South Korea's Saemaul (New Village) movement: an organisational technology for the production of developmentalist subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper uses the Foucauldian concepts of governmentality and apparatus (dispositive) to understand how the state can use an organisational technology to penetrate everyday life through hegemonic discourse. With a case study of the Saemaul (New Village) movement, a rural development initiative in South Korea in the 1970s, we analyse how the state used half-civilian, half-bureaucratic agents called Saemaul leaders to inscribe the discourse of developmentalism in the peasants' bodies and souls. This article claims that organisational technology plays a critical role in the diffusion of hegemonic discourse during rapid structural transformations such as the industrialisation of South Korea. Résumé Ce travail s'appuie sur les notions foucaldiennes de « gouvernementalité » et de « dispositif » pour analyser la façon dont l'Etat emploie les technologies d'organisation pour pénétrer la vie quotidienne des citoyens à travers les discours hégémoniques favorisant le développement. Les auteurs utilisent comme cas d’étude le mouvement Saemaul (mouvement du nouveau village), une initiative créée par le gouvernement sud-coréen pour encourager le développement rural dans les années 1970. Les auteurs analysent, en particulier, le rôle des agents, à la fois civils et politiques, dans la transmission du discours au sein de l'esprit et du corps des paysans. Les auteurs constatent que les technologies d'organisation étudiées dans l'article jouent un rôle essentiel dans la diffusion des discours hégémoniques soutenant le développement et l'industrialisation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".