By ANDY JACKSON
Marmot??s Hole Guest Blogger
President Roh is not a dumb man, but in a meeting with newspaper editors yesterday he once again made it pretty clear that he may be in over his head with his current job.
In his quest to latch all opposition parties to his Pequod-like ship-of-state (NOTE: You know you are in for some quality blogging when you see literary references like that), Roh has yet again called for a coalition government and puctuated his lastest attempt with this (Yonhap):
Roh urged the major opposition Grand National Party (GNP) to present “any justifiable rationale” for its refusal to accept the coalition proposal.
Ooh, ooh! I have one; it’s a frick’n opposition party.
Korea is not at war and the economy, while not so great, is not in depression. There is no need for a coalition.
If Roh wants them to support a change in the political system, he’ll just have to make a proposal that they can accept. He is the one doing the wooing. It is his job to provide the opposition parties with a ‘justifiable rationale’ for joining a coalition. Either that or he can get a clue on how to govern.
51 Comments
I wrote:Someone who wants to engage North Korea but will come to the table with carrots in one hand and sticks in the other, not someone with chocolate-covered candy corn in the shape of carrots.This got cut somehow. It was supposed to read, “not someone with chocolate-covered candy corn in the shape of carrots in both hands, and the chocolate starts to melt all over his hands, so he grabs the nearest South Korean taxpayer and wipes it off on his good shirt.
Sperwer,
Quite an eloquent defense of Lincoln, but–though this is off topic–I will have to defend both myself and Strauss (who was a teacher of a number of my teachers):
1. I said “Lincoln… may have been disingenous” about his profession of unfitness. I emphasize “may”!
Second, even if I had not inserted the qualifier “may” in there, I hardly see my proposition as a “cheap shot”–even considering your own qualifier “mistaken.” Lincoln self-consciously cultivated an image of himself as Everyman to persuade the masses; but there is no question that he was an extraordinary man in terms of both his gifts and character.
2. “…I think the guilt by association with the Straussian valorization of a fantasy politics as propounded/practiced by the Greeks also is worng.”
I do not understand what this means.
First, the only thing Strauss “valorized” was philosophy, not politics, whether ancient or modern.
Second, I have no idea what “fantasy politics as propounded/practiced by the Greeks” was.
Kushibo,
We’ve debated about this before, but given the history/context of ideological polarization in modern South Korea, is it possible to have a pragmatic leftist emerge from the Korean political scene? I certainly don’t see anything like the Clintonite DLC movement in the South Korean Left (perhaps because the Democratic Party was not that far left of the Center anyways traditionally?).
Marmot, please install some sort of self-editing feature (esp. for those FoBs who can barely write Engrish!)
I meant to say, in my response #11: “but there is no question that he was an extraordinary man in terms of both his gifts and character, AND THAT HE WAS AWARE OF IT.”
WJC wrote:We??ve debated about this before, but given the history/context of ideological polarization in modern South Korea, is it possible to have a pragmatic leftist emerge from the Korean political scene? I certainly don??t see anything like the Clintonite DLC movement in the South Korean Left (perhaps because the Democratic Party was not that far left of the Center anyways traditionally?).Yes, right now you’re probably right. I can’t think of anyone off the top of my head.
But… a Korean Clintonite can emerge from the right. A moderate from the “conservatives” who would stand promote pragmatic solutions that are good for the population in general while respecting the importance of a free market where reasonable regulations are enforced and corruption not tolerated.
That might sound a little nuts, to say that a pragmatic leftist might come from the “conservative” party, but parties in Korea are still largely region-based, party loyalty is far less defined than in a country like the U.S., and parties aren’t as married to this or that idea.
While we wouldn’t likely see John McCain say, “Hey, these right-wingers are ruining the Republican Party, I’m going to run on a ticket with Al Gore!” we can see something like that in Korea. A moderate who feels unwelcome in the Hannara Party might decide to do such a thing.
Similarly, an issue like environmental protection from reclamation projects, while not traditionally a conservative issue, would not seem so unbelievable if it were suddenly taken up by a pragmatic conservative. And a “left-winger” who starts talking about the danger of growing Chinese influence as a reason to strengthen traditional ties with the United States and even Japan wouldn’t be so out-of-line, either.
For the left to regain credibility (not just with the U.S. and Japan, but with many Koreans), it is going to have to take up some positions traditionally considered “conservative,” and for the right to gain more support, it is going to have to believably take up more positions traditionally associated with the left or middle.
It may not take a Clintonite (i.e., a moderate pragmatist who is willing to buck some of his own side’s positions in favor of workable ideas from the other side, whichever side that is) to win the next election, but it will take a Clintonite to win the next election and move the country forward.
So there is a commonality between Lincoln and Roh after all!
That is, they both publicly questioned their own fitness for the highest office of the land.
Of course, Lincoln–a master rhetorician and the practitioner of “esoteric” writing/speech before Leo Strauss introduced it to an American audience–may have been disingenous. One could only hope Roh is not.
I admit I haven’t been following this particular story closely enough, but even if there were a convincing reason for a coalition government, who would really go for it? I imagine there are some MNAs in the GNP and Uri Party who would be willing to work with each other and listen to each other’s positions and proposals, but surely a number of Uri Party MNAs wouldn’t want to have anything to do with the GNP, and vice versa? And what of the Minju Nodongdang? Aren’t they already in a coalition with the Uri Party? I just can’t see members of the Grand National and Minju Nodong parties working together as part of a coalition!
I don’t think, Curious, that the idea behind this is for Roh’s party to listen to other ideas. Rather, he wants to be able to form a coalition (as in Japan — this is codeword for setting up a parliamentary-style system) so that he can make dictates without worrying about them passing. Essentially making the president-turned-premier a dictator for the life of his or her term.
Nice and easy, no need to convince people of your whacky ideas, no need to press the flesh and get people on board… you can just put your ideas into practice and everybody will see the wisdom of your fresh outlook.
It’s in the same vein as limiting the power of opposition newspapers: he doesn’t like their criticism of his behavior and his policies, so rather than seeing what’s wrong with his behavior and his policies, he’d rather just shut them up.
In the past, Korean kings consolidated their rule by getting factions behind them. Roh is taking a page out of their playbook. Neo-royalism, it is, gov’nuh!
People’s participation government is a joke. Unless they mean that the Blue House dictates, and the people participate by doing what he says.
Well, I was thinking what you wrote, but I was trying to be diplomatic about it. No, I’m quite sure he has no intention of paying much heed to the GNP’s policies or positions; but then, it’s not really a “coalition,” is it?
“Human Rights Lawyer”
“Korean Lincoln”
Irony of ironies.
Two more years. Just two more years.
Roh is certainly no dummy. The problem is that his Lincolnesque ambitions far exceed his abilities as a thinker, speaker and politician and his quality as a man - what a Confucian might call his rectitude or righteousness.
Whether for better or worse, Lincoln really did aim for a “rebirth of freedom”. Not just in the narrow sense of black emancipation - which came pretty late in the game — but in the much, much larger sense of fundamentally remolding the American polity in a manner calculated to ensure both that it would remain true to and further realize its ideal of being a government of, by and for the people, and that it would be able to defend that form of government against its enemies, and so not perish from the earth, in the era of industrialization and dramatically increased comeptition among nations resulting from industrialization.
In other words, Lincoln saw “globalization” coming, and concluded that in order to succeed in the new era the US needed a much stronger national government than would be possible if the proponents of extreme states rights prevailed.
He is one of, in my estimation 2 (other short lists are possible) truly great Presidents, because of his ability to articulate and implement America’s second revolution. Others disagree, one of the more eloquent and persuasive of Lincoln’s critics being Gore Vidal, a descendant of an earlier opponent of federalismm and hence Alexander ahamilton’s nemesis, Aaron Burr.
He was. as Choe says, a masterful rhetorician, against whom levelling a charge of disingenousness is a mistaken cheap shot. He was mainfestly free of any sense that his abilities - let alone, unlike Roh et al. and their political opponents, his morality - “entitled” him to govern [Korean politicians, I suspect moreover, think they are entitled to "rule"]. Hence, I think the guilt by association with the Straussian valorization of a fantasy politics as propounded/practiced by the Greeks also is worng.
What’s pathetic about Roh is that this coalition strategem, were it to succeed, would simply perpetuate the pattern of Korean politics that Roh purports to want to end, i.e., the Tammnay Hall type spoils system for the elite. All that would change is that the formerly beyond the pale 386s would now get their own reserved spots at the trough - to which we already have seen them, including some of Roh’s inner circle, sidling up in, as revealed in the current Administration’s accumulating scandal blotter.
What’s truly pathetic about Roh, is that, as in many of his other domesticand, certainly, his foreign policy initiatives, he doesn’t seem to be able to envisions and understand the dynamic that he is attempting to loose into the vortex of Korean politics.
I really think that few of the likely electable people could be worse than amateur-hour Roh, with the single exception of Chung.
One of Roh’s many problems is that he’s idealistic but ill-informed. He doesn’t understand the diplomatic nuances important when one wants to try new ideas but not piss off important allies, and he is susceptible to others’ agendas.
But this is not an exclusively leftist situation. Some would argue that Bush has many of these same traits. I’m not saying this to excuse Roh or to bash Bush, but to just point out that a left-leaning pragmatist would not necessarily be a bad thing. Someone who wants to engage North Korea but will come to the table with carrots in one hand and sticks in the other, not someone with chocolate-covered candy corn in the shape of carrots. Someone who understands that while engagement is important, pressing North Korea and China on the NK refugee issue is important. Someone who understands that a lot of work must be done to restore good will with South Korea’s most important military and political ally and ensurer of ROK security, the United States. Someone who understands that Korea will thrive in the future by being friends with a democratic Japan with whom it shares a great deal in common.
Despite some glitches, Kim Daejung understood these things far better than Roh Moohyun does. It is Kim Daejung’s “looking forward” agreement with Japan that was being trampled upon by Roh with his “diplomatic war.”
On the other side of the coin, a right-wing ideologue in Korea might be no better than Roh. Someone who disregards the needs of the poor and the middle class in favor of helping the elite, or who appears to engage in an ass-kissing relationship with the United States without addressing Korean concerns about the relationship (which is how past regimes are sometimes seen), then the Korean conservatives will have a short-lived reign.
Hey, Kushibo, guess wha?. I agree with you! ))
Ah, you’ve just got Stockholm Syndrome.
Take two ibuprofen and call me in the morning.
Kushibo,
As usual, a comprehensive and thoughtful reply. I also do see the possibility of a maverick like Lee Myung-Bak defecting to the Uri Party if he doesn’t win the GNP nomination. He could even conceivably win the presidency on a Uri ticket. But how could he govern from the center or slightly right of center without risking a mass revolt by the leftist Uri rank and file? Or is it your theory that (perhaps following Henderson’s “politics of the vortex”) a strong personality like Lee could pull a sizable majority of the Uri rank and file to his vision?
Or perhaps a lot of (esp. younger) GNP rank and file could defect to Uri like lemmings if Lee won the presidency on a Uri ticket and on a centrist platform…
I don’t know. Maybe you are on to something.
Won Joon:
Interesting. I also studied with a whole bunch of Strauss’ students many years ago - Bloom, Dannhauser, et al - the whole so-called Cornell Strauss mafia.
I agree that Lincoln was aware that he was extraordinary. I disagree with even the suggestion (’may”) that he ever dissembled about this when he expressed doubt about the success of his undertakings or misgivings about some of his strategic and tactical choices. As far as his personal quality was concerned he tended simply to avoid self-aggrandizement and to suffer in silence those who denigrated him as a “common” man.. I don’t think he ever lost sight of the fact that despite his genius he himself was “of the people” and put his trousers on one leg at at a time, too. Just because he didn’t put on airs but clove to the manners of the station of his birth and upbringing doesn’t mean he deliberately was hiding his light under a bushel basket. Plenty of discerning people at the time also clearly knew he was exceptional.
Strauss - or maybe I should say Bloom, at least, whom I understood at the time to be talking the party line — valorized philosophy and also a (perhaps mistaken) platonic notion of rule by the philosophers and the “noble” lie. That has been widely and crudely, but perhaps not altogether mistakenly, understood to justify dissenmbling and disingenousness, i.e., deception, fraud, lies and misrepresentations, in the service of a higher good. Given the number of Straussians in the current administration recently, including perhaps most notably Wolfowitz, who lived at Telluride house when he was a student at Cornell, where Bloom also lived as the faculty proctor, perhaps sheds some light on the phantom Iraqi WMD.
Anyway, I was just reacting to the subtle or unintended association of Lincoln with a Straussian (or perhaps debased Straussian) view of how politics works or should work. And I don’t think any such heuristic is helpful in understanding Lincoln.
Sperwer,
I don’t want to name names in a public forum, but there are many prominent Straussians who disapprove of Bloom’s politicization and popularization of Strauss and his message. Or as one of them have confided in me: the publication of The Closing of the American Mind was the worst thing that ever happened to Strauss.
But even given Bloom’s differences with Strauss, I don’t ever recall anything from Bloom’s oeuvre where he endorsed the Platonic regime of the philosopher king, the kallipolis, as a practical guide. In print, Bloom always took the Straussian line that Plato’s ultimate goal in sketching the kallipolis was to show the impossibility of its actualization and thereby to wean talented youth away from politics. But I’ve also heard Bloom was even bolder in the classroom than in print; so maybe he was a proponent of Machiavellian mendacity in person.
I guess my own irritation emerged out of my initial impression–perhaps mistaken–that you were not familiar with Strauss’ writings yourself but are merely regurgitating the tiresome Lyndon LaRouche, anti-semitic, conspiracy-mongering fruitcake line about Leo Strauss that has infected much of the American media’s depiction of Strauss.
As for my comments about Lincoln, no, I didn’t mean to suggest that he was some sort of an American version of Machiavelli’s diabolical Il Principe. Perhaps the misunderstanding has to do with my lack of perfect fluency in the English language and my imperfect understanding of the term “disingenous.” Nonetheless, Lincoln did often hide his real views in his rhetoric out of prudence; see Jaffa’s magisterial two-volume study of Lincoln, as well as Anastaplo’s wonderful little book on him.
I don’t know how to do a “trackback” and I’m not sure what one is, but I’ve just blogged the subject at my own place.
Remember that it was the GNP that first suggested forming a special “national cabinet.” Now he’s calling their bluff. If the GNP accepts his offer of a “coalition gov’t” he’ll have silenced it and gotten its cooperation. If it continues to reject the proposal it can’t claim the country is in a state of total crisis. Either way he wins.
From Oranckay’s blog:
Perhaps that??s why the The Marmot felt he can??t ignore the nonsense any longer. Me too.
Just to be clear, the poster above is Andy the Yangban. I was quite content to ignore the nonsense a little longer.
As for the trackback, you need to copy the trackback address and paste it where it says “trackback” on your adminstrator page:
http://blog.marmot.cc/archives.....trackback/
Kushibo:
Re #14: concur again.
A couple of years ago I had my hand taken apart and put back together here in Korea and when I woke up from the anesthesia opted for the proferred ibuprufen (instead of the morphine that, to my astonishment, also was not just on offer but was actually being pushed by the hospital staff. Anyway, the ibuprufen was 800mg strength. If you can tell me where to get some more, I’d be much obliged.
WJC:
Bloom WAS rather intemperate and indiscreet in lectures and conversation; “The CLosing of the American Mind” was not an aberration, unfortunately.
Thanks (?) for letting me off the Lyndon LaRouche, anti-semitic, etc., etc. hook.
I think our difference regarding Lincoln is perhaps one of nuance rather than real substance.
Hey, how did a discussion about Roh turn into “Who knows more Straussians” contest? Geez. Showoffs.
James
aka Guns and Butter
aka The Asianist
Sperwer,
Yes, I think our differences regarding Lincoln are minor–if they exist at all.
So around what time did you attend Cornell, may I ask? Did you attend class perchance with the Telluride folks who would later become prominent–e.g. Wolfowitz, Fukuyama?
Hey, how did a discussion about Roh turn into ??Who knows more Straussians?? contest?
Beats me. Sweet design on The Asianist blog, BTW.
James,
I don’t think it’s the first time that a Marmot comment section wandered off into monst strange tangents (e.g. every Blog entry Baduk participates in)! It’s just that as a Straussian myself, I feel a personal stake in this issue, and Strauss has been taking too many cheap shots for the sins of his more wayward students.
oranckay wrote:I don??t know how to do a ??trackback?? and I??m not sure what one is, but I??ve just blogged the subject at my own place.You’ve got a blog? Sure you do.
I’m not falling for that one again.
WJC:
Late ’60s. I knew Wolfowitz slightly and some others; I almost moved into Telluride but decided to take a pass in favor of C-Town.
I see from your recent WJA Op-ed piece that we may also have in common being apostate corporate lawyers. I was @ MTHM, where i had a fascinating first tour sitting in the office next to John J. McCloy, who was then in his late ’80s, and overhearing him bellow at his secretary to get Nixon, Kissinger, et al on the horn and working on stuff for the the Rockies and Chase, the Shah, the King of Morocco and really, really big (think Ed Sullivan) oil.
Totally agree with Kushibo up there in comment No. 7. Out with the bums–all of them. How would Mayor Lee Myung-bak be as a candidate? His background doesn’t seem too ideologically tainted, but maybe someone out there knows some dirt about him that I don’t.
Lee Myung Bak is rather eccentric from what I know, but I can’t say I disapprove of his attempts to make Seoul less of a colossal eyesore.
OTOH, he has apparently devoted the city to God, is fervent Christian fundo in that peculiarly discomforting Korean way, and wants to crack down on “immorality” in one of the few culturally vibrant nabes in Seoul, Hongdae. There is probably as least as much potential for him to be as anti-intellectual as Roh.
I’d heard he was a Christian, but in Korea that’s like saying the guy eats kimchi…didn’t know he was a fundie, though, that is discouraging. I figured the “crackdown” on Hongdae clubs was for show, PR for the presidential run and, well, who can resist a good crackdown?
This is a good reason for not having a coalition:
http://www.iht.com/articles/20.....ermany.php
Money quote: “It would be the smallest and dumbest common denominator.”
I think consensus politics can be achieved in this country without a coalition or “national cabinet.” It would just mean the Uri Party and GNP focusing on bipartisan matters such as economic reform and decentralization (not “capital relocation”) that everybody agrees is overdue. The GNP isn’t faultless, but it’s Roh and his bunch with their ad hoc approach and insistence on politicizing history to their own ends that is the problem, and no coalition will solve that.
When the nicest thing you can say about somebody is “he’s not a dumb man”, I guess that says it all…
SPERWER: “What??s pathetic about Roh is that this coalition strategem, were it to succeed, would simply perpetuate the pattern of Korean politics that Roh purports to want to end, i.e., the Tammnay Hall type spoils system for the elite.”
BINGO, BINGO, BINGO, Sperwer! Recall that one badge of honor Roh has worn was his quitting Kim Young-sam’s party (and a safe re-election) after YS joined hands with the military party in the early 1990s. At this distance, It seems like likes to fling stuff at the wall and see what sticks.
Many Koreans including a KA like moi believe that there is more sinister reason for the coalition being proposed. Rho is not a fool. And, there is no reason to call for coalition. None.
Then, why is he doing it, despite the heavy objection from Hannara party?
Many believe the real reason for coalition is the inclusion of NK as a part of coalition. This cannot be done right away because Korean constitution will prohibit it.
However, this formation of coalition gives the glimpse of what will come next. The unified SK-NK government in terms of coalition government.
Far-fetched? Maybe. It is strange, though, that Rho keeps insisting on it when there is no reason for it.
Sperwer, I’m sorry to pose a question on a tangent, but were you around during the seige of Day Hall?
Sperwer,
Indeed I am a lapsed corporate attorney–though my own “apostasy” was forced upon me by the Godess Fortuna rather than emerging out of my own free will.
In any case, could you e-mail me at wonjoon@gmail.com? I am very interested in discussing Strauss Straussians further–and I am afraid that the rest of the Marmot readership is not
We could talk about Richard Strauss or Levi-Strauss (although I know more about the clothier than the philosopher)….
Curious,
Leo Strauss, neither Richard the composer nor Claude the anthropologist
Leo has been in hot waters because he was a teacher of Paul Wolfowitz (who is himself not as radical as his caricatures in the media make him out to be–though that’s another topic altogether); but I say that’s like blaming Socrates for the misdeeds of an Alcibiades or a Callicles.
Sorry, I meant Levi Strauss, the man who gave jeans to the world, and yes, the hyphenated Levi-Strauss was an anthropologist, not a philosopher.
Now, if someone were to write a dissertation on the social history of bluejeans, he or she could apply the work of Levi-Strauss to an examination of the work of Levi Strauss….
Virtual Wanderer:
Yes, and the Straight before that. My girlfreind’s parents were actually staying at the Straight, which then had some guest rooms, when the Black Student Caucus took it over and then brought in the guns to defend themselves against the supposed assault to come from the frat boys and the local gendarmes. They probably had more to worry about from her father, who had been a member of the Home Army undeground in Poland during the war - but fortunately, I managed to get him out of there before he did much damage.
You guys are a riot. I am glad I found this site.
Mr. Choe, drop me a line when you get a chance. I also put your AWSJ piece on my new Asia blog. I agree with you, by the way, that Strauss has been much maligned, but remember that ad hominem attacks are a sign of a weak argument.
To stir the pot a little more, I understand what Bloom thought of the MBA education. What do you guys think he thought of the legal education as it is taught at law schools in the United States today, since at least two of you are lapsed corporate attorneys?
Oh, and thank you, The Marmot, for the compliment about my new blog. It’s still new, so there is much tinkering to do.
I hope you don’t mind that I will liberally cite/trackback this site.
James
aka Guns and Butter
aka The Asianist
James Na asks the question because he already knows the answer — legal education sucks, and for the same reasons that higher education across America sucks more and more. American law schools are virtually the exclusive province of the detached Limousine Left, and political correctness rules the day. I got a double dose of this because I chose to go to school in Seattle despite being a “Jesusland” Missourian with hillbilly sensibilities.
My favorite hypocrite was the professor who had done construction law at Morrison Foerster, then come to teach us contracts and “Critical Legal Theory” (basically, a series of lectures by a shaggy white guy about how the law institutionalizes ‘violence’ against Negroes and ladies, and how now white guys younger than he should be penalized for his crimes). After spending his days decrying the system, he would clamber into his Porsche 911 and tool across I-90 to a manse on Mercer Island. I always wondered why this charming, engaging man was so comfortable holding on to the “blood money”, as he described it. Oh, but there goes the ad hominem so I’d better stop.
Guns Butter:
35 years ago, Bloom thought law school generally was just a kind of hopped up trade school.
Sperwer,
! I apologize again for posing just two more tangent/trivial questions. Were you ROTC back then? Do you remember seeing Christopher Reeves on campus? You can just ignore this if you don’t want to answer. Thanks for your reply–always fascinating to know what things were really like in the 60’s.
VW:
ROTC? Not bloody likely. I actually first learned to shoot in the basement of, I think it was called, the Ithaca Press, on Stewart Avenue near the Chapter House (of all places), I think, which printed all the rad broadsheets and was the de facto home of the local contingent of SDS, especially the irrepresible David Burack, later the Weatherpeople and various other wackos, including the TA in my German literature class, who later incinerated herself in some Bader/Meinhof escapade. I remember that she lived out in Danby with a couple of monstrous German shepherds and an equally hirsute guy who had a really impressivc collection of automatic weapons in the barn.
I met Reeves a few times; we were chasing around the same skirt from the Art Arch crowd for awhile and hanging in the Green Dragon. With my then shoulder-length Prince Galahad non-haircut I won; even then Reeves was relatively pretty cleancut. Poor girl obviously made a terrible mistake.
I also knew Daniel Berrigan, and met his brother Phillip, the Jesuits who later torched the draft office in Harrisburg. Dan was the Catholic chaplain at Cornell.
Sperwer, the more I learn, the more inane questions I want to pose you! It seems like you might even have been in the same social circle as my boss. I really appreciate your anecdotes, and please feel free to tell me more. I mean, the very thought of shooting in the basement of Ithaca Press!! Haha! Prepairing for the world-wise proletariot revolution! ahh…
We all knew that the school was really communist. Big Red. Siberian winter. Bear as mascot. Long queues everywhere. “I would found an Institution where any person could find instruction in any study.” Sounds very pinkish… hmm…
Unfortunately since you left, I am afraid that the school has become fascist and is undergoing a phased plan to get rid of the venerable school tradition that is Slope Day.
world-wise=worldwide, mea culpa
ooo… you didn’t have slope day… it would have been called spring day back in those days, but your classmates were too busy demonstrating…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slope_Day
VW:
I’m beginning to feel like a bout of alzheimers is coming on, but if you want to continue I’m game - although we should probably take this off line. You can contact me at musash1@mail.anonymizer.com.
I don’t remember slope day, but I do remember snow in June. Also the first snowfall every year saw everyone swiping dining trays from the Straight to use for sledding down the slope
Don’t fall for the ploy, Sperwer! OPSEC!