If you’ve ever wondered why many Koreans seem less than enthusiastic about some of the “North Korean human rights rallies” being sponsored by South Korea’s far right, well, here you go:
Sorry for the title there but given how easy it is to forget, it seemed time for another reminder about the true nature of the likes of Park Geun Hye and the far-right Christian organization that organizes some of the more internationally publicized anti-North Korea rallies.
The Christian Council of Korea, one of the country’s two ecumenical Christian organizations, the one that remained silent when torture was taking place in South Korea and that now only talks about human rights as it pertains to North Korea, has filed a motion with a court demanding that The Da Vinci Code (the movie) be prevented from being shown publicly in South Korea. It is threatening to take to the streets to prevent the film from being shown in Korea if its motion is rejected.
The Chosun Ilbo, in its endless campaign to keep the international community in the dark about what Korea’s leading conservatives are made of, conveniently forgot to mention in its English piece that GNP chairwoman Park Geun Hye is going to help them in their Talibanesque efforts.
As Oranckay points out:
[I]f you’ve ever asked yourself why Korea’s traditional “democratic elements” have their doubts about the motives behind the anti-NK protests organized by the country’s conservatives, I submit that it is largely the conservatives’ lack of respect for and understanding of, well, democracy. Naturally, progressives are to blame for letting these remnants of dictatorships past co-opt what should’ve been their cause and for doing close to nothing, but the hypocrisy on their side has been well documented in English.
I think it’s a bit unfair to say progressives have done close to nothing about North Korea: in terms of apologizing for North Korea’s behavior, rallying support for Pyongyang and undermining U.S. initiatives toward the North, I think they’ve done quite a bit 
Nevertheless, Oranckay really cuts to the heart of the problem: the Korean right can be so full of shit that it’s hard to take them seriously, even when–like in the case of North Korea–they are right.
71 Comments
This is sad and a practical demonstration of why I have no respect for most protestant groups in Korea. They are like a cancer in that many only want to spread and grow, giving almost no service to their immediant community and having more to do with politics and money than Christ. This is why their complaint in that a piece of fiction on the screen might “be an obstacle to the Christian Church’s missionary work” is disgusting.
Oddly enough, these so-called Christians seem to have no faith in the teachings of Christ since they believe that a movie might undermine their missionary work to spread their influence — rather than teaching the message of Christ. This is much more about politics than matters of the spirit.
I’d have more sympathy for the so-called progressives if the Roh gov’t wasn’t totally silent on the issue–actually, they have gone to the extent of criticizing U.S. officials for stating the obvious about N.K.’s human rights abuses and supporting the N.K. regime with unconditional aid.
You also have a National Human Rights Commission in Korea that condemns the U.S. for entering Iraq, but says nothing about N.K.
Compared to these anti-progressives the conservatives are showing real moral courage. If Oranckay can’t take them seriously, too bad for him — he can hardly set the morally bankrupt left in Korea as a counter to them.
News flash! Expose! Park Geun Hye trying to help conservative Christians — that’s right, the so-called North Korean human rights supporters — fight against a…
movie!
Reality check: being offended by a flim and boycotting or protesting it is not “Talibanesque.” You’ve got to be kidding me if you think this somehow undermines the credibility of their concern about human rights in North Korea. Of course, if after five years of losing this front to the conservatives, the best the dictator-coddling “progressives” can come up with is pointing out how Christian groups are fighting against showing a movie in theatres, that just shows how badly they’ve lost any moral high ground.
That certain groups in the past may have remained silent when torture was taking place in South Korea is a notable issue in one respect, I will grant that. It also shows how much foresight they had. South Korea, starting as a center-right dictatorship, could handle social change and achieve progress without resorting to war or massive violence, and has evolved into a liberal democracy, seen elsewhere in Taiwan, Greece, Spain, Argentina, and elsewhere. North Korea, ruled by a labor-socialist totalitarian regime, will never improve without a collapse that will result in the death of tens, perhaps hundreds, of thousands. If anyone here thinks President Park’s HR record is the same as Chairman Kim, you’ve got to seriously reset your moral compass.
I hardly think Oranckay is apologizing for the South Korean left here, but rather making clear what should be made clear - that many of the groups involved in the North Korean human rights issue have motives beyond helping a terrified people escape their prison state. Like the Marmot says, they may be right about North Korea, but their obvious hypocrisy turns off the kind of people they need to convince in SK to form any kind of political consensus about the North.
While this can certainly be said about politics and politicians in most countries, South Koreans have few good choices when they vote. That’s what I got from Oranckays post.
In the upside-down world of Korean politics, it’s the “obvious hypocrisy” of the so-called left that strikes me as far more anti-progressive right now, today, than the right is currently. Protesting one film is hardly on a par with officially condemning U.S. officials for pointing out human rights abuses in N.K. and sending unconditional aid to the regime. I’ll grant that maybe Park Geun-hye et al. are not spotless in all regards, and yet Roh et al. are so incompetent and unsophisticated that they make a liberal agenda look very unappealing, which is a shame.
is the line that Oracknay is using to justify condemning Ms. Park for the sins of one portion of her supporters.
That’s a pretty thin thread with which to try to hang Ms. Park. Of course, she’s going to go to the Assembly and see what can be done about it. Where she will find out that nothing can and then be able to cover her six w/ the religious right by saying she tried. It would be nice if she also came back and demonstrated a little more leadership by using the occasion to try to educate her religious right constituency about the benefits of free speech. Personally, I’d like to see her spend some political capital challenging the economic right instead. The biggest challenge for the GOP, IMHO, is to mount a sort of TR/LaFollette challenge to their traditional economic base. Succeeding in that would do a lot more for Korea in the short, middle and long distance than talking down the religious right - particularly if keeping it at least mollified with gestures gets the GOP the political cover it will need to take on the economic mandarins.
I agree with both Michael and Curzon’s sober replies.
It is an unsophisticated, and ultimately unbalanced, perspective indeed that likens the Korean Christian community to the Taliban, or implies that there is some sort of moral equivalence between the South’s modernizing military autocracy of the past and the North’s totalitarian monstrosity of the present. I suppose there is no absolutely difference between engineering one of the most astonishing economic growths in human history and presiding over one of the most heinous genocides in human history. They are all dictatorships, and all dictatorships are alike!
Of course, painting with a Manichean brush is a favorite pastime of foreigners who write about Korean or East Asian politics. Nor is it confined to those who, like Oranckay, seem to be left of the center. William Safire is the example par excellence among those who practice this irresponsible and dishonest rhetoric. He too likens Lee Kuan Yew to Hitler and calls him a (”Oriental”?) despot.
But what surprised me was that the usually-sober Mr. Koehler also engaged in the same irresponsible rhetoric: “The Korean right can be so full of shit that it’s hard to take them seriously.” I suppose that, in spite of being a self-professed “conservative,” he forgot one of the fundamental tenets of conservatism is to choose the lesser evil or to resist the inebriated siren calls of perfection. Or in his terminology, politics is about choosing the less malodorous feces rather than imagining a world devoid of excrement.
Choe: Nice closing line. I also was surprised to see Marmot quoting that with no alternative viewpoint.
You’re right on about the modern-day myopia so many have about politics. Unfortunately, people are quick to condemn Pinochet and Pol-Pot in the same breath, forgeting that Pinochet killed 3,000 and Pol-Pot slaughtered approximately 2 million. Chile is today the richest country in South America, and Cambodia is a backwater. Of course, both Pinochet and Pol-Pot were bastards. But to equivocate them is an act of supreme “progressive” ignorance.
Block the movie. Korea has blocked some X-rated movies in the past for dirty and unnatural sex scenes. Korea still has some value system. Some filth should stay off-shore.
Christians are open game these days. If the movie were about Buddha bashing or about Chosun bashing, you liberal guys would have understood the Korean sensitivity. Why not Christianity? Why Christianity something that can easily trash?
Korean Christians will do something about this hate-based lie, when the Western counterpart is so weak to anything about. Korean Christians are strong Christians and will not stand for this filth.
Someday, Korea will be the only true Christian nation in the world, sending out the most number of Christian missionaries and reaching Africa, South America and Asia for Christ.
Far-fetched? Korea already is sending out great number of Christian missionaries to the world, second only to the U.S. And, many “U.S.” missionaries are actually KoreanAmericans.
Just wait and see the work of God done by Koreans.
Baduk, it is *quality*, not quantity that wins prizes.
Many protestant sects are notorious for just such a fatal flaw. Does Korea really need its culture and reputation smeared by such an unworthy thing?
Curzon and Won Joon Choe: Nobody’s saying that the human rights records of Park, Chun, Roh, et. al. were the same as North Korea’s. Nor is anyone saying that the development dictatorships of the 60s, 70s and 80s didn’t do a lot for Korea. Even critics of Park will begrudgingly admit that he did a lot for the country. Nor is anyone giving the left a free ride on its attitudes about North Korea–they’ve taken a lot of shit for their NK statements and policies from a good many places, including this blog (and Oranckay’s, for that matter–see his post immediately prior to the one linked above). What is being said, however, is that Korea’s conservatives might gain a wee bit of “street cred” about the North Korea issue if they put their own shit in order first. Nobody is going to take cries about North Korean freedom seriously when it’s coming from Fifth Republic types, their collaborators and a press that pays only lip service to objectivity. It’s easy to slag on the beliefs of the left, especially when it pertains to North Korea. But think about it–if the hypocricy of Korean progressives concerning North Korea is fairly obvious, why is it that criticism of Seoul’s policies about North Korea seems to fall on deaf ears? Is it because South Koreans don’t hear the criticism because of press censorship? I don’t think so, given how the nation’s three largest papers can’t get through a single issue without repeatedly blasting the gov’t for being soft on North Korea. Is it because the opposition has been frightened into silence about the issue? Obviously not. Perhaps one needs to look at the messengers and how much credibility they carry with the South Korean public.
P.S. I don’t mean to say that all critics of the government’s North Korea policies come from tainted individuals; obviously, that’s not true. If you want examples of “moral courage,” don’t look to the politicians and press who didn’t do or say anything when abuses were taking place in their own country and now talk about human rights in the North to score political points. Instead, look to guys like Kim Moon-soo, who stood up to dictators in the South and now stands up for human rights in the North.
Korean Christians will do something about this hate-based lie, when the Western counterpart is so weak to anything about. Korean Christians are strong Christians and will not stand for this filth.
is it really necessary to _do_ anything? truth is truth. fiction is fiction. There’s a reason why Dan Brown’s books are in the fiction section. (They’re a guilty pleasure :P) But the more vehement reaction you have towards it, the more likely people are to think there might be some truth to the matter. If Korean Christians are such strong Christians and you are one of those strong Christians, then you should probably recognize that truth is most palatable when not forced down your throat. Let the movie be, it’s pure entertainment. Now if you were beginning to question your faith based on a fictional movie, I’d wonder how strong your faith was to begin with.
Rob:
“Put their own shit in order”? What are we talking about here? RUNkay said it best: they’re religious people with sensitive sensibilities. So they are going to try and get a movie censored. They won’t succeed. There might be protests. So what? :yawn:
I’m glad to say that when the Religious Right was bitching about the lack of freedom behind the iron wall in the 1980s, plenty of athiests and secularists and others with different beliefs from the Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson et al didn’t let Christians pollute the message. Far from it. You may remember a certain movie called the Temptation of Christ which recieved similar boycotts and protests. I’m glad to say that people didn’t then go, “I hear the people protesting Temptation of Christ think the Soviet Union is evil… since I saw the movie and enjoyed it, their logic on commie regimes must be wrong!” That seems to be the line of reasoning you’re trying to get us to believe.
I wish there were more guys like Moon-soo. But are you saying the reason there aren’t more is all the Christian Right’s fault? Again, what I’m basically hearing is, “how can the average ROK citizen see the North Korean regime as evil when the people criticizing it are :shudder: conservative Christians?”
Mr. Marmot, “why is it that criticism of Seoul’s policies about North Korea seems to fall on deaf ears?” If you mean the lukewarm attitude of Koreans toward the situation of their bretheren in the North, it might have a lot to do with Kim Dae-jung’s inter-Korean summit and Roh’s illusion of engagement with North Korea through the Kaesong industrial complex–leading the average Korean to believe that “something is being done about N.K.,” without delving into the actual shallowness and ineffectuality of what is being done.
It’s not easy for some of us to “slag the beliefs of the left,” because that’s closer to my beliefs, but I really must criticize the Roh gov’t since its schoolboy marxism is laughable and inability to take the North to task about anything is shameful.
To its credit though, the Roh gov’t is finally, finally talking about reciprocity for all the unconditional support they give the North, although they are unlikely to get any:
http://english.donga.com/srv/s.....6041028808
Curzon and Won Joon Choe are right.
As for the charge about the “conservatives’ lack of respect for and understanding of, well, democracy,” I would say that Korean conservatives understand what the “R” stands for in the ROK.
The republican form of government ensures genuine freedom while protecting minorities from the “tyranny of the majority” that comes with democracy. I shudder to think of what this country would become if it were a mobocracy run by “netizens.”
South Korea is an ethnically homogenous but multireligious society. The only religious grouping that can claim a majority, perhaps, is “no affiliation.” Religion is one of the only major flashpoints for conflict here. The movie is a libelous attack on one of Korea’s minority religions and the CCK is not even talking about banning the movie, just preventing its public showing. The CCK has acted within the rule of law, so what’s the problem?
Perhaps measures we would not take in the West (except in Europe when it comes to Holocaust denial) are needed here to promote true tolerance (not the PC distortion of the term). Perhaps not. Who am I to say? Let the representatives of the Korean people decide.
random guy,
Koreans are not Americans. Take some X-rated movies as examples. Americans are used to seeing all kinds of deviant sexual behaviors on the screen and nothing affects them much.
However, it is too much for average Koreans to watch these filths. So, Korea as a society decided to ban some movies that depicts some very sick sex acts. Does Korea as a nation have a right to do that? Yes, people decide what to watch. Some sex acts on the screen are so sick that they don’t want those movies shown on the theater.
Korean Christians can be mad about a movie that undermines their faith. Jesus Christ is the center of Christian faith. If somebody were to suggest that Jesus is not what he claimed himself to be, Korean Christians have a right to get mad. And, they have right to try to ban the movie. Is it “forcing something down your throat”? None at all. We just don’t want some people to get the wrong information. Some Germans do not want Neo-Nazi leaflets given to children in the street. Is it censorship? Yes, very good one.
Movies are powerful mediums. They change people’s perception on social/religious/political issues. Communists have used this medium to their advantage in the past. And, some homosexuals and feminists these days are pouring millions to Holywood to produce their message.
This “Stupid code” movie is a propaganda, an anti-Christian message. Strong Christians must defy this message. Weak Christians in the West have lost their faith - they just want to be PC and to blend in with non-Christians. Korean Christians are different; we will fight this Devil’s lies.
http://koreanamerican431.blogspot.com/
Mr. Koehler,
I have a lot of things to say about this topic but due to time constraints (and also because I have written about these issues in several places) I will limit myself to two quick points:
1. Yes, perhaps the South Korean populace’s indifference to the GNP’s human rights agenda is in part due to the GNP’s own complicity in the earlier (albeit more limited) human rights violations perpetrated by the military regimes.
But at the risk of engaging in immoderate speech myself, I would also point the finger in your general direction as well: in the direction of that irrepressible American naivete. Let me be utterly blunt: Perhaps one of the main reasons why a certain segment of the South Korean public has lurched Left is precisely because Americans so vigorously and indiscriminately promoted an extravagant ideal of democracy–an ideal that was patently unrealistic given the circumstances–in South Korea. As a result, this democratic rhetoric created a belief within a large segment of the South Korean intelligentsia that nothing short of a full actualization of American-style democracy was acceptable. In fact, in the case of certain American administrations, e.g., Carter, this rhetoric became so belligerent that it basically branded Park’s regime as illegitimate. As a result, not only Park’s military regime, but the U.S. also lost legitimacy in the eyes of that particular segment of the South Korean public, when practical necessities dictated Americans support Park. Hence, that precious middle ground, by which all healthy regimes must be ballasted, was lost in the Korean political discourse, and many with budding democratic aspirations found refugee in the hard Left.
In other words, if American propaganda were more realistic and honest about the limits of democracy, we may not have the spectacle of leftists like Roh in power. And the neoconservative example in the Middle East have demonstrated to me that Americans still have not learned.
2. You mention Kim Moon-soo as someone under whose banner that responsible conservatives should rally. I am not so sure. I am wary of those who are too fond of absolutist, Kantian rhetoric. Mencius has a wonderful sentence that captures my wariness: “He who opens his mouth lightly does so simply because he has no responsibilities of office.”
“…I really must criticize the Roh gov’t since its schoolboy marxism is laughable and inability to take the North to task about anything is shameful.”
Shameful indeed. Roh’s face-saving concessions to KJI make it clear that his previous job was a hell of a lot more focused on ‘lawyer’ than ‘human rights’.
Wel, NKay also admits he is unfamiliar with Korean history, which is perhaps why he makes the conclusion that he does. We’re talking about the Korean Council of Churches. Yes, they are religious people with sensitive sensibilities, but those sensibilities apparently didn’t include things like arbitrary arrests, torture, extralegal killings, illegal coups and the massacre of pro-democracy demonstrators in Gwangju. After all, the CCK was founded by right-wing mega-church heads like the Yoido Full Gospel Church’s David Yonggi Cho (prayer session for “King Solomon” Chun Doo-hwan, anyone?), and do I really have to explain why that makes the CCK’s contributions to the North Korean human rights struggle suspect in the eyes of many?
So both left and right in Korea are unqualified to address the North Korean human rights issue — guess it’s up to Prez George “Bunker-Buster Nuke” Bush to deal with it
Baduk,
you make it sound as if Koreans are little more than naive children unable to make informed decisions without the intervention of the government holding its hand over their eyes and ears.
I don’t know enough about free speech in Germany to argue with you about activities of Neo Nazis there, however, I do know that the KKK and Neo Nazis have the right to pass out whatever pamphlets they want without fear of censorship. Why? Because ultimately, their brand of hatred and ignorance is more effective a tool when people are allowed to see how idiotic it is for themselves rather then being told by a patronizing big brother who censures information.
How does a movie undermine their faith? Isn’t faith something that’s either there or it isn’t? As far as being a strong or weak Christian, if your idea of a strong Christian is to spew hate and vitriole at anyone that doesn’t fall in line with what you believe to be a good Christian, then you can keep your selective Christianity to yourself.
As a side note, the ‘average’ Korean knows all about Miari, Yongsan, Cheonyangi and all the other red light districts… just like you’re familiar with the red light districts in Busan. (Hrm!) I’m sure they can handle a movie.
I wonder if baduk has ever seen OCN after midnight.
“대한민국 number one channel!”
> RUNkay said it best: they’re religious people with sensitive sensibilities.
> So they are going to try and get a movie censored. They won’t succeed.
> There might be protests. So what?
The “so what” is that nearly everyone in Korea has sensitive sensibilities and thinks nothing of banning whatever causes offense. Which is pretty much the opposite of how democracy and free markets work. Sure, it is unlikely to work for the DaVinci Code, but it does work far more often than it should.
The DaVinci Code is no attack in the church. It certainly is not “libelous”. It is a mild attack on good writing, but that’s about it. The Left Behind series is a much worse attack on both good theology and good writing than anything in Dan Brown’s silly books.
As for the true meaning of “tolerance”, Katolic, you should look it up. It comes from “tolere”, “to bear a heavy burden.” It does not mean liking what others do or condoning or never having your feelings hurt. It means that even though you do not like something, you bear it, expecting them to do the same for your beliefs.
Haisan, I bought that book for my wife and leafed through it a bit — it’s a vicious attack on good writing, not a mild one. It makes Robert Ludlum look like Proust.
This would be less of an issue if neither the left nor the right were supposed to take the lead on human rights in North Korea. It IS a question of why the progressives abdicated the lead on human rights, but it is more of a question of why middle-of-the-road groups/people have not taken the lead either. Nothing will get done until then.
Quit looking way to the left or right. Look at the complacent middle.
yup, I agree with Robert. The Korean right basically started the tradition of executive government corruption in South Korea. Park Chung Hee, Jun Doo Hwan, Roh Tae Woo,…Even when they are right about North Korea, I know that their real motive is to get right back into the executive branch of government.
And do basically what Roh is doing right now. Take bribes from Hyundai, Sam Sung, or other big corps (speculative on my part), arrest/fine big corps who don’t play along, use KBS news to “educate” the masses and spread propaganda consistent with desired government policy, accuse opposition party members of corruption or illegal activity, force powerful political opponents to retire from politics, etc.
Although, South Korea did come a long way. I don’t think elections can be fixed anymore. The ruling executive branch doesn’t know and the opposition party doesn’t know who’s going to win a given election.
The human rights situation in North Korea should be protested because it’s the right thing to do, not because one party or the other is or isn’t behind it.
And don’t get me started on moral equivalency–dictators with flowers named after them were and are in no way similar to the military authoritarians that presided over economic growth unprecendented in world history.
Katolik Shimja:
Careful, your apparent training in Newspeak is showing.
Won Joon:
Thanks for the quote from Mencius.. Now I know the reference of the Korean phrase “to speak with a heavy mouth.”
The majority of Korean Christians I’ve encountered, having tried to recruit me into their ranks, lean much more to the Join-My-Old-Boys’-Network-and-Send-Missionairies-not-Aid-to-Africa variety than to liberation theology. A tired and ultimately self-serving club.
On this comment
“It is an unsophisticated, and ultimately unbalanced, perspective indeed that …. implies that there is some sort of moral equivalence between the South’s modernizing military autocracy of the past and the North’s totalitarian monstrosity of the present. I suppose there is no absolutely difference between engineering one of the most astonishing economic growths in human history and presiding over one of the most heinous genocides in human history. They are all dictatorships, and all dictatorships are alike!” (WJ Choe)
Not all alike but ultimately just different sides of the same old coin - you screw your (or now ‘our’) brothers and I’ll keep my pie-hole shut about it. Do you really fail to see any “moral equivalence” in such complicity? The south is loathe to bring up human rights for several reasons, not least the face-losing fact that Why, yes brother, we can fall into madness left to our own devices.
Just to refresh your memory there’s a direct correlation between the Koreas’ divergent economic outcomes - who was and wasn’t your very generous Uncle along the way. Let’s not forget who was really presiding over “one of the most astonishing economic growths in human history”
Mr. Won Joon Choe had this to say above:
First of all, the CCK is not “the Korean Christian community,” and in my humble opinion, any suggestion that is the case is an embarassing revelation of a lack of familiarity with South Korean society. Or it could just be an attempt to smear.
The larger, older national Christian organizatoin, the National Council of Churches of Korea (http://www.kncc.or.kr/), the one that spoke up much and in a big way during the South’s dictatorships, had this to say:
Secondly, and maybe it’s just a reading problem on Mr. Choe’s part, is that I never implied there is any moral equivalency. I realize that the truth about that particular strand of Korean conservatism may hurt, but I point it out anyway because no one else does it in English. I don’t spend as much time blasting the left because a lot of people (Chosun English, English blogs) have got that covered very well indeed, and the problems of the Korean left are well known the world over. I also don’t try to cover my @$$ with statements to put my comments in perspective because i’m going to here “oh there goes oranckay again” anyway, but Mr. Choe has been around for a while and so to humor him a little… Obviously, I’d rather live in a society that bans Da Vinci Code than one where films glorifying the Dear Leader are the only option. Obviously, if I were in a gulag up North, I’d be grateful to anyone who cared about my plight, whatever his motive. You have never seen me suggest otherwise. It is you who suggest that I have/do, and yet I’m the one with bias?
Frankly, I don’t even blame (again, let me say not all but “that particular strand of”) Korean conservatives for being the way they are. If they were silent about and sometimes defended or participated in the dictatorships, it is only natural that they continue to have no appreciation for an open and free democratic society. The progressives are still the bigger problem here, for being silent on NK such to the point that - by comparison - these dictatorial leftovers get to look like rational democrats.
Whatever my take on this story, ignore what I said and consider this:
1. Was the information I provided, biased as I may have said it, still valuable information worthy of distribution in that it helps in the understanding of SK society and politics?
2. Did you see Park Geun Hye’s comments elsewhere in Korea’s English language media? This is the head of the opposition, a woman who is in the running for president. Whatever she says about this situation is worthy of note. Where was Korea’s English language media on this? Why didn’t they report on it, and what does it tell you about them? What else aren’t they reporting?
As Sperwer notes, quite correctly, Park just threw the CCK a bone and has probably not even looked into what she can “do about it legally.” But had Chung Dong Young talked about banning ANYTHING, you’d have heard about it and it would the be blogged to death so I wouldn’t have to. At the very least, I think this episode is first and foremost a lesson in the SK media and the picture the rest of the world has of Korea because of it.
I wonder if baduk has ever seen OCN after midnight.
Or at 7:00 AM when kids are getting ready for school. Flipping through the channels at that hour, I saw Monica Bellucci getting raped in Irréversible, a scene that prompted a walkout at Cannes. Cannes! The one in France!
Katolik Shimja… Careful, your apparent training in Newspeak is showing.
That’s Shinnja, but point well taken.
Still, we’re not talking preveting folks from viewing the mobie in the privacy of their own homes. Letting market forces decide is not always the solution; the public distribution of offensive material is limited by civil authorities the world over. It’s the determination of what’s offensive that’s problematic.
Oranckay,
Two things,
First, I would appreciate it if you would cover your @$$ a little more. Allowing yourself to look “moonbatty” (although I personally do not think you did that here) doesn’t help anyone. Take that as construct criticism from a guy that goes “wingnutty” on his own blog from time to time.
Second, I can’t seem to backtrack to your post. I am doing a cut-n-paste of the URL like I do with the Marmot’s backtracks, but that does not seem to work. What do I need to do?
Katolik Shinja:
If you don’t object to people watching it in the privacy of their own homes (and presumably learning of that option through public advertising of the availability of the CD), why do you care whether it’s in the movie theatres, to which you and yours don;t have to buy tickets. No one ois forcing any sensitive Christian to watch it, and at this point there’s little likelihood you’ll be tempted to tune in on tv. And this ’s a far, far cry from anything that would qualify for proscription by the civil authorities in any jurisdiction with even a modicum of civil rights. All I’m hearing is the spirit of Savonarola redux.
random guy,
Let’s just assume some Korean Commies got together and made a hideous anti-American movie about a bunch of soldiers raping a young girl and her mother in VietNam. And, officers not only condone the action but jail the young girl and mother and rape them in the prison themselves, take them to the U.S. and keep them in their country club and sell them to the members of the club as sex slaves.
A total fabrication and a ridiculous lie.
A Japanese-owned movie company (Sony) brings the movie to America and opens in all theaters. The U.S. Veterans group strongly object to the content of the film and how American soldiers are portrayed in the film and request the congressmen and the president to ban the film. And, the U.S. president who needs veterans’ support, tells Sony to can it.
Censorship is not possible in the U.S.? Every country does it. People have sensitive areas and government has to protect constituents’ interests.
If you want to see a good movie, go see “Flight 93″ when it comes out. You will find out what it means to be an American! Fight evil forces and fabricated lies.
Korean Christians feel strongly now to engage in Korean politics. Korea is heading toward disaster; grown-ups, let alone young people, are seriously confused about what course of actions Korea should take in the future. Korea being surrounded by enemies (China, Japan, Russia) cannot be this confused.
Korean Christians as a group will act. We will continue till our voices are heard. Banning this movie is only an attempt to test our solidarity and strength of our political muscle. We will shout with one voice and set this country right! To the right!
In the U.S., Christian majority has set the course of action in last three decades starting from “Moral Majority” movement. Korea will follow the example. After all, in country like Korea, if Christians stay quiet, Communists will have their day.
As God is willing, Korean Christians will fight and win!!!! Amen.
Baduk: amen, at least to your 11:29 pm comment.
Korea being surrounded by enemies — China, Russia, Japan — you’ll have to explain to me someday why they can’t stop themselves from pissing in America’s cornflakes.
Hey Baduk, this just occured to me, and I know this may sound like a really irrelevant question, but on the question of the movie…well…there’s this really best selling book with the same name …it made a buck or two…how do you feel about people reading it? You know, like in public where anybody might just take a peak at the contents of the pages…which might lead to a discussion about the book …and then ….horror of horrors…the other person might be influenced just enough to buy it…you know…because they were curious and all.
baduk,
how about a movie where the events of 9/11 are orchestrated by the US government and evidence about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction is inflated if not outright fabricated. Do you think this movie would ever have a chance at being released in the US?
Gotta love free speech. It is protected for all, not just the things you want to hear.
Speak out against the movie all you want, that’s your right. But to decide for other people what they can’t or can’t see as consenting adults. Please, give me a break.
Didn’t Fahrenheit 9/11 have plenty of conspiracy theorizing in it, as well as plenty of falsehoods? Was there any censorship of that movie? And a movie about 9/11 being orchestrated by the US government? Although this is a completely irrational conspiracy theory, I’m sure if someone went ahead and financed it, it would play somewhere, if only on leftist college campuses across the country.
Though I definitely sympathize with Christians, as I see that they get almost 100% bad press (probably more consistently negative than terrorists do)I don’t think they should have any kind of censorship of the DaVinci Code. After all, it’s only a movie. Let people decide for themselves, even if they are given a fake story, as with the many Hollywood movies where corporations and/or the US government is corrupt and evil.
Mr. Oranckay,
1. I confess that I was careless in conflating the CCK with the “Korean Christian Community.”
Nonetheless, your claim that my lack of familiarity in these matters is indicative of either my general “lack of familarity with South Korean society” (and an “embarrassing” one at that!) or impure motive on my part is, well, oh so characteristically over-the-top.
Needless to say, while I do penitently plead guilty of the particular crime of rhetorical imprecision (as well as to the general crime of rhetorical excesses), I think the indictment is less persuasive coming from you for obvious reasons that may involve the pot and the kettle (more on this later).
2. You are also correct that I inferred “moral equivalency” in your text where the ordinary reader may not have inferred. But as your “there goes Oranckay again” comment implies, my inference can only be understood in the context of what I have read from your Blog and our past interactions.
Nonetheless, even if we assume the absolute worst and conclude that I am simply “biased” and unfairly characterizing you, I don’t see how my mischaracterization is more of a distortion than calling the CCK’s action “Talibanesque” or claiming that I had flat-out “lied” (in my previous WSJ op-ed) where our understanding of the passage of a particular bill in the South Korean National Assembly differed.
3. I agree that, in spite of your own rhetorical imprecision and excesses, your Blog is rather unique in that you depart from the usual ex-pat Republican line and therefore does serve an invaluable outlet. I have said this both publicly and in private communication with you. So you need not emphasize the value of that perspective to me. In fact, I have even recommended your Blog as one of the four must reads for other friends and colleagues who are interested in Korea and were seeking informative Blogs (along with Mr. Koehler’s, The Korea Liberator, and Kushibo’s).
4. You say that the South Korean conservatives “continue to have no appreciation for an open and free democratic society” in your reply to me. Again, your rhetoric is a bit too much.
But more important, the above quote is a revision of your original Blog declaration that the conservatives lack “a respect for and understanding of, well, democracy.”
Now if I were to compose as hostile and intemperate reply as yours, I would begin by saying something along the lines of, “First of all, free speech in theory has nothing to do with democracy, and any suggestion that is the case is an embarassing revelation of a lack of familiarity with the theory and history of democracy.”
Democracy in its purest form means the rule of the majority or the rule of the demos (which is usually translated as the “people” but had a more unflattering connotation of the poor urban masses in the original Greek). Such a democracy is not synonymous with a regime that protects such basic rights as the right to free speech. Need I remind you that Socrates died for speaking his mind freely, and that Plato was famously shouted down when he tried to mount a defense of Socrates in front of the Athenian assembly? Democracy begins to respect rights only if it merges with “liberalism” and transmogrifies itself into an amalgam called “liberal democracy.” This is a point so ably made by, Fareed Zakaria, among others, in his critique of Third World “illiberal” democracies that utilizes elections but do not protect any rights deemed fundamental in Western liberal democracies.
Now you can reply that you revised or moderated your rhetoric by using the term “an open and free democratic society.” But really, objecting the release of a religiously offensive movie constitutes “no appreciation” for a liberal democracy? You really think that’s fair?
Besides, perhaps more important, to evoke descend or ascend to the realm of theory again, the originators of liberalism (who invented “free speech” as we understand it today) were emphatically not indiscriminate supporter of free speech, in spite of what the American Supreme Court would like to believe. Contrary to today’s absolutist advocates of free speech, the originators of liberalism emphasized that free speech must be exercised responsibly and that those granted such a privilege would above all FORBEAR from offensive speech. So to a certain extent, it is the indiscriminate advocate of free speech who show no appreciation of the original intent of liberal democracy.
Two questions:
1. How do I highlight a section of my post?
2. Why does it say something along the lines of “you do not have the permission to access this page” when I try to edit what I wrote?
Having parents-in-law who are very much conservative Christian, love the GNP, and demonize the North (perhaps, rightfully so), I can tell you that the conservative Christians in Korea are no different from those in the U.S. They believe what they believe because church leaders have tied political leanings to biblical morality. I don’t see what the big deal is with this story in Korea, considering similar things are occuring in the States. Christians fought for banning Brokeback Mountain from Walmart shelves. A gay student was expelled from a Baptist college. School boards are divided over intelligent design and evolution in school curriculum. It’s the same old same old.
If you believe something, what’s wrong with trying to effectuate policies that are in line with your beliefs? If unpopular, the democratic process will kill it.
I don’t think Korean Christians are just like American Christians. Well, I guess to a certain extent. There is the Southwest region in Korea which doesn’t trust the SouthEast region’s Han Nara party. Reason is simple. When the Southeast was in power, the Southwest got screwed over. Park Jung Hee built a lot of factories, ports, ship building facilities, car factories, highways on the Southeast, but left the Southwest without them. Almost the same thing can be said for Chung Chong Do. Until Roh Tae Woo came along, and actually built stuff on the Non-Seoul, Non-Incheon part of South Korea. Roh is commendable because he invested in Dae Jeon and Kwang Yang.
It’s not a good analogy, but it’s like the South of US, being very Baptist, yet having voted for the Democrats for almost forever until George W. Bush came along. Blame Bill Clinton for that. He gave the Southern Baptists Democrats an identity crisis. That explains how Tennesse (I spelled that wrong, but I don’t care that much) voted against Al Gore. The South of US almost vowed never to vote Republican, because of what the carpetbaggers did after the Civil War.
Last US election showed almost all of those Blue states turning Red. I’m just saying I’ll be shocked to see the Southwest vote the way the Southeast does. There’s still tremendous mistrust in my mind.
Of course, the Korean Christians would want Lee Myung Bak to be President. I think he’s a good choice, personally. After all, he’s smart, speaks well, thinks well, and has experience in governing a good company and a good city. He’s kind of like George W. Bush, though, because he’ll try to mix his faith with government affairs. Lee also has a personal black eye for having been cheap enough to take that free tennis membership. Also, some people will wonder exactly how he amassed his personal wealth.
South Koreans overseas cannot vote. If I could vote, I’ll vote for Lee Myung Bak. I think it’s time for a South Korean government that is further away from socialism. South Korea isn’t rich enough to toy with the idea of the welfare state. It can’t afford an unemployment rate like France, Italy, etc.
I may be insane for saying this, but does anyone else think Park Geun Hye is a MILF? I don’t know whats with me and female conservative firebrands but I think they are hot. Though thankfully I never once had a thing for Phillis Schlafly or Peggy Noonan. I suspect it has something to due with my conservative episcopalian sophmore year girlfriend, but then again the root maybe something deeper and darker.
People have sensitive areas and government has to protect constituents’ interests.
I don’t know about you, but I’d prefer the government keep its grubby hands away from my sensitive areas.
It’s not a good analogy, but it’s like the South of US, being very Baptist, yet having voted for the Democrats for almost forever until George W. Bush came along. Blame Bill Clinton for that. He gave the Southern Baptists Democrats an identity crisis. That explains how Tennesse (I spelled that wrong, but I don’t care that much) voted against Al Gore.
That started with Reagan in 1980 and 1984, not Bush in 2000 or 2004. “Reagan Democrats,” they were called. Clinton was able to gain some of them back, but issues like abortion have kept most (?) of them voting Republican.
I think Clinton did come off badly with the Monica Lewinskey situation in 1998, and that association hurt Gore in 2000, perhaps enough to lose Tennessee, but Gore himself had lived in Washington DC long enough that he didn’t seem like a home-boy to many Tennesseans anymore.
Anyway, I do think some analogy between the religious right in the US and the religious right in Korea does hold. I can see them as being a strong block of voters that, if they are not careful, will become a divisive group in the general body politic if they (a) are hypocritical about their political positions, or (b) it seems as if they seek to impose their religious views and/or values on the general population.
WJC wrote:
Two questions:
1. How do I highlight a section of my post?
It’s hard to demonstrate here because it will format the examples and it won’t be clear what I typed to get that formatting. Email me off-blog and I’ll tell you.
2. Why does it say something along the lines of “you do not have the permission to access this page” when I try to edit what I wrote?
Because the Marmot is teasing us. He wants us to think we have the power, but we don’t.
I may be insane for saying this, but does anyone else think Park Geun Hye is a MILF?
I have no idea what a MILF is, but Miss Park is most definitely Korea’s best looking politician, with the possible exception of Kang Ki-gap.
MILF - Mother I’d Love to “Fornicate” (with)
(Just providing a service)
cmdjing,
Park Geun-hye cannot, by definition, be a MILF because she is not a mother. However, I agree she is not bad for an older chick.
While we are on the subject, when I read Oranckay’s past glowing accounts of the wonderfulness of Kang Kum-sil, I somehow got the idea that she was pretty hot. But when I saw pictures of her this week, she looked like a typical ajuma with money.
Katolik Shinja,
If you don’t know what MILF means, that indicates you are either a soul pure of heart or you’re someone who doesn’t get a lot of spam mail.
Park Geun-hye cannot, by definition, be a MILF because she is not a mother. However, I agree she is not bad for an older chick.
Ahem, MILF is “ajumMa I’d Like to have Fun with.”
Or he just hasn’t seen “American Pie”
95-
I think Clinton did come off badly with the Monica Lewinskey situation in 1998, and that association hurt Gore in 2000, perhaps enough to lose Tennessee, but Gore himself had lived in Washington DC long enough that he didn’t seem like a home-boy to many Tennesseans anymore.
I just had a discussion about that the other day. What’s ironic is that the public is very forgiving about infidelity to a certain extent, if anything they were more critical of his choice of mistress… but they really don’t like being Lied To. That being said, if you recall, Gore distanced himself from Clinton as much as possible in the 2000 election which I think was a critical mistake on his part. Bill Clinton is one of the most charismatic speakers I’ve ever seen in person. The man is charming. If anything, Gore didn’t use Clinton’s campaign wiles nearly enough in the 2000 election. It still befuddles me how Gore could get 500,000 more votes than Dubya and still manage to lose an election. Definitely need to address the electoral college system.
Sorry bout the thread hijacks Robert, I’m in rare form these last couple of days.
Then again, with even kushibo jumping in on the MILF bandwagon, I’d say say everything is fair game
Random Guy,
I agree with you about the mistake of distancing himself too much from Clinton. However, he did manage to win the popular vote, so it wasn’t that much of a failure. His failure was in taking his home state for granted (to some extent) and for not focusing on voter rights and get-out-the-vote drives enough in states like Florida.
That said, I do NOT agree with this:
It still befuddles me how Gore could get 500,000 more votes than Dubya and still manage to lose an election. Definitely need to address the electoral college system.
The electoral college system is there for a reason (the need for national office seekers to address voters from all parts of the nation), and that reason remains today. And I am speaking from the point of view of an American voter who is from the most per-voter under-represented state in the Senate and Electoral college, California.
It is not the Constitutionally outlined electoral college system itself that is problematic, but the non-Constitutional “winner-take-all” system that is the problem. Political parties writing states off, in fact, can tend to undermine what the Founding Fathers had in mind when they developed the electoral college system. Having a winner-take-all system at the congressional district level, for example, or having electors divided up according to popular vote returns, would reflect the people’s will better while also better ensuring that the candidates address people from across the country.
Sorry Random Guy, you said address the electoral college system, not get rid of. I may have been jumping the gun regarding my disagreement with you.
Then again, with even kushibo jumping in on the MILF bandwagon, I’d say say everything is fair game
Jumping… MILFs? Oh, I’m glad my mother doesn’t read this blog anymore.
I personally think 나경원 looks better than First Daughter Park, though admittedly we are not exactly being asked to choose between Helen and Persephone…
I agree wholeheartedly with Kushibo’s stance on the electoral college below:
“The electoral college system is there for a reason (the need for national office seekers to address voters from all parts of the nation), and that reason remains today. And I am speaking from the point of view of an American voter who is from the most per-voter under-represented state in the Senate and Electoral college, California.”
While I am not a “hard” originalist, I’d also add that there is something to be said about–in the Federalist’s parlance–fostering an “attachment and reverence… towards a political system.” And the electoral college is one of the most powerful reminders that the Framers sought to institute a democratic republic along the lines of Montesquieu’s England, rather than a “pure” democracy in the manner of Athens or even the New England towns.
As much as I respect Oranckay’s Korean language ability and interest in championing Korea’s left, he seems to often choose tangential issues with which to criticize the powers that be. Here’s one example:
http://oranckay.net/blog/?p=1235#
I prefer to read more substantial observations and critiques, which is frankly why I don’t bother with his blog. I’m certain that blogging an apologetics for the Korean left must be a thankless task, but simply cherry-picking issues that supposedly make them look better by contrast is a disservice to the people he claims to advocate for.
kushibo,
Sorry Random Guy, you said address the electoral college system, not get rid of. I may have been jumping the gun regarding my disagreement with you.
no harm, no foul. before I read this, I was going to say I agree with you on what you said about the electoral college, both bits
i don’t think we need to get rid of the electoral college, just needs some tweaking with the times.
The Da Vinci Code movie shouldn’t be banned, but why anyone would want to see it is beyond me.
The book was the worst book I ever read, right up there with Tom Clancy’s best.
Since movies are usually worse than books, this movie is guaranteed to suck.
The whole issue about opening the Korean movie market to foreign movies has been revolving around economics, but the real issue is class.
Import Hollywood movies you’re taking a step into the proverbial sewer.
They all suck.
Well, 90% anyhow.
Actually, the DaVinci Code is a great use of fiction to expose the real historical wrongdoingss of organized Christianity. Oppression of the feminine influence in religion and marginalization of women, repression of the original gnostic gospels and persecution of scientific thinkers, Constantine’s cynical invention of the modern Bible for the purposes of political consolidation, groundless portrayals of Mary Mag as a prostitute, repression of sex and perpetration of the historically unlikely scenario that Jesus would not have married (which would have been an aberation). Historically speaking, the book is spot on. And the fiction makes it a fun way to discover the real history that today’s irrational Christians would still prefer to hide from.
I like Won Joon Choe. He’s into complex analysis. Good work, Won!
Mizar5,
Some people, including myself, have studied Bible and the church tradition for decades. I found your observation on Christianity ridiculous.
1) “historical wrongdoings of organized Christianity”
-The book presents some ridiculous arguments. See my objection (copied from a Catholic site). I am a Protestant but we agree on nearly all points.
http://koreanamerican431.blogspot.com/
2) “Oppression of the feminine influence in religion and marginalization of women”
-Holy Mother is worshipped by Catholics. (Protestants don’t)
-Christianity has freed women all over the world. Would you like to wear a wrapper all your life (Islam nation) or be a concubine (old Korea) or a hooker (Thailand)? Christians respect women and the sanctity of marriage.
3)”repression of the original gnostic gospels and persecution of scientific thinkers”, “Constantine’s cynical invention of the modern Bible for the purposes of political consolidation”
-See my website. These are groundless claims in the fiction. You are misled.
4) “groundless portrayals of Mary Mag as a prostitute”
- I agree with you on this point. People have brought in their groundless imagination into the doctrine of the church. Church elders had to make decision on what is reliable and what is not. The Da Vinci Code is a heresy.
5)”repression of sex”
-What do you want? Free Sex?
6) “and perpetration of the historically unlikely scenario that Jesus would not have married (which would have been an aberation)”
- People, more honest and sincere people than you, have been studying Bible for two thousand years. There is no ground for this. The fact that you don’t like Christians does not give you a license to make up stories.
7) “Historically speaking, the book is spot on.”
-It is what present generation wants to believe. The book sells because people like you want to smash Christianity and Christians. You may have met some bad and hypocritical Christians. Well, they are not good Christians. Meet some good Christians and you will change. Think of Mother Teresa. Or, two nuns came from Europe to help take care of Korean lepers, who even Koreans wouldn’t touch.
-All in your head. Break out of your Christian-hate. There is true happiness and eternal life through Jesus Christ. I and many people all around the world believe THE TRUTH. It is international. You are still a frog in the pond writing something you don’t know much about and pretending you know everything about Christianity.
Start reading Bible. You and this garbage’s author do not know even one tenth of what I and other Christians know. If you hold a strong opinion about something you really do not know much about, then you are a bigot and a simpleton.
This site may answer some of your questions on Christianity.
http://www.josh.org/apologetic.....ubject.asp
Actually, the crux of Chritianity is the resurrection of Jesus. If you want to demolish Christianity, attack the aspect, as the book, “Passover Plot”(before your time?), did. That book is more damaging to Christianity than this present-day garbage.
Mizar5,
The DVC mentions the “historically unlikely scenario that Jesus would not have married” as proof that He must have been married, yet goes on to insist on the even more historically unlikely, no, impossible, scenario that Jesus would have established Mary Magdelene, a woman, as the head of the Church. Such a thing would have been impossible to Jew, much more than celibacy. Many Jews of Christ’s day, the Essenes for example, practices celibacy. So the DVC posits that Christ was too much of a conformist not to get married but an absolute feminist rebel!
The claims of the DVC, the best-selling novel in world history, are not taken seriously by any real scholars. The fact is that the books New Testament is dated historically to the 1st or early second 2nd Centuries. The now popular “Gospel of Judas” and the rumors Dan Brown based his book on come from centuries after that. Anyone with any training in the discipline of History would know the earlier sources are more likely to be accurate.
I offer these texts for your edification:
Dismantling The Da Vinci Code
Cracking The Da Vinci Code
http://www.opusdei.org/art.php?w=32&p=7017
As for the “persecution of scientific thinkers” you mention, it is a historical fact that what we call science developed in Christendom. Great civilizations like China, India, and Arabia had some notable scientific and technical achievements, but all were surpassed by Europe in the so-called Dark Ages, as were ancient Greece and Rome. It’s amazing how we moderns so easily ignore the engineering skill that went into the great mediæval cathedrals.
Again, for your edification:
How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization
An old theology for modern times: A review of Rodney Stark’s Victory of Reason
The Galileo Affair.
Baduk,
I appreciate your spirited defense of orthodox Christian doctrine. Everything you say is spot-on, except this: “Holy Mother is worshipped by Catholics.”
I, too, used to believe this when I was a Protestant. Catholics do not worship Mary; worship (Greek: latria) is reserved for the Triune God. We venerate (Greek: dulia) Mary.
We recognize, as I’m sure you do, that Christ was fully God and fully man: one Person, two Natures. Therefore, it is a testimony to Christ, not his mother, to say that she is the Mother of God (Greek: Theotokos, “God-bearer”).
Dividing Christ was one of the oldest heresies, Arianism.
We also recognize, as I’m sure you do, that the Trinity is One: three Persons, one Essence. Thus, it is by no means scadalous to say that Mary, “to the wonderment of nature, bore her Creator.”
Everything about Mary points to her Son and His Incarnation.
Wow. The Galileo Affair (which Katolic linked to) is some pretty bad church apologia.
Anyhow, to engage in the DaVinci Code book is a waste of time (it is a silly novel)… But to go from saying it is a work of fiction to saying the movie version should be banned from the cinemas is a huge and illogical leap. What’s next? Banning Dracula for its “lies” about the church? Or Indiana Jones? It is fiction. Let it go. Sure, some people will take it too seriously; but some people believe in vampires or whatever.
I, for one, am sick of enthusiasts, whatever their creed.
Nice links KS . . .
Actually I’m not surprised that no outrage has occured within most protestant circles over the Gospel of Judas, simply because I don’t think these groups have the intellectual capacity to understand that such is a more potent attack against the traditional views of Christ than this fictional movie.
The movie sounds boring anyway.
4 Trackbacks
Human Rights or The DaVinci Code…
(Via. The Marmot’s Hole) If I had a choice between getting North Korean human rights or getting to watch The DaVinci Code, guess what I would choose? So excuse me if I am not bothered that some of the same people leading the way in calling for …
What they said (Park Geun-hye gets it wrong ont he Da Vinci Code)…
I have little to add to the extensive coverage at Oranckay and the Marmot’s Hole (quoting Oranckay) of Park Geun-hye’s offering to go to the National Assembly and see what can be done about it legally. The it in this…
[...] Oranckay has finally done it. In the span of a day, he’s joined us all into a single, in-bred borg. Today, he goes to The Marmot’s Hole to defend his latest post, which links OFK posts by myself and Andy Jackson, who now co-blogs at the Hole. Someone ought to wake Dr. Hwang from his alcoholic fog to tell him a greater crime has finally been committed against nature. [...]
nice!̷