By Andrew Salmon

In the mid-1990s, while living in London, my wife and I used to travel to New Malden, the "Koreatown" south of the city, to stock up on kimchi and other essentials at a small shop selling side dishes.

It was run by a Korean ajummah who spoke minimal English but who was always strikingly cheerful. I asked her once what made her so happy. She replied, "Here in the U.K., everyone is so free!"

I remember thinking, "This old duck is out of date. Korea is a democracy too!" It took me years to realize what she was talking about ― and it ran far deeper than political freedoms.

Today, "The Korean Tragedy" tends to refer to the six-decade division of the peninsula, forced upon it by powers beyond Koreans' control. Or, perhaps, to the appalling hardships suffered by millions of poor, hungry, isolated and repressed North Koreans.

But there is another tragedy, albeit on the micro rather than macro scale, and it is unique to South Korea. In survey after survey, Koreans state their lack of satisfaction with their lives. Long after the economic imperative to do so evaporated, many Koreans long to emigrate. And suicide is the top killer of Koreans aged 15-24.

How can the people who wrote the greatest national success story of the 20th century ― the economic miracle of the 1960s and '70s, the political miracle of the 1980s ― be so miserable?

It starts early. In education ― and education begins for Koreans almost in the cradle ― narrowly defined over-achievement is pursued by parents. This leads children, I suspect, to being obsessively competitive after they leave school ― in their business, financial and social lives.

Moreover, due to Korean social culture, opportunities are lacking for those without connections. Exacerbating the above stresses is the massive weight of Korean culture: Peer pressure, social expectation and group-think.

In her inaugural speech, President Park stated her mission: make Koreans happy. But what is an appropriate conceptual framework to create an environment where individual happiness can be freely pursued?

I would humbly suggest that Korea needs to fully embrace, and indeed promote, diversity.

When we think of diversity, we tend to think race. And certainly Korea is becoming racially diverse. Yet how many naturalized Koreans have really made it? The lawmaker Jasmine Lee is one: Korea needs 100 more like her.

But diversity is broader than ethnicity. It includes lifestyle, and lifestyle choices tend to be narrowly proscribed. Those who choose alternative lifestyles often face discrimination. Gay actor Hong Seok-chon lost his TV career after coming out, but has successfully reinvented himself as an entrepreneur. Korea needs 100 more like him.

And there needs to be diversity of talent. Professionals in specific fields don't have to share identical attributes. Psy smashed the "accepted" mold of the Korean pop star: Korea needs 100 more like him.

To upgrade our living environment, there needs to be diversity of hardware. Not everyone needs to drive black, grey or white salons, nor live in identical concrete apartments. Bukchon shows how low-rise, neo-traditional neighborhoods inject charm into cityscapes. Seoul needs 100 Bukchons.

The catchphrase "economic democratization" indicates Korea's lack of economic diversity. The business landscape remains top heavy; SMEs and entrepreneurs lack access to capital and support. There are Korean inventors and entrepreneurs who create success from scratch, such as Romi Haan of Hann Corp., but damned few of them. Korea needs 100 of her.

And there is too much emphasis on connections and gender. Success is not the sole prerogative of male graduates of Seoul, Yonsei and Korea universities. There needs to be diversity of opportunity; the embrace of diverse qualifications and genders. Korea needs 100 more Park Geun-hyes.

Finally, there must be diversity of aspiration. Not everyone should aim to be doctor, lawyer, chaebol employee or hallyu star. Society needs to let people dream their own dreams, forge their own paths.

But can Korea embrace diversity? Can government undertake the kind of socio-cultural engineering needed to achieve it?

Perhaps. By reforming education, leveling the economic playing field, legislating diversity-friendly laws and running public relations campaigns to encourage changes in thinking, government can do much.

Yet is the concept of diversity not simply a "Western" imposition?

I would say no. Encouraging diversity means freeing people to be what they want to be. This is democratization – for at the heart of democratization lies the equality and the rights of the individual. Koreans need to flower as individuals, without being channeled into directions they don't want to go, and without being crushed by social expectations or peer pressure.

That, at least, is the understanding I took from an old lady selling kimchi in New Malden.

Andrew Salmon is a Seoul-based reporter and author. Reach him at andrewcsalmon@yahoo.co.uk.