Saigu: The Korean Struggle Behind the Los Angeles Riots of 1992

“People calling me things, you know, Nip, Chink, Jap. You know, after a while, I would get mad and start cussing right back, and then I’d be like, look, man, you want to call me Gook? Guess what. You’re a - I would say racial slurs. It was bad.”¹

— Carol Park, Korean cashier

The infamous Los Angeles riots of 1992 revealed a groundswell of injustice and anger over the systemic racism that African Americans have faced throughout American history. The riots also highlighted deep complexities around other tensions, not only between African Americans and Whites, but also between African Americans and Koreans, who found themselves at the heart of the outbreak. The riots transformed Korean American identity and their social relationship with African Americans, exposing the effects of ethnic economic competition and cultural miscommunications in Los Angeles.

On March 3, 1991, Rodney King, an African American man, was involved in a car chase with police in the city of Los Angeles. Once King was apprehended, four white officers from the LAPD assaulted King, repeatedly beating him with batons for almost 15 minutes. A video taken by bystander, George Holliday, showed the graphic footage of the attack. The tape circulated to news sources and was broadcast throughout the nation. King sustained skull fractures, broken bones and teeth, and permanent brain damage.² A year later, on April 29, 1992, the four Los Angeles police officers involved were acquitted. Fueled by decades of racism and economic inequality, fury over the acquittal emptied into the streets of Los Angeles, resulting in five days of rioting, looting, and burning. In the years leading up to the riots, tensions had already been accumulating in African American communities. Along with a staggeringly high unemployment rate of nearly 50 percent, rampant drug usage, crime, and mass incarceration swept through Black neighborhoods.³ By the end of the five days of riots, more than 50 people were killed, over 2,000 were injured, and nearly 6,000 alleged looters and arsonists were detained. In all, approximately $1 billion worth of property damage was sustained, and over 1,000 buildings were damaged or destroyed.⁴

Amidst the intensity and chaos of the riots, Korean immigrants meanwhile found themselves in a crucible of turmoil as their businesses were looted. At the time of the riots, there were over 145,000 people that identified as Korean living in Los Angeles County most of whom agreed the verdict was unjust.⁵ However, many Koreans held perceived positions of economic dominance over African Americans, and Korean stores and businesses located in primarily Black neighborhoods were targeted by rioters.⁶ As the five days of chaos came to an end, LA Koreans suffered heavy financial consequences: 2,280 Korean American-owned stores were looted, burned, or damaged, causing approximately $400 million in losses.⁷ In the words of Dr. Man Chul Cho, a therapist who worked with Korean store owners after the riots, “[Koreans] were sympathetic... Then they were destroyed.”⁸ This predicament, however, was not a random act of inexplicable violence. Rather, the complex nature of Koreans’ economic position, the cultural differences between Korean merchants and Black customers, and Korean ignorance and indifference towards African Americans’ continued racial struggle in the United States, were all integral components of Koreans’ role in the riots. These challenges spurred Korean development in the Los Angeles community.

The economic niche Korean Americans made for themselves created tension and competition with Black-owned businesses and in LA. A main source of this tension derived from Korean Americans as “Middleman Minorities” in Black neighborhoods. “Middleman Minorities” refers to minority entrepreneurs whose customers are typically members of marginalized racial or ethnic groups that are segregated from a dominant group.⁹ The Middleman Minority Theory, coined by Hubert Blalock in 1967, explored the reasoning behind the common economic position into which many minority groups found themselves. One of the prominent features of a Middleman Minority (here, Korean Americans) was their reaction to hostility from the dominant group (Whites), usually on the basis of cultural or racial distinctiveness. As members of the Middleman Minority, they were pushed out of desirable occupations, yet they managed to escape the lowest rungs of economic pressure by closing ranks. Maintaining solidarity within their communities allows members of the Middleman Minority to thrive where other groups do not.¹⁰ Racial discrimination in the US affected (and still affects) many ethnic groups. Koreans, though perhaps not being the target of explicit legislative racism at the time, still faced racial biases and stereotyping just as other people of color in America had for centuries. As such, they responded in the manner the theory described. In Los Angeles, Koreans collaboratively focused their economic growth through entrepreneurship. By 1990, there were 6,000 Korean-owned businesses supporting nearly half of the Korean population in Los Angeles.¹¹ Pooling the resources of their community, Korean businesspeople often developed a competitive business edge, using the bond of a tight-knit community to achieve economic advantages other business owners could not. In particular, the ability to minimize labor costs through reliance on family members and fellow Korean workers willing to contribute long hours for little pay, was extremely impactful as Koreans entered the realm of economic competition.¹²

Korean immigrant solidarity was a key factor in Koreans’ economic success during this time, but also deepened the conflicted nature of their relationship with African American businesspeople. Professor Edward Taehan Chang of UC Riverside surmised that “Korea is one of the most homogeneous societies in the world claiming to have one language, one culture, and one ethnicity.”¹³ The Korean community in Los Angeles embodied these characteristics and diligently exposed their children to Korean culture. The establishment of Koreatown (residential self-segregation), language and cultural immersion schools like the Korean Institute of Southern California (est. 1972) and the Korean School Association of America (est. 1982), and the tendency of Los Angeles Koreans to maintain distinctive cultural traditions, such as language, ethnic food, and religion, all contributed to a “primordial tie” that provided a basis for trust within the Korean community.¹⁴

The emphasis on shared culture allowed for both distribution of economic resources and lessening of internal competition. The circulation of resources included capital, such as low interest loans, the use of partnerships, information and training, and, perhaps most importantly, jobs and opportunities.¹⁵ On top of this, Korean store owners often operated their businesses through their own labor with assistance from immediate family members and other Korean associates. Employees would work long hours for low (or no) wage and were loyal to the business owners.¹⁶ While this effective combination of community and collaborative economics led to Korean immigrant prosperity, it also laid the foundation for the tension between the Korean American and the African American communities.

Two major issues impacted Korean and African American relationships: Korean entrepreneurs did not hire African American workers and Koreans did not contribute profits to the Black community.¹⁷ Racial biases and a broader sense of competition underscored the economic tension between the competing businesses, as is common when members of one race act as merchants, profiting off of another group of people, while adding little to nothing to their community. Some African Americans, as a result, began to view Korean Americans as yet another race attempting to profit from and exploit the suffering of Black people.¹⁸ Unfortunately, the underlying racial economic competition was not the only impetus for conflict between African Americans and Korean Americans—tension between the two groups arose at the level of customer interaction as well, revealing deep cultural differences that exacerbated the conflicts.

As Korean businesses spread throughout Los Angeles, a clash of cultures emerged in the interactions between Korean store owners and African American customers. As stated by Larry Aubrey, a consultant with the Los Angeles County Human Relations Division, “Monocultural people doing business in a multicultural society [is] potentially problematic.”¹⁹ Aubrey found that complaints from both Black and Korean people primarily involved social interactions, in particular, the subjects of customer treatment and communication. Korean store owners were described as “hostile... and rude,” while Koreans raised similar complaints towards Black customers.²⁰ As a product of drastically different cultures, each group carried different expectations concerning proper attitudes and behaviors in business settings.

If these expectations were challenged on either side, conflict emerged. In particular, Prof. Chang outlined Koreans’ grievances as loudness, bad language, and shoplifting, when the behaviour valued by shop owners was respect, courtesy, and frequent apologies. On the other hand, African Americans frequently commented on Koreans’ negative attitudes, habit of ignoring or watching Black customers constantly suspiciously, and disrespectful interactions with money.²¹ Conflicts arose in two distinct interactions between Koreans and African Americans: the transaction of business, and the Korean response to Black customers’ perceived misdemeanor. Korean transactional expectations are rooted in Korean culture and are therefore well-known among Koreans. However, Korean response towards Western customs reveals the insularity of Koreans’ immigrant background and experience.

This insularity was a root cause behind social tensions between Korean store owners and African American customers. The strong communal bonds Koreans created with each other, through their shared struggle and backgrounds, amplified Korean Americans’ monocultural experience. Koreans’ mode of interpersonal communication became a trigger for misunderstandings between Koreans and African Americans.

Korean culture honors two terms to a high degree in social interactions: ‘respect’ and ‘education’. These terms carry more complex meanings in 한글 (hangul, the Korean language) than they do in English. The way in which Korean store owners use the term ‘respect’ strongly corresponds to the Korean word 존경 (jongyeong)²², used to describe the respect paid to a superior in a hierarchical relationship.²³ In Korean culture, respect for elders is of deep importance and age hierarchy is embedded in most social and business frameworks. Koreans’ saw a lack of ‘respect’ frequently in the context of a younger customer, whom they felt did not show the proper forms of ‘respect’ Koreans believed appropriate for business interactions.

In tandem with the ‘respect’ of customers, Koreans interpreted many common Western cultural practices as lacking ‘education’. The translation of ‘education’ in Korean, 교육 (gyoyug)²⁴, implies not only academic learning but also the training in proper forms of social and personal conduct.²⁵ Based in a strong Confucist history, Korean culture values the propriety of social interaction, learning to suppress the “seven passions of joy, anger, sorrow, fear, love, hatred, and desire.”²⁶ The more ‘educated’ someone is, the less emotion they will display in everyday interactions. Behavior that many Western cultures might believe to be signs of sociability, things like small talk and jokes, are considered a sign of poor ‘education’ or manners by Korean immigrants.²⁷

These traits were best exemplified by the differences in conversation between Korean store owners and customers of Korean background, compared to interactions with those of African American background. A Brown University study videotaped unscripted interactions between Korean American shop owners and customers of different racial backgrounds in Los Angeles during 1994-95. The following partial transcript is an example of Korean-Korean interactions, which describes a short, efficient, and transactional style of communication. Both the customer and cashier display little emotion throughout the interaction and do not use this meeting to strengthen any relationship to each other.

Cashier: Annyoˇng haseyo.
Hello [Customer has just entered store]

Korean Customer: Annyoˇng haseyo. Tambae!
Hello. Cigarettes!

Cashier: Tambae tuˇ ryoˇyo?
You would like cigarettes? [Cashier reaches for cigarettes under counter]

Cashier: Yoˇgi issuˇ mnida.
Here you are [Cashier takes customer’s money and hands her cigarettes; customer turns to leave]

Cashier: Annyoˇnghi kaseyo.
Good-bye.

Korean Customer: Nye.
Okay.²⁸

In total, the conversation comprises 13 words (in the English translation), with neither person saying more than 4 words in a row. In comparison, a recorded conversation with an African American customer contained 279 words spoken, with the African American customer speaking 257 words in total. An excerpt from this conversation reveals multiple attempts by the customer to engage in conversation, but the Korean store owner and cashier grow less and less involved.

Customer: I had a total [injured] knee so my company is retiring my- old black ass at fifty-four... [Customer smiles and gazes at owner]

Owner: Mmh. [Owner shakes his head laterally and gazes away from the customer]

Customer: And they give me some money.

Cashier: Huh. [Cashier bares his teeth briefly in a smile]

Customer: So I’m spending my money at your store on liquor heh heh heh heh hah hah. [Customer laughs animatedly, turning toward the owner who does not smile, but who continues lateral headshakes as he takes a few steps to the side]²⁹

Because the inclusion of personal topics in a business transaction was considered rude (an example of improper ‘education’), the Korean employees respond by distancing themselves from the conversation, likely creating further tension with customers.

The root of the clash between Koreans and Black people did not solely originate from the differences in culture and social customs, but also from Korean identity as immigrants in the United States. Korean immigrants’ interpretation of the “American Dream” and Koreans’ ignorance of African American suffering, underpinned Korean behaviour towards Black customers. As voluntary immigrants, Koreans had a drastically different view of America compared to that of African Americans. The Immigrant Theory suggested that immigrants from Asian and Latin American origin would emulate traits of successfully assimilated European migrants, who placed emphasis on economic upward mobility through hard work, education, and a willingness to work long hours.³⁰ Even when encountering the obstacle of racism, Koreans nevertheless held fast to the ideals that hard work and academic education would achieve the “American Dream.”³¹

As they were unacquainted with the suffering of African Americans (ie. slavery, segregation, systemic oppression, etc..), Koreans embraced the notion of the “land of opportunities,” showing little understanding towards the African American plight, and incorrectly surmising that African Americans had no one but themselves to blame for their problems.³² Because the value of social customs was so ingrained in Korean culture, the act of ignoring a customer who lacked social propriety was seen as an appropriate response. As one Korean merchant declared, “How can I smile at the customer who uses bad language and shows no respect for me?”³³ However, this type of Korean response struck the core of many systemic problems faced by African Americans, who have been oppressed, disregarded, and belittled for generations. Feeling ignored is a direct violation of one’s humanity, and, in the words of a Black customer at a Korean store, “[the store owners] wouldn’t look at you at all. They wouldn’t acknowledge you in any way. Nothing. You were nobody... They’d look over you or around you.”³⁴ Though the Korean response might have carried a different intention, these Korean cultural tendencies were understandably taken as insults to Black customers, exacerbating intolerance and prejudice on both sides.

The friction between Korean Americans and African Americans, grounded in economic competition and cultural differences, was evident to many in Los Angeles. Carol Park, the Korean American daughter of a gas station owner, poignantly described the tension between Korean and African Americans. She recounted that “People would say, you know, damn Koreans. Get out of the hood. What are you doing here overcharging me for a can of soda? It was like a stick of dynamite waiting to explode.”³⁵ Ultimately, the tension between Koreans and African Americans did explode. However, it was not only the riots that marked the climax of the conflict, but a tragic event more than a year earlier. On March 16, 1991, only two weeks after the beating of Rodney King, Soon Ja Du, a Korean store owner, shot and killed a 15-year old African American girl, Latasha Harlins. Du accused the girl of stealing a bottle of orange juice and an altercation ensued. When Latasha placed the juice on the counter and began to exit the store, Du shot her in the head.³⁶ Not only was this event clear evidence of dangerously strained relations between Korean Americans and African Americans, its outcome only added to the tension. Ja Du, as punishment for the murder of Harlins, received probation and a $500 fine, foreshadowing the outcome of the King trial.³⁷ For African Americans, the lenient sentence was yet another unfair outcome in a long line of unjust punishment. “It’s a travesty of justice,” declared a family friend of the Harlins.³⁸

Outraged with the acquittal of the Rodney King police officers, the riots began. Unrest quickly reached many parts of South Central Los Angeles, primarily where Korean stores were doing business in Black communities.³⁹ The years of tension between Koreans and African Americans boiled over as rioters looted and burned Korean-owned stores across the city. Unprepared law enforcement was unable to respond to the violence for over three hours, leavings Koreans to defend their stores alone, prompting their use of military experience from Korea and firearms to combat rioters.⁴⁰ As one Korean resident described, “armed employees guarded her father’s store and tossed back out several gasoline bombs that had come crashing through the windows.”⁴¹ Koreans felt that “they were deemed expendable. The reason was simple: a lack of political voice and political power.”⁴² This dramatic recognition created shifts in Korean American ideology, as Koreans realized that economic success alone was not a guarantee of their place in America.

In the aftermath, many LA Koreans found their property and lively hoods decimated, with almost a third of all Korean-owned businesses in Los Angeles damaged or destroyed.⁴³ In a study conducted by the Korean American Inter-Agency Council (KAIAC) six months after the riots, “more than 50% of store owners face[d] a ‘very difficult’ financial situation.”⁴⁴ The devastating economic hardship revealed the deeper challenge that the community faced. Despite the model minority myth used to stereotype Koreans and other Asian immigrants as prosperous and successful, many Korean businessmen in Los Angeles were poor immigrants who would often remain in debt for years.⁴⁵ Ivan Light, the author of “Immigrant Entrepreneurs,” a study of Koreans in Los Angeles, acknowledged that “there will be some pulling out… but most [Korean owners] don’t have any options. That is their livelihood.”⁴⁶

Forced to reopen stores, Koreans depended on access money to rebuild and being allowed to reopen their stores, both factors which were challenging without political and governmental support. The mutual aid system among Korean businesses (who would normally have supported each other) was not enough to cover the $400 million in damage produced by the riots.⁴⁷ This led them to seek financial aid from the government, to help revitalize the community. However, such support didn’t materialize. With loan payments and other “bureaucratic red tape” still in effect, the government’s failure to assist, acted as a “second riot” for many Koreans, re-traumatizing them through neglect.⁴⁸ In addition to limited support, the California government capitalized on the destruction of many liquor stores, requiring liquor store owners to go through public hearings before reopening their stores, further shining light on the vulnerability Koreans faced without political engagement in Los Angeles.⁴⁹

The impact of these economic losses not only revealed the absence of political representation of Korean Americans, but it also influenced normal life for many Korean families.⁵⁰ The important cultural values of the community, education and stoicism were shaken by the effects of the riots. A study by the KAIAC in July of 1993 found that 15% of college-age Korean students had dropped out of school due to the riots with many other students pausing their studies to help their families. The immigrant belief in their “American Dream” was deeply challenged. The politically fraught situation also created a highly emotional atmosphere, colliding with the cultural norms brought from Korea. The immensity of the riots forced many to defy cultural practices of deference and stoicism and seek mental treatment. Dr. Man Chul Cho, a Korean therapist in Los Angeles, organized an outreach program to help riot victims work through these issues. Over 2,000 people signed up. In all, more than 500 out of 2,000 therapy patients of Dr. Cho were diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder.⁵¹ Up to this point, Koreans’ stiff, monocultural values brought them into conflict with African Americans, but this calamitous, multicultural disaster forced them to face that they were no longer in a single ethic society, and therefore relying on their native complex social norms was inappropriate to dictate behaviors in this country. As many Koreans understood after the riots, communication with the Black community was key to begin closing the rift between the two groups.

One of the most important lessons Korean Americans learned from riots was the influential role that African Americans played in Korean businesses and communities. Koreans realized that because of their Middleman position, conflict was inevitable when outreach and communication were not present. In several cases, Korean businessmen and African American customers used the tragic event of the riots to better understand each other’s culture and to diffuse tensions between the groups.⁵² In particular, initiatives to bring together the communities began, such as the efforts of David Ryu, a Korean student, and Nathan Redfern, a former Crips gang member, who worked together to lessen tensions between their communities by resolving conflicts between Korean store owners and Black customers, teaching classes in English as a second language, and providing mock citizenship exams for immigrants.⁵³

In combination, the changes brought about by the 5 days of rioting cemented the period as one of the most influential events in Korean American history. Today, the riots carry the moniker of 사이구 (saigu), meaning 4/29, expressing similar weight to 9/11 in the broader American culture. The uprisings marked a turning point of Korean integration into American society, ultimately producing indelible political, cultural, and economic changes that deeply affected Korean immigrants’ position in Los Angeles. In the years since the riots, Korean Americans have become far more politically active, with the first Korean congress member being elected a year after the riots.

While these advancements to ameliorate the conditions surrounding the riots are positive steps, the conditions that created the confrontational divide between two minority groups are still in play. The lack of immigrant integration in the US impacts many groups facing similar issues to west coast Korean immigrants, particularly those immigrant cultures which continue to serve in the Middleman Minority role (Armenians, Jews, Chinese, Hispanics) and create businesses in cultures outside of their own.⁵⁴ Recent hostilities against Asian Americans indicate persistent conflicts, and highlight the plight of non-white Americans. Numerous non-white immigrants in America are pressured by racial biases and innate cultural differences, drawing them in to conflict with various communities. The romanticization of the Korean struggle during the riots, primarily in the form of recent “rooftop Korean’’ memes proliferating online, has compelled many to see Koreans as solely victims of the riots and their defensive response as the model for other minorities.⁵⁵ This view myopically ignores the complexity of Korean immigrant interactions with other minority groups, which simmered beneath the surface for many years and contributed to the violence of the day. Moreover, while Koreans are often placed upon a racial pedestal, portrayed as the model minority, such narrow stereotypes ignore Korean suffering, demonize African Americans, and diminish the precarious state and vulnerabilities of minorities across the U.S. Ultimately, the role of Korean Americans before, during, and after the 1992 Los Angeles riots was not as heroes or villains, rather as small yet critical players in the larger systemic racial injustices that have plagued our nation since its founding.