Scribblings of the Metropolitician

Whoa...Ouch!

Did she really just say that?

Ouuuuuch. (HT to ExpatJane)

"That Hillary Show"

I'm sorry, Hillary supporters. This one's simply irresistable.

Bye, Bye Speed Racer

As I predicted, Speed Racer is bombing, mainly because it apparently sucks. So far, one call down, and Ironman is still booming at the box office. My doubtful Korean friends are all now true believers. I've even got one friend going again to see it. Hehe. Ironman, baby.

Bomb English #15 - Being a Lesbian in Korea

In our 15th episode, Jennifer and Michael talk with a Korean lesbian who tells us what many people want to ask, but never get the chance. "Are there REALLY gay people in Korea?!"

For those of you who don't know, our Bomb English project is going pretty well, where we provide good conversational English content along with a transcript for free. We keep it frank, honest, and real as can be. No Arirang, EBS English here -- recommend it to your Korean friends for their intermediate/advanced study, and listen in yourselves as native speakers, since we treat the topics as real topics and not just awkward, superficial conversations about things we don't care about.

This is real English, with Korean content. So there's something for everyone.

Check us out!

"The Five Mistakes Clinton Made", Why She Doesn't Deserve to Be President, and Why It's Time to Hang It Up

The "five mistakes" are kind of telling, in that these are not the kind of mistakes that I would have wanted a potential president to make. And when I say "deserve," I mean it -- look at the frickin' delegate count lead Obama has, which has remained constant for far longer than Hillary should have been in the race. Time Magazine's list:

1. She misjudged the mood.

2. She didn't master the rules.

3. She underestimated the caucus states.

4. She relied on old money.

5. She never counted on a long haul.

What does this add up to? "Out of touch" and "arrogant" spring to mind. Oh, and "elitist," a term she has (inexplicably!) trying to pin on Obama.

As I've said before, when I called it right, and I'll say again -- it's time for Hillary to step aside.

I've come a long way since I first decided to tentatively decide my conscience and realize that Obama was going to be a great candidate, or stop believing the line that "no one would really vote for a Black president" and that once in the voting booths, white people just couldn't punch it for a black man (and they call ME the cynic, right?), or the accusation that the real hope and excitement Obama supporters see was "cultish" and MLK's greatness was diminished as "just words", or when the Clintons started pulling out the "kitchen sink" and engaging in a politics of "hopelessness", And even after Obama actually WON Texas, and didn't win Ohio (which didn't even affect his delegate lead, but the media kept reporting it as a "loss"), or the Wright non-fiasco that was absolutely racist in the way the media chose to put Obama's feet to the fire but let the far more crazy of the religious crazies with far closer actual ties to other candidates (both past and present) completely off the hook, even as he handled it by dropping the science and one of the most important pieces of political rhetoric in a century...

Obama's come a long way, too, and more than earned the right to shake of the "all talk" jabs by holding his own against anything that Clinton threw at him, by taking the high ground, by actually not engaging in the dirty pool that he claims to not want to play. His money came from average people and not old money, he planned ahead, he had a pulse on the sentiments of the people.

How is he not completely and obviously better qualified than Hillary to be nominated? What remaining reservations are there? Ah, he's not a realist, we need a connected political animal to get things done? She has "more experience?" Pshaw. Is that all that's left?

In a way, it doesn't matter. Obama's done the do-diligence. He's run the political gauntlet, even as people (including myself) were half covering their faces and hoping that he wouldn't fall flat on his face, and as he not only didn't, but continued to display his appropriateness for the job, and many on the side of the fence who might actually vote for him have continued to be emboldened enough to be more vocal about their support for him.

Many African-Americans were initially quite skeptical about his prospects at the beginning -- and did not offer the kind of blind support that many seem to assume was given only because he was black (umm, Jesse Jackson was also black, but let's not nitpick...) Now, Obama's completed the tough task of convincing these final cynics -- us.

What people fail to realize in this myopic, horse-race way of dealing with political races in the US, is that Obama has already changed a lot of the rules of the game, has raised the level of political discourse, has already raised the bar again for what can be hoped for in politics. Is the job done? No.

But the man ain't even President yet. And prognosticating naysaying aside (since he's made it through a whole heaping helping of that and come out rosy), what if...just what if...his candidacy actually reflects what he does as president?

Imagine that!

My vote's right where it's been since December, 2007.

And yeah, I told you so.

A Voice of Rationality

CORRECTION: An astute reader pointed out an error in this post, which is pertinent to what I'm saying and should be noted:

"김 교수는 자신의 논문에서 밝힌 광우병의 위험성을 적극 알리지 않았다는 이유로 '분뇨 테러'까지 당한 것으로 전해졌다. 광우병 논란 사태가 불거진 후 몇몇 사람들이 집에 찾아와 욕설을 하며 동물 분뇨를 뿌렸다는 것이다. "

which describe that the shit terror occured prior to him making the statement revealing the truth, not after the fact. The actual reason for the shit attack was because he did not actively spread the word of danger to the public as 'described' in his research paper, not because he turned around to say 'no thats not what it says.'

Duly noted, although I still don't think it says much for the rationality of the protesters in attacking an innocent researcher, it is an important point. I just skimmed through the article and trusted the summarized translation of others, instead of fact- and error-checking myself. I stand corrected. Thanks, Greg.

------------

I love being right. I really do.

No, I'm not a scientist, as certain irrational people point out -- I love when people point out the obvious -- but I am a reasonable, educated person who has the ability to discern substance from, ahem, bullshit. (Yes, I am trying to be "punny.")

So -- as I've been saying from the beginning, when I have been taking people to task for 1) not really knowing what the actual source was for the "Korean genetic predisposition to mad cow disease" argument, and 2) for misinterpreting what even the apparent meaning of that statistic is -- the media and the general populace has been freaking out over nothing. Let me repeat:

It has not been established that American beef is any more unsafe than any other country's beef.

And so says the author of the scientific paper being (mis)used by PD 수첩, crazed netizens, petrified students, and anti-American FTA activists (who must be complimented for an amazing PR coup, since this was, admittedly, a master stroke of political theater and manipulation):

국내 광우병 사태를 촉발한 ‘한국인 광우병 취약’ 논문의 저자인 김용선 한림대 의대 교수는 자신의 논문이 일부 언론에 의해 과장 보도됐고 정치적으로 악용됐다고 주변 인사들에게 말한 것으로 확인됐다.

김 교수는 4일 한림대 의대 학장 자격으로 핀란드의 헬싱키 의대 등과의 업무 협의를 위해 윤대원 한림대 이사장 등과 함께 핀란드로 출국했다.

6일 헬싱키 시내 호텔에서 만난 윤 이사장은 기자에게 “김 교수의 논문은 일부 미디어에 의해 부풀려졌고 이를 다시 정치권이 마녀사냥 식으로 악용하고 있다”고 말했다.

I put it in Korean so it's clear to the several commenters who seem to take my critique of the poor critical thinking skills of the media and political groups as proof of my arrogance (guilty as charged, since I consider the rantings and ravings of stupid people, umm, stupid, and I don't consider myself stupid), or proof of me, once again, "hating" Korea. (You can read the English-language breakdown of the article quoted above at the Marmot's Hole.)

Well, it's not surprising, since the author of the study has had his house attacked by shit-throwing idiots. And I don't mean that in the rhetorical sense -- I mean that people have actually found his house and thrown shit at it. If even the author of the study in question gets shit on, is it surprising that anyone with lesser authority (ohhh -- I'm not a scientist!) would get the same treatment? Because we all need to be scientists or other specialists to make critical judgments of obviously faulty logic or specious claims, right?

We should be a clear expert or authority to make any claims? Kim Yong-seon has that authority! "He said Koreans are 94% more likely to...umm...I don't really understand it, but...anyway! He said it! See!"

But then that very authority turns around and says, "No. That's not what it says. You're wrong."

So people start throwing shit at his house, and he's afraid to even come back to Korea from his research trip. The man's nearly in hiding. And what did he do to deserve this? Umm, absolutely nothing. Lovely.

What is more obvious is that PD 수첩's research is shoddy and unprofessional -- I've said it before. And I'm right again: obviously, they never even contacted the professor to discuss the meaning of his paper. Otherwise, they wouldn't have made it the center of their claims, linking it with other specious claims.

The point is -- to those of you getting on my case for pointing out that the statistic looked fishy and taken completely out of context -- you need to ask yourself why it was so obvious to someone like ME that the "94% genetic predisposition" claim looked very suspicious, and NOT to someone like YOU. What separate us? Nationality? Genetics? What neighborhood in Seoul I lived in? Or perhaps my school names?

It's critical thinking skills, people. Link that with a little basic understanding of logical and statistical fallacies, a rudimentary understanding of the science we all should have learned in high school, as well as not being beholden to a slavish belief in "authority," or the petty maneuverings of a self-interested few of what is clearly a highly-politicized issue -- and you get the ability to not be driven into irrational hysteria over a minor trade dispute.

Does this make me arrogant? If so, I guess I'm arrogant, then.

Does pointing this out make me an asshole? If so, I guess I gotta be an asshole, then.

Does this make me anti-Korean? Again, I'm just pointing out what I consider to be the overreactions of the irrational. By some people's standards, that makes me "anti-Korean," I guess. Hmm.

But then again, by "some people's standards," this innocent professor who did nothing but write a paper on an issue that people not only didn't properly understand, but actively misused for political gain, and when he simply clarified the actual meaning of the research being misused by intellectual brownshirts (and I use the term "intellectual" hesitantly), a completely innocent academic who literally has been dragged into a political shitstorm now has cow dung being thrown at his house and fears for his physical safety.

I guess that makes me, him, and anyone else who raises a voice outside of the mass-mind of the angry crowd, "anti-Korean," right? But to the mob, what does the truth -- nay, even mere rationality -- matter? "You're either with us or against us." Or, as the great Captain Jean-Luc Picard once ominously warned while under the assimilative mind control of cybernetic alien nanoprobes, "You WILL become one with the Borg."

"대~한민국!"

Korean Designer Profiles: Hwang Jae Bock

FMS is starting a series on Korea's most famous and influential fashion designers in the field of Korean fashion! This first episode kicks off with Hwang Jae Bock, a leading fashion designer and head of the Seoul Fashion Designers' Association. Check it out!

For those who prefer the YouTube version (compatible with more browsers):

What I really liked about the interview was the fact that I was able to stick in one of my little working theories about Korean fashion -- as the balance between a pressure to break out from the crowd as powered by a new boldness largely enabled by the Internet in constant tension with a a very Korean "social monitoring" that keeps people generally within the socially-acceptable range of the crowd -- and she saw it exactly the same way. Having one's observation be confirmed by someone much more knowledgeable is a very reassuring feeling and gives a certain boost in confidence.

At the end, I liked the fact she bought it in terms of my "Korean street fashion is ready-to-wear" and "Japanese street fashion is couture" metaphor. And I think I got a lot of credit for that one in her eyes. I thought it was a good interview to lead off the series with. And you might have noticed ExpatJane's voice in there, as she had arranged all the interviews for the show. Major hat tip to her!

Get more into Korean fashion by going over to FeetManSeoul.com and taking a look around!

More Details on the Soyuz Return Trip

Just got an email from a reader with a link to a pretty cool story on the Discovery Channel web site describing in detail coming back in on the Soyuz space capsule. Their first "rescuers" were Kazhak farmers, apparently. Peggy Whitson's money quote about getting having gotten out of the capsule: "I was having neuro-vestibular problems. I was not feeling great. My primary concern at that point was not puking."

Hehe. After 8.2 G's (not the 10 reported in other media -- interesting), I think my primary concern would be similar. Again, congratulations to everyone and we're glad all made it back safe and sound. [HT to Tony!]

Colbert Got Rained On!

Good stuff. I guess his profile got big enough with Speed Racer that they thought of a way to bring him on without a translator. That line when Rain entered was a sample from the movie, I think. Clever. [HT to Ggamssi!]

You Know, Maybe Government Suits Should Read the Expat Blogs...

Guess what? What many foreigners have been saying for a long time would happen HAS! While the Seoul Metropolitan Government wastes time asking western foreigners whether or not they like the toilets and tries to encourage tourism in Korea by just saying the country is now "sparkling!" foreign investment in Korea has been falling faster than a crackhead's mean body weight.

Any and all foreigners who've been in the middle of Roh Moo Hyeon's anti-American, anti-foreign, kneejerk nationalism has wondered how Korea would ever become the "hub of Asia" if any foreign firm who makes money here is constantly vilified beyond reasonableness, even as actual North Korean propaganda is allowed to be taught to schoolchildren by members of the Korean Teachers' Union, and the media continues to set up foreigners as the ultimate scapegoat for everything they can't now blame Lee Myung Bak for.

We've been saying it for years now.

If you're going to make Korea a place where it sucks to live, not to mention invest and make money, do you think anyone but the craziest or most committed are going to stay? Especially with the open and welcoming arms of China right next door? The first thing that Korean slogan and campaign planners need to figure out is that Korean automatically being the hub of anything was only a truism before there was international plane travel. Because now, people can fly OVER Korea without going THROUGH it.

I hate to say "I told you so." (Well, actually, I don't.) But "I told you so." And so did any other foreigner who's been here a long time and has been constantly shaking their head as Korea continued to embarrassingly piss yet another dream of being a "hub" down the proverbial drain.

And in this particular case, there's no one to blame other than -- wait for it -- the usual suspects: a formerly anti-American government and a continually anti-foreigner news media.

[Go read more here!]

Congratulations! This time, there's no one to blame but Korea itself! And with the hysterics over the KORUS FTA, wow -- for better or worse, Korea sure knows how to create a hospitable atmosphere for making agreements and then having the population go absolutely berzerk over it for the most irrational of reasons.