"Dae-Han-Min-Guk": The "Red Devils," Korean Identity, and the 2002 FIFA World Cup
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the 2002 FIFA World Cup, staged in South Korea and Japan, the Red Devils, the supporters of the South Korean football team, made headlines around the world. Taking to the streets in huge numbers—most estimates suggest 7 million people took part in the celebrations over the course of the tournament—they displayed fervor and a sense of unity that commentators found unprecedented. This phenomenon went beyond the physical borders of Korea, moreover, as diasporic Korean communities from Toronto to London celebrated in a similar fashion. Taking seriously the claims of diaspora studies, which seek to understand the relationship of national (and other) identities in transnational context, this study investigates the experiences of Korean and Korean Canadian participants in the Red Devils cheering. Two Koreans and two Korean Canadians participated in semistructured, open-ended interviews designed to understand the meaning of their participation in these events. The major themes that emerged from the interviews include the importance of understanding the cheering in the context of Korea’s colonial history, the importance of a sense of belonging and the traditional “we” culture, and the need for catharsis after economically challenging times.
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 | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".