SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: FaultLine who wrote (11606)10/10/2003 3:54:30 AM
From: D. Long  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793656
 
That is certainly a set of valid concerns, FL. But to call the recall undemocratic is simply absurd.

Democracy - from the Greek demos "people" + kratos "rule or strength". Not "oligarchy" or "plutocracy" - the rule of the few or the wealthy - ie. the professional political class.

Derek



To: FaultLine who wrote (11606)10/10/2003 4:43:13 AM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793656
 
This, in a nutshell, is why I opposed the recall.

I don't like "mob rule" either, FL. And California makes it too easy to legislate by ballot box. That will never be changed. The people don't trust the politicians, and they like it too much.

Davis really asked for it. You won't see it happen again, IMO.



To: FaultLine who wrote (11606)10/10/2003 5:37:32 AM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793656
 
I find this article absolutely incredible. It just floors me. I had no idea these people existed. But this is the reason they do it. "These schools are our only way to educate our children in an ethnic Korean surrounding,
_____________


Revolution Is Brewing at N. Korean Schools in Japan

By Anthony Faiola
Washington Post Foreign Service
Friday, October 10, 2003; Page A01

TOKYO -- As the morning bell tolls at First Chosen Grammar School on the outskirts of this sprawling capital, students rush to class under a mural urging them to cram for the glory of North Korea. At recess they march to blaring North Korean hymns. Their history lessons extol the virtues of Kim Il Sung -- the North Korean "Great Leader" who, they are taught, won the Korean War in 1953.

For decades this has been the drill at First Chosen, one of about 130 schools across Japan partly funded by the North Korean government. The students are sons and daughters of ethnic Koreans living in Japan as North Korean citizens, about 150,000 in total. Almost all are descendants of laborers brought here by force or lured by the promise of a better life during Japan's occupation of the Korean Peninsula from 1910 to 1945. Generations of these ethnic Koreans have pledged allegiance to the North's Communist government, their cash remittances back home a critical source of hard currency for the isolated nation.

But a revolution is brewing at First Chosen and the other North Korean schools in Japan.

Spurred by an increasingly skeptical view of the North Korean government, parent groups have launched a movement to depoliticize the schools. In the past year they have pushed the schools to remove the official portraits of the late Kim Il Sung and his son, the current ruler Kim Jong Il, from the front wall of every classroom.

In addition, parents have insisted on the distribution of new textbooks that have less North Korean propaganda and give more facts on South Korea. A new curriculum unveiled this year includes brief accounts of South Korean history while an entire class, the "Revolutionary Activities of Kim Il Sung," has been cut, parents and teachers said.

"We can no longer look at the system in North Korea as the model to teach our children," said Pak Hyang Gu, 49, a Korean language professor at a Japanese university whose two children attend North Korean schools in western Tokyo. "We can see now that North Korea is not what we thought it was. It is not a workers' paradise. We have no wish to teach our children something that is not true."

Legends such as the one that Kim Jong Il's birth was heralded by rapturous lightning bolts and the appearance of a double rainbow are no longer being taught in grammar schools here, said O Beak Kun, principal of First Chosen. High school students are still presented with such teachings, but now "they are not taught as fact," he said. "The students make up their own minds about such mysteries. This is what the parents want."

In Tachikawa, just west of Tokyo, Pak sat with his wife, Kim Yong, 44, and their daughter, Pak Mire, 14, around their dining room table on a recent afternoon. They were among the first parents to demand changes to the system six years ago. "In the beginning, we didn't dare to mention bringing the portraits down. It was still too taboo," Kim said. "When we brought up changing the curriculum, we were sometimes shouted down. . . . But each year, we made progress."

Eventually, dozens of like-minded parents at North Korean schools across Japan united in new parent groups and school forums to pressure Chosen Soren, North Korea's representative organization in Japan, which oversees the schools, issues North Korean passports and handles the government's affairs in Japan. The two countries have no official diplomatic relations.

"They were shocked at first," Kim said of Chosen Soren authorities. "But they gradually began to listen and, then, to act." Korean analysts and parents said Chosen Soren has agreed to the changes at the schools largely out of alarm that the schools are alienating North Koreans in Japan. Enrollment at the Chosen Soren schools is falling, with 20,000 students today compared to 40,000 two decades ago.

But "the schools are the only way our children will learn about the atrocities committed by the Japanese against our people," Kim said. "They would never get that in Japanese schools."

Her daughter wears a coat to cover the traditional Korean dress she wears to school during fall and winter, fearing she might be targeted by Japanese children. But Pak Mire has no intention of going to Korea, and dreams of being a fashion designer in Europe.

Wearing a hot pink T-shirt and a funky hairstyle, she said bluntly: "I don't think Kim Jong Il is a good man. I think the Japanese still have a lot to atone for regarding Koreans, but the truth is that I don't particularly like North Korea either."

Once, her parents might have scolded her, but no more. "She has the right to her opinion," said Pak, her father. "We want her to know the good things, the bad things -- the truth."

Mire excitedly interrupted. "You know, we sometimes sing a song at school about the leader in North Korea being born on a mountaintop," she said. "But I think it is sort of funny. Everyone knows that's not true. He was born in Russia!"

Her mother glanced at her daughter and smiled. "She's a smart girl."

Interviews with more than two dozen parents, students, school officials and Korean analysts indicated that discontent has been building since the mid-1990s, and quickened with the shock over the North's admission last year that it had abducted Japanese citizens during the 1970s and 1980s for use in spy training camps.

North Korean citizens in Japan, although still reluctant to speak out too strongly against the North Korean government, said their frustrations are an echo of the growing dissatisfaction among their relatives back home, many of whom have passed word of the increasingly harsh conditions there. These overseas Koreans -- the largest group of North Koreans outside the Korean Peninsula -- offer a window into their shuttered homeland, enjoying unrivaled access through relatively frequent travel to the North, the exchange of letters and packages, and even telephone calls.

After the Korean War ended, the 600,000 ethnic Koreans in Japan had the option of becoming citizens of either South or North Korea. The North moved quickly, setting up a network of grammar schools, high schools and a university, which lured not only ethnic Koreans with leftist sentiments, but also those who felt disenfranchised in Japan -- a homogeneous society where for years the bureaucracy largely prevented ethnic Koreans from becoming citizens.

South Korea, on the other hand, encouraged ethnic Koreans to assimilate. Today there are only four schools for South Koreans in Japan, with about 1,600 students, although there are three times as many South Korean citizens here as North Koreans. Since the 1990s ethnic Koreans have had a much easier time becoming Japanese citizens, and tens of thousands have done so.

The North Koreans, meanwhile, are still largely viewed as outsiders by most Japanese. They found community and purpose inside the Korean schools run by Chosen Soren. Until recently, all but a few of the ethnic Koreans holding the North's citizenship were strident supporters of its government.

"What is happening in the North Korean community in Japan are indications that the thought control wielded by the regime is weakening," said Park Towjin, a former teacher at Chosen Soren's university just outside Tokyo who is now a critic of the government. "It has become obvious that either Pyongyang has decided it must soften its doctrine to survive or that it has become so weak that it can no longer turn back the tide of change."

The decision to change the curriculum was pragmatic, said Lee Ju Hyung, Chosen Soren's chairman in the northern port city of Niigata, where North Korean ferries dock. "We recognize that it is now wise to lessen the political content in schools," he said. "Their role has changed. These children will now be a bridge to unite North and South following our great reunification."

The North Korean government still sees the schools as vital. With a dreamy smile, Lee recounted a chat he had with Kim Jong Il at a February 2002 party in the suburbs of Pyongyang. The North Korean leader "said to me, 'We must continue with the education of Koreans in Japan,' and then, in an act of incredible generosity, he gave us a $1 million donation to fortify our teachings here." The money, Lee said, later arrived by bank transfer.

The budget of the schools used to be mostly covered by the North Korean government, but that money has tapered off over the last 15 years. Today, North Korea gives the schools $3.6 million a year, a quarter of what it provided in the 1980s and early 1990s. As a result, tuition is higher, with parents paying from $150 to $450 a month, depending on the school, grade level and whether the child is receiving room and board.

Yet it is politics, Korean residents here said, that has driven many parents to take their children out of Chosen Soren schools, and others to push the schools toward more independence.

"I don't like those guys in Pyongyang, and I agree 100 percent with the changes being made," said Lee Ung Chul, a board member at the Chosen school in Niigata and president of a company that makes pachinko machines, a popular gambling device.

Lee switched his citizenship from North to South in the 1990s, in part so he could visit family members in South Korea. North Koreans cannot travel freely there. His wife, Lee Bong Sung, changed her citizenship this year. Towjin, the former university teacher, estimated from his own research that about 30,000 North Korean citizens had switched citizenship in the past two years, largely out of growing disgust with the North and its policies.

But Lee still sends his daughter to the North Korean school. "These schools are our only way to educate our children in an ethnic Korean surrounding, so we are working to change the belief system from the inside," he said. "It is not easy. but I think we are showing that it can be done."

Special correspondent Akiko Yamamoto contributed to this report.
washingtonpost.com



To: FaultLine who wrote (11606)10/10/2003 6:02:30 AM
From: LindyBill  Respond to of 793656
 
"PC" really rules in Hollywood. These two quotes sum it up.

"Who's going to be the hero?" asks Lionel Chetwynd, the writer of "DC 9/11" and its producer. "The CIA? The government? Our government?"

"I mean, my goodness," he chuckles. "What an idea!"

"Who would you have as the enemy if you made a picture about terrorism?" Jack Valenti, the head of the Motion Picture Association of America, asks. "You'd probably have Muslims, would you not? If you did, I think there would be backlash from the decent, hardworking, law-abiding Muslim community in this country."


________________________________________

TASTE COMMENTARY WSJ.com

War? What War?
Hollywood ignores today's biggest story line.

BY JONATHAN V. LAST
Friday, October 10, 2003 12:01 a.m.

Today marks the beginning of prestige season at the movies. The rollout of Quentin Tarantino's "Kill Bill" will be followed in the coming weeks by "The Matrix: Revolutions," "The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King," "Cold Mountain," "The Human Stain" and other high-profile releases. What you won't see this fall--or winter, or spring, or summer for that matter--is a single movie about the war on terror.
It's a little hard to believe. Yes, we have had a small-screen documentary and the film version of a play ("The Guys"), both about Sept. 11 itself. And Showtime aired a TV original movie, "DC 9/11." But that's it. Contrast this with Hollywood's output during World War II, when it seemed like every fifth movie was about America's heroic struggle to fend off the Germans and Japanese. Clearly, something's going on here.

But it's a complicated something. When asked why Hollywood hasn't made movies about the war on terror, the first-blush answer is almost always political correctness. "Who would you have as the enemy if you made a picture about terrorism?" Jack Valenti, the head of the Motion Picture Association of America, asks. "You'd probably have Muslims, would you not? If you did, I think there would be backlash from the decent, hardworking, law-abiding Muslim community in this country."

Mr. Valenti isn't being paranoid. The last big-budget movie with terrorists was the 2002 adaptation of Tom Clancy's "The Sum of All Fears." In the novel, Arab terrorists set off a nuclear bomb at the Super Bowl. But as soon as the book went into development in Hollywood (long before Sept. 11), the Council on American Islamic Relations sprang into action. "Before we had typed a word on paper," producer Mace Neufeld told Slate, "I was getting complaints." And, voilà! The terrorists in the movie became neo-Nazis.

If anything, the PC pressure has been upped since the war on terror began--almost a reversal of the way Hollywood operated in the early 1940s. It is difficult to imagine a movie like "G.I. Jane," "The Siege" or even "True Lies"--all of which have Middle Eastern villains--being green-lit by a studio now. "The only unorganized groups you can make as the enemy," Mr. Valenti says with a laugh, "would be the U.S. government, the police, the FBI and corporate America."

But the joke cuts both ways. If Hollywood has a PC problem with antagonists, it's got another problem with protagonists. In a movie about the war on terror, "Who's going to be the hero?" asks Lionel Chetwynd, the writer of "DC 9/11" and its producer. "The CIA? The government? Our government?"

"I mean, my goodness," he chuckles. "What an idea!"

When you stop to think about it, Mr. Chetwynd has a point. In post-Vietnam cinema, the government is almost never good, and when a government figure is heroic, as in "A Few Good Men," it's because he's a maverick fighting against a corrupt government establishment.

Hypersensitivity, however, is only one part of the story. Show business is another. "They don't believe terrorism sells," explains an old Hollywood hand. For a variety of reasons, it isn't clear that American audiences are ready to embrace war-on-terror movies. Robin Bronk, the executive director of the Creative Coalition, wonders whether it's because we already have saturation coverage from the cable news networks or because "we are still just too raw."
And the war on terror rests a little closer to home. "In World War II, you didn't have to worry--except for a couple of days in Santa Barbara or Long Beach--that the movie theater you were taking refuge in was safe," muses Joel Engel, author of "The Rookie." "The war on terror is on this soil. If theoretically movies had existed during the Civil War, you might have had the same situation we do now. You wouldn't go to see a movie about the Civil War in 1862 in Charleston."

Even if a war-on-terror movie could be sold to American audiences, there is no evidence that it would be viable overseas, where the war is decidedly unpopular. In 2000, "Rules of Engagement," a movie about an American embassy being attacked by an Arab mob, grossed $60 million domestically, just barely covering its production costs. Its foreign grosses were almost nil--a disturbing fact, since studio movies now expect about half of their receipts to come from foreign box offices.

"The answer," one prominent screenwriter shrugs, "is that I don't know how you gamble it. John Wayne made 'The Green Berets' because he directed it and he starred in it and he was John Wayne. And I'm going to guess that if Tom Hanks or Tom Cruise wanted a movie about the war on terror, they could do it. But I think they're the only two."

Still, some insiders believe that if a war-on-terror movie were released and grossed big money--$150 million-plus--other would follow.

But Mr. Chetwynd isn't convinced. "I'm not sure that one swing of the bat would be persuasive," he says. Why the pessimism? Politics. "Political affiliation is very much at the root of how people identify themselves in Hollywood," he explains. "Many of my colleagues would have difficulty in trying to decide which was the greater threat to their liberty, Islamic fundamentalism--as an abstract notion--or John Ashcroft, as a clear and present danger."

"Hatred of Bush is a big factor," says another Hollywood player. "It's his war, not their war, and none of them wants to be seen as toadying to the president." Supporting that sentiment, one movie person I talked with told me: "I'm one of those people who believes the entirety of the war in Iraq is to get our president re-elected. . . . I believe Bush will find Saddam for the election--and I'm not liberal."

Ethnic sensitivity, economic reality and politics all play a role, but the biggest reason may be something else altogether. Historically, the cinema is a lagging, not leading, cultural indicator, and the World War II movies of the early 1940s may be the exception, not the rule. The definitive movies on Vietnam, "The Deer Hunter," "Apocalypse Now," "Platoon" and "Full Metal Jacket," for example, were all made after the fighting was finished and after a national consensus had been reached on the war.
"In 50 years, when this war is over," one screenwriter notes, "there will be movies about the war on terror and they will show that the bad guys were the bad guys and that the Islamofascists did want to take over the world."

Until then, sword fights and middlebrow literary adaptations will have to do.

Mr. Last is online editor of The Weekly Standard.

opinionjournal.com



To: FaultLine who wrote (11606)10/10/2003 10:44:04 AM
From: JohnM  Respond to of 793656
 
This, in a nutshell, is why I opposed the recall.

Well said.



To: FaultLine who wrote (11606)10/10/2003 11:54:55 AM
From: Lazarus_Long  Respond to of 793656
 
So do you oppose the very idea of recall? I assume so, since you consider its exercise such a danger. Recall was put into the CA constitution in 1911; this is the first time a governor has been recalled in 92 years. Do you suppose it might be because people saw it as actually necessary instead of an exercise in mob rule? The legislature was NOT going to impeach him, you know; it is heavily democratic.

Maybe there are reasons people wanted him out. Do you approve of allowing illegal aliens to vote? Because effectively, with the motor voter law, that's what the law he signed allowing them to get driver's licenses will do. You might also approve of socialized medicine. On a national scale it might be somewhat workable, but it is suicide for a single state to attempt it om its own; businesses will simply pack up and leave. They are already groaning under excessive regulation and taxes.

Our system puts the people's choice in a position of power for a specified period.
Suppose they lie materially during their electons campaign? Is that still true? It would appear Davis did just that about the size of the budget deficit. Had people known what was coming, he would have been out at the last election.

but still legal, decisions
His lies were legal; they simply were not acceptable. You complain about Bush's lies about Iraq; what of these?

The Bill of Rights contains mechanisms that protect unpopular positions.
The Bill of Rights was meant to further, not thwart, democracy. And it was never meant to prevent the people from removing craven, incompetent officials.

"Instant Democracy"
Instant? This took about a year. Hardly instant. People had plenty of time to consider issues.

All governors in the last 30 years have faced some level of recall attempt.
igs.berkeley.edu
It seems to me that there is quite a high hurdle here.

Some background you might want to consider. I think if you cast aside partisan anger, you will have to admit there was just cause.
Message 19386859
Message 19387575
Message 19387568
Message 19387803



To: FaultLine who wrote (11606)10/10/2003 3:10:41 PM
From: greenspirit  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793656
 
In other words, you don't really trust in the good judgement of the American people. The assumption appears to be, I have the good sense to balance the factors of mob rule, difficult decisions being unpopular and so forth, but 'those other people' do not.