Sure, well, I don’t see anyone on either side willing to discuss data, facts, and so on.

And frankly, the onus is on the government to inform people of the rationale behind its policies. When the government dismisses concerns by shrugging them off, instead of providing information, a huge information void is left open. This leaves people very much more susceptible to rumors and so on than they would be with a government that seemed to be making an effort to be transparent and open with its reasons for doing things. It’s funny that you have a higher standard of conduct — your demand of integrity — for the people than for the president and the administration. Somehow that rings false for me.

As for free speech: well I don’t support hateful speech, of course. The people utter threats to the President are acting foolishly, and that needs to stop. The people who are speaking angrily, even if they are misinformed, have a right to speak. But the misinformation would not be anywhere near as much of an issue were the facts to be presented openly, fairly, with reference to data, information, and so on.

I’m just saying that there are more credible ways of getting your point across – both from a domestic and international perspective.

Focus on the percentage of cows being tested, use American sources and consumer groups advocating the same thing, etc etc.

Of course the implication was not that there would be children at the protest, but that it was just one tool being used (fear in children to force the parents).

Either way the interested parties were quite clever in mobilizing those that probably had little or no idea about the facts of the matter.

The lefties can attack him all they want (as he does have some ridiculous ideas) but they should (I am asking for a lot out of politicians here) try to do it with at least a touch of integrity.

In reference to free speech – I don’t think I would go so far as to protect malicious and unfactual speech with the intention of inciting fear and panic in order to achieve political goals. But that’s just me….

Well, you know, if the presidential elections had involved, say, a debate, I might be able to hold the polity to expectations of reasoned discussion in a public forum. But even the President isn’t up for that kind of thing.

I don’t doubt some distortions have crept into the debate, but a lot of that is clearing up now and the more sensible arguments are coming up, as others have noted.

And by the way, were you at the protests? I was, and it was mostly (ie. the vast majority of participants were) young adults (or older adults) and not children. I think you’re buying some of the Cho/Joong/Do party line there — a standard move to discredit the protest.

As for progressives attacking Lee, there’s an element of that — after all, he’s got a weak mandate and got in on a large minority, right? (And with a polity that largely was convinced on one issue: his economic “prowess.”) I think he has many more protests ahead of him, and crackdowns will not gain him credibility in the face of them. But really, the policies look bad to anyone who knows anything about such policies elsewhere. Privatizing water? Privatizing the health insurance system? These are much worse for the vast majority than the current system, something most people in places that have experienced such policies would agree.

Protesting on facts with valid points is a good way to make a statement. These protests, however, were based on rumors, myths, and outright lies.

I am not saying that there is no risk with eating US beef (or any food for that matter) – but the risks and issues that are there should at least be known by some of the protesters (yeah a generalization…but it seems to hold true).

I see this issue as just a convenient way for the recently booted “progressives” to attack the present administration – which I can assume by your use of heavily loaded words is just fine and dandy.

The worst part is that the sick cowards are using kids (through fear) to do it.

Nice blog, by the way! I heard you visited Lime’s site too. :)

I should note that I had more to say about the demos here and that I was much less impressed with the second one, mostly because it turned the participants into a mere audience. (Also, some idiot installed a stage with bellydancers and synchronized pop dancing on it right in the middle of the demo area. Idiots!)

But yeah, I think you’re right that the protests are really, deep down, about way more than beef: they’re about understandable anxieties regarding Lee’s outrageous and intolerable policy initiatives, and about his apparent recklessness.

Many of my students put it this way: they felt like they had a choice between economic growth or decency and moral leadership. (Remarkable, since the economy was doing quite well, really; it’s the distribution that’s having problems.) Their feeling is that they bet on growth, and now they’re losing out on both.

I’m pretty sure Lime isn’t the only person eager to leave considering the mess that Lee’s set out to make of this country. It’s a shame… though maybe it’s through this kind of disaster that the polity will wake up and work on reforms and the establishment of an active political life, instead of this “no-debate, just election” crap we had with Lee.

Actually, I agree that this has to so with economics/politics, too — more than the realistic risk of CJD outbreak in Korea. (Though I think people do have the right to demand freedom from that risk, however slim, I’m nervous at the more pressing issues that have gotten almost no press, here or abroad.)

But, then, I don’t happen to think that protectionism is always bad, and besides, nobody’s protesting against Aussie beef. The US economic model doesn’t work for every country, as John Ralston Saul pointed out about its implementation in Canada, and the experience with CJD in Britain certainly does pose a precedent for people being very careful about imports of food products. (Especially when there are manifest problems in the industry in the exporter, as there right now are.)

I’d prefer if the Korean public were even more freaked out about the bad IP law that’s required in the FTA, which poses a much more dire and certain risk to Korean industry and innovation. But if beef is what they want to base their objections on, I’m not one to mock them on those objections.

I respect your analysis of the situation, but this has way more to do with protectionist economic policies than it does with protecting the people from bad American beef.

You comment won’t be appearing as it’s mere insult-trolling and it includes racist language. This is not The Marmot’s, and I don’t tolerate crap like that.

However, I wish to note that my Korean fiancée and I are planning to leave Korea too. We’re not blind to the problems and “backwardness” you see — far from it, we’ve experienced a number of symptoms of this problem ourselves. I just don’t choose to hate the society from bottom to brim, as you seem to do.

Trolling will not be tolerated. Into the spam filter you go. Move along, kiddo.