No abstract

This article demonstrates that the paradoxical configuration of groups supporting multiculturalism in South Korea stems from uniquely Korean experiences of colonialism, territorial division, and modernization. Unlike other societies, conservative political force advocates for multiculturalism and blames nationalism for its intolerance. On the other hand, its political counterparts have lingered on Korean nationalism, often presented as an antipode of multiculturalism. For exploring the antecedents of South Korean multiculturalism that contributed to shaping such configuration, I use the Foucauldian theoretical concept of governmentality and genealogy. Governmentality focuses on the conditions or circumstances under which policy problems are produced and genealogy allows us to trace back to its origin of the discourse, for defamiliarizing and dismantling the widespread perception of South Korean multiculturalism. This article explores how historical and geopolitical conditions have shaped engagement with multiculturalism discourse and how the emergence of post-nationalism laid the foundation for multiculturalism policy.

Drawing on the Foucauldian theoretical concepts of governmentality and genealogy as a method for grasping the unconventional reality of multiculturalism discourse in South Korea, this paper aims to go beyond ahistorical accounts of multicultural policy. The article offers an analysis of policy discourses relating to multicultural families in South Korea, and it examines the strategies utilized by the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family to maintain and expand its ministerial jurisdiction. Such analyses reveal how policy discourse has shifted away from Korean blood-based ethnicity and the “mixed-blood” category of people in favor of focusing on female marriage migrants and their families. Furthermore, the examination highlights how legislation that supports these families conceptualizes female migrants as apolitical, family-oriented, and maternal beings. This conceptualization is legitimized by the ministerial strategies adopted by “femocrats,” government officials affiliated with the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family.