Korea, Taiwan, they were able to succeed. So that's explained China's success as well. And in this case,

India has a lot of promise. So And then if I add a little more, I see more now, you know, regional, okay, talent, mobility within Asia-Pacific, you know, reason. Because now even like Korea, Japan, they need, you know, foreign talent because of a demographic crisis, right? And universities in Korea, Japan, Australia, they are getting better and better, right? and therefore, you know, many people in, let's say, in Southeast Asia,

it will be easier to go to study in Korea or Japan than in the United States. Right. I mean, it's a little easier to get in there. Closer and closer, right? So certainly this brain selection linkage for Indian and Chinese happened largely with North America like the United States. I think for Indonesian, you know, Malaysian, you know, I don't know, Bangladesian.

I think they should take advantage of this regional talent flow. So send them more to Korea, more to Japan, more to Australia, and then Singapore, and they figure out how are you going to utilize those talents after education, after work experience. I think this is a very important policy question for political leaders in those countries. Yeah. I mean, I've kind of shared this with you separately. before, if we take a look at the number of Indonesians studying in the U.S. in the 80s, it was

around 16,000. Now it's dwindled to 8,000 to 8,500. And I remember in the 80s, you know, we used to think that we had as many Indonesians as South Koreans in the U.S. Now it's like, we're looking at, you know, more than 100,000 Koreans in the U.S. studying at any other than any given time at all universities, right? Whereas the Indonesians, they amount to around 8 to 8,500. That is, I think, something that needs to be taken a view off. If we really want to, you know, become better going forward, learning from other places, you know, wisdom that I think could be beneficial.

So do they stay in Indonesia or go to university in Asia? Well, there's been some rotational behavior. they have been going more to Australia, to Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, places that are much nearby and cheaper. But we have bigger wallet now. We can afford to send people to places like Europe, the United States.

You've been working on this new program called the Policy Lab, the next Asia Policy Lab at Stanford. Talk about that. Yeah, okay, that's... A new project. So we are going to open this Pallus Lab July of this year. So we got only like a few months away.

So here there are, I think maybe two key worlds. One is Next Asia. Okay. And the other one, Pallus Lab. So the next Asia means how we can upgrade in Asia to next level. I mean, we are talking about like a new Asia, but the new Asia has been used too much, overused, right? So I think here main thinking is that, sure, you know, Asia has come along, you know, quite well for the last several decades.

But how can they move up to the next level? Okay, it's not only economically, but, you know, socially, culturally in education, as I mentioned, you know, earlier. So that's the main idea. And then the second one, you know, palace lap, which means that, sure, we are going to do very rigorous, you know, research. But it's not going to be purely academic or theoretical. So we like to draw some, you know, palace implications based on our research. And there are four research tracks. The one is talent and development, which I mentioned earlier.

The second one, nationalism. nationalism and racism. So we talk about racism in the States a lot, but then there's a lot of racism in Asia as well. Third one, U.S. Asia relations. Especially we like to compare U.S.-China relations of today with U.S.-Japan relations of 1980s, the last one, democratic crisis and reform.

So I think for each track, we're going to hire, the process hiring like a post-doctoral fellow and then we have some research associates and we're going to involve in our students but also we are going to invite some visiting scholar

from Asia so anyone listening this show. Listen. And then if I like to spend your sabbatical then you know there's a good opportunity. So and then I think eventually we like to involve some

you know, Asian student from Asia, especially smart, promising, ambitious young people but from underprivileged background or, you know, families. So this will be really, you know, projects of collaboration. So I like to really create a great team. And then not only doing academic research, but engaging, you know, our policy community, academic community, here and also in Asia. So, as I mentioned, I'm

from Asia, and I feel it's my mission to bridge between Asia and United States, in academia, in policy community, and education, and so on. So it's a really exciting project.

And hopefully we can share more exciting news later, but we are all preparing for the launch of this new lab, in the summer. It sounds really good. I don't want to take this a little bit further in the context of this decoupling between China and the U.S.

and how that has and is likely to affect the posturing of South Korea going forward. I mean, it's safe to assume that, you know, for the layman like me, Korea would look to the U.S. for security, but look to China for economic purposes. And how do you see this developing going forward? Right. So this is also a central challenge for Korea and I think many other countries

in Asia. So in the past main paradigm was like US for security and China for economy. Because Korea has military alliance with the United States. But, you know, China has been a major trading partner. Right. Okay, so for the last 10, 20 years.

But now, as you know, there's some trend for decoupling. And then, you know, some area we kind of a semiconductor. So that is being closely linked to security. So in some area, it's very hard to separate economy from security. like a semi-conduct is one good example. So now I think some Korean conference like Samsung, SK, they're moving,

I think they're trying to move from China to the United States or maybe go to India, Vietnam, or Indonesia. But it's not easy. Because they already made a huge investment in China. It's much more expensive to come to United States. States, India, Indonesia's still infrastructure is not as good as in China. And then you can't really agitate China either.

So I think this is a really difficult issue for China. So certainly, US is pushing, you know, Korea and some other countries to work with the United States. But it's a big, big, big, big challenge. A very tough issue for Korea, for sure. The slowness with respect to shifting supply chain capabilities from China onto places like Southeast Asia is not because of lack of desire to reshore, French shore or offshore. Right. But as you aptly pointed out, it's the lack of capacity to increase marginal productivity.

Right, right. You know, within many places in Southeast Asia. rule of law and also the infrastructure that's needed. Covenancy. Yeah. So I think the rhetoric is a lot louder on reshoring compared to the reality on the ground. And this is something that I think policymakers in Southeast Asia need to be more cognizant of. And hopefully they can do something about it.

But how do you see Korea moving forward in this context? I mean, you've got the Taiwan issue, you've got the U.S.-China issue. What's your take on this? Well, I think, you know, one issue is, you know, certainly Korea is democratic society. Right. And there's change in regime, right? But then there's so much change, you know, with changing government. And I think Korea needs more

consistent in policy. But for example, now the conservative are back to power. So they're really moving away from policies their previous government pursued. So now, certainly they are trying to strengthen alliance with the United States.

And President Yun-Sung-Yer just went to Tokyo because the bilateral relations between Japan and South Korea was really sour for the last several years. But still, North Korean threat is very serious and how to deal with China.

Right? I mean, that's a big issue. And now their growing concern is what if there's military tension over Taiwan, then what Korea can do. So I think now Korea is facing multiple

challenges in national security. and it's really daunting in the challenge I want to switch to democracy I think you've alluded to the fact that democracy has been in recession in many places how do we fix that

right so that's also a big question and you know I've been speaking out about democratic crisis in Korea And as you mentioned, Korea is not unique. I mean, we have seen a similar democratic erosion. I mean, even in this country, in the UK, and many parts of the world.

Now, for example, like, political polarization is really extreme. Certainly, there has been some disagreements about, of, you know, powers towards North Korea, U.S., and so on. But now this polarization is really serious. When I, you know, go to Korea, I see that, like, you know, people from, you know, different political, ideological camp, they don't talk to each other. And this social media, you know, only aggravating the situation. And so how to, you know, get together, you know, create. people for national agenda.

As I mentioned, Korea is facing a big challenge. But the Korean people are divided. So I often remind Koreans of what happened in late 19th century. Because

at the time, Korea was divided. Like pro-Russian, pro-Chinese, pro-Japanese, pro-American. And then eventually Korea became Japanese-Solarly. So, of course, it's not only because of Koreans' faults, but still if they were able to, you know,

have some consensus, then probably they could have, you know, dealt with better with Japanese aggression. So now, you know, Korea's facing a lot of problems, but then Koreans are so divided and fighting against each other. It's just really bad to see those infighting among themselves. And so, you know, I've been saying that, sure, I mean, Korea is a democratic country. You know, they are largely following a rule of law. Right.

But they should really promote democratic, you know, thinking, spirit, you know, value. So that the rule of law is unnecessary but not sufficient for a mature democracy. And now you have to respect, you know, our. other people, and especially during the last government, they really divide people, you know, good versus evil. Okay, so the other side is not only political opponents, but they are like enemy, you know, evil. So they should be punished. So when you try to label the other side from, you know, moral perspective, good. versus evil, it's very hard to compromise.

So they should be punished. You know, we are the one who just, you know, carry in our nation. So I think a lot of bad bloods being shed and it's an early good situation. And, you know, even now with the new government, you know, Mr. Yun's rating, like, between, I say, 30 to 40 percent, right? So it's very hard to mobilize people for national agenda when you have low ratings. So I think he needs to be more inclusive, embracing different sectors of society to carry on his main agenda. Social media has been a big reason, right, for the inability of both sides to talk to each other. What's your take on what needs to be done from a policy,

or a political standpoint. With respect to social media. Right. So, you know, I don't do any social media. Your wife does. My wife does. So I only do, you know, in an email because I have to survive for my work. But it's a reality for a lot of people out there.

Right. And then, you know, Koreans, you know, almost all Koreans do, you know, cacao talk, like cato. And I don't do that. some of my friends complain and I don't do any any car talk. So, I mean, it's a, you know, democratic society. I mean, so they should

be allowed, you know, freedom of speech, right? Yeah. And I don't think it's a good idea to regulate, you know, through law, right? So, but I think, but, I mean, that's why this, like, promoting, you know, culture of tolerance, you know, diversity.

You know, these are very important. because you know otherwise I mean social media is only only means

right and then it can be used for you know different reasons right

different goals right it can be used for good or for bad right and now

I mean there's some you know good function of social media but then how you're

regulate I don't think it's a good idea for government to crack down

certain media but at the same time I don't know it might take a long time

we really have to educate the values of diversity, you know, tolerance, and understanding. Otherwise, I mean, this is like, you know, YouTube, for example, like, you know, Koreans do a lot of YouTube. And some of contents are really, you know, a lot of problems.

Well, we're doing what we're doing. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So, but this is great. But some of them, I mean, a lot of, you know, fake news or false information. And I'm telling my wife, don't watch Korean YouTube. There's a lot of misinformation. Yeah.

So, how are you going to do? I mean, you know, you can go back to all 30 years, right? Then cracking down. So I think we don't have to educate how to improve. So I don't know. After all, I still believe in the value of education. It might take time.

I agree. But we have to work together to educate. I'm a little concerned. So your podcast can help for that, yeah. I'm just a little concerned with, you know, how people equate algorithmic amplifications with democracy. Right. And how people keep thinking that we need to dignify freedom of speech when that speech is actually paid for. Right, right.

You know, by way of the virality so that you get the necessary. number of clickbaits so you can advertise and whatever it doesn't seem to get fixed by policymakers politicians much less the technology owners

it does require some viewtaking I think for democracy to come out of this recession in many places I think also that involves a political leadership I think

I think in this society, people don't trust or they don't have any respect for political leaders. So that even when the leaders are saying something, then people don't either trust or believe, and then they just go on their own way, sharing their own view sometimes misinformation. So I think political leaders should regain trust and respect from people. I think that's one way of solving or at least mitigating this problem. Yeah. I'm curious about your view on where China and India are going to end up globally. You know, they've done really well in this context of brain circulation in different ways.

Right, right. But how do you foresee them in the next couple of decades or a few decades? Okay, so with China, I got a little careful. I don't mean to put you on a spot, but I think, you know, it's important for the audience to hear your wisdom. So, I think, you know, China has done so well for the last several decades. Right. Okay. And so in my view, there are a few things.

So one is, you know, openness. As I mentioned, they sent a lot of talented people. Right. And then brought back, right? But now my sense, now they're becoming more inward-looking. Just like what happened in Japan, maybe for a different reason. I think now maybe less Chinese are interesting coming to study. I think like in this country, I heard last year like it cut into half of pre-pendemic level.

So even accounting for the impact of pandemic, it really declined. And I heard that That's in the hundreds of thousands Yeah, I heard that now They're really encouraging young people to go out to study or experience So I think whether China can maintain

openness, I mean, that's very important because that's one big factor for Chinese success And I have some former students Teaching at the top Chinese universities

They are saying that in the past, they were in college or even pushed to write articles in English. But now they have to publish in Chinese as well. Okay, so there's quite a change. So I think that's the one. The other one, political leadership. And certainly, you know, China was not and it's not liberal democracy in the sense that we understand here. but still they had very well

designed kind of way of power transition and succession because as you know the main challenge for any authoritarian

regime is a power succession right so I mean like North Korea is a dynasty for example so you know like

two term and then 10 years and you know transparent in a way of power succession has been in place for the last few decades, but now Xi Jinping

broke the tradition and he might stay forever in power and there may not be different voices within the power elite in China. So

can China sustain their success with these different leadership style. I'm really skeptical. And the third one, here I'm a little bit careful, but in Palo Alto, there's a term what you call rich mandarines, which means that a lot of wealthy Chinese

come here and stay. Okay, I mean, they had nice homes and so on. So, you know, my interpretation, is that they may not have much faith in their own country, even though they are very successful. So, you know, my own view is that I don't think China can take over United States in my generation. So, I mean, China has some remarkable success for the last several decades. And I'm not sure they're moving forward or going backwards.

And my own sense may not be moving forward. So that's my concern. And India, I have more mixed feeling because, as I mentioned, a lot of talented Indians coming to U.S. and be successful. And, you know, they engage in a country. They're developing, you know, very fast. Okay. And then at least for now and probably in your future,

India doesn't have any conflict with the United States in the way China has. Right? But at the same time, inside India now, they're promoting Hindu nationalism, a lot of racism. So politically, I mean, in India, saying we are the largest democratic country in the world. I'm not sure their democracy is moving forward or going backwards. So, I mean, that's why there's some promising aspect, but also some area of concern for India. So I cannot claim, you know, expert in China or India, say. But by looking from like a Silicon Valley from Stanford, that's my honest view. And,

you know, I may wrong and hopefully I'm wrong, but then I'm quite concerned. Yeah. You know, my sister spends hours watching Korean drama. Right. Every week. And sometimes she doesn't even look at the subtitles. It makes me think that she understands Korean, but she doesn't. But she already follows. Right. And it's really amazing how you have grown economically, how you've projected soft power. All across the world.

Right. From little towns in India to little towns in the U.S. Little towns in Indonesia. And in a matter of just a few decades. This is going to be my last question. Right. What would be the one or two or three things that you think Southeast Asia could learn from South Korea? So that we could be as badass as you.

Right. So, I mean, that's also an amazing story. Because usually you have to have, you know, economic capital, you know, before promoting cultural capital. But it's not easy process. You might become wealthy, but may not be able to convert economic into cultural capital. And, you know, frankly, maybe shame on myself, but I've been sort of discounting the importance of this cultural power. I thought, oh, maybe just like for a few years then and go away. But now I realize that it's real.

So in my course in Korea, I began to call. cover Korean soft power, especially K-Drama in K-pop, finally. And I'm trying to explain the success. And last year, we had a 20th anniversary of Korea program at Stanford. And then we had, like, North Korea and then K-pop. Because these are two issues that American audience are interesting. So we had, like, you know, Ban Ki-moon. former UN Secretary General, among other people.

And also, we have a K-pop star, Suho, of Exo, is a really new experience. Because the response by young people, including our own students, is just amazing. And, you know, you'll show reach to a lot of people, but, you know, my lecture never goes to a lot of people, right? But then when, you know, this K-pop stars came to our campus to give a talk.

It's not really performance. It's just like talk and discussion. You know, the response has been tremendous. And I think we got the most hits for this talk. And I think one example, like

the University Communication Team, so they did Instagram when Sue came. So I heard almost like more than 40,000 people say, you know, I like this, right?

and I think two weeks before Obama came and the same thing they only like 20,000 so we are joking there you know, so bit Obama quite nicely. We're viewed by more than 20,000. Right, so

that's one example and I think I have given a few interview on this topic to Korean and TV and some documentary and I don't know, you know, one is

Korea was able to address some universal issue like inequality, for example. So like the director of Parasite, he went to the same department as mine. I mean, it's like maybe 10 years younger than me.

And, you know, was able to address pretty well using Korea as a case by addressing more general issue. Like like BTS I think their message is quite

positive, like you know, love yourself. Yeah. So, you know, K-pop doesn't deal with, like, you know, sex and drugs as in some other countries. Absolutely. Yeah. So a very clean image and, you know,

fandom. So, you know, certainly, whether they can sustain current success, I mean, that's a big question, too. But so far, it's amazing that K-pop, you know, K-drama are so

successful. So, I mean, Even in Palo Alto, sometimes when I go to a restaurant. And like, you know, Mexican, let's say, you know, lady serving my table. And when she found out, I'm Korean there, oh, my God, do you know, crash landing? And all of a sudden, we engage in a conversation for, like, you know, several minutes. So it's quite amazing. And but still, one issue, if you look at at least like, I think initially,

It spread to Asia, like Japan, Korea, China, Southeast Asia, then here. But here is still the main audience, like Asian America or more ethnic minorities and female. I don't think a culture was able to penetrate sort of what you call mainstream, like a white Caucasian male. So there's certain limitation in that regard. There's 700 million people in Southeast Asia How do you get every one of the 700 million people To have the same kind of hunger Thirst

Dry for excellence The way the Koreans have shown How do you do that I mean I'm still trying to figure out Because You know I began to watch K-drama During the pandemic

Nothing else to do And I think also You know since it was lucky to be able to use a global platform, like Netflix and YouTube's, right? Because they were not made by Korean,

but then Korean was able to utilize those very effectively. So, let's say, you know, without this global platform, probably much more challenging, right? But still, still, then why Korean? Movie, why Korean drama?

Korean economy, Korean manufacturing capabilities. Right. So, So on April 19, we are going to have a special conference on K-drama and cinema. So maybe some of you can see, you know, we have some, you know, Korean writer and actor, and we have in a panel to talk about this issue, you know, why Korean drama has been able to succeed and can it be sustainable and so on. So it's April 19.

I'll be there. Last one. I mean, I've gone to school with so many Koreans. I've known so many Koreans on a golf course, on a tennis court, in social scenes, and the entrepreneurial space. I've not met any Korean who's not competitive. That's pretty amazing. Yeah, yeah. Right. And that, that I think, is something that the Southeast Asians need to take a look at if we want to be. you know, in any way slightly better. Yeah, I think that's a good point. But I think for Korea to survive, you really have to be competitive. As I mentioned, you know, Korea is surrounded by big power. You know, I've been telling my, you know, students saying that, you know,

Korean Peninsula, if we move Korean Peninsula from North East Asia to Europe, Korea is not a small country by the inters size and population but in Northeast Asia Korea looks very small China's huge You know Russia is big Japan is not in a small country either

actually So you know Korea has survived Chinese dominance for many many many centuries right And how

I think Korea has to be very comparative And that's why they have to work very hard. So sometimes maybe a little too excessive, but investing in the human capital and then connected to the outside. I think that's the only way Korea can survive. Because otherwise, I mean, Korea doesn't have the size

of international population. Korea doesn't have natural resources that you have in your country, right? So what are you going to do? you have in the United States, small country, just have to work very hard and be competitive.

That's the only way to survive. And I think so far, it's pretty well. Well done. Thank you so much. Okay, thank you. Okay. So, Terry,

Terry Mac Gassim. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. That was Professor Giewok-Shin, director of AP Park at Stanford University. Thank you.

This is Endgame.