Didn’t notice any commenters attacking the identity of the editorial writer. Some seem to agree with him, actually. Your point must be that only chauvinists would find anything to criticize. That is, only racist anti-Koreans would object to something a Korean wrote, eh? This is such an overused canard that I’m already too bored to write anything else about it.

Actually, you’re probably just trying to comment “aggressively.” Good luck with that.

God bless the USA. Let the eagle soar.

Try this link and listen to it on your mp3 player:

http://librivox.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4902

Please note: it’s not finished yet. Librivox.

Good point. You’ve got me there.

Hmm… maybe uninspiring leaders that pander for votes is just the price we pay for the freedoms we have.

I should really get around to reading my copy of ‘Democracy in America’ I’ve had on my bookshelf for like two years… It’s just so darn long…..

How productive are systems that have a greater number of parties who are forced to make grand coalitions to take power? It seems that many countries with this kind of situation regularly see their governments fall in short order. Not exactly conducive to the already underachieving productivity of most governments.

If we’re going to believe in things like being a ‘city on a hill’ and ’spreading democracy’ then we’d better live up to it. But based on the actions of our leaders, it doesn’t seem they believe their own rhetoric.

1) Chosun Ilbo is probably one of the most pro-U.S publication in Korea, and has been advocating KORUS FTA for years
2) Chosun Ilbo lambasted Korean government for last-minute renegotiation of the Uruguay Round (1) (2) (3)

This probably pisses off pro-FTA crowds in Korea, such as Chosun Ilbo guys, more than anyone else because it will undoubtedly sway public opinion against the FTA again.

When the UN was talking about sending in peacekeeping troops and the United States said it wouldn’t participate other than for logistics (planes, etc), the Chosun said in an editorial that the big “seonjin’guks” like the U.S. should not run from their responsibilities as nations with leadership roles. Just a week or so later, when Kim Daejung said Korea should send troops to East Timor, it wrote in an editorial that doing so could hurt relations with Indonesia and lead to an anti-Korean backlash there, and so on. Remember, this is the big pro-American paper that VOA gives its articles to for its English internet section, the only one Rumsfeld gave regular one-on-one interviews. I’m sorry I can’t find the link to those two editorials but that was back in the days when I translated all three their editorials every day of the week, and the flip-flop was well noted in media watch circles. There were other motives, of course - namely that conservatives didn’t want Kim to win the Nobel and suspected winning it was one of his reasons for wanting to send troops. But the “America is the big, strong, powerful, rich nation and thus needs to set an example commensurate with that position” kind of logic in Korean thinking (editorials from the Chosun, the JoongAng, to the Hankyoreh) are very common. It’s not just opportunism, either, though it usually looks that way. The same things are said of Korea’s “jidocheung,” the “leadership class” in Korean society, made up it’s rich, well educated, powerful, etc, who are expected to live up to higher moral standards (but of course usually fail). This is fundamentalist Confucian ideology at work - he who is higher in a hierarchy shall follow a moral code bestowed unto him for his position. You hear it all the time and I would most humbly argue that (whether or not you think it applies here) knowledge of this kind of thinking is key to understanding social discourse in Korea.

FWIW I think the US should never be underestimated for its ability to seem like a Third World nation. Paperwork (taxes, etc) involving the US federal government that takes weeks and months (even for US citizens) usually takes just a few minutes in Korea (for Korean citizens), for example, and sometimes it seems 80% of US territory is a no service zone for mobile phones

About Kaesong/Gaeseong. I think the U.S. went along with that because apparently it can still have a say in what goes to the US from NK and, more than anything, because South Korea wanted this sooooo bad. So it gave SK what it wanted and got concessions in return, well knowing how far Roh/Uri would go to get Kaesong products included.