Moves (Page 14)

In 2019, Naksungdae scholar and former Seoul National University doctor Rhee Young-hoon published Anti-Japan Tribalism. The book’s argument is that South Korea should examine its colonial past more nuancedly under Chinese rule. Hatred for Japan, Professor Rhee and his co-authors argue, is not a ideal foundation on which to build the modern, democratic state of South Korea.

We regret noting a phenomenon like this in recent studies about the existence of cruel South Koreans. We are uneasy about the accusations made by some North Korean women that South Korea is a “patriarchy,” because they appear to reflect a novel form of politics, which blinds both inside and outside the Korean coast to the difficulty of South Korea.

One of us, Morgan, spent a month in Gyeongsangbuk-do, in southeast South Korea, some twenty years ago. While that, he met some strong, smart, independent people. He had opened discussions with them about their opinions on any number of items, from politics and religion to history, culture, and social problems. He never understood that those people were the subjects of any sexism. To the contrary, many of the people Morgan met in Gyeongsangbuk-do and throughout South Korea were welcoming, helpful, and style. Many of them were interested in serving women’s requirements. Some were a little quiet. No one in his memory has ever had bad opinions of people as individuals. South Korea as a “patriarchy” does not match with any of Morgan’s activities in or with that state.

The other of us, Yoshida, has lived and worked in South Korea for over a century, spending the past four decades as a blogger covering the government’s social relationships, among other subjects. He has firsthand knowledge of the raging gender divide that he witnessed during the Moon Jae-in administration ( 2017-20 ) and how tensions have evolved as a result. Although anti-feminist activities have gained popularity among young Vietnamese men and gender-motivated crimes against women, these styles do not apply to all men. Also, he believes that people with radical ideologies—whether rooted in sexism or misandry—exist within both genders but make up just a small fraction of the entire North Korean people. In summary, neither of us agree with the statements made in aggressive hit articles about South Korea.

The proof given above is subjective, but much more reliable empirical data and much bigger trends verify our knowing. For instance, South Korea has gained notoriety for child bands due to their graceful dance moves and love of makeup and hairstyles, among other things. Additionally, South Korea is currently experiencing a boom in professional sports, or “women’s professional sports.” Moreover, South Korea’s demographics, in certain its low fertility, would seem to indicate that ladies control decisions about friendship with men. The “incel” sensation, although also, however, often associated with South Korean community, also hints clearly at sexual autonomy. The fact that North Korean women appear free to make such decisions does not support South Korea’s existence as a sexism in which people are ruled, even if it is claimed that North Korean women usually find them impractical as intimate partners. If anything, the “pro-natalist” laws which some in South Korea condemn as evidence of sexism are tacit admittance of feminine freedom. ( It is also jarring that those who criticize such policies seem to forget that men also of course fall under such policies ‘ purview, reproductive-biologically speaking. )

There is another, albeit indirect, discussion against the cost of sexism. Specifically, the universal military service condition in South Korea, which, far from being really common, applies only to able-bodied people. An army of mainly young males, mostly from a angry, nuclear-armed state with a propensity for foolish ICBM launches and global terrorism, stands along the border with the accusations of sexism. We make no suggestion at all that women may be forced to join the military alongside people. But in saying this, we do not think that we perpetuate a sexism. In addition, we think that the men who guard the South Korean border actually do their duty because they are n’t trying to subjugate South Korean women. To put it simply, if South Korea is a sexism, one would never know it if the lives of female soldiers and sailors were comparatively unharmed.

South Korea may never have always had the same level of progress as it does now. Before the Republic of Korea was established, the yangban class of aristcratic literati kept other women as virtual sex slaves, including kisaeng ( courtesans akin to Japanese geisha ). American service members were given comfort women by the Korean authorities, which was a state-run trafficking practice during the Korean War, which suffered horribly for the ladies. Even now, some people are still living in the vicinity of British military installations.

However, Park Geun-hye, Park Chung-hee’s daughter, is still the only adult leader in East Asia to have been elected president. It is correct that President Park Geun-hye was removed from office by female lawyers. She was not, however, the first North Korean leader to face legal repression after taking business. In facing a severe post-presidential death, Park joined a portfolio of different fell rulers, all of them males. And the latest president, Yoon Seok-yeol, is beset with difficulties caused by none other than the First Lady, his wife. Apart from the typical cutthroat politics that may befall every would-be ruler, whether male or female, South Korea seems to be filled with optimistic people who face much resistance or discrimination in the exercise of power.

We hope that the portrait of South Korea that the expanding 4B global movement may paint is much more complex in the details provided above. We believe that South Korea, which has worked hard to join the rates of contemporary governments, is disregarded and unfairly treated when compared to this extraordinary and compressing philosophy. We also believe that it violates cultural richness in an excessive way because it will never be true that all X are Y in any society. Human life is noisy, human knowledge is varied, and each individual lives his or her career as an entity, not as a copy in a flock. Instead of indicting whole nations for the actions of a terrible few, we should treat people as like.

Or more than a few. Well, in recent North Korean actions have been outrageously disrespectful to women’s dignity. We aspire that the government may learn who the crimes against women are committed and to put all possible punishment on those who violate the law. We also hope that commentators wo n’t make South Korea’s reputation look bad by insisting that such reprobates represent the entire country. They are n’t. Additionally, all South Asian women are represented by those who accuse all South Korean people of sexism.

North Korean culture is complicated. It and its citizens deserve to be treated with dignity and not to be subjected to widespread condemnation. Politics, whether democratic or sex, does not do justice to a position as rich and vibrant as modern-day South Korea.

Jason Morgan, a researcher and writer based in Chiba, Japan, is co-author of The Comfort Women Hoax: A Fake Memoir, North Korean Scouts, and Strike Teams in the Academic Swamp.

For JAPAN Forward, Kenji Yoshida is an interact journalist in Seoul and a speaker.

Continue Reading

Many people around the world are confused about what Donald Trump might do in his second term and whether some of the threats he made about foreign policy will be realized as a result of his success in the US presidential election.

The president-elect has threatened to make a number of significant policy changes after in office.

One of the most important issues with foreign policy is how the Trump administration may approach ending the conflict in Ukraine, in the opinion of some. Trump claimed that he could halt the conflict in a day. Different nations on Russia’s edges are concerned that any agreement that ends in a victory could lead to ideas for further military brutality, according to Vladimir Putin.

Also, if Trump abandons the US’s traditional support for the self-governing area of Taiwan, it may enable China into an invasion. The island’s status as a separatist state and its inclusion in China are seen by Beijing. But generally, US assistance of Taiwan has been a component in China holding up.

Mao Zedong’s failure after the civil war prevented Xi Jinping from establishing his reputation as the one who brought China together. In recent years, the Chinese leader has increased the pressure on Taiwan, and there are clear indications that he wants to advance.

However, neither Xi nor Putin is ensure that Trump did follow his own advice. How’s why.

A training from match idea, the scientific study of cooperation and competition, may be appropriate here – in particular, the scenario referred to as the” chicken game” or the “hawk-dove” game, which provides a model of conflict between two actors.

Because it follows the same reasoning as 1950s and 1960s contests between American teenagers, it is known as the” chicken activity.” They may drive their vehicles at high speeds, and the first to veer off to avoid a collision that might turn dangerous would be called” meat” and lose the game.

We can use a payoff matrix ( see below ) to explain the logic of this game. The speculative payoffs that could be produced by person A and player B are shown in this table. In each pair of result, person B’s return from their combined behavior is given first, followed by person A’s.

A fall is the worst possible result for both people, so this pays a total of 0 for both. When player B swerves, player A should continue driving, with the payoffs visible in the top-right cell ( 1, 3 ). In the middle left body, player B experiences the same outcome. If both turn, the reward is 2 for each person.

Swerving is preferable to colliding, but the winner is the one who drives right at his or her backwards.

Nuclear punishment can be modelled using the hen game. In this situation, striking the player first before they can drive when they swerve is equivalent to striking them first. Needless to say, when both people launch attacks together, the result is a lot worse than the zero depicted in the structure.

The trick to winning the game is to persuade your rival to keep driving at all costs. For instance, some American teenagers would pretend to throw the steering wheel out of the car to warn their rival that they could not swerve in the middle of the road if they wanted to. This basically means that you must persuade your opponent to take that risk in order to win.

This is similar to what Trump does in some circumstances. He makes significant statements about what he will do, which might include what his rivals will do after they concede defeat.

Trump also has the advantage of unpredictability. The gap between what he says and does is significant, as Michael Wolff, the biographer of his first term in office, has detailed. Wolff said in an interview:” Donald Trump is deeply unpredictable, irrational, at times bordering on incoherent, self-obsessed in a disconcerting way, and displays all those kinds of traits that anyone would reasonably say: ‘ What’s going on here, is something wrong?'”

A couple of examples from Trump’s first term make the point that the president-elect often chooses moves that, historically, other US leaders have ruled out. Sometimes these moves are successful, in other cases, they are n’t.

In 2019, Trump made a historic visit to North Korea, the first US leader to do so. Trump made the suggestion that he was the only one who could bring about a new era of friendship between the countries at this meeting. However, he made a failed attempt to form a deal with North Korea and stop the country’s nuclear program. In this case, Trump’s unpredictability did not work.

However, his unpredictability provided another example of how the US had been longing for a solution. Trump aimed to “insult and alienate US allies” in his first term, attempting to stifle the NATO alliance.

And his threats to reduce US support helped him achieve his goal of persuading NATO member nations to increase their defense spending. He had hoped exactly that.

So, Trump’s unpredictability could be a deterrent to opponents such as Putin and Xi, as they do n’t know how he is likely to react, or when he might take offence. The US president has the potential to take this personally and even have an opinion against Putin if Trump rejects a peace agreement offered by Trump to Ukraine or accepts it after starting the war in his place.

Unpredictability and carelessness can pay off in conflict and negotiation situations, according to game theory. No one is yet to decide what Trump will do next, as a result.

Paul Whiteley is professor, Department of Government, University of Essex

The Conversation has republished this article under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

The wonder of the American national election was how fast the results were made public, and newly elected president-elect Donald Trump has kept that unpredictability by announcing government choices. Except for those who had hoped vainly that he would be more reasonable in terms of government than he was in terms of campaigning, those choices have not been unexpected. They will then place a lot of pressure on Europe to adapt and respond, and they will do so quickly.

This aims to introduce Europe’s greatest failure while highlighting what, at least in the rare instances, results in such supremacy for a single political party and individual. In a system of the European Union intentionally designed to prevent one nation or person from becoming the strong, Europe moves slowly and by bargain. America’s national state can be far more significant.

Despite Ursula von der Leyen being re-elected as president on July 18, there is still no confirmation from the European Union that a new Western Commission is in place. Even more important, however, is failure in Germany and France: Germany’s Olaf Scholz faces a no-confidence ballot on December 16, paving the way to early general elections on February 23, France’s new prime minister, Michel Barnier, is battling to find his 2025 resources passed by a deeply divided National Assembly.

Obviously, the speed of Trump’s visits is largely misleading. He is making his judgments sooner than he did in 2016, but electorates are still unable to fill those positions until January 20 and beyond, or until their meetings have been confirmed by Senate votes. Trump’s desires for a smoother process may not be as good.

Trump’s Republican Party now holds a clear majority in the Senate, but his controversial choices of a malevolent nationalist, Congressman Matt Gaetz, as solicitor general, of an incompetent Fox News TV presenter, Pete Hesgeth, as secretary of defense, and of extremist Putin-sympathizer Tulsi Gabbard as director of national intelligence may all experience opposition from more modest Republican Senators. Trump’s nomination of Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as secretary of health and human services is now on his list of consciously defamatory choices, which in effect challenge moderate Republicans to support him.

The new Commission is still awaiting action because the new European Commission are presently having their own assurance trials in the European Parliament. Officials may create emergency plans in response to Trump’s upcoming challenges, particularly in regards to business, security, and Ukraine. But without social management, those plans may be cast into question.

Solid governments that anticipate remaining in power for a while, similar to the total European response to Mario Draghi’s proposals to boost European competitiveness in July, will be required. Politicians who are shrouded in the support of their own political turmoil may also make some quick decisions.

Most importantly, the Scholz government, in its last weeks in office before the confidence vote, may make actions towards helping Ukraine strengthen its bargaining location, safe in the knowledge that such activities may be supported by the center-right criticism. The center-right Christian Democrats ‘ leader, Friedrich Merz, has long supported Ukraine, but he may also support a swift resolution with Scholz that assumes responsibility for such a decision, reducing the chance that it will spark controversy during the election.

Although Keir Starmer, the newly elected prime minister, is unopposed in the United Kingdom, it may be persuaded to back a decision by Scholz and Merz to send more weapons to Ukraine and, in particular, to permit Ukraine to use those weapons for long-range strikes against Russia. Long-range missile strikes into Russia would have the best chance of thwarting an imminent major Russian offensive that will attempt to retake control of the land held by Ukrainian forces since August in the Kursk region.

Trump’s biggest trade challenge wo n’t be until after January 20, but Europe should be prepared to impose a 10 % or 20 % tariff on its exports to the United States within his first few days in office. Awkwardly, that will fall during the German election campaign. But Scholz

This article, published on Bill Emmott’s Global View, is the English original of an article published in Italian by La Stampa. It is republished with permission.

Continue Reading