Epistemic Challenges of Oppression: Exploring the Impact on Identity, Agency, and Resistance

Our panel examines the intersections of epistemic injustice and power, exploring how they collectively erode democratic norms, marginalize minority groups, and reshape societal identities. Epistemic injustice, whereby certain groups lack the resources or credibility to express their realities, is a central factor in the maintenance of these unequal power dynamics. Each paper examines the impact of structural conditions on marginalized groups' sense of self, agency, and ability to challenge or navigate systemic oppression, albeit through different theoretical frameworks and contexts.
Jaeyeon Yun discusses how autocratic regimes limit the moral relationships between citizens by creating essentialized in-group/out-group dynamics, analyzing the ways in which over-politicization in autocracies shapes social bonds and the moral agency of individuals, often through mechanisms that echo in democratic states.
Se Hyun Kim's paper focuses on structural gaslighting resulting from epistemic injustice, illustrating how mundane everyday South Korean society's interactions with Korean Chinese destabilize their sense of self, trapping them in unequal relationships that reinforce marginalization.
Eun-A Park examines how differential treatment of co-ethnic migrant groups in South Korea shapes their sense of belonging and political engagement, using theories of social identity and intergroup threat to show that ethnic hierarchies created by the host society affect how migrant groups perceive themselves and others within the national context.
Suwon Shin explores epistemic differences between victims and non-victims of structural injustice, arguing that while both face epistemic challenges in recognizing injustice, victims develop unique resources (information, critical consciousness, and experiential knowledge) that empower them to participate meaningfully in resistance against structural injustices.
Jihyun Jeong argues that uncivil resistance conveys essential “affective knowledge”—the visceral, emotional insights of oppressed individuals. Unlike civil resistance, which communicates injustices rationally, uncivil acts create a powerful emotional impact, fostering a deeper understanding of oppression in imbalanced power contexts. Using the example of South Korean disability rights activists, the author shows its political value by highlighting the emotional experiences of the oppressed.
Each paper addresses the intersection of epistemic resources, identity, and agency within structures of power, highlighting the importance of understanding how minority and marginalized groups are affected by and respond to systemic inequalities.