The Miracle of Han River

[elevenoclock_seulgihwang]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UA92mb3d3x0

The video on the above link basically praises President Park's effort to develop Korea's economy.
He certainly was a good president. Without him Korea would not have developed this much.
Even though there is no doubt of him being the economy leader, i'm afriad this video over emphasizes the good side of the president.
President Park have led coups in the past and also have ruled the country under dicatatorship which goes against the will of the citizens.
Is economic development really the most important category when evaluating a president?

[Yang hyun ju(Happy)]

I think the most important category when evaluating a president is not only economic development but also something else.
but economic development has a large part in every country. So, most president concentrate for economic development.
Also president park concentrated the growth of korea and now people recognize that he is worthy as a good president.
On the other hand, he has a negative aspect because of despotic government and whether he was a good president or not by it.
Each presidents have differently pursuance they want, so people don't have to evaluate a president with only economic development.
But maybe those who want the economic development can recognize that the growth of korea coincide with the president's ability.

[eleveno'clock_JuilanYun]

Rather than saying was Park Chung-Hee a good president or a bad president? Judging the depression Korea was going
through on that certain period of time,I would state that he had done what was needed. Korea didn't need anyone to elect
a president with just simple status, instead the country needed a leader with a voice to talk for them and a leader who can guide a path.
After watching the video, I realized that he was able to achieve what the country really needed I mean honestly anyone think he really
forgave the Japanese for what had happen in Korea? That’s really my question.
As a leader taking a bow to another leader is simply accepting a defeat. But I disagree with such pessimistic judge of statement, as a leader to take a sacrifice
and lower his status is what I see a leader has to do, and who is only cable of doing. Even though he didn’t forgive the Japanese I still believe
he did what was rational. Because of his decisions, I wouldn't say "He had made what is today". But instead "He started a small light in the
abyss of lost hopes", Park Chung-Hee had set path for Korea to grow.
I respect the Park Chung-hee’s decisions as a leader, and I believe he gave Korea a opportunity to start and shine out once more.

Julian Aka - Young Kyon Yun

[happyJiyu]

It is very arguable whether president Park was a good leader or not in Korea but I totally agree with Julian.
In 1950's, right after Korean war, Korean was really really really poor. They even couldn't eat something which can be called 'food'.
Korea was one of the poorest country in the world. (Actually, poorer than North Korea and Ethiopea.)
Koreans' crest was fallen and they was overwhelmed by a sense of defeat. President Park not only improved the ecomony greatly but also cheered them up. He help Koreans to believe 'you can do it.' Park's effort moved Koreans' heart. They worked hard and hard and finally they made rising economic powerhouse 'Republic of Korea'. Many Koreans in these days blame President Park in terms of some aspect but the people who had lived in that hard period with Park say he was true leader.
Someone called him 'dictator'. It might be right.
However Alvin Toffler known as a futurologist by 'The third wave', as you know, said; 'Democratization can be done after industrialization. For democratization, freedom should be limited for a while. It doesn't make any sense to denounce a leader who stifled liberty for democratization as a dictator.'