The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 Jeremy Cooper Archive
Gangnam and Minjok
Reports Of Korea’s Self-Abolition Have Been Exaggerated
Endangered Species? Credit: VDare.com.
Endangered Species? Credit: VDare.com.

(Headline with apologies to Mark Twain). Immigration patriots have long been fascinated by nation-states that appear to be resisting globalist pressure to abolish themselves, like Japan and Israel. So some dismay greeted the report by Canadian anthropologist Peter Frost that multiculturalism had infected South Korea and that it was well down the path to Western-style cultural suicide (“an Asian poster boy for immigration and multiculturalism —a radical departure from the mono-ethnic face it once had”—The Changing Face of Gangnam, UNZ.com,February 14, 2016. Gangnam is an exclusive district in the capital city of Seoul—“Gangnam Style” means “like the rich folks”.) However, after a recent trip, I don’t quite see it that way.

I was expecting to see a nation wholeheartedly and clearly embracing multiculturalism. But while there are some troubling demographic trends, the situation on the ground looks manageable. South Korea does not seem to be heading towards the long-term disaster that threatens to engulf the U.S. and Western Europe.

Over the last century, Koreans have prided themselves on their loyalty to the minjok—a word that has been translated as “race-nation.” According to B.R. Myers, author of The Cleanest Race: How North Koreans See Themselves and Why It Matters, the idea is rooted in the early 20thcentury occupation by Japan, which tried to convince Koreans that they and the Japanese were all part of a united race and gave the Koreans a relatively privileged place in the empire.

Before Japanese colonization, most educated Koreans had seen themselves as sharing a similar cultural heritage with the Han Chinese. The Japanese left, but the idea that Korea was an ethnic nation that could pride itself on its common bloodline and internal homogeneity remained.

For years after independence in 1948, South Korean immigration policy was non-existent or ethnicity-based. Beginning in the 1980s, the government welcomed ethnic Koreans who were living in China and the West [Ethnic return migration and hierarchical nationhood, by Dong-Hoon Seol and John Skrentny, Ethnicities,Volume 9, 2009]. To this day, if North Koreans are able to get to the South, they are given stipends, free apartments, and job training, while practically all other refugees are shunned [Unexpected lives: North Korean Refugees in South Korea,by Laura Elizabeth Pohl, LauraPohl.com, 2006].

But in recent years, the South Korean elite has been increasingly insistent on an official endorsement of multiculturalism. In 2006, the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family began its “Grand Plan,” with goals including raising awareness of multicultural issues and facilitating the integration of non-ethnic Koreans [International marriage and the state in South Korea: focusing on governmental policy, by Hye-Kyung Lee, Citizenship Studies, Volume 12, 2008]. Beginning in 2011, the word minjok was omitted from the oath taken by enlisted soldiers in the Korean army, and that same year the government lifted the ban on mixed-race men serving.

The main source of non-ethnic Korean immigration comes from international marriages. As the economy boomed in the 1980s and the country urbanized, it became more and more difficult for rural men to find wives. Many therefore began to look for foreign brides, mainly from Vietnam and China. In 2005, 13.6% of marriages in the entire country were between a Korean and a foreigner. As of 2015, there were about 23,000 foreign husbands in the country, and 127,000 foreign wives, in a country of 50 million.

Wikipedia has a nice breakdown by country of origin. Of the foreign wives, the vast majority are from Vietnam or China (including ethnic Koreans from China, or the Joseonjok), followed by the Philippines, Japan, and Cambodia. The four most common countries of origin for foreign husbands: China, the United States, Japan, and Canada.

Pop star Son Ga InIn 2011, South Korea reached a cumulative total of 100,000 naturalizations since the founding of the modern state in 1948 [Number of naturalized Korean citizens passes 100,000, The Korea Times,January 24, 2011]. About 79% of those have come from China, including the Joseonjok, with the second largest group being Vietnamese at 9%—mostly due to international marriages.

Despite the relatively few 10,000-a-year or so naturalizations, the fact that most immigrants come specifically to get married implies that people with foreign origins will be a sizeable part of the next generation.

But remember that although 13% of marriages include a foreigner, about 40% of those involve an individual from the ethnically-close countries of China and Japan, including the Joseonjok. Over another quarter come from Vietnam, a country where the people are at least phenotypically similar and tend to do pretty well on international test scores.

Thus, an estimated 3% or so of marriages in the country involve a foreigner marrying a person from a totally alien culture, and even that number includes many Westerners.

All this is ignoring marriages in Korea that occur between two foreigners, which seems to be a rarity since the majority of legal immigrants come specifically to marry Koreans. The foreigners that do settle as families tend to be Joseonjok or Han Chinese, groups that will not do much to upset the ethnic balance of the country.

Walking around the South Korean capital of Seoul and the surrounding area, I would often see groups of South Asian men, but they almost never had wives or children with them. These are likely economic migrants, legal and illegal, who may eventually settle back in their home countries.

So although South Korea will not maintain its complete “racial purity” indefinitely into the future, it is not facing the “Great Replacement” or wholesale dispossession taking place in the West. Nor does South Korea have to contend with huge settlements of hostile populations which can’t or won’t integrate into First World societies. The half-ethnic Koreans of the future will have at least one Korean parent, they will come from a variety of different backgrounds; most will have two Asian parents and be physically indistinguishable from the rest of society. Generally, Western-style identity politics usually results when there are groups of people that have the numbers to separate themselves from the larger society and are clearly physically distinct from the majority population.

Interestingly, the place where the minjok ideology survives in its purest form is in the nominally communist state of North Korea. In 1960, amid deteriorating relations with other communist states, party members were prohibited from marrying foreigners. The government also began a campaign against existing mixed-marriages, forcing many divorces, with a party cadre giving a speech calling such unions a “crime against the Korean race.” This clearly shocked the East German ambassador, who called the speech “Goebbelsian.” [Kim Il Sung in the Khrushchev Era, by Balázs Szalontai, 2006, p.201 ]

Today, North Korea’ s obsession with racial purity takes some quite demented forms. According to a United Nations report, women returning from China pregnant are forced to have abortions, lest they bring in foreign blood [U.N. exposes North Korea’s rampant forced abortions, sterilizations, infanticide, and persecution of the disabled, by Rachel Denhollander, Live Action News, February 18, 2014]. When an American soldier named James Joseph Dresnok defected to North Korea in 1962, the communist government reportedly abducted a Romanian woman for him to marry. [An American GI defected to North Korea. Now his sons are propaganda stars, by Anna Fifield, Washington Post, May 25, 2016]. After she died, Dresnok married his second wife (third if you count his American marriage), a woman who was the daughter of a North Korean mother and a Togolese diplomat.

Two of Dresnok’s sons are now in the North Korean military, although one assumes that if they are married it is to women of foreign origin.

B. R. Myers. argues in his book The Cleanest Racethat North Korean propaganda no longer mentions socialism or even tries to hide the fact that the South enjoys a higher standard of living. Rather, the Kim regime maintains its legitimacy by portraying itself as the true defender of the Korean bloodline and the sovereignty of its people’s culture. For example, when Korean-black American football player Hines Ward (pictured right with his mother) was welcome by the South Korea government in 2006, the North Korean party daily ranted against “the talk of ‘a multi-ethnic, multi-racial society’,” and condemned any policy that “would dilute even the bloodline of our people.” (Cleanest Race, p. 72)

The late Christopher Hitchens, in his review of Myers’ book recounted an incident during his own trip to North Korea where his minder expressed concern:

The people of South Korea, he pointed out, were becoming mongrelized. They wedded foreigners—even black American soldiers, or so he’d heard to his evident disgust—and were losing their purity and distinction.

[A Nation of Racist Dwarfs, Slate, February 1, 2010]

As for my general impressions, there is certainly a great deal to suggest that South Korea is a part of a globalized, international culture. One thing that is striking is how ubiquitous American franchises and brands are. Everything from Starbucks to 7/11 to KFC is about as common in Seoul as in Chicago. Even the clothing and jewelry stores in the mall are filled with familiar European and American brands.

English is everywhere, with practically every highway sign in the capital having a transliteration of the name of the exit or town it is pointing to. Restaurants and shops also advertise in English, along with Korean, and the language is also located on many menus.

An uninformed traveler would think that English is the second language of Korea, but very few people on the street can actually speak it, despite familiarity with the alphabet. In my experience, the average Korean’s grasp of the English language is much below that of even Eastern Europeans.

But despite the overwhelming influence of Western business and the English language, I saw little evidence that the multicultural ideology of the state has become anything close to the massive destructive force that it is in the West. Watching TV for a week, I did not see a single foreign character in commercials or dramas. This is nothing like the United States, where every time we see a doctor or engineer, Main Stream Media SJWs take the opportunity to show us how smart minorities are.

Other small signs of normality were greatly appreciated: For example, on a visit to Seoul National University, the top-rated school in the country, I noticed that the sign for the men’s bathroom was blue and that for females was pink. I thought about the kind of uproar that such signs would cause at an elite American university, and felt both amused at and sorry for my country. This blue/pink distinction in bathroom signage is nearly universal in South Korea.

South Korea in fact has much to recommend to social conservatives, particularly those who worry that Western children are swimming around in smut as soon as they’re old enough to turn on a TV or log on to the internet. It is apparently against the law to show women in bikinis or underwear on TV. When I tried going to a pornographic website (for research purposes of course), I was redirected to this page. When I asked a woman whether there were any gay celebrities, she said yes, there is exactly one (1) with whom everyone is familiar.

There was another telling episode: a man told me that his wallet had been stolen. Surprised, I replied, “Really, in Korea?” He laughed and said of course not, there are no thieves in Korea. He was on a trip to Europe and had been robbed by Gypsies.

But despite the social peace that South Korea enjoys, its elites certainly appear enamored with aping some of the most suicidal policies of the West. In 2012, Jasmine Lee from the Philippines became the first non-ethnic Korean to win a seat in the Parliament—where she is now a strong supporter of increased immigration [Meet the Movie Star Turned Lawmaker Who Wants to Reshape Korea, by Sam Kim and Jiyeun Lee, Bloomberg, February 2, 2016]. Surprisingly, Mrs. Lee is a member of the center-right Saenuri Party, which considers neo-liberalism to be fundamental to South Korean nationalism [Multiculturalism in South Korea: A Critical Assessment, by Iain Watson, Journal of Contemporary Asia, March 18, 2010]. The political right in South Korea is similar ideologically to the U.S. Conservative Establishment in the early 2000s, before Trump-style National Conservatives started seizing power within the party.

So South Korea does face real dangers. However, “there is a great deal of ruin in a nation.” As I’ve described, South Korean demographics remain quite favorable compared to those of the United States and Western Europe, and immigration policies remain relatively strict. And there is little indication that there are large numbers of Koreans scouring the globe looking for the most hopeless cases in order to bring back to their country.

Even as the South Korean government gradually gives up on the concept of minjok, South Korean leaders still seem to believe that any migration must be controlled and actually be a net benefit to the country. Of course, this is why they have kept out practically all Syrian refugees [Syrians Seeking Asylum in South Korea Find Only a Cold Shoulder, by Choe Sang-Hun, New York Times, August 5, 2016]

Historically, both Koreas have had reunification of the peninsula under one government as their ultimate goal. The South is changing slowly, but there is no demographic threat to Korean cultural and racial autonomy in the North thanks to government ideology (and crushing poverty).

One day, however, the two Koreas seem destined to engage in difficult discussions about nationhood, race, and the future of their people. One only hopes that these conversations do not involve the use of nuclear weapons.

Jeremy Cooper is a specialist in international politics and an observer of global trends. Follow him at @NeoNeoLiberal.

(Reprinted from VDare.com by permission of author or representative)
 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
140 Comments to "Gangnam and Minjok"
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[]
  1. The girl in the top picture is not Korean.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    She might be, plastic surgery is omnipresent there.
    , @Truth
    I worked in Seoul, Kyung-ju and Ok-Po in 2000, and I can personally attest than anyone who feels that they can predict, with certainty, an Asian's persons ethnicity, is mistaken, and probably ridiculously arrogant.
    , @neprof
    Looks Japanese to me (??)
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are only available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also only be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/article/gangnam-and-minjok/#comment-1715880
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. There are lots of foreigners in kpop, but is harder to tell at a glance because they are all asian and they are taught korean.
    The entertainment companies tried bringing at least a black girl, but the public was not very interested.
    Still, hip hop is very big and they look up to african-americans even if the enthusiasm is sometimes gauche like using the n-word without proper permits.
    Most kpop groups (boys and girls) display homoerotic undertones between members. This is called fanservice and it’s a big part of the kpop scene. They will not go further with the gay stuff because they try to sell kpop in muslim countries, so they have to keep up a more decent image then jpop.
    I see South Korea as being like the West in the 90′s on these topics, but like in everything else, they are determined to catch up.
    They do have some conservative moderating factors: recent rural roots for almost everybody, universal male conscription and powerful evangelical churches.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    I'm a little concerned by the existence of agencies such as "Ministry of Gender Equality" - Japan, fortunately, had powerful societies to keep such destructive forces from picking up legs and China gives lip service while disappearing the malcontents. Korea has no such mechanism, though with the current outrage against the Goddess cult, hopefully it'll also reduce the power of feminists there.
  3. I wouldn’t generally translate minjok as “race.” The term (minzoku in Japanese, minzu in Chinese) consists of two Chinese characters: min 民, meaning people (as in the People’s Republic); and jok 族, meaning clan, group, etc. Together, the meaning is what we would generally now call ethnicity; in older times perhaps “national stock” or something along those lines. If one doesn’t mind a cumbersome term, “national ethnicity” would do. But in any case, the meaning is not what we think of nowadays as race crossing national and ethnic boundaries.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Mingzu(民族) in Chinese is heavily slanted toward race, I'd say. Though perhaps these days its probably even more clannish to slant toward jiazu(家族) thanks to provincial clannishness.
    , @ogunsiron
    I think it was quite common in the early 20th century to use "race" interchangeably with "nation". People still spoke of the German, English or French race in those days.
  4. Well, that was a quick change. From rice farmers to tech, quality of life leading country. My wife recently went for a diagnosis on a growth in the uterus. She went to an American hospital and then to a Korean hospital. The American doctor simply told her she might have uterine cancer and should come back in three months. The Korean doctor told her she didn’t have uterine cancer and the reasons why and gave her a 10 page report explaining her condition in detail along with dietary recommendations. Her impression was that quality of patient care is now much better in Korea than the US.

    There are about a thousand objective ways that Korea is now better than America- lack of crime being an obvious example. Yet Americans go to Korea preaching all the virtues of the West and still look down on Korea as a socially backward country. Shrug.

    Read More
    • Replies: @bzbz
    Idk maybe you should ask Korean middle schoolers and their parents about their advanced passenger ferry safety system, eons ahead of what is present in Baltic and English channel ferries. Shrug. Or how their shopping malls can carry 8 storeys of mass with a foundation for 2 stories, stupid Europeans and gringos could never match Korean genius.
    , @Some Economist
    I don't think it's Americans going to Korea and preaching so much as Koreans appropriating Western technology and, along with that, embracing some of the sillier social trends. And these "thousand objective ways that Korea is now better" do not seem to be deterring large flows of migration in what would be the wrong direction for some reason (I wish they would).
  5. Korea hasn’t invaded or colonised other people’s land, and it doesn’t have settler communities in other people’s land. Koreans only have Korea, unlike Europeans who’ve taken over 3 continents and nearly wiped out the natives of those lands.
    To this day Europeans still invade, dominate and destroy other people’s countries.

    Invade, invite

    You can’t have your cake and eat it.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Santoculto
    Sweden and Switzerland invaded and destroy other... ''countries''

    Ok, learning new things here.

    ''Europeans' still invade, dominate and destroy''

    the english boy who born yesterday is guilty by the ''mistakes'' (euphemism for sure) of ''your'' people in the past...

    If you can blame fairly someone at least start to blaming western elites...
    , @Marcus
    Not our fault you are losers of history.

    Korea hasn’t invaded or colonised other people’s land, and it doesn’t have settler communities in other people’s land.
     
    I wish this were true, but there are plenty of you pan-faced ingrates here
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Americans
    , @Wally
    "unlike Europeans who’ve taken over 3 continents and nearly wiped out the natives of those lands"

    Please present proof for your "nearly wiped out".
    Everywhere I look there are plenty of those dimwitted natives, too many in fact.

    The truth is those natives were better off with the Europeans, just look at those natives now.
    Not a pretty sight.

    , @Wizard of Oz
    It doesn't help an argument to spout rubbish in support. The present day descendants of native populations of lands taken over by Europeans are nearly all far more numerous than they were before, according to you, they were almost wiped out. Also the initial impact of Eurasian diseases has been more than made up for by modern Western medicine.
  6. @Hacienda
    Well, that was a quick change. From rice farmers to tech, quality of life leading country. My wife recently went for a diagnosis on a growth in the uterus. She went to an American hospital and then to a Korean hospital. The American doctor simply told her she might have uterine cancer and should come back in three months. The Korean doctor told her she didn't have uterine cancer and the reasons why and gave her a 10 page report explaining her condition in detail along with dietary recommendations. Her impression was that quality of patient care is now much better in Korea than the US.

    There are about a thousand objective ways that Korea is now better than America- lack of crime being an obvious example. Yet Americans go to Korea preaching all the virtues of the West and still look down on Korea as a socially backward country. Shrug.

    Idk maybe you should ask Korean middle schoolers and their parents about their advanced passenger ferry safety system, eons ahead of what is present in Baltic and English channel ferries. Shrug. Or how their shopping malls can carry 8 storeys of mass with a foundation for 2 stories, stupid Europeans and gringos could never match Korean genius.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hacienda
    Here's the takeaway from my post: Asians don't like being hectored by Westerners.
  7. Hmm, it seems that Mr. Cooper did not visit the entertainment district of It’aewon in central Seoul, which is so flooded with expats and foreigners nowadays that Koreans like to visit as tourists themselves on a kind of quick-stop safari adventure. Meanwhile, the Chinese are so fond of the southern isle of Jeju (“Hawaii of the Orient”!) that locals now fret that they may buy the whole damn rock out from under them.

    In general, though, you’ll need hit the countryside to find most of the foreign migrant workers and foreign brides, of which there are a great many. A Korean friend of mine teaches weekend Korean-language classes to mostly migrant workers in a smaller city about an hour-and-a-half south of Seoul. It’s a government-run program, part of a larger national policy to encourage assimilation into the local culture. Unlike the United States or most Western European countries these days, which are afflicted with self-hate and malaise and consider it somehow “oppressive” or “morally repugnant” to expect recent migrants to try to fit into their new home societies, South Korea is wise enough, at least for now, to recognize that there is a difference between multiracialism and multiculturalism, and that the former need not lead inevitably to the later.

    Oh, and I would personally translate “minjok” as “ethnic nation.” After all, the Koreans, Japanese and Han Chinese all belong to the same “race” but are certainly different ethnicities!

    Read More
  8. @utu
    The girl in the top picture is not Korean.

    She might be, plastic surgery is omnipresent there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Sean
    https://koreaexpose.com/voices/a-nation-as-beautiful-as-a-rolex-knockoff/

    This is little unfair because they are trying for a look that Korean men would appreciate even if they had never seen a European

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2332785/Dangerous-double-jaw-surgery-rise-South-Korea-women-encouraged-face-risks-bone-cutting-procedure-beauty.html


    http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms11616 Consistent with the effect of EDAR on chin protrusion, we documented alterations of mandible length in mice with modified Edar function
     
    OK, women under pressure to look beautiful reduce their mandible protrusion, and Koreans have EDARed lantern jaws. Rolexes, sorry, Europeans, don't have EDAR. So we now know why people apart from Europeans, have EDAR: lack of sexual selection on women.

    That Korean women feel the need to drastically improve their looks suggests that there are more foreign women taking eligible Korean men than Jeremy Cooper allows.

  9. @bzbz
    Idk maybe you should ask Korean middle schoolers and their parents about their advanced passenger ferry safety system, eons ahead of what is present in Baltic and English channel ferries. Shrug. Or how their shopping malls can carry 8 storeys of mass with a foundation for 2 stories, stupid Europeans and gringos could never match Korean genius.

    Here’s the takeaway from my post: Asians don’t like being hectored by Westerners.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MJMD

    Idk maybe you should ask Korean middle schoolers and their parents about their advanced passenger ferry safety system, eons ahead of what is present in Baltic and English channel ferries...
     
    If I may refer Mr. bzbz to the following:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Costa_Concordia_disaster


    Or how their shopping malls can carry 8 storeys of mass with a foundation for 2 stories, stupid Europeans and gringos could never match Korean genius.
     
    Again, have to point out:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyatt_Regency_walkway_collapse

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Narrows_Bridge_(1940)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algo_Centre_Mall

    Somewhere in the process of building a modern industrialized nation completely from scratch beginning in the 1950s (when just about every building in their country over two stories tall had been dynamited, burned down, or riddled with machine gun fire), the South Koreans cut a few corners. No one is denying this: the Koreans themselves even make some marvelous movies about it these days (see, for example, Barking Dogs Never Bite)! But don't tell me that nobody in the West ever pads their pockets and waters down the booze, or pours some more sand into the cement (and with no less than a hundred years' head start to negate any excuse). Take Hacienda's hint about people in glass houses. Westerners taking a few Korean foibles as proof of enduring white superiority is scarcely any different than John Kerry lecturing Sergei Lavrov about how Russia violated international law by invading Crimea.

  10. there has yet to be found a solution of the problem which arises with financial and otherwise independence of women and world wide migration, given the HBD fact of different levels of physical male attractiveness between different populations. This is the basic problem which leads all the other problems with migration

    Read More
  11. @Rr
    Korea hasn't invaded or colonised other people's land, and it doesn't have settler communities in other people's land. Koreans only have Korea, unlike Europeans who've taken over 3 continents and nearly wiped out the natives of those lands.
    To this day Europeans still invade, dominate and destroy other people's countries.

    Invade, invite

    You can't have your cake and eat it.

    Sweden and Switzerland invaded and destroy other… ”countries”

    Ok, learning new things here.

    ”Europeans’ still invade, dominate and destroy”

    the english boy who born yesterday is guilty by the ”mistakes” (euphemism for sure) of ”your” people in the past…

    If you can blame fairly someone at least start to blaming western elites…

    Read More
    • Replies: @colm
    Sweden not invading and destroying other countries?

    Ask Gustaf Adolf or Karl XII.

    Switzerland also began from Schwyz, and did invade and take other Cantons.
  12. @Pseudonymic Handle
    There are lots of foreigners in kpop, but is harder to tell at a glance because they are all asian and they are taught korean.
    The entertainment companies tried bringing at least a black girl, but the public was not very interested.
    Still, hip hop is very big and they look up to african-americans even if the enthusiasm is sometimes gauche like using the n-word without proper permits.
    Most kpop groups (boys and girls) display homoerotic undertones between members. This is called fanservice and it's a big part of the kpop scene. They will not go further with the gay stuff because they try to sell kpop in muslim countries, so they have to keep up a more decent image then jpop.
    I see South Korea as being like the West in the 90's on these topics, but like in everything else, they are determined to catch up.
    They do have some conservative moderating factors: recent rural roots for almost everybody, universal male conscription and powerful evangelical churches.

    I’m a little concerned by the existence of agencies such as “Ministry of Gender Equality” – Japan, fortunately, had powerful societies to keep such destructive forces from picking up legs and China gives lip service while disappearing the malcontents. Korea has no such mechanism, though with the current outrage against the Goddess cult, hopefully it’ll also reduce the power of feminists there.

    Read More
    • Replies: @ogunsiron
    Japan, fortunately, had powerful societies to keep such destructive forces from picking up legs and China gives lip service while disappearing the malcontents
    ----
    Would you mind briefly expanding on the way Japan and China kept the disease at bay ?
  13. @keuril
    I wouldn't generally translate minjok as "race." The term (minzoku in Japanese, minzu in Chinese) consists of two Chinese characters: min 民, meaning people (as in the People's Republic); and jok 族, meaning clan, group, etc. Together, the meaning is what we would generally now call ethnicity; in older times perhaps "national stock" or something along those lines. If one doesn't mind a cumbersome term, "national ethnicity" would do. But in any case, the meaning is not what we think of nowadays as race crossing national and ethnic boundaries.

    Mingzu(民族) in Chinese is heavily slanted toward race, I’d say. Though perhaps these days its probably even more clannish to slant toward jiazu(家族) thanks to provincial clannishness.

    Read More
  14. @Rr
    Korea hasn't invaded or colonised other people's land, and it doesn't have settler communities in other people's land. Koreans only have Korea, unlike Europeans who've taken over 3 continents and nearly wiped out the natives of those lands.
    To this day Europeans still invade, dominate and destroy other people's countries.

    Invade, invite

    You can't have your cake and eat it.

    Not our fault you are losers of history.

    Korea hasn’t invaded or colonised other people’s land, and it doesn’t have settler communities in other people’s land.

    I wish this were true, but there are plenty of you pan-faced ingrates here

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Americans

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    Koreans are the same race as the original native inhabitants. The invasive ingrates are you.
  15. Surprised no one has mentioned so far: the Koreans do not have 6 million jooie cultists trying to subvert the society for their own advantage by pushing turd world immigration and debilitating diversity. This is not an accident. The Asians in general and the Chinese in particular are familiar with how the jooies operate: the vile Brit jooie Sassoon family ran the opium trade into China, resulting in occupation, humiliation, and several wars to expel the monsters.

    Read More
  16. 1.2 children per woman (South).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_fertility_rate

    Sounds like self-abolition.

    When the last South Korean joins his ancestors at least he’ll be 100% Korean.

    Priorities!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey anony-mouse,

    The suicide rates in Korea are shockingly high also. Depending on the authority, they are either in second place or first:
    https://data.oecd.org/healthstat/suicide-rates.htm
    http://apps.who.int/gho/data/node.main.MHSUICIDE?lang=en

    Does anyone know what's going on?

    Peace.
  17. So, it seems like most foreigners are foreign brides for Korean men in the countryside.

    Most of these offspring will become undistuinguishable from ethnic Koreans in the 2nd generation. Try making a distinction between the kids of Irish-Americans and Ukrainian-Americans.

    Non-East Asian immigration still seems incredibly marginal and basically a non-issue.

    Read More
  18. I’m less sanguine about South Korea’s future. Twenty years from now, ethnic Koreans will be a minority in the country’s elementary schools. That prediction may seem unbelievable, but demographic replacement can happen very fast in a country where native fertility is close to 1.2 children per woman and where immigration is now mainly from countries where the fertility rate is at least twice that level.

    The process is more advanced than what most people think. South Korea does not keep statistics on ethnic origin. Most statistics are about “foreign residents” and that figure is only 3-4%. The term “foreign resident” excludes, however, adult members of the second generation. It also excludes the growing population of undocumented immigrants.

    Yes, a little over half of all “foreign residents” are from China, and many of them are ethnic Koreans from Manchuria. But their fertility rate is very low. If you go into South Korean schools, particularly in rural areas, you’ll find that most of the “New Koreans” are of Filipino, Indonesian, or Cambodian origin, with growing numbers of Bangladeshis and Pakistanis. That is the future South Korea we’ll see twenty years from now.

    And this is assuming that current immigration flows will remain as they are now. But they won’t. They will shift more and more away from East Asia and towards Southeast Asia, South Asia, and Africa. That is where the pressure for out-migration is strongest.

    This change in population policy is recent—essentially since the year 2000—and reflects a profound ideological shift in the thinking of South Korea’s elites. This shift has been described by a Japanese researcher who was puzzled by the growing divergence between South Korea and Japan in terms of immigration policy:

    While Japan continues to restrict foreign nationals, in Korea, there has been an opening of opportunities for forces that seek an expansion in the acceptance of immigrants. The influence of the business community. in South Korea informs conservative political parties, while improvements in the treatment of foreigners from a human rights perspective, and the resulting influences of interests calling for the expansion of acceptance are reflected in progressive political parties. [...] the two dominant political parties, conservative and progressive, are actively in favor of accepting foreign workers.

    K. Kimura. (2016). Why Do Immigration Policies Differ Between  Japan and Korea? Sociology Study, August 2016, Vol. 6, No. 8, 490‐507 

    The key factor seems to be the profound Americanization of South Korean society, particularly at the level of elites in business, the media, and government. These elites are able to manufacture new social norms that are replicated throughout South Korean society, essentially through the desire of citizens to think and behave “normally.” Population replacement thus comes to be seen as something that is not only inevitable but also normal and desirable.

    Researchers point to the media, as well as academia and the entertainment industry, as the main tools for reshaping how South Koreans perceive their demographic future:

    Mainstream newspapers in South Korea have been a major shaper of the public opinion of diverse groups of immigrants whose presence is becoming increasingly visible in this country with a strong self-image as a mono-ethnic nation. The ways in which these new immigrants, typically lower class, are constructed in public discourses expose the nexus of citizenship, class and ethnicity.

    K. Park (2014). Foreigners or multicultural citizens? Press media’s construction of immigrants in South Korea, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37

    The result has been a rapid shift in public opinion that I described in my earlier column. Yoon et al. (2008) discussed the results of two surveys, one in 2003 and the other in 2007. To the statement “It is impossible for people who don’ t share South Korean traditions and customs fully to become South Korean”, 55% of the respondents agreed while 23% disagreed in 2003, but in 2007 30.8% of the respondents agreed while 32.9% disagreed. There was also an increase in hostility to public meetings of “ people prejudiced against racial and ethnical groups.” In 2004, 29.6% of respondents felt such meetings “should definitely not be allowed.” By 2007, the figure had risen to 46.5%.

    Yoon, I-J.,Y-H. Song, Y-J. Bae. (2008). South Koreans’ Attitudes toward Foreigners, Minorities and Multiculturalism, Paper prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Boston, MA from August 1-4, 2008.

    South Korea thus shows us how it is possible to reshape how an entire society sees itself simply by manipulating a limited number of “choke points” where social norms are created and replicated.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jason Liu
    I doubt South Korea will continue this rate of immigration until their kids become a minority in their own country, and there is probably at least some degree of assimilation.
    , @Jeremy Cooper

    The process is more advanced than what most people think. South Korea does not keep statistics on ethnic origin. Most statistics are about “foreign residents” and that figure is only 3-4%. The term “foreign resident” excludes, however, adult members of the second generation.
     
    There simply hasn't been enough time for there to be much of a second generation. If you look at the marriage statistics, 13% involve a foreigner. We can take that to mean that the other 87% are between two ethnic Koreans, since there hasn't been time for non-Koreans to grow up and get married. As you pointed out, immigration only really started after 2000, so people born to foreigners haven't had the time to grow up and get married yet.

    Unquestionably, however, the lack of data on ethnic origin will make it difficult to interpret demographic statistics in the future.

    It also excludes the growing population of undocumented immigrants.
     
    Growing to what? We don't have data to judge. I suspect that it might be much harder to go through life as an illegal immigrant in Korea compared to the US or Western Europe. Furthermore, many illegal immigrants come to work and then go back, which would not cause demographic change long term. When I saw South Asians, they were almost always groups of men, indicating that they might not be there for permanent settlement.

    And this is assuming that current immigration flows will remain as they are now. But they won’t. They will shift more and more away from East Asia and towards Southeast Asia, South Asia, and Africa. That is where the pressure for out-migration is strongest.

     

    And yet South Korea has completely locked out Syrian refugees. Why assume when there's even less international pressure to accept migrants they'll throw open the doors? They don't even need to believe in race, just holding on to the assumption that immigration should be a net financial benefit to the nation would preclude large scale settlement of Middle Easterners or Africans.

    If you go into South Korean schools, particularly in rural areas, you’ll find that most of the “New Koreans” are of Filipino, Indonesian, or Cambodian origin, with growing numbers of Bangladeshis and Pakistanis. That is the future South Korea we’ll see twenty years from now.
     
    Fine, but the country is 82% urbanized. It would be like, if in the United States, California and New York were completely white, but non-whites were increasing in Wyoming and Montana. We shouldn't exaggerate the change here.

    I note the troubling trends with regards to culture and public education. However, I'd caution against trying to understand Korean culture through reading a bunch of Western academics. Imagine trying to learn about the United States from scholars who focus on ethnic issues. There's simply a lot we don't know.

    I can say, however, from being on the ground, that TV is exclusively Korean, and all advertisements you see feature either Koreans or whites. How much of a grip can multiculturalism have on a nation if foreign residents are still invisible in the media? (Asians using whites in ads has been normal for decades and precedes any kind of societal acceptance of multiculturalism)

    What we do have is hard numbers, and they say that there have only been 100,000 naturalizations or so in a country of 50 million. That's 0.2%. Plus more than half are ethnic Koreans, Chinese, or Japanese. We can speculate on illegal immigrants or huge differentials in birth rates, but we really don't know how much of a factor any of that is.

    No doubt the country is changing, it's just the pace that is up to debate. And how big of a problem it is depends on the degree to which you think that kids who are half southeast Asian can assimilate.

    The disastrously low birth rate is another issue altogether.
    , @Wizard of Oz
    Sounds like Sweden - and if someone said that last par described Norway too (and ???) it wouldn't surprise me.
    , @ogunsiron
    Where do the japanese elite go to school ?
    I'm guessing that the japanese elites are overwhelmingly educated in Japan itself and they they have little interest in becoming part of the globo-elite. I imagine that the korean elites, especially when christian, are much more likely to come to the West to be educated.
  19. This is a pretty good article.

    Minjuk (as another commenter said, 民族), really means ‘ethnicity’, I would guess it is used in that way against kokumin or guomin, kuomin, the national people, the equivalent in Japan and Taiwan, as a reaction against the Japanese colonial period. You will still see many institutions with kookmin, the Korean equivalent in their names.

    The meaning of minjuk is a little like La Raza in the USA, except the Koreans are not invading, but at home.

    Must sleeping, but final point is that Korea and Vietnam have much in common. The language of the latter is grammatically from Chinese, that of Korea is not, but much vocabulary is.

    Both have many cognate words from China.

    Both also have a history of obeying or rejecting Chinese influence, always being on the edge in that.

    They also have similar tales from times of independence to losing it, particularly of romantic loyalty, so in that case, it is beyond phenotypic similarity, but also a similar background in culture.

    That was my penultimate point. Although they do none of the hideous things of Muslim invaders, some of the Korean protestant young try to vandalise Buddhist temples, so the latter require special protection near the cities.

    That is very ugly! Surely, a combination of influence from U.S. parent churches and western pop ‘culture’.

    Read More
    • Replies: @MarcZhang
    " The language of the latter is grammatically from Chinese, that of Korea is not, but much vocabulary is."

    Vietnamese is not Sino-Tibetan - it's Austroasiatic.
  20. @anony-mouse
    1.2 children per woman (South).

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_fertility_rate

    Sounds like self-abolition.

    When the last South Korean joins his ancestors at least he'll be 100% Korean.

    Priorities!

    Hey anony-mouse,

    The suicide rates in Korea are shockingly high also. Depending on the authority, they are either in second place or first:

    https://data.oecd.org/healthstat/suicide-rates.htm

    http://apps.who.int/gho/data/node.main.MHSUICIDE?lang=en

    Does anyone know what’s going on?

    Peace.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    East Asian countries always have very high suicide rates. We perceive the act of ending your life differently from most of the world. I'm surprised, for example, that Park Geun-hye hasn't leapt off a cliff yet. It would be the honorable thing to do, and it would perhaps dignify what remains of her family name.
    , @Hacienda
    The suicide rate is especially high with the senior generation. Korean capitalism is youth centered and many +50 employees are considered liabilities. So many voluntarily leave or are terminated from the work force. This causes many to attempt to open small businesses, which have a high failure rate.

    But there are other features of Korean culture which is unique to Korea that causes its high suicide rate. The intense academic competitiveness. The life-on-the-edge nature of Korea with N.Korea and major powers, 2 years mandatory military service where Korean men take nationalism up another notch. Korea is in the unfortunate position of trying to manage multiple relations with entities much larger than itself- China, Japan, US, Russia, even SE Asia. The highest rates of alcohol consumption in the world also helps.

    OTOH, there are forces at work that counter the suicide problem. Koreans still have family values, Buddhism and Confucianism remain powerful influences. The lawyers in Korea are really cream of Korea and the world. Becoming a lawyer in Korea is 100x more difficult there. Not the joke that it's become in the US.

    , @Art
    Talha,

    For what it is worth - the women in Korea are very aggressive - they wear the family pants. It may not be so much fun to be a Korean male?

    Art

    p.s. Same thing in Japan.
  21. Immigration patriots have long been fascinated by nation-states that appear to be resisting globalist pressure to abolish themselves, like Japan and Israel.

    LOL, the “Israelis” are immigrants from Egypt, Russia, Poland and Germany, you clown.

    https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/06/98/1d/06981da3849e7228a3569ee59f13c01d.jpg

    Read More
    • Replies: @DINDUNUFFINS
    LMFAO!What a bunch of afrocentric NONSENSE!Put down the pipe now before you hurt someone.
  22. It seems like such an ironic twist of fate, that I would love to emigrate to a country where ethno-nationalism was such a deeply ingrained aspect of the culture, but I would not be welcome there because of that very ethno-nationalism. I wonder if there are any provisions or precedents for becoming an “honorary” Korean or Japanese, if I swear in earnest to abjure my past and to fully assimilate. I believe this illustrates the flaw in any purely racialist ideology. Strong peoples, although of course heavily biased towards their own type, do not need to insist on 100% blood purity as a defining characteristic, but are ready to welcome a stranger into the family as long as he has the right “spirit” (which is really what is meant by “race” anyway).

    Marriage and family, especially respect for one’s elders and mutual aid towards one’s near relations, play a huge part in this. For instance, marrying a foreign girl need not be interpreted within the narrative of “raiding” that other country and taking away their womenfolk—an act which would rightly cause the men of that culture to react towards foreigners of your type with suspicion and anger. It could instead mean—should instead mean—accepting all the duties of a son and a brother, of caring for your in-laws and mingling your life with theirs, such that hence forth their battles become your battles. A girl can be a hero to her people by drawing a strong-blooded man into the family; she need not be a traitor to her people by skanking around with an exotic cad. As in all things, the bad is the corruption of the good. It’s all a matter of honor, reciprocity, patience, and humility; of doing things the right way, with the appropriate timing and tact. The timeless drama between the sexes always has this tragic element in it, so we need to do what we can to make the better version of the story prevail.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth


    For instance, marrying a foreign girl need not be interpreted within the narrative of “raiding” that other country and taking away their womenfolk—an act which would rightly cause the men of that culture to react towards foreigners of your type with suspicion and anger. It could instead mean—should instead mean—accepting all the duties of a son and a brother, of caring for your in-laws and mingling your life with theirs, such that hence forth their battles become your battles. A girl can be a hero to her people by drawing a strong-blooded man into the family;

     

    That's exactly what Tiki has been trying to say!

    http://assets-s3.usmagazine.com/uploads/assets/articles/69126-tiki-barbers-wife-traci-lynn-johnson-gives-birth-welcomes-baby-girl-brooklyn/1388244967_tiki-barber-traci-lynn-johnson-welcomed-baby_1.jpg
  23. For example, on a visit to Seoul National University, the top-rated school in the country, I noticed that the sign for the men’s bathroom was blue and that for females was pink. I thought about the kind of uproar that such signs would cause at an elite American university, and felt both amused at and sorry for my country.

    Oh it’s “your country” now? Your lack of historical knowledge makes your articles highly amusing, really doesn’t shine the best light on University College London..

    http://www.thescavenger.net/feminism-a-pop-culture-sp-9560/feminism-a-pop-culture/128-how-the-colour-pink-lost-its-masculinity.html

    Read More
  24. @Talha
    Hey anony-mouse,

    The suicide rates in Korea are shockingly high also. Depending on the authority, they are either in second place or first:
    https://data.oecd.org/healthstat/suicide-rates.htm
    http://apps.who.int/gho/data/node.main.MHSUICIDE?lang=en

    Does anyone know what's going on?

    Peace.

    East Asian countries always have very high suicide rates. We perceive the act of ending your life differently from most of the world. I’m surprised, for example, that Park Geun-hye hasn’t leapt off a cliff yet. It would be the honorable thing to do, and it would perhaps dignify what remains of her family name.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Thanks for that insight Daniel. I can understand why that would be the case given different predominate belief systems.

    I'm a big fan of Japanese cinema from the 50's, 60's and 70's - this theme features very prominently in them and yes, you often don't get a feeling for desperation, but rather honor and principle - though I don't know if that is the case today.

    One of my favorites is Hara-kiri (this is the last scene so - spoiler alert):
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7GDfzGeVnM

    But still, the fact that a person is 10 times more likely to kill themselves in Korea than in Mali, must be a bit disturbing, no?

    Peace.

    , @Che Guava
    Hello, Daniel.

    I’m surprised, for example, that Park Geun-hye hasn’t leapt off a cliff yet.
     
    You are making a very good point there, we all recall president Roh, who did the right thing when his wrong did not warrant such an extreme reaction.

    Many incidents in Japan and China, leading to the death of many in the last ten years, very few or no honour suicides in response.

    I do not know of one in the wake of the Fukushima disaster, likewise for the many people dead in the wake of bad building standards and quake in China.

    In North Korea, of course, they will just execute the person. As in the PRC at times.

    So, I think the tradition of honour-suicide only really survives in South Korea, perhaps in ROC (Taiwan), but I cannot recall a recent case there.

    Rho's honour-suicide is the last I can thinking of. It was some years ago.

    Give Anon (the artist formerly known as Priss) a break, he is a ranter, but surprisingly knowledgeable at times.

    “gaijin hunters” who have clear preferences
     
    :you are using a Japanese word, in a way that casts doubt on all of your other words.

    Would you liking to borrow a $3 bill to go with your general presentation? It would suit you.

    The comment about Han admixture in Koreans, it is true to an extent, but I can almost always tell the difference.
  25. @utu
    The girl in the top picture is not Korean.

    I worked in Seoul, Kyung-ju and Ok-Po in 2000, and I can personally attest than anyone who feels that they can predict, with certainty, an Asian’s persons ethnicity, is mistaken, and probably ridiculously arrogant.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Never stops us from trying, though. The Korean have so much Han admixture though, that its always a hilarious effort.
    , @White Guy In Japan
    Even funnier is when Asians can't tell each other apart.

    At my first teaching job in Japan, we got a new teacher who was Vietnamese-American. Japanese staff were confused, thought he was their new co-worker. Restaurant staff would talk to him and ignore me as I was ordering in Japanese.
  26. @Truth
    I worked in Seoul, Kyung-ju and Ok-Po in 2000, and I can personally attest than anyone who feels that they can predict, with certainty, an Asian's persons ethnicity, is mistaken, and probably ridiculously arrogant.

    Never stops us from trying, though. The Korean have so much Han admixture though, that its always a hilarious effort.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth
    Yes, there are certainly general differences, but an "Educated" Swipple, will always tell you that he knows better than you.
  27. @Daniel Chieh
    East Asian countries always have very high suicide rates. We perceive the act of ending your life differently from most of the world. I'm surprised, for example, that Park Geun-hye hasn't leapt off a cliff yet. It would be the honorable thing to do, and it would perhaps dignify what remains of her family name.

    Thanks for that insight Daniel. I can understand why that would be the case given different predominate belief systems.

    I’m a big fan of Japanese cinema from the 50′s, 60′s and 70′s – this theme features very prominently in them and yes, you often don’t get a feeling for desperation, but rather honor and principle – though I don’t know if that is the case today.

    One of my favorites is Hara-kiri (this is the last scene so – spoiler alert):

    But still, the fact that a person is 10 times more likely to kill themselves in Korea than in Mali, must be a bit disturbing, no?

    Peace.

    Read More
  28. @Talha
    Hey anony-mouse,

    The suicide rates in Korea are shockingly high also. Depending on the authority, they are either in second place or first:
    https://data.oecd.org/healthstat/suicide-rates.htm
    http://apps.who.int/gho/data/node.main.MHSUICIDE?lang=en

    Does anyone know what's going on?

    Peace.

    The suicide rate is especially high with the senior generation. Korean capitalism is youth centered and many +50 employees are considered liabilities. So many voluntarily leave or are terminated from the work force. This causes many to attempt to open small businesses, which have a high failure rate.

    But there are other features of Korean culture which is unique to Korea that causes its high suicide rate. The intense academic competitiveness. The life-on-the-edge nature of Korea with N.Korea and major powers, 2 years mandatory military service where Korean men take nationalism up another notch. Korea is in the unfortunate position of trying to manage multiple relations with entities much larger than itself- China, Japan, US, Russia, even SE Asia. The highest rates of alcohol consumption in the world also helps.

    OTOH, there are forces at work that counter the suicide problem. Koreans still have family values, Buddhism and Confucianism remain powerful influences. The lawyers in Korea are really cream of Korea and the world. Becoming a lawyer in Korea is 100x more difficult there. Not the joke that it’s become in the US.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ivan K.

    [T]here are other features of Korean culture which is unique to Korea that causes its high suicide rate. The intense academic competitiveness.
     
    I wonder what has changed since 2003 when the following commentary on Korean education has been written :

    Charles Harvie, Hyun-Hoon Lee: Korea’s Economic Miracle: Fading or Reviving :


    Despite the high degree of educational attainment, Korean education has many intrinsic defects. It has been suggested, for example, that the great enthusiasm for education among Koreans, which is not so common in other countries, is not because of the knowledge and values they can acquire at school, but because they want to get into top-rank universities as hakyeon, or alma mater linkage, is highly important in business life. …… It is also worthy to note that learning has traditionally been by rote, with little emphasis on individual thinking and creativity. Hence the current education system has been criticised for producing students who may excel in subjects involving straightforward calculations but are unidimensional in their thinking and unable to do tasks requiring analytical reasoning and creativeness. This is in part due to the fact that the government over-regulates the school curriculum and the university entrance mechanism, resulting in homogeneous education throughout the country.
    Once students are admitted to a university or a college they no longer have to study hard because graduate certificates, students’ main reason for entering university, are awarded to most final-year students. According to Lee (2001), university is treated as a four-year holiday rather than a time for personal growth and introspection. Indeed Korean firms complain that they have to retrain the graduates that enter their workforce. For example a study by the Korea Research Institute for Education and Training revealed that about 30 per cent of personnel managers and 58 per cent of college students regard college education as an inadequate breeding ground for the level of talent required by business (Korea Herald, 20 December 2000). Korean universities have also been criticised for carrying out very little research (OECD and World Bank, 2000).
     
    If you read this, I hope you'll tell me what in what sense is Korean academia intensely competitive nowadays. And perhaps you know something about how has the change occurred.
  29. @Peter Frost
    I'm less sanguine about South Korea's future. Twenty years from now, ethnic Koreans will be a minority in the country's elementary schools. That prediction may seem unbelievable, but demographic replacement can happen very fast in a country where native fertility is close to 1.2 children per woman and where immigration is now mainly from countries where the fertility rate is at least twice that level.

    The process is more advanced than what most people think. South Korea does not keep statistics on ethnic origin. Most statistics are about "foreign residents" and that figure is only 3-4%. The term "foreign resident" excludes, however, adult members of the second generation. It also excludes the growing population of undocumented immigrants.

    Yes, a little over half of all "foreign residents" are from China, and many of them are ethnic Koreans from Manchuria. But their fertility rate is very low. If you go into South Korean schools, particularly in rural areas, you'll find that most of the "New Koreans" are of Filipino, Indonesian, or Cambodian origin, with growing numbers of Bangladeshis and Pakistanis. That is the future South Korea we'll see twenty years from now.

    And this is assuming that current immigration flows will remain as they are now. But they won't. They will shift more and more away from East Asia and towards Southeast Asia, South Asia, and Africa. That is where the pressure for out-migration is strongest.

    This change in population policy is recent—essentially since the year 2000—and reflects a profound ideological shift in the thinking of South Korea's elites. This shift has been described by a Japanese researcher who was puzzled by the growing divergence between South Korea and Japan in terms of immigration policy:

    While Japan continues to restrict foreign nationals, in Korea, there has been an opening of opportunities for forces that seek an expansion in the acceptance of immigrants. The influence of the business community. in South Korea informs conservative political parties, while improvements in the treatment of foreigners from a human rights perspective, and the resulting influences of interests calling for the expansion of acceptance are reflected in progressive political parties. [...] the two dominant political parties, conservative and progressive, are actively in favor of accepting foreign workers.

     

    K. Kimura. (2016). Why Do Immigration Policies Differ Between  Japan and Korea? Sociology Study, August 2016, Vol. 6, No. 8, 490‐507 

    The key factor seems to be the profound Americanization of South Korean society, particularly at the level of elites in business, the media, and government. These elites are able to manufacture new social norms that are replicated throughout South Korean society, essentially through the desire of citizens to think and behave "normally." Population replacement thus comes to be seen as something that is not only inevitable but also normal and desirable.

    Researchers point to the media, as well as academia and the entertainment industry, as the main tools for reshaping how South Koreans perceive their demographic future:

    Mainstream newspapers in South Korea have been a major shaper of the public opinion of diverse groups of immigrants whose presence is becoming increasingly visible in this country with a strong self-image as a mono-ethnic nation. The ways in which these new immigrants, typically lower class, are constructed in public discourses expose the nexus of citizenship, class and ethnicity.

     

    K. Park (2014). Foreigners or multicultural citizens? Press media's construction of immigrants in South Korea, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37

    The result has been a rapid shift in public opinion that I described in my earlier column. Yoon et al. (2008) discussed the results of two surveys, one in 2003 and the other in 2007. To the statement "It is impossible for people who don' t share South Korean traditions and customs fully to become South Korean", 55% of the respondents agreed while 23% disagreed in 2003, but in 2007 30.8% of the respondents agreed while 32.9% disagreed. There was also an increase in hostility to public meetings of “ people prejudiced against racial and ethnical groups.” In 2004, 29.6% of respondents felt such meetings “should definitely not be allowed.” By 2007, the figure had risen to 46.5%.

    Yoon, I-J.,Y-H. Song, Y-J. Bae. (2008). South Koreans' Attitudes toward Foreigners, Minorities and Multiculturalism, Paper prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Boston, MA from August 1-4, 2008.

    South Korea thus shows us how it is possible to reshape how an entire society sees itself simply by manipulating a limited number of "choke points" where social norms are created and replicated.

    I doubt South Korea will continue this rate of immigration until their kids become a minority in their own country, and there is probably at least some degree of assimilation.

    Read More
  30. @Talha
    Hey anony-mouse,

    The suicide rates in Korea are shockingly high also. Depending on the authority, they are either in second place or first:
    https://data.oecd.org/healthstat/suicide-rates.htm
    http://apps.who.int/gho/data/node.main.MHSUICIDE?lang=en

    Does anyone know what's going on?

    Peace.

    Talha,

    For what it is worth – the women in Korea are very aggressive – they wear the family pants. It may not be so much fun to be a Korean male?

    Art

    p.s. Same thing in Japan.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Talha
    Hey Art,

    Possibly, the suicide rate for men is definitely higher in males (according to stats). But that seems to be reflected elsewhere also.

    Either way, it is a sad state of affairs. I was reading Hacienda's comments and my eyes started to well up at the despair some of those older men may be feeling that takes them to do this.

    I really hope they are able to figure a way out - I like the Koreans (stuff like filial piety is still strong in them from what I can tell), I hope they won't rob humanity of their company by not sticking around.

    Peace.

  31. @Art
    Talha,

    For what it is worth - the women in Korea are very aggressive - they wear the family pants. It may not be so much fun to be a Korean male?

    Art

    p.s. Same thing in Japan.

    Hey Art,

    Possibly, the suicide rate for men is definitely higher in males (according to stats). But that seems to be reflected elsewhere also.

    Either way, it is a sad state of affairs. I was reading Hacienda’s comments and my eyes started to well up at the despair some of those older men may be feeling that takes them to do this.

    I really hope they are able to figure a way out – I like the Koreans (stuff like filial piety is still strong in them from what I can tell), I hope they won’t rob humanity of their company by not sticking around.

    Peace.

    Read More
  32. @Hacienda
    Well, that was a quick change. From rice farmers to tech, quality of life leading country. My wife recently went for a diagnosis on a growth in the uterus. She went to an American hospital and then to a Korean hospital. The American doctor simply told her she might have uterine cancer and should come back in three months. The Korean doctor told her she didn't have uterine cancer and the reasons why and gave her a 10 page report explaining her condition in detail along with dietary recommendations. Her impression was that quality of patient care is now much better in Korea than the US.

    There are about a thousand objective ways that Korea is now better than America- lack of crime being an obvious example. Yet Americans go to Korea preaching all the virtues of the West and still look down on Korea as a socially backward country. Shrug.

    I don’t think it’s Americans going to Korea and preaching so much as Koreans appropriating Western technology and, along with that, embracing some of the sillier social trends. And these “thousand objective ways that Korea is now better” do not seem to be deterring large flows of migration in what would be the wrong direction for some reason (I wish they would).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hacienda
    There's some accuracy to what you say. I also see quite a bit of preachiness among Westerners in Korea, like among ESL teachers on Youtube and Westerners blogging in Korea. And don't get me started on Mormon missionaries, please.

    The Korean response, at least among the powerful, has been measured and conservative. As you'd expect. Like limiting foreigner access to Korean internet sites. The general Korean masses tend to like foreigners, but at a distance. The masses of Korean fools? Who cares about them? Just try to limit the damage they cause.

  33. @Peter Frost
    I'm less sanguine about South Korea's future. Twenty years from now, ethnic Koreans will be a minority in the country's elementary schools. That prediction may seem unbelievable, but demographic replacement can happen very fast in a country where native fertility is close to 1.2 children per woman and where immigration is now mainly from countries where the fertility rate is at least twice that level.

    The process is more advanced than what most people think. South Korea does not keep statistics on ethnic origin. Most statistics are about "foreign residents" and that figure is only 3-4%. The term "foreign resident" excludes, however, adult members of the second generation. It also excludes the growing population of undocumented immigrants.

    Yes, a little over half of all "foreign residents" are from China, and many of them are ethnic Koreans from Manchuria. But their fertility rate is very low. If you go into South Korean schools, particularly in rural areas, you'll find that most of the "New Koreans" are of Filipino, Indonesian, or Cambodian origin, with growing numbers of Bangladeshis and Pakistanis. That is the future South Korea we'll see twenty years from now.

    And this is assuming that current immigration flows will remain as they are now. But they won't. They will shift more and more away from East Asia and towards Southeast Asia, South Asia, and Africa. That is where the pressure for out-migration is strongest.

    This change in population policy is recent—essentially since the year 2000—and reflects a profound ideological shift in the thinking of South Korea's elites. This shift has been described by a Japanese researcher who was puzzled by the growing divergence between South Korea and Japan in terms of immigration policy:

    While Japan continues to restrict foreign nationals, in Korea, there has been an opening of opportunities for forces that seek an expansion in the acceptance of immigrants. The influence of the business community. in South Korea informs conservative political parties, while improvements in the treatment of foreigners from a human rights perspective, and the resulting influences of interests calling for the expansion of acceptance are reflected in progressive political parties. [...] the two dominant political parties, conservative and progressive, are actively in favor of accepting foreign workers.

     

    K. Kimura. (2016). Why Do Immigration Policies Differ Between  Japan and Korea? Sociology Study, August 2016, Vol. 6, No. 8, 490‐507 

    The key factor seems to be the profound Americanization of South Korean society, particularly at the level of elites in business, the media, and government. These elites are able to manufacture new social norms that are replicated throughout South Korean society, essentially through the desire of citizens to think and behave "normally." Population replacement thus comes to be seen as something that is not only inevitable but also normal and desirable.

    Researchers point to the media, as well as academia and the entertainment industry, as the main tools for reshaping how South Koreans perceive their demographic future:

    Mainstream newspapers in South Korea have been a major shaper of the public opinion of diverse groups of immigrants whose presence is becoming increasingly visible in this country with a strong self-image as a mono-ethnic nation. The ways in which these new immigrants, typically lower class, are constructed in public discourses expose the nexus of citizenship, class and ethnicity.

     

    K. Park (2014). Foreigners or multicultural citizens? Press media's construction of immigrants in South Korea, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37

    The result has been a rapid shift in public opinion that I described in my earlier column. Yoon et al. (2008) discussed the results of two surveys, one in 2003 and the other in 2007. To the statement "It is impossible for people who don' t share South Korean traditions and customs fully to become South Korean", 55% of the respondents agreed while 23% disagreed in 2003, but in 2007 30.8% of the respondents agreed while 32.9% disagreed. There was also an increase in hostility to public meetings of “ people prejudiced against racial and ethnical groups.” In 2004, 29.6% of respondents felt such meetings “should definitely not be allowed.” By 2007, the figure had risen to 46.5%.

    Yoon, I-J.,Y-H. Song, Y-J. Bae. (2008). South Koreans' Attitudes toward Foreigners, Minorities and Multiculturalism, Paper prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Boston, MA from August 1-4, 2008.

    South Korea thus shows us how it is possible to reshape how an entire society sees itself simply by manipulating a limited number of "choke points" where social norms are created and replicated.

    The process is more advanced than what most people think. South Korea does not keep statistics on ethnic origin. Most statistics are about “foreign residents” and that figure is only 3-4%. The term “foreign resident” excludes, however, adult members of the second generation.

    There simply hasn’t been enough time for there to be much of a second generation. If you look at the marriage statistics, 13% involve a foreigner. We can take that to mean that the other 87% are between two ethnic Koreans, since there hasn’t been time for non-Koreans to grow up and get married. As you pointed out, immigration only really started after 2000, so people born to foreigners haven’t had the time to grow up and get married yet.

    Unquestionably, however, the lack of data on ethnic origin will make it difficult to interpret demographic statistics in the future.

    It also excludes the growing population of undocumented immigrants.

    Growing to what? We don’t have data to judge. I suspect that it might be much harder to go through life as an illegal immigrant in Korea compared to the US or Western Europe. Furthermore, many illegal immigrants come to work and then go back, which would not cause demographic change long term. When I saw South Asians, they were almost always groups of men, indicating that they might not be there for permanent settlement.

    And this is assuming that current immigration flows will remain as they are now. But they won’t. They will shift more and more away from East Asia and towards Southeast Asia, South Asia, and Africa. That is where the pressure for out-migration is strongest.

    And yet South Korea has completely locked out Syrian refugees. Why assume when there’s even less international pressure to accept migrants they’ll throw open the doors? They don’t even need to believe in race, just holding on to the assumption that immigration should be a net financial benefit to the nation would preclude large scale settlement of Middle Easterners or Africans.

    If you go into South Korean schools, particularly in rural areas, you’ll find that most of the “New Koreans” are of Filipino, Indonesian, or Cambodian origin, with growing numbers of Bangladeshis and Pakistanis. That is the future South Korea we’ll see twenty years from now.

    Fine, but the country is 82% urbanized. It would be like, if in the United States, California and New York were completely white, but non-whites were increasing in Wyoming and Montana. We shouldn’t exaggerate the change here.

    I note the troubling trends with regards to culture and public education. However, I’d caution against trying to understand Korean culture through reading a bunch of Western academics. Imagine trying to learn about the United States from scholars who focus on ethnic issues. There’s simply a lot we don’t know.

    I can say, however, from being on the ground, that TV is exclusively Korean, and all advertisements you see feature either Koreans or whites. How much of a grip can multiculturalism have on a nation if foreign residents are still invisible in the media? (Asians using whites in ads has been normal for decades and precedes any kind of societal acceptance of multiculturalism)

    What we do have is hard numbers, and they say that there have only been 100,000 naturalizations or so in a country of 50 million. That’s 0.2%. Plus more than half are ethnic Koreans, Chinese, or Japanese. We can speculate on illegal immigrants or huge differentials in birth rates, but we really don’t know how much of a factor any of that is.

    No doubt the country is changing, it’s just the pace that is up to debate. And how big of a problem it is depends on the degree to which you think that kids who are half southeast Asian can assimilate.

    The disastrously low birth rate is another issue altogether.

    Read More
  34. @Marcus
    She might be, plastic surgery is omnipresent there.

    https://koreaexpose.com/voices/a-nation-as-beautiful-as-a-rolex-knockoff/

    This is little unfair because they are trying for a look that Korean men would appreciate even if they had never seen a European

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2332785/Dangerous-double-jaw-surgery-rise-South-Korea-women-encouraged-face-risks-bone-cutting-procedure-beauty.html

    http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms11616 Consistent with the effect of EDAR on chin protrusion, we documented alterations of mandible length in mice with modified Edar function

    OK, women under pressure to look beautiful reduce their mandible protrusion, and Koreans have EDARed lantern jaws. Rolexes, sorry, Europeans, don’t have EDAR. So we now know why people apart from Europeans, have EDAR: lack of sexual selection on women.

    That Korean women feel the need to drastically improve their looks suggests that there are more foreign women taking eligible Korean men than Jeremy Cooper allows.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    The concept of aesthetics developed in the West for good reason, also the notion of romantic love. Other societies treat body as source of shame or derision (compare Judeo-Christian attitudes to Hellenic) and relationships as purely reproduction or transactional.
  35. @Sean
    https://koreaexpose.com/voices/a-nation-as-beautiful-as-a-rolex-knockoff/

    This is little unfair because they are trying for a look that Korean men would appreciate even if they had never seen a European

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2332785/Dangerous-double-jaw-surgery-rise-South-Korea-women-encouraged-face-risks-bone-cutting-procedure-beauty.html


    http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms11616 Consistent with the effect of EDAR on chin protrusion, we documented alterations of mandible length in mice with modified Edar function
     
    OK, women under pressure to look beautiful reduce their mandible protrusion, and Koreans have EDARed lantern jaws. Rolexes, sorry, Europeans, don't have EDAR. So we now know why people apart from Europeans, have EDAR: lack of sexual selection on women.

    That Korean women feel the need to drastically improve their looks suggests that there are more foreign women taking eligible Korean men than Jeremy Cooper allows.

    The concept of aesthetics developed in the West for good reason, also the notion of romantic love. Other societies treat body as source of shame or derision (compare Judeo-Christian attitudes to Hellenic) and relationships as purely reproduction or transactional.

    Read More
  36. @Intelligent Dasein
    It seems like such an ironic twist of fate, that I would love to emigrate to a country where ethno-nationalism was such a deeply ingrained aspect of the culture, but I would not be welcome there because of that very ethno-nationalism. I wonder if there are any provisions or precedents for becoming an "honorary" Korean or Japanese, if I swear in earnest to abjure my past and to fully assimilate. I believe this illustrates the flaw in any purely racialist ideology. Strong peoples, although of course heavily biased towards their own type, do not need to insist on 100% blood purity as a defining characteristic, but are ready to welcome a stranger into the family as long as he has the right "spirit" (which is really what is meant by "race" anyway).

    Marriage and family, especially respect for one's elders and mutual aid towards one's near relations, play a huge part in this. For instance, marrying a foreign girl need not be interpreted within the narrative of "raiding" that other country and taking away their womenfolk---an act which would rightly cause the men of that culture to react towards foreigners of your type with suspicion and anger. It could instead mean---should instead mean---accepting all the duties of a son and a brother, of caring for your in-laws and mingling your life with theirs, such that hence forth their battles become your battles. A girl can be a hero to her people by drawing a strong-blooded man into the family; she need not be a traitor to her people by skanking around with an exotic cad. As in all things, the bad is the corruption of the good. It's all a matter of honor, reciprocity, patience, and humility; of doing things the right way, with the appropriate timing and tact. The timeless drama between the sexes always has this tragic element in it, so we need to do what we can to make the better version of the story prevail.

    For instance, marrying a foreign girl need not be interpreted within the narrative of “raiding” that other country and taking away their womenfolk—an act which would rightly cause the men of that culture to react towards foreigners of your type with suspicion and anger. It could instead mean—should instead mean—accepting all the duties of a son and a brother, of caring for your in-laws and mingling your life with theirs, such that hence forth their battles become your battles. A girl can be a hero to her people by drawing a strong-blooded man into the family;

    That’s exactly what Tiki has been trying to say!

    http://assets-s3.usmagazine.com/uploads/assets/articles/69126-tiki-barbers-wife-traci-lynn-johnson-gives-birth-welcomes-baby-girl-brooklyn/1388244967_tiki-barber-traci-lynn-johnson-welcomed-baby_1.jpg

    Read More
  37. @Daniel Chieh
    Never stops us from trying, though. The Korean have so much Han admixture though, that its always a hilarious effort.

    Yes, there are certainly general differences, but an “Educated” Swipple, will always tell you that he knows better than you.

    Read More
  38. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    I hoped you’d give us the contact info of the main picture’s lady.

    I know marriage between people having the same surname, even not otherwise related, was illegal in South Korea.
    Wonder if the prohibition is still in place, and what was its rationale.

    Read More
  39. @Some Economist
    I don't think it's Americans going to Korea and preaching so much as Koreans appropriating Western technology and, along with that, embracing some of the sillier social trends. And these "thousand objective ways that Korea is now better" do not seem to be deterring large flows of migration in what would be the wrong direction for some reason (I wish they would).

    There’s some accuracy to what you say. I also see quite a bit of preachiness among Westerners in Korea, like among ESL teachers on Youtube and Westerners blogging in Korea. And don’t get me started on Mormon missionaries, please.

    The Korean response, at least among the powerful, has been measured and conservative. As you’d expect. Like limiting foreigner access to Korean internet sites. The general Korean masses tend to like foreigners, but at a distance. The masses of Korean fools? Who cares about them? Just try to limit the damage they cause.

    Read More
  40. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Marcus
    Not our fault you are losers of history.

    Korea hasn’t invaded or colonised other people’s land, and it doesn’t have settler communities in other people’s land.
     
    I wish this were true, but there are plenty of you pan-faced ingrates here
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_Americans

    Koreans are the same race as the original native inhabitants. The invasive ingrates are you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Erikson
    Yes, all the so-called "native Americans" are just descendants of Asian immigrants.
  41. @Rr
    Korea hasn't invaded or colonised other people's land, and it doesn't have settler communities in other people's land. Koreans only have Korea, unlike Europeans who've taken over 3 continents and nearly wiped out the natives of those lands.
    To this day Europeans still invade, dominate and destroy other people's countries.

    Invade, invite

    You can't have your cake and eat it.

    “unlike Europeans who’ve taken over 3 continents and nearly wiped out the natives of those lands”

    Please present proof for your “nearly wiped out”.
    Everywhere I look there are plenty of those dimwitted natives, too many in fact.

    The truth is those natives were better off with the Europeans, just look at those natives now.
    Not a pretty sight.

    Read More
  42. @Marcus
    The concept of aesthetics developed in the West for good reason, also the notion of romantic love. Other societies treat body as source of shame or derision (compare Judeo-Christian attitudes to Hellenic) and relationships as purely reproduction or transactional.

    There is no such thing as “Judeo-Christian”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Marcus
    Christianity and Islam are bastard children of Judaism, with some paganism and Platonism mixed in. Korea has been heavily infected by Christianity, even the Kim family has a Christian background.
  43. @Hacienda
    Here's the takeaway from my post: Asians don't like being hectored by Westerners.

    Idk maybe you should ask Korean middle schoolers and their parents about their advanced passenger ferry safety system, eons ahead of what is present in Baltic and English channel ferries…

    If I may refer Mr. bzbz to the following:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Costa_Concordia_disaster

    Or how their shopping malls can carry 8 storeys of mass with a foundation for 2 stories, stupid Europeans and gringos could never match Korean genius.

    Again, have to point out:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyatt_Regency_walkway_collapse

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Narrows_Bridge_(1940)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algo_Centre_Mall

    Somewhere in the process of building a modern industrialized nation completely from scratch beginning in the 1950s (when just about every building in their country over two stories tall had been dynamited, burned down, or riddled with machine gun fire), the South Koreans cut a few corners. No one is denying this: the Koreans themselves even make some marvelous movies about it these days (see, for example, Barking Dogs Never Bite)! But don’t tell me that nobody in the West ever pads their pockets and waters down the booze, or pours some more sand into the cement (and with no less than a hundred years’ head start to negate any excuse). Take Hacienda’s hint about people in glass houses. Westerners taking a few Korean foibles as proof of enduring white superiority is scarcely any different than John Kerry lecturing Sergei Lavrov about how Russia violated international law by invading Crimea.

    Read More
    • Replies: @nxjxj
    Moron you know that ships capsize when they are holed in numerous bulkheads right?
  44. @Peter Frost
    I'm less sanguine about South Korea's future. Twenty years from now, ethnic Koreans will be a minority in the country's elementary schools. That prediction may seem unbelievable, but demographic replacement can happen very fast in a country where native fertility is close to 1.2 children per woman and where immigration is now mainly from countries where the fertility rate is at least twice that level.

    The process is more advanced than what most people think. South Korea does not keep statistics on ethnic origin. Most statistics are about "foreign residents" and that figure is only 3-4%. The term "foreign resident" excludes, however, adult members of the second generation. It also excludes the growing population of undocumented immigrants.

    Yes, a little over half of all "foreign residents" are from China, and many of them are ethnic Koreans from Manchuria. But their fertility rate is very low. If you go into South Korean schools, particularly in rural areas, you'll find that most of the "New Koreans" are of Filipino, Indonesian, or Cambodian origin, with growing numbers of Bangladeshis and Pakistanis. That is the future South Korea we'll see twenty years from now.

    And this is assuming that current immigration flows will remain as they are now. But they won't. They will shift more and more away from East Asia and towards Southeast Asia, South Asia, and Africa. That is where the pressure for out-migration is strongest.

    This change in population policy is recent—essentially since the year 2000—and reflects a profound ideological shift in the thinking of South Korea's elites. This shift has been described by a Japanese researcher who was puzzled by the growing divergence between South Korea and Japan in terms of immigration policy:

    While Japan continues to restrict foreign nationals, in Korea, there has been an opening of opportunities for forces that seek an expansion in the acceptance of immigrants. The influence of the business community. in South Korea informs conservative political parties, while improvements in the treatment of foreigners from a human rights perspective, and the resulting influences of interests calling for the expansion of acceptance are reflected in progressive political parties. [...] the two dominant political parties, conservative and progressive, are actively in favor of accepting foreign workers.

     

    K. Kimura. (2016). Why Do Immigration Policies Differ Between  Japan and Korea? Sociology Study, August 2016, Vol. 6, No. 8, 490‐507 

    The key factor seems to be the profound Americanization of South Korean society, particularly at the level of elites in business, the media, and government. These elites are able to manufacture new social norms that are replicated throughout South Korean society, essentially through the desire of citizens to think and behave "normally." Population replacement thus comes to be seen as something that is not only inevitable but also normal and desirable.

    Researchers point to the media, as well as academia and the entertainment industry, as the main tools for reshaping how South Koreans perceive their demographic future:

    Mainstream newspapers in South Korea have been a major shaper of the public opinion of diverse groups of immigrants whose presence is becoming increasingly visible in this country with a strong self-image as a mono-ethnic nation. The ways in which these new immigrants, typically lower class, are constructed in public discourses expose the nexus of citizenship, class and ethnicity.

     

    K. Park (2014). Foreigners or multicultural citizens? Press media's construction of immigrants in South Korea, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37

    The result has been a rapid shift in public opinion that I described in my earlier column. Yoon et al. (2008) discussed the results of two surveys, one in 2003 and the other in 2007. To the statement "It is impossible for people who don' t share South Korean traditions and customs fully to become South Korean", 55% of the respondents agreed while 23% disagreed in 2003, but in 2007 30.8% of the respondents agreed while 32.9% disagreed. There was also an increase in hostility to public meetings of “ people prejudiced against racial and ethnical groups.” In 2004, 29.6% of respondents felt such meetings “should definitely not be allowed.” By 2007, the figure had risen to 46.5%.

    Yoon, I-J.,Y-H. Song, Y-J. Bae. (2008). South Koreans' Attitudes toward Foreigners, Minorities and Multiculturalism, Paper prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Boston, MA from August 1-4, 2008.

    South Korea thus shows us how it is possible to reshape how an entire society sees itself simply by manipulating a limited number of "choke points" where social norms are created and replicated.

    Sounds like Sweden – and if someone said that last par described Norway too (and ???) it wouldn’t surprise me.

    Read More
  45. Jan 4, 2017 WebTVAsia Awards 2016 travel report in KOREA – Part 2

    Day 2 for a travel report of my trip to Seoul Korea for the WebTVAsia Awards 2016. My journey started on the 24th of November when we flew from Bangkok to Seoul, Korea.

    Read More
  46. South Korea in fact has much to recommend to social conservatives, particularly those who worry that Western children are swimming around in smut as soon as they’re old enough to turn on a TV or log on to the internet.

    LOL – South Korea is the world’s biggest per capita consumer of porn. Thinly disguised prostitution is everywhere in South Korea. Prostitution was outlawed in the early 2000s under pressure from the US State Department, but all it’s accomplished is the proliferation of euphemistic disguises. The law is also resented as being the product of US meddling.

    Read More
  47. @MJMD

    Idk maybe you should ask Korean middle schoolers and their parents about their advanced passenger ferry safety system, eons ahead of what is present in Baltic and English channel ferries...
     
    If I may refer Mr. bzbz to the following:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Costa_Concordia_disaster


    Or how their shopping malls can carry 8 storeys of mass with a foundation for 2 stories, stupid Europeans and gringos could never match Korean genius.
     
    Again, have to point out:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyatt_Regency_walkway_collapse

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Narrows_Bridge_(1940)

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algo_Centre_Mall

    Somewhere in the process of building a modern industrialized nation completely from scratch beginning in the 1950s (when just about every building in their country over two stories tall had been dynamited, burned down, or riddled with machine gun fire), the South Koreans cut a few corners. No one is denying this: the Koreans themselves even make some marvelous movies about it these days (see, for example, Barking Dogs Never Bite)! But don't tell me that nobody in the West ever pads their pockets and waters down the booze, or pours some more sand into the cement (and with no less than a hundred years' head start to negate any excuse). Take Hacienda's hint about people in glass houses. Westerners taking a few Korean foibles as proof of enduring white superiority is scarcely any different than John Kerry lecturing Sergei Lavrov about how Russia violated international law by invading Crimea.

    Moron you know that ships capsize when they are holed in numerous bulkheads right?

    Read More
    • Replies: @MJMD

    [Y]ou know that ships capsize when they are holed in numerous bulkheads right?
     
    Yeah, that's something that can happen when you turn off the navigation computer and give the Moldovan whore you're banging a turn at the wheel. Your point?

    If you're saying that a comparison between the two disasters is meaningless because one was the result of complete stupidity on the part of the captain while the other was a structural safety failure (thus suggesting that European organizational superiority, but for human error, would have won the day), may I point out that the advanced passenger ferry safety systems found on Baltic and English channel ferries that bzbz mentions were largely instituted in response to the deadliest maritime disaster since the Titanic, the sinking of the MS Estonia, where 852 people died as a result of technical failures similar to the ones that sunk the Sewol. I expect that most Korean passenger lines are in the process of dramatically upgrading safety procedures as we speak. People are pretty much the same everywhere: we're all very good at closing the barn door after the horse has already bolted.
  48. @Truth
    I worked in Seoul, Kyung-ju and Ok-Po in 2000, and I can personally attest than anyone who feels that they can predict, with certainty, an Asian's persons ethnicity, is mistaken, and probably ridiculously arrogant.

    Even funnier is when Asians can’t tell each other apart.

    At my first teaching job in Japan, we got a new teacher who was Vietnamese-American. Japanese staff were confused, thought he was their new co-worker. Restaurant staff would talk to him and ignore me as I was ordering in Japanese.

    Read More
  49. South Korea is the world’s biggest per capita consumer of porn.

    Much of it is Japanese, as production of the hard-core stuff is banned in the ROK.

    Thinly disguised prostitution is everywhere in South Korea.

    South Korea can thank the Japanese for that as well, as industrial-scale prostitution was introduced to the Korean Peninsula for the first time during the Japanese colonial period (1910-1945). The American military also helped keep the industry alive after Liberation, until the local economy started to take off in the 1970s.

    Prostitution was outlawed in the early 2000s under pressure from the US State Department, but all it’s accomplished is the proliferation of euphemistic disguises. The law is also resented as being the product of US meddling.

    Korea has always been a shrimp amongst whales. Koreans tend to follow the whims of the greater powers to which they have allied themselves, lest they get suddenly crushed.

    Read More
  50. @Santoculto
    Sweden and Switzerland invaded and destroy other... ''countries''

    Ok, learning new things here.

    ''Europeans' still invade, dominate and destroy''

    the english boy who born yesterday is guilty by the ''mistakes'' (euphemism for sure) of ''your'' people in the past...

    If you can blame fairly someone at least start to blaming western elites...

    Sweden not invading and destroying other countries?

    Ask Gustaf Adolf or Karl XII.

    Switzerland also began from Schwyz, and did invade and take other Cantons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Swedes invaded other white nations.
    , @Talha
    Hey colm,

    Yeah - invading Russia - what could possibly go wrong?

    Peace.
  51. From OECD sources, comparitively US is not that much diff from Korea.

    OECD International migration database 2014

    B11 Inflows of foreign population 2014
    3.16% 2599300 DEU B11
    0.50% 334734 FRA B11
    1.50% 983000 GBR B11
    0.62% 2032187 USA B11
    0.53% 672823 JPN B11
    1.60% 814106 KOR B11
    B12 Outflows of foreign population 2014
    0.49% 320000 GBR B12
    1.83% 1510668 DEU B12
    0.33% 425682 JPN B12
    1.06% 541030 KOR B12
    B15 Stock of foreign population 2014
    19.61% 16120330 DEU B15
    16.47% 10728000 GBR B15
    6.89% 22407056 USA B15
    3.34% 4243213 JPN B15
    4.29% 2183048 KOR B15

    Read More
  52. Anonymous says: • Website     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Do African men in China or Korea have a lot of problems finding women to sleep with?

    Read More
  53. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @colm
    Sweden not invading and destroying other countries?

    Ask Gustaf Adolf or Karl XII.

    Switzerland also began from Schwyz, and did invade and take other Cantons.

    Swedes invaded other white nations.

    Read More
  54. @nxjxj
    Moron you know that ships capsize when they are holed in numerous bulkheads right?

    [Y]ou know that ships capsize when they are holed in numerous bulkheads right?

    Yeah, that’s something that can happen when you turn off the navigation computer and give the Moldovan whore you’re banging a turn at the wheel. Your point?

    If you’re saying that a comparison between the two disasters is meaningless because one was the result of complete stupidity on the part of the captain while the other was a structural safety failure (thus suggesting that European organizational superiority, but for human error, would have won the day), may I point out that the advanced passenger ferry safety systems found on Baltic and English channel ferries that bzbz mentions were largely instituted in response to the deadliest maritime disaster since the Titanic, the sinking of the MS Estonia, where 852 people died as a result of technical failures similar to the ones that sunk the Sewol. I expect that most Korean passenger lines are in the process of dramatically upgrading safety procedures as we speak. People are pretty much the same everywhere: we’re all very good at closing the barn door after the horse has already bolted.

    Read More
  55. There simply hasn’t been enough time for there to be much of a second generation.

    Jeremy,

    There is already a large second generation of “New Koreans.” An article in 2011 commented on the phenomenon:

    In June, the government announced that the number of children with at least one parent of non-Korean heritage reached 150,000 this year, a number that has increased fourfold over the last four years. They are expected to number over 1.6 million by 2020, with a third of all children born that year the offspring of international unions. Aside from the serious problems of familial and racial discrimination, as well as the high rates of domestic violence already affecting migrant wives, a larger social policy problem brewing is the issue of successfully integrating these children. Due to discrimination, poorer language proficiency, and limited school support, they are facing below national average dropout rates of 20 percent in middle school and 40 percent in high school. This, along with a lack of social capital, suggests these children face a future as the country’s permanent, racialized underclass.

    Lim, F.J. (2011). Korea’s multicultural future? New Leaders Forum

    http://the-diplomat.com/new-leaders-forum/2011/07/20/south-koreas-multiethnic-future/

    A high school dropout in 2011 would definitely be an adult in 2017. I may have misled you by pointing to the year 2000 as the turning point in South Korean policy. That was when the government embraced multiculturalism and global immigration. But the shift in migration flows actually began in the mid-1990s.

    If you look at the marriage statistics, 13% involve a foreigner.

    The percentage is much higher in rural areas, as the above article notes. And it is in the rural areas where conditions are most conducive to family formation. South Korea’s urban areas are “population sinks” with very low fertility.

    I suspect that it might be much harder to go through life as an illegal immigrant in Korea compared to the US or Western Europe.

    It’s hard in the sense that they are underpaid, but the wages are still better than what they’d get in their home countries. But enforcement of immigration law has become steadily weaker, largely because of pressure from employers.

    In 2001, 77.4% of foreign workers were undocumented [illegal immigrants]. Ever since the “Employment Approval System” was enacted in 2004, the percentage of undocumented foreign workers has been approximately 50% . This number is relatively high compared with that of Japan (32%), Singapore (3%), and Taiwan (7%).

    Moon, S. (2010). Multicultural and Global Citizenship in the Transnational Age: The Case of South Korea, International Journal of Multicultural Education, 12, 1-15.

    http://ijme-journal.org/index.php/ijme/article/view/261/392

    I’d caution against trying to understand Korean culture through reading a bunch of Western academics.

    Most of the academics I cited are South Korean (Kimura is Japanese).

    TV is exclusively Korean, and all advertisements you see feature either Koreans or whites. How much of a grip can multiculturalism have on a nation if foreign residents are still invisible in the media?

    It’s important to distinguish between leading indicators and trailing indicators. When your favorite TV show goes multicultural, the big changes have already long been in place.

    What we do have is hard numbers, and they say that there have only been 100,000 naturalizations or so in a country of 50 million. That’s 0.2%. Plus more than half are ethnic Koreans, Chinese, or Japanese. We can speculate on illegal immigrants or huge differentials in birth rates, but we really don’t know how much of a factor any of that is.

    The rate of naturalization is relatively unimportant. The children of unnaturalized immigrants are not deported. And we have good data on fertility differentials.

    And how big of a problem it is depends on the degree to which you think that kids who are half southeast Asian can assimilate.

    Actually, they assimilate fairly well. That isn’t the problem. The problem is that they have trouble meeting the demands of the South Korean educational system. This is why the dropout rate is so high. “New Korean” children do well in subjects that require social interaction with other kids (music, painting, physical education). They do poorly in subjects that require abstract skills, like mathematics.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jeremy Cooper
    From the Diplomat article you cite

    In June, the government announced that the number of children with at least one parent of non-Korean heritage reached 150,000 this year, a number that has increased fourfold over the last four years. They are expected to number over 1.6 million by 2020, with a third of all children born that year the offspring of international unions.
     
    Ok, that's a lot higher than I expected. Even if you assume half involve a foreigner that is an ethnic Korean or Chinese, you still have about 17% of children with foreign origins by 2020.

    I personally don't think it's the end of the world, as Vietnam's test scores are actually pretty good. If these kids do poorly in school, it may have less to do with the ethnicity of their mothers than the fact that their fathers are unable to find wives in their own country, maybe because they're not very good providers. Differential birth rates by IQ is a huge issue even independent of immigration, and stupid Koreans having more children also brings down the national average.
  56. @Anonymous
    Koreans are the same race as the original native inhabitants. The invasive ingrates are you.

    Yes, all the so-called “native Americans” are just descendants of Asian immigrants.

    Read More
  57. @Wally
    There is no such thing as "Judeo-Christian".

    Christianity and Islam are bastard children of Judaism, with some paganism and Platonism mixed in. Korea has been heavily infected by Christianity, even the Kim family has a Christian background.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Wally
    I should have been more specific with your alleged "Judeo-Christian attitudes".

    There are no "Judeo-Christian" attitudes.
  58. @colm
    Sweden not invading and destroying other countries?

    Ask Gustaf Adolf or Karl XII.

    Switzerland also began from Schwyz, and did invade and take other Cantons.

    Hey colm,

    Yeah – invading Russia – what could possibly go wrong?

    Peace.

    Read More
  59. Not sure if troll or not, but pretty obviously East Asians and Native Americans are significantly different. As the article notes, even a simple smell test would find that idea to be pretty silly.

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/11/131120-science-native-american-people-migration-siberia-genetics/

    Read More
  60. @Peter Frost
    There simply hasn’t been enough time for there to be much of a second generation.

    Jeremy,

    There is already a large second generation of "New Koreans." An article in 2011 commented on the phenomenon:

    In June, the government announced that the number of children with at least one parent of non-Korean heritage reached 150,000 this year, a number that has increased fourfold over the last four years. They are expected to number over 1.6 million by 2020, with a third of all children born that year the offspring of international unions. Aside from the serious problems of familial and racial discrimination, as well as the high rates of domestic violence already affecting migrant wives, a larger social policy problem brewing is the issue of successfully integrating these children. Due to discrimination, poorer language proficiency, and limited school support, they are facing below national average dropout rates of 20 percent in middle school and 40 percent in high school. This, along with a lack of social capital, suggests these children face a future as the country’s permanent, racialized underclass.
     
    Lim, F.J. (2011). Korea’s multicultural future? New Leaders Forum
    http://the-diplomat.com/new-leaders-forum/2011/07/20/south-koreas-multiethnic-future/

    A high school dropout in 2011 would definitely be an adult in 2017. I may have misled you by pointing to the year 2000 as the turning point in South Korean policy. That was when the government embraced multiculturalism and global immigration. But the shift in migration flows actually began in the mid-1990s.

    If you look at the marriage statistics, 13% involve a foreigner.

    The percentage is much higher in rural areas, as the above article notes. And it is in the rural areas where conditions are most conducive to family formation. South Korea's urban areas are "population sinks" with very low fertility.

    I suspect that it might be much harder to go through life as an illegal immigrant in Korea compared to the US or Western Europe.

    It's hard in the sense that they are underpaid, but the wages are still better than what they'd get in their home countries. But enforcement of immigration law has become steadily weaker, largely because of pressure from employers.

    In 2001, 77.4% of foreign workers were undocumented [illegal immigrants]. Ever since the “Employment Approval System” was enacted in 2004, the percentage of undocumented foreign workers has been approximately 50% . This number is relatively high compared with that of Japan (32%), Singapore (3%), and Taiwan (7%).

     

    Moon, S. (2010). Multicultural and Global Citizenship in the Transnational Age: The Case of South Korea, International Journal of Multicultural Education, 12, 1-15.
    http://ijme-journal.org/index.php/ijme/article/view/261/392

    I’d caution against trying to understand Korean culture through reading a bunch of Western academics.

    Most of the academics I cited are South Korean (Kimura is Japanese).

    TV is exclusively Korean, and all advertisements you see feature either Koreans or whites. How much of a grip can multiculturalism have on a nation if foreign residents are still invisible in the media?

    It's important to distinguish between leading indicators and trailing indicators. When your favorite TV show goes multicultural, the big changes have already long been in place.

    What we do have is hard numbers, and they say that there have only been 100,000 naturalizations or so in a country of 50 million. That’s 0.2%. Plus more than half are ethnic Koreans, Chinese, or Japanese. We can speculate on illegal immigrants or huge differentials in birth rates, but we really don’t know how much of a factor any of that is.

    The rate of naturalization is relatively unimportant. The children of unnaturalized immigrants are not deported. And we have good data on fertility differentials.

    And how big of a problem it is depends on the degree to which you think that kids who are half southeast Asian can assimilate.

    Actually, they assimilate fairly well. That isn't the problem. The problem is that they have trouble meeting the demands of the South Korean educational system. This is why the dropout rate is so high. "New Korean" children do well in subjects that require social interaction with other kids (music, painting, physical education). They do poorly in subjects that require abstract skills, like mathematics.

    From the Diplomat article you cite

    In June, the government announced that the number of children with at least one parent of non-Korean heritage reached 150,000 this year, a number that has increased fourfold over the last four years. They are expected to number over 1.6 million by 2020, with a third of all children born that year the offspring of international unions.

    Ok, that’s a lot higher than I expected. Even if you assume half involve a foreigner that is an ethnic Korean or Chinese, you still have about 17% of children with foreign origins by 2020.

    I personally don’t think it’s the end of the world, as Vietnam’s test scores are actually pretty good. If these kids do poorly in school, it may have less to do with the ethnicity of their mothers than the fact that their fathers are unable to find wives in their own country, maybe because they’re not very good providers. Differential birth rates by IQ is a huge issue even independent of immigration, and stupid Koreans having more children also brings down the national average.

    Read More
  61. The Economist’s Korea correspondent, Daniel Tudor wrote about many of the peculiar features of this country, and Koreans do seem to have a thing about speaking English.

    He talks about the desire for physical perfection with cosmetic surgery being available for all ages, including tongue surgery to supposedly enable the better pronunciation of English words.
    And once you can speak and pronounce English perfectly (after obligatory high level learning) it seems unlikely that you will ever need it – but it does help to gain entrance to Seoul’s four top universities where candidate levels are apparently so high that fluency in English is an added factor.

    Also extreme emotions, Han & Heung. I have no idea whether he is right but he claims that Koreans wear their hearts on their sleeve and delight in extremes of sadness and joy as reflected in their films and music with a big following in Asia (Korean popular singers and actors regarded as the most attractive in Asia).

    Read More
    • Replies: @King Baeksu

    I have no idea whether he is right
     
    Please. Economist "correspondents" who parachute into random foreign countries and can't even speak the local lingo have no other utility than promoting neoliberal, globalist nonsense to its gullible readers.

    he claims that Koreans wear their hearts on their sleeve
     
    Umm, no. Anyone who makes such a claim has no understanding of Confucianism-based East Asian societies. One only need note how much Koreans rely on the bottle to understand how hard it is for them to actually "open up."

    B.R. Myers is also quite suspect and has his own agenda, but at least he can speak Korean and done some original research. All Tudor has managed to do is cobble together a series of Korea Times articles and Wikipedia entries and call it a "book." As Trump would say: Sad!
  62. @Marcus
    Christianity and Islam are bastard children of Judaism, with some paganism and Platonism mixed in. Korea has been heavily infected by Christianity, even the Kim family has a Christian background.

    I should have been more specific with your alleged “Judeo-Christian attitudes“.

    There are no “Judeo-Christian” attitudes.

    Read More
  63. South Korea has a big Christian population. I wonder if that has played a part in softening them up and making them receptive to non-Korean immigration.

    Read More
  64. @Wally
    I should have been more specific with your alleged "Judeo-Christian attitudes".

    There are no "Judeo-Christian" attitudes.

    You’re insane.

    Read More
  65. @Miro23
    The Economist's Korea correspondent, Daniel Tudor wrote about many of the peculiar features of this country, and Koreans do seem to have a thing about speaking English.

    He talks about the desire for physical perfection with cosmetic surgery being available for all ages, including tongue surgery to supposedly enable the better pronunciation of English words.
    And once you can speak and pronounce English perfectly (after obligatory high level learning) it seems unlikely that you will ever need it - but it does help to gain entrance to Seoul's four top universities where candidate levels are apparently so high that fluency in English is an added factor.

    Also extreme emotions, Han & Heung. I have no idea whether he is right but he claims that Koreans wear their hearts on their sleeve and delight in extremes of sadness and joy as reflected in their films and music with a big following in Asia (Korean popular singers and actors regarded as the most attractive in Asia).

    I have no idea whether he is right

    Please. Economist “correspondents” who parachute into random foreign countries and can’t even speak the local lingo have no other utility than promoting neoliberal, globalist nonsense to its gullible readers.

    he claims that Koreans wear their hearts on their sleeve

    Umm, no. Anyone who makes such a claim has no understanding of Confucianism-based East Asian societies. One only need note how much Koreans rely on the bottle to understand how hard it is for them to actually “open up.”

    B.R. Myers is also quite suspect and has his own agenda, but at least he can speak Korean and done some original research. All Tudor has managed to do is cobble together a series of Korea Times articles and Wikipedia entries and call it a “book.” As Trump would say: Sad!

    Read More
  66. @Daniel Chieh
    I'm a little concerned by the existence of agencies such as "Ministry of Gender Equality" - Japan, fortunately, had powerful societies to keep such destructive forces from picking up legs and China gives lip service while disappearing the malcontents. Korea has no such mechanism, though with the current outrage against the Goddess cult, hopefully it'll also reduce the power of feminists there.

    Japan, fortunately, had powerful societies to keep such destructive forces from picking up legs and China gives lip service while disappearing the malcontents
    —-
    Would you mind briefly expanding on the way Japan and China kept the disease at bay ?

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Mostly by realizing that its a disease and by being more autocratic governments in general, from what I can tell. I'm not Japanese, but the existence of the Nippon Kaigi seems to consistently form an effective block against radical feminism. In China, limited expressions are coop'ed by the government while radicals are disappeared and reeducated. Can't deal with fanatics sometimes except through force, a tool which Western societies have lost.
  67. @keuril
    I wouldn't generally translate minjok as "race." The term (minzoku in Japanese, minzu in Chinese) consists of two Chinese characters: min 民, meaning people (as in the People's Republic); and jok 族, meaning clan, group, etc. Together, the meaning is what we would generally now call ethnicity; in older times perhaps "national stock" or something along those lines. If one doesn't mind a cumbersome term, "national ethnicity" would do. But in any case, the meaning is not what we think of nowadays as race crossing national and ethnic boundaries.

    I think it was quite common in the early 20th century to use “race” interchangeably with “nation”. People still spoke of the German, English or French race in those days.

    Read More
  68. @Peter Frost
    I'm less sanguine about South Korea's future. Twenty years from now, ethnic Koreans will be a minority in the country's elementary schools. That prediction may seem unbelievable, but demographic replacement can happen very fast in a country where native fertility is close to 1.2 children per woman and where immigration is now mainly from countries where the fertility rate is at least twice that level.

    The process is more advanced than what most people think. South Korea does not keep statistics on ethnic origin. Most statistics are about "foreign residents" and that figure is only 3-4%. The term "foreign resident" excludes, however, adult members of the second generation. It also excludes the growing population of undocumented immigrants.

    Yes, a little over half of all "foreign residents" are from China, and many of them are ethnic Koreans from Manchuria. But their fertility rate is very low. If you go into South Korean schools, particularly in rural areas, you'll find that most of the "New Koreans" are of Filipino, Indonesian, or Cambodian origin, with growing numbers of Bangladeshis and Pakistanis. That is the future South Korea we'll see twenty years from now.

    And this is assuming that current immigration flows will remain as they are now. But they won't. They will shift more and more away from East Asia and towards Southeast Asia, South Asia, and Africa. That is where the pressure for out-migration is strongest.

    This change in population policy is recent—essentially since the year 2000—and reflects a profound ideological shift in the thinking of South Korea's elites. This shift has been described by a Japanese researcher who was puzzled by the growing divergence between South Korea and Japan in terms of immigration policy:

    While Japan continues to restrict foreign nationals, in Korea, there has been an opening of opportunities for forces that seek an expansion in the acceptance of immigrants. The influence of the business community. in South Korea informs conservative political parties, while improvements in the treatment of foreigners from a human rights perspective, and the resulting influences of interests calling for the expansion of acceptance are reflected in progressive political parties. [...] the two dominant political parties, conservative and progressive, are actively in favor of accepting foreign workers.

     

    K. Kimura. (2016). Why Do Immigration Policies Differ Between  Japan and Korea? Sociology Study, August 2016, Vol. 6, No. 8, 490‐507 

    The key factor seems to be the profound Americanization of South Korean society, particularly at the level of elites in business, the media, and government. These elites are able to manufacture new social norms that are replicated throughout South Korean society, essentially through the desire of citizens to think and behave "normally." Population replacement thus comes to be seen as something that is not only inevitable but also normal and desirable.

    Researchers point to the media, as well as academia and the entertainment industry, as the main tools for reshaping how South Koreans perceive their demographic future:

    Mainstream newspapers in South Korea have been a major shaper of the public opinion of diverse groups of immigrants whose presence is becoming increasingly visible in this country with a strong self-image as a mono-ethnic nation. The ways in which these new immigrants, typically lower class, are constructed in public discourses expose the nexus of citizenship, class and ethnicity.

     

    K. Park (2014). Foreigners or multicultural citizens? Press media's construction of immigrants in South Korea, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 37

    The result has been a rapid shift in public opinion that I described in my earlier column. Yoon et al. (2008) discussed the results of two surveys, one in 2003 and the other in 2007. To the statement "It is impossible for people who don' t share South Korean traditions and customs fully to become South Korean", 55% of the respondents agreed while 23% disagreed in 2003, but in 2007 30.8% of the respondents agreed while 32.9% disagreed. There was also an increase in hostility to public meetings of “ people prejudiced against racial and ethnical groups.” In 2004, 29.6% of respondents felt such meetings “should definitely not be allowed.” By 2007, the figure had risen to 46.5%.

    Yoon, I-J.,Y-H. Song, Y-J. Bae. (2008). South Koreans' Attitudes toward Foreigners, Minorities and Multiculturalism, Paper prepared for presentation at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association, Boston, MA from August 1-4, 2008.

    South Korea thus shows us how it is possible to reshape how an entire society sees itself simply by manipulating a limited number of "choke points" where social norms are created and replicated.

    Where do the japanese elite go to school ?
    I’m guessing that the japanese elites are overwhelmingly educated in Japan itself and they they have little interest in becoming part of the globo-elite. I imagine that the korean elites, especially when christian, are much more likely to come to the West to be educated.

    Read More
  69. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Personally I don’t think that a big dose of multiculturalism is a bad thing for korea. (I am korean myself) Korea is a very high achieving country but socially speaking…its quite stunted compared to its western counterparts, in fact all of east asia is like this. While the western countries are socially adept and “cool”, east asian countries are repressed, stuffy and nerdy. I think the introduction of some volatile, more socially dynamic people in korea will actually be good for the country; I am not denying that these elements would create a lot of social problems and headaches for native korean people, but this is actually the point. I really do think that koreans need to be socially challenged, and they need to be forced to adapt, the introduction of unpredictable (by korean standards) foreigners will help aid this process. If anybody here is intimately familiar with korean culture, then they are probably already aware that korea has a pretty dysfunctional culture beyond its seemingly pristine appearance. In my opinion, this dysfunctionality has roots in the fact that korea has been an insular and closed off society for so long, as a result the culture has become “inbred”, with all the deficits that occur as a result of “inbreeding”. Compare korea’s situation to say, any regular western european country. The average denizen of your typical western european country is a lot more outgoing, extroverted and interesting than your typical korean person, in my opinion this is due to a couple of factors, but one potential factor is that due to europe’s constant history of internecine strife, it somehow created a cultural dynamicism which over time selected for socially positive traits which we now identify with european people. Juxtapose this to korea, which has been the target of occasional intermittent regional internecine strife, but for the most part just existed as a vassal state; which is something that IMO ended up being imprinted itself (through cultural feedback loops) on the genetic psychology of korean people. That being said, I feel similarly about east asian culture as a whole, and I feel like its culturally pretty stagnant and compared to other cultures, its just a boring and socially repressed place. Even east asian people themselves are not comfortable with the status quo, but they know nothing else outside of their own culture, so it is difficult for them to identify what exactly is wrong. Most importantly, east asian people, but especially korean people are extremely racist in terms of protecting their genepool. (not so much in terms of being overtly racist though) Thus even if there were a large influx of immigrants into korea, I don’t think that korean society outside of impoverished farmers and their mail order brides would be open to mixing with their new counterparts on a mass scale; the social stigma received from other koreans would simply be too much. Thus ethnic koreans wouldn’t really be at danger of losing themselves to multiculturalism, korean people will never embrace multiculturalism the same way that many whites do, they are simply too racially insular.

    TLDR: multiculturalism is not a uniformly bad concept, in the case of east asia; this area of the world is severely culturally ossified and it needs some “destructive” elements to help break this ossification and encourage new, more dynamic elements to take their place.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Miro23

    TLDR: multiculturalism is not a uniformly bad concept, in the case of east asia; this area of the world is severely culturally ossified and it needs some “destructive” elements to help break this ossification and encourage new, more dynamic elements to take their place.
     
    Good point, if Asia isn't getting enough, then maybe the US and Europe are getting too much. You can get too much of a good thing.
    , @Daniel Chieh
    It doesn't really take a lot of feminism before literally everything that is our culture ceases to be. Remove a few pillars of a culture and the house falls. As an East Asians, I'll rather defend the beauty of the culture - though I'm coming from the Chinese side.
    , @German_reader
    "That being said, I feel similarly about east asian culture as a whole, and I feel like its culturally pretty stagnant and compared to other cultures"

    Compared to which cultures? I don't get the impression that much of lasting cultural worth has been produced in Western countries in the last few decades. My own country seems extremely dull and boring on a cultural level despite the ever increasing "diversity" and popular culture in many Western countries today is nothing but consumerist dreck.
    And even if Korea could profit from foreign influences, they certainly should never allow large-scale settlement of Muslims or Africans, that will only cause trouble.
    , @Anon
    "Personally I don’t think that a big dose of multiculturalism is a bad thing for korea. (I am korean myself) Korea is a very high achieving country but socially speaking…its quite stunted compared to its western counterparts, in fact all of east asia is like this. While the western countries are socially adept and “cool”, east asian countries are repressed, stuffy and nerdy. I think the introduction of some volatile, more socially dynamic people in korea will actually be good for the country; I am not denying that these elements would create a lot of social problems and headaches for native korean people, but this is actually the point."

    You make a good point about wanting to make Korea more culturally dynamic and interesting. But you got your priorities upside down. The first responsibility of a nation to survive and defend itself as a race and culture. Everything else is secondary. If Korea had health birthrates, your proposal wouldn't be so bad. But with plummeting birthrates among Koreans, increased diversity could mean Koreans losing their land to foreigners forever. Surrendering one's nation to foreigners just to win some more 'cool' pokemon points is about the dumbest thing one can imagine.

    Also, is 'cool' such a good thing? It has style but it's meaningless and lacks substance. Blacks are 'cool' in the US, but their communities have no value, no meaning. It's all noise and volume without sense. Because blacks put style above substance, they live in an empire of lies like Black Lives Matter when, in fact, most blacks are murdered by other blacks who are into 'cool' rap gangsta culture.
    True meaning comes not from 'cool' or style but from moral sense and substance. What Korea needs to do is worry less about style and care more about truth and meaning. And truth and meaning don't result from more diversity and noise. After all, Singapore is a more diverse, but it is one of the most dull places culturally. If anything, all that diversity has made it necessary for the government to suppress dissension.

    'Cool' is about glitter, easy sensations. It isn't about reality. It is an illusion, mirage. Now, 'cool' is fine in entertainment, like in 007 movies. But mistaking it for reality or truth is foolish. After all, the real Sean Connery depended on stunt doubles to do all the tricks. The culture of 'cool' favors vapid image over true substance. Korea, like Japan and EU, is filled with 'vibrant' style of 'cool' in pop music and etc. But, it has made both nations dumber, shallower, and trashier.

    Also, isn't it odd that Korea was more volatile and dynamic when it was more homogeneous? Korea today is more diverse, with many men having foreign brides. But it's a duller place except in cinema. Why? I would think the reason was the same as in Japan before birthrates dropped suddenly. In the past, there were bigger families. Parents couldn't micro-manage all the kids. Kids played outside. There were fewer control over the kids. And parents had kids just to have kids, to have families.
    Back then, Korean parents, like Japanese parents, didn't expect every child to be success in college and in having Good Job. Family and togetherness came first.
    There was a time when Japanese didn't look down on many jobs as 'dirty, dangerous, and demeaning'. After all, modern Japan was built by many Japanese who did those kinds of jobs.

    But then, success made Korean parents care only about more success. They had kids only to turn them into successes and bragging rights to friends. Ordinary jobs were not good enough for their kids. It was 'dirty' and only for lowly foreigners from poor nations.
    And to turn their precious kids into successes, there was the parental culture of micro-management and more control over kids' lives. And since kids had no time to play outdoors, they grew up on videogames and internet. And since families had fewer kids, it meant fewer or no uncles, aunts, cousins, and that make life more interesting.
    Korea seems to be going Japanese in this regard. Japan was a far more dynamic place after WWII when things were so out of whack. Many had to find their own way.
    Japan became duller with the success of 70s and 80s. With more prosperity and social order, there was more systematic control over Japanese youths. And fewer kids meant that every kid got controlled more by parents and teachers. And fewer kids meant fewer siblings, fewer friends, fewer cousins. and that meant relying more on TV and videogames as friends. And rise of pop culture meant Japanese kids growing up to identify with cartoons, movies, soap opera, and etc than with their own race, culture, history.

    But the problem is there in EU too. Did Sweden become more interesting and dynamic as the result of mass migration and multi-culturalism? Yes, in terms of crime and violence. But intellectually and artistically, Sweden got worse. Multi-culturalism has made Swedish even more timid and repressed. Why? Because the Cult of Diversity means that the majority population mustn't do anything to OFFEND the minorities. So, there is more censorship, more Big Brother controls. Swedes are not even allowed to complain about the Rape Epidemic or call an end to immigration.
    Also, the example of Latin America shows that Diversity doesn't necessarily lead to more dynamic culture. Most Latin American nations were stagnant economically, culturally, and intellectually.
    The most dynamic centers of the world in the 19th century and first half of 20th century were relatively homogeneous civilizations like Germany, UK, France, US, and Japan. If diversity makes for more dynamism, it should have been Central Asia with its Eurasian population that should have achieved more than Japanese.

    Funnily enough, the fact that you think Korea needs more Diversity to be more dynamic goes to show how PC has made you un-dynamic and stupid. If Koreans want more individuality and freedom, they only need to find it within themselves. If they lack the courage and vision to find it in their own hearts and minds, then they are cowards. You seem to be arguing that Koreans are so worthless and deficient that they must leech off the dynamism of others. Such attitude is pathetic. NO wonder so many Koreans want to come to the US and just flee their own nation. They lack the guts and vision to fix problems at home. They just want to rely on OTHER people as either emigration destinations or immigration hopes. Or maybe the immigration-outlet has made Koreans so devaluing of their own nation. Ever since the world opened up to Korean immigration, most Koreans think, "We should leave and go to better country" instead of thinking to stay and fix their own problems. Same thing in many nations, which accounts for all the brain drain. US as immigration destination has made many people look to ESCAPE TO AMERICA as solution to all their problems. It is the coward's way out.

    But then, were Koreans always this lackluster and dull? Wasn't there a dynamic protest movement in the 80s? Unlike Japan that was handed its democracy by the US, didn't Koreans fight for their democracy? Didn't young people make sacrifices to make this happen? What happened to this fire? What we hear from this millennial Korean is "we need foreigners because we koreans are uncool and suck so bad." How pussy.

    I see the problem as Globalism than Korean-ism. Koreans became so obsessed with economically catching up to the advanced world that they forgot their own identity, culture, and values. What's happening to Korea is just another variation of what's happening all over the world.
    Koreans only judge themselves in relation to OTHER cultures.
    So, they've neglected their own history, heritage, and culture. They use plastic surgery to look white. They imitate black rappers like dumb yellow monkeys. They dye their hair blonde to look western or like Japanese anime characters. They imitate Western PC because they think the West is fount of all wisdom and because they are afraid to think for themselves. They neglect their own identity and culture and imitate OTHERS but then complain that Korean-ness sucks. They reject their true identity and heritage in pale imitation of the 'cool' West, but they blame all the problem on Korean-ness. No, the problem is Koreans imitate too much and fantasize too much of the Superior Other instead of valuing their own race and culture and building on them.
    Korea has come to suck because Koreans are obsessed with the Other. Because their sense of worth is measured by what Others think. It's like the articles about how South Koreans are obsessed about winning the Nobel Prize in Literature, as if they need validation by the West for their self-worth. It is THIS attitude that is turning Korea into dull and dumb country. It is not that Koreans are too Korean but they are too imitative and slavish to foreign styles and approvals. People who love literature love it out of genuine love. They don't care about prizes or foreign validations. Koreans feel they have no value unless they are validated by the Superior Other, mainly the West. If some Koreans wanna be validated by Sweden's Nobel community, others wanna be validated by black rap community. Such slavish imitation that rejects one's own race and culture doesn't lead to anything real or true.

    Koreans seem to be stuck in some kind of contradiction. They want to be more dynamic, free, and confident as individuals... but they say they must depend on OTHERS to show the way. What kind of confidence and freedom is that? What can non-Koreans do for Koreans what Koreans can't do for themselves because they are so lacking in will and agency?
    Such hope of the Foreign Fix is especially laughable when many migrants to Korea come from rather backward places like Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, and other Asian nations that are hardly known for culture of individualism and great achievement. How will Korea become more dynamic by having more people from rest of Asia that have achieved even less than Koreans? It's like Hungarians thinking their nation will be made more dynamic by arrival of migrants from poor Arab nations. Ridiculous.

    Also, the commenter's sense that Korea must rely on OTHER peoples is part of the imperial legacy. He or she complains about Korea's servility to Great China, but he or she expresses similar servility to Globalism.
    For 2000 yrs, Koreans felt they must look to and rely on China and only China. Now, the new generation of Koreans say Korean must look to globo-multi-culti PC. So, Koreans can't think or do anything on their own. Koreans must look to China, to US, to globalism, or etc. They must follow like a dog some great country or some foreign ideology.
    Now, it's good for any nation to trade and learn from other nations and peoples, but ultimately, it has to develop its own modes of freedom and truth. It can't rely on others to do the homework for them.

    But Koreans are a bunch of leeches. Look at the military arrangement. Cold War is long over. China and Russia do business with S. Korea, more than they do with N. Korea. South Korea has 40x the economy of the North and more than double the population. North Korea is a nation of skinny half-starved people. Yet, South Korea still relies on the US for 'protection'. Lone Israel, surrounded by big hostile nations, goes it alone in defending itself. But South Korea, much bigger and richer than N. Korea in population and economy, still hides behind Uncle Sam that, btw, provokes tensions with NK merely to keep and use SK as pawn against China.

    So, it seems to me that the problem of South Korea is not that it's too Korean. Rather, it's because dumb and cowardly Koreans are too wussy to look into their own minds, hearts, and souls to find true freedom and truth and independence. Instead, they cower behind Uncle Sam. They still take orders from a nation that divided their country and rained down holocaust-level bombs on the north. It is no wonder that the commenter looks to 'multi-culturalism' for solution to Korea's problem. It is the same pattern. Korean cowards cannot find their own way, their own answers. Just like they need Uncle Sam for protection from starving people in North Korea, they need migrants from Philippines, Indonesia, Iran, Cambodia, India, and etc. to learn how to be free. LOL.

    In a way, truth and freedom are so easy to find. Indeed, they are difficult because they are so easy. All it takes a bit of courage, but courage doesn't come easily to a nation of cowards that won't face up to its own history and won't defend itself(and still plays whore dog to Uncle Sam). As long as Koreans are cowards, no amount of Multi-Culti will save it. Also, when people of cowardice invite people of courage, won't the latter gain control over the former. Didn't China invite the Manchus only to be ruled by them? Didn't EU's reliance on US protection turn it into the vassal of Washington DC? When Europeans lost the will to defend themselves, they just turned into pussy-puppets of the US. South Koreans seem to have the same mentality. A cultural mindset of dependence on US and globalism.

    If Koreans don't have the fire of courage, they shouldn't expect it to given to them by those who have it. Those with courage will only burn the Korean cowards who don't have it.
    Furthermore, what is the Western attitude toward nations like Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and even China? It is one of arrogance and supremacism. The West acts like it is 'more evolved' and that the East exists only to obey and imitate the West. And given the cowardly Korean commenter who made the comments above, it's not surprising why the West feels this way. The West says, 'We are better than you and you must obey us', and this Korean commenter says, 'Yes, we Koreans suck and we need YOU to teach us to be free because we suck so bad.' What a pussy dog.
    Now, why can't this Korean tell himself and his people that they should find within their own hearts and minds to be free? Why this servile and slavish look to the West or the Other for salvation?

    He also seems to miss the point that the West is currently in a state of crazy contradiction. On the one hand, the West does indeed say, 'We are the best, most evolved, most exceptional, and most indispensable', but the West is also about the cowardice of its native white population that says, 'we suck so bad, we are so dull and white bread, we are so guilty, we are evil, and therefore, we need diversity to redeem us from our wicked whiteness'.

    The funny irony is that the Korean commenter apes this crazy Western logic. He looks to the West for the Answer of being 'cool', but the West is now in the process of denouncing itself as 'evil' because it's not diverse enough. Indeed, 'western values' have now been rewritten to call for the desired abolition of the West. White politicians in the US talk about how it is great, even necessary, for US to become a non-white majority nation. German politicians say German cities will be majority non-German, and that is a good thing. Koreans, being so slavish, ape these sentiments in their own way: "We Koreans are such dull yellow bread that we need diversity to enrich us." What a yellow dog. If the White West must commit suicide, Korean yellow dogs must follow because it is in their cultural DNA to follow their master.

    According to the commenter, Korean problem is too much inbreeding, culturally and biologically. (This is rather odd for a nation that's been whore-vagina to Uncle Sam since end of WWII and pimp-rapist of Vietnam during Vietnam War. Funnier still since Koreans are a race of Michael Jacksons who rely on extensive surgery, hair-dyeing, and rap-culture-aping to look 'American'. When Koreans complain about 'inbreeding', they really seem to mean they want Western features and feel inferior for having slanty eyes and black hair. They want the 'superior' features of other races, esp white ones). But is out-breeding necessarily better than 'national in-breeding'?
    Let's look at Central Asia where most people are a mix of Asian and European. Are they necessarily more dynamic? Those cultures seem pretty backward and dull. Or look at Uighurs of Northwest China. Many people there look like a cross of Turks and East Asians. Are they more dynamic? Or look at North Africa, a mix of Semitic, Arabic, European, and black. Is North Africa some dynamic paradise? It's mostly poor, boring, and backward, and its people all wanna flee to Europe, especially to Northern Europe that is most homogeneous(though not for long as the invasion continues unabated). Most Indonesians are a hodge-podge of mixed blood, but they cannot even control their own economy. Chinese rule Indonesian economy. Latin America has majority mixed blood peoples, and most Latin American nations are dull culturally and intellectually.
    And then, look at the golden age of Europe. When Germany produced its great composers, it was all white. When UK produces its giants of literature, it was all white. Ingmar Bergman, the giant of Swedish cinema, is the product of all-white Sweden.
    And Japan saw great cultural flowering through much of its history, during reform era, and after WWII when it was mostly all-Japanese.
    If diversity is the panacea to cultural stagnation, then Afghanistan should be the cultural capital of the world.

    Also, one must not confuse style with the real thing. The West may seem 'cool' because of its pop culture, but it has also made the West dumber, trashier, and shallower. Style adds spice to substance, but the current West is style without substance. No wonder all this homo garbage is the new religion. It is worship of the ephemeral, faddish, fashionable, hyped.
    Today's British people may be 'cooler' in their loutish behavior, drunkenness, lack of inhibitions, and party culture, but they have less substance as thinkers, writers, critics, and commentators. Aldous Huxley and George Orwell were not cool, but they had courage, integrity, and conviction. They had honesty and substance. That is the sort of thing that people should emulate. I'm sure that Korea has its share of honest critics and writers, but they don't get noticed because so much of globalist culture showers attention on the loud, brash, stupid, instant, glitzy, and obnoxious... like the dumb ugly gangnam style song. If that is the 'cool' that Koreans aspire to, they are morons or Korons, aka Korean morons.

    Indeed, the example of Japan after WWII goes to show that great things can be achieved in a mono-racial-culture. Kurosawa and other great film-makers didn't need foreigners to teach them how to make films. Sure, they took inspiration from foreign films and learned from others. But they learned to do their own thing because they had confidence, conviction, and belief in their own vision. They were not wimps who who said, "Oh geez, we are so lame, we are so inbred. We can't do anything unless we are surrounded by foreigners who will teach us to be creative." While US occupation and its after-effects did allow for more freedom, the cultural flowering of modern Japan happened much earlier. And even before Westernization, Japan achieved more culturally and artistically than Korea because Japanese had trust in their own genius, creativity, and culture. Apparently, Korons lack this confidence. Is it because of servile attachment to China over many centuries? But if this is the problem, then Koreans need to learn to to be more independent-minded, not more dependent on foreigners for the fix. Independence isn't isolation. No one is opposed to learning from other nations/cultures and trading with other economies. But especially because the world is now so inter-connected, a nation/culture must insist on its independence because failure to do so will make it come under the dominance of Globalism controlled by the US. Look at European nations. Each nation surrendered its independence to EU, and then EU as a whole surrendered to US-led globalism. This didn't lead to more dynamic Europe but one more hampered by PC, censorship, ideological conformity, spread of trash culture, etc.

    Also, Globalist Culture does NOT foster more creativity, individuality, and vitality. Yes, globo-culture is loud, clamorous, and hyper-active, but it's all just empty fire-works. It's the umpteenth STAR WARS sequel, the same dumb rap song about 'muh gun' and 'muh dic*', the same booty shaking dance moves, the same immature attitudes, the same night club whore culture, the same tattoo on ass, the same piercing through nose, the same hair dyed blonde, green, or pink. Globo-creativity is about everyone watching same comic book movie, listening to same kind of hip hop, imitating ghetto trash culture, and reducing all of culture into orgamo-pornography of insta-gratification video-game.

    Indeed, current globalist culture isn't even 'cool' in the classic sense. Classic Cool really was impressive in style if not much else. Sean Connery as 007 was cool. Spaghetti Westerns were cool. Swinging London had some cool fashions. Beatles were cool. James Dean was cool. They didn't add up to much meaning, but they had really impressive style. But what is today's cool? It's some tattoo on ass of a moron with piercing through his nose under a hair dyed pink that belongs to a man who claims to be a 'woman'. 'Cool' is middle-aged rappers reaching in their 50s still yapping about 'my ho's'. It's about black thugs making all sorts of ugly faces with 'attitude, ya'. It's the French, Germans, Swedes, and Brits imitating this same trash. It's J-pop sounding the same song after song like dildo-vibrators to the ears. It's K-pop sounding like J-pop combined with rap imitation. This isn't real creativity. Popular music of each nation was more individualistic and different and diverse in the pro-global era.

    And if it's true that racial-mixing, socially or sexually, leads to more creativity, we sure don't see it among Asian-Americans. While Asian-Americans, Korons included, may be more outgoing and expressive due to Americanization, they are hardly more creative, individualistic, or whatever in the West. Look at Chinese/Japanese/Korean-American writers, activists, journalists, and academics, and they all sound the same. They just sound like carbon-copy of white Political Correctness. Or they are just pale imitators of black rage or some POC crap. They either sound like parrots of PC or yellow rappin' fools.

    Why is it that the most interesting creative Asians are all in Asia? Kurosawa, Mishima, Kobo Abe, Mizoguchi, Tanizaki, Imamura, and etc all drew inspiration from the West, but they were all Japanese in Japan. The best Chinese film-makers are in China. Hong Kong, very creative stylistically, developed in Asia. While drawing inspiration from other cultures is good and necessary, whoever said you need foreigners all around you to teach you to be creative? Asians in America and Canada are surrounded by non-Asians, but all they do is imitate and parrot. Ever look at Chinese academic radicals in colleges? They claim to be 'free thinking progressives' but EVERYTHING they say is an imitation of white PC.

    The choice is not between total isolation and total surrender. I agree that some degree of diversity can liven up any nation. If Korea can maintain a non-Korean population at around 5%, I don't see any damage, at least as long as blacks are not part of the mix. Blacks, even in small numbers, can do lots of damage. Look at France, Holland, Canada, and etc. Japan has small number of blacks, but they cause a lot of problems.
    But the example of EU goes to show that once a nation catches the multi-culti virus, there is no end. Multi-culturalism was designed ideologically to act like a cancer. once it begins, it has no end.
    The foreign masses keep coming and coming. They are welcomed by so-called 'progressives' who seek to destroy every national identity and by corporate interests that want cheap docile labor. Also, the rich industrialists know that a diverse work force is easier to exploit that a mono-national one. If all workers in Korea are Korean, they can unite as a force to demand more. If they are diverse, they will be harder to unite against the rich class. We see the same pattern in the West. The rich elites don't mind diversity among the work force since a diverse work force barely united into strong labor movement. There was a time when the British working class held great moral capital. But today, the British elites excoriate and denounce the white working class for not being 'welcoming' of foreign masses who are willing to work for less.

    Anyway, because of low birth rates in South Korea and the logic of Multi-culturalism(where the mass invasion never ends), it would be stupid to gamble on the promise of Diversity as a fix to Korea's problem.
    There is no quick fix to national problems. If indeed, as the commenter says, South Koreans are not independent-minded enough, then they need to fix the problem on their own. It cannot be fixed by foreigners if Koreans are a bunch of cowards and morons. Besides, many foreigners come from poor Asian nations that are hardly known for innovation, creativity, and originality. What can Koreans really learn from Cambodians or Laotians? Or Mongolians? Maybe Mongols can teach them to make yak yogurt. If the commenter means Western foreigners, he or she needs to understand that the West is now the World Capital of Political Correctness, racial self-loathing, censorship, and garbage pop culture. What may seem 'free' in the West is mere hedonism promoted by capitalism. It is not the freedom of people with minds and souls but the debauchery of people without self-control and sense. It is the 'freedom' of whore culture, pimp culture, decadence, and degeneracy. In the West, people's lives are destroyed for not worshiping homosexuals and trannies. If this is what Koreans want, then they are indeed a bunch of slaves who only know how to imitate, follow, and obey the powerful. Since the West is still the richest and most powerful, the Korons seem to think they must emulate everything about it. That is not true freedom, true individuality, and true independence.

    Besides, if Koreans cannot learn to be free on their own, it only means lots of foreigners in Korea will lead to their domination over Koreans. After all, the commenter seems to think that foreigners can be free & dynamic on their own. But Koreans lack this abilty. So, when a people who are naturally free and independent mix with people who are naturally servile and slavish, then the former will rule over the latter. The commenter hopes that the freedom of foreigners will rub off on Koreans, but there is no guarantee. Rather, the foreigners may just come to rule over slavish and servile imitative Koreans.

    Koreans need to stop being such dogs. They need to stop looking to OTHERS for the solution. They need to defend themselves and run their own military. They must stop being cowards hiding behind Uncle Sam. The Cold War is so over. China and Russia want to be friend with South Korea. They will not back any North Korean aggression against the South. The South has more than 2x population of north and 40x the economy. So, why are South Koreans hiding behind Uncle Sam? Is the NK threat really so serious? If so, why did South Korea allow a bunch of homos to take over music-TV industry and promote girly look among the boys? Imagine that! South Korea is under so much threat from starving North Korea that it needs to hide behind Uncle Sam... but Korean pop culture should encourage South Korean boys to look and act like girlies. And if South Korea is under such threat, why do so many Koreans wanna come to the US? They don't want to stay and defend their own country but leave it forever while asking Uncle Sam to defend them?

    And why can't South Koreans be honest about their own history and begin a dialogue about how the division of Korea is the result of US policy and that it is continuing US policy to maintain the division so as to keep South Korea as a puppet against China forever? These seem to me like substantive issues, but the commenter is fixated on insipid stuff like the 'cool' style. I mean who cares about 'cool'? This 'cool' cult is destroying cultures all over. After all, what does 'coolness' have to do with anything real? The Americans who built the roads, worked in factories, survived WWII and Depression, and toiled on farms were NOT cool. The kind of people in GRAPES OF WRATH were not 'cool'. But they led full meaningful lives of family, tradition, religion, community. And I'm sure all nations, Korea included, has tons of these stories of people who went through 20th century with so much tumult and crisis. But in the 21st century, we have some silly vapid Korean commenter who, in imitation of deracinated West, yammers about how his nation needs to be more 'cool'. The father in BICYCLE THIEVES isn't cool. The dying man in IKIRU isn't cool. Vito Corleone who loses his job to some mafia flunky in GODFATHER II and walks home jobless isn't cool. But are their lives and stories any less meaningful or worthy? Whatever happened to humanism that values people for what they are than for some dumb hipster style?

    Globalism and Americanism make people all around the world act like Aesop's dog with bone looking at the illusion in the water. They don't value what they have. They have no sense of the value of what they have. Look at those nutty European nations. They are playing ideological games with their homelands. If they lost their homelands, they are finished. They fantasize about some Diversity Utopia where their own motherlands are being vanishing before their eyes.

    Now, Korea doesn't mean much to the world cuz it's not a great culture. Japanese culture is really something special. If Japanese had never existed, the world would lose something. While not a central world culture, the Japanese did remarkable things in painting, sculpture, architecture, gardening, music, (music)theater, cinema, and etc. And their samurai culture and code of bushido are fascinating. Japanese conceptualized culture as a blend of art and action. So, it is a great addition to World Culture.
    But if Korea had never existed, we wouldn't miss much. Still, my view is every nation/culture is valuable for what it is, and it should be of immense value to the people who belong to it. Why? It's like family. Most families are not great, but one's parents and family members should mean more than any other. Besides, for a people to rise to potential greatness, they must exist in the first place. Germans were ungreat for a long time before they became great. The Jews were, for a long time, just a bunch of goat-herders before they began to make a difference.

    Korea is a special nation in this sense. It is not a fake artificial nation created by imperialists. Look at Latin America. Fake nations created by Spanish and Portuguese empire. And their indigenous peoples still live under iron heel of the conquering races. And Philippines, which was conquered by the Spanish, is still a hodgepodge nation. It was forged by conquest and foreign rule than independence and organic development. Indonesia is totally a fake nation, the product of Dutch imperialism. Iraq, Syria, Libya, modern Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and etc are all artificial creations of European imperialists. Things are even crazier in black Africa with giant nations made up of 100s, even 1000s, of tribes.

    In contrast, nations like Japan, Korea, and Vietnam are indeed products of organic growths over long periods of time. And the relative geographical isolation of Korea and Japan made this possible, just like Sweden was able to remain mostly Nordic to due to isolation(before crazy ideologues decided to flood it with Muslims and Africans in the notion that there is no such thing as 'Swedish culture'.) They are real nations with real history, culture, and identity. They were not 'invented' by imperialism and post-imperialism. Japanese did try to create a giant Asian empire, but they failed.
    So, it seems Koreans have one thing in common with Japanese. Though their culture isn't as special as that of the Japanese, they have a real nation, a real history, and real identity. That is of great value for such truly organic nations are rare in the entire world. Why throw it away cuz of some globo fad about 'cool'-ness?

    Geographical isolation was a blessing for Korea and Japan. Look at the Middle East. As so many cultures and races are joined together, there has been constant invasion and counter-invasion. Turkey still has a sad problem with Kurds who want a nation of their own. Chinese let Koreans have a nation of their own. Turks won't all this to Kurds. And we saw the recent war in Syria. We saw what diversity of clan loyalties can do to Libya. Iraq is torn apart by sects and ethnos, as Arabs and Kurds don't see eye to eye. Who the hell wants diversity, at least on this level? Who wants a fake national identity like 'Iraqi' that doesn't mean anything? Would Koreans really like it better if they were geographically surrounded by India, Iran, Egypt, Brazil, and etc? Would Korea even have existed or developed if it had been surrounded by so many other peoples who might have invaded and taken over?

    Geographical isolation has its downsides, but it also has advantages. It makes possible the survival and development of a truer culture that is relatively protected from invasions. Consider the many ancient civilizations of the Middle East. Most are gone forever. Whoever hears of Hittites or Babylonians or Phoenicians? They are gone because of constant invasions and clashes. Only the Jews survived intact as an ancient identity, and it was because they created the Covenant of the Biology and Spirit.

    Now, because Japanese and Koreans(and I gather most other Asians) have no such concept, they can only survive as a people in their homeland. Jews had no home for 1000s of yrs, but they kept their identity. But Asians cannot. Look at Japanese in Brazil. There are over a million of them, but they are un-Japanese. They know nothing of the language, culture, or history of Japan. And they don't even care to know. When they return to Japan, they feel as total foreigners in the land of their ancestors.
    I recall reading something about Koreans in Russia, and they are the same way. They don't feel Korean at all and just feel 'Russian'. And they don't care to know anything about their homeland. And my encounters with most Asians in the US tells me they know nothing, care nothing, and feel nothing for their homeland. Their 'asian identity' consists of people-of-color cliches so that they can associate themselves with 'cooler' blacks or PC anti-white activism. Maybe the Chinese care somewhat cuz of middle kingdom pride, but a lot of Chinese girls seem to marry Jewish men and have Jewish kids. Look at Zuckerberg's wife. Hindus are better at keeping their culture, but then, there is no single India, an artificial nation created by British Imperialism and doesn't really make sense without that history despite Hindu resentment toward Anglos.

    Anyway, the lesson of the dog with bone in mouth looking at the water is a lesson for all time. Find value in what you have. Don't grasp for too much. Japan tried to grab more and lost WWII in bad way. EU is now trying to be World Culture with all this mass migration and Diversity. It is on a path to hell. And Korea will just be part of this mess if they don't wake up from the idiot shallow cult of the 'cool'.

    I'm sure Korea needs much progress and improvement in many areas, but foreigners are not the answer. Also, if indeed Koreans are such dull pussies and cowards, foreigners will look upon them with contempt and arrogance. Foreigners will come not with respect but disdain. After all, the Korean commenter's message is, "We suck so bad, we are so worthless, so please come to our country and teach us to be free and 'cool'. If Koreans feel this way, who would respect them? They are like dogs without a master begging for a master to come rule over them.

    What Koreans need is courage and honesty within their own hearts. It is so easy yet so hard. So hard because some brave soul has to take the first step.
    From the commenter's remark, it is obvious that he or she is a coward who is unwilling to take the first step. He or she wants to be protected by Uncle Sam and wants foreigners to teach Koreans how to be free.
    What a koron.
  70. Where do the japanese elite go to school ?

    About 99% are educated at Japanese universities.

    http://www.oecd.org/edu/Japan-EAG2014-Country-Note.pdf

    Japan has very weak cultural linkages with the rest of the world. This is probably a big reason why Japan is not “getting with the program,” at least not like South Korea.

    If I ever get back to blogging, I would like to write an update about the situation in South Korea. A lot has happened even over the past year, as noted in this Wiki entry:

    Immigration to South Korea is rising quickly due to a recent multicultural policy, with over 220,000 accepted in 2014.[1] This was a 14.1% increase over the previous year – Between 2009 and 2014, the number of immigrants have been rising 9.3% annually. As of August 2016, there are over 2 million foreign immigrants accounting for 4% of the total population.[2]
    From 2018, the South Korean government will actively pursue massive immigration to counter the declining working population from 2017. Nearly 5 million immigrants are needed by 2020, 10 million by 2030 and over 17 million by 2060, at which point immigrants will represent over 44% of the total working population.[3]

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_South_Korea

    http://thumb.mt.co.kr/06/2015/12/2015122721551652955_1.jpg

    Anon,

    “Coolness” is a positive quality that has been reconstructed to mean the opposite of what it used to mean. It formerly meant the ability to control your emotions. Today, it means a willingness to let go with your emotions with as little self-control as possible. People used to call that “childishness.”

    The same goes for words like “culturally stagnant” and “dysfunctional.” Yes, these words can be used objectively, but if one uses them objectively to rank the different countries of the world, South Korea would not be in the top 10. Or even the top 100.

    It bothers me, frankly, that South Koreans are starting to internalize the kind of self-hate that North Americans and Western Europeans have been internalizing. The cause seems to be the same. They’re plugging themselves into the same ideological and cultural system.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    I would have to disagree, western europe has managed to balance being extremely wealthy, well educated and high achieving while also being extremely well adapted socially as well as sexually. Its not an either/or proposition, its possible to have both. I would hope that one day east asia could also be similarly balanced; however as it currently stands, east asia is overly tilted towards cerebral and financial pursuits, while it is considerably lacking when it comes to social/sexual ability. East asia's social/sexual retardation is due to a nasty confluence of dysgenic breeding (IE alpha, manly characteristics are either not selected for or bred out), estrogenic diet (soy soy soy soy,) and finally a culture which actively suppresses the kind of free wheeling social/sexual dynamics that the rest of the world seems to enjoy. So basically east asia is the nerdy, asexual student who gets good grades but misses out on all the fun writ large. Im sorry, but financial/educational attainment are not the only things in life that matter, they are important, but east asian culture has taken it too far; so by this rubric I stand by my assertion that indeed east asian/korean culture is deeply stagnant and also dysfunctional.

    I doubt that south koreans could have the same kind of internalized self hatred that north americans and western europeans have; you seem to forget that south koreans are a different race, as such they possess a different racial psychology. When it comes down to it, asian people will never self-flagellate in the same way that whites do, the reason why is because asian people are far too practical, far too selfish, and lack the deep, intense degree of self-awareness needed to feel the need to self-flagellate in the first place. If anything, south koreans of all people could use a little bit of self-hate; we're entirely too proud, and we have no reason to be so.

    Anyways, south koreans/east asians will never go whole hog on the whole multiculturalism thing; this is why multiculturalism is terrific for east asia because east asian culture will reap the benefits of cultural de-ossification and cultural regeneration, while simultaneously not embracing multiculturalism to the point where ethnic self-abnegation is actually realized.
    , @German_reader
    "It bothers me, frankly, that South Koreans are starting to internalize the kind of self-hate that North Americans and Western Europeans have been internalizing. The cause seems to be the same. They’re plugging themselves into the same ideological and cultural system."

    What's your opinion about the role of Christianity in all of this?
    And good to see you comment here again, would be nice if you returned to blogging at some point.
    , @Anon
    "From 2018, the South Korean government will actively pursue massive immigration to counter the declining working population from 2017. Nearly 5 million immigrants are needed by 2020, 10 million by 2030 and over 17 million by 2060, at which point immigrants will represent over 44% of the total working population.[3]"

    Yet, 80% of Koreans say they want to leave Korea, mainly to the US because there are not jobs.

    It seems the problem is elitism that has become universalized in this status-driven society. Most Koreans feel they are too good for 'dirty' jobs. And they don't want their kids to have those jobs. And they don't want to have kids unless they can be sure the kids can have good jobs. Especially as much of lower labor is associated with 'foreign workers', Koreans feel it is shameful to have them. This notion of 'dirty, demeaning, and dangerous' jobs began in Japan, I think. Such lack of respect for labor is harming advanced nations. One good thing about socialism is the respect for labor. After all, it is labor that built the roads and manned the factories.

    So, we have a paradox. We have Koreans complaining about there not being enough jobs and opportunities. They say they must emigrate to the US to have jobs.
    But then, we have Korea saying they have labor shortage and need more immigrants to fill those jobs.

    This is the result of univeralization of elitism. With close to 99% of Koreans going to college, most jobs are not good enough for them. High suicide rates show that Koreans would rather die than face the shame of having a lowly job.
    Especially with lowly foreigners taking those jobs, Koreans feel it is shameful to have them as it means they are on the level of poor foreigners. And they don't want to have kids unless kids can be guaranteed 'good' jobs.

    This is the the result of fusion of capitalism and neo-confucianism where the dream was to be part of the scholar-class that does 'clean' things and never dirties the hands.

    And as South Korea turns into multi-culti hodge-podge of 'new koreans' who feel no ethnic ties to Koreans in the North, the division will become permanent. The scar that the US left in 1945 will never go away. Of course, US is happy about this because it wants a divided Korea forever. As Korea loses its identity and culture --- as "koreannes" goes from identity, culture, and history to a piece of legal paper that can mean anyone from Indonesian to African --- , it will become like a colony of the US. Like Hawaii or Puerto Rico.

    But as American-educated Koreans and Korean-Americans are a bunch of collaborators of globalism, they are blind to their own national and cultural demise. They only seek approval of the US and worship Diversity as the ultimate good since their globo-imperialist professors and handlers told them so.

    What the Japanese failed to do, the US succeeded in doing. But then, there was no liberation of Korea after Japanese defeat. There was just division, occupation, and vassalage. When US was run by white majority, its template to other nations was native-majority domination. But as US turned into Jewish-minority dominated nation that favors minority-elitism, the new mantra became 'diversity is our strength' and 'homomania', and those are pushed on all nations. When US was a confident white-majority-nation, it saw nothing wrong with Korea being Korean-majority nation. But as the US is all about 'diversity', it seems most Korean-Americans and American-educated Koreans feel shame about Korea not being 'diverse enough'. They feel Korea must reflect the Ideal promoted by the New America.

    I wonder how Korean Christians feel about this. Don't they feel betrayed? When South Korea was rocked by so much anti-American protests and Marxist radicals, it was the conservative Korean Christians who were most loyal to the US. But it is now the US that is doing most to push homomania and globalist virus into South Korea.

    But then, the problem isn't just with South Korea but with Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore, all of which suffer from low-birth-rates. It is due to neo-confucianism where elitism has been universalized.
    Also, sexual culture has become loosened in Asia. In Japan, loose women were once looked down upon. But today, it's perfectly normal for Japanese women to remain unmarried and hook up with men and have sex. They see marriage and stuff as just hindrance when they have guilt-free and shame-free sex, with Japanese or foreign men. If you check night clubs scenes all over Asia on youtube, it seems the women have gotten pretty whory and sex-and-city lifestyle is common. So why marry? Why not just earn enough to party and have sex?
    This esp seems to be the norm about Asian-American women, and in our insta-globa, what happens in LA soon spreads to Tokyo, Taipei, Seoul, and Singapore. Even Shanghai.
  71. @anon
    Personally I don't think that a big dose of multiculturalism is a bad thing for korea. (I am korean myself) Korea is a very high achieving country but socially speaking...its quite stunted compared to its western counterparts, in fact all of east asia is like this. While the western countries are socially adept and "cool", east asian countries are repressed, stuffy and nerdy. I think the introduction of some volatile, more socially dynamic people in korea will actually be good for the country; I am not denying that these elements would create a lot of social problems and headaches for native korean people, but this is actually the point. I really do think that koreans need to be socially challenged, and they need to be forced to adapt, the introduction of unpredictable (by korean standards) foreigners will help aid this process. If anybody here is intimately familiar with korean culture, then they are probably already aware that korea has a pretty dysfunctional culture beyond its seemingly pristine appearance. In my opinion, this dysfunctionality has roots in the fact that korea has been an insular and closed off society for so long, as a result the culture has become "inbred", with all the deficits that occur as a result of "inbreeding". Compare korea's situation to say, any regular western european country. The average denizen of your typical western european country is a lot more outgoing, extroverted and interesting than your typical korean person, in my opinion this is due to a couple of factors, but one potential factor is that due to europe's constant history of internecine strife, it somehow created a cultural dynamicism which over time selected for socially positive traits which we now identify with european people. Juxtapose this to korea, which has been the target of occasional intermittent regional internecine strife, but for the most part just existed as a vassal state; which is something that IMO ended up being imprinted itself (through cultural feedback loops) on the genetic psychology of korean people. That being said, I feel similarly about east asian culture as a whole, and I feel like its culturally pretty stagnant and compared to other cultures, its just a boring and socially repressed place. Even east asian people themselves are not comfortable with the status quo, but they know nothing else outside of their own culture, so it is difficult for them to identify what exactly is wrong. Most importantly, east asian people, but especially korean people are extremely racist in terms of protecting their genepool. (not so much in terms of being overtly racist though) Thus even if there were a large influx of immigrants into korea, I don't think that korean society outside of impoverished farmers and their mail order brides would be open to mixing with their new counterparts on a mass scale; the social stigma received from other koreans would simply be too much. Thus ethnic koreans wouldn't really be at danger of losing themselves to multiculturalism, korean people will never embrace multiculturalism the same way that many whites do, they are simply too racially insular.

    TLDR: multiculturalism is not a uniformly bad concept, in the case of east asia; this area of the world is severely culturally ossified and it needs some "destructive" elements to help break this ossification and encourage new, more dynamic elements to take their place.

    TLDR: multiculturalism is not a uniformly bad concept, in the case of east asia; this area of the world is severely culturally ossified and it needs some “destructive” elements to help break this ossification and encourage new, more dynamic elements to take their place.

    Good point, if Asia isn’t getting enough, then maybe the US and Europe are getting too much. You can get too much of a good thing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    "Good point, if Asia isn’t getting enough, then maybe the US and Europe are getting too much. You can get too much of a good thing."

    Wrong. That's like saying cancer is good if you have little of it. It would be nuts to divide people into ones with good little cancer and ones with bad big cancer. Cancer is bad, small or big, because all little cancers turn into big cancers and fatal cancers.
    A person with little cancer will soon have big cancer. It is the logic of cancer. If allowed to grow, it never stops.

    Multi-culturalism is a cancer. It is an invasive and aggressive ideology and was designed to be such. It never ends. It keeps calling for more 'diversity', more PC, more minority privilege, and more suppression of native-majority identity and interests to accommodate the minority. It was largely designed by Jews to favor minority Jewish interests over majority gentile interests. It was also a means to increase gentile diversity so that Jewish elite minorities can play divide-and-rule.

    Now, no nation is totally homogeneous. Even seemingly homogeneous ones have some minorities. And even among the native majority, there is some genetic mixture. Even if Korea were all Korean, many Koreans would have some Chinese, Mongol, Manchu, etc blood.

    Some nations are quite diverse, like Iran. Such nations are usually the result of imperialism. Most peoples do not seek control under other people. It is usually forced. There is generally resistance against foreign domination, but if the domination lasts long enough, a kind of imperial nation is created. We see this in English rule over Scotland. Ireland almost became part of permanent Britain as well.

    Now, diversity is something all nations have to deal with. And since there's gonna be some degree of international migration, populations will alter over time. Even if Korea has zero immigration policy, the fact is some foreign workers there might marry a Korean and settle there. And Koreans will have to accept this.

    Multi-culturalism is about something very different. It is an agenda, an ideology that says a nation that is homogeneous is sick, evil, and wicked. It is diseased and must cure itself with diversity.
    Multi-culturalism pushes blind faith in diversity-as-a-good when there is so much evidence to the contrary. If diversity works so good, why did the USSR fall apart? Why did Yugoslavia fall apart? Why did the Ottoman World fall apart? And if diversity does such wonders, why are the native peoples of Latin America still under the rule of white elites? Wasn't diversity forced on them through force?

    Also, if diversity is so great, why did the Vietnamese force out the French? Why did Koreans want to be rid of Japanese rule? Empires are diverse. Nationalism seeks liberation from foreign rule. Diversity was once synonymous with Empire. The resistance against imperialism sought to end or reduce diversity by sending white or Japanese colonizers packing to return to their home nations.

    And there was greater peace around the world thanks to such process of liberation. But then, globalism said there should be massive global migrations of people. Mass demographic imperialism is supposedly the answer to all problems. But why? There is no clear answer why even though raw evidence shows that it leads to disasters.

    Multi-culturalism is an ideology based on blind faith.. Yet, it is cancerous and poisonous. It was meant to weaken and harm the native majority community. How do we know this? Well, Jews played a big role in concocting Multi-Culturalism, but they never practice it on Israel. It is always on gentile nations. Jews, who don't accept Syrian refugees, ask Japan and Korea to take them. The nerves! Jewish-controlled foreign policy created much of the mess in Middle East and North Africa, but Jews pressure ONLY European nations and US to take in refugees... but there is no pressure on Israel to take them. If anything, Israelis go to Europe to help refugees come to EU. We can guess as to why. Jews wanna depopulate parts of Muslim world and eventually push all the Palestinians there so they can have an Israel that is all Jewish.
    Multi-culturalism is for suckers. It is snake-oil.

    Now, if multi-culturalism had an iron rule that said 'diversity should end at 5%', it might be doable. But MC has no limits. It is cancerous. If France turns 20% non-white, Multi-culturalism will say MORE. When France turns 40% non-white, MC will call for MORE. When France turns 70% non-white, MC will still call for STILL MORE. It is a cancer.

    Globalized Koreans who call for MC will never know when to say STOP. Also, MC is a lie. Remember when white Americans were assured that change in immigration policy will not upset the demographic balance of the US? Well, what has happened? Now, the PC forces are gloating that US will turn majority non-white.

    MC was created by people who think and feel like Tim Wise. It is a virus, a poison, a cancer. It offers nice-sounding promises, but its goal is to overtake and kill the native host.

    MC may be appealing to people of all nations because the Exotic Solutions seems the easy fix. All nations have problems and difficulties. These are not easy to fix... so some people look to the Foreign Fix. It's like LOST HORIZON where some Shagri-La has all the answers. If some Easterners look to West for all the answers, some in the West exaggerate 'Eastern Wisdom'. Consider the hippies in 60s who were into India as the fountain of wisdom. Look at some Hollywood celebs who think Dalai Lama and Tibetan Buddhism offers all the answers. Now, it may be true that another culture has some good stuff lacking in one's own culture. The danger is leaping to the conclusion that the foreign culture must have all the answers. In fact, they have just as many problems. It's like some Americans, tired of Hollywood junk, overly idealize foreign cinema because they've seen the best of foreign movies. So, they think all foreign movies must be great when, in fact, 95% of them are totally worthless, even worse than Hollywood junk.

    Also, certain globalized indivduals want to feel better and morally superior. And multi-cultism makes for an easy way to feel superior to others of one's kind. So, white progs feel so 'superior' to 'Islamophobic whites' because they welcome Muslims. So much of white proggism is about 'virtue-signaling', as John Derbyshire said. Because national identities are being weakened, people seek new identity of 'virtue-sigaling'.
    And it seems this bug has spread to Koreans too. The Korean commenter who's for MC surely feels superior to other Koreans who oppose it. You see, those who oppose it are 'inbred inferior Koreans'. But he or she is a superior Korean because he or she wants to mix blood with superior foreigners with all the answers. A total phony.
  72. @anon
    Personally I don't think that a big dose of multiculturalism is a bad thing for korea. (I am korean myself) Korea is a very high achieving country but socially speaking...its quite stunted compared to its western counterparts, in fact all of east asia is like this. While the western countries are socially adept and "cool", east asian countries are repressed, stuffy and nerdy. I think the introduction of some volatile, more socially dynamic people in korea will actually be good for the country; I am not denying that these elements would create a lot of social problems and headaches for native korean people, but this is actually the point. I really do think that koreans need to be socially challenged, and they need to be forced to adapt, the introduction of unpredictable (by korean standards) foreigners will help aid this process. If anybody here is intimately familiar with korean culture, then they are probably already aware that korea has a pretty dysfunctional culture beyond its seemingly pristine appearance. In my opinion, this dysfunctionality has roots in the fact that korea has been an insular and closed off society for so long, as a result the culture has become "inbred", with all the deficits that occur as a result of "inbreeding". Compare korea's situation to say, any regular western european country. The average denizen of your typical western european country is a lot more outgoing, extroverted and interesting than your typical korean person, in my opinion this is due to a couple of factors, but one potential factor is that due to europe's constant history of internecine strife, it somehow created a cultural dynamicism which over time selected for socially positive traits which we now identify with european people. Juxtapose this to korea, which has been the target of occasional intermittent regional internecine strife, but for the most part just existed as a vassal state; which is something that IMO ended up being imprinted itself (through cultural feedback loops) on the genetic psychology of korean people. That being said, I feel similarly about east asian culture as a whole, and I feel like its culturally pretty stagnant and compared to other cultures, its just a boring and socially repressed place. Even east asian people themselves are not comfortable with the status quo, but they know nothing else outside of their own culture, so it is difficult for them to identify what exactly is wrong. Most importantly, east asian people, but especially korean people are extremely racist in terms of protecting their genepool. (not so much in terms of being overtly racist though) Thus even if there were a large influx of immigrants into korea, I don't think that korean society outside of impoverished farmers and their mail order brides would be open to mixing with their new counterparts on a mass scale; the social stigma received from other koreans would simply be too much. Thus ethnic koreans wouldn't really be at danger of losing themselves to multiculturalism, korean people will never embrace multiculturalism the same way that many whites do, they are simply too racially insular.

    TLDR: multiculturalism is not a uniformly bad concept, in the case of east asia; this area of the world is severely culturally ossified and it needs some "destructive" elements to help break this ossification and encourage new, more dynamic elements to take their place.

    It doesn’t really take a lot of feminism before literally everything that is our culture ceases to be. Remove a few pillars of a culture and the house falls. As an East Asians, I’ll rather defend the beauty of the culture – though I’m coming from the Chinese side.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    nah, feminism is exactly what our culture needs; if you value physical fitness that is. Allow me to explain. Basically the current east asian phenotype is essentially the result of thousands of years of male sexual selection. IE in highly patriarchal societies such as the ones that existed in east asia, men were the choosers, not women. Even if you take into account the institution of arranged marriages, men (fathers) were still probably the primary deciding factor. That being said, men and especially east asian men will almost always choose petite, mild mannered and gracile women to start a family with and will consequently select against tall or robust women; thus as a natural result of male monopolization of mate choice the east asian race has been selecting for feminine traits (both physical and psychological) for thousands of years. In order to reverse this trend, we need to encourage feminism and female financial independence in east asia, as well as actively disenfranchising the patriarchy (gasp! I know); by doing this we will create the conditions for asian women to be the primary actors in mate selection. (Predictably women in general will usually select for masculinity and high sociability/charisma, which are exactly the traits that the asian race lacks) For a good example of this concept, consider the highly matriarchal societies of africa and the physical/mental qualities which african (matriarchal) societies selected for. Granted, we obviously don't want east asia to take it to quite the same degree as africa, but we definitely do need to encourage policies which will naturally function as eugenic pressures that will allow the asian race to become balanced mentally, physically and sensually; as opposed to our current unbalanced state where we are mentally strong but physically and sensually deficient.
  73. @ogunsiron
    Japan, fortunately, had powerful societies to keep such destructive forces from picking up legs and China gives lip service while disappearing the malcontents
    ----
    Would you mind briefly expanding on the way Japan and China kept the disease at bay ?

    Mostly by realizing that its a disease and by being more autocratic governments in general, from what I can tell. I’m not Japanese, but the existence of the Nippon Kaigi seems to consistently form an effective block against radical feminism. In China, limited expressions are coop’ed by the government while radicals are disappeared and reeducated. Can’t deal with fanatics sometimes except through force, a tool which Western societies have lost.

    Read More
  74. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Peter Frost
    Where do the japanese elite go to school ?

    About 99% are educated at Japanese universities.

    http://www.oecd.org/edu/Japan-EAG2014-Country-Note.pdf

    Japan has very weak cultural linkages with the rest of the world. This is probably a big reason why Japan is not "getting with the program," at least not like South Korea.

    If I ever get back to blogging, I would like to write an update about the situation in South Korea. A lot has happened even over the past year, as noted in this Wiki entry:

    Immigration to South Korea is rising quickly due to a recent multicultural policy, with over 220,000 accepted in 2014.[1] This was a 14.1% increase over the previous year - Between 2009 and 2014, the number of immigrants have been rising 9.3% annually. As of August 2016, there are over 2 million foreign immigrants accounting for 4% of the total population.[2]
    From 2018, the South Korean government will actively pursue massive immigration to counter the declining working population from 2017. Nearly 5 million immigrants are needed by 2020, 10 million by 2030 and over 17 million by 2060, at which point immigrants will represent over 44% of the total working population.[3]

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_South_Korea

    http://thumb.mt.co.kr/06/2015/12/2015122721551652955_1.jpg

    Anon,

    "Coolness" is a positive quality that has been reconstructed to mean the opposite of what it used to mean. It formerly meant the ability to control your emotions. Today, it means a willingness to let go with your emotions with as little self-control as possible. People used to call that "childishness."

    The same goes for words like "culturally stagnant" and "dysfunctional." Yes, these words can be used objectively, but if one uses them objectively to rank the different countries of the world, South Korea would not be in the top 10. Or even the top 100.

    It bothers me, frankly, that South Koreans are starting to internalize the kind of self-hate that North Americans and Western Europeans have been internalizing. The cause seems to be the same. They're plugging themselves into the same ideological and cultural system.

    I would have to disagree, western europe has managed to balance being extremely wealthy, well educated and high achieving while also being extremely well adapted socially as well as sexually. Its not an either/or proposition, its possible to have both. I would hope that one day east asia could also be similarly balanced; however as it currently stands, east asia is overly tilted towards cerebral and financial pursuits, while it is considerably lacking when it comes to social/sexual ability. East asia’s social/sexual retardation is due to a nasty confluence of dysgenic breeding (IE alpha, manly characteristics are either not selected for or bred out), estrogenic diet (soy soy soy soy,) and finally a culture which actively suppresses the kind of free wheeling social/sexual dynamics that the rest of the world seems to enjoy. So basically east asia is the nerdy, asexual student who gets good grades but misses out on all the fun writ large. Im sorry, but financial/educational attainment are not the only things in life that matter, they are important, but east asian culture has taken it too far; so by this rubric I stand by my assertion that indeed east asian/korean culture is deeply stagnant and also dysfunctional.

    I doubt that south koreans could have the same kind of internalized self hatred that north americans and western europeans have; you seem to forget that south koreans are a different race, as such they possess a different racial psychology. When it comes down to it, asian people will never self-flagellate in the same way that whites do, the reason why is because asian people are far too practical, far too selfish, and lack the deep, intense degree of self-awareness needed to feel the need to self-flagellate in the first place. If anything, south koreans of all people could use a little bit of self-hate; we’re entirely too proud, and we have no reason to be so.

    Anyways, south koreans/east asians will never go whole hog on the whole multiculturalism thing; this is why multiculturalism is terrific for east asia because east asian culture will reap the benefits of cultural de-ossification and cultural regeneration, while simultaneously not embracing multiculturalism to the point where ethnic self-abnegation is actually realized.

    Read More
  75. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Miro23

    TLDR: multiculturalism is not a uniformly bad concept, in the case of east asia; this area of the world is severely culturally ossified and it needs some “destructive” elements to help break this ossification and encourage new, more dynamic elements to take their place.
     
    Good point, if Asia isn't getting enough, then maybe the US and Europe are getting too much. You can get too much of a good thing.

    “Good point, if Asia isn’t getting enough, then maybe the US and Europe are getting too much. You can get too much of a good thing.”

    Wrong. That’s like saying cancer is good if you have little of it. It would be nuts to divide people into ones with good little cancer and ones with bad big cancer. Cancer is bad, small or big, because all little cancers turn into big cancers and fatal cancers.
    A person with little cancer will soon have big cancer. It is the logic of cancer. If allowed to grow, it never stops.

    Multi-culturalism is a cancer. It is an invasive and aggressive ideology and was designed to be such. It never ends. It keeps calling for more ‘diversity’, more PC, more minority privilege, and more suppression of native-majority identity and interests to accommodate the minority. It was largely designed by Jews to favor minority Jewish interests over majority gentile interests. It was also a means to increase gentile diversity so that Jewish elite minorities can play divide-and-rule.

    Now, no nation is totally homogeneous. Even seemingly homogeneous ones have some minorities. And even among the native majority, there is some genetic mixture. Even if Korea were all Korean, many Koreans would have some Chinese, Mongol, Manchu, etc blood.

    Some nations are quite diverse, like Iran. Such nations are usually the result of imperialism. Most peoples do not seek control under other people. It is usually forced. There is generally resistance against foreign domination, but if the domination lasts long enough, a kind of imperial nation is created. We see this in English rule over Scotland. Ireland almost became part of permanent Britain as well.

    Now, diversity is something all nations have to deal with. And since there’s gonna be some degree of international migration, populations will alter over time. Even if Korea has zero immigration policy, the fact is some foreign workers there might marry a Korean and settle there. And Koreans will have to accept this.

    Multi-culturalism is about something very different. It is an agenda, an ideology that says a nation that is homogeneous is sick, evil, and wicked. It is diseased and must cure itself with diversity.
    Multi-culturalism pushes blind faith in diversity-as-a-good when there is so much evidence to the contrary. If diversity works so good, why did the USSR fall apart? Why did Yugoslavia fall apart? Why did the Ottoman World fall apart? And if diversity does such wonders, why are the native peoples of Latin America still under the rule of white elites? Wasn’t diversity forced on them through force?

    Also, if diversity is so great, why did the Vietnamese force out the French? Why did Koreans want to be rid of Japanese rule? Empires are diverse. Nationalism seeks liberation from foreign rule. Diversity was once synonymous with Empire. The resistance against imperialism sought to end or reduce diversity by sending white or Japanese colonizers packing to return to their home nations.

    And there was greater peace around the world thanks to such process of liberation. But then, globalism said there should be massive global migrations of people. Mass demographic imperialism is supposedly the answer to all problems. But why? There is no clear answer why even though raw evidence shows that it leads to disasters.

    Multi-culturalism is an ideology based on blind faith.. Yet, it is cancerous and poisonous. It was meant to weaken and harm the native majority community. How do we know this? Well, Jews played a big role in concocting Multi-Culturalism, but they never practice it on Israel. It is always on gentile nations. Jews, who don’t accept Syrian refugees, ask Japan and Korea to take them. The nerves! Jewish-controlled foreign policy created much of the mess in Middle East and North Africa, but Jews pressure ONLY European nations and US to take in refugees… but there is no pressure on Israel to take them. If anything, Israelis go to Europe to help refugees come to EU. We can guess as to why. Jews wanna depopulate parts of Muslim world and eventually push all the Palestinians there so they can have an Israel that is all Jewish.
    Multi-culturalism is for suckers. It is snake-oil.

    Now, if multi-culturalism had an iron rule that said ‘diversity should end at 5%’, it might be doable. But MC has no limits. It is cancerous. If France turns 20% non-white, Multi-culturalism will say MORE. When France turns 40% non-white, MC will call for MORE. When France turns 70% non-white, MC will still call for STILL MORE. It is a cancer.

    Globalized Koreans who call for MC will never know when to say STOP. Also, MC is a lie. Remember when white Americans were assured that change in immigration policy will not upset the demographic balance of the US? Well, what has happened? Now, the PC forces are gloating that US will turn majority non-white.

    MC was created by people who think and feel like Tim Wise. It is a virus, a poison, a cancer. It offers nice-sounding promises, but its goal is to overtake and kill the native host.

    MC may be appealing to people of all nations because the Exotic Solutions seems the easy fix. All nations have problems and difficulties. These are not easy to fix… so some people look to the Foreign Fix. It’s like LOST HORIZON where some Shagri-La has all the answers. If some Easterners look to West for all the answers, some in the West exaggerate ‘Eastern Wisdom’. Consider the hippies in 60s who were into India as the fountain of wisdom. Look at some Hollywood celebs who think Dalai Lama and Tibetan Buddhism offers all the answers. Now, it may be true that another culture has some good stuff lacking in one’s own culture. The danger is leaping to the conclusion that the foreign culture must have all the answers. In fact, they have just as many problems. It’s like some Americans, tired of Hollywood junk, overly idealize foreign cinema because they’ve seen the best of foreign movies. So, they think all foreign movies must be great when, in fact, 95% of them are totally worthless, even worse than Hollywood junk.

    Also, certain globalized indivduals want to feel better and morally superior. And multi-cultism makes for an easy way to feel superior to others of one’s kind. So, white progs feel so ‘superior’ to ‘Islamophobic whites’ because they welcome Muslims. So much of white proggism is about ‘virtue-signaling’, as John Derbyshire said. Because national identities are being weakened, people seek new identity of ‘virtue-sigaling’.
    And it seems this bug has spread to Koreans too. The Korean commenter who’s for MC surely feels superior to other Koreans who oppose it. You see, those who oppose it are ‘inbred inferior Koreans’. But he or she is a superior Korean because he or she wants to mix blood with superior foreigners with all the answers. A total phony.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    nah, I dont feel morally superior to other koreans who oppose MC. Morals have nothing to do with it, I just see MC as a viable way of attacking traditional korean culture which impedes the positive development of korean people. To me, MC is somewhat comparable to mao zedong's cultural revolution; it is true that the cultural revolution destroyed a lot of traditional chinese culture and hurt a lot of people, but on the other hand the wanton destruction caused by the cultural revolution helped liberate china from its own restrictive and backwards culture. Modern day china's meteoric rise would not have been possible if it wasn't for the dissolution of large parts of china's traditional culture. You should also keep in mind that at the end of the qing dynasty china was invaded not because the foreigners were too strong, but rather because china was too weak. At this point in time china was holding itself back because it was mired in the past and in stagnant cultures and traditions; however it was as a result of the western imperial incursions that china was forced to put its house in order. Thus the fate of the late qing dynasty is a perfect example of the kind of "creative destruction" that I am referring to when I advocate MC for korea/east asia.

    On that same tangent, I want to point out that every act of imperialism or western aggression against asia only serves to ultimately advance and strengthen asia. If it wasn't for the western imperialists continually antagonizing east asia over the past couple of centuries, there is a very good chance that east asia would still be living like it was in the 16th century. I am obviously not condoning imperialism here, but I am making the argument that east asia seems to function quite differently than the west, and things that are negatives for the west may potentially function as positives for the east. I see MC in the same light, I think it is something negative that can surprisingly benefit east asia through its destructive capabilities.
    , @Miro23

    Multi-culturalism is a cancer. It is an invasive and aggressive ideology and was designed to be such. It never ends. It keeps calling for more ‘diversity’, more PC, more minority privilege, and more suppression of native-majority identity and interests to accommodate the minority. It was largely designed by Jews to favor minority Jewish interests over majority gentile interests. It was also a means to increase gentile diversity so that Jewish elite minorities can play divide-and-rule.
     
    I agree, anon said "Multiculturalism", but I took it to mean Integration of (some) immigrants.

    Multiculturalism is a disastrous idea, but the "melting pot" idea is fine if it's done carefully with a clear allegiance to a new national identity and no barriers to intermarriage. The US and Europe have benefited from the gradual evolution of their ethnic base along the lines that for example, France is majority ethnic French with some non-French ethnic input. Same as the UK, Germany or Russia. The key is full acceptance and integration of a smallish number of immigrants with the national ethos and majority ethnic group. Pushkin's great grandfather was ethnically Black African and that worked out OK. He didn't push for a Russian version of BLM.

    If immigrants only come for economic reasons and wish to ghettoize themselves, then their true status is "Foreign Resident" with a work permit and an entry and exit date, and no question of gaining nationality or working in government.
  76. The average denizen of your typical western european country is a lot more outgoing, extroverted and interesting than your typical korean person, in my opinion this is due to a couple of factors, but one potential factor is that due to europe’s constant history of internecine strife, it somehow created a cultural dynamicism which over time selected for socially positive traits which we now identify with european people.

    In which case Koreans need to reproduce that constant history of internecine strife in order to become as interesting as Europeans. Your suggestion that Koreans can imitate or manage their way to it is Ban Ki Moon’s level of bureaucrat think.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    incorrect, you need to reread the part that you quoted from me. I wrote:

    but one potential factor is that due to europe’s constant history of internecine strife, it somehow created a cultural dynamicism which over time selected for socially positive traits which we now identify with european people.
     
    I am not implying that koreans can magically become more interesting by merely having internecine strife, rather I clearly stated that internecine strife/some conditions of conflict seem to act as a positive genetic and/or culture eugenic (or dysgenic, depending on what traits you value) force. This of course would not happen over night, but would be a slow, gradual process taking many generations and at least hundreds of years. Either way, it is impossible to create organic internecine conditions, but multiculturalism would somewhat replicate the effect.
  77. @anon
    Personally I don't think that a big dose of multiculturalism is a bad thing for korea. (I am korean myself) Korea is a very high achieving country but socially speaking...its quite stunted compared to its western counterparts, in fact all of east asia is like this. While the western countries are socially adept and "cool", east asian countries are repressed, stuffy and nerdy. I think the introduction of some volatile, more socially dynamic people in korea will actually be good for the country; I am not denying that these elements would create a lot of social problems and headaches for native korean people, but this is actually the point. I really do think that koreans need to be socially challenged, and they need to be forced to adapt, the introduction of unpredictable (by korean standards) foreigners will help aid this process. If anybody here is intimately familiar with korean culture, then they are probably already aware that korea has a pretty dysfunctional culture beyond its seemingly pristine appearance. In my opinion, this dysfunctionality has roots in the fact that korea has been an insular and closed off society for so long, as a result the culture has become "inbred", with all the deficits that occur as a result of "inbreeding". Compare korea's situation to say, any regular western european country. The average denizen of your typical western european country is a lot more outgoing, extroverted and interesting than your typical korean person, in my opinion this is due to a couple of factors, but one potential factor is that due to europe's constant history of internecine strife, it somehow created a cultural dynamicism which over time selected for socially positive traits which we now identify with european people. Juxtapose this to korea, which has been the target of occasional intermittent regional internecine strife, but for the most part just existed as a vassal state; which is something that IMO ended up being imprinted itself (through cultural feedback loops) on the genetic psychology of korean people. That being said, I feel similarly about east asian culture as a whole, and I feel like its culturally pretty stagnant and compared to other cultures, its just a boring and socially repressed place. Even east asian people themselves are not comfortable with the status quo, but they know nothing else outside of their own culture, so it is difficult for them to identify what exactly is wrong. Most importantly, east asian people, but especially korean people are extremely racist in terms of protecting their genepool. (not so much in terms of being overtly racist though) Thus even if there were a large influx of immigrants into korea, I don't think that korean society outside of impoverished farmers and their mail order brides would be open to mixing with their new counterparts on a mass scale; the social stigma received from other koreans would simply be too much. Thus ethnic koreans wouldn't really be at danger of losing themselves to multiculturalism, korean people will never embrace multiculturalism the same way that many whites do, they are simply too racially insular.

    TLDR: multiculturalism is not a uniformly bad concept, in the case of east asia; this area of the world is severely culturally ossified and it needs some "destructive" elements to help break this ossification and encourage new, more dynamic elements to take their place.

    “That being said, I feel similarly about east asian culture as a whole, and I feel like its culturally pretty stagnant and compared to other cultures”

    Compared to which cultures? I don’t get the impression that much of lasting cultural worth has been produced in Western countries in the last few decades. My own country seems extremely dull and boring on a cultural level despite the ever increasing “diversity” and popular culture in many Western countries today is nothing but consumerist dreck.
    And even if Korea could profit from foreign influences, they certainly should never allow large-scale settlement of Muslims or Africans, that will only cause trouble.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    compared to pretty much everywhere else on earth but east asia.

    Europeans seem to have a healthy relationship with sociability and sexuality

    Africans are super social and sexual (maybe a bit too much lol)

    Latin Americans are super social and sexual as well

    The middle east I have no idea about

    Obviously I am referring to cultural stagnation in terms of sociability and sexuality. While this may sound trite to you, this is because as a european you come from a relatively balanced culture and you don't have to worry about things like this, but to the east asian culture, sociability and sexuality are cultural values which east asia sorely needs to cultivate, especially in this day and age of globalized sexual norms. Do you really think its normal, or even desirable that any plain white guy can hop on a plane to asia and within 24 hours be swarmed by tons of willing asian girls while your typical asian guy could never hope to replicate a similar feat with white girls? This is something that needs to be fixed, and traditional asian culture/diet/dysgenic trends are all to blame for this. This is the kind of cultural stagnation that I am referring to; east asian culture has many good aspects, but in the realm of sociability and sexuality it fails miserably.

    Regarding muslim immigrants, they might potentially be troublesome, I don't really have an opinion on them; however when it comes to african immigration I am actually quite sanguine about that. Africans are a pretty colorful, social and sensual people; at the very least they will help the social and sensual development of east asia via cultural osmosis (for an example of this consider latin america and the social and sensual gifts that this culture received from their african diaspora) Additionally an african diaspora in asia would help because it would disrupt existing masculine norms in asia and force them to evolve, essentially a masculinity arms race. A similar effect can be observed in the US where the african american community here definitely has a subtle but very strong effect on notions of masculinity in america. Finally I want to add that masculinity in east asia is frankly embarrassing. East asian people are soft as fuck and everybody in the entire world knows this. I would welcome anything that would shatter the complacency and guilelessness of east asian males and force them to man up.

  78. @Peter Frost
    Where do the japanese elite go to school ?

    About 99% are educated at Japanese universities.

    http://www.oecd.org/edu/Japan-EAG2014-Country-Note.pdf

    Japan has very weak cultural linkages with the rest of the world. This is probably a big reason why Japan is not "getting with the program," at least not like South Korea.

    If I ever get back to blogging, I would like to write an update about the situation in South Korea. A lot has happened even over the past year, as noted in this Wiki entry:

    Immigration to South Korea is rising quickly due to a recent multicultural policy, with over 220,000 accepted in 2014.[1] This was a 14.1% increase over the previous year - Between 2009 and 2014, the number of immigrants have been rising 9.3% annually. As of August 2016, there are over 2 million foreign immigrants accounting for 4% of the total population.[2]
    From 2018, the South Korean government will actively pursue massive immigration to counter the declining working population from 2017. Nearly 5 million immigrants are needed by 2020, 10 million by 2030 and over 17 million by 2060, at which point immigrants will represent over 44% of the total working population.[3]

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_South_Korea

    http://thumb.mt.co.kr/06/2015/12/2015122721551652955_1.jpg

    Anon,

    "Coolness" is a positive quality that has been reconstructed to mean the opposite of what it used to mean. It formerly meant the ability to control your emotions. Today, it means a willingness to let go with your emotions with as little self-control as possible. People used to call that "childishness."

    The same goes for words like "culturally stagnant" and "dysfunctional." Yes, these words can be used objectively, but if one uses them objectively to rank the different countries of the world, South Korea would not be in the top 10. Or even the top 100.

    It bothers me, frankly, that South Koreans are starting to internalize the kind of self-hate that North Americans and Western Europeans have been internalizing. The cause seems to be the same. They're plugging themselves into the same ideological and cultural system.

    “It bothers me, frankly, that South Koreans are starting to internalize the kind of self-hate that North Americans and Western Europeans have been internalizing. The cause seems to be the same. They’re plugging themselves into the same ideological and cultural system.”

    What’s your opinion about the role of Christianity in all of this?
    And good to see you comment here again, would be nice if you returned to blogging at some point.

    Read More
  79. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @anon
    Personally I don't think that a big dose of multiculturalism is a bad thing for korea. (I am korean myself) Korea is a very high achieving country but socially speaking...its quite stunted compared to its western counterparts, in fact all of east asia is like this. While the western countries are socially adept and "cool", east asian countries are repressed, stuffy and nerdy. I think the introduction of some volatile, more socially dynamic people in korea will actually be good for the country; I am not denying that these elements would create a lot of social problems and headaches for native korean people, but this is actually the point. I really do think that koreans need to be socially challenged, and they need to be forced to adapt, the introduction of unpredictable (by korean standards) foreigners will help aid this process. If anybody here is intimately familiar with korean culture, then they are probably already aware that korea has a pretty dysfunctional culture beyond its seemingly pristine appearance. In my opinion, this dysfunctionality has roots in the fact that korea has been an insular and closed off society for so long, as a result the culture has become "inbred", with all the deficits that occur as a result of "inbreeding". Compare korea's situation to say, any regular western european country. The average denizen of your typical western european country is a lot more outgoing, extroverted and interesting than your typical korean person, in my opinion this is due to a couple of factors, but one potential factor is that due to europe's constant history of internecine strife, it somehow created a cultural dynamicism which over time selected for socially positive traits which we now identify with european people. Juxtapose this to korea, which has been the target of occasional intermittent regional internecine strife, but for the most part just existed as a vassal state; which is something that IMO ended up being imprinted itself (through cultural feedback loops) on the genetic psychology of korean people. That being said, I feel similarly about east asian culture as a whole, and I feel like its culturally pretty stagnant and compared to other cultures, its just a boring and socially repressed place. Even east asian people themselves are not comfortable with the status quo, but they know nothing else outside of their own culture, so it is difficult for them to identify what exactly is wrong. Most importantly, east asian people, but especially korean people are extremely racist in terms of protecting their genepool. (not so much in terms of being overtly racist though) Thus even if there were a large influx of immigrants into korea, I don't think that korean society outside of impoverished farmers and their mail order brides would be open to mixing with their new counterparts on a mass scale; the social stigma received from other koreans would simply be too much. Thus ethnic koreans wouldn't really be at danger of losing themselves to multiculturalism, korean people will never embrace multiculturalism the same way that many whites do, they are simply too racially insular.

    TLDR: multiculturalism is not a uniformly bad concept, in the case of east asia; this area of the world is severely culturally ossified and it needs some "destructive" elements to help break this ossification and encourage new, more dynamic elements to take their place.

    “Personally I don’t think that a big dose of multiculturalism is a bad thing for korea. (I am korean myself) Korea is a very high achieving country but socially speaking…its quite stunted compared to its western counterparts, in fact all of east asia is like this. While the western countries are socially adept and “cool”, east asian countries are repressed, stuffy and nerdy. I think the introduction of some volatile, more socially dynamic people in korea will actually be good for the country; I am not denying that these elements would create a lot of social problems and headaches for native korean people, but this is actually the point.”

    You make a good point about wanting to make Korea more culturally dynamic and interesting. But you got your priorities upside down. The first responsibility of a nation to survive and defend itself as a race and culture. Everything else is secondary. If Korea had health birthrates, your proposal wouldn’t be so bad. But with plummeting birthrates among Koreans, increased diversity could mean Koreans losing their land to foreigners forever. Surrendering one’s nation to foreigners just to win some more ‘cool’ pokemon points is about the dumbest thing one can imagine.

    Also, is ‘cool’ such a good thing? It has style but it’s meaningless and lacks substance. Blacks are ‘cool’ in the US, but their communities have no value, no meaning. It’s all noise and volume without sense. Because blacks put style above substance, they live in an empire of lies like Black Lives Matter when, in fact, most blacks are murdered by other blacks who are into ‘cool’ rap gangsta culture.
    True meaning comes not from ‘cool’ or style but from moral sense and substance. What Korea needs to do is worry less about style and care more about truth and meaning. And truth and meaning don’t result from more diversity and noise. After all, Singapore is a more diverse, but it is one of the most dull places culturally. If anything, all that diversity has made it necessary for the government to suppress dissension.

    ‘Cool’ is about glitter, easy sensations. It isn’t about reality. It is an illusion, mirage. Now, ‘cool’ is fine in entertainment, like in 007 movies. But mistaking it for reality or truth is foolish. After all, the real Sean Connery depended on stunt doubles to do all the tricks. The culture of ‘cool’ favors vapid image over true substance. Korea, like Japan and EU, is filled with ‘vibrant’ style of ‘cool’ in pop music and etc. But, it has made both nations dumber, shallower, and trashier.

    Also, isn’t it odd that Korea was more volatile and dynamic when it was more homogeneous? Korea today is more diverse, with many men having foreign brides. But it’s a duller place except in cinema. Why? I would think the reason was the same as in Japan before birthrates dropped suddenly. In the past, there were bigger families. Parents couldn’t micro-manage all the kids. Kids played outside. There were fewer control over the kids. And parents had kids just to have kids, to have families.
    Back then, Korean parents, like Japanese parents, didn’t expect every child to be success in college and in having Good Job. Family and togetherness came first.
    There was a time when Japanese didn’t look down on many jobs as ‘dirty, dangerous, and demeaning’. After all, modern Japan was built by many Japanese who did those kinds of jobs.

    [MORE]

    But then, success made Korean parents care only about more success. They had kids only to turn them into successes and bragging rights to friends. Ordinary jobs were not good enough for their kids. It was ‘dirty’ and only for lowly foreigners from poor nations.
    And to turn their precious kids into successes, there was the parental culture of micro-management and more control over kids’ lives. And since kids had no time to play outdoors, they grew up on videogames and internet. And since families had fewer kids, it meant fewer or no uncles, aunts, cousins, and that make life more interesting.
    Korea seems to be going Japanese in this regard. Japan was a far more dynamic place after WWII when things were so out of whack. Many had to find their own way.
    Japan became duller with the success of 70s and 80s. With more prosperity and social order, there was more systematic control over Japanese youths. And fewer kids meant that every kid got controlled more by parents and teachers. And fewer kids meant fewer siblings, fewer friends, fewer cousins. and that meant relying more on TV and videogames as friends. And rise of pop culture meant Japanese kids growing up to identify with cartoons, movies, soap opera, and etc than with their own race, culture, history.

    But the problem is there in EU too. Did Sweden become more interesting and dynamic as the result of mass migration and multi-culturalism? Yes, in terms of crime and violence. But intellectually and artistically, Sweden got worse. Multi-culturalism has made Swedish even more timid and repressed. Why? Because the Cult of Diversity means that the majority population mustn’t do anything to OFFEND the minorities. So, there is more censorship, more Big Brother controls. Swedes are not even allowed to complain about the Rape Epidemic or call an end to immigration.
    Also, the example of Latin America shows that Diversity doesn’t necessarily lead to more dynamic culture. Most Latin American nations were stagnant economically, culturally, and intellectually.
    The most dynamic centers of the world in the 19th century and first half of 20th century were relatively homogeneous civilizations like Germany, UK, France, US, and Japan. If diversity makes for more dynamism, it should have been Central Asia with its Eurasian population that should have achieved more than Japanese.

    Funnily enough, the fact that you think Korea needs more Diversity to be more dynamic goes to show how PC has made you un-dynamic and stupid. If Koreans want more individuality and freedom, they only need to find it within themselves. If they lack the courage and vision to find it in their own hearts and minds, then they are cowards. You seem to be arguing that Koreans are so worthless and deficient that they must leech off the dynamism of others. Such attitude is pathetic. NO wonder so many Koreans want to come to the US and just flee their own nation. They lack the guts and vision to fix problems at home. They just want to rely on OTHER people as either emigration destinations or immigration hopes. Or maybe the immigration-outlet has made Koreans so devaluing of their own nation. Ever since the world opened up to Korean immigration, most Koreans think, “We should leave and go to better country” instead of thinking to stay and fix their own problems. Same thing in many nations, which accounts for all the brain drain. US as immigration destination has made many people look to ESCAPE TO AMERICA as solution to all their problems. It is the coward’s way out.

    But then, were Koreans always this lackluster and dull? Wasn’t there a dynamic protest movement in the 80s? Unlike Japan that was handed its democracy by the US, didn’t Koreans fight for their democracy? Didn’t young people make sacrifices to make this happen? What happened to this fire? What we hear from this millennial Korean is “we need foreigners because we koreans are uncool and suck so bad.” How pussy.

    I see the problem as Globalism than Korean-ism. Koreans became so obsessed with economically catching up to the advanced world that they forgot their own identity, culture, and values. What’s happening to Korea is just another variation of what’s happening all over the world.
    Koreans only judge themselves in relation to OTHER cultures.
    So, they’ve neglected their own history, heritage, and culture. They use plastic surgery to look white. They imitate black rappers like dumb yellow monkeys. They dye their hair blonde to look western or like Japanese anime characters. They imitate Western PC because they think the West is fount of all wisdom and because they are afraid to think for themselves. They neglect their own identity and culture and imitate OTHERS but then complain that Korean-ness sucks. They reject their true identity and heritage in pale imitation of the ‘cool’ West, but they blame all the problem on Korean-ness. No, the problem is Koreans imitate too much and fantasize too much of the Superior Other instead of valuing their own race and culture and building on them.
    Korea has come to suck because Koreans are obsessed with the Other. Because their sense of worth is measured by what Others think. It’s like the articles about how South Koreans are obsessed about winning the Nobel Prize in Literature, as if they need validation by the West for their self-worth. It is THIS attitude that is turning Korea into dull and dumb country. It is not that Koreans are too Korean but they are too imitative and slavish to foreign styles and approvals. People who love literature love it out of genuine love. They don’t care about prizes or foreign validations. Koreans feel they have no value unless they are validated by the Superior Other, mainly the West. If some Koreans wanna be validated by Sweden’s Nobel community, others wanna be validated by black rap community. Such slavish imitation that rejects one’s own race and culture doesn’t lead to anything real or true.

    Koreans seem to be stuck in some kind of contradiction. They want to be more dynamic, free, and confident as individuals… but they say they must depend on OTHERS to show the way. What kind of confidence and freedom is that? What can non-Koreans do for Koreans what Koreans can’t do for themselves because they are so lacking in will and agency?
    Such hope of the Foreign Fix is especially laughable when many migrants to Korea come from rather backward places like Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, and other Asian nations that are hardly known for culture of individualism and great achievement. How will Korea become more dynamic by having more people from rest of Asia that have achieved even less than Koreans? It’s like Hungarians thinking their nation will be made more dynamic by arrival of migrants from poor Arab nations. Ridiculous.

    Also, the commenter’s sense that Korea must rely on OTHER peoples is part of the imperial legacy. He or she complains about Korea’s servility to Great China, but he or she expresses similar servility to Globalism.
    For 2000 yrs, Koreans felt they must look to and rely on China and only China. Now, the new generation of Koreans say Korean must look to globo-multi-culti PC. So, Koreans can’t think or do anything on their own. Koreans must look to China, to US, to globalism, or etc. They must follow like a dog some great country or some foreign ideology.
    Now, it’s good for any nation to trade and learn from other nations and peoples, but ultimately, it has to develop its own modes of freedom and truth. It can’t rely on others to do the homework for them.

    But Koreans are a bunch of leeches. Look at the military arrangement. Cold War is long over. China and Russia do business with S. Korea, more than they do with N. Korea. South Korea has 40x the economy of the North and more than double the population. North Korea is a nation of skinny half-starved people. Yet, South Korea still relies on the US for ‘protection’. Lone Israel, surrounded by big hostile nations, goes it alone in defending itself. But South Korea, much bigger and richer than N. Korea in population and economy, still hides behind Uncle Sam that, btw, provokes tensions with NK merely to keep and use SK as pawn against China.

    So, it seems to me that the problem of South Korea is not that it’s too Korean. Rather, it’s because dumb and cowardly Koreans are too wussy to look into their own minds, hearts, and souls to find true freedom and truth and independence. Instead, they cower behind Uncle Sam. They still take orders from a nation that divided their country and rained down holocaust-level bombs on the north. It is no wonder that the commenter looks to ‘multi-culturalism’ for solution to Korea’s problem. It is the same pattern. Korean cowards cannot find their own way, their own answers. Just like they need Uncle Sam for protection from starving people in North Korea, they need migrants from Philippines, Indonesia, Iran, Cambodia, India, and etc. to learn how to be free. LOL.

    In a way, truth and freedom are so easy to find. Indeed, they are difficult because they are so easy. All it takes a bit of courage, but courage doesn’t come easily to a nation of cowards that won’t face up to its own history and won’t defend itself(and still plays whore dog to Uncle Sam). As long as Koreans are cowards, no amount of Multi-Culti will save it. Also, when people of cowardice invite people of courage, won’t the latter gain control over the former. Didn’t China invite the Manchus only to be ruled by them? Didn’t EU’s reliance on US protection turn it into the vassal of Washington DC? When Europeans lost the will to defend themselves, they just turned into pussy-puppets of the US. South Koreans seem to have the same mentality. A cultural mindset of dependence on US and globalism.

    If Koreans don’t have the fire of courage, they shouldn’t expect it to given to them by those who have it. Those with courage will only burn the Korean cowards who don’t have it.
    Furthermore, what is the Western attitude toward nations like Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and even China? It is one of arrogance and supremacism. The West acts like it is ‘more evolved’ and that the East exists only to obey and imitate the West. And given the cowardly Korean commenter who made the comments above, it’s not surprising why the West feels this way. The West says, ‘We are better than you and you must obey us’, and this Korean commenter says, ‘Yes, we Koreans suck and we need YOU to teach us to be free because we suck so bad.’ What a pussy dog.
    Now, why can’t this Korean tell himself and his people that they should find within their own hearts and minds to be free? Why this servile and slavish look to the West or the Other for salvation?

    He also seems to miss the point that the West is currently in a state of crazy contradiction. On the one hand, the West does indeed say, ‘We are the best, most evolved, most exceptional, and most indispensable’, but the West is also about the cowardice of its native white population that says, ‘we suck so bad, we are so dull and white bread, we are so guilty, we are evil, and therefore, we need diversity to redeem us from our wicked whiteness’.

    The funny irony is that the Korean commenter apes this crazy Western logic. He looks to the West for the Answer of being ‘cool’, but the West is now in the process of denouncing itself as ‘evil’ because it’s not diverse enough. Indeed, ‘western values’ have now been rewritten to call for the desired abolition of the West. White politicians in the US talk about how it is great, even necessary, for US to become a non-white majority nation. German politicians say German cities will be majority non-German, and that is a good thing. Koreans, being so slavish, ape these sentiments in their own way: “We Koreans are such dull yellow bread that we need diversity to enrich us.” What a yellow dog. If the White West must commit suicide, Korean yellow dogs must follow because it is in their cultural DNA to follow their master.

    According to the commenter, Korean problem is too much inbreeding, culturally and biologically. (This is rather odd for a nation that’s been whore-vagina to Uncle Sam since end of WWII and pimp-rapist of Vietnam during Vietnam War. Funnier still since Koreans are a race of Michael Jacksons who rely on extensive surgery, hair-dyeing, and rap-culture-aping to look ‘American’. When Koreans complain about ‘inbreeding’, they really seem to mean they want Western features and feel inferior for having slanty eyes and black hair. They want the ‘superior’ features of other races, esp white ones). But is out-breeding necessarily better than ‘national in-breeding’?
    Let’s look at Central Asia where most people are a mix of Asian and European. Are they necessarily more dynamic? Those cultures seem pretty backward and dull. Or look at Uighurs of Northwest China. Many people there look like a cross of Turks and East Asians. Are they more dynamic? Or look at North Africa, a mix of Semitic, Arabic, European, and black. Is North Africa some dynamic paradise? It’s mostly poor, boring, and backward, and its people all wanna flee to Europe, especially to Northern Europe that is most homogeneous(though not for long as the invasion continues unabated). Most Indonesians are a hodge-podge of mixed blood, but they cannot even control their own economy. Chinese rule Indonesian economy. Latin America has majority mixed blood peoples, and most Latin American nations are dull culturally and intellectually.
    And then, look at the golden age of Europe. When Germany produced its great composers, it was all white. When UK produces its giants of literature, it was all white. Ingmar Bergman, the giant of Swedish cinema, is the product of all-white Sweden.
    And Japan saw great cultural flowering through much of its history, during reform era, and after WWII when it was mostly all-Japanese.
    If diversity is the panacea to cultural stagnation, then Afghanistan should be the cultural capital of the world.

    Also, one must not confuse style with the real thing. The West may seem ‘cool’ because of its pop culture, but it has also made the West dumber, trashier, and shallower. Style adds spice to substance, but the current West is style without substance. No wonder all this homo garbage is the new religion. It is worship of the ephemeral, faddish, fashionable, hyped.
    Today’s British people may be ‘cooler’ in their loutish behavior, drunkenness, lack of inhibitions, and party culture, but they have less substance as thinkers, writers, critics, and commentators. Aldous Huxley and George Orwell were not cool, but they had courage, integrity, and conviction. They had honesty and substance. That is the sort of thing that people should emulate. I’m sure that Korea has its share of honest critics and writers, but they don’t get noticed because so much of globalist culture showers attention on the loud, brash, stupid, instant, glitzy, and obnoxious… like the dumb ugly gangnam style song. If that is the ‘cool’ that Koreans aspire to, they are morons or Korons, aka Korean morons.

    Indeed, the example of Japan after WWII goes to show that great things can be achieved in a mono-racial-culture. Kurosawa and other great film-makers didn’t need foreigners to teach them how to make films. Sure, they took inspiration from foreign films and learned from others. But they learned to do their own thing because they had confidence, conviction, and belief in their own vision. They were not wimps who who said, “Oh geez, we are so lame, we are so inbred. We can’t do anything unless we are surrounded by foreigners who will teach us to be creative.” While US occupation and its after-effects did allow for more freedom, the cultural flowering of modern Japan happened much earlier. And even before Westernization, Japan achieved more culturally and artistically than Korea because Japanese had trust in their own genius, creativity, and culture. Apparently, Korons lack this confidence. Is it because of servile attachment to China over many centuries? But if this is the problem, then Koreans need to learn to to be more independent-minded, not more dependent on foreigners for the fix. Independence isn’t isolation. No one is opposed to learning from other nations/cultures and trading with other economies. But especially because the world is now so inter-connected, a nation/culture must insist on its independence because failure to do so will make it come under the dominance of Globalism controlled by the US. Look at European nations. Each nation surrendered its independence to EU, and then EU as a whole surrendered to US-led globalism. This didn’t lead to more dynamic Europe but one more hampered by PC, censorship, ideological conformity, spread of trash culture, etc.

    Also, Globalist Culture does NOT foster more creativity, individuality, and vitality. Yes, globo-culture is loud, clamorous, and hyper-active, but it’s all just empty fire-works. It’s the umpteenth STAR WARS sequel, the same dumb rap song about ‘muh gun’ and ‘muh dic*’, the same booty shaking dance moves, the same immature attitudes, the same night club whore culture, the same tattoo on ass, the same piercing through nose, the same hair dyed blonde, green, or pink. Globo-creativity is about everyone watching same comic book movie, listening to same kind of hip hop, imitating ghetto trash culture, and reducing all of culture into orgamo-pornography of insta-gratification video-game.

    Indeed, current globalist culture isn’t even ‘cool’ in the classic sense. Classic Cool really was impressive in style if not much else. Sean Connery as 007 was cool. Spaghetti Westerns were cool. Swinging London had some cool fashions. Beatles were cool. James Dean was cool. They didn’t add up to much meaning, but they had really impressive style. But what is today’s cool? It’s some tattoo on ass of a moron with piercing through his nose under a hair dyed pink that belongs to a man who claims to be a ‘woman’. ‘Cool’ is middle-aged rappers reaching in their 50s still yapping about ‘my ho’s’. It’s about black thugs making all sorts of ugly faces with ‘attitude, ya’. It’s the French, Germans, Swedes, and Brits imitating this same trash. It’s J-pop sounding the same song after song like dildo-vibrators to the ears. It’s K-pop sounding like J-pop combined with rap imitation. This isn’t real creativity. Popular music of each nation was more individualistic and different and diverse in the pro-global era.

    And if it’s true that racial-mixing, socially or sexually, leads to more creativity, we sure don’t see it among Asian-Americans. While Asian-Americans, Korons included, may be more outgoing and expressive due to Americanization, they are hardly more creative, individualistic, or whatever in the West. Look at Chinese/Japanese/Korean-American writers, activists, journalists, and academics, and they all sound the same. They just sound like carbon-copy of white Political Correctness. Or they are just pale imitators of black rage or some POC crap. They either sound like parrots of PC or yellow rappin’ fools.

    Why is it that the most interesting creative Asians are all in Asia? Kurosawa, Mishima, Kobo Abe, Mizoguchi, Tanizaki, Imamura, and etc all drew inspiration from the West, but they were all Japanese in Japan. The best Chinese film-makers are in China. Hong Kong, very creative stylistically, developed in Asia. While drawing inspiration from other cultures is good and necessary, whoever said you need foreigners all around you to teach you to be creative? Asians in America and Canada are surrounded by non-Asians, but all they do is imitate and parrot. Ever look at Chinese academic radicals in colleges? They claim to be ‘free thinking progressives’ but EVERYTHING they say is an imitation of white PC.

    The choice is not between total isolation and total surrender. I agree that some degree of diversity can liven up any nation. If Korea can maintain a non-Korean population at around 5%, I don’t see any damage, at least as long as blacks are not part of the mix. Blacks, even in small numbers, can do lots of damage. Look at France, Holland, Canada, and etc. Japan has small number of blacks, but they cause a lot of problems.
    But the example of EU goes to show that once a nation catches the multi-culti virus, there is no end. Multi-culturalism was designed ideologically to act like a cancer. once it begins, it has no end.
    The foreign masses keep coming and coming. They are welcomed by so-called ‘progressives’ who seek to destroy every national identity and by corporate interests that want cheap docile labor. Also, the rich industrialists know that a diverse work force is easier to exploit that a mono-national one. If all workers in Korea are Korean, they can unite as a force to demand more. If they are diverse, they will be harder to unite against the rich class. We see the same pattern in the West. The rich elites don’t mind diversity among the work force since a diverse work force barely united into strong labor movement. There was a time when the British working class held great moral capital. But today, the British elites excoriate and denounce the white working class for not being ‘welcoming’ of foreign masses who are willing to work for less.

    Anyway, because of low birth rates in South Korea and the logic of Multi-culturalism(where the mass invasion never ends), it would be stupid to gamble on the promise of Diversity as a fix to Korea’s problem.
    There is no quick fix to national problems. If indeed, as the commenter says, South Koreans are not independent-minded enough, then they need to fix the problem on their own. It cannot be fixed by foreigners if Koreans are a bunch of cowards and morons. Besides, many foreigners come from poor Asian nations that are hardly known for innovation, creativity, and originality. What can Koreans really learn from Cambodians or Laotians? Or Mongolians? Maybe Mongols can teach them to make yak yogurt. If the commenter means Western foreigners, he or she needs to understand that the West is now the World Capital of Political Correctness, racial self-loathing, censorship, and garbage pop culture. What may seem ‘free’ in the West is mere hedonism promoted by capitalism. It is not the freedom of people with minds and souls but the debauchery of people without self-control and sense. It is the ‘freedom’ of whore culture, pimp culture, decadence, and degeneracy. In the West, people’s lives are destroyed for not worshiping homosexuals and trannies. If this is what Koreans want, then they are indeed a bunch of slaves who only know how to imitate, follow, and obey the powerful. Since the West is still the richest and most powerful, the Korons seem to think they must emulate everything about it. That is not true freedom, true individuality, and true independence.

    Besides, if Koreans cannot learn to be free on their own, it only means lots of foreigners in Korea will lead to their domination over Koreans. After all, the commenter seems to think that foreigners can be free & dynamic on their own. But Koreans lack this abilty. So, when a people who are naturally free and independent mix with people who are naturally servile and slavish, then the former will rule over the latter. The commenter hopes that the freedom of foreigners will rub off on Koreans, but there is no guarantee. Rather, the foreigners may just come to rule over slavish and servile imitative Koreans.

    Koreans need to stop being such dogs. They need to stop looking to OTHERS for the solution. They need to defend themselves and run their own military. They must stop being cowards hiding behind Uncle Sam. The Cold War is so over. China and Russia want to be friend with South Korea. They will not back any North Korean aggression against the South. The South has more than 2x population of north and 40x the economy. So, why are South Koreans hiding behind Uncle Sam? Is the NK threat really so serious? If so, why did South Korea allow a bunch of homos to take over music-TV industry and promote girly look among the boys? Imagine that! South Korea is under so much threat from starving North Korea that it needs to hide behind Uncle Sam… but Korean pop culture should encourage South Korean boys to look and act like girlies. And if South Korea is under such threat, why do so many Koreans wanna come to the US? They don’t want to stay and defend their own country but leave it forever while asking Uncle Sam to defend them?

    And why can’t South Koreans be honest about their own history and begin a dialogue about how the division of Korea is the result of US policy and that it is continuing US policy to maintain the division so as to keep South Korea as a puppet against China forever? These seem to me like substantive issues, but the commenter is fixated on insipid stuff like the ‘cool’ style. I mean who cares about ‘cool’? This ‘cool’ cult is destroying cultures all over. After all, what does ‘coolness’ have to do with anything real? The Americans who built the roads, worked in factories, survived WWII and Depression, and toiled on farms were NOT cool. The kind of people in GRAPES OF WRATH were not ‘cool’. But they led full meaningful lives of family, tradition, religion, community. And I’m sure all nations, Korea included, has tons of these stories of people who went through 20th century with so much tumult and crisis. But in the 21st century, we have some silly vapid Korean commenter who, in imitation of deracinated West, yammers about how his nation needs to be more ‘cool’. The father in BICYCLE THIEVES isn’t cool. The dying man in IKIRU isn’t cool. Vito Corleone who loses his job to some mafia flunky in GODFATHER II and walks home jobless isn’t cool. But are their lives and stories any less meaningful or worthy? Whatever happened to humanism that values people for what they are than for some dumb hipster style?

    Globalism and Americanism make people all around the world act like Aesop’s dog with bone looking at the illusion in the water. They don’t value what they have. They have no sense of the value of what they have. Look at those nutty European nations. They are playing ideological games with their homelands. If they lost their homelands, they are finished. They fantasize about some Diversity Utopia where their own motherlands are being vanishing before their eyes.

    Now, Korea doesn’t mean much to the world cuz it’s not a great culture. Japanese culture is really something special. If Japanese had never existed, the world would lose something. While not a central world culture, the Japanese did remarkable things in painting, sculpture, architecture, gardening, music, (music)theater, cinema, and etc. And their samurai culture and code of bushido are fascinating. Japanese conceptualized culture as a blend of art and action. So, it is a great addition to World Culture.
    But if Korea had never existed, we wouldn’t miss much. Still, my view is every nation/culture is valuable for what it is, and it should be of immense value to the people who belong to it. Why? It’s like family. Most families are not great, but one’s parents and family members should mean more than any other. Besides, for a people to rise to potential greatness, they must exist in the first place. Germans were ungreat for a long time before they became great. The Jews were, for a long time, just a bunch of goat-herders before they began to make a difference.

    Korea is a special nation in this sense. It is not a fake artificial nation created by imperialists. Look at Latin America. Fake nations created by Spanish and Portuguese empire. And their indigenous peoples still live under iron heel of the conquering races. And Philippines, which was conquered by the Spanish, is still a hodgepodge nation. It was forged by conquest and foreign rule than independence and organic development. Indonesia is totally a fake nation, the product of Dutch imperialism. Iraq, Syria, Libya, modern Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and etc are all artificial creations of European imperialists. Things are even crazier in black Africa with giant nations made up of 100s, even 1000s, of tribes.

    In contrast, nations like Japan, Korea, and Vietnam are indeed products of organic growths over long periods of time. And the relative geographical isolation of Korea and Japan made this possible, just like Sweden was able to remain mostly Nordic to due to isolation(before crazy ideologues decided to flood it with Muslims and Africans in the notion that there is no such thing as ‘Swedish culture’.) They are real nations with real history, culture, and identity. They were not ‘invented’ by imperialism and post-imperialism. Japanese did try to create a giant Asian empire, but they failed.
    So, it seems Koreans have one thing in common with Japanese. Though their culture isn’t as special as that of the Japanese, they have a real nation, a real history, and real identity. That is of great value for such truly organic nations are rare in the entire world. Why throw it away cuz of some globo fad about ‘cool’-ness?

    Geographical isolation was a blessing for Korea and Japan. Look at the Middle East. As so many cultures and races are joined together, there has been constant invasion and counter-invasion. Turkey still has a sad problem with Kurds who want a nation of their own. Chinese let Koreans have a nation of their own. Turks won’t all this to Kurds. And we saw the recent war in Syria. We saw what diversity of clan loyalties can do to Libya. Iraq is torn apart by sects and ethnos, as Arabs and Kurds don’t see eye to eye. Who the hell wants diversity, at least on this level? Who wants a fake national identity like ‘Iraqi’ that doesn’t mean anything? Would Koreans really like it better if they were geographically surrounded by India, Iran, Egypt, Brazil, and etc? Would Korea even have existed or developed if it had been surrounded by so many other peoples who might have invaded and taken over?

    Geographical isolation has its downsides, but it also has advantages. It makes possible the survival and development of a truer culture that is relatively protected from invasions. Consider the many ancient civilizations of the Middle East. Most are gone forever. Whoever hears of Hittites or Babylonians or Phoenicians? They are gone because of constant invasions and clashes. Only the Jews survived intact as an ancient identity, and it was because they created the Covenant of the Biology and Spirit.

    Now, because Japanese and Koreans(and I gather most other Asians) have no such concept, they can only survive as a people in their homeland. Jews had no home for 1000s of yrs, but they kept their identity. But Asians cannot. Look at Japanese in Brazil. There are over a million of them, but they are un-Japanese. They know nothing of the language, culture, or history of Japan. And they don’t even care to know. When they return to Japan, they feel as total foreigners in the land of their ancestors.
    I recall reading something about Koreans in Russia, and they are the same way. They don’t feel Korean at all and just feel ‘Russian’. And they don’t care to know anything about their homeland. And my encounters with most Asians in the US tells me they know nothing, care nothing, and feel nothing for their homeland. Their ‘asian identity’ consists of people-of-color cliches so that they can associate themselves with ‘cooler’ blacks or PC anti-white activism. Maybe the Chinese care somewhat cuz of middle kingdom pride, but a lot of Chinese girls seem to marry Jewish men and have Jewish kids. Look at Zuckerberg’s wife. Hindus are better at keeping their culture, but then, there is no single India, an artificial nation created by British Imperialism and doesn’t really make sense without that history despite Hindu resentment toward Anglos.

    Anyway, the lesson of the dog with bone in mouth looking at the water is a lesson for all time. Find value in what you have. Don’t grasp for too much. Japan tried to grab more and lost WWII in bad way. EU is now trying to be World Culture with all this mass migration and Diversity. It is on a path to hell. And Korea will just be part of this mess if they don’t wake up from the idiot shallow cult of the ‘cool’.

    I’m sure Korea needs much progress and improvement in many areas, but foreigners are not the answer. Also, if indeed Koreans are such dull pussies and cowards, foreigners will look upon them with contempt and arrogance. Foreigners will come not with respect but disdain. After all, the Korean commenter’s message is, “We suck so bad, we are so worthless, so please come to our country and teach us to be free and ‘cool’. If Koreans feel this way, who would respect them? They are like dogs without a master begging for a master to come rule over them.

    What Koreans need is courage and honesty within their own hearts. It is so easy yet so hard. So hard because some brave soul has to take the first step.
    From the commenter’s remark, it is obvious that he or she is a coward who is unwilling to take the first step. He or she wants to be protected by Uncle Sam and wants foreigners to teach Koreans how to be free.
    What a koron.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    koron, lol. Thats a good one.

    We are obviously talking about two types of "coolness". You are referring to the (shallow) social perception of "coolness", I am referring to much more objective, deeper and substantial notions of individual dynamicism, intense self awareness/sentience, charisma and well developed interpersonal/social skills; all of which are things which are mediated by culture and also genes. This is the kind of "coolness" which I seek for korean/asian people. This is much more preferable to the quasi-autistic, highly introverted, semi-sentience that korean/asian people generally possess. Korean/east asian people are held back by their own repressive culture; if multiculturalism can be used as a tool to attack and weaken indigenous east asian culture so that something better can arise then so be it. I am not advocating multiculturalism for korea just because "its cool" and its "what the cool kids are doing." I am advocating multiculturalism in korea because in the case of korea/east asia, multiculturalism would actually be quite useful for korea/east asia since multiculturalism is effective at destroying/weakening cultures, and as I stated before, korea/east asia's own worst enemy is our own culture which stifles dynamism, passion and creativity.

    Ironically you accuse korean people (as well as myself) of being mindless, weak followers; however this is the entire point of why I am advocating multiculturalism in the first place, in order to expunge and transform mindlessness and weakness into individuality and strength via intentional cultural destruction.

    Koreans/east asians do possess the ability for greatness, but it will require cultural change, dietary change and also a correct application of eugenic measures.
  80. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Hacienda

    The average denizen of your typical western european country is a lot more outgoing, extroverted and interesting than your typical korean person, in my opinion this is due to a couple of factors, but one potential factor is that due to europe’s constant history of internecine strife, it somehow created a cultural dynamicism which over time selected for socially positive traits which we now identify with european people.
     
    In which case Koreans need to reproduce that constant history of internecine strife in order to become as interesting as Europeans. Your suggestion that Koreans can imitate or manage their way to it is Ban Ki Moon's level of bureaucrat think.

    incorrect, you need to reread the part that you quoted from me. I wrote:

    but one potential factor is that due to europe’s constant history of internecine strife, it somehow created a cultural dynamicism which over time selected for socially positive traits which we now identify with european people.

    I am not implying that koreans can magically become more interesting by merely having internecine strife, rather I clearly stated that internecine strife/some conditions of conflict seem to act as a positive genetic and/or culture eugenic (or dysgenic, depending on what traits you value) force. This of course would not happen over night, but would be a slow, gradual process taking many generations and at least hundreds of years. Either way, it is impossible to create organic internecine conditions, but multiculturalism would somewhat replicate the effect.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hacienda
    You make the mistake of the mis-scaled comparison. Korean to European comparison is absurd. Like asking people who live in Normal, Illinois to act like Chicagoans. And your remedy is to import Chicagoans to Normal. A better one is Korea to Poland. Similar population and geographic size. What you're actually (unstated) comparing is Korea to America. A recurring problem with Koreans the last 50 years. Koreans will never find their own culture as long as they keep comparing themselves to Americans.
  81. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Peter Frost
    Where do the japanese elite go to school ?

    About 99% are educated at Japanese universities.

    http://www.oecd.org/edu/Japan-EAG2014-Country-Note.pdf

    Japan has very weak cultural linkages with the rest of the world. This is probably a big reason why Japan is not "getting with the program," at least not like South Korea.

    If I ever get back to blogging, I would like to write an update about the situation in South Korea. A lot has happened even over the past year, as noted in this Wiki entry:

    Immigration to South Korea is rising quickly due to a recent multicultural policy, with over 220,000 accepted in 2014.[1] This was a 14.1% increase over the previous year - Between 2009 and 2014, the number of immigrants have been rising 9.3% annually. As of August 2016, there are over 2 million foreign immigrants accounting for 4% of the total population.[2]
    From 2018, the South Korean government will actively pursue massive immigration to counter the declining working population from 2017. Nearly 5 million immigrants are needed by 2020, 10 million by 2030 and over 17 million by 2060, at which point immigrants will represent over 44% of the total working population.[3]

     

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immigration_to_South_Korea

    http://thumb.mt.co.kr/06/2015/12/2015122721551652955_1.jpg

    Anon,

    "Coolness" is a positive quality that has been reconstructed to mean the opposite of what it used to mean. It formerly meant the ability to control your emotions. Today, it means a willingness to let go with your emotions with as little self-control as possible. People used to call that "childishness."

    The same goes for words like "culturally stagnant" and "dysfunctional." Yes, these words can be used objectively, but if one uses them objectively to rank the different countries of the world, South Korea would not be in the top 10. Or even the top 100.

    It bothers me, frankly, that South Koreans are starting to internalize the kind of self-hate that North Americans and Western Europeans have been internalizing. The cause seems to be the same. They're plugging themselves into the same ideological and cultural system.

    “From 2018, the South Korean government will actively pursue massive immigration to counter the declining working population from 2017. Nearly 5 million immigrants are needed by 2020, 10 million by 2030 and over 17 million by 2060, at which point immigrants will represent over 44% of the total working population.[3]”

    Yet, 80% of Koreans say they want to leave Korea, mainly to the US because there are not jobs.

    It seems the problem is elitism that has become universalized in this status-driven society. Most Koreans feel they are too good for ‘dirty’ jobs. And they don’t want their kids to have those jobs. And they don’t want to have kids unless they can be sure the kids can have good jobs. Especially as much of lower labor is associated with ‘foreign workers’, Koreans feel it is shameful to have them. This notion of ‘dirty, demeaning, and dangerous’ jobs began in Japan, I think. Such lack of respect for labor is harming advanced nations. One good thing about socialism is the respect for labor. After all, it is labor that built the roads and manned the factories.

    So, we have a paradox. We have Koreans complaining about there not being enough jobs and opportunities. They say they must emigrate to the US to have jobs.
    But then, we have Korea saying they have labor shortage and need more immigrants to fill those jobs.

    This is the result of univeralization of elitism. With close to 99% of Koreans going to college, most jobs are not good enough for them. High suicide rates show that Koreans would rather die than face the shame of having a lowly job.
    Especially with lowly foreigners taking those jobs, Koreans feel it is shameful to have them as it means they are on the level of poor foreigners. And they don’t want to have kids unless kids can be guaranteed ‘good’ jobs.

    This is the the result of fusion of capitalism and neo-confucianism where the dream was to be part of the scholar-class that does ‘clean’ things and never dirties the hands.

    And as South Korea turns into multi-culti hodge-podge of ‘new koreans’ who feel no ethnic ties to Koreans in the North, the division will become permanent. The scar that the US left in 1945 will never go away. Of course, US is happy about this because it wants a divided Korea forever. As Korea loses its identity and culture — as “koreannes” goes from identity, culture, and history to a piece of legal paper that can mean anyone from Indonesian to African — , it will become like a colony of the US. Like Hawaii or Puerto Rico.

    But as American-educated Koreans and Korean-Americans are a bunch of collaborators of globalism, they are blind to their own national and cultural demise. They only seek approval of the US and worship Diversity as the ultimate good since their globo-imperialist professors and handlers told them so.

    What the Japanese failed to do, the US succeeded in doing. But then, there was no liberation of Korea after Japanese defeat. There was just division, occupation, and vassalage. When US was run by white majority, its template to other nations was native-majority domination. But as US turned into Jewish-minority dominated nation that favors minority-elitism, the new mantra became ‘diversity is our strength’ and ‘homomania’, and those are pushed on all nations. When US was a confident white-majority-nation, it saw nothing wrong with Korea being Korean-majority nation. But as the US is all about ‘diversity’, it seems most Korean-Americans and American-educated Koreans feel shame about Korea not being ‘diverse enough’. They feel Korea must reflect the Ideal promoted by the New America.

    I wonder how Korean Christians feel about this. Don’t they feel betrayed? When South Korea was rocked by so much anti-American protests and Marxist radicals, it was the conservative Korean Christians who were most loyal to the US. But it is now the US that is doing most to push homomania and globalist virus into South Korea.

    But then, the problem isn’t just with South Korea but with Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore, all of which suffer from low-birth-rates. It is due to neo-confucianism where elitism has been universalized.
    Also, sexual culture has become loosened in Asia. In Japan, loose women were once looked down upon. But today, it’s perfectly normal for Japanese women to remain unmarried and hook up with men and have sex. They see marriage and stuff as just hindrance when they have guilt-free and shame-free sex, with Japanese or foreign men. If you check night clubs scenes all over Asia on youtube, it seems the women have gotten pretty whory and sex-and-city lifestyle is common. So why marry? Why not just earn enough to party and have sex?
    This esp seems to be the norm about Asian-American women, and in our insta-globa, what happens in LA soon spreads to Tokyo, Taipei, Seoul, and Singapore. Even Shanghai.

    Read More
  82. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Daniel Chieh
    It doesn't really take a lot of feminism before literally everything that is our culture ceases to be. Remove a few pillars of a culture and the house falls. As an East Asians, I'll rather defend the beauty of the culture - though I'm coming from the Chinese side.

    nah, feminism is exactly what our culture needs; if you value physical fitness that is. Allow me to explain. Basically the current east asian phenotype is essentially the result of thousands of years of male sexual selection. IE in highly patriarchal societies such as the ones that existed in east asia, men were the choosers, not women. Even if you take into account the institution of arranged marriages, men (fathers) were still probably the primary deciding factor. That being said, men and especially east asian men will almost always choose petite, mild mannered and gracile women to start a family with and will consequently select against tall or robust women; thus as a natural result of male monopolization of mate choice the east asian race has been selecting for feminine traits (both physical and psychological) for thousands of years. In order to reverse this trend, we need to encourage feminism and female financial independence in east asia, as well as actively disenfranchising the patriarchy (gasp! I know); by doing this we will create the conditions for asian women to be the primary actors in mate selection. (Predictably women in general will usually select for masculinity and high sociability/charisma, which are exactly the traits that the asian race lacks) For a good example of this concept, consider the highly matriarchal societies of africa and the physical/mental qualities which african (matriarchal) societies selected for. Granted, we obviously don’t want east asia to take it to quite the same degree as africa, but we definitely do need to encourage policies which will naturally function as eugenic pressures that will allow the asian race to become balanced mentally, physically and sensually; as opposed to our current unbalanced state where we are mentally strong but physically and sensually deficient.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Heck no. If for some mysterious reason you desperately want to increase size of men, there are significantly easier ways that don't involve effectively destroying society. Actively disenfranchising men would essentially serve instead to feminize us even further, an idiotic idea, and everything you're saying basically involves self-destruction.

    How about...no.

    If you really want to create a world that selects for personal valor or something like that, you can't do that in a civilized world and certainly not in a feminized world. You basically have to reduce society to something like Scottish clans raiding each other for cattle.

    I just don't see that happening. And it'll be a lot easier anyway to alter characteristics of testosterone than to basically self-destruct in an effort to not be ourselves.

  83. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @German_reader
    "That being said, I feel similarly about east asian culture as a whole, and I feel like its culturally pretty stagnant and compared to other cultures"

    Compared to which cultures? I don't get the impression that much of lasting cultural worth has been produced in Western countries in the last few decades. My own country seems extremely dull and boring on a cultural level despite the ever increasing "diversity" and popular culture in many Western countries today is nothing but consumerist dreck.
    And even if Korea could profit from foreign influences, they certainly should never allow large-scale settlement of Muslims or Africans, that will only cause trouble.

    compared to pretty much everywhere else on earth but east asia.

    Europeans seem to have a healthy relationship with sociability and sexuality

    Africans are super social and sexual (maybe a bit too much lol)

    Latin Americans are super social and sexual as well

    The middle east I have no idea about

    Obviously I am referring to cultural stagnation in terms of sociability and sexuality. While this may sound trite to you, this is because as a european you come from a relatively balanced culture and you don’t have to worry about things like this, but to the east asian culture, sociability and sexuality are cultural values which east asia sorely needs to cultivate, especially in this day and age of globalized sexual norms. Do you really think its normal, or even desirable that any plain white guy can hop on a plane to asia and within 24 hours be swarmed by tons of willing asian girls while your typical asian guy could never hope to replicate a similar feat with white girls? This is something that needs to be fixed, and traditional asian culture/diet/dysgenic trends are all to blame for this. This is the kind of cultural stagnation that I am referring to; east asian culture has many good aspects, but in the realm of sociability and sexuality it fails miserably.

    Regarding muslim immigrants, they might potentially be troublesome, I don’t really have an opinion on them; however when it comes to african immigration I am actually quite sanguine about that. Africans are a pretty colorful, social and sensual people; at the very least they will help the social and sensual development of east asia via cultural osmosis (for an example of this consider latin america and the social and sensual gifts that this culture received from their african diaspora) Additionally an african diaspora in asia would help because it would disrupt existing masculine norms in asia and force them to evolve, essentially a masculinity arms race. A similar effect can be observed in the US where the african american community here definitely has a subtle but very strong effect on notions of masculinity in america. Finally I want to add that masculinity in east asia is frankly embarrassing. East asian people are soft as fuck and everybody in the entire world knows this. I would welcome anything that would shatter the complacency and guilelessness of east asian males and force them to man up.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    lol, I cannot believe you're serious...are you trolling me? Granted, maybe East Asian societies do have some cultural problems (e.g. excessive focus on work, belief in hierarchy etc.)...but you want to become more like Latin America and think African immigrants will improve your country?????
    And I don't know if this is true:
    "East asian people are soft as fuck and everybody in the entire world knows this."

    Granted, East Asia maybe has too many nerds today...but South Korea still has conscription (which many European countries have foolishly abolished) and many really tough military types. Even Japan has quite impressive defense forces. And maybe I have an outmoded view of things but when I think about East Asians I think about things like the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy rolling up the European colonial empires, the Chinese pushing the Americans down the Korean peninsula, the Cultural revolution etc. ...these aren't the actions of people "soft as fuck"...more like extremely scary people! Maybe things have changed somewhat since then, but I think you're exaggerating, and in any case Western degeneracy seems far more advanced.
  84. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anon
    "Personally I don’t think that a big dose of multiculturalism is a bad thing for korea. (I am korean myself) Korea is a very high achieving country but socially speaking…its quite stunted compared to its western counterparts, in fact all of east asia is like this. While the western countries are socially adept and “cool”, east asian countries are repressed, stuffy and nerdy. I think the introduction of some volatile, more socially dynamic people in korea will actually be good for the country; I am not denying that these elements would create a lot of social problems and headaches for native korean people, but this is actually the point."

    You make a good point about wanting to make Korea more culturally dynamic and interesting. But you got your priorities upside down. The first responsibility of a nation to survive and defend itself as a race and culture. Everything else is secondary. If Korea had health birthrates, your proposal wouldn't be so bad. But with plummeting birthrates among Koreans, increased diversity could mean Koreans losing their land to foreigners forever. Surrendering one's nation to foreigners just to win some more 'cool' pokemon points is about the dumbest thing one can imagine.

    Also, is 'cool' such a good thing? It has style but it's meaningless and lacks substance. Blacks are 'cool' in the US, but their communities have no value, no meaning. It's all noise and volume without sense. Because blacks put style above substance, they live in an empire of lies like Black Lives Matter when, in fact, most blacks are murdered by other blacks who are into 'cool' rap gangsta culture.
    True meaning comes not from 'cool' or style but from moral sense and substance. What Korea needs to do is worry less about style and care more about truth and meaning. And truth and meaning don't result from more diversity and noise. After all, Singapore is a more diverse, but it is one of the most dull places culturally. If anything, all that diversity has made it necessary for the government to suppress dissension.

    'Cool' is about glitter, easy sensations. It isn't about reality. It is an illusion, mirage. Now, 'cool' is fine in entertainment, like in 007 movies. But mistaking it for reality or truth is foolish. After all, the real Sean Connery depended on stunt doubles to do all the tricks. The culture of 'cool' favors vapid image over true substance. Korea, like Japan and EU, is filled with 'vibrant' style of 'cool' in pop music and etc. But, it has made both nations dumber, shallower, and trashier.

    Also, isn't it odd that Korea was more volatile and dynamic when it was more homogeneous? Korea today is more diverse, with many men having foreign brides. But it's a duller place except in cinema. Why? I would think the reason was the same as in Japan before birthrates dropped suddenly. In the past, there were bigger families. Parents couldn't micro-manage all the kids. Kids played outside. There were fewer control over the kids. And parents had kids just to have kids, to have families.
    Back then, Korean parents, like Japanese parents, didn't expect every child to be success in college and in having Good Job. Family and togetherness came first.
    There was a time when Japanese didn't look down on many jobs as 'dirty, dangerous, and demeaning'. After all, modern Japan was built by many Japanese who did those kinds of jobs.

    But then, success made Korean parents care only about more success. They had kids only to turn them into successes and bragging rights to friends. Ordinary jobs were not good enough for their kids. It was 'dirty' and only for lowly foreigners from poor nations.
    And to turn their precious kids into successes, there was the parental culture of micro-management and more control over kids' lives. And since kids had no time to play outdoors, they grew up on videogames and internet. And since families had fewer kids, it meant fewer or no uncles, aunts, cousins, and that make life more interesting.
    Korea seems to be going Japanese in this regard. Japan was a far more dynamic place after WWII when things were so out of whack. Many had to find their own way.
    Japan became duller with the success of 70s and 80s. With more prosperity and social order, there was more systematic control over Japanese youths. And fewer kids meant that every kid got controlled more by parents and teachers. And fewer kids meant fewer siblings, fewer friends, fewer cousins. and that meant relying more on TV and videogames as friends. And rise of pop culture meant Japanese kids growing up to identify with cartoons, movies, soap opera, and etc than with their own race, culture, history.

    But the problem is there in EU too. Did Sweden become more interesting and dynamic as the result of mass migration and multi-culturalism? Yes, in terms of crime and violence. But intellectually and artistically, Sweden got worse. Multi-culturalism has made Swedish even more timid and repressed. Why? Because the Cult of Diversity means that the majority population mustn't do anything to OFFEND the minorities. So, there is more censorship, more Big Brother controls. Swedes are not even allowed to complain about the Rape Epidemic or call an end to immigration.
    Also, the example of Latin America shows that Diversity doesn't necessarily lead to more dynamic culture. Most Latin American nations were stagnant economically, culturally, and intellectually.
    The most dynamic centers of the world in the 19th century and first half of 20th century were relatively homogeneous civilizations like Germany, UK, France, US, and Japan. If diversity makes for more dynamism, it should have been Central Asia with its Eurasian population that should have achieved more than Japanese.

    Funnily enough, the fact that you think Korea needs more Diversity to be more dynamic goes to show how PC has made you un-dynamic and stupid. If Koreans want more individuality and freedom, they only need to find it within themselves. If they lack the courage and vision to find it in their own hearts and minds, then they are cowards. You seem to be arguing that Koreans are so worthless and deficient that they must leech off the dynamism of others. Such attitude is pathetic. NO wonder so many Koreans want to come to the US and just flee their own nation. They lack the guts and vision to fix problems at home. They just want to rely on OTHER people as either emigration destinations or immigration hopes. Or maybe the immigration-outlet has made Koreans so devaluing of their own nation. Ever since the world opened up to Korean immigration, most Koreans think, "We should leave and go to better country" instead of thinking to stay and fix their own problems. Same thing in many nations, which accounts for all the brain drain. US as immigration destination has made many people look to ESCAPE TO AMERICA as solution to all their problems. It is the coward's way out.

    But then, were Koreans always this lackluster and dull? Wasn't there a dynamic protest movement in the 80s? Unlike Japan that was handed its democracy by the US, didn't Koreans fight for their democracy? Didn't young people make sacrifices to make this happen? What happened to this fire? What we hear from this millennial Korean is "we need foreigners because we koreans are uncool and suck so bad." How pussy.

    I see the problem as Globalism than Korean-ism. Koreans became so obsessed with economically catching up to the advanced world that they forgot their own identity, culture, and values. What's happening to Korea is just another variation of what's happening all over the world.
    Koreans only judge themselves in relation to OTHER cultures.
    So, they've neglected their own history, heritage, and culture. They use plastic surgery to look white. They imitate black rappers like dumb yellow monkeys. They dye their hair blonde to look western or like Japanese anime characters. They imitate Western PC because they think the West is fount of all wisdom and because they are afraid to think for themselves. They neglect their own identity and culture and imitate OTHERS but then complain that Korean-ness sucks. They reject their true identity and heritage in pale imitation of the 'cool' West, but they blame all the problem on Korean-ness. No, the problem is Koreans imitate too much and fantasize too much of the Superior Other instead of valuing their own race and culture and building on them.
    Korea has come to suck because Koreans are obsessed with the Other. Because their sense of worth is measured by what Others think. It's like the articles about how South Koreans are obsessed about winning the Nobel Prize in Literature, as if they need validation by the West for their self-worth. It is THIS attitude that is turning Korea into dull and dumb country. It is not that Koreans are too Korean but they are too imitative and slavish to foreign styles and approvals. People who love literature love it out of genuine love. They don't care about prizes or foreign validations. Koreans feel they have no value unless they are validated by the Superior Other, mainly the West. If some Koreans wanna be validated by Sweden's Nobel community, others wanna be validated by black rap community. Such slavish imitation that rejects one's own race and culture doesn't lead to anything real or true.

    Koreans seem to be stuck in some kind of contradiction. They want to be more dynamic, free, and confident as individuals... but they say they must depend on OTHERS to show the way. What kind of confidence and freedom is that? What can non-Koreans do for Koreans what Koreans can't do for themselves because they are so lacking in will and agency?
    Such hope of the Foreign Fix is especially laughable when many migrants to Korea come from rather backward places like Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, and other Asian nations that are hardly known for culture of individualism and great achievement. How will Korea become more dynamic by having more people from rest of Asia that have achieved even less than Koreans? It's like Hungarians thinking their nation will be made more dynamic by arrival of migrants from poor Arab nations. Ridiculous.

    Also, the commenter's sense that Korea must rely on OTHER peoples is part of the imperial legacy. He or she complains about Korea's servility to Great China, but he or she expresses similar servility to Globalism.
    For 2000 yrs, Koreans felt they must look to and rely on China and only China. Now, the new generation of Koreans say Korean must look to globo-multi-culti PC. So, Koreans can't think or do anything on their own. Koreans must look to China, to US, to globalism, or etc. They must follow like a dog some great country or some foreign ideology.
    Now, it's good for any nation to trade and learn from other nations and peoples, but ultimately, it has to develop its own modes of freedom and truth. It can't rely on others to do the homework for them.

    But Koreans are a bunch of leeches. Look at the military arrangement. Cold War is long over. China and Russia do business with S. Korea, more than they do with N. Korea. South Korea has 40x the economy of the North and more than double the population. North Korea is a nation of skinny half-starved people. Yet, South Korea still relies on the US for 'protection'. Lone Israel, surrounded by big hostile nations, goes it alone in defending itself. But South Korea, much bigger and richer than N. Korea in population and economy, still hides behind Uncle Sam that, btw, provokes tensions with NK merely to keep and use SK as pawn against China.

    So, it seems to me that the problem of South Korea is not that it's too Korean. Rather, it's because dumb and cowardly Koreans are too wussy to look into their own minds, hearts, and souls to find true freedom and truth and independence. Instead, they cower behind Uncle Sam. They still take orders from a nation that divided their country and rained down holocaust-level bombs on the north. It is no wonder that the commenter looks to 'multi-culturalism' for solution to Korea's problem. It is the same pattern. Korean cowards cannot find their own way, their own answers. Just like they need Uncle Sam for protection from starving people in North Korea, they need migrants from Philippines, Indonesia, Iran, Cambodia, India, and etc. to learn how to be free. LOL.

    In a way, truth and freedom are so easy to find. Indeed, they are difficult because they are so easy. All it takes a bit of courage, but courage doesn't come easily to a nation of cowards that won't face up to its own history and won't defend itself(and still plays whore dog to Uncle Sam). As long as Koreans are cowards, no amount of Multi-Culti will save it. Also, when people of cowardice invite people of courage, won't the latter gain control over the former. Didn't China invite the Manchus only to be ruled by them? Didn't EU's reliance on US protection turn it into the vassal of Washington DC? When Europeans lost the will to defend themselves, they just turned into pussy-puppets of the US. South Koreans seem to have the same mentality. A cultural mindset of dependence on US and globalism.

    If Koreans don't have the fire of courage, they shouldn't expect it to given to them by those who have it. Those with courage will only burn the Korean cowards who don't have it.
    Furthermore, what is the Western attitude toward nations like Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and even China? It is one of arrogance and supremacism. The West acts like it is 'more evolved' and that the East exists only to obey and imitate the West. And given the cowardly Korean commenter who made the comments above, it's not surprising why the West feels this way. The West says, 'We are better than you and you must obey us', and this Korean commenter says, 'Yes, we Koreans suck and we need YOU to teach us to be free because we suck so bad.' What a pussy dog.
    Now, why can't this Korean tell himself and his people that they should find within their own hearts and minds to be free? Why this servile and slavish look to the West or the Other for salvation?

    He also seems to miss the point that the West is currently in a state of crazy contradiction. On the one hand, the West does indeed say, 'We are the best, most evolved, most exceptional, and most indispensable', but the West is also about the cowardice of its native white population that says, 'we suck so bad, we are so dull and white bread, we are so guilty, we are evil, and therefore, we need diversity to redeem us from our wicked whiteness'.

    The funny irony is that the Korean commenter apes this crazy Western logic. He looks to the West for the Answer of being 'cool', but the West is now in the process of denouncing itself as 'evil' because it's not diverse enough. Indeed, 'western values' have now been rewritten to call for the desired abolition of the West. White politicians in the US talk about how it is great, even necessary, for US to become a non-white majority nation. German politicians say German cities will be majority non-German, and that is a good thing. Koreans, being so slavish, ape these sentiments in their own way: "We Koreans are such dull yellow bread that we need diversity to enrich us." What a yellow dog. If the White West must commit suicide, Korean yellow dogs must follow because it is in their cultural DNA to follow their master.

    According to the commenter, Korean problem is too much inbreeding, culturally and biologically. (This is rather odd for a nation that's been whore-vagina to Uncle Sam since end of WWII and pimp-rapist of Vietnam during Vietnam War. Funnier still since Koreans are a race of Michael Jacksons who rely on extensive surgery, hair-dyeing, and rap-culture-aping to look 'American'. When Koreans complain about 'inbreeding', they really seem to mean they want Western features and feel inferior for having slanty eyes and black hair. They want the 'superior' features of other races, esp white ones). But is out-breeding necessarily better than 'national in-breeding'?
    Let's look at Central Asia where most people are a mix of Asian and European. Are they necessarily more dynamic? Those cultures seem pretty backward and dull. Or look at Uighurs of Northwest China. Many people there look like a cross of Turks and East Asians. Are they more dynamic? Or look at North Africa, a mix of Semitic, Arabic, European, and black. Is North Africa some dynamic paradise? It's mostly poor, boring, and backward, and its people all wanna flee to Europe, especially to Northern Europe that is most homogeneous(though not for long as the invasion continues unabated). Most Indonesians are a hodge-podge of mixed blood, but they cannot even control their own economy. Chinese rule Indonesian economy. Latin America has majority mixed blood peoples, and most Latin American nations are dull culturally and intellectually.
    And then, look at the golden age of Europe. When Germany produced its great composers, it was all white. When UK produces its giants of literature, it was all white. Ingmar Bergman, the giant of Swedish cinema, is the product of all-white Sweden.
    And Japan saw great cultural flowering through much of its history, during reform era, and after WWII when it was mostly all-Japanese.
    If diversity is the panacea to cultural stagnation, then Afghanistan should be the cultural capital of the world.

    Also, one must not confuse style with the real thing. The West may seem 'cool' because of its pop culture, but it has also made the West dumber, trashier, and shallower. Style adds spice to substance, but the current West is style without substance. No wonder all this homo garbage is the new religion. It is worship of the ephemeral, faddish, fashionable, hyped.
    Today's British people may be 'cooler' in their loutish behavior, drunkenness, lack of inhibitions, and party culture, but they have less substance as thinkers, writers, critics, and commentators. Aldous Huxley and George Orwell were not cool, but they had courage, integrity, and conviction. They had honesty and substance. That is the sort of thing that people should emulate. I'm sure that Korea has its share of honest critics and writers, but they don't get noticed because so much of globalist culture showers attention on the loud, brash, stupid, instant, glitzy, and obnoxious... like the dumb ugly gangnam style song. If that is the 'cool' that Koreans aspire to, they are morons or Korons, aka Korean morons.

    Indeed, the example of Japan after WWII goes to show that great things can be achieved in a mono-racial-culture. Kurosawa and other great film-makers didn't need foreigners to teach them how to make films. Sure, they took inspiration from foreign films and learned from others. But they learned to do their own thing because they had confidence, conviction, and belief in their own vision. They were not wimps who who said, "Oh geez, we are so lame, we are so inbred. We can't do anything unless we are surrounded by foreigners who will teach us to be creative." While US occupation and its after-effects did allow for more freedom, the cultural flowering of modern Japan happened much earlier. And even before Westernization, Japan achieved more culturally and artistically than Korea because Japanese had trust in their own genius, creativity, and culture. Apparently, Korons lack this confidence. Is it because of servile attachment to China over many centuries? But if this is the problem, then Koreans need to learn to to be more independent-minded, not more dependent on foreigners for the fix. Independence isn't isolation. No one is opposed to learning from other nations/cultures and trading with other economies. But especially because the world is now so inter-connected, a nation/culture must insist on its independence because failure to do so will make it come under the dominance of Globalism controlled by the US. Look at European nations. Each nation surrendered its independence to EU, and then EU as a whole surrendered to US-led globalism. This didn't lead to more dynamic Europe but one more hampered by PC, censorship, ideological conformity, spread of trash culture, etc.

    Also, Globalist Culture does NOT foster more creativity, individuality, and vitality. Yes, globo-culture is loud, clamorous, and hyper-active, but it's all just empty fire-works. It's the umpteenth STAR WARS sequel, the same dumb rap song about 'muh gun' and 'muh dic*', the same booty shaking dance moves, the same immature attitudes, the same night club whore culture, the same tattoo on ass, the same piercing through nose, the same hair dyed blonde, green, or pink. Globo-creativity is about everyone watching same comic book movie, listening to same kind of hip hop, imitating ghetto trash culture, and reducing all of culture into orgamo-pornography of insta-gratification video-game.

    Indeed, current globalist culture isn't even 'cool' in the classic sense. Classic Cool really was impressive in style if not much else. Sean Connery as 007 was cool. Spaghetti Westerns were cool. Swinging London had some cool fashions. Beatles were cool. James Dean was cool. They didn't add up to much meaning, but they had really impressive style. But what is today's cool? It's some tattoo on ass of a moron with piercing through his nose under a hair dyed pink that belongs to a man who claims to be a 'woman'. 'Cool' is middle-aged rappers reaching in their 50s still yapping about 'my ho's'. It's about black thugs making all sorts of ugly faces with 'attitude, ya'. It's the French, Germans, Swedes, and Brits imitating this same trash. It's J-pop sounding the same song after song like dildo-vibrators to the ears. It's K-pop sounding like J-pop combined with rap imitation. This isn't real creativity. Popular music of each nation was more individualistic and different and diverse in the pro-global era.

    And if it's true that racial-mixing, socially or sexually, leads to more creativity, we sure don't see it among Asian-Americans. While Asian-Americans, Korons included, may be more outgoing and expressive due to Americanization, they are hardly more creative, individualistic, or whatever in the West. Look at Chinese/Japanese/Korean-American writers, activists, journalists, and academics, and they all sound the same. They just sound like carbon-copy of white Political Correctness. Or they are just pale imitators of black rage or some POC crap. They either sound like parrots of PC or yellow rappin' fools.

    Why is it that the most interesting creative Asians are all in Asia? Kurosawa, Mishima, Kobo Abe, Mizoguchi, Tanizaki, Imamura, and etc all drew inspiration from the West, but they were all Japanese in Japan. The best Chinese film-makers are in China. Hong Kong, very creative stylistically, developed in Asia. While drawing inspiration from other cultures is good and necessary, whoever said you need foreigners all around you to teach you to be creative? Asians in America and Canada are surrounded by non-Asians, but all they do is imitate and parrot. Ever look at Chinese academic radicals in colleges? They claim to be 'free thinking progressives' but EVERYTHING they say is an imitation of white PC.

    The choice is not between total isolation and total surrender. I agree that some degree of diversity can liven up any nation. If Korea can maintain a non-Korean population at around 5%, I don't see any damage, at least as long as blacks are not part of the mix. Blacks, even in small numbers, can do lots of damage. Look at France, Holland, Canada, and etc. Japan has small number of blacks, but they cause a lot of problems.
    But the example of EU goes to show that once a nation catches the multi-culti virus, there is no end. Multi-culturalism was designed ideologically to act like a cancer. once it begins, it has no end.
    The foreign masses keep coming and coming. They are welcomed by so-called 'progressives' who seek to destroy every national identity and by corporate interests that want cheap docile labor. Also, the rich industrialists know that a diverse work force is easier to exploit that a mono-national one. If all workers in Korea are Korean, they can unite as a force to demand more. If they are diverse, they will be harder to unite against the rich class. We see the same pattern in the West. The rich elites don't mind diversity among the work force since a diverse work force barely united into strong labor movement. There was a time when the British working class held great moral capital. But today, the British elites excoriate and denounce the white working class for not being 'welcoming' of foreign masses who are willing to work for less.

    Anyway, because of low birth rates in South Korea and the logic of Multi-culturalism(where the mass invasion never ends), it would be stupid to gamble on the promise of Diversity as a fix to Korea's problem.
    There is no quick fix to national problems. If indeed, as the commenter says, South Koreans are not independent-minded enough, then they need to fix the problem on their own. It cannot be fixed by foreigners if Koreans are a bunch of cowards and morons. Besides, many foreigners come from poor Asian nations that are hardly known for innovation, creativity, and originality. What can Koreans really learn from Cambodians or Laotians? Or Mongolians? Maybe Mongols can teach them to make yak yogurt. If the commenter means Western foreigners, he or she needs to understand that the West is now the World Capital of Political Correctness, racial self-loathing, censorship, and garbage pop culture. What may seem 'free' in the West is mere hedonism promoted by capitalism. It is not the freedom of people with minds and souls but the debauchery of people without self-control and sense. It is the 'freedom' of whore culture, pimp culture, decadence, and degeneracy. In the West, people's lives are destroyed for not worshiping homosexuals and trannies. If this is what Koreans want, then they are indeed a bunch of slaves who only know how to imitate, follow, and obey the powerful. Since the West is still the richest and most powerful, the Korons seem to think they must emulate everything about it. That is not true freedom, true individuality, and true independence.

    Besides, if Koreans cannot learn to be free on their own, it only means lots of foreigners in Korea will lead to their domination over Koreans. After all, the commenter seems to think that foreigners can be free & dynamic on their own. But Koreans lack this abilty. So, when a people who are naturally free and independent mix with people who are naturally servile and slavish, then the former will rule over the latter. The commenter hopes that the freedom of foreigners will rub off on Koreans, but there is no guarantee. Rather, the foreigners may just come to rule over slavish and servile imitative Koreans.

    Koreans need to stop being such dogs. They need to stop looking to OTHERS for the solution. They need to defend themselves and run their own military. They must stop being cowards hiding behind Uncle Sam. The Cold War is so over. China and Russia want to be friend with South Korea. They will not back any North Korean aggression against the South. The South has more than 2x population of north and 40x the economy. So, why are South Koreans hiding behind Uncle Sam? Is the NK threat really so serious? If so, why did South Korea allow a bunch of homos to take over music-TV industry and promote girly look among the boys? Imagine that! South Korea is under so much threat from starving North Korea that it needs to hide behind Uncle Sam... but Korean pop culture should encourage South Korean boys to look and act like girlies. And if South Korea is under such threat, why do so many Koreans wanna come to the US? They don't want to stay and defend their own country but leave it forever while asking Uncle Sam to defend them?

    And why can't South Koreans be honest about their own history and begin a dialogue about how the division of Korea is the result of US policy and that it is continuing US policy to maintain the division so as to keep South Korea as a puppet against China forever? These seem to me like substantive issues, but the commenter is fixated on insipid stuff like the 'cool' style. I mean who cares about 'cool'? This 'cool' cult is destroying cultures all over. After all, what does 'coolness' have to do with anything real? The Americans who built the roads, worked in factories, survived WWII and Depression, and toiled on farms were NOT cool. The kind of people in GRAPES OF WRATH were not 'cool'. But they led full meaningful lives of family, tradition, religion, community. And I'm sure all nations, Korea included, has tons of these stories of people who went through 20th century with so much tumult and crisis. But in the 21st century, we have some silly vapid Korean commenter who, in imitation of deracinated West, yammers about how his nation needs to be more 'cool'. The father in BICYCLE THIEVES isn't cool. The dying man in IKIRU isn't cool. Vito Corleone who loses his job to some mafia flunky in GODFATHER II and walks home jobless isn't cool. But are their lives and stories any less meaningful or worthy? Whatever happened to humanism that values people for what they are than for some dumb hipster style?

    Globalism and Americanism make people all around the world act like Aesop's dog with bone looking at the illusion in the water. They don't value what they have. They have no sense of the value of what they have. Look at those nutty European nations. They are playing ideological games with their homelands. If they lost their homelands, they are finished. They fantasize about some Diversity Utopia where their own motherlands are being vanishing before their eyes.

    Now, Korea doesn't mean much to the world cuz it's not a great culture. Japanese culture is really something special. If Japanese had never existed, the world would lose something. While not a central world culture, the Japanese did remarkable things in painting, sculpture, architecture, gardening, music, (music)theater, cinema, and etc. And their samurai culture and code of bushido are fascinating. Japanese conceptualized culture as a blend of art and action. So, it is a great addition to World Culture.
    But if Korea had never existed, we wouldn't miss much. Still, my view is every nation/culture is valuable for what it is, and it should be of immense value to the people who belong to it. Why? It's like family. Most families are not great, but one's parents and family members should mean more than any other. Besides, for a people to rise to potential greatness, they must exist in the first place. Germans were ungreat for a long time before they became great. The Jews were, for a long time, just a bunch of goat-herders before they began to make a difference.

    Korea is a special nation in this sense. It is not a fake artificial nation created by imperialists. Look at Latin America. Fake nations created by Spanish and Portuguese empire. And their indigenous peoples still live under iron heel of the conquering races. And Philippines, which was conquered by the Spanish, is still a hodgepodge nation. It was forged by conquest and foreign rule than independence and organic development. Indonesia is totally a fake nation, the product of Dutch imperialism. Iraq, Syria, Libya, modern Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, and etc are all artificial creations of European imperialists. Things are even crazier in black Africa with giant nations made up of 100s, even 1000s, of tribes.

    In contrast, nations like Japan, Korea, and Vietnam are indeed products of organic growths over long periods of time. And the relative geographical isolation of Korea and Japan made this possible, just like Sweden was able to remain mostly Nordic to due to isolation(before crazy ideologues decided to flood it with Muslims and Africans in the notion that there is no such thing as 'Swedish culture'.) They are real nations with real history, culture, and identity. They were not 'invented' by imperialism and post-imperialism. Japanese did try to create a giant Asian empire, but they failed.
    So, it seems Koreans have one thing in common with Japanese. Though their culture isn't as special as that of the Japanese, they have a real nation, a real history, and real identity. That is of great value for such truly organic nations are rare in the entire world. Why throw it away cuz of some globo fad about 'cool'-ness?

    Geographical isolation was a blessing for Korea and Japan. Look at the Middle East. As so many cultures and races are joined together, there has been constant invasion and counter-invasion. Turkey still has a sad problem with Kurds who want a nation of their own. Chinese let Koreans have a nation of their own. Turks won't all this to Kurds. And we saw the recent war in Syria. We saw what diversity of clan loyalties can do to Libya. Iraq is torn apart by sects and ethnos, as Arabs and Kurds don't see eye to eye. Who the hell wants diversity, at least on this level? Who wants a fake national identity like 'Iraqi' that doesn't mean anything? Would Koreans really like it better if they were geographically surrounded by India, Iran, Egypt, Brazil, and etc? Would Korea even have existed or developed if it had been surrounded by so many other peoples who might have invaded and taken over?

    Geographical isolation has its downsides, but it also has advantages. It makes possible the survival and development of a truer culture that is relatively protected from invasions. Consider the many ancient civilizations of the Middle East. Most are gone forever. Whoever hears of Hittites or Babylonians or Phoenicians? They are gone because of constant invasions and clashes. Only the Jews survived intact as an ancient identity, and it was because they created the Covenant of the Biology and Spirit.

    Now, because Japanese and Koreans(and I gather most other Asians) have no such concept, they can only survive as a people in their homeland. Jews had no home for 1000s of yrs, but they kept their identity. But Asians cannot. Look at Japanese in Brazil. There are over a million of them, but they are un-Japanese. They know nothing of the language, culture, or history of Japan. And they don't even care to know. When they return to Japan, they feel as total foreigners in the land of their ancestors.
    I recall reading something about Koreans in Russia, and they are the same way. They don't feel Korean at all and just feel 'Russian'. And they don't care to know anything about their homeland. And my encounters with most Asians in the US tells me they know nothing, care nothing, and feel nothing for their homeland. Their 'asian identity' consists of people-of-color cliches so that they can associate themselves with 'cooler' blacks or PC anti-white activism. Maybe the Chinese care somewhat cuz of middle kingdom pride, but a lot of Chinese girls seem to marry Jewish men and have Jewish kids. Look at Zuckerberg's wife. Hindus are better at keeping their culture, but then, there is no single India, an artificial nation created by British Imperialism and doesn't really make sense without that history despite Hindu resentment toward Anglos.

    Anyway, the lesson of the dog with bone in mouth looking at the water is a lesson for all time. Find value in what you have. Don't grasp for too much. Japan tried to grab more and lost WWII in bad way. EU is now trying to be World Culture with all this mass migration and Diversity. It is on a path to hell. And Korea will just be part of this mess if they don't wake up from the idiot shallow cult of the 'cool'.

    I'm sure Korea needs much progress and improvement in many areas, but foreigners are not the answer. Also, if indeed Koreans are such dull pussies and cowards, foreigners will look upon them with contempt and arrogance. Foreigners will come not with respect but disdain. After all, the Korean commenter's message is, "We suck so bad, we are so worthless, so please come to our country and teach us to be free and 'cool'. If Koreans feel this way, who would respect them? They are like dogs without a master begging for a master to come rule over them.

    What Koreans need is courage and honesty within their own hearts. It is so easy yet so hard. So hard because some brave soul has to take the first step.
    From the commenter's remark, it is obvious that he or she is a coward who is unwilling to take the first step. He or she wants to be protected by Uncle Sam and wants foreigners to teach Koreans how to be free.
    What a koron.

    koron, lol. Thats a good one.

    We are obviously talking about two types of “coolness”. You are referring to the (shallow) social perception of “coolness”, I am referring to much more objective, deeper and substantial notions of individual dynamicism, intense self awareness/sentience, charisma and well developed interpersonal/social skills; all of which are things which are mediated by culture and also genes. This is the kind of “coolness” which I seek for korean/asian people. This is much more preferable to the quasi-autistic, highly introverted, semi-sentience that korean/asian people generally possess. Korean/east asian people are held back by their own repressive culture; if multiculturalism can be used as a tool to attack and weaken indigenous east asian culture so that something better can arise then so be it. I am not advocating multiculturalism for korea just because “its cool” and its “what the cool kids are doing.” I am advocating multiculturalism in korea because in the case of korea/east asia, multiculturalism would actually be quite useful for korea/east asia since multiculturalism is effective at destroying/weakening cultures, and as I stated before, korea/east asia’s own worst enemy is our own culture which stifles dynamism, passion and creativity.

    Ironically you accuse korean people (as well as myself) of being mindless, weak followers; however this is the entire point of why I am advocating multiculturalism in the first place, in order to expunge and transform mindlessness and weakness into individuality and strength via intentional cultural destruction.

    Koreans/east asians do possess the ability for greatness, but it will require cultural change, dietary change and also a correct application of eugenic measures.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    "I am referring to much more objective, deeper and substantial notions of individual dynamicism, intense self awareness/sentience, charisma and well developed interpersonal/social skills; all of which are things which are mediated by culture and also genes."

    Haven't you seen PC in the West? A society that is truly free and individualist doesn't produce something like PC. If whites are so dynamic, why did they fall victim to PC and 'white guilt'? Have you see Swedes lately? Whites WERE dynamic, but they lost it.

    Whatever problem East Asia has, it cannot look to the suicidal West. While young people in the West seem louder and more expressive, much of it is wasted energy on stupidity(like partying, getting drunk, and etc) or fanaticism like PC. Western colleges got so bad that even Liberal professors say they're scared of their nutjob students. Also, Western individuality has been replaced by Western insipidity whereby spoiled millennial brats bitch about 'micro-aggressions' and 'triggering'. And I just don't see evidence that current Western influence makes Asians better. Asian-Americans and Asian-Canadians are among the most imitative, insipid, shallow, and trite bunch of morons even though they rub shoulders with Westerners all the time. They just parrot whatever was taught to them by their professors. If Asian men need contact with Western men in order to be manly successes, why do Asian men fail so much as leaders and lovers in the West?

    Anyway, the problem of cravenness and cowardice is a global phenom. And the problem can only be fixed INTERNALLY with each individual learning to develop in himself/herself the virtues of courage, curiosity, and honesty. If Asians think whites or blacks are better and just imitate the outward styles of whites/blacks, they won't get anywhere. It's just imitation.
    True freedom comes from within. It's like real fire burns from within. You can set anything on fire with lighter fluid. But once the fluid burns out, there is no fire. True fire comes from the thing itself, like a burning wood or coal. Asians relying on whites/blacks/foreigners as lighter-fluid may create the semblance of change, but there is no real change unless there is light burning within the Asian heart/mind. And that can be lit by Asians themselves with a bit of courage, curiosity, and honesty.

    But this goes for the West too. White guys may act more 'fun', but they are totally cucked. They are brainwashed. The only free white individuals in the West are Alt Right guys who reject PC, have reconnected with their roots, and are passionate about defense of identity(when they are not having fun with green frog memes).

    Also, individuals are different. Some are outgoing, some are shy, some are extroverted, some are introverted, and etc. Most men are not charismatic. We think of blacks as being like MLK or Farrakhan who has real charisma, but even most blacks are not charismatic. Most talk like morons like Mike Tyson or the Nasty Coates, who is boring and tarded.

    We have to accept the fact that most people are not and cannot be charismatic. That is why few become rock stars. That is why Germans were so wowed by Hitler. He had that rare charisma, a dangerous thing in his case.

    I agree that the East Asian educational system seems to turn out messed up kids. But it isn't too surprising. Japan and South Korea are small nations with limited opportunities. So, there is hyper-competition for those top positions. In a resource-and-opportunity-limited society, there is going to be fierce competition, especially if there is much obsession about status and rank. China is a bigger nation but it has a lot of people competing for limited college slots, and that too leads to intense nerve-racking competition.

    Also, greater wealth and vast expansion of education has meant everyone can go to college, and so, it has made competition even worse. In the past, even though the ideal was to attend college, most East Asians knew they didn't have a chance. So, only a limited number of Asians were super-competitive. Rest of Asians settled for something more modest and real. They accepted 'inferior' status and lived their lives with less stress. But as educational opportunities opened up to all, EVERY child is obsessed with making it under parental pressure. And this turned all these kids into autistic tards. Worse, video-games and smartphones made it even worse. In the past, when kids needed to take it easy, they got together and took a hike or played sports or ran around with a kite. They got some nature. Today, when they are not hitting the books, they are just playing with video screens or smart phones. And that has cut them off from nature. And of course, there is homo control of culture. I'm convinced both J-pop and K-pop fashions are controlled by Homos. Both genres feature girly boys who look and act like pansies that is supposed to be 'so cute'. These flower boys are the new idols and models for young boys, and that turns them into soy-boys. But we have some of this in the West too. We have homos promoting male fashions that are getting fruitier. Someone in NYT complained that his 'gaydar' is broken because even straight hipsters now dress and talk so fey-gay.

    I fail to see how Korean attitudes are gonna change due to foreigners. Foreigners from poor Asian nations are boring and dull. If they're so great, why do their own nations suck so bad? And what blacks ever done for Europe or Asia except try to hump every ho or sing rap? Have black rapists in Okinawa made that place any better? Okinawa is filled with US troops, but it's just a whore-island. If, as you say, presence of foreigners make Asian society 'dynamic', I don't see it in Okinawa. Or in Manila Bay with all those US soldiers teaching Filipino girls to act like whores.

    Your Asian-Nietzschean fantasy of the 'cool' charismatic intense Asian ubermensch via inspiration by foreign elements is so much bunk.

    What Asia needs isn't such intensity. What it need is a nationalism and humanism. It is globalism that made Korea go extra-nuts. Once it began to think in global terms, it measured everything by global hyper-standards. So, nothing has value unless it has 'global' cachet. It's like Koreans are awful proud of 'korea wave' because, gee whiz, some people in latin america listen to k-pop. But it's all soda fizz culture. Besides, the cultural tastes all around is pretty low, sleazy, and stupid. Wow, Koreans won some fans around the world by acting like tards to appeal to other tards. And Koreans are proud of the popularity of korean soap opera in other asian nations. But I've seen some of these on youtube, and they suck donkey dic*. Korean Wave is Korean Sewage.

    Globalism makes Koreans think too much in megalonational terms. Good is not good enough. Everything Korean has to be validated and approved by the world. Koreans must play for global recognition. Blah blah blah. It's like Korea has to be GLOBAL Player or it has no value.
    Such a small limited nation having such outsized ego makes for too much competition, status obsession, and culture of contempt for 'losers'.

    No, if Korea wants to be a saner place, it needs to restore nationalism and humanism. Nationalism says Korea has value in and of itself. Sure, it needs to compete and trade with the world, but it is merely one nation among many others, and it needn't be more than what it is. It must stop obsessing about global ranking in GDP, and etc. Koreans should just do their best, and accept the limitations of their achievements. Globalism makes every nation measure itself to world power and world prestige.
    It is a game that can only be played by the US. Japan played for top of the hill in the 80s, and they lost. And Japan is better for accepting a more measured place in the world. No more dream of Japan as numbah one. Maybe Koreans have this inferiority complex cuz they don't matter in World History and Culture. After all, if Japan vanished, many people would miss it cuz there are Japanese things that are world-renowned. Same can be said of China, India, Germany, France, and etc. But if Korea vanished, who would really care? Sure, Korea makes decent cars and phones, but plenty of other nations make good phones and cars. There is nothing unique about Korea that the world cares about. K-pop is for kids. The world wouldn't care if Korea disappeared overnight. The only people who should care are the Koreans themselves since it is their culture, their history. Even if it means nothing to the world, it should mean something to them. But too many korons are obsessed about global this, global that... just like crazy Merkel and Germany keep thinking in terms of Germany's redemptive place in the world when they should really just think of preserving Germany for Germans.

    Nationalism in the best sense is humble. It is about humility. It says, our nation is a nation among many others. It is not the world. We shouldn't try to remake the world in our image, nor should we remake our nation into a miniature version of the world. To maintain diversity in the world, each nation should guard and preserve its own identity and values. And that should be the main concern of Koreans. It should be about what Korea means Koreans themselves, not what it means to globalism that, btw, is excessive and trashy and megalomaniacal. Let crazy Americans go on and on about being the 'exceptional' and 'indispensable' nation. What good did such megalo-American attitude do for Iraq, Syria, Libya, Ukraine, and etc?

    Along with nationalism, what societies need is humanism. It is about existence on the human scale. Narcissism and nihilism makes people dream of charisma, greatness, superiority, eternal youth, petty self-absorption, and etc. While some individuals are indeed highly talented, most people are just people. And even the greatest individual has his limits, weaknesses, and will grow old and die in the end. Even the great Muhammad Ali ended up sick and weary and old and dead. So, even though competition and achievement are all good, we need humanism to remind us of our limits. It seems this kind of humanism has been lost in globalist Korea that is obsessed with 'greatness'. In a way, the above commenter is blind to the fact that the 'autistic' character of so many East Asians is due to HIS kind of obsession with 'greatness'. Too many Koreans been pushed from young age to believe that ONLY THE BEST is good enough and if you don't make the cut, you suck.

    The only difference between Korean parents and the above commenter is that the former thinks excellence can be achieved by Cram-school while the latter thinks it can be achieved by some magical osmosis of foreigners passing their 'charisma' onto Koreans. Where did he get that, some Hollywood movie?

    No, the problem with Asian neuroticism is due to too much obsession with greatness, excellence, winning, and making it. If Koreans learn the value of humanism, then they will see value in life even if things don't work out according to the grand plan.

    Also, the above commenter missed the point about Maoism. Though Mao was a horrible leader and did much damage to China, there was one good thing about China under communism. There was less competitive pressure to Make It. Communism said all Chinese, from educated person to toiling peasant, has same value as comrade and fellow country man. Though Mao was wrong to send intellectual to the country side to carry dung and raise pigs, the message was that all Chinese are part of one humanity.

    So, things were more relaxed during parts of Mao's rule. But as China has turned capitalist and very competitive, we are seeing the same kinds of pathology that exist in Japan and South Korea. In Mao's China, you could only rise so high. So, everyone focused on getting along and respecting one another as fellow comrades. Apart from the ideological furies of certain campaigns, the overwhelming attitude among Chinese under communism was one of shared humanity. But now that Chinese can become very rich if they succeed, they will do anything to make it. And this had led to fraying of social bonds and narcissism and mania.
    But we see the same thing in the US. After WWII, there was the rise of the broad middle class. Though there were very rich people, most of America was defined by middle class that shared common humanity and aspirations of modest good life. But in today's globalized American where elites must compete with many more people and where sky is the limit in terms of wealth, the widening gulf between the super-haves and have-lesses have made social tensions in America far more explosive. It is esp nuts as the 'left' is represented by the urban super-rich while the 'right' is represented by the lower middle class and working class.

    The above commenter talk of these hyper qualities like charisma and ultra-individuality, but they will always apply to just a handful of individuals, and this goes for the West as well.
    Most people are just human without greatness, and they need to be made to feel that they are part of the larger humanity. And this calls for humanism, not some Ayn-Randianism for the masses.

    Neither more cram schools or more foreigners will fix the problem of Korea. The only thing that will work is revival of nationalism and humanism, a kind of human national socialism that restores the concept of 'minjok'. Without that concept, Koreans are NOTHING. After all, the core meaning of Korean-ness isn't about wealth, achievement, popularity, tv shows, pop music, and etc. After all, North Korea has nothing that South Korea has, yet it is no less Korean than the South. Why? Because it is defined the idea of Korean ethny, or 'minjok'. So, that is the key ABOVE ALL. A nation may grow rich or poor and change over time, but a nation defined by ethny will lose itself unless it preserves that sense of identity.

    Koreans must be made to feel that their elites care about them, their nation and culture, not about the globe or masses of foreign invaders who are to replace the real Koreans as the 'new Koreans'. That is deeply demoralizing to the native masses. Just look at the state of British working class that has been betrayed by UK elites. Look at White Death in the US as the result of the white elites abandonment of the white masses.
    Also, humanism will restore a sense of meaning of life. The poison comes from stuff like K-pop and fashion culture that promote some idealized fantasy of the Korean with plastic surgery and blonde hair as white-wanna-be and etc. All that stuff is about narcissism and etc. It degrades one's appreciation of human as human.

    I get the impression that older generation of Asians were probably saner than younger ones. And I get this impression when I compare older generations of Japanese with younger ones in movies. Older generation knew more hardship, grew up with solid values of family, had strong national identity, a sense of history, and sense of identity. They had moral values and sense of moral limits. They were not PC. Their traditional views may have been limited in some ways, but they also kept them rooted in a meaningful past. But younger Asians who grew up on too much technology, too much social order, too much micro-management, too much pop culture, too much deracinated globalism than rich nationalism, and are maxed on narcissism/nihilism than the humility of humanism... these are like robots.
    So, I don't think this problem is intrinsically Asian. Rather, it is the globalization of Asia that has cut off Asians from their roots and identity and values. Asianness has become plastic than organic. Just compare Japanese literature and cinema from 50s to those today. Today's stuff are so shallow, hollow, immature, thin.

    I recognize real humans in older Japanese films. But in many new Japanese films, they seem like zombies and shallow twerps with no grounding in reality. They seem to live in some kind of bubble fantasy of globo-pop-culture.

    But this is true of Canadians too. They now say stuff like, "there is no such thing as Canadian culture." So, globlaism is all that counts. That man-child Justin Trudeau(who makes my skin crawl) is just some playboy cuck-stooge to anyone of money and wealth. He doesn't represent his own people. But Canadians voted for him because so many of them have been brainwashed by PC and globalism that erases national past and humanist moderation. It sucks everyone into the dream of some globalist utopia ruled by new breed of unbermensch.

    I mean this is precious:

    "Koreans/east asians do possess the ability for greatness, but it will require cultural change, dietary change and also a correct application of eugenic measures."

    No, you got it all wrong. Koreans, like rest of humanity, should just try to be sane, good, and balanced. They should not think of greatness. Most people will not be great. Less than 0.1% of humanity has chance of greatness. What every society should try to be is good. And within that goodness, certain great individuals will arise and do great things. Why? Cuz they have that rare natural talent. But for most people, the most they can hope for is goodness(humanism) within their homeland(nationalism). Most people can only hope to manage a good society. Greatness is always unpredictable. Who knows where the new Beethoven will come from? All you can do is manage a society where the rare great genius can flourish. And for most people, it means having a sense of goodness and decency.

    With all this silly dream of globo-greatness, Koreans have lost their sense of humanity. And if Koreans think flooding their nation with foreigners will somehow lead to greatness, they are nuts and, in the process, only lose their country as well to the foreign tide.

    Italy is now being invaded by tons of Africans and Muslims. I fail to see any greatness in this. I fail to see any spark.

    The best one can hope for from a foreign invasion is the rise in nationalism, like we are seeing in Poland and Hungary. The massive tide of foreigners has made Poles and Hungarians rise up in nationalism again.

    But I get a sense that the above commenter is not hoping for renewal of Korean nationalism to resist the tide. Rather, he or she thinks that Korea will benefit from surrendering like a pussy to the foreign tide. While it's true that foreign challenge, even imperialism, can inspire change and progress, such can only happen in the mode of resistance, not of surrender and servility.
    Any people who say "We welcome invasion by foreigners because we suck so bad" will not have the respect of foreigners. Foreigners will just see such a people as submissive pussies to conquer and dominate.

    The above commenter's message is "We Koreans are so pathetic and hopeless that we need foreign invaders to teach us how to be 'cool' and dynamic."

    I don't know of any foreigner who will respect such a cuck wuss. It's like a man saying, 'come and fuc* my wife to teach me how to be a cool lover'.
  85. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anon
    "Good point, if Asia isn’t getting enough, then maybe the US and Europe are getting too much. You can get too much of a good thing."

    Wrong. That's like saying cancer is good if you have little of it. It would be nuts to divide people into ones with good little cancer and ones with bad big cancer. Cancer is bad, small or big, because all little cancers turn into big cancers and fatal cancers.
    A person with little cancer will soon have big cancer. It is the logic of cancer. If allowed to grow, it never stops.

    Multi-culturalism is a cancer. It is an invasive and aggressive ideology and was designed to be such. It never ends. It keeps calling for more 'diversity', more PC, more minority privilege, and more suppression of native-majority identity and interests to accommodate the minority. It was largely designed by Jews to favor minority Jewish interests over majority gentile interests. It was also a means to increase gentile diversity so that Jewish elite minorities can play divide-and-rule.

    Now, no nation is totally homogeneous. Even seemingly homogeneous ones have some minorities. And even among the native majority, there is some genetic mixture. Even if Korea were all Korean, many Koreans would have some Chinese, Mongol, Manchu, etc blood.

    Some nations are quite diverse, like Iran. Such nations are usually the result of imperialism. Most peoples do not seek control under other people. It is usually forced. There is generally resistance against foreign domination, but if the domination lasts long enough, a kind of imperial nation is created. We see this in English rule over Scotland. Ireland almost became part of permanent Britain as well.

    Now, diversity is something all nations have to deal with. And since there's gonna be some degree of international migration, populations will alter over time. Even if Korea has zero immigration policy, the fact is some foreign workers there might marry a Korean and settle there. And Koreans will have to accept this.

    Multi-culturalism is about something very different. It is an agenda, an ideology that says a nation that is homogeneous is sick, evil, and wicked. It is diseased and must cure itself with diversity.
    Multi-culturalism pushes blind faith in diversity-as-a-good when there is so much evidence to the contrary. If diversity works so good, why did the USSR fall apart? Why did Yugoslavia fall apart? Why did the Ottoman World fall apart? And if diversity does such wonders, why are the native peoples of Latin America still under the rule of white elites? Wasn't diversity forced on them through force?

    Also, if diversity is so great, why did the Vietnamese force out the French? Why did Koreans want to be rid of Japanese rule? Empires are diverse. Nationalism seeks liberation from foreign rule. Diversity was once synonymous with Empire. The resistance against imperialism sought to end or reduce diversity by sending white or Japanese colonizers packing to return to their home nations.

    And there was greater peace around the world thanks to such process of liberation. But then, globalism said there should be massive global migrations of people. Mass demographic imperialism is supposedly the answer to all problems. But why? There is no clear answer why even though raw evidence shows that it leads to disasters.

    Multi-culturalism is an ideology based on blind faith.. Yet, it is cancerous and poisonous. It was meant to weaken and harm the native majority community. How do we know this? Well, Jews played a big role in concocting Multi-Culturalism, but they never practice it on Israel. It is always on gentile nations. Jews, who don't accept Syrian refugees, ask Japan and Korea to take them. The nerves! Jewish-controlled foreign policy created much of the mess in Middle East and North Africa, but Jews pressure ONLY European nations and US to take in refugees... but there is no pressure on Israel to take them. If anything, Israelis go to Europe to help refugees come to EU. We can guess as to why. Jews wanna depopulate parts of Muslim world and eventually push all the Palestinians there so they can have an Israel that is all Jewish.
    Multi-culturalism is for suckers. It is snake-oil.

    Now, if multi-culturalism had an iron rule that said 'diversity should end at 5%', it might be doable. But MC has no limits. It is cancerous. If France turns 20% non-white, Multi-culturalism will say MORE. When France turns 40% non-white, MC will call for MORE. When France turns 70% non-white, MC will still call for STILL MORE. It is a cancer.

    Globalized Koreans who call for MC will never know when to say STOP. Also, MC is a lie. Remember when white Americans were assured that change in immigration policy will not upset the demographic balance of the US? Well, what has happened? Now, the PC forces are gloating that US will turn majority non-white.

    MC was created by people who think and feel like Tim Wise. It is a virus, a poison, a cancer. It offers nice-sounding promises, but its goal is to overtake and kill the native host.

    MC may be appealing to people of all nations because the Exotic Solutions seems the easy fix. All nations have problems and difficulties. These are not easy to fix... so some people look to the Foreign Fix. It's like LOST HORIZON where some Shagri-La has all the answers. If some Easterners look to West for all the answers, some in the West exaggerate 'Eastern Wisdom'. Consider the hippies in 60s who were into India as the fountain of wisdom. Look at some Hollywood celebs who think Dalai Lama and Tibetan Buddhism offers all the answers. Now, it may be true that another culture has some good stuff lacking in one's own culture. The danger is leaping to the conclusion that the foreign culture must have all the answers. In fact, they have just as many problems. It's like some Americans, tired of Hollywood junk, overly idealize foreign cinema because they've seen the best of foreign movies. So, they think all foreign movies must be great when, in fact, 95% of them are totally worthless, even worse than Hollywood junk.

    Also, certain globalized indivduals want to feel better and morally superior. And multi-cultism makes for an easy way to feel superior to others of one's kind. So, white progs feel so 'superior' to 'Islamophobic whites' because they welcome Muslims. So much of white proggism is about 'virtue-signaling', as John Derbyshire said. Because national identities are being weakened, people seek new identity of 'virtue-sigaling'.
    And it seems this bug has spread to Koreans too. The Korean commenter who's for MC surely feels superior to other Koreans who oppose it. You see, those who oppose it are 'inbred inferior Koreans'. But he or she is a superior Korean because he or she wants to mix blood with superior foreigners with all the answers. A total phony.

    nah, I dont feel morally superior to other koreans who oppose MC. Morals have nothing to do with it, I just see MC as a viable way of attacking traditional korean culture which impedes the positive development of korean people. To me, MC is somewhat comparable to mao zedong’s cultural revolution; it is true that the cultural revolution destroyed a lot of traditional chinese culture and hurt a lot of people, but on the other hand the wanton destruction caused by the cultural revolution helped liberate china from its own restrictive and backwards culture. Modern day china’s meteoric rise would not have been possible if it wasn’t for the dissolution of large parts of china’s traditional culture. You should also keep in mind that at the end of the qing dynasty china was invaded not because the foreigners were too strong, but rather because china was too weak. At this point in time china was holding itself back because it was mired in the past and in stagnant cultures and traditions; however it was as a result of the western imperial incursions that china was forced to put its house in order. Thus the fate of the late qing dynasty is a perfect example of the kind of “creative destruction” that I am referring to when I advocate MC for korea/east asia.

    On that same tangent, I want to point out that every act of imperialism or western aggression against asia only serves to ultimately advance and strengthen asia. If it wasn’t for the western imperialists continually antagonizing east asia over the past couple of centuries, there is a very good chance that east asia would still be living like it was in the 16th century. I am obviously not condoning imperialism here, but I am making the argument that east asia seems to function quite differently than the west, and things that are negatives for the west may potentially function as positives for the east. I see MC in the same light, I think it is something negative that can surprisingly benefit east asia through its destructive capabilities.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    I am Chinese. The Cultural Revolution served nothing except to kill millions of people and demonstrate that Soviet ideas are bad in the Soviet Union, but even worse when adopted elsewhere. It put us behind at least ten, perhaps twenty years. It has created, quite possibly, the massively amoral Chinese society where getting ahead is all that matters.

    Your grasp of Chinese history is dubious.

    The Qing took us over because they WERE strong. They fielded one hundred thousand horse archers, for starters. Secondly, we were internally feuding with rebellions that had taken our capital, thus causing loyalist forces to join the Qing to enforce the Mandate of Heaven.

    I mean, Native American horse archers in vastly smaller numbers with inferior weapons would be a thorn in the side of European and American armies until the invention of multi-shot firearms. That a hundred thousand organized horsemen with composite bows aided by the cream of Ming imperial loyalists overran weary musket-armed Han rebels is not exactly surprising.

    And this is after we were literally holding off the various horse-riding nations, often with turncoat Chinese advisors, for about two hundred plus years with basically endless artillery spam - one receipt found shows something like a hundred cannons delivered north every year. No functioning government can maintain a state of war for that many years without insane stress on the population. Of course we failed in the end.

    The Qing takeover was a disaster for us, too. The Ming were developing along a gunpowder doctrine and could have possibly managed to keep up with the West; with the success of the Qing, they basically proceeded to rely on basically a horse/sword/bow force and military theory, and we never really developed military science again until the fall of the Qing.

    , @Anon
    "nah, I dont feel morally superior to other koreans who oppose MC. Morals have nothing to do with it, I just see MC as a viable way of attacking traditional korean culture which impedes the positive development of korean people."

    That makes no sense. You say you don't feel morally superior to traditional Koreans, BUT you want to destroy their culture because it impedes 'positive development'. Well, you must believe their 'traditional culture' is morally inferior since it 'impedes positive development'. Social and political issues are intrinsically moral. You have your idea of a good or better society. You believe 'traditional korean values' prevent this. Thus, it means you believe those values are morally inferior to your own.

    Another thing. What traditional culture is left in Korea? Isn't K-pop the main cultural expression of Korea? What is that? It's J-pop gone full retard. Just when I thought nothing could be worse than J-pop, there is this crap called K-pop with bimbos overdone with plastic surgery and hair dye. Or that gangnam style frog-faced psy.
    It is the fantasy of Korean Michael Jacksons who wanna live in the neverland of trans-racial fantasy of being white and black. And I've seen some Korean soap operas on TV, and I don't see any traditional values. They are mostly insipid and about empty modern souls talking shit. Given the total vapidity of much of Korean 'culture', I don't think tradition would be so bad.

    Now, I'm not a dogmatic traditionalist. Tradition could be bad, it could be good. Same with change. It could be good or bad. I'm more interested in the preservation of core identity, sense of history, and heritage despite the changes.
    That is to say, even when Japan decided to modernize in the late 19th century, they did it for Japan with a powerful sense of Japanese-ness. In other words, accept change and progress but for the good of Japanese people. Make foreign ideas serve the Japanese nation. So, Japanese lost a lot of repressive traditions --- like the samurai caste system --- , but they still held onto their identity, sovereignty, and sense of independence. Unfortunately, the Japanese trampled on the independence of other Asian nations. Instead of helping them to modernize and defend themselves from the West, Japan collaborated with UK and US(and other European powers) to carve up much of Asia.... that is until it turned into Japan vs USSR & US, and then Japan lost and has been a US puppet since. Still, elements in Japan has held onto Japanese identity and history, and I respect them.

    You're probably right that Koreans would do better to let go of some of their traditional attitudes. And practices like dog-eating, but from what I hear, it's not as common as it used to be.

    "To me, MC is somewhat comparable to mao zedong’s cultural revolution; it is true that the cultural revolution destroyed a lot of traditional chinese culture and hurt a lot of people, but on the other hand the wanton destruction caused by the cultural revolution helped liberate china from its own restrictive and backwards culture. Modern day china’s meteoric rise would not have been possible if it wasn’t for the dissolution of large parts of china’s traditional culture."

    This is nuts. The crazy thing about Cultural Revolution was it was, in many ways, reversion to the worst kind of Oriental Despotism. This kind of violence was nothing new in China, especially when it was invaded by barbarians. Indeed, the first emperor Ch'in had similarly killed tons of scholars and laid waste to culture. Of course, Mao respected him. Also, the main victims of Cultural Revolution were NOT holders of old culture, which had been destroyed already in the 50s. It was the communist bureaucracy. Most victims were party cadres accused of being 'capitalist roaders'. In the 50s, Mao wiped out the landlord class. He had removed all bourgeois elements. Traditional scholars were all marginalized or even killed. The entire education system, media, and everything was under communist control. There was no need for the destructive force of Cultural Revolution to wage war on tradition. Indeed, it was really a power struggle between Mao and others like Liu Shao chi, Deng, and etc.
    Mao saw them as rivals, and he used Red Guards to destroy them. Most victims of the CR were professors, bureaucrats, teachers, commissars, and etc who were accused of betraying the Revolution. But in fact, nearly all of them were faithful communists, not traditionalists.
    Now, if the Cultural Revolution did some good for China, it was because Mao made a mess of the Communist Party. Because of CR's wreckage and chaos, the Chinese Communist party lost the kind of iron control held by the Soviet Communist Party. So, after Mao died, reformers could build anew and make changes because the party had been so weakened. So, in the end, Mao ironically paved the way for return of capitalism because he gave communism such a bad name and made even party elders hanker for a new direction, something other than nutty Maoism. CR wasn't a war on tradition since traditional ways had already been banned in the 50s. Its real harm was the destruction of art works, books, sculpture, temples, and etc. When American visitors came to Chinese universities in the late 70s, they found almost no books. All had been burnt. There was just the books of Mao. Among foreign books, there was just some Encyclopedia Brittanicca from the 50s.

    Maoism was a strange case. Even though Mao despised Confucius, his brand of communism repeated the same mistakes: hatred of the business class. Capitalism taught us that trade-and-investment makes for modern society. Confucius was an elitist, but he hated the merchant class as exploitative. His economic policy was 'peasants good cuz they make rice', 'artisans okay cuz they make stuff', and 'scholars wonderful cuz they are about wisdom', but 'merchants bad cuz they just make money off stuff made by others. they no good'. Confucius failed to understand that the role of middlemen is vital to the economy. Maoism was like Confucianism in idolizing the peasant and totally degrading the business class. Mao replaced the scholar-literati with the communist cadre, but the theme was the same: both groups were about wisdom/justice. Now, both Confucius and Mao were right about the shadiness of the business class. While business is necessary, when a society puts economics at the center of society, everything is determined by profits and market value. When there are only virtue industries, it's not so bad. But there are also vice industries, and they will favor profits even when the stuff they peddle harm society. We see this in rise of gambling. We saw this in the Opium Trade. The Brits and Jews didn't care about all those Chinese losing their souls to opium as long as the money rolled in. And look at K-Pop and other crap. It is cultural dope, total trash that harms souls, but the music industry sells it as musical-dildos. Given the moral/cultural rot of so much of the modern world, what it really needs is something like the Iranian Revolution of 1979(minus the theocracy), National Socialist revival(minus the radical racism), and Putin's restoration of Church. National Culture should be more than 'me so horny me so horny' and 'muh dic*' and drugged out orgies at rave parties.

    By the way, where does one get the notion that communist destruction of culture is necessary for profound progress? It's nuts to believe China would not have great progress if Mao hadn't swept away the bad old ways.
    Japan made progress without something like the cultural revolution. Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore, all of them Chinese-run, were spared communism and cultural revolution, but they westernized and modernized, indeed much faster and more than mainland China under Mao. And look at South Korea and North Korea. South was run by rightist regime whereas North was run by leftist regime that did more to attack tradition. Yet, the North has been slow to change whereas the South changed so much.

    If communism is to be credited with anything good in Asia and Europe, it was its conservative influence. Despite its revolutionary rhetoric, the strict social controls and lack of consumer-hedonistic culture actually made those societies more nationalist, conservative, and even traditionalist. Modern China is now more traditional than Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan(that, being a puppet of US, is now into 'gay marriage'). Modern China still has nationalist and patriotic culture. Another positive outcome of communism is national sovereignty. This is something China has. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Philippines don't. They are cuck-vassals of the US and must follow orders. North Korea also has relative sovereignty but is run by a fat retard and uses it very badly.
    Today, the former communist nations in Europe are far more conservative than the Western ones that measure 'progress' by sucking up to Jews, homos, Negroes, and Muslims.

    Anyway, your mention of Cultural Revolution goes to show there is something totally pussy about Koreans. After all, good or bad, CR was about Chinese doing their own thing. Mao didn't invite foreigners to mess up China. If anything, Mao's one good quality was he was an ardent nationalist who even broke ties with Russia because he wanted China to be ruled by Chinese. But YOU don't even have confidence in your own people. You see them as the enemy who must be destroyed by FOREIGNERS. A patriot, you ain't. You want FOREIGNERS to mess up your own countrymen to bring about your idea of 'progress', which is what? The culture of 'cool' where Koreans ape and imitate deracinated Westerners who worship homos, black dongs, racial displacement of their own kind? What is your idea of progress? What is it about the West that attracts you so?
    It is true that the West was once the crowning jewel of the world in its ideas, arts, culture, and science. Today, it still leads in science, but what else? A culture where white guys invite black guys to hump their women is 'progress'? Hey, it's 'cool' since negroes are 'badass'!! Or maybe progress is a replacing Christianity with the worship of a holy homo anus that takes penises. Or praising the courage of Bruce Jenner for saying he's a 'woman'. Or all those college kids yapping about 50 genders being fluid or something.

    Another thing. The 'traditional' Koreans you despise so much, the people who survived the colonization, the division, the horrible war, experienced great poverty, and toiled so hard to create modern Korea, will soon be gone. Don't worry. Within few decades, everyone who lived through the war will be dead and buried... just like the Greatest Generation in America are vanishing forever. And then, the nation will belong entirely to your kind, and you can have all the 'progress' you want. All the interracial orgies, all the homo parades, all the plastic surgeries, all the rave scenes, all the drugs, all the booty-bumping-humping music, acting like whores and pimps.
    And while you guys live your degenerate lives that ape and imitate western decadence, you can spit and piss on the ancestors who were too 'traditional' and 'uncool'. I mean what a bunch of losers they were. Their idea of culture was not going to night clubs, bumping and grinding to rap, getting tattoos all over, and spouting PC they heard from black thugs and white cucks. Their 'lame' idea of life and culture was raising families, maintaining moral values, and upholding national unity and patriotism. They didn't have tattoos all over their arms, rings through their noses. Their idea of culture wasn't rap music about blacks saying 'suck my dic*'. They respected their parents and grandparents. What a bunch of traditional losers. But you and your ilk are so much better because you are 'cool'. You wave the homo flag. That is 'cool'. Your entire idea of music is wiggling your scrawny yellow to some lame k-pop imitation of some 'cool' negro rapper going on and on about his 'ho'. Now, that is 'progress'.

    "On that same tangent, I want to point out that every act of imperialism or western aggression against asia only serves to ultimately advance and strengthen asia. If it wasn’t for the western imperialists continually antagonizing east asia over the past couple of centuries, there is a very good chance that east asia would still be living like it was in the 16th century."

    You have a point there. I've always argued that imperialism wasn't all bad. Current Western PC blames the West for everything, but imperialism did some good to shake up the entire world and create new possibilities.
    But keep in mind that the reason why East Asia fared better was because it wasn't colonized and dominated to the extent of others.
    If imperialism is always good, look at the fate of the indigenous peoples of Latin America. They are a conquered and defeated people forever.
    Also, is it worth losing one's homeland for material progress? Surely, Hawaiian live better because of Americanization. But they've lost their homeland to whites and Asians forever. And imperialism in Asia also created a basketcase like Philippines. It's long been a whore of Spain, now a whore of US. Not a happy story. And I'm not sure imperialism did much good for Indonesia which, btw, is a fake country.

    East Asia did gain by imperialism --- even though Koreans are loathe to admit it, they gained a lot under Japanese imperialism too --- , but keep in mind that East Asia was less dominated by others. China was divided among imperial powers but was never owned like India was by UK. Korea was ruled by Japan, fellow Asian nation, not be Western power. Japan and Korea came under less direct Western power but did better than Asian nations that came under direct Western rule like Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Burma, and India/Pakistan.
    And the late entry of Western Imperialism into Asia owed to the power of China. Because of China's size and power, the West was wary about conquering and dominating that part of the world. And as long as the West feared China, it also kept away from its satellite kingdoms like Korea, Vietnam, etc. It was when China lost the Opium Wars that the West smelled blood and made aggressive foray into East Asia. This threat from the West did a lot of good by forcing Asia to make fundamental changes. Japan did this best and most intelligently with Meiji Reforms, but then Japan figured, if China cannot withstand the West, Japan can't either... so it has to modernize and westernize. But the thing is both Japan and China sought to modernize while also keeping their independence or sovereignty. Japan managed to keep it, and China struggled to regain it under Chiang who was not a bad guy. Mao thought the answer would be communism. Ironically, Mao's adoption of a radical western ideology led to the closing off of China from the West once again. This is the irony of communism. It made China, Vietnam, and North Korea to revert to the old 'xenophobic' ways of closing off to the outside world and turning into mummy-nations frozen in time. In the 60s, China shut itself not only to Japan and the West but even to the USSR and Soviet Bloc. And North Korea under communism became a hermit kingdom again.

    Anyway, I agree that Western Imperialism did some good around the world. But why did it do more good in East Asia than in other parts? One reason is homogeneity of East Asian nations that had organic and genuine history. Because Japan was a nation of one race, it could rally together and work as a whole. China is more diverse than Japan, but there is an ethnic Han Chinese consciousness, and Han Chinese made up 97% of all Chinese in 1950. Unlike diverse India which could be manipulated in 'divide and rule' ways by the British, Chinese nationalism was faster to come together cuz of ethnic unity. And Vietnamese were also able to effectively challenge the French and then the Americans cuz all Vietnamese shared common identity and heritage. And Koreans are one people. So, East Asian nations, due to their homogeneity, could work more effectively to meet the challenge of the West. They could unite politically and work with sense of common destiny. In contrast, much of Africa and Middle East had nothing like homogeneous nations in East Asia. And even much of Southeast Asia was a hodge-podge of different peoples. It's like Indonesian identity is an invention of various ethnic groups bunched together. And those nations in Middle East are creations of European imperialism.
    So, homogeneity and national unity were a huge boon to East Asia. If Japan had been 1/3 Japanese, 1/3 Indian, and 1/3 Filipino, it wouldn't have been very effective in challenging the West. Indeed, the imperialists could have played divide-and-rule among those different group.

    Another factor of success of East Asia is higher IQ. Though not higher than white IQ, it was higher than IQ of most other nations. Korea and Japan are small and natural-resource-poor, but they have higher IQs. This is why Korea and Japan have much to lose if they bring in lots of low IQ people who have lots of babies. Already in nations like Sweden, we are seeing the drop in student IQ because high IQ Swedes are having less babies, having babies with blacks and Muslims, and being replaced by lower IQ Muslims and blacks.
    Another factor for East Asian success is Confucianism. Even though Classic Confucianism became rigid and moribund, it did instill those cultures with respect for learning, teaching, knowledge, and culture. When East Asians shifted this mindset from Confucian classic to modern education, they learned very fast because they revered education.
    It's like Jews and their Rabbinical studies. Even though that stuff became outdated in the modern world, it had instilled Jews with a profound reverence for knowledge, study, and learning. This culture was lacking in other non-white cultures for the most part. Jews and East Asians had a tradition of reverence for knowledge. The Hindus had the Brahmin tradition of learning, but it was restricted only to the Brahmin caste. In contrast, the Jewish ideal was for ALL Jews to be knowledgeable if possible. And the ideal of Confucianism reached down to every person if he had the means.
    So, it is stupid to denounce all of tradition. There are valuable assets in tradition that can be revised and altered to serve changing times. Chiang Kai-Shek tried to modernize Confucianism by combining it with respect for business, exercise, military, and etc. Tradition can inspire the new. For example, even though the Japanese got rid of the samurai order, they still maintained certain samurai ethos and culture in the modern world, and those have served the Japanese well. While tradition can be a hindrance to change, it can also offer a balance against the instability of change. It's like a tree needs to grow taller and wider.. but it must rely on the stability and firmness offered by the trunk and roots.
    Precisely because the modern world is so hectic, wild, crazy, and uprooting, there is a need for core conservatism, traditionalism, and eternalism as counter-balance. Indeed, we see this in Israel itself. It is a very modern state, but it is also rooted in a powerful sense of identity, heritage, culture, and history. Now, Jews don't need foreigners to come to Israel to tell them what to do. Why can't Koreans learn to be like Israelis and find their own meaning and balance?

    Also, I think you're not giving East Asians enough credit. Look at the changes Japan, China, and Korea went through from 1900 to 2000. These people you dismiss so much have done notable things. If anything, they have done more than any part of the world except the West. You might argue they would have done EVEN MORE if they'd been invaded by the West more. But look at the examples of the world that came under greater domination of the West: Africa, Middle East, and Latin America. Black Africa is still a mess. Middle East has imploded. And Latin America is stuck in its rut. And Philippines was under far more Western control than Korea, Japan, or China. It has accomplished much less. And India? It was a basket-case even though it was under British rule for 200 yrs. And in early 90s, its economy was smaller than that of South Korea. Even now, over 50% of people shit outdoors. If it began to make progress, it was because it learned from East Asia that capitalism works better than state-socialism.
    As for Thailand, which should be called Thigh-land, it's been open to Westerners for a long long time. It is sucky sucky land where one of the main industries is prostitution. Americans, Europeans, Japanese, and other foreigners have been going there forever, but has it made the nation any better? It is whore-ville.
  86. @anon
    compared to pretty much everywhere else on earth but east asia.

    Europeans seem to have a healthy relationship with sociability and sexuality

    Africans are super social and sexual (maybe a bit too much lol)

    Latin Americans are super social and sexual as well

    The middle east I have no idea about

    Obviously I am referring to cultural stagnation in terms of sociability and sexuality. While this may sound trite to you, this is because as a european you come from a relatively balanced culture and you don't have to worry about things like this, but to the east asian culture, sociability and sexuality are cultural values which east asia sorely needs to cultivate, especially in this day and age of globalized sexual norms. Do you really think its normal, or even desirable that any plain white guy can hop on a plane to asia and within 24 hours be swarmed by tons of willing asian girls while your typical asian guy could never hope to replicate a similar feat with white girls? This is something that needs to be fixed, and traditional asian culture/diet/dysgenic trends are all to blame for this. This is the kind of cultural stagnation that I am referring to; east asian culture has many good aspects, but in the realm of sociability and sexuality it fails miserably.

    Regarding muslim immigrants, they might potentially be troublesome, I don't really have an opinion on them; however when it comes to african immigration I am actually quite sanguine about that. Africans are a pretty colorful, social and sensual people; at the very least they will help the social and sensual development of east asia via cultural osmosis (for an example of this consider latin america and the social and sensual gifts that this culture received from their african diaspora) Additionally an african diaspora in asia would help because it would disrupt existing masculine norms in asia and force them to evolve, essentially a masculinity arms race. A similar effect can be observed in the US where the african american community here definitely has a subtle but very strong effect on notions of masculinity in america. Finally I want to add that masculinity in east asia is frankly embarrassing. East asian people are soft as fuck and everybody in the entire world knows this. I would welcome anything that would shatter the complacency and guilelessness of east asian males and force them to man up.

    lol, I cannot believe you’re serious…are you trolling me? Granted, maybe East Asian societies do have some cultural problems (e.g. excessive focus on work, belief in hierarchy etc.)…but you want to become more like Latin America and think African immigrants will improve your country?????
    And I don’t know if this is true:
    “East asian people are soft as fuck and everybody in the entire world knows this.”

    Granted, East Asia maybe has too many nerds today…but South Korea still has conscription (which many European countries have foolishly abolished) and many really tough military types. Even Japan has quite impressive defense forces. And maybe I have an outmoded view of things but when I think about East Asians I think about things like the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy rolling up the European colonial empires, the Chinese pushing the Americans down the Korean peninsula, the Cultural revolution etc. …these aren’t the actions of people “soft as fuck”…more like extremely scary people! Maybe things have changed somewhat since then, but I think you’re exaggerating, and in any case Western degeneracy seems far more advanced.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Im talking about on an interpersonal level, not on a military level. Anybody can be brave when they are carrying a gun. East asian people tend to be conflict adverse, submissive and "cowardly" on a personal level.

    No I do not want east asia to become like latin america, or africa, or even europe for that matter. I want east asia to become the best version of east asia that it can possibly be, this is only possibly by balancing a fundamentally imbalanced culture. East asians are culturally and genetically primed towards intellectualness and femininity (as a result taking a hit when it comes to sensuality and masculinity), I seek to address this problem and create a race and culture that is equally balanced in terms of intellect and sensuality, feminity and masculinity; europe is a good example of this balance I am talking about, but I want to emphasize that I dont want east asia copying europe; I just want east asia to be balanced in the same way that europe is.
    , @Anon
    "lol, I cannot believe you’re serious…are you trolling me?"

    Yikes.. has it been just an elaborate trolling on his part?

    Come to think of it, his theories do sound loopy...

    But then, no loopier than what we usually hear nowadays.

  87. @anon
    incorrect, you need to reread the part that you quoted from me. I wrote:

    but one potential factor is that due to europe’s constant history of internecine strife, it somehow created a cultural dynamicism which over time selected for socially positive traits which we now identify with european people.
     
    I am not implying that koreans can magically become more interesting by merely having internecine strife, rather I clearly stated that internecine strife/some conditions of conflict seem to act as a positive genetic and/or culture eugenic (or dysgenic, depending on what traits you value) force. This of course would not happen over night, but would be a slow, gradual process taking many generations and at least hundreds of years. Either way, it is impossible to create organic internecine conditions, but multiculturalism would somewhat replicate the effect.

    You make the mistake of the mis-scaled comparison. Korean to European comparison is absurd. Like asking people who live in Normal, Illinois to act like Chicagoans. And your remedy is to import Chicagoans to Normal. A better one is Korea to Poland. Similar population and geographic size. What you’re actually (unstated) comparing is Korea to America. A recurring problem with Koreans the last 50 years. Koreans will never find their own culture as long as they keep comparing themselves to Americans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    The point I am making is that korean/east asian culture is imbalanced and backwards. The rest of the world's population are quite well developed socially as well as sexually, however east asia is the odd one out. I am not in the wrong here, I am simply making valid criticisms of korean/east asian culture. If you think I'm merely comparing koreans to americans then you are wrong, I am pointing out glaring deficiencies in korean/east asian culture that need to be fixed, no more and no less. Maybe there are some koreans/east asians out there who are perfectly content with their race/culture being the most feminine and also being awkward and nebbish, sorry but I am not one of those people, I correctly recognize that in certain aspects korean/east asian culture is fundamentally broken and needs to be fixed.
  88. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @German_reader
    lol, I cannot believe you're serious...are you trolling me? Granted, maybe East Asian societies do have some cultural problems (e.g. excessive focus on work, belief in hierarchy etc.)...but you want to become more like Latin America and think African immigrants will improve your country?????
    And I don't know if this is true:
    "East asian people are soft as fuck and everybody in the entire world knows this."

    Granted, East Asia maybe has too many nerds today...but South Korea still has conscription (which many European countries have foolishly abolished) and many really tough military types. Even Japan has quite impressive defense forces. And maybe I have an outmoded view of things but when I think about East Asians I think about things like the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy rolling up the European colonial empires, the Chinese pushing the Americans down the Korean peninsula, the Cultural revolution etc. ...these aren't the actions of people "soft as fuck"...more like extremely scary people! Maybe things have changed somewhat since then, but I think you're exaggerating, and in any case Western degeneracy seems far more advanced.

    Im talking about on an interpersonal level, not on a military level. Anybody can be brave when they are carrying a gun. East asian people tend to be conflict adverse, submissive and “cowardly” on a personal level.

    No I do not want east asia to become like latin america, or africa, or even europe for that matter. I want east asia to become the best version of east asia that it can possibly be, this is only possibly by balancing a fundamentally imbalanced culture. East asians are culturally and genetically primed towards intellectualness and femininity (as a result taking a hit when it comes to sensuality and masculinity), I seek to address this problem and create a race and culture that is equally balanced in terms of intellect and sensuality, feminity and masculinity; europe is a good example of this balance I am talking about, but I want to emphasize that I dont want east asia copying europe; I just want east asia to be balanced in the same way that europe is.

    Read More
  89. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Hacienda
    You make the mistake of the mis-scaled comparison. Korean to European comparison is absurd. Like asking people who live in Normal, Illinois to act like Chicagoans. And your remedy is to import Chicagoans to Normal. A better one is Korea to Poland. Similar population and geographic size. What you're actually (unstated) comparing is Korea to America. A recurring problem with Koreans the last 50 years. Koreans will never find their own culture as long as they keep comparing themselves to Americans.

    The point I am making is that korean/east asian culture is imbalanced and backwards. The rest of the world’s population are quite well developed socially as well as sexually, however east asia is the odd one out. I am not in the wrong here, I am simply making valid criticisms of korean/east asian culture. If you think I’m merely comparing koreans to americans then you are wrong, I am pointing out glaring deficiencies in korean/east asian culture that need to be fixed, no more and no less. Maybe there are some koreans/east asians out there who are perfectly content with their race/culture being the most feminine and also being awkward and nebbish, sorry but I am not one of those people, I correctly recognize that in certain aspects korean/east asian culture is fundamentally broken and needs to be fixed.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hacienda
    So you take the feminine/passive solution of importing what you perceive to be as masculine men and even more feminine women to address these problems. LOL. Koreans have a word for you: pyeontae (geek, pervert).
    , @Anon
    "The point I am making is that korean/east asian culture is imbalanced and backwards. The rest of the world’s population are quite well developed socially as well as sexually, however east asia is the odd one out."

    Sexual balance in Africa? A continent where men rape young girls to be purified of HIV? A continent where men bang women all around and don't stick around to take care of them? African women have 6 or 7 kids each. Many babies are offered for sale to Westerners like puppies. Africa is so poor, violent, and vile that millions try to flee to Europe for better life. Rape is common in Africa. The president of South Africa, once accused of rape, joked about it and was acquitted. It's the norm in Africa for women to have kids with different men and for men to have several wives. Is this the 'sexual balance' you're talking about?

    The Muslim world is sexually healthy? Then, why do Muslim men have such loutish attitudes when they come to the West? They gang-rape women. They have rape-torture gangs in Rotherham. And in the Muslim world, there is cousin-marriage galore that produces a bunch of tards.

    And where is sexual balance in the West? Women are a bunch of whores. We have Lena Dunham-ism. What sane society wants girls to emulate that blob? Or Emma Sulkowicz. And if the West is sexually so healthy, why all the Rape Culture hysteria?
    And what is so sexually balanced about rap culture where the message is 'suck my dic*, ho'? And what kind of national cultural revolves around 'twerking'? 40% of white kids in working class are now fatherless. 75% of black kids have no fathers who stick around.

    And it's difficult to speak of Latin America which is made up of many races, classes, castes, and etc. I would not say Latin American sexual culture is healthy. Too much machismo, too much preference of image and style over meaning and substance. Argentina is the capital of the vapid and shallow.

    As for East Asia, there WAS sexual balance. Most men got married, most women got married. This was the case in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and etc. So, what happened?
    One was pop culture. I took a class in college on Japanese society and Chinese society. In a more traditional setting, an average Asian person would have grown up in company of grandparents and relatives. It's like in the films of Yasujiro Ozu: A young Japanese woman has frequent contacts with parents, older people, relatives, and young people(nieces or nephews). So, she is aware that she is part of a link in time. You go from childhood to youthhood to adulthood to oldhood to death. You're part of time, you're part of culture, you're part of community.

    But then came the TV. And people began to watch TV, TV, and TV. And then TV got dumber and trashier. And youth culture took over and convinced even grown ups to act young and immature forever. We have 50 yr olds now still listening to rap music in the West. How pathetic is that? If you've ever seen Japanese TV, you know what I"m talking about. It is mind-destroying, soul-killing. So vapid, empty, hollow, tarded.
    But parents just let kids indulge in this junky cartoon, fake, shallow, vapid fantasyland. And old people have been shunted off out of sight into retirement complexes. And young people were encouraged to obsess over their image, pleasure, and attitude above all else. So, young people grew up without a sense of connection to other people. In Kurosawa's RED BEARD, the noble elder doctor teaches the younger one to observe people and feel a part of larger humanity. But today's pop culture tells young people to just indulge in their own petty narcissism and hedonism. This affected young girls more than young boys because women are, by nature, more narcissistic. If you give a boy a videogame, he will play all day. If you give a girl a mirror, she will stare at it all day.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOCKBnxgflU

    What East Asia lost was a sense of balance. In the past, it wasn't just about SEX and fun. It was about life, duty, and family. So, love and sex were a part of life, not something disassociated from life. The BALANCE was in morality and family. You found someone to love, you committed to that person, and you had kids with her. This is the balance between nature and culture, between biology and morality. But modern society is all about individual funnery. So, sex is seen as something to do just for kicks. It's like Beavis going 'boing!!'.
    This very concept is an imbalance. Sex for mere sex leads to Lena-Dunham, booty-call-ism, Afro-dong-ism, Porkys-ism, Ron-Jeremy-sucking-his-own-dong-ism(which a Jewish kid showed me on dad's VCR in the early 80s). In the past, the ideal was love and marriage. This was so in the West too. But when sex was decoupled from morality, duty, and obligation due to abortion, birth control pill, and other means, sex became a thing in and of itself. This turned women into whores and men into pimps or wanna-be-pimps. Or cucks. There was a time when a white guy had a good chance of deflowering the woman he fell in love with and married. Now, the chances are he's marrying someone like Emma Sulkowicz of the infamous "fuc* me in the butt" texting. This is what you call the 'sexual balance' of the West?

    Though the East may not be as debauched as the West, the same attitudes has spread far and wide through pop culture, Hollywood, MTV, and internet that affects everyone all over, and no nation is as wired up as Korea.
    In Asian societies, when FAMILY was at the center of culture, men and women understood that the thing was find a decent person to marry and have children with. But the new attitude says it is okay to just hook up and have sex. This is why so many Japanese women don't get married. Many continue to live at home, go to night clubs, hook up with men, use contraceptives, and act like hookers.
    And these skankisans imitate every dumb hornball fad that comes of black America.
    One out of every 200 Japanese women works in porn.

    Now, this kind of 'sexual climate' is more difficult for many Asians since they are, by nature, more awkward and inhibited. They evolved that way. Asian societies punished or killed those who acted too wild, so over time, the population became tamer and more docile, which is good for cohesion and cooperation.
    What this means is that East Asia should reject Western and especially African sexual mores since 'game' doesn't come naturally to Asians. Most Asians would do better with a traditional sexual culture of shame, duty, marriage, and family. Such values would pressure men and women to find someone nice for marriage and commitment than for loose sex on the basis of 'my ding-a-ling' and booty-call. Blacks are different cuz black guys wanna shout to the world, 'suck my dic*' and black women will start shaking their booties like baboons whenever the music is playing, indeed even at Walmart as I've seen on occasion. Races are different, so they need different sexual cultures. When a black guy sees a black mama shake her ass, he's like "dang, gotta go there and rub my dic* on her booooooooty!" When Asian women act this way, Asian boys get nosebleeds like in those anime.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manga_iconography#Nose

    There is no "one size fits all" solution for all races, just like there is no one-size-condom-fits-all-for-everyone. What works with blacks work less well with whites, and what works with whites work less well with Asians. It's like what works for cats will not work for dogs, and what works for dogs will not work for coyotes.

    East Asia did fine sexually under the traditional values of duty, commitment, marriage, and family. It is doing horribly under the new regimen of 'me so horny' and 'me ape rapper'. In the past, most men got married to most women, and they had families and had meaning.

    Of course, another problem is the Fantasy spread by Soap Operas which feature Ideal Lovers. Also, as East Asia got richer, women have fantasies of marrying the better kind of man. They have a moon or bust mentality. It's no wonder 50% of Japanese men have given up on womenfolk. They sense their jobs are not good enough. In the past, and this goes for the West too, most people were either poor, working class, or barely in middle class. And they didn't expect too much from life. They didn't grow up on TV fantasies and Eternal Youth mentality. They had a better sense of reality and modest pleasure of life. So, people met and got married cuz they just liked one another. Today, with so much wealth and with TV & pop culture filled with ideal lifestyles of rich folks, hip folks, cool folks, and etc., men and esp women have become very choosy in their choice of mates. Good is no longer good enough for lots of women who hold on for the Dream Beau to the very end... and end up being a cat lady.

    Another thing. The above commenter seems to think FOREIGNERS will make things better for Asia. No, the foreigners will make things worse. If the foreigners are desperate women from poor Asian nations, then Korean men might marry them instead of looking for Korean mates. If the foreigners are white or black men with 'game', they might take Korean women from Korean men. The above commenter seems to think white guys and black guys will TEACH Korean guys how to get women. But men don't think like that. Men are dog-eat-dog or dong-beat-dong, that is competitive. If foreign white/black men come to Asia and notice that Korean guys are a bunch of wusses, they will make the move on the women.

    Maybe the above commenter is really a Korean woman who wants more foreigners cuz she wants a white/black guy who will save her and take her to America or something.
    And that brings us to the issue of sexuality in globalism. Globo-sexuality is not about equality but about hierarchy. We see this in the West itself. As black men are more muscular and bigger-donged and have stronger voices, the New Western Ideal is for the white woman(seen as most beautiful female) to go with the black man(seen as the most alpha male). Global sexual culture is not about equality. Why is there talk of a black James Bond? Why is the Lancelot character a Negro in some TV show about Camelot? Why do so many ads feature black men with white women? Why is sports about black male athletes and white female cheerleaders? Why is Obama, the product Negro boffing a white woman, president?

    In this American Renaissance article, it shows that racial integration in schools leads to black boys beating up white boys and humping white girls.

    https://www.amren.com/features/2016/12/blacks-changed-school/

    The vision of the Globo-Eden is Negro as Adam and White woman as Eve. According to this narrative, white women had been sexually bound to the inferior lame white male all these eons. But she is finally liberated by the Negro. And the new interracial eden will be defined by the children of black adam and white eve. Well, if white guys lose out like this in the globalized order, Asian boys will lose out even worse. In the US, a very globalized sexual market place, Asian boys lose out most. Whites lose to blacks, Asians lose to whites and blacks. Now, I don't know of any white guy or black guy who sympathizes with yellow guys and wants to help them out.

    Yet, the above commenter seems to think that more whites/blacks in Korea will lead to better sexual prospects for Korean men. What a dumbass. Koreans in Korea will end up like Asian boys in America. Total losers. It's one thing for them to lose in a foreign country, but why would they want to lose on home turf?

    Just look at France. At one time, all French athletes were white Frenchmen. But France allowed tons of blacks in, and now the French soccer team is nearly all black. Did those foreigners help French men become more athletic? No, those blacks, as the 'New French', kick white French men and hump tons of white French women
    who are race traitors and give birth to mulattos who beat up whites.

    The top female kick boxer of Europe was the product of a black father and white mother. And she beat up all the white women. And some mulatto named Overeem is a top contender in UFC. He is the product of black father and white mother. So, some European woman rejected white men and decided to have a kid with a black man. And her half-black son grew up to beat up white men. Is that progress for whitey?
    What's so great about having your women having kids with foreign men and having those kids grow up to beat up your kids?
    One thing for sure, globalism is one big lie. It talks of equality and says 'race is just a social construct', but there is clearly a racial hierarchy to globalist culture of sports, music, sex, and etc.
    In the US, even American Indians do little else but see loud and crazy blacks on TV. I doubt if American Indians, as racial cousins of the Asiatics, got much good from it.

    What we need to do is to admit that races are different, and different races need different social and sexual attitudes/mores to flourish. Asians are not like whites and certainly not like blacks. If they spread Western or Afro norms in Asian pop culture and raise their kids to think like pimps and whores, it's not going to work out well since their racial nature is incompatible with such modes. It's like lactose-intolerance. Many Asian stomachs just can't digest milk. Likewise, lots of East Asians are
    Cock-Whore-Intolerant.

    Japan, for one, needs to ban porn and do to porn peddlers what Duterte is doing to dope-pushers. And it needs to do away with baby-talk kawaii cartoon culture and restore Kurosawa-ism and get people to grow up and become moral men and dutiful women once again.

    What did Japan gain from that mulatto Miss Japan whose father is black? The only lesson from that is Japanese women should reject Japanese men as inferior and have a kid with some black gigolo who won't even stick around to raise his own kid.
    Some FOREIGN Inspiration.
  90. @anon
    The point I am making is that korean/east asian culture is imbalanced and backwards. The rest of the world's population are quite well developed socially as well as sexually, however east asia is the odd one out. I am not in the wrong here, I am simply making valid criticisms of korean/east asian culture. If you think I'm merely comparing koreans to americans then you are wrong, I am pointing out glaring deficiencies in korean/east asian culture that need to be fixed, no more and no less. Maybe there are some koreans/east asians out there who are perfectly content with their race/culture being the most feminine and also being awkward and nebbish, sorry but I am not one of those people, I correctly recognize that in certain aspects korean/east asian culture is fundamentally broken and needs to be fixed.

    So you take the feminine/passive solution of importing what you perceive to be as masculine men and even more feminine women to address these problems. LOL. Koreans have a word for you: pyeontae (geek, pervert).

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Im korean and I know what 변태 means. You are obviously not grasping what I am saying if you think that my solution is simply about importing masculine men and even more feminine women, IE cuckold fantasy on steroids. Have you really bothered to read what I have been writing? Or have you just been skimming over the whole thing? If you disagree with me then just be straightup about it and say so, don't resort to these passive aggressive strawman games. I'll rehash the whole thing so that you understand it clearer:

    1.multiculturalism to break up/weaken the existing "stagnant" korean culture

    2.as a result of MC there will be more masculine cultures, this will serve the purpose of introducing a more extreme form of masculinity into korea, which will in turn spark a masculinity arms race, forcing local korean men to up their game. Increased cultural standards of masculinity will in turn act as new criteria for mate selection on behalf of females, which will in turn have a gradual eugenic effect. Hell, this doesn't even have to include african immigration, which is what I think most posters here are getting bent out of shape about. The immigration could be 100% white british and the culturally masculinizing effect I am talking about would be the same.

    3.I proposed feminism, not more feminine women. Feminism (IE empowering female ability to choose mates) is a no brainer if you want to pursue positive eugenics for male traits. The ideal solution is a culture where men and women have equal powers of mate selection (a culture based on romantic love as opposed to pragmatic love?), however this kind of solution takes a lot longer, and korea is too far slanted in the opposite direction away from masculinity; thus feminism would restore social/sexual balance to korea a lot faster than would the establishment of cultural notions of romantic love in korea. Finally, a major mistake that people here might make is that they would assume that feminism would permanently hold in korea, or in east asia for that matter, but I think a more likely assumption would be that feminism would be popular for a while and then it would burn out. If you are assuming that I am advocating a permanent state of feminism then you are wrong; I am only advocating a long enough period of feminism to where it would permanently influence cultural ideals regarding female mate selection.

    The irony of all of this is that the measures I am proposing have already been taking place the past 100 or so years in some shape or form in asia due to western imperialism/contact. They are nothing new, my ideas are just a more sentient and self aware version of preexisting trends.

    1.Replace multiculturalism with imperialism. I would argue that modern day notions and attitudes towards masculinity in east asia have been significantly influenced by direct and indirect contact with western imperialism, as well as with western culture and westerners themselves.

    2.As a result of western imperialism, feminism has been growing in leaps and bounds in asia over the past century; mate selection in east asia is significantly different than it was in my grandparents generation.

    So far, I feel like the changes that have occurred in the culture of east asia as a reaction to western imperialism/contact have done nothing but benefit the people and also technological advancement of east asia. This clear civilizational advancement is obvious and undeniable to anybody. The proposals I am making are merely a stronger step in this same direction. For all intents and purposes, asian people do not act, they react. In order for korea/east asia to become stronger (either on cultural level or a civilizational level) they have to be subjected to some kind of stimulus. They will never find the inner spark to change themselves, asian people are simply not restless enough for that.

    Finally I want to make it clear that I am not an apologist for western imperialism, or imperialism for that matter. I am merely making the case that imperialism, or anything that shakes up asia, is actually good for asia in the long run; and I dont mean this is the kind of abstract, wishy washy way either, I am talking about good for asia in ways that are concrete and obvious.
  91. @anon
    nah, feminism is exactly what our culture needs; if you value physical fitness that is. Allow me to explain. Basically the current east asian phenotype is essentially the result of thousands of years of male sexual selection. IE in highly patriarchal societies such as the ones that existed in east asia, men were the choosers, not women. Even if you take into account the institution of arranged marriages, men (fathers) were still probably the primary deciding factor. That being said, men and especially east asian men will almost always choose petite, mild mannered and gracile women to start a family with and will consequently select against tall or robust women; thus as a natural result of male monopolization of mate choice the east asian race has been selecting for feminine traits (both physical and psychological) for thousands of years. In order to reverse this trend, we need to encourage feminism and female financial independence in east asia, as well as actively disenfranchising the patriarchy (gasp! I know); by doing this we will create the conditions for asian women to be the primary actors in mate selection. (Predictably women in general will usually select for masculinity and high sociability/charisma, which are exactly the traits that the asian race lacks) For a good example of this concept, consider the highly matriarchal societies of africa and the physical/mental qualities which african (matriarchal) societies selected for. Granted, we obviously don't want east asia to take it to quite the same degree as africa, but we definitely do need to encourage policies which will naturally function as eugenic pressures that will allow the asian race to become balanced mentally, physically and sensually; as opposed to our current unbalanced state where we are mentally strong but physically and sensually deficient.

    Heck no. If for some mysterious reason you desperately want to increase size of men, there are significantly easier ways that don’t involve effectively destroying society. Actively disenfranchising men would essentially serve instead to feminize us even further, an idiotic idea, and everything you’re saying basically involves self-destruction.

    How about…no.

    If you really want to create a world that selects for personal valor or something like that, you can’t do that in a civilized world and certainly not in a feminized world. You basically have to reduce society to something like Scottish clans raiding each other for cattle.

    I just don’t see that happening. And it’ll be a lot easier anyway to alter characteristics of testosterone than to basically self-destruct in an effort to not be ourselves.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    its not just about increasing the size of men; its about increasing the physical and psychological masculinity of east asian culture. I'm talking about effecting a holistic trend here, not just simply "making men bigger".

    How would disenfranchising men and reorienting mate selection rights to females feminize us further? Explain this to me. If by feminize you mean disempower/weaken in a political/social sense then you are absolutely correct. However if you are referring to physical/psychological masculinity then you are absolutely wrong. If females are given the ability to, they will consistently select for masculine traits; this is simply how they are wired. Females crave physical and mental masculinity; why else do you think that white men are such a hit in asia? On that tangent, if you disagree with the idea of white guy going to asia and banging asian women left right and center then you should probably support the masculinization of the asian race. Personally I am willing to subject asian men to a few generations of female empowerment so that subsequent generations of asian men will be significantly more masculinized both physically and psychologically.

    You are extremely mistaken if you assume I am advocating completely changing the asian race and everything we are about. I am not, I am advocating the optimizing and balancing of the asian race. As I said many times before, I want the asian race to be balanced (intellectually and sexually) in the same way that the european race is balanced, thats it, no more and no less. We can be ourselves, in fact a better version of ourselves if we can rebalance our culture.

    Secondly it is not simply about testosterone levels, it is more about the asian cultures fundamental relationship with masculinity. This is the core issue and it must be changed first in order to effect other changes on down the line. However it is not as simple as simply telling asian people to be more manly, rather in order to effect these kinds of changes, you have to utilize natual/organic conduits and create the necessary change indirectly. In this case I am correctly identifying that the best and most logical way to resolve this situation is via asian females. Asian culture would become a lot more exciting, dynamic and creative if asians fixed their relationship regarding femininity and masculinity and encouraged a positive interplay between these two dynamics as opposed to the current situation in asia where masculinity culturally dominates femininity and as a result has the unexpected effect of actually making us less masculine and more feminine. In order to achieve peak racial fitness, we need to achieve cultural gender balance between the masculine and the feminine; as for feminism, it is only a means to an end. Too much of anything, whether it be "masculinism" (east asia's default ideology for 1000s of years) or feminism is a bad thing. Currently IMO feminism is needed to balance things out.
  92. @anon
    nah, I dont feel morally superior to other koreans who oppose MC. Morals have nothing to do with it, I just see MC as a viable way of attacking traditional korean culture which impedes the positive development of korean people. To me, MC is somewhat comparable to mao zedong's cultural revolution; it is true that the cultural revolution destroyed a lot of traditional chinese culture and hurt a lot of people, but on the other hand the wanton destruction caused by the cultural revolution helped liberate china from its own restrictive and backwards culture. Modern day china's meteoric rise would not have been possible if it wasn't for the dissolution of large parts of china's traditional culture. You should also keep in mind that at the end of the qing dynasty china was invaded not because the foreigners were too strong, but rather because china was too weak. At this point in time china was holding itself back because it was mired in the past and in stagnant cultures and traditions; however it was as a result of the western imperial incursions that china was forced to put its house in order. Thus the fate of the late qing dynasty is a perfect example of the kind of "creative destruction" that I am referring to when I advocate MC for korea/east asia.

    On that same tangent, I want to point out that every act of imperialism or western aggression against asia only serves to ultimately advance and strengthen asia. If it wasn't for the western imperialists continually antagonizing east asia over the past couple of centuries, there is a very good chance that east asia would still be living like it was in the 16th century. I am obviously not condoning imperialism here, but I am making the argument that east asia seems to function quite differently than the west, and things that are negatives for the west may potentially function as positives for the east. I see MC in the same light, I think it is something negative that can surprisingly benefit east asia through its destructive capabilities.

    I am Chinese. The Cultural Revolution served nothing except to kill millions of people and demonstrate that Soviet ideas are bad in the Soviet Union, but even worse when adopted elsewhere. It put us behind at least ten, perhaps twenty years. It has created, quite possibly, the massively amoral Chinese society where getting ahead is all that matters.

    Your grasp of Chinese history is dubious.

    The Qing took us over because they WERE strong. They fielded one hundred thousand horse archers, for starters. Secondly, we were internally feuding with rebellions that had taken our capital, thus causing loyalist forces to join the Qing to enforce the Mandate of Heaven.

    I mean, Native American horse archers in vastly smaller numbers with inferior weapons would be a thorn in the side of European and American armies until the invention of multi-shot firearms. That a hundred thousand organized horsemen with composite bows aided by the cream of Ming imperial loyalists overran weary musket-armed Han rebels is not exactly surprising.

    And this is after we were literally holding off the various horse-riding nations, often with turncoat Chinese advisors, for about two hundred plus years with basically endless artillery spam – one receipt found shows something like a hundred cannons delivered north every year. No functioning government can maintain a state of war for that many years without insane stress on the population. Of course we failed in the end.

    The Qing takeover was a disaster for us, too. The Ming were developing along a gunpowder doctrine and could have possibly managed to keep up with the West; with the success of the Qing, they basically proceeded to rely on basically a horse/sword/bow force and military theory, and we never really developed military science again until the fall of the Qing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    I am Chinese. The Cultural Revolution served nothing except to kill millions of people and demonstrate that Soviet ideas are bad in the Soviet Union, but even worse when adopted elsewhere. It put us behind at least ten, perhaps twenty years. It has created, quite possibly, the massively amoral Chinese society where getting ahead is all that matters.
     
    -You don't know this, and honestly neither do I. The scale of the movement and its effects are simply too large to accurately estimate the effects of. We don't know an alternate timeline where it didn't happen, so it is impossible to know the true effects of the cultural revolution. Its possible that if it had not occurred then it would have triggered a chain of events which would have ultimately led to the downfall of china later on down the road, or maybe something else entirely. In my opinion the madness and destruction of the cultural revolution and the great leap forwards were useful because it paved the way for the dissolution of communism and lead to the ascendancy of deng xiaoping and his capitalistic reforms. Had the cultural revolution and the great leap forward never happened then its quite possible that China would have continued its ill fated experiment with communism for many more decades ala north korea. This is something that we will never know for sure, but what is certain is that China is currently posed to be the next super power and is the world's 2nd largest economy, this current state of affairs was only possible in a timeline that included the cultural revolution and the great leap forward as well as the cultural backlash that occurred in reaction to those events which was ultimately used to reject communism and propel china in a more positive direction under deng xiaoping. The cultural revolution is only bad when observed in terms of its immediate results, but when considered holistically and from a long enough perspective then it begins to appear as a blessing in disguise.

    Anyways, I am digressing here. The fact of the matter is, right or wrong, the cultural revolution destroyed lots of chinese culture. The crux of the matter is whether or not the chinese culture that was destroyed was good culture or bad culture. You have to recall that the cultural revolution did not happen in isolation, as a chinese you are already well aware of this. The cultural revolution happened on a well spring of collective impetus for cultural change that even predated the CCP coming to power, such was the collective sentiment that sought to ban antiquated things like foot binding for example. It is entirely possible (and again me and you will never know with certainty) that thanks to the cultural revolution, a lot of restricting or antiquated chinese cultural practices and beliefs were wiped out or significantly weakened. So it is possible that as a result of the cultural revolution, chinese society was incidentally liberated from its own cultural restraints and was able to succeed as a result of that.

    The Qing took us over because they WERE strong. They fielded one hundred thousand horse archers, for starters. Secondly, we were internally feuding with rebellions that had taken our capital, thus causing loyalist forces to join the Qing to enforce the Mandate of Heaven.
     
    Reading comprehension is vital. Here is what I originally wrote:

    You should also keep in mind that at the end of the qing dynasty china was invaded not because the foreigners were too strong, but rather because china was too weak. At this point in time china was holding itself back because it was mired in the past and in stagnant cultures and traditions; however it was as a result of the western imperial incursions that china was forced to put its house in order. Thus the fate of the late qing dynasty is a perfect example of the kind of “creative destruction” that I am referring to when I advocate MC for korea/east asia.
     
    I was not referring to the qing dynasty taking over, I was clearly referring to the late qing dynasty being taken over. Big difference.
  93. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @anon
    nah, I dont feel morally superior to other koreans who oppose MC. Morals have nothing to do with it, I just see MC as a viable way of attacking traditional korean culture which impedes the positive development of korean people. To me, MC is somewhat comparable to mao zedong's cultural revolution; it is true that the cultural revolution destroyed a lot of traditional chinese culture and hurt a lot of people, but on the other hand the wanton destruction caused by the cultural revolution helped liberate china from its own restrictive and backwards culture. Modern day china's meteoric rise would not have been possible if it wasn't for the dissolution of large parts of china's traditional culture. You should also keep in mind that at the end of the qing dynasty china was invaded not because the foreigners were too strong, but rather because china was too weak. At this point in time china was holding itself back because it was mired in the past and in stagnant cultures and traditions; however it was as a result of the western imperial incursions that china was forced to put its house in order. Thus the fate of the late qing dynasty is a perfect example of the kind of "creative destruction" that I am referring to when I advocate MC for korea/east asia.

    On that same tangent, I want to point out that every act of imperialism or western aggression against asia only serves to ultimately advance and strengthen asia. If it wasn't for the western imperialists continually antagonizing east asia over the past couple of centuries, there is a very good chance that east asia would still be living like it was in the 16th century. I am obviously not condoning imperialism here, but I am making the argument that east asia seems to function quite differently than the west, and things that are negatives for the west may potentially function as positives for the east. I see MC in the same light, I think it is something negative that can surprisingly benefit east asia through its destructive capabilities.

    “nah, I dont feel morally superior to other koreans who oppose MC. Morals have nothing to do with it, I just see MC as a viable way of attacking traditional korean culture which impedes the positive development of korean people.”

    That makes no sense. You say you don’t feel morally superior to traditional Koreans, BUT you want to destroy their culture because it impedes ‘positive development’. Well, you must believe their ‘traditional culture’ is morally inferior since it ‘impedes positive development’. Social and political issues are intrinsically moral. You have your idea of a good or better society. You believe ‘traditional korean values’ prevent this. Thus, it means you believe those values are morally inferior to your own.

    Another thing. What traditional culture is left in Korea? Isn’t K-pop the main cultural expression of Korea? What is that? It’s J-pop gone full retard. Just when I thought nothing could be worse than J-pop, there is this crap called K-pop with bimbos overdone with plastic surgery and hair dye. Or that gangnam style frog-faced psy.
    It is the fantasy of Korean Michael Jacksons who wanna live in the neverland of trans-racial fantasy of being white and black. And I’ve seen some Korean soap operas on TV, and I don’t see any traditional values. They are mostly insipid and about empty modern souls talking shit. Given the total vapidity of much of Korean ‘culture’, I don’t think tradition would be so bad.

    [MORE]

    Now, I’m not a dogmatic traditionalist. Tradition could be bad, it could be good. Same with change. It could be good or bad. I’m more interested in the preservation of core identity, sense of history, and heritage despite the changes.
    That is to say, even when Japan decided to modernize in the late 19th century, they did it for Japan with a powerful sense of Japanese-ness. In other words, accept change and progress but for the good of Japanese people. Make foreign ideas serve the Japanese nation. So, Japanese lost a lot of repressive traditions — like the samurai caste system — , but they still held onto their identity, sovereignty, and sense of independence. Unfortunately, the Japanese trampled on the independence of other Asian nations. Instead of helping them to modernize and defend themselves from the West, Japan collaborated with UK and US(and other European powers) to carve up much of Asia…. that is until it turned into Japan vs USSR & US, and then Japan lost and has been a US puppet since. Still, elements in Japan has held onto Japanese identity and history, and I respect them.

    You’re probably right that Koreans would do better to let go of some of their traditional attitudes. And practices like dog-eating, but from what I hear, it’s not as common as it used to be.

    “To me, MC is somewhat comparable to mao zedong’s cultural revolution; it is true that the cultural revolution destroyed a lot of traditional chinese culture and hurt a lot of people, but on the other hand the wanton destruction caused by the cultural revolution helped liberate china from its own restrictive and backwards culture. Modern day china’s meteoric rise would not have been possible if it wasn’t for the dissolution of large parts of china’s traditional culture.”

    This is nuts. The crazy thing about Cultural Revolution was it was, in many ways, reversion to the worst kind of Oriental Despotism. This kind of violence was nothing new in China, especially when it was invaded by barbarians. Indeed, the first emperor Ch’in had similarly killed tons of scholars and laid waste to culture. Of course, Mao respected him. Also, the main victims of Cultural Revolution were NOT holders of old culture, which had been destroyed already in the 50s. It was the communist bureaucracy. Most victims were party cadres accused of being ‘capitalist roaders’. In the 50s, Mao wiped out the landlord class. He had removed all bourgeois elements. Traditional scholars were all marginalized or even killed. The entire education system, media, and everything was under communist control. There was no need for the destructive force of Cultural Revolution to wage war on tradition. Indeed, it was really a power struggle between Mao and others like Liu Shao chi, Deng, and etc.
    Mao saw them as rivals, and he used Red Guards to destroy them. Most victims of the CR were professors, bureaucrats, teachers, commissars, and etc who were accused of betraying the Revolution. But in fact, nearly all of them were faithful communists, not traditionalists.
    Now, if the Cultural Revolution did some good for China, it was because Mao made a mess of the Communist Party. Because of CR’s wreckage and chaos, the Chinese Communist party lost the kind of iron control held by the Soviet Communist Party. So, after Mao died, reformers could build anew and make changes because the party had been so weakened. So, in the end, Mao ironically paved the way for return of capitalism because he gave communism such a bad name and made even party elders hanker for a new direction, something other than nutty Maoism. CR wasn’t a war on tradition since traditional ways had already been banned in the 50s. Its real harm was the destruction of art works, books, sculpture, temples, and etc. When American visitors came to Chinese universities in the late 70s, they found almost no books. All had been burnt. There was just the books of Mao. Among foreign books, there was just some Encyclopedia Brittanicca from the 50s.

    Maoism was a strange case. Even though Mao despised Confucius, his brand of communism repeated the same mistakes: hatred of the business class. Capitalism taught us that trade-and-investment makes for modern society. Confucius was an elitist, but he hated the merchant class as exploitative. His economic policy was ‘peasants good cuz they make rice’, ‘artisans okay cuz they make stuff’, and ‘scholars wonderful cuz they are about wisdom’, but ‘merchants bad cuz they just make money off stuff made by others. they no good’. Confucius failed to understand that the role of middlemen is vital to the economy. Maoism was like Confucianism in idolizing the peasant and totally degrading the business class. Mao replaced the scholar-literati with the communist cadre, but the theme was the same: both groups were about wisdom/justice. Now, both Confucius and Mao were right about the shadiness of the business class. While business is necessary, when a society puts economics at the center of society, everything is determined by profits and market value. When there are only virtue industries, it’s not so bad. But there are also vice industries, and they will favor profits even when the stuff they peddle harm society. We see this in rise of gambling. We saw this in the Opium Trade. The Brits and Jews didn’t care about all those Chinese losing their souls to opium as long as the money rolled in. And look at K-Pop and other crap. It is cultural dope, total trash that harms souls, but the music industry sells it as musical-dildos. Given the moral/cultural rot of so much of the modern world, what it really needs is something like the Iranian Revolution of 1979(minus the theocracy), National Socialist revival(minus the radical racism), and Putin’s restoration of Church. National Culture should be more than ‘me so horny me so horny’ and ‘muh dic*’ and drugged out orgies at rave parties.

    By the way, where does one get the notion that communist destruction of culture is necessary for profound progress? It’s nuts to believe China would not have great progress if Mao hadn’t swept away the bad old ways.
    Japan made progress without something like the cultural revolution. Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore, all of them Chinese-run, were spared communism and cultural revolution, but they westernized and modernized, indeed much faster and more than mainland China under Mao. And look at South Korea and North Korea. South was run by rightist regime whereas North was run by leftist regime that did more to attack tradition. Yet, the North has been slow to change whereas the South changed so much.

    If communism is to be credited with anything good in Asia and Europe, it was its conservative influence. Despite its revolutionary rhetoric, the strict social controls and lack of consumer-hedonistic culture actually made those societies more nationalist, conservative, and even traditionalist. Modern China is now more traditional than Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan(that, being a puppet of US, is now into ‘gay marriage’). Modern China still has nationalist and patriotic culture. Another positive outcome of communism is national sovereignty. This is something China has. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and Philippines don’t. They are cuck-vassals of the US and must follow orders. North Korea also has relative sovereignty but is run by a fat retard and uses it very badly.
    Today, the former communist nations in Europe are far more conservative than the Western ones that measure ‘progress’ by sucking up to Jews, homos, Negroes, and Muslims.

    Anyway, your mention of Cultural Revolution goes to show there is something totally pussy about Koreans. After all, good or bad, CR was about Chinese doing their own thing. Mao didn’t invite foreigners to mess up China. If anything, Mao’s one good quality was he was an ardent nationalist who even broke ties with Russia because he wanted China to be ruled by Chinese. But YOU don’t even have confidence in your own people. You see them as the enemy who must be destroyed by FOREIGNERS. A patriot, you ain’t. You want FOREIGNERS to mess up your own countrymen to bring about your idea of ‘progress’, which is what? The culture of ‘cool’ where Koreans ape and imitate deracinated Westerners who worship homos, black dongs, racial displacement of their own kind? What is your idea of progress? What is it about the West that attracts you so?
    It is true that the West was once the crowning jewel of the world in its ideas, arts, culture, and science. Today, it still leads in science, but what else? A culture where white guys invite black guys to hump their women is ‘progress’? Hey, it’s ‘cool’ since negroes are ‘badass’!! Or maybe progress is a replacing Christianity with the worship of a holy homo anus that takes penises. Or praising the courage of Bruce Jenner for saying he’s a ‘woman’. Or all those college kids yapping about 50 genders being fluid or something.

    Another thing. The ‘traditional’ Koreans you despise so much, the people who survived the colonization, the division, the horrible war, experienced great poverty, and toiled so hard to create modern Korea, will soon be gone. Don’t worry. Within few decades, everyone who lived through the war will be dead and buried… just like the Greatest Generation in America are vanishing forever. And then, the nation will belong entirely to your kind, and you can have all the ‘progress’ you want. All the interracial orgies, all the homo parades, all the plastic surgeries, all the rave scenes, all the drugs, all the booty-bumping-humping music, acting like whores and pimps.
    And while you guys live your degenerate lives that ape and imitate western decadence, you can spit and piss on the ancestors who were too ‘traditional’ and ‘uncool’. I mean what a bunch of losers they were. Their idea of culture was not going to night clubs, bumping and grinding to rap, getting tattoos all over, and spouting PC they heard from black thugs and white cucks. Their ‘lame’ idea of life and culture was raising families, maintaining moral values, and upholding national unity and patriotism. They didn’t have tattoos all over their arms, rings through their noses. Their idea of culture wasn’t rap music about blacks saying ‘suck my dic*’. They respected their parents and grandparents. What a bunch of traditional losers. But you and your ilk are so much better because you are ‘cool’. You wave the homo flag. That is ‘cool’. Your entire idea of music is wiggling your scrawny yellow to some lame k-pop imitation of some ‘cool’ negro rapper going on and on about his ‘ho’. Now, that is ‘progress’.

    “On that same tangent, I want to point out that every act of imperialism or western aggression against asia only serves to ultimately advance and strengthen asia. If it wasn’t for the western imperialists continually antagonizing east asia over the past couple of centuries, there is a very good chance that east asia would still be living like it was in the 16th century.”

    You have a point there. I’ve always argued that imperialism wasn’t all bad. Current Western PC blames the West for everything, but imperialism did some good to shake up the entire world and create new possibilities.
    But keep in mind that the reason why East Asia fared better was because it wasn’t colonized and dominated to the extent of others.
    If imperialism is always good, look at the fate of the indigenous peoples of Latin America. They are a conquered and defeated people forever.
    Also, is it worth losing one’s homeland for material progress? Surely, Hawaiian live better because of Americanization. But they’ve lost their homeland to whites and Asians forever. And imperialism in Asia also created a basketcase like Philippines. It’s long been a whore of Spain, now a whore of US. Not a happy story. And I’m not sure imperialism did much good for Indonesia which, btw, is a fake country.

    East Asia did gain by imperialism — even though Koreans are loathe to admit it, they gained a lot under Japanese imperialism too — , but keep in mind that East Asia was less dominated by others. China was divided among imperial powers but was never owned like India was by UK. Korea was ruled by Japan, fellow Asian nation, not be Western power. Japan and Korea came under less direct Western power but did better than Asian nations that came under direct Western rule like Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines, Burma, and India/Pakistan.
    And the late entry of Western Imperialism into Asia owed to the power of China. Because of China’s size and power, the West was wary about conquering and dominating that part of the world. And as long as the West feared China, it also kept away from its satellite kingdoms like Korea, Vietnam, etc. It was when China lost the Opium Wars that the West smelled blood and made aggressive foray into East Asia. This threat from the West did a lot of good by forcing Asia to make fundamental changes. Japan did this best and most intelligently with Meiji Reforms, but then Japan figured, if China cannot withstand the West, Japan can’t either… so it has to modernize and westernize. But the thing is both Japan and China sought to modernize while also keeping their independence or sovereignty. Japan managed to keep it, and China struggled to regain it under Chiang who was not a bad guy. Mao thought the answer would be communism. Ironically, Mao’s adoption of a radical western ideology led to the closing off of China from the West once again. This is the irony of communism. It made China, Vietnam, and North Korea to revert to the old ‘xenophobic’ ways of closing off to the outside world and turning into mummy-nations frozen in time. In the 60s, China shut itself not only to Japan and the West but even to the USSR and Soviet Bloc. And North Korea under communism became a hermit kingdom again.

    Anyway, I agree that Western Imperialism did some good around the world. But why did it do more good in East Asia than in other parts? One reason is homogeneity of East Asian nations that had organic and genuine history. Because Japan was a nation of one race, it could rally together and work as a whole. China is more diverse than Japan, but there is an ethnic Han Chinese consciousness, and Han Chinese made up 97% of all Chinese in 1950. Unlike diverse India which could be manipulated in ‘divide and rule’ ways by the British, Chinese nationalism was faster to come together cuz of ethnic unity. And Vietnamese were also able to effectively challenge the French and then the Americans cuz all Vietnamese shared common identity and heritage. And Koreans are one people. So, East Asian nations, due to their homogeneity, could work more effectively to meet the challenge of the West. They could unite politically and work with sense of common destiny. In contrast, much of Africa and Middle East had nothing like homogeneous nations in East Asia. And even much of Southeast Asia was a hodge-podge of different peoples. It’s like Indonesian identity is an invention of various ethnic groups bunched together. And those nations in Middle East are creations of European imperialism.
    So, homogeneity and national unity were a huge boon to East Asia. If Japan had been 1/3 Japanese, 1/3 Indian, and 1/3 Filipino, it wouldn’t have been very effective in challenging the West. Indeed, the imperialists could have played divide-and-rule among those different group.

    Another factor of success of East Asia is higher IQ. Though not higher than white IQ, it was higher than IQ of most other nations. Korea and Japan are small and natural-resource-poor, but they have higher IQs. This is why Korea and Japan have much to lose if they bring in lots of low IQ people who have lots of babies. Already in nations like Sweden, we are seeing the drop in student IQ because high IQ Swedes are having less babies, having babies with blacks and Muslims, and being replaced by lower IQ Muslims and blacks.
    Another factor for East Asian success is Confucianism. Even though Classic Confucianism became rigid and moribund, it did instill those cultures with respect for learning, teaching, knowledge, and culture. When East Asians shifted this mindset from Confucian classic to modern education, they learned very fast because they revered education.
    It’s like Jews and their Rabbinical studies. Even though that stuff became outdated in the modern world, it had instilled Jews with a profound reverence for knowledge, study, and learning. This culture was lacking in other non-white cultures for the most part. Jews and East Asians had a tradition of reverence for knowledge. The Hindus had the Brahmin tradition of learning, but it was restricted only to the Brahmin caste. In contrast, the Jewish ideal was for ALL Jews to be knowledgeable if possible. And the ideal of Confucianism reached down to every person if he had the means.
    So, it is stupid to denounce all of tradition. There are valuable assets in tradition that can be revised and altered to serve changing times. Chiang Kai-Shek tried to modernize Confucianism by combining it with respect for business, exercise, military, and etc. Tradition can inspire the new. For example, even though the Japanese got rid of the samurai order, they still maintained certain samurai ethos and culture in the modern world, and those have served the Japanese well. While tradition can be a hindrance to change, it can also offer a balance against the instability of change. It’s like a tree needs to grow taller and wider.. but it must rely on the stability and firmness offered by the trunk and roots.
    Precisely because the modern world is so hectic, wild, crazy, and uprooting, there is a need for core conservatism, traditionalism, and eternalism as counter-balance. Indeed, we see this in Israel itself. It is a very modern state, but it is also rooted in a powerful sense of identity, heritage, culture, and history. Now, Jews don’t need foreigners to come to Israel to tell them what to do. Why can’t Koreans learn to be like Israelis and find their own meaning and balance?

    Also, I think you’re not giving East Asians enough credit. Look at the changes Japan, China, and Korea went through from 1900 to 2000. These people you dismiss so much have done notable things. If anything, they have done more than any part of the world except the West. You might argue they would have done EVEN MORE if they’d been invaded by the West more. But look at the examples of the world that came under greater domination of the West: Africa, Middle East, and Latin America. Black Africa is still a mess. Middle East has imploded. And Latin America is stuck in its rut. And Philippines was under far more Western control than Korea, Japan, or China. It has accomplished much less. And India? It was a basket-case even though it was under British rule for 200 yrs. And in early 90s, its economy was smaller than that of South Korea. Even now, over 50% of people shit outdoors. If it began to make progress, it was because it learned from East Asia that capitalism works better than state-socialism.
    As for Thailand, which should be called Thigh-land, it’s been open to Westerners for a long long time. It is sucky sucky land where one of the main industries is prostitution. Americans, Europeans, Japanese, and other foreigners have been going there forever, but has it made the nation any better? It is whore-ville.

    Read More
  94. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @anon
    The point I am making is that korean/east asian culture is imbalanced and backwards. The rest of the world's population are quite well developed socially as well as sexually, however east asia is the odd one out. I am not in the wrong here, I am simply making valid criticisms of korean/east asian culture. If you think I'm merely comparing koreans to americans then you are wrong, I am pointing out glaring deficiencies in korean/east asian culture that need to be fixed, no more and no less. Maybe there are some koreans/east asians out there who are perfectly content with their race/culture being the most feminine and also being awkward and nebbish, sorry but I am not one of those people, I correctly recognize that in certain aspects korean/east asian culture is fundamentally broken and needs to be fixed.

    “The point I am making is that korean/east asian culture is imbalanced and backwards. The rest of the world’s population are quite well developed socially as well as sexually, however east asia is the odd one out.”

    Sexual balance in Africa? A continent where men rape young girls to be purified of HIV? A continent where men bang women all around and don’t stick around to take care of them? African women have 6 or 7 kids each. Many babies are offered for sale to Westerners like puppies. Africa is so poor, violent, and vile that millions try to flee to Europe for better life. Rape is common in Africa. The president of South Africa, once accused of rape, joked about it and was acquitted. It’s the norm in Africa for women to have kids with different men and for men to have several wives. Is this the ‘sexual balance’ you’re talking about?

    The Muslim world is sexually healthy? Then, why do Muslim men have such loutish attitudes when they come to the West? They gang-rape women. They have rape-torture gangs in Rotherham. And in the Muslim world, there is cousin-marriage galore that produces a bunch of tards.

    And where is sexual balance in the West? Women are a bunch of whores. We have Lena Dunham-ism. What sane society wants girls to emulate that blob? Or Emma Sulkowicz. And if the West is sexually so healthy, why all the Rape Culture hysteria?
    And what is so sexually balanced about rap culture where the message is ‘suck my dic*, ho’? And what kind of national cultural revolves around ‘twerking’? 40% of white kids in working class are now fatherless. 75% of black kids have no fathers who stick around.

    [MORE]

    And it’s difficult to speak of Latin America which is made up of many races, classes, castes, and etc. I would not say Latin American sexual culture is healthy. Too much machismo, too much preference of image and style over meaning and substance. Argentina is the capital of the vapid and shallow.

    As for East Asia, there WAS sexual balance. Most men got married, most women got married. This was the case in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and etc. So, what happened?
    One was pop culture. I took a class in college on Japanese society and Chinese society. In a more traditional setting, an average Asian person would have grown up in company of grandparents and relatives. It’s like in the films of Yasujiro Ozu: A young Japanese woman has frequent contacts with parents, older people, relatives, and young people(nieces or nephews). So, she is aware that she is part of a link in time. You go from childhood to youthhood to adulthood to oldhood to death. You’re part of time, you’re part of culture, you’re part of community.

    But then came the TV. And people began to watch TV, TV, and TV. And then TV got dumber and trashier. And youth culture took over and convinced even grown ups to act young and immature forever. We have 50 yr olds now still listening to rap music in the West. How pathetic is that? If you’ve ever seen Japanese TV, you know what I”m talking about. It is mind-destroying, soul-killing. So vapid, empty, hollow, tarded.
    But parents just let kids indulge in this junky cartoon, fake, shallow, vapid fantasyland. And old people have been shunted off out of sight into retirement complexes. And young people were encouraged to obsess over their image, pleasure, and attitude above all else. So, young people grew up without a sense of connection to other people. In Kurosawa’s RED BEARD, the noble elder doctor teaches the younger one to observe people and feel a part of larger humanity. But today’s pop culture tells young people to just indulge in their own petty narcissism and hedonism. This affected young girls more than young boys because women are, by nature, more narcissistic. If you give a boy a videogame, he will play all day. If you give a girl a mirror, she will stare at it all day.

    What East Asia lost was a sense of balance. In the past, it wasn’t just about SEX and fun. It was about life, duty, and family. So, love and sex were a part of life, not something disassociated from life. The BALANCE was in morality and family. You found someone to love, you committed to that person, and you had kids with her. This is the balance between nature and culture, between biology and morality. But modern society is all about individual funnery. So, sex is seen as something to do just for kicks. It’s like Beavis going ‘boing!!’.
    This very concept is an imbalance. Sex for mere sex leads to Lena-Dunham, booty-call-ism, Afro-dong-ism, Porkys-ism, Ron-Jeremy-sucking-his-own-dong-ism(which a Jewish kid showed me on dad’s VCR in the early 80s). In the past, the ideal was love and marriage. This was so in the West too. But when sex was decoupled from morality, duty, and obligation due to abortion, birth control pill, and other means, sex became a thing in and of itself. This turned women into whores and men into pimps or wanna-be-pimps. Or cucks. There was a time when a white guy had a good chance of deflowering the woman he fell in love with and married. Now, the chances are he’s marrying someone like Emma Sulkowicz of the infamous “fuc* me in the butt” texting. This is what you call the ‘sexual balance’ of the West?

    Though the East may not be as debauched as the West, the same attitudes has spread far and wide through pop culture, Hollywood, MTV, and internet that affects everyone all over, and no nation is as wired up as Korea.
    In Asian societies, when FAMILY was at the center of culture, men and women understood that the thing was find a decent person to marry and have children with. But the new attitude says it is okay to just hook up and have sex. This is why so many Japanese women don’t get married. Many continue to live at home, go to night clubs, hook up with men, use contraceptives, and act like hookers.
    And these skankisans imitate every dumb hornball fad that comes of black America.
    One out of every 200 Japanese women works in porn.

    Now, this kind of ‘sexual climate’ is more difficult for many Asians since they are, by nature, more awkward and inhibited. They evolved that way. Asian societies punished or killed those who acted too wild, so over time, the population became tamer and more docile, which is good for cohesion and cooperation.
    What this means is that East Asia should reject Western and especially African sexual mores since ‘game’ doesn’t come naturally to Asians. Most Asians would do better with a traditional sexual culture of shame, duty, marriage, and family. Such values would pressure men and women to find someone nice for marriage and commitment than for loose sex on the basis of ‘my ding-a-ling’ and booty-call. Blacks are different cuz black guys wanna shout to the world, ‘suck my dic*’ and black women will start shaking their booties like baboons whenever the music is playing, indeed even at Walmart as I’ve seen on occasion. Races are different, so they need different sexual cultures. When a black guy sees a black mama shake her ass, he’s like “dang, gotta go there and rub my dic* on her booooooooty!” When Asian women act this way, Asian boys get nosebleeds like in those anime.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manga_iconography#Nose

    There is no “one size fits all” solution for all races, just like there is no one-size-condom-fits-all-for-everyone. What works with blacks work less well with whites, and what works with whites work less well with Asians. It’s like what works for cats will not work for dogs, and what works for dogs will not work for coyotes.

    East Asia did fine sexually under the traditional values of duty, commitment, marriage, and family. It is doing horribly under the new regimen of ‘me so horny’ and ‘me ape rapper’. In the past, most men got married to most women, and they had families and had meaning.

    Of course, another problem is the Fantasy spread by Soap Operas which feature Ideal Lovers. Also, as East Asia got richer, women have fantasies of marrying the better kind of man. They have a moon or bust mentality. It’s no wonder 50% of Japanese men have given up on womenfolk. They sense their jobs are not good enough. In the past, and this goes for the West too, most people were either poor, working class, or barely in middle class. And they didn’t expect too much from life. They didn’t grow up on TV fantasies and Eternal Youth mentality. They had a better sense of reality and modest pleasure of life. So, people met and got married cuz they just liked one another. Today, with so much wealth and with TV & pop culture filled with ideal lifestyles of rich folks, hip folks, cool folks, and etc., men and esp women have become very choosy in their choice of mates. Good is no longer good enough for lots of women who hold on for the Dream Beau to the very end… and end up being a cat lady.

    Another thing. The above commenter seems to think FOREIGNERS will make things better for Asia. No, the foreigners will make things worse. If the foreigners are desperate women from poor Asian nations, then Korean men might marry them instead of looking for Korean mates. If the foreigners are white or black men with ‘game’, they might take Korean women from Korean men. The above commenter seems to think white guys and black guys will TEACH Korean guys how to get women. But men don’t think like that. Men are dog-eat-dog or dong-beat-dong, that is competitive. If foreign white/black men come to Asia and notice that Korean guys are a bunch of wusses, they will make the move on the women.

    Maybe the above commenter is really a Korean woman who wants more foreigners cuz she wants a white/black guy who will save her and take her to America or something.
    And that brings us to the issue of sexuality in globalism. Globo-sexuality is not about equality but about hierarchy. We see this in the West itself. As black men are more muscular and bigger-donged and have stronger voices, the New Western Ideal is for the white woman(seen as most beautiful female) to go with the black man(seen as the most alpha male). Global sexual culture is not about equality. Why is there talk of a black James Bond? Why is the Lancelot character a Negro in some TV show about Camelot? Why do so many ads feature black men with white women? Why is sports about black male athletes and white female cheerleaders? Why is Obama, the product Negro boffing a white woman, president?

    In this American Renaissance article, it shows that racial integration in schools leads to black boys beating up white boys and humping white girls.

    https://www.amren.com/features/2016/12/blacks-changed-school/

    The vision of the Globo-Eden is Negro as Adam and White woman as Eve. According to this narrative, white women had been sexually bound to the inferior lame white male all these eons. But she is finally liberated by the Negro. And the new interracial eden will be defined by the children of black adam and white eve. Well, if white guys lose out like this in the globalized order, Asian boys will lose out even worse. In the US, a very globalized sexual market place, Asian boys lose out most. Whites lose to blacks, Asians lose to whites and blacks. Now, I don’t know of any white guy or black guy who sympathizes with yellow guys and wants to help them out.

    Yet, the above commenter seems to think that more whites/blacks in Korea will lead to better sexual prospects for Korean men. What a dumbass. Koreans in Korea will end up like Asian boys in America. Total losers. It’s one thing for them to lose in a foreign country, but why would they want to lose on home turf?

    Just look at France. At one time, all French athletes were white Frenchmen. But France allowed tons of blacks in, and now the French soccer team is nearly all black. Did those foreigners help French men become more athletic? No, those blacks, as the ‘New French’, kick white French men and hump tons of white French women
    who are race traitors and give birth to mulattos who beat up whites.

    The top female kick boxer of Europe was the product of a black father and white mother. And she beat up all the white women. And some mulatto named Overeem is a top contender in UFC. He is the product of black father and white mother. So, some European woman rejected white men and decided to have a kid with a black man. And her half-black son grew up to beat up white men. Is that progress for whitey?
    What’s so great about having your women having kids with foreign men and having those kids grow up to beat up your kids?
    One thing for sure, globalism is one big lie. It talks of equality and says ‘race is just a social construct’, but there is clearly a racial hierarchy to globalist culture of sports, music, sex, and etc.
    In the US, even American Indians do little else but see loud and crazy blacks on TV. I doubt if American Indians, as racial cousins of the Asiatics, got much good from it.

    What we need to do is to admit that races are different, and different races need different social and sexual attitudes/mores to flourish. Asians are not like whites and certainly not like blacks. If they spread Western or Afro norms in Asian pop culture and raise their kids to think like pimps and whores, it’s not going to work out well since their racial nature is incompatible with such modes. It’s like lactose-intolerance. Many Asian stomachs just can’t digest milk. Likewise, lots of East Asians are
    Cock-Whore-Intolerant.

    Japan, for one, needs to ban porn and do to porn peddlers what Duterte is doing to dope-pushers. And it needs to do away with baby-talk kawaii cartoon culture and restore Kurosawa-ism and get people to grow up and become moral men and dutiful women once again.

    What did Japan gain from that mulatto Miss Japan whose father is black? The only lesson from that is Japanese women should reject Japanese men as inferior and have a kid with some black gigolo who won’t even stick around to raise his own kid.
    Some FOREIGN Inspiration.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon
    Im sorry man, I appreciate your input, but you have to be more concise in your views. I literally don't have time to read every comment you make, they are simply too long and drawn out, this is especially so considering that I am trying to take the time to write detailed responses to about 3-4 other commenters as well. Make your comments more targeted and concise and I will be happy to respond to you. If I get some time, I will respond to a few segments of what you have written though.
  95. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @anon
    koron, lol. Thats a good one.

    We are obviously talking about two types of "coolness". You are referring to the (shallow) social perception of "coolness", I am referring to much more objective, deeper and substantial notions of individual dynamicism, intense self awareness/sentience, charisma and well developed interpersonal/social skills; all of which are things which are mediated by culture and also genes. This is the kind of "coolness" which I seek for korean/asian people. This is much more preferable to the quasi-autistic, highly introverted, semi-sentience that korean/asian people generally possess. Korean/east asian people are held back by their own repressive culture; if multiculturalism can be used as a tool to attack and weaken indigenous east asian culture so that something better can arise then so be it. I am not advocating multiculturalism for korea just because "its cool" and its "what the cool kids are doing." I am advocating multiculturalism in korea because in the case of korea/east asia, multiculturalism would actually be quite useful for korea/east asia since multiculturalism is effective at destroying/weakening cultures, and as I stated before, korea/east asia's own worst enemy is our own culture which stifles dynamism, passion and creativity.

    Ironically you accuse korean people (as well as myself) of being mindless, weak followers; however this is the entire point of why I am advocating multiculturalism in the first place, in order to expunge and transform mindlessness and weakness into individuality and strength via intentional cultural destruction.

    Koreans/east asians do possess the ability for greatness, but it will require cultural change, dietary change and also a correct application of eugenic measures.

    “I am referring to much more objective, deeper and substantial notions of individual dynamicism, intense self awareness/sentience, charisma and well developed interpersonal/social skills; all of which are things which are mediated by culture and also genes.”

    Haven’t you seen PC in the West? A society that is truly free and individualist doesn’t produce something like PC. If whites are so dynamic, why did they fall victim to PC and ‘white guilt’? Have you see Swedes lately? Whites WERE dynamic, but they lost it.

    [MORE]

    Whatever problem East Asia has, it cannot look to the suicidal West. While young people in the West seem louder and more expressive, much of it is wasted energy on stupidity(like partying, getting drunk, and etc) or fanaticism like PC. Western colleges got so bad that even Liberal professors say they’re scared of their nutjob students. Also, Western individuality has been replaced by Western insipidity whereby spoiled millennial brats bitch about ‘micro-aggressions’ and ‘triggering’. And I just don’t see evidence that current Western influence makes Asians better. Asian-Americans and Asian-Canadians are among the most imitative, insipid, shallow, and trite bunch of morons even though they rub shoulders with Westerners all the time. They just parrot whatever was taught to them by their professors. If Asian men need contact with Western men in order to be manly successes, why do Asian men fail so much as leaders and lovers in the West?

    Anyway, the problem of cravenness and cowardice is a global phenom. And the problem can only be fixed INTERNALLY with each individual learning to develop in himself/herself the virtues of courage, curiosity, and honesty. If Asians think whites or blacks are better and just imitate the outward styles of whites/blacks, they won’t get anywhere. It’s just imitation.
    True freedom comes from within. It’s like real fire burns from within. You can set anything on fire with lighter fluid. But once the fluid burns out, there is no fire. True fire comes from the thing itself, like a burning wood or coal. Asians relying on whites/blacks/foreigners as lighter-fluid may create the semblance of change, but there is no real change unless there is light burning within the Asian heart/mind. And that can be lit by Asians themselves with a bit of courage, curiosity, and honesty.

    But this goes for the West too. White guys may act more ‘fun’, but they are totally cucked. They are brainwashed. The only free white individuals in the West are Alt Right guys who reject PC, have reconnected with their roots, and are passionate about defense of identity(when they are not having fun with green frog memes).

    Also, individuals are different. Some are outgoing, some are shy, some are extroverted, some are introverted, and etc. Most men are not charismatic. We think of blacks as being like MLK or Farrakhan who has real charisma, but even most blacks are not charismatic. Most talk like morons like Mike Tyson or the Nasty Coates, who is boring and tarded.

    We have to accept the fact that most people are not and cannot be charismatic. That is why few become rock stars. That is why Germans were so wowed by Hitler. He had that rare charisma, a dangerous thing in his case.

    I agree that the East Asian educational system seems to turn out messed up kids. But it isn’t too surprising. Japan and South Korea are small nations with limited opportunities. So, there is hyper-competition for those top positions. In a resource-and-opportunity-limited society, there is going to be fierce competition, especially if there is much obsession about status and rank. China is a bigger nation but it has a lot of people competing for limited college slots, and that too leads to intense nerve-racking competition.

    Also, greater wealth and vast expansion of education has meant everyone can go to college, and so, it has made competition even worse. In the past, even though the ideal was to attend college, most East Asians knew they didn’t have a chance. So, only a limited number of Asians were super-competitive. Rest of Asians settled for something more modest and real. They accepted ‘inferior’ status and lived their lives with less stress. But as educational opportunities opened up to all, EVERY child is obsessed with making it under parental pressure. And this turned all these kids into autistic tards. Worse, video-games and smartphones made it even worse. In the past, when kids needed to take it easy, they got together and took a hike or played sports or ran around with a kite. They got some nature. Today, when they are not hitting the books, they are just playing with video screens or smart phones. And that has cut them off from nature. And of course, there is homo control of culture. I’m convinced both J-pop and K-pop fashions are controlled by Homos. Both genres feature girly boys who look and act like pansies that is supposed to be ‘so cute’. These flower boys are the new idols and models for young boys, and that turns them into soy-boys. But we have some of this in the West too. We have homos promoting male fashions that are getting fruitier. Someone in NYT complained that his ‘gaydar’ is broken because even straight hipsters now dress and talk so fey-gay.

    I fail to see how Korean attitudes are gonna change due to foreigners. Foreigners from poor Asian nations are boring and dull. If they’re so great, why do their own nations suck so bad? And what blacks ever done for Europe or Asia except try to hump every ho or sing rap? Have black rapists in Okinawa made that place any better? Okinawa is filled with US troops, but it’s just a whore-island. If, as you say, presence of foreigners make Asian society ‘dynamic’, I don’t see it in Okinawa. Or in Manila Bay with all those US soldiers teaching Filipino girls to act like whores.

    Your Asian-Nietzschean fantasy of the ‘cool’ charismatic intense Asian ubermensch via inspiration by foreign elements is so much bunk.

    What Asia needs isn’t such intensity. What it need is a nationalism and humanism. It is globalism that made Korea go extra-nuts. Once it began to think in global terms, it measured everything by global hyper-standards. So, nothing has value unless it has ‘global’ cachet. It’s like Koreans are awful proud of ‘korea wave’ because, gee whiz, some people in latin america listen to k-pop. But it’s all soda fizz culture. Besides, the cultural tastes all around is pretty low, sleazy, and stupid. Wow, Koreans won some fans around the world by acting like tards to appeal to other tards. And Koreans are proud of the popularity of korean soap opera in other asian nations. But I’ve seen some of these on youtube, and they suck donkey dic*. Korean Wave is Korean Sewage.

    Globalism makes Koreans think too much in megalonational terms. Good is not good enough. Everything Korean has to be validated and approved by the world. Koreans must play for global recognition. Blah blah blah. It’s like Korea has to be GLOBAL Player or it has no value.
    Such a small limited nation having such outsized ego makes for too much competition, status obsession, and culture of contempt for ‘losers’.

    No, if Korea wants to be a saner place, it needs to restore nationalism and humanism. Nationalism says Korea has value in and of itself. Sure, it needs to compete and trade with the world, but it is merely one nation among many others, and it needn’t be more than what it is. It must stop obsessing about global ranking in GDP, and etc. Koreans should just do their best, and accept the limitations of their achievements. Globalism makes every nation measure itself to world power and world prestige.
    It is a game that can only be played by the US. Japan played for top of the hill in the 80s, and they lost. And Japan is better for accepting a more measured place in the world. No more dream of Japan as numbah one. Maybe Koreans have this inferiority complex cuz they don’t matter in World History and Culture. After all, if Japan vanished, many people would miss it cuz there are Japanese things that are world-renowned. Same can be said of China, India, Germany, France, and etc. But if Korea vanished, who would really care? Sure, Korea makes decent cars and phones, but plenty of other nations make good phones and cars. There is nothing unique about Korea that the world cares about. K-pop is for kids. The world wouldn’t care if Korea disappeared overnight. The only people who should care are the Koreans themselves since it is their culture, their history. Even if it means nothing to the world, it should mean something to them. But too many korons are obsessed about global this, global that… just like crazy Merkel and Germany keep thinking in terms of Germany’s redemptive place in the world when they should really just think of preserving Germany for Germans.

    Nationalism in the best sense is humble. It is about humility. It says, our nation is a nation among many others. It is not the world. We shouldn’t try to remake the world in our image, nor should we remake our nation into a miniature version of the world. To maintain diversity in the world, each nation should guard and preserve its own identity and values. And that should be the main concern of Koreans. It should be about what Korea means Koreans themselves, not what it means to globalism that, btw, is excessive and trashy and megalomaniacal. Let crazy Americans go on and on about being the ‘exceptional’ and ‘indispensable’ nation. What good did such megalo-American attitude do for Iraq, Syria, Libya, Ukraine, and etc?

    Along with nationalism, what societies need is humanism. It is about existence on the human scale. Narcissism and nihilism makes people dream of charisma, greatness, superiority, eternal youth, petty self-absorption, and etc. While some individuals are indeed highly talented, most people are just people. And even the greatest individual has his limits, weaknesses, and will grow old and die in the end. Even the great Muhammad Ali ended up sick and weary and old and dead. So, even though competition and achievement are all good, we need humanism to remind us of our limits. It seems this kind of humanism has been lost in globalist Korea that is obsessed with ‘greatness’. In a way, the above commenter is blind to the fact that the ‘autistic’ character of so many East Asians is due to HIS kind of obsession with ‘greatness’. Too many Koreans been pushed from young age to believe that ONLY THE BEST is good enough and if you don’t make the cut, you suck.

    The only difference between Korean parents and the above commenter is that the former thinks excellence can be achieved by Cram-school while the latter thinks it can be achieved by some magical osmosis of foreigners passing their ‘charisma’ onto Koreans. Where did he get that, some Hollywood movie?

    No, the problem with Asian neuroticism is due to too much obsession with greatness, excellence, winning, and making it. If Koreans learn the value of humanism, then they will see value in life even if things don’t work out according to the grand plan.

    Also, the above commenter missed the point about Maoism. Though Mao was a horrible leader and did much damage to China, there was one good thing about China under communism. There was less competitive pressure to Make It. Communism said all Chinese, from educated person to toiling peasant, has same value as comrade and fellow country man. Though Mao was wrong to send intellectual to the country side to carry dung and raise pigs, the message was that all Chinese are part of one humanity.

    So, things were more relaxed during parts of Mao’s rule. But as China has turned capitalist and very competitive, we are seeing the same kinds of pathology that exist in Japan and South Korea. In Mao’s China, you could only rise so high. So, everyone focused on getting along and respecting one another as fellow comrades. Apart from the ideological furies of certain campaigns, the overwhelming attitude among Chinese under communism was one of shared humanity. But now that Chinese can become very rich if they succeed, they will do anything to make it. And this had led to fraying of social bonds and narcissism and mania.
    But we see the same thing in the US. After WWII, there was the rise of the broad middle class. Though there were very rich people, most of America was defined by middle class that shared common humanity and aspirations of modest good life. But in today’s globalized American where elites must compete with many more people and where sky is the limit in terms of wealth, the widening gulf between the super-haves and have-lesses have made social tensions in America far more explosive. It is esp nuts as the ‘left’ is represented by the urban super-rich while the ‘right’ is represented by the lower middle class and working class.

    The above commenter talk of these hyper qualities like charisma and ultra-individuality, but they will always apply to just a handful of individuals, and this goes for the West as well.
    Most people are just human without greatness, and they need to be made to feel that they are part of the larger humanity. And this calls for humanism, not some Ayn-Randianism for the masses.

    Neither more cram schools or more foreigners will fix the problem of Korea. The only thing that will work is revival of nationalism and humanism, a kind of human national socialism that restores the concept of ‘minjok’. Without that concept, Koreans are NOTHING. After all, the core meaning of Korean-ness isn’t about wealth, achievement, popularity, tv shows, pop music, and etc. After all, North Korea has nothing that South Korea has, yet it is no less Korean than the South. Why? Because it is defined the idea of Korean ethny, or ‘minjok’. So, that is the key ABOVE ALL. A nation may grow rich or poor and change over time, but a nation defined by ethny will lose itself unless it preserves that sense of identity.

    Koreans must be made to feel that their elites care about them, their nation and culture, not about the globe or masses of foreign invaders who are to replace the real Koreans as the ‘new Koreans’. That is deeply demoralizing to the native masses. Just look at the state of British working class that has been betrayed by UK elites. Look at White Death in the US as the result of the white elites abandonment of the white masses.
    Also, humanism will restore a sense of meaning of life. The poison comes from stuff like K-pop and fashion culture that promote some idealized fantasy of the Korean with plastic surgery and blonde hair as white-wanna-be and etc. All that stuff is about narcissism and etc. It degrades one’s appreciation of human as human.

    I get the impression that older generation of Asians were probably saner than younger ones. And I get this impression when I compare older generations of Japanese with younger ones in movies. Older generation knew more hardship, grew up with solid values of family, had strong national identity, a sense of history, and sense of identity. They had moral values and sense of moral limits. They were not PC. Their traditional views may have been limited in some ways, but they also kept them rooted in a meaningful past. But younger Asians who grew up on too much technology, too much social order, too much micro-management, too much pop culture, too much deracinated globalism than rich nationalism, and are maxed on narcissism/nihilism than the humility of humanism… these are like robots.
    So, I don’t think this problem is intrinsically Asian. Rather, it is the globalization of Asia that has cut off Asians from their roots and identity and values. Asianness has become plastic than organic. Just compare Japanese literature and cinema from 50s to those today. Today’s stuff are so shallow, hollow, immature, thin.

    I recognize real humans in older Japanese films. But in many new Japanese films, they seem like zombies and shallow twerps with no grounding in reality. They seem to live in some kind of bubble fantasy of globo-pop-culture.

    But this is true of Canadians too. They now say stuff like, “there is no such thing as Canadian culture.” So, globlaism is all that counts. That man-child Justin Trudeau(who makes my skin crawl) is just some playboy cuck-stooge to anyone of money and wealth. He doesn’t represent his own people. But Canadians voted for him because so many of them have been brainwashed by PC and globalism that erases national past and humanist moderation. It sucks everyone into the dream of some globalist utopia ruled by new breed of unbermensch.

    I mean this is precious:

    “Koreans/east asians do possess the ability for greatness, but it will require cultural change, dietary change and also a correct application of eugenic measures.”

    No, you got it all wrong. Koreans, like rest of humanity, should just try to be sane, good, and balanced. They should not think of greatness. Most people will not be great. Less than 0.1% of humanity has chance of greatness. What every society should try to be is good. And within that goodness, certain great individuals will arise and do great things. Why? Cuz they have that rare natural talent. But for most people, the most they can hope for is goodness(humanism) within their homeland(nationalism). Most people can only hope to manage a good society. Greatness is always unpredictable. Who knows where the new Beethoven will come from? All you can do is manage a society where the rare great genius can flourish. And for most people, it means having a sense of goodness and decency.

    With all this silly dream of globo-greatness, Koreans have lost their sense of humanity. And if Koreans think flooding their nation with foreigners will somehow lead to greatness, they are nuts and, in the process, only lose their country as well to the foreign tide.

    Italy is now being invaded by tons of Africans and Muslims. I fail to see any greatness in this. I fail to see any spark.

    The best one can hope for from a foreign invasion is the rise in nationalism, like we are seeing in Poland and Hungary. The massive tide of foreigners has made Poles and Hungarians rise up in nationalism again.

    But I get a sense that the above commenter is not hoping for renewal of Korean nationalism to resist the tide. Rather, he or she thinks that Korea will benefit from surrendering like a pussy to the foreign tide. While it’s true that foreign challenge, even imperialism, can inspire change and progress, such can only happen in the mode of resistance, not of surrender and servility.
    Any people who say “We welcome invasion by foreigners because we suck so bad” will not have the respect of foreigners. Foreigners will just see such a people as submissive pussies to conquer and dominate.

    The above commenter’s message is “We Koreans are so pathetic and hopeless that we need foreign invaders to teach us how to be ‘cool’ and dynamic.”

    I don’t know of any foreigner who will respect such a cuck wuss. It’s like a man saying, ‘come and fuc* my wife to teach me how to be a cool lover’.

    Read More
  96. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @German_reader
    lol, I cannot believe you're serious...are you trolling me? Granted, maybe East Asian societies do have some cultural problems (e.g. excessive focus on work, belief in hierarchy etc.)...but you want to become more like Latin America and think African immigrants will improve your country?????
    And I don't know if this is true:
    "East asian people are soft as fuck and everybody in the entire world knows this."

    Granted, East Asia maybe has too many nerds today...but South Korea still has conscription (which many European countries have foolishly abolished) and many really tough military types. Even Japan has quite impressive defense forces. And maybe I have an outmoded view of things but when I think about East Asians I think about things like the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy rolling up the European colonial empires, the Chinese pushing the Americans down the Korean peninsula, the Cultural revolution etc. ...these aren't the actions of people "soft as fuck"...more like extremely scary people! Maybe things have changed somewhat since then, but I think you're exaggerating, and in any case Western degeneracy seems far more advanced.

    “lol, I cannot believe you’re serious…are you trolling me?”

    Yikes.. has it been just an elaborate trolling on his part?

    Come to think of it, his theories do sound loopy…

    But then, no loopier than what we usually hear nowadays.

    Read More
  97. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Hacienda
    So you take the feminine/passive solution of importing what you perceive to be as masculine men and even more feminine women to address these problems. LOL. Koreans have a word for you: pyeontae (geek, pervert).

    Im korean and I know what 변태 means. You are obviously not grasping what I am saying if you think that my solution is simply about importing masculine men and even more feminine women, IE cuckold fantasy on steroids. Have you really bothered to read what I have been writing? Or have you just been skimming over the whole thing? If you disagree with me then just be straightup about it and say so, don’t resort to these passive aggressive strawman games. I’ll rehash the whole thing so that you understand it clearer:

    1.multiculturalism to break up/weaken the existing “stagnant” korean culture

    2.as a result of MC there will be more masculine cultures, this will serve the purpose of introducing a more extreme form of masculinity into korea, which will in turn spark a masculinity arms race, forcing local korean men to up their game. Increased cultural standards of masculinity will in turn act as new criteria for mate selection on behalf of females, which will in turn have a gradual eugenic effect. Hell, this doesn’t even have to include african immigration, which is what I think most posters here are getting bent out of shape about. The immigration could be 100% white british and the culturally masculinizing effect I am talking about would be the same.

    3.I proposed feminism, not more feminine women. Feminism (IE empowering female ability to choose mates) is a no brainer if you want to pursue positive eugenics for male traits. The ideal solution is a culture where men and women have equal powers of mate selection (a culture based on romantic love as opposed to pragmatic love?), however this kind of solution takes a lot longer, and korea is too far slanted in the opposite direction away from masculinity; thus feminism would restore social/sexual balance to korea a lot faster than would the establishment of cultural notions of romantic love in korea. Finally, a major mistake that people here might make is that they would assume that feminism would permanently hold in korea, or in east asia for that matter, but I think a more likely assumption would be that feminism would be popular for a while and then it would burn out. If you are assuming that I am advocating a permanent state of feminism then you are wrong; I am only advocating a long enough period of feminism to where it would permanently influence cultural ideals regarding female mate selection.

    The irony of all of this is that the measures I am proposing have already been taking place the past 100 or so years in some shape or form in asia due to western imperialism/contact. They are nothing new, my ideas are just a more sentient and self aware version of preexisting trends.

    1.Replace multiculturalism with imperialism. I would argue that modern day notions and attitudes towards masculinity in east asia have been significantly influenced by direct and indirect contact with western imperialism, as well as with western culture and westerners themselves.

    2.As a result of western imperialism, feminism has been growing in leaps and bounds in asia over the past century; mate selection in east asia is significantly different than it was in my grandparents generation.

    So far, I feel like the changes that have occurred in the culture of east asia as a reaction to western imperialism/contact have done nothing but benefit the people and also technological advancement of east asia. This clear civilizational advancement is obvious and undeniable to anybody. The proposals I am making are merely a stronger step in this same direction. For all intents and purposes, asian people do not act, they react. In order for korea/east asia to become stronger (either on cultural level or a civilizational level) they have to be subjected to some kind of stimulus. They will never find the inner spark to change themselves, asian people are simply not restless enough for that.

    Finally I want to make it clear that I am not an apologist for western imperialism, or imperialism for that matter. I am merely making the case that imperialism, or anything that shakes up asia, is actually good for asia in the long run; and I dont mean this is the kind of abstract, wishy washy way either, I am talking about good for asia in ways that are concrete and obvious.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    In short, you're hoping to break from our culture of conformity by trying to confirm to the West. I'm not sure if you're missing your sense of irony, but this isn't how it works. You don't become free by looking for a new master.

    And sure, we react plenty fine to cancers such as feminism. I'm reacting right now. The appropriate reaction to cancer is to try to reduce it, not to encourage it further.

    Further, it is entirely possible to absorb the technological accomplishments of other nations without adopting their culture. Otherwise, the Arabs would be trying to copy the Chinese culture when they adopted gunpowder, or the Europeans trying to copy the Jannisary culture of the Turkish. Adapting the good while excluding the bad is a fundamental step forward.

    At the very least, limit your analysis to Korea. The Chinese are quite capable of having the expansive energy to take on the world, we just don't usually do so explicitly with invasions. The Japanese have tried to conquer all of East Asia, as I'm sure you're aware of.


    I proposed feminism, not more feminine women
     
    This has concluded that you must be a troll. You seem to want Asian women to be be butch dykers, essentially, and believe this will be an overall step toward progress. Most mysteriously, that this will be a step toward masculinity, with the clear example of Sweden and every single country that has massively succumbed to feminism showing us that it only leads to even more effeminate men.

    If you're not a troll, try to develop a more coherent thesis. Feminism will not help Korea, it'll just make sure that it becomes as hollow culturally as the rest of Europe is rapidly racing to. Your conflation of stress with positivity isn't wrong: things that shake us up do benefit us. But not by surrendering to them.

    You remind me of people who argue that Korea benefitted greatly and should have been more grateful of Japanese ownership. Quite literally, there are people who have looked at the increased number of rape babies fathered by Japanese occupiers and declared "Korean population increased! This was great for us!" Right then and there, you're proof that feminism has done a great job at enmasculating Koreans.

    , @Hacienda
    Korea's and the world's experiment with Korean multi-racialism has progressed enough we can make some judgments about it already. Unsurprisingly, it tracks similar to America's left/cultural Marxist/female empowerment/corporate domination/individual atomization/Jewish rhetorical leadership results. Outside of the fact the white males score better with Asian women than Asian men score with white women, there's little to recommend the path America's gone down. And dig under the surface a little and you see white women and what they have become in reaction. Reactive sex tours to Africa and the Caribbean. LOL. And obviously, no amount of social experimentation will make Asian men and black women good with each other. Although, I don't hold anything against the unicorn pairings of Asian male/black female couples. And we're talking about sex pairings here- a sacred thing, a core concern to say the least. Open Korean society to white men, you also inevitably open Korean society to the world. You don't get a choice in this. Some "obvious" musings on the net about female/racial selection and the way things should turn out are easily dismissed by the equally obvious observations of what white Americans have become socially.
  98. @anon
    Im korean and I know what 변태 means. You are obviously not grasping what I am saying if you think that my solution is simply about importing masculine men and even more feminine women, IE cuckold fantasy on steroids. Have you really bothered to read what I have been writing? Or have you just been skimming over the whole thing? If you disagree with me then just be straightup about it and say so, don't resort to these passive aggressive strawman games. I'll rehash the whole thing so that you understand it clearer:

    1.multiculturalism to break up/weaken the existing "stagnant" korean culture

    2.as a result of MC there will be more masculine cultures, this will serve the purpose of introducing a more extreme form of masculinity into korea, which will in turn spark a masculinity arms race, forcing local korean men to up their game. Increased cultural standards of masculinity will in turn act as new criteria for mate selection on behalf of females, which will in turn have a gradual eugenic effect. Hell, this doesn't even have to include african immigration, which is what I think most posters here are getting bent out of shape about. The immigration could be 100% white british and the culturally masculinizing effect I am talking about would be the same.

    3.I proposed feminism, not more feminine women. Feminism (IE empowering female ability to choose mates) is a no brainer if you want to pursue positive eugenics for male traits. The ideal solution is a culture where men and women have equal powers of mate selection (a culture based on romantic love as opposed to pragmatic love?), however this kind of solution takes a lot longer, and korea is too far slanted in the opposite direction away from masculinity; thus feminism would restore social/sexual balance to korea a lot faster than would the establishment of cultural notions of romantic love in korea. Finally, a major mistake that people here might make is that they would assume that feminism would permanently hold in korea, or in east asia for that matter, but I think a more likely assumption would be that feminism would be popular for a while and then it would burn out. If you are assuming that I am advocating a permanent state of feminism then you are wrong; I am only advocating a long enough period of feminism to where it would permanently influence cultural ideals regarding female mate selection.

    The irony of all of this is that the measures I am proposing have already been taking place the past 100 or so years in some shape or form in asia due to western imperialism/contact. They are nothing new, my ideas are just a more sentient and self aware version of preexisting trends.

    1.Replace multiculturalism with imperialism. I would argue that modern day notions and attitudes towards masculinity in east asia have been significantly influenced by direct and indirect contact with western imperialism, as well as with western culture and westerners themselves.

    2.As a result of western imperialism, feminism has been growing in leaps and bounds in asia over the past century; mate selection in east asia is significantly different than it was in my grandparents generation.

    So far, I feel like the changes that have occurred in the culture of east asia as a reaction to western imperialism/contact have done nothing but benefit the people and also technological advancement of east asia. This clear civilizational advancement is obvious and undeniable to anybody. The proposals I am making are merely a stronger step in this same direction. For all intents and purposes, asian people do not act, they react. In order for korea/east asia to become stronger (either on cultural level or a civilizational level) they have to be subjected to some kind of stimulus. They will never find the inner spark to change themselves, asian people are simply not restless enough for that.

    Finally I want to make it clear that I am not an apologist for western imperialism, or imperialism for that matter. I am merely making the case that imperialism, or anything that shakes up asia, is actually good for asia in the long run; and I dont mean this is the kind of abstract, wishy washy way either, I am talking about good for asia in ways that are concrete and obvious.

    In short, you’re hoping to break from our culture of conformity by trying to confirm to the West. I’m not sure if you’re missing your sense of irony, but this isn’t how it works. You don’t become free by looking for a new master.

    And sure, we react plenty fine to cancers such as feminism. I’m reacting right now. The appropriate reaction to cancer is to try to reduce it, not to encourage it further.

    Further, it is entirely possible to absorb the technological accomplishments of other nations without adopting their culture. Otherwise, the Arabs would be trying to copy the Chinese culture when they adopted gunpowder, or the Europeans trying to copy the Jannisary culture of the Turkish. Adapting the good while excluding the bad is a fundamental step forward.

    At the very least, limit your analysis to Korea. The Chinese are quite capable of having the expansive energy to take on the world, we just don’t usually do so explicitly with invasions. The Japanese have tried to conquer all of East Asia, as I’m sure you’re aware of.

    I proposed feminism, not more feminine women

    This has concluded that you must be a troll. You seem to want Asian women to be be butch dykers, essentially, and believe this will be an overall step toward progress. Most mysteriously, that this will be a step toward masculinity, with the clear example of Sweden and every single country that has massively succumbed to feminism showing us that it only leads to even more effeminate men.

    If you’re not a troll, try to develop a more coherent thesis. Feminism will not help Korea, it’ll just make sure that it becomes as hollow culturally as the rest of Europe is rapidly racing to. Your conflation of stress with positivity isn’t wrong: things that shake us up do benefit us. But not by surrendering to them.

    You remind me of people who argue that Korea benefitted greatly and should have been more grateful of Japanese ownership. Quite literally, there are people who have looked at the increased number of rape babies fathered by Japanese occupiers and declared “Korean population increased! This was great for us!” Right then and there, you’re proof that feminism has done a great job at enmasculating Koreans.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    In short, you’re hoping to break from our culture of conformity by trying to confirm to the West. I’m not sure if you’re missing your sense of irony, but this isn’t how it works. You don’t become free by looking for a new master.
     
    incorrect. I am advocating executing what policies are necessary in order to destroy certain aspects of traditional asian culture, and then to reconstruct them in a more positive manner. My ideas are unconventional yes, but they are a far cry from mindlessly trying to conform to the west. So far I have clearly and in detail described the purposes for given policies, its not as if I am just repeating tired cliches and empty platitudes. In case it is not already clear enough to you, I will explain this again. Multiculturalism and feminism tend to be bad news, they are bad policies, generally speaking. However, it is possible that multiculturalism and feminism are only bad in a western context, in an eastern context, multiculturalism and feminism may have positive effects; and at the very least multiculturalism and feminism could not run wild in asia in the same way that it does in the west due to asians being significantly less permissive and open minded. Either way, you are deliberately attempting to misrepresent my views, and its obvious that you have an ideological axe to grind against feminism, but so far you have not brought up any actual, logical and well thought out objections to my proposal that feminism (feminism to me is anything that would empower female ability for mate selection) is actually a pro-masculine eugenic force. If you want to have an actual discussion let me know, but I am not interested in talking over each others heads about ideological abstractions.

    This has concluded that you must be a troll. You seem to want Asian women to be be butch dykers, essentially, and believe this will be an overall step toward progress. Most mysteriously, that this will be a step toward masculinity, with the clear example of Sweden and every single country that has massively succumbed to feminism showing us that it only leads to even more effeminate men.
     
    Not necessarily, america is a pretty feminist country and men here seem pretty manly, much more so than in east asia which is a nominally "masculine" society. I think a more realistic idea of what goes on in feminist countries is that manly men become more manly and feminine men become more feminine. The whole trope about swedish men being effeminate may or may not be true in relevant ways. What you read on the news or on the internet and the reality on the ground might be quite different. Have you ever been to sweden? Do you have any personal experience with swedes? I haven't had much, although I have met a handful of swedish guys (yeah not a huge sample size but whatever) and they seemed pretty masculine and quite well socially adjusted. I don't think the relationship between feminism and effeminate men is quite as clear as how you are trying to act like it is. More importantly though is that I am predominately advocating empowering female mate selection. If this can be done without feminism then so be it. We should not make the mistake of unnecessarily conflating feminism with empowering female mate selection.

    If you’re not a troll, try to develop a more coherent thesis. Feminism will not help Korea, it’ll just make sure that it becomes as hollow culturally as the rest of Europe is rapidly racing to. Your conflation of stress with positivity isn’t wrong: things that shake us up do benefit us. But not by surrendering to them.
     
    I use feminism as shorthand for empowering female mate selection, no more and no less. If empowering female mate selection in east asia can be accomplished without all the loony feminist bells and whistles then all the better.

    There is no conflation here, nor did I ever state that the asian people had to surrender to anything, in fact that is the opposite of what I am saying and I think you are aware of this, but you are just pretending to be dense and misrepresent my stance in order to score cheap points. East asia benefits by rising up and reacting to stressful situations; this has been what I have been saying this entire time.

    You remind me of people who argue that Korea benefitted greatly and should have been more grateful of Japanese ownership. Quite literally, there are people who have looked at the increased number of rape babies fathered by Japanese occupiers and declared “Korean population increased! This was great for us!” Right then and there, you’re proof that feminism has done a great job at enmasculating Koreans.
     
    We should be logical. Korea suffered and also benefited as a result of japanese colonialism. Like anything in life, colonialism has its positive aspects and negative aspects. We should always consider things objectively and not be dictated by emotional or historical pleas.
  99. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Daniel Chieh
    Heck no. If for some mysterious reason you desperately want to increase size of men, there are significantly easier ways that don't involve effectively destroying society. Actively disenfranchising men would essentially serve instead to feminize us even further, an idiotic idea, and everything you're saying basically involves self-destruction.

    How about...no.

    If you really want to create a world that selects for personal valor or something like that, you can't do that in a civilized world and certainly not in a feminized world. You basically have to reduce society to something like Scottish clans raiding each other for cattle.

    I just don't see that happening. And it'll be a lot easier anyway to alter characteristics of testosterone than to basically self-destruct in an effort to not be ourselves.

    its not just about increasing the size of men; its about increasing the physical and psychological masculinity of east asian culture. I’m talking about effecting a holistic trend here, not just simply “making men bigger”.

    How would disenfranchising men and reorienting mate selection rights to females feminize us further? Explain this to me. If by feminize you mean disempower/weaken in a political/social sense then you are absolutely correct. However if you are referring to physical/psychological masculinity then you are absolutely wrong. If females are given the ability to, they will consistently select for masculine traits; this is simply how they are wired. Females crave physical and mental masculinity; why else do you think that white men are such a hit in asia? On that tangent, if you disagree with the idea of white guy going to asia and banging asian women left right and center then you should probably support the masculinization of the asian race. Personally I am willing to subject asian men to a few generations of female empowerment so that subsequent generations of asian men will be significantly more masculinized both physically and psychologically.

    You are extremely mistaken if you assume I am advocating completely changing the asian race and everything we are about. I am not, I am advocating the optimizing and balancing of the asian race. As I said many times before, I want the asian race to be balanced (intellectually and sexually) in the same way that the european race is balanced, thats it, no more and no less. We can be ourselves, in fact a better version of ourselves if we can rebalance our culture.

    Secondly it is not simply about testosterone levels, it is more about the asian cultures fundamental relationship with masculinity. This is the core issue and it must be changed first in order to effect other changes on down the line. However it is not as simple as simply telling asian people to be more manly, rather in order to effect these kinds of changes, you have to utilize natual/organic conduits and create the necessary change indirectly. In this case I am correctly identifying that the best and most logical way to resolve this situation is via asian females. Asian culture would become a lot more exciting, dynamic and creative if asians fixed their relationship regarding femininity and masculinity and encouraged a positive interplay between these two dynamics as opposed to the current situation in asia where masculinity culturally dominates femininity and as a result has the unexpected effect of actually making us less masculine and more feminine. In order to achieve peak racial fitness, we need to achieve cultural gender balance between the masculine and the feminine; as for feminism, it is only a means to an end. Too much of anything, whether it be “masculinism” (east asia’s default ideology for 1000s of years) or feminism is a bad thing. Currently IMO feminism is needed to balance things out.

    Read More
    • Troll: Daniel Chieh
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh

    How would disenfranchising men and reorienting mate selection rights to females feminize us further? Explain this to me.
     
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/13/sweden-left-party-toilet-stand_n_1590572.html

    In this case I am correctly identifying that the best and most logical way to resolve this situation is via asian females
     
    You're incorrect. The fact that you keep claiming that you're correct is what makes me think you're a weird troll.

    You do not masculinize men by feminizing society. Your theory is ridiculous, and fundamentally rejected by just by any study of history. As a society, Asians are already "feminized" because we have a society that's overall more warlike. You want to know why white men are typically more masculine? Its nothing to do with early feminism in their society. It had everything to do with limited centralization of power, creating long periods of warfare, and for a long time, essentially accepting a much lower standard of living.

    You can see this effect anywhere. "Nonfunctioning systems" with high scarcity result in stiffening of traditional gender roles since they reinforce clan structure and basically try to organize along biological lines: this was true in the Middle East, in Africa, South America, in South Asia, etc. They have to develop a high level of tolerance for violence, strong selection for masculinity in men, while having a much lower standard of living and minimalization of individual freedom. Yes, even beyond Asian levels, because Asian levels of hierarchies expect stable rules that do not enforce along strength. Its basically a might-makes-right, removed even from customs of eldelry respect.

    This is absolute not what feminism encourages in a society. This is basically "toxic masculinity." If you want to encourage that, you need to basically have a failed society.

    You want to see what feminism will bring us eventually? Look at bonobos. Women in power show low preference for risk, and bring about a very static, low-violence but also low-ambition society. Its basically living death.

    I have lived in much of the world, including North Europe, where feminism has a very strong foothold. Trust me, Asia does not need more feminism and you will not like the results of having more of it. It will certainly not make for more masculine men. The solutions that "work" for Europe, even to the limited extent they work, do not work for us, and will not work for us. Our brains aren't even the same, and if Communism is any evidence, we take already bad ideas to ridiculously terrible conclusions and destroy ourselves with them in ways that the West could only fantasize with.

    PS: White men in China are only popular in China with a certain segment. Otherwise, as is typical, the money is the greatest aphordisiac.

  100. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Daniel Chieh
    I am Chinese. The Cultural Revolution served nothing except to kill millions of people and demonstrate that Soviet ideas are bad in the Soviet Union, but even worse when adopted elsewhere. It put us behind at least ten, perhaps twenty years. It has created, quite possibly, the massively amoral Chinese society where getting ahead is all that matters.

    Your grasp of Chinese history is dubious.

    The Qing took us over because they WERE strong. They fielded one hundred thousand horse archers, for starters. Secondly, we were internally feuding with rebellions that had taken our capital, thus causing loyalist forces to join the Qing to enforce the Mandate of Heaven.

    I mean, Native American horse archers in vastly smaller numbers with inferior weapons would be a thorn in the side of European and American armies until the invention of multi-shot firearms. That a hundred thousand organized horsemen with composite bows aided by the cream of Ming imperial loyalists overran weary musket-armed Han rebels is not exactly surprising.

    And this is after we were literally holding off the various horse-riding nations, often with turncoat Chinese advisors, for about two hundred plus years with basically endless artillery spam - one receipt found shows something like a hundred cannons delivered north every year. No functioning government can maintain a state of war for that many years without insane stress on the population. Of course we failed in the end.

    The Qing takeover was a disaster for us, too. The Ming were developing along a gunpowder doctrine and could have possibly managed to keep up with the West; with the success of the Qing, they basically proceeded to rely on basically a horse/sword/bow force and military theory, and we never really developed military science again until the fall of the Qing.

    I am Chinese. The Cultural Revolution served nothing except to kill millions of people and demonstrate that Soviet ideas are bad in the Soviet Union, but even worse when adopted elsewhere. It put us behind at least ten, perhaps twenty years. It has created, quite possibly, the massively amoral Chinese society where getting ahead is all that matters.

    -You don’t know this, and honestly neither do I. The scale of the movement and its effects are simply too large to accurately estimate the effects of. We don’t know an alternate timeline where it didn’t happen, so it is impossible to know the true effects of the cultural revolution. Its possible that if it had not occurred then it would have triggered a chain of events which would have ultimately led to the downfall of china later on down the road, or maybe something else entirely. In my opinion the madness and destruction of the cultural revolution and the great leap forwards were useful because it paved the way for the dissolution of communism and lead to the ascendancy of deng xiaoping and his capitalistic reforms. Had the cultural revolution and the great leap forward never happened then its quite possible that China would have continued its ill fated experiment with communism for many more decades ala north korea. This is something that we will never know for sure, but what is certain is that China is currently posed to be the next super power and is the world’s 2nd largest economy, this current state of affairs was only possible in a timeline that included the cultural revolution and the great leap forward as well as the cultural backlash that occurred in reaction to those events which was ultimately used to reject communism and propel china in a more positive direction under deng xiaoping. The cultural revolution is only bad when observed in terms of its immediate results, but when considered holistically and from a long enough perspective then it begins to appear as a blessing in disguise.

    Anyways, I am digressing here. The fact of the matter is, right or wrong, the cultural revolution destroyed lots of chinese culture. The crux of the matter is whether or not the chinese culture that was destroyed was good culture or bad culture. You have to recall that the cultural revolution did not happen in isolation, as a chinese you are already well aware of this. The cultural revolution happened on a well spring of collective impetus for cultural change that even predated the CCP coming to power, such was the collective sentiment that sought to ban antiquated things like foot binding for example. It is entirely possible (and again me and you will never know with certainty) that thanks to the cultural revolution, a lot of restricting or antiquated chinese cultural practices and beliefs were wiped out or significantly weakened. So it is possible that as a result of the cultural revolution, chinese society was incidentally liberated from its own cultural restraints and was able to succeed as a result of that.

    The Qing took us over because they WERE strong. They fielded one hundred thousand horse archers, for starters. Secondly, we were internally feuding with rebellions that had taken our capital, thus causing loyalist forces to join the Qing to enforce the Mandate of Heaven.

    Reading comprehension is vital. Here is what I originally wrote:

    You should also keep in mind that at the end of the qing dynasty china was invaded not because the foreigners were too strong, but rather because china was too weak. At this point in time china was holding itself back because it was mired in the past and in stagnant cultures and traditions; however it was as a result of the western imperial incursions that china was forced to put its house in order. Thus the fate of the late qing dynasty is a perfect example of the kind of “creative destruction” that I am referring to when I advocate MC for korea/east asia.

    I was not referring to the qing dynasty taking over, I was clearly referring to the late qing dynasty being taken over. Big difference.

    Read More
  101. @anon
    its not just about increasing the size of men; its about increasing the physical and psychological masculinity of east asian culture. I'm talking about effecting a holistic trend here, not just simply "making men bigger".

    How would disenfranchising men and reorienting mate selection rights to females feminize us further? Explain this to me. If by feminize you mean disempower/weaken in a political/social sense then you are absolutely correct. However if you are referring to physical/psychological masculinity then you are absolutely wrong. If females are given the ability to, they will consistently select for masculine traits; this is simply how they are wired. Females crave physical and mental masculinity; why else do you think that white men are such a hit in asia? On that tangent, if you disagree with the idea of white guy going to asia and banging asian women left right and center then you should probably support the masculinization of the asian race. Personally I am willing to subject asian men to a few generations of female empowerment so that subsequent generations of asian men will be significantly more masculinized both physically and psychologically.

    You are extremely mistaken if you assume I am advocating completely changing the asian race and everything we are about. I am not, I am advocating the optimizing and balancing of the asian race. As I said many times before, I want the asian race to be balanced (intellectually and sexually) in the same way that the european race is balanced, thats it, no more and no less. We can be ourselves, in fact a better version of ourselves if we can rebalance our culture.

    Secondly it is not simply about testosterone levels, it is more about the asian cultures fundamental relationship with masculinity. This is the core issue and it must be changed first in order to effect other changes on down the line. However it is not as simple as simply telling asian people to be more manly, rather in order to effect these kinds of changes, you have to utilize natual/organic conduits and create the necessary change indirectly. In this case I am correctly identifying that the best and most logical way to resolve this situation is via asian females. Asian culture would become a lot more exciting, dynamic and creative if asians fixed their relationship regarding femininity and masculinity and encouraged a positive interplay between these two dynamics as opposed to the current situation in asia where masculinity culturally dominates femininity and as a result has the unexpected effect of actually making us less masculine and more feminine. In order to achieve peak racial fitness, we need to achieve cultural gender balance between the masculine and the feminine; as for feminism, it is only a means to an end. Too much of anything, whether it be "masculinism" (east asia's default ideology for 1000s of years) or feminism is a bad thing. Currently IMO feminism is needed to balance things out.

    How would disenfranchising men and reorienting mate selection rights to females feminize us further? Explain this to me.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/13/sweden-left-party-toilet-stand_n_1590572.html

    In this case I am correctly identifying that the best and most logical way to resolve this situation is via asian females

    You’re incorrect. The fact that you keep claiming that you’re correct is what makes me think you’re a weird troll.

    You do not masculinize men by feminizing society. Your theory is ridiculous, and fundamentally rejected by just by any study of history. As a society, Asians are already “feminized” because we have a society that’s overall more warlike. You want to know why white men are typically more masculine? Its nothing to do with early feminism in their society. It had everything to do with limited centralization of power, creating long periods of warfare, and for a long time, essentially accepting a much lower standard of living.

    You can see this effect anywhere. “Nonfunctioning systems” with high scarcity result in stiffening of traditional gender roles since they reinforce clan structure and basically try to organize along biological lines: this was true in the Middle East, in Africa, South America, in South Asia, etc. They have to develop a high level of tolerance for violence, strong selection for masculinity in men, while having a much lower standard of living and minimalization of individual freedom. Yes, even beyond Asian levels, because Asian levels of hierarchies expect stable rules that do not enforce along strength. Its basically a might-makes-right, removed even from customs of eldelry respect.

    This is absolute not what feminism encourages in a society. This is basically “toxic masculinity.” If you want to encourage that, you need to basically have a failed society.

    You want to see what feminism will bring us eventually? Look at bonobos. Women in power show low preference for risk, and bring about a very static, low-violence but also low-ambition society. Its basically living death.

    I have lived in much of the world, including North Europe, where feminism has a very strong foothold. Trust me, Asia does not need more feminism and you will not like the results of having more of it. It will certainly not make for more masculine men. The solutions that “work” for Europe, even to the limited extent they work, do not work for us, and will not work for us. Our brains aren’t even the same, and if Communism is any evidence, we take already bad ideas to ridiculously terrible conclusions and destroy ourselves with them in ways that the West could only fantasize with.

    PS: White men in China are only popular in China with a certain segment. Otherwise, as is typical, the money is the greatest aphordisiac.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    You do not masculinize men by feminizing society. Your theory is ridiculous, and fundamentally rejected by just by any study of history. As a society, Asians are already “feminized” because we have a society that’s overall more warlike. You want to know why white men are typically more masculine? Its nothing to do with early feminism in their society. It had everything to do with limited centralization of power, creating long periods of warfare, and for a long time, essentially accepting a much lower standard of living.
     
    I accept that parts of this thesis may be true, but I dont think its the entire case. There are numerous factors which influence sexual dimorphism/masculinity, of which what you stated is one. When it comes to increasing sexual dimorphism, there is more than one way to skin that cat. However your explanation completely ignores the role of female mate choice, which is a very basic biological concept. As I explained in my new post though, I essentially support empowering female mate selection because females will consistently select for manly men, meanwhile men will consistently select for feminine women. If we assume that sexual dimorphism is genetically mediated (and it is), then it is common sense that empowering female mate selection would eventually result in a more manly race. Likwise, I think you would be hardpressed to deny the fact that asian men have monopolized mate selection in east asia for thousands of years, as a result we have the current east asian physical and psychological template that we currently do. More importantly, beyond simply increasing sexual dimorphism/masculinity, I also advocate a stronger interplay between masculinity and femininity in asia which would create a more dynamic and creative culture (sexual desire can be transmuted to make terrific scientific/artistic/etc accomplishments. In my opinion, east asia lacks "creativity
    because it largely lacks sexual fire and a culture which is conducive to or at the very least not antagonistic to this drive). Currently east asia is pretty repressed and a quiet place, which is not necessarily bad, but east asia takes it too far. I feel it is this way as a result of weak interplay between masculinity and femininity in asia (IE masculinity overpowers everything and just makes everything a grind) As always, I advocate balance.

    You want to see what feminism will bring us eventually? Look at bonobos. Women in power show low preference for risk, and bring about a very static, low-violence but also low-ambition society. Its basically living death.
     
    I won't say you are incorrect, but I won't say you are correct either. Humans are humans and bonobos are bonobos. Lets not conflate apples for oranges.

    I have lived in much of the world, including North Europe, where feminism has a very strong foothold. Trust me, Asia does not need more feminism and you will not like the results of having more of it. It will certainly not make for more masculine men. The solutions that “work” for Europe, even to the limited extent they work, do not work for us, and will not work for us. Our brains aren’t even the same, and if Communism is any evidence, we take already bad ideas to ridiculously terrible conclusions and destroy ourselves with them in ways that the West could only fantasize with.
     
    My mistake was perhaps using feminism and assuming that it meant the same things to me as it does to you, or other posters here. Let me clearly and definitively state what I am advocating. I am advocating empowering female mate choice and encouraging female sexual agency in asia while simultaneous removing the male monopoly on sexual agency. Thats it, no more and no less. I care very little for all the assorted non-sense that often accompanies feminism as we know it.

    PS: White men in China are only popular in China with a certain segment. Otherwise, as is typical, the money is the greatest aphordisiac.
     

    lol, explain why white men are such a hit in economically developed countries like south korea and japan as well? When you say stuff like this you lose credibility, lets call a spade a spade and stop trying to rationalize the reality that is staring us all in the face. An average asian man cannot come to a western country and do the same thing as an average white man can do when he comes to asia, this is undeniable. Stop acting like money is the cause of this. The fact that a white man can come to any east asian country and clean up says a lot about our culture and its deficiencies.
  102. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Anon
    "The point I am making is that korean/east asian culture is imbalanced and backwards. The rest of the world’s population are quite well developed socially as well as sexually, however east asia is the odd one out."

    Sexual balance in Africa? A continent where men rape young girls to be purified of HIV? A continent where men bang women all around and don't stick around to take care of them? African women have 6 or 7 kids each. Many babies are offered for sale to Westerners like puppies. Africa is so poor, violent, and vile that millions try to flee to Europe for better life. Rape is common in Africa. The president of South Africa, once accused of rape, joked about it and was acquitted. It's the norm in Africa for women to have kids with different men and for men to have several wives. Is this the 'sexual balance' you're talking about?

    The Muslim world is sexually healthy? Then, why do Muslim men have such loutish attitudes when they come to the West? They gang-rape women. They have rape-torture gangs in Rotherham. And in the Muslim world, there is cousin-marriage galore that produces a bunch of tards.

    And where is sexual balance in the West? Women are a bunch of whores. We have Lena Dunham-ism. What sane society wants girls to emulate that blob? Or Emma Sulkowicz. And if the West is sexually so healthy, why all the Rape Culture hysteria?
    And what is so sexually balanced about rap culture where the message is 'suck my dic*, ho'? And what kind of national cultural revolves around 'twerking'? 40% of white kids in working class are now fatherless. 75% of black kids have no fathers who stick around.

    And it's difficult to speak of Latin America which is made up of many races, classes, castes, and etc. I would not say Latin American sexual culture is healthy. Too much machismo, too much preference of image and style over meaning and substance. Argentina is the capital of the vapid and shallow.

    As for East Asia, there WAS sexual balance. Most men got married, most women got married. This was the case in Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and etc. So, what happened?
    One was pop culture. I took a class in college on Japanese society and Chinese society. In a more traditional setting, an average Asian person would have grown up in company of grandparents and relatives. It's like in the films of Yasujiro Ozu: A young Japanese woman has frequent contacts with parents, older people, relatives, and young people(nieces or nephews). So, she is aware that she is part of a link in time. You go from childhood to youthhood to adulthood to oldhood to death. You're part of time, you're part of culture, you're part of community.

    But then came the TV. And people began to watch TV, TV, and TV. And then TV got dumber and trashier. And youth culture took over and convinced even grown ups to act young and immature forever. We have 50 yr olds now still listening to rap music in the West. How pathetic is that? If you've ever seen Japanese TV, you know what I"m talking about. It is mind-destroying, soul-killing. So vapid, empty, hollow, tarded.
    But parents just let kids indulge in this junky cartoon, fake, shallow, vapid fantasyland. And old people have been shunted off out of sight into retirement complexes. And young people were encouraged to obsess over their image, pleasure, and attitude above all else. So, young people grew up without a sense of connection to other people. In Kurosawa's RED BEARD, the noble elder doctor teaches the younger one to observe people and feel a part of larger humanity. But today's pop culture tells young people to just indulge in their own petty narcissism and hedonism. This affected young girls more than young boys because women are, by nature, more narcissistic. If you give a boy a videogame, he will play all day. If you give a girl a mirror, she will stare at it all day.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOCKBnxgflU

    What East Asia lost was a sense of balance. In the past, it wasn't just about SEX and fun. It was about life, duty, and family. So, love and sex were a part of life, not something disassociated from life. The BALANCE was in morality and family. You found someone to love, you committed to that person, and you had kids with her. This is the balance between nature and culture, between biology and morality. But modern society is all about individual funnery. So, sex is seen as something to do just for kicks. It's like Beavis going 'boing!!'.
    This very concept is an imbalance. Sex for mere sex leads to Lena-Dunham, booty-call-ism, Afro-dong-ism, Porkys-ism, Ron-Jeremy-sucking-his-own-dong-ism(which a Jewish kid showed me on dad's VCR in the early 80s). In the past, the ideal was love and marriage. This was so in the West too. But when sex was decoupled from morality, duty, and obligation due to abortion, birth control pill, and other means, sex became a thing in and of itself. This turned women into whores and men into pimps or wanna-be-pimps. Or cucks. There was a time when a white guy had a good chance of deflowering the woman he fell in love with and married. Now, the chances are he's marrying someone like Emma Sulkowicz of the infamous "fuc* me in the butt" texting. This is what you call the 'sexual balance' of the West?

    Though the East may not be as debauched as the West, the same attitudes has spread far and wide through pop culture, Hollywood, MTV, and internet that affects everyone all over, and no nation is as wired up as Korea.
    In Asian societies, when FAMILY was at the center of culture, men and women understood that the thing was find a decent person to marry and have children with. But the new attitude says it is okay to just hook up and have sex. This is why so many Japanese women don't get married. Many continue to live at home, go to night clubs, hook up with men, use contraceptives, and act like hookers.
    And these skankisans imitate every dumb hornball fad that comes of black America.
    One out of every 200 Japanese women works in porn.

    Now, this kind of 'sexual climate' is more difficult for many Asians since they are, by nature, more awkward and inhibited. They evolved that way. Asian societies punished or killed those who acted too wild, so over time, the population became tamer and more docile, which is good for cohesion and cooperation.
    What this means is that East Asia should reject Western and especially African sexual mores since 'game' doesn't come naturally to Asians. Most Asians would do better with a traditional sexual culture of shame, duty, marriage, and family. Such values would pressure men and women to find someone nice for marriage and commitment than for loose sex on the basis of 'my ding-a-ling' and booty-call. Blacks are different cuz black guys wanna shout to the world, 'suck my dic*' and black women will start shaking their booties like baboons whenever the music is playing, indeed even at Walmart as I've seen on occasion. Races are different, so they need different sexual cultures. When a black guy sees a black mama shake her ass, he's like "dang, gotta go there and rub my dic* on her booooooooty!" When Asian women act this way, Asian boys get nosebleeds like in those anime.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manga_iconography#Nose

    There is no "one size fits all" solution for all races, just like there is no one-size-condom-fits-all-for-everyone. What works with blacks work less well with whites, and what works with whites work less well with Asians. It's like what works for cats will not work for dogs, and what works for dogs will not work for coyotes.

    East Asia did fine sexually under the traditional values of duty, commitment, marriage, and family. It is doing horribly under the new regimen of 'me so horny' and 'me ape rapper'. In the past, most men got married to most women, and they had families and had meaning.

    Of course, another problem is the Fantasy spread by Soap Operas which feature Ideal Lovers. Also, as East Asia got richer, women have fantasies of marrying the better kind of man. They have a moon or bust mentality. It's no wonder 50% of Japanese men have given up on womenfolk. They sense their jobs are not good enough. In the past, and this goes for the West too, most people were either poor, working class, or barely in middle class. And they didn't expect too much from life. They didn't grow up on TV fantasies and Eternal Youth mentality. They had a better sense of reality and modest pleasure of life. So, people met and got married cuz they just liked one another. Today, with so much wealth and with TV & pop culture filled with ideal lifestyles of rich folks, hip folks, cool folks, and etc., men and esp women have become very choosy in their choice of mates. Good is no longer good enough for lots of women who hold on for the Dream Beau to the very end... and end up being a cat lady.

    Another thing. The above commenter seems to think FOREIGNERS will make things better for Asia. No, the foreigners will make things worse. If the foreigners are desperate women from poor Asian nations, then Korean men might marry them instead of looking for Korean mates. If the foreigners are white or black men with 'game', they might take Korean women from Korean men. The above commenter seems to think white guys and black guys will TEACH Korean guys how to get women. But men don't think like that. Men are dog-eat-dog or dong-beat-dong, that is competitive. If foreign white/black men come to Asia and notice that Korean guys are a bunch of wusses, they will make the move on the women.

    Maybe the above commenter is really a Korean woman who wants more foreigners cuz she wants a white/black guy who will save her and take her to America or something.
    And that brings us to the issue of sexuality in globalism. Globo-sexuality is not about equality but about hierarchy. We see this in the West itself. As black men are more muscular and bigger-donged and have stronger voices, the New Western Ideal is for the white woman(seen as most beautiful female) to go with the black man(seen as the most alpha male). Global sexual culture is not about equality. Why is there talk of a black James Bond? Why is the Lancelot character a Negro in some TV show about Camelot? Why do so many ads feature black men with white women? Why is sports about black male athletes and white female cheerleaders? Why is Obama, the product Negro boffing a white woman, president?

    In this American Renaissance article, it shows that racial integration in schools leads to black boys beating up white boys and humping white girls.

    https://www.amren.com/features/2016/12/blacks-changed-school/

    The vision of the Globo-Eden is Negro as Adam and White woman as Eve. According to this narrative, white women had been sexually bound to the inferior lame white male all these eons. But she is finally liberated by the Negro. And the new interracial eden will be defined by the children of black adam and white eve. Well, if white guys lose out like this in the globalized order, Asian boys will lose out even worse. In the US, a very globalized sexual market place, Asian boys lose out most. Whites lose to blacks, Asians lose to whites and blacks. Now, I don't know of any white guy or black guy who sympathizes with yellow guys and wants to help them out.

    Yet, the above commenter seems to think that more whites/blacks in Korea will lead to better sexual prospects for Korean men. What a dumbass. Koreans in Korea will end up like Asian boys in America. Total losers. It's one thing for them to lose in a foreign country, but why would they want to lose on home turf?

    Just look at France. At one time, all French athletes were white Frenchmen. But France allowed tons of blacks in, and now the French soccer team is nearly all black. Did those foreigners help French men become more athletic? No, those blacks, as the 'New French', kick white French men and hump tons of white French women
    who are race traitors and give birth to mulattos who beat up whites.

    The top female kick boxer of Europe was the product of a black father and white mother. And she beat up all the white women. And some mulatto named Overeem is a top contender in UFC. He is the product of black father and white mother. So, some European woman rejected white men and decided to have a kid with a black man. And her half-black son grew up to beat up white men. Is that progress for whitey?
    What's so great about having your women having kids with foreign men and having those kids grow up to beat up your kids?
    One thing for sure, globalism is one big lie. It talks of equality and says 'race is just a social construct', but there is clearly a racial hierarchy to globalist culture of sports, music, sex, and etc.
    In the US, even American Indians do little else but see loud and crazy blacks on TV. I doubt if American Indians, as racial cousins of the Asiatics, got much good from it.

    What we need to do is to admit that races are different, and different races need different social and sexual attitudes/mores to flourish. Asians are not like whites and certainly not like blacks. If they spread Western or Afro norms in Asian pop culture and raise their kids to think like pimps and whores, it's not going to work out well since their racial nature is incompatible with such modes. It's like lactose-intolerance. Many Asian stomachs just can't digest milk. Likewise, lots of East Asians are
    Cock-Whore-Intolerant.

    Japan, for one, needs to ban porn and do to porn peddlers what Duterte is doing to dope-pushers. And it needs to do away with baby-talk kawaii cartoon culture and restore Kurosawa-ism and get people to grow up and become moral men and dutiful women once again.

    What did Japan gain from that mulatto Miss Japan whose father is black? The only lesson from that is Japanese women should reject Japanese men as inferior and have a kid with some black gigolo who won't even stick around to raise his own kid.
    Some FOREIGN Inspiration.

    Im sorry man, I appreciate your input, but you have to be more concise in your views. I literally don’t have time to read every comment you make, they are simply too long and drawn out, this is especially so considering that I am trying to take the time to write detailed responses to about 3-4 other commenters as well. Make your comments more targeted and concise and I will be happy to respond to you. If I get some time, I will respond to a few segments of what you have written though.

    Read More
  103. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Daniel Chieh
    In short, you're hoping to break from our culture of conformity by trying to confirm to the West. I'm not sure if you're missing your sense of irony, but this isn't how it works. You don't become free by looking for a new master.

    And sure, we react plenty fine to cancers such as feminism. I'm reacting right now. The appropriate reaction to cancer is to try to reduce it, not to encourage it further.

    Further, it is entirely possible to absorb the technological accomplishments of other nations without adopting their culture. Otherwise, the Arabs would be trying to copy the Chinese culture when they adopted gunpowder, or the Europeans trying to copy the Jannisary culture of the Turkish. Adapting the good while excluding the bad is a fundamental step forward.

    At the very least, limit your analysis to Korea. The Chinese are quite capable of having the expansive energy to take on the world, we just don't usually do so explicitly with invasions. The Japanese have tried to conquer all of East Asia, as I'm sure you're aware of.


    I proposed feminism, not more feminine women
     
    This has concluded that you must be a troll. You seem to want Asian women to be be butch dykers, essentially, and believe this will be an overall step toward progress. Most mysteriously, that this will be a step toward masculinity, with the clear example of Sweden and every single country that has massively succumbed to feminism showing us that it only leads to even more effeminate men.

    If you're not a troll, try to develop a more coherent thesis. Feminism will not help Korea, it'll just make sure that it becomes as hollow culturally as the rest of Europe is rapidly racing to. Your conflation of stress with positivity isn't wrong: things that shake us up do benefit us. But not by surrendering to them.

    You remind me of people who argue that Korea benefitted greatly and should have been more grateful of Japanese ownership. Quite literally, there are people who have looked at the increased number of rape babies fathered by Japanese occupiers and declared "Korean population increased! This was great for us!" Right then and there, you're proof that feminism has done a great job at enmasculating Koreans.

    In short, you’re hoping to break from our culture of conformity by trying to confirm to the West. I’m not sure if you’re missing your sense of irony, but this isn’t how it works. You don’t become free by looking for a new master.

    incorrect. I am advocating executing what policies are necessary in order to destroy certain aspects of traditional asian culture, and then to reconstruct them in a more positive manner. My ideas are unconventional yes, but they are a far cry from mindlessly trying to conform to the west. So far I have clearly and in detail described the purposes for given policies, its not as if I am just repeating tired cliches and empty platitudes. In case it is not already clear enough to you, I will explain this again. Multiculturalism and feminism tend to be bad news, they are bad policies, generally speaking. However, it is possible that multiculturalism and feminism are only bad in a western context, in an eastern context, multiculturalism and feminism may have positive effects; and at the very least multiculturalism and feminism could not run wild in asia in the same way that it does in the west due to asians being significantly less permissive and open minded. Either way, you are deliberately attempting to misrepresent my views, and its obvious that you have an ideological axe to grind against feminism, but so far you have not brought up any actual, logical and well thought out objections to my proposal that feminism (feminism to me is anything that would empower female ability for mate selection) is actually a pro-masculine eugenic force. If you want to have an actual discussion let me know, but I am not interested in talking over each others heads about ideological abstractions.

    This has concluded that you must be a troll. You seem to want Asian women to be be butch dykers, essentially, and believe this will be an overall step toward progress. Most mysteriously, that this will be a step toward masculinity, with the clear example of Sweden and every single country that has massively succumbed to feminism showing us that it only leads to even more effeminate men.

    Not necessarily, america is a pretty feminist country and men here seem pretty manly, much more so than in east asia which is a nominally “masculine” society. I think a more realistic idea of what goes on in feminist countries is that manly men become more manly and feminine men become more feminine. The whole trope about swedish men being effeminate may or may not be true in relevant ways. What you read on the news or on the internet and the reality on the ground might be quite different. Have you ever been to sweden? Do you have any personal experience with swedes? I haven’t had much, although I have met a handful of swedish guys (yeah not a huge sample size but whatever) and they seemed pretty masculine and quite well socially adjusted. I don’t think the relationship between feminism and effeminate men is quite as clear as how you are trying to act like it is. More importantly though is that I am predominately advocating empowering female mate selection. If this can be done without feminism then so be it. We should not make the mistake of unnecessarily conflating feminism with empowering female mate selection.

    If you’re not a troll, try to develop a more coherent thesis. Feminism will not help Korea, it’ll just make sure that it becomes as hollow culturally as the rest of Europe is rapidly racing to. Your conflation of stress with positivity isn’t wrong: things that shake us up do benefit us. But not by surrendering to them.

    I use feminism as shorthand for empowering female mate selection, no more and no less. If empowering female mate selection in east asia can be accomplished without all the loony feminist bells and whistles then all the better.

    There is no conflation here, nor did I ever state that the asian people had to surrender to anything, in fact that is the opposite of what I am saying and I think you are aware of this, but you are just pretending to be dense and misrepresent my stance in order to score cheap points. East asia benefits by rising up and reacting to stressful situations; this has been what I have been saying this entire time.

    You remind me of people who argue that Korea benefitted greatly and should have been more grateful of Japanese ownership. Quite literally, there are people who have looked at the increased number of rape babies fathered by Japanese occupiers and declared “Korean population increased! This was great for us!” Right then and there, you’re proof that feminism has done a great job at enmasculating Koreans.

    We should be logical. Korea suffered and also benefited as a result of japanese colonialism. Like anything in life, colonialism has its positive aspects and negative aspects. We should always consider things objectively and not be dictated by emotional or historical pleas.

    Read More
  104. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Daniel Chieh

    How would disenfranchising men and reorienting mate selection rights to females feminize us further? Explain this to me.
     
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/13/sweden-left-party-toilet-stand_n_1590572.html

    In this case I am correctly identifying that the best and most logical way to resolve this situation is via asian females
     
    You're incorrect. The fact that you keep claiming that you're correct is what makes me think you're a weird troll.

    You do not masculinize men by feminizing society. Your theory is ridiculous, and fundamentally rejected by just by any study of history. As a society, Asians are already "feminized" because we have a society that's overall more warlike. You want to know why white men are typically more masculine? Its nothing to do with early feminism in their society. It had everything to do with limited centralization of power, creating long periods of warfare, and for a long time, essentially accepting a much lower standard of living.

    You can see this effect anywhere. "Nonfunctioning systems" with high scarcity result in stiffening of traditional gender roles since they reinforce clan structure and basically try to organize along biological lines: this was true in the Middle East, in Africa, South America, in South Asia, etc. They have to develop a high level of tolerance for violence, strong selection for masculinity in men, while having a much lower standard of living and minimalization of individual freedom. Yes, even beyond Asian levels, because Asian levels of hierarchies expect stable rules that do not enforce along strength. Its basically a might-makes-right, removed even from customs of eldelry respect.

    This is absolute not what feminism encourages in a society. This is basically "toxic masculinity." If you want to encourage that, you need to basically have a failed society.

    You want to see what feminism will bring us eventually? Look at bonobos. Women in power show low preference for risk, and bring about a very static, low-violence but also low-ambition society. Its basically living death.

    I have lived in much of the world, including North Europe, where feminism has a very strong foothold. Trust me, Asia does not need more feminism and you will not like the results of having more of it. It will certainly not make for more masculine men. The solutions that "work" for Europe, even to the limited extent they work, do not work for us, and will not work for us. Our brains aren't even the same, and if Communism is any evidence, we take already bad ideas to ridiculously terrible conclusions and destroy ourselves with them in ways that the West could only fantasize with.

    PS: White men in China are only popular in China with a certain segment. Otherwise, as is typical, the money is the greatest aphordisiac.

    You do not masculinize men by feminizing society. Your theory is ridiculous, and fundamentally rejected by just by any study of history. As a society, Asians are already “feminized” because we have a society that’s overall more warlike. You want to know why white men are typically more masculine? Its nothing to do with early feminism in their society. It had everything to do with limited centralization of power, creating long periods of warfare, and for a long time, essentially accepting a much lower standard of living.

    I accept that parts of this thesis may be true, but I dont think its the entire case. There are numerous factors which influence sexual dimorphism/masculinity, of which what you stated is one. When it comes to increasing sexual dimorphism, there is more than one way to skin that cat. However your explanation completely ignores the role of female mate choice, which is a very basic biological concept. As I explained in my new post though, I essentially support empowering female mate selection because females will consistently select for manly men, meanwhile men will consistently select for feminine women. If we assume that sexual dimorphism is genetically mediated (and it is), then it is common sense that empowering female mate selection would eventually result in a more manly race. Likwise, I think you would be hardpressed to deny the fact that asian men have monopolized mate selection in east asia for thousands of years, as a result we have the current east asian physical and psychological template that we currently do. More importantly, beyond simply increasing sexual dimorphism/masculinity, I also advocate a stronger interplay between masculinity and femininity in asia which would create a more dynamic and creative culture (sexual desire can be transmuted to make terrific scientific/artistic/etc accomplishments. In my opinion, east asia lacks “creativity
    because it largely lacks sexual fire and a culture which is conducive to or at the very least not antagonistic to this drive). Currently east asia is pretty repressed and a quiet place, which is not necessarily bad, but east asia takes it too far. I feel it is this way as a result of weak interplay between masculinity and femininity in asia (IE masculinity overpowers everything and just makes everything a grind) As always, I advocate balance.

    You want to see what feminism will bring us eventually? Look at bonobos. Women in power show low preference for risk, and bring about a very static, low-violence but also low-ambition society. Its basically living death.

    I won’t say you are incorrect, but I won’t say you are correct either. Humans are humans and bonobos are bonobos. Lets not conflate apples for oranges.

    I have lived in much of the world, including North Europe, where feminism has a very strong foothold. Trust me, Asia does not need more feminism and you will not like the results of having more of it. It will certainly not make for more masculine men. The solutions that “work” for Europe, even to the limited extent they work, do not work for us, and will not work for us. Our brains aren’t even the same, and if Communism is any evidence, we take already bad ideas to ridiculously terrible conclusions and destroy ourselves with them in ways that the West could only fantasize with.

    My mistake was perhaps using feminism and assuming that it meant the same things to me as it does to you, or other posters here. Let me clearly and definitively state what I am advocating. I am advocating empowering female mate choice and encouraging female sexual agency in asia while simultaneous removing the male monopoly on sexual agency. Thats it, no more and no less. I care very little for all the assorted non-sense that often accompanies feminism as we know it.

    PS: White men in China are only popular in China with a certain segment. Otherwise, as is typical, the money is the greatest aphordisiac.

    lol, explain why white men are such a hit in economically developed countries like south korea and japan as well? When you say stuff like this you lose credibility, lets call a spade a spade and stop trying to rationalize the reality that is staring us all in the face. An average asian man cannot come to a western country and do the same thing as an average white man can do when he comes to asia, this is undeniable. Stop acting like money is the cause of this. The fact that a white man can come to any east asian country and clean up says a lot about our culture and its deficiencies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Last time I'm replying to you.

    I am advocating empowering female mate choice and encouraging female sexual agency in asia while simultaneous removing the male monopoly on sexual agency.

     

    Women have always had mate choice - if not for themselves, then usually through familial arrangements through their mothers. As it is, female mate choice in China is hardly limited and the BS that is feminism won't help it.

    lol, explain why white men are such a hit in economically developed countries like south korea and japan as well?
     
    Its when you say things like that when you lose credibility. I'm here in Shenzhen and its well known that while white men might have an advantage, its not that significant - plenty of "sexpats" come here trying to score with a teaching career and invariably return disappointed. That you have a different experience is more of an definition of your beliefs than anything else. In Japan, there are women known specifically as "gaijin hunters" who have clear preferences, but its basically a fetish. Its hardly an universal aspect.

    That the Chinese used to frequent Russian prostitutes until the economy recovered after Putin highly suggests that it is heavily related to wealth and status. South Asia and Greece also are experiencing the same issues. Its very heavily tied with wealth.


    As I explained in my new post though, I essentially support empowering female mate selection because females will consistently select for manly men, meanwhile men will consistently select for feminine women
     
    Your thesis is incorrect. All I can say is that if you actually lived abroad, you'll realize this. Women aren't a monolith, but the idea that they select for "manly men" in a context of feminism untrue. Women select for security. Selecting for men, even "manly men" is always a mistake because it reduces autonomy. In essence, they would select for a larger welfare state and "independence" which allows them not to have to rely on anyone in specific but rather an impersonal form of governance.

    In a lot of countries, this basically results in bonobo behavior which is accurate - they select for security by disempowering any forces seen as chaotic, including men.

    There's plenty of statistic evidence for this. Although not universally, women typically vote as a group against men(the reverse isn't true), women typically vote for a larger state, and women typically increase a huge number of liberal causes, all which are basically self-destructive if only from the financial perspective.

    Replying to you is weary because you're relying on a premise which is attractive("women select for manly men"), but is ultimately untrue in any effective sense. You're using a very limited context from what you've seen, basing it out of some self of ethnic self-hate and intentionally ignoring the actual empirical evidence when provided elsewhere.

    Oh, and perhaps I disagree on your opinion because I have a white wife and before, a mistress. I can strongly state the feminism does nothing to benefit me and can relate to that personally.

    Our actual problems as East Asians is a lack of curiousity and basically, a lack of creativity. Nothing will help that. Its probably just going to be our cross to bear.

  105. Dang, ya’ll Asians done learned how to write in some damn good English. Little laborious for my taste, but hey…

    Anyway, my 2 cents; an ex-girlfriend I once had, that ran an organic farm once told me something that stuck with me;

    “Truth” she said; “An citizen has two votes and neither of them is political. You vote with your wallet and your suitcases.” What she meant was that the vote in what is good for society is conducted by how the citizens spend their money, and where they want to live.

    So, do your countrymen in Soul, Beijing, Taipei and Tokyo really want to live in cities that are governed, comprised of, and totally inclusive of themselves, or do they want to have anchor babies and move to New York?

    The polls say that most of these proud, racially-aware Koreans and Chinese would give their eye teeth to immigrate to the land of the Knee-grows, fags, Muslims, Spics and rednecks. So, I guess they are voting with their suitcases.

    Hybrid vigor wins!

    Read More
  106. @Anon
    "Good point, if Asia isn’t getting enough, then maybe the US and Europe are getting too much. You can get too much of a good thing."

    Wrong. That's like saying cancer is good if you have little of it. It would be nuts to divide people into ones with good little cancer and ones with bad big cancer. Cancer is bad, small or big, because all little cancers turn into big cancers and fatal cancers.
    A person with little cancer will soon have big cancer. It is the logic of cancer. If allowed to grow, it never stops.

    Multi-culturalism is a cancer. It is an invasive and aggressive ideology and was designed to be such. It never ends. It keeps calling for more 'diversity', more PC, more minority privilege, and more suppression of native-majority identity and interests to accommodate the minority. It was largely designed by Jews to favor minority Jewish interests over majority gentile interests. It was also a means to increase gentile diversity so that Jewish elite minorities can play divide-and-rule.

    Now, no nation is totally homogeneous. Even seemingly homogeneous ones have some minorities. And even among the native majority, there is some genetic mixture. Even if Korea were all Korean, many Koreans would have some Chinese, Mongol, Manchu, etc blood.

    Some nations are quite diverse, like Iran. Such nations are usually the result of imperialism. Most peoples do not seek control under other people. It is usually forced. There is generally resistance against foreign domination, but if the domination lasts long enough, a kind of imperial nation is created. We see this in English rule over Scotland. Ireland almost became part of permanent Britain as well.

    Now, diversity is something all nations have to deal with. And since there's gonna be some degree of international migration, populations will alter over time. Even if Korea has zero immigration policy, the fact is some foreign workers there might marry a Korean and settle there. And Koreans will have to accept this.

    Multi-culturalism is about something very different. It is an agenda, an ideology that says a nation that is homogeneous is sick, evil, and wicked. It is diseased and must cure itself with diversity.
    Multi-culturalism pushes blind faith in diversity-as-a-good when there is so much evidence to the contrary. If diversity works so good, why did the USSR fall apart? Why did Yugoslavia fall apart? Why did the Ottoman World fall apart? And if diversity does such wonders, why are the native peoples of Latin America still under the rule of white elites? Wasn't diversity forced on them through force?

    Also, if diversity is so great, why did the Vietnamese force out the French? Why did Koreans want to be rid of Japanese rule? Empires are diverse. Nationalism seeks liberation from foreign rule. Diversity was once synonymous with Empire. The resistance against imperialism sought to end or reduce diversity by sending white or Japanese colonizers packing to return to their home nations.

    And there was greater peace around the world thanks to such process of liberation. But then, globalism said there should be massive global migrations of people. Mass demographic imperialism is supposedly the answer to all problems. But why? There is no clear answer why even though raw evidence shows that it leads to disasters.

    Multi-culturalism is an ideology based on blind faith.. Yet, it is cancerous and poisonous. It was meant to weaken and harm the native majority community. How do we know this? Well, Jews played a big role in concocting Multi-Culturalism, but they never practice it on Israel. It is always on gentile nations. Jews, who don't accept Syrian refugees, ask Japan and Korea to take them. The nerves! Jewish-controlled foreign policy created much of the mess in Middle East and North Africa, but Jews pressure ONLY European nations and US to take in refugees... but there is no pressure on Israel to take them. If anything, Israelis go to Europe to help refugees come to EU. We can guess as to why. Jews wanna depopulate parts of Muslim world and eventually push all the Palestinians there so they can have an Israel that is all Jewish.
    Multi-culturalism is for suckers. It is snake-oil.

    Now, if multi-culturalism had an iron rule that said 'diversity should end at 5%', it might be doable. But MC has no limits. It is cancerous. If France turns 20% non-white, Multi-culturalism will say MORE. When France turns 40% non-white, MC will call for MORE. When France turns 70% non-white, MC will still call for STILL MORE. It is a cancer.

    Globalized Koreans who call for MC will never know when to say STOP. Also, MC is a lie. Remember when white Americans were assured that change in immigration policy will not upset the demographic balance of the US? Well, what has happened? Now, the PC forces are gloating that US will turn majority non-white.

    MC was created by people who think and feel like Tim Wise. It is a virus, a poison, a cancer. It offers nice-sounding promises, but its goal is to overtake and kill the native host.

    MC may be appealing to people of all nations because the Exotic Solutions seems the easy fix. All nations have problems and difficulties. These are not easy to fix... so some people look to the Foreign Fix. It's like LOST HORIZON where some Shagri-La has all the answers. If some Easterners look to West for all the answers, some in the West exaggerate 'Eastern Wisdom'. Consider the hippies in 60s who were into India as the fountain of wisdom. Look at some Hollywood celebs who think Dalai Lama and Tibetan Buddhism offers all the answers. Now, it may be true that another culture has some good stuff lacking in one's own culture. The danger is leaping to the conclusion that the foreign culture must have all the answers. In fact, they have just as many problems. It's like some Americans, tired of Hollywood junk, overly idealize foreign cinema because they've seen the best of foreign movies. So, they think all foreign movies must be great when, in fact, 95% of them are totally worthless, even worse than Hollywood junk.

    Also, certain globalized indivduals want to feel better and morally superior. And multi-cultism makes for an easy way to feel superior to others of one's kind. So, white progs feel so 'superior' to 'Islamophobic whites' because they welcome Muslims. So much of white proggism is about 'virtue-signaling', as John Derbyshire said. Because national identities are being weakened, people seek new identity of 'virtue-sigaling'.
    And it seems this bug has spread to Koreans too. The Korean commenter who's for MC surely feels superior to other Koreans who oppose it. You see, those who oppose it are 'inbred inferior Koreans'. But he or she is a superior Korean because he or she wants to mix blood with superior foreigners with all the answers. A total phony.

    Multi-culturalism is a cancer. It is an invasive and aggressive ideology and was designed to be such. It never ends. It keeps calling for more ‘diversity’, more PC, more minority privilege, and more suppression of native-majority identity and interests to accommodate the minority. It was largely designed by Jews to favor minority Jewish interests over majority gentile interests. It was also a means to increase gentile diversity so that Jewish elite minorities can play divide-and-rule.

    I agree, anon said “Multiculturalism”, but I took it to mean Integration of (some) immigrants.

    Multiculturalism is a disastrous idea, but the “melting pot” idea is fine if it’s done carefully with a clear allegiance to a new national identity and no barriers to intermarriage. The US and Europe have benefited from the gradual evolution of their ethnic base along the lines that for example, France is majority ethnic French with some non-French ethnic input. Same as the UK, Germany or Russia. The key is full acceptance and integration of a smallish number of immigrants with the national ethos and majority ethnic group. Pushkin’s great grandfather was ethnically Black African and that worked out OK. He didn’t push for a Russian version of BLM.

    If immigrants only come for economic reasons and wish to ghettoize themselves, then their true status is “Foreign Resident” with a work permit and an entry and exit date, and no question of gaining nationality or working in government.

    Read More
  107. @anon
    Im korean and I know what 변태 means. You are obviously not grasping what I am saying if you think that my solution is simply about importing masculine men and even more feminine women, IE cuckold fantasy on steroids. Have you really bothered to read what I have been writing? Or have you just been skimming over the whole thing? If you disagree with me then just be straightup about it and say so, don't resort to these passive aggressive strawman games. I'll rehash the whole thing so that you understand it clearer:

    1.multiculturalism to break up/weaken the existing "stagnant" korean culture

    2.as a result of MC there will be more masculine cultures, this will serve the purpose of introducing a more extreme form of masculinity into korea, which will in turn spark a masculinity arms race, forcing local korean men to up their game. Increased cultural standards of masculinity will in turn act as new criteria for mate selection on behalf of females, which will in turn have a gradual eugenic effect. Hell, this doesn't even have to include african immigration, which is what I think most posters here are getting bent out of shape about. The immigration could be 100% white british and the culturally masculinizing effect I am talking about would be the same.

    3.I proposed feminism, not more feminine women. Feminism (IE empowering female ability to choose mates) is a no brainer if you want to pursue positive eugenics for male traits. The ideal solution is a culture where men and women have equal powers of mate selection (a culture based on romantic love as opposed to pragmatic love?), however this kind of solution takes a lot longer, and korea is too far slanted in the opposite direction away from masculinity; thus feminism would restore social/sexual balance to korea a lot faster than would the establishment of cultural notions of romantic love in korea. Finally, a major mistake that people here might make is that they would assume that feminism would permanently hold in korea, or in east asia for that matter, but I think a more likely assumption would be that feminism would be popular for a while and then it would burn out. If you are assuming that I am advocating a permanent state of feminism then you are wrong; I am only advocating a long enough period of feminism to where it would permanently influence cultural ideals regarding female mate selection.

    The irony of all of this is that the measures I am proposing have already been taking place the past 100 or so years in some shape or form in asia due to western imperialism/contact. They are nothing new, my ideas are just a more sentient and self aware version of preexisting trends.

    1.Replace multiculturalism with imperialism. I would argue that modern day notions and attitudes towards masculinity in east asia have been significantly influenced by direct and indirect contact with western imperialism, as well as with western culture and westerners themselves.

    2.As a result of western imperialism, feminism has been growing in leaps and bounds in asia over the past century; mate selection in east asia is significantly different than it was in my grandparents generation.

    So far, I feel like the changes that have occurred in the culture of east asia as a reaction to western imperialism/contact have done nothing but benefit the people and also technological advancement of east asia. This clear civilizational advancement is obvious and undeniable to anybody. The proposals I am making are merely a stronger step in this same direction. For all intents and purposes, asian people do not act, they react. In order for korea/east asia to become stronger (either on cultural level or a civilizational level) they have to be subjected to some kind of stimulus. They will never find the inner spark to change themselves, asian people are simply not restless enough for that.

    Finally I want to make it clear that I am not an apologist for western imperialism, or imperialism for that matter. I am merely making the case that imperialism, or anything that shakes up asia, is actually good for asia in the long run; and I dont mean this is the kind of abstract, wishy washy way either, I am talking about good for asia in ways that are concrete and obvious.

    Korea’s and the world’s experiment with Korean multi-racialism has progressed enough we can make some judgments about it already. Unsurprisingly, it tracks similar to America’s left/cultural Marxist/female empowerment/corporate domination/individual atomization/Jewish rhetorical leadership results. Outside of the fact the white males score better with Asian women than Asian men score with white women, there’s little to recommend the path America’s gone down. And dig under the surface a little and you see white women and what they have become in reaction. Reactive sex tours to Africa and the Caribbean. LOL. And obviously, no amount of social experimentation will make Asian men and black women good with each other. Although, I don’t hold anything against the unicorn pairings of Asian male/black female couples. And we’re talking about sex pairings here- a sacred thing, a core concern to say the least. Open Korean society to white men, you also inevitably open Korean society to the world. You don’t get a choice in this. Some “obvious” musings on the net about female/racial selection and the way things should turn out are easily dismissed by the equally obvious observations of what white Americans have become socially.

    Read More
  108. @anon

    You do not masculinize men by feminizing society. Your theory is ridiculous, and fundamentally rejected by just by any study of history. As a society, Asians are already “feminized” because we have a society that’s overall more warlike. You want to know why white men are typically more masculine? Its nothing to do with early feminism in their society. It had everything to do with limited centralization of power, creating long periods of warfare, and for a long time, essentially accepting a much lower standard of living.
     
    I accept that parts of this thesis may be true, but I dont think its the entire case. There are numerous factors which influence sexual dimorphism/masculinity, of which what you stated is one. When it comes to increasing sexual dimorphism, there is more than one way to skin that cat. However your explanation completely ignores the role of female mate choice, which is a very basic biological concept. As I explained in my new post though, I essentially support empowering female mate selection because females will consistently select for manly men, meanwhile men will consistently select for feminine women. If we assume that sexual dimorphism is genetically mediated (and it is), then it is common sense that empowering female mate selection would eventually result in a more manly race. Likwise, I think you would be hardpressed to deny the fact that asian men have monopolized mate selection in east asia for thousands of years, as a result we have the current east asian physical and psychological template that we currently do. More importantly, beyond simply increasing sexual dimorphism/masculinity, I also advocate a stronger interplay between masculinity and femininity in asia which would create a more dynamic and creative culture (sexual desire can be transmuted to make terrific scientific/artistic/etc accomplishments. In my opinion, east asia lacks "creativity
    because it largely lacks sexual fire and a culture which is conducive to or at the very least not antagonistic to this drive). Currently east asia is pretty repressed and a quiet place, which is not necessarily bad, but east asia takes it too far. I feel it is this way as a result of weak interplay between masculinity and femininity in asia (IE masculinity overpowers everything and just makes everything a grind) As always, I advocate balance.

    You want to see what feminism will bring us eventually? Look at bonobos. Women in power show low preference for risk, and bring about a very static, low-violence but also low-ambition society. Its basically living death.
     
    I won't say you are incorrect, but I won't say you are correct either. Humans are humans and bonobos are bonobos. Lets not conflate apples for oranges.

    I have lived in much of the world, including North Europe, where feminism has a very strong foothold. Trust me, Asia does not need more feminism and you will not like the results of having more of it. It will certainly not make for more masculine men. The solutions that “work” for Europe, even to the limited extent they work, do not work for us, and will not work for us. Our brains aren’t even the same, and if Communism is any evidence, we take already bad ideas to ridiculously terrible conclusions and destroy ourselves with them in ways that the West could only fantasize with.
     
    My mistake was perhaps using feminism and assuming that it meant the same things to me as it does to you, or other posters here. Let me clearly and definitively state what I am advocating. I am advocating empowering female mate choice and encouraging female sexual agency in asia while simultaneous removing the male monopoly on sexual agency. Thats it, no more and no less. I care very little for all the assorted non-sense that often accompanies feminism as we know it.

    PS: White men in China are only popular in China with a certain segment. Otherwise, as is typical, the money is the greatest aphordisiac.
     

    lol, explain why white men are such a hit in economically developed countries like south korea and japan as well? When you say stuff like this you lose credibility, lets call a spade a spade and stop trying to rationalize the reality that is staring us all in the face. An average asian man cannot come to a western country and do the same thing as an average white man can do when he comes to asia, this is undeniable. Stop acting like money is the cause of this. The fact that a white man can come to any east asian country and clean up says a lot about our culture and its deficiencies.

    Last time I’m replying to you.

    I am advocating empowering female mate choice and encouraging female sexual agency in asia while simultaneous removing the male monopoly on sexual agency.

    Women have always had mate choice – if not for themselves, then usually through familial arrangements through their mothers. As it is, female mate choice in China is hardly limited and the BS that is feminism won’t help it.

    lol, explain why white men are such a hit in economically developed countries like south korea and japan as well?

    Its when you say things like that when you lose credibility. I’m here in Shenzhen and its well known that while white men might have an advantage, its not that significant – plenty of “sexpats” come here trying to score with a teaching career and invariably return disappointed. That you have a different experience is more of an definition of your beliefs than anything else. In Japan, there are women known specifically as “gaijin hunters” who have clear preferences, but its basically a fetish. Its hardly an universal aspect.

    That the Chinese used to frequent Russian prostitutes until the economy recovered after Putin highly suggests that it is heavily related to wealth and status. South Asia and Greece also are experiencing the same issues. Its very heavily tied with wealth.

    As I explained in my new post though, I essentially support empowering female mate selection because females will consistently select for manly men, meanwhile men will consistently select for feminine women

    Your thesis is incorrect. All I can say is that if you actually lived abroad, you’ll realize this. Women aren’t a monolith, but the idea that they select for “manly men” in a context of feminism untrue. Women select for security. Selecting for men, even “manly men” is always a mistake because it reduces autonomy. In essence, they would select for a larger welfare state and “independence” which allows them not to have to rely on anyone in specific but rather an impersonal form of governance.

    In a lot of countries, this basically results in bonobo behavior which is accurate – they select for security by disempowering any forces seen as chaotic, including men.

    There’s plenty of statistic evidence for this. Although not universally, women typically vote as a group against men(the reverse isn’t true), women typically vote for a larger state, and women typically increase a huge number of liberal causes, all which are basically self-destructive if only from the financial perspective.

    Replying to you is weary because you’re relying on a premise which is attractive(“women select for manly men”), but is ultimately untrue in any effective sense. You’re using a very limited context from what you’ve seen, basing it out of some self of ethnic self-hate and intentionally ignoring the actual empirical evidence when provided elsewhere.

    Oh, and perhaps I disagree on your opinion because I have a white wife and before, a mistress. I can strongly state the feminism does nothing to benefit me and can relate to that personally.

    Our actual problems as East Asians is a lack of curiousity and basically, a lack of creativity. Nothing will help that. Its probably just going to be our cross to bear.

    Read More
  109. Outside of the fact the white males score better with Asian women than Asian men score with white women,

    Hey, where’s Twinkie with all his Korean-Alpha stats?

    Read More
  110. What’s your opinion about the role of Christianity in all of this?

    The problem is not so much Christianity as post-Christianity, i.e., an ideology that has evolved out of Christianity and that has largely replaced it. I suppose you could call it “universalism” or “human rights-ism.”

    Even if Jesus had never existed, something like Christianity would have developed in the Roman Empire. This was an empire that demanded two things from its subjects: renunciation of violence as a means of personal advancement, and submission of smaller collective identities (the family, the clan, the ethny) to the higher universal authority of Rome. Consequently, Roman civilization favored pacifism and universalism, and these qualities became embedded in its spiritual environment.

    We see a similar evolution of religion in East Asia with Buddhism, although the Chinese Empire, unlike the Roman Empire, largely remained an outgrowth of its founding people. The Romans tried to Romanize their conquered peoples, but ended up creating a new universalistic culture, and it was this culture that favored the rise of Christianity.

    I am advocating executing what policies are necessary in order to destroy certain aspects of traditional asian culture, and then to reconstruct them in a more positive manner.

    Most experiments fail to produce their anticipated results. Sometimes, this is because not all of the conditions are in place. Sometimes, this is because the theory sucks.

    So you should start with a small number of guinea pigs and then scale up if your experiment turns out O.K. If you start with an entire country (e.g., South Korea), you won’t have a backup copy in case things go wrong. Well, you will have the North Koreans, and I guess they’ll be more than happy to take over …

    Anyway, you seem to have forgotten one detail. This experiment is not in your hands. It’s in the hands of the South Korean government. All you can do is buy popcorn and watch it happen.

    If you want to know what your government is planning for you and your children, just click on this link: http://thumb.mt.co.kr/06/2015/12/2015122721551652955_1.jpg

    Yes, this is the South Korea that your children will inherit. Nice, isn’t it, to live in a democratic country that carries out the will of the people …

    Read More
    • Agree: Daniel Chieh
    • Replies: @German_reader
    Thank you for your reply. I agree that something like Christianity would probably eventually have evolved in the Roman empire anyway. But to me at least this means that in many way Christianity is a religion more suited to an empire...it's a bad fit for a modern democratic nation state (but then those will probably soon be a thing of the past anyway).
    , @anon
    so far, all events in east asia from the 19th century onwards show that east asian countries have a tremendous resiliency and capacity for regeneration; I am fairly confident that south korea's embrace of multiculturalism will probably be the same. Could I be wrong? Of course, but only time will tell.

    Secondly, I think the trend of farmers importing wives from south east asian countries is not really a bad thing. As it is, korean culture has a strong autistic/socially uptight streak; the importation of lots of freewheeling, highly social and comparatively laid back cambodian, thai and filipino wives is not a bad thing at all. Korean culture could definitely use these qualities more, both through cultural osmosis but also through acquiring the genes that lead to these personality traits as well. As it currently stands, korea and east asia are culturally (perhaps genetically as well) unbalanced and overly focused on the intellectual, grinding, status seeking side of life; it would not hurt east asian culture at all to become a little bit more laidback, social, frivolous and sensual. As the infamous movie quote goes: "All work and no play makes jack a dull boy"

    The only potential problem is that multiculturalism could take off and become uncontrollable in korea but I detailed why I think that will probably not happen in a previous comment. (Differences in the racial psychology of east asians precludes east asians from ever becoming truly passionate about multiculturalism) Most importantly, this is a trend that is already taking place, might as well enjoy the ride; I don't think it will turn out nearly as disasterously as people are thinking. Just as experiments often fail, so do predictions.
  111. @Che Guava
    This is a pretty good article.

    Minjuk (as another commenter said, 民族), really means 'ethnicity', I would guess it is used in that way against kokumin or guomin, kuomin, the national people, the equivalent in Japan and Taiwan, as a reaction against the Japanese colonial period. You will still see many institutions with kookmin, the Korean equivalent in their names.

    The meaning of minjuk is a little like La Raza in the USA, except the Koreans are not invading, but at home.

    Must sleeping, but final point is that Korea and Vietnam have much in common. The language of the latter is grammatically from Chinese, that of Korea is not, but much vocabulary is.

    Both have many cognate words from China.

    Both also have a history of obeying or rejecting Chinese influence, always being on the edge in that.

    They also have similar tales from times of independence to losing it, particularly of romantic loyalty, so in that case, it is beyond phenotypic similarity, but also a similar background in culture.

    That was my penultimate point. Although they do none of the hideous things of Muslim invaders, some of the Korean protestant young try to vandalise Buddhist temples, so the latter require special protection near the cities.

    That is very ugly! Surely, a combination of influence from U.S. parent churches and western pop 'culture'.

    ” The language of the latter is grammatically from Chinese, that of Korea is not, but much vocabulary is.”

    Vietnamese is not Sino-Tibetan – it’s Austroasiatic.

    Read More
  112. “In my opinion, east asia lacks “creativity
    because it largely lacks sexual fire and a culture which is conducive to or at the very least not antagonistic to this drive). ”

    It’s your opinion only because you’re ignorant – the region lays claim to the greatest traditions of letters and fine arts in the world, as well as the best modern movies and the only viable export culture outside of the Anglosphere – see the sheer abundance of wapanese and Koreaboos throughout the West.

    Read More
    • Replies: @German_reader
    I have to agree with this (at least in part, I'm not qualified to judge East Asia's traditions of letters and fine arts)...I'm not much interested in it myself, but at the level of popular culture East Asia has enormous appeal for many Westerners (anime, manga, certain genres of movies etc.). Maybe this will eventually be true for high culture as well, there was a lot of interest in and admiration of China among Enlightenment thinkers, maybe something like this could happen again.
  113. “The fact that a white man can come to any east asian country and clean up says a lot about our culture and its deficiencies.”

    From what I’ve seen in mainland China, it’s mainly low hanging fruit or apples from the bottom of the barrel. In Shanghai, the gormless foreigner with the unattractive local girl is a common trope, and the source of much mirth for the Chinese.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anon

    From what I’ve seen in mainland China, it’s mainly low hanging fruit or apples from the bottom of the barrel. In Shanghai, the gormless foreigner with the unattractive local girl is a common trope, and the source of much mirth for the Chinese.
     
    This is a common refrain of white nationalists on the internet who always claim that black guys only get fat and ugly white women; but of course the reality on the ground is different. The truth of the matter is that yes, lots of black guys only get fat and ugly white women, but there are also lots of black guys that are hooking up with primo white girls. Many more so than white nationalists would like to believe; thus they console themselves with sour grapes. Unfortunately, It is much the same with asian naysayers who like to act like white guys only get bottom of the barrel girls in asia; lets dispense with that falsehood shall we? The truth of the matter is that lots of white guys do get low hanging fruit/bottom barrel girls in asia, but lots of white guys also get very high quality girls as well. And the white guys that do do well in asia do very very well indeed. Like it or not, these things actually happen, and they are not that uncommon. Thus I imagine that the chinese guys laughing at these losers are probably doing it as a way of dealing with the much more sobering reality that there are white guys out there that are actually killing it with quality women in china, much in the same way that white nationalists do when it comes to black men and high quality white women. Either way, I believe for this kind of situation, the appropriate response is to look at the situation dispassionately and objectively and consider the actual truth of the matter; only by forcing ourselves to look at the gritty reality can we begin to come up with actual solutions. You can't address a problem if you keep denying it.
  114. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    It seems most Koreans don’t care about their race, culture, history, and nation.
    Recent globo-news say 80% of Koreans say they want to emigrate, give up Korean citizenship and identity, and become something else. They want to become ‘American’, take on Western names. Korean parents don’t want their children to grow up Korean. They want their children to grow up as ‘American’, ‘Canadian’, ‘Australian’, or ‘New Zealander’. They don’t want to preserve the identity, heritage, and history of Korea. They’ve given up on the idea of ‘minjok’. So, Koreans are not unique. They can go elsewhere and instantly un-korean themselves into ‘Americans’ or ‘Canadians’. And any number of foreigners can come to Korea and become instant-new-koreans.

    There are signs that Korons look at their own race and culture as inferior. For instance, Korean women get plastic surgery to look white. According to youtube news, South Korea gets MORE plastic surgery than any other nation. Something like 25% of women got it. They dye their hair to look blonde or brunette… apparently because they are ashamed of the hair color given to them by their ancestors.

    [MORE]

    Maybe Koreans look at old photos of their parents, grandparents, and ancestors and feel shame because the people are not ‘hip’ and ‘cool’. Since Korean kids grow up from young age to K-pop stars who try to look ‘white’ and act ‘black’ and Japanese anime where all the characters are western-looking, blonde or brunette, or long-legged, it could be that Korean kids grow up to feel shame. (Maybe part of the reason for welcoming people from poorer Asian nations is it gives Koreans a chance to feel superior to them. It is compensation for feeling inferior to the West. “We are shorter than Americans but taller than Vietnamese and Cambodians.”)
    So, Koreans try to imitate rappers, get tattoos, get piercings, and etc. The more educated Koreans become professors or journalists and just ape Western PC without a single original thought. (I see more Asian journalists and academics, but everything they say is parroting what they were taught by Jewish or white professors. Many Asians even adopt ‘white guilt’ and overly sympathize with blacks as if it is also a yellow burden.) Or they get plastic surgery or change hair color. Or mix race with ‘superior’ races. Given that good many American men got Korean brides, it seems Korean women see whites and blacks as superior and want to go with them. As Korean men are rejected by their own women, they have no choice but to marry women from poor backward nations like Philippines and Burma.

    Given recent trends, one may surmise Koreans want to race-mix because they want ‘superior’ genes. Korean women see Korean men as inferior and want to mate with superior men who are taller, more handsome. Korean women don’t like Korean men and don’t want marry someone who looks like their father, likely shorter than foreign men. And they don’t want to have inferior Korean sons. They want to have children with white men and have taller sons with western features. Or they want to have sons with black men because a half-black will be stronger, more muscular, more athletic, and have bigger penises. And it seems increasing numbers of Korean families feel flattered to have their kid marry into the superior race. There was an article in NYT about how Korean family was delighted that their daughter was marrying a German. It was like moving up the racial scale. The idea of being accepted by the superior German was happy. Generally, it seems Korean women marry up, whereas Korean men marry down. This is understandable given differential in sexual market value between Asian men and Asian women under globalism. Asian women, seen as feminine, as desired by men of all races. Asian men, seen as weak soy-boys and gimps, are undesired by women of all races, including increasing number of Asian women who want superior men. So, Korean men, rejected by Korean women and having poor choices with white/black women, marry down by looking for brides from poor Asian nations where women will marry out of desperation for better material life.

    It could Korean men love white women who are seen as superior in beauty; it is certainly the case that lots of black men prefer white women over black ones. Given the popularity of western culture in Asian, maybe Korean men want white wives and want to Eurasian kids with bigger eyes. They might see Korean women as short-limbed, flat-faced, and slanty-eyed. Or if Korean men can’t have white women, they opt for Korean women with plastic surgery and blonde-dyed hair that makes them semi-white: the illusion of having a white woman.
    Korean women have much better chance at mating with foreigners because globalism values Asian women as feminine while disregarding Asian men as unmanly. This is why American men go to Korea to find wives, but almost NO American woman goes to Asia to find husbands. This is why sizable number of Korean women marry American men whereas most women who marry Korean men are from poor nations. Only desperate and poor women will marry Korean men who are seen as inferior in the manly department.

    Part of the reason why so many Korean men marry Asian women from poor nations may be due to too many Korean women dreaming of finding a superior white husband or black husband. Or she dreams of marrying a Korean-American guy who will take her away from Korea to America where she can have bigger house and cars.

    One thing for sure, ‘interracial’ marriage in Korea is not the product of some noble ideal of racial equality. It is due to Korean women preferring American men as superior to Korean men, and it’s about Korean men settling for women from poor nations because of rejection by Korean women. But Koreans are too ashamed to admit this fact. Instead, they are cowards who hide behind Political Correctness and Multi-Culturalist rhetoric to prettify what is really happening. Race-mixing by Koreans is not about equality. It is about racial inequality under globalist pressure. In the past when Korea was closed off, almost all Koreans married Koreans, like almost all Japanese married Japanese. Also, as marriages were arranged, neither men nor women had choice. They married as matched by parents and elders. And then, in the modern era, Korean men and women caught up to modern Japan. And men and women got married on the basis of individual choice. But as Korea was still all Korean and very nationalist, almost all Koreans married other Koreans. But under globalist pressure, Koreans can travel more or emigrate. Also, Korea is filling up with foreigners as workers or immigrants. So, sexual choice has gone from national to global. And this means Korean women has great advantage over Korean men. We see the same thing in Japan. Asian women have global market value, Asian men do not. So, we see more Asian women marrying or mating up, and more Asian men marrying or mating down. In Japan also, as more globalized Japanese women hanker for white men or black men, many Japanese men have lost sexual confidence and settle for poor women from other Asian nations. Why would it be any different in Korea that is even more eager to be globalized?

    As Koreans have lost their sense of culture, history, and heritage, they don’t see any value in living in Korea and preserving their race and culture. They’ve become like deracinated Europeans. But it’s worse. Europeans don’t see themselves as racially inferior. In contrast, Koreans almost certainly do. Why preserve an inferior race? News stories on plastic surgery in Korea(and Asia in general) indicate that Koreans have among the worst self-image in the world. They feel ugliest, which is why Korean women get the most plastic surgery than any other nation. A people who feel ugly will not want to preserve itself. Also, Korean women who get plastic surgery to look white means they want white husbands and white-looking children with Western names like ‘Alvin’ and ‘Jay Caspian’ or ‘Jeanne’.

    Also, Koreans see their own culture as backward and ‘less evolved’. Korean Christians worship a foreign god, and secular Koreans worship ‘Western Values’ like ‘same sex marriage’ and ‘interracial diversity’. Koreans see their own culture as inferior and ‘less evolved’, as something despicable. So, why should they care about preserving it?
    Most Asian-Americans seem to feel that Asia is backward and must follow and obey the superior West. If West has ‘gay marriage’, then the East must conform and follow like a dog. Never question or challenge the West. Asia must be monkey see, monkey do.
    So, it’s not surprising that Koreans don’t mind abandoning their identity/culture and going to America to become ‘American’, a person of superior race and culture. While ‘progressive globalism’ talks about ‘equality’, it’s about New Hierarchy. After all, Americanism is about worshiping strong athletic musical black males with large penises. American Pop Culture is all about the Superior Negro of music, sports, and sex. We see in it advertising that idealize black men and white women. So, this Afro-Western Ideal affects the East too since Asians are so conformist and imitative. Since the West dominates globalists, the East must follow and obey.

    Indeed, the rise of interracial marriage in Korea is due to racial hierarchy. Korean men do not really want to marry Vietnamese or Filipino women who are dirt-poor and don’t speak Korean. They marry them because they have no choice. Why? Because Korean women see Korean men as racially & sexually inferior and refuse to marry them. So, Korean women reject Korean men, and so Korean men have to find women from poor nations. And those women are not marrying Korean men out of love but out of desperation. They wanna escape poverty, so they’ll marry even men they don’t love. It is not the story of love but of loss. Korean men lost their own women, and poor women leave their own nations to live with Korean men(whom they don’t love) for better food and housing. They are essentially brides-as-whores.

    Korean women pretend to be ‘progressive’ and about ‘equality’, but their reason for rejecting Korean men is based on a sense of racial hierarchy. As Korea is globalized, Korean women come under the same pressures of sexual dynamics that sweep across the globe. For instance, the freedom of sexual choice hasn’t been good for black women, and this is why many educated middle class black women are single. Since black women are seen as less feminine and gross — even by black men who are into jungle fever for white women –, they remain single and without husband. Global sex culture favors asian women over black women and favors white men over asian men.

    Korean women are globalized and now compare Asian men with non-Asian men, and they see non-Asian men as superior. And that could be why they hold off for marriage with possible foreign men. The big romantic dream of most Korean woman could be to be saved by a White Knight from America who will marry her and take her to America where she will have half-white kids without slanty eyes. Some Korean women(especially those immersed in rap culture) are into jungle fever and into black men. Meanwhile, many Korean men go without women. As time passes and Asia becomes ever more globalized, it could well be the case that Korean women will marry Korean men ONLY IF they are rich enough, and this will put tremendous pressure on Korean men to compete to make money.
    But then, with increasing numbers of women in the workforce, there will be even fiercer competition for Korean men to to gain success. Therefore, many men will fail and commit suicide. In current Korea, it appears many men are so frustrated that they settle for foreign brides because Korean women look down on them as inferior and reject them.

    Interracialism was never about equality. It was always about rejecting the opposite sex of one’s race as inferior and going with the opposite sex of another race as superior. Indeed, interracial patterns bear this out. Notice that almost all black-Asian pairings are black male and Asian female. Why? Because Black men see Asian-ness as feminine and submissive, whereas Asian women see black men as bigger and more manly and superior to wimpy Asian males.
    Indeed, notice all the interracial culture in Japan that has black men having sex with Japanese women. Now, there maybe Asian men doing black women, but my guess is that for every yellow guy doing black girl, there are 100o black guys doing yellow girls.

    The aljazeera story of this guys in informative. He is FLEEING from his own country and wants to raise his son as an un-Korean, an American. He sees his nation not as homeland but as prison to escape from forever and forget.

    http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/101east/2016/12/fleeing-south-korea-161228075711093.html

    He doesn’t care about his son preserving his race, culture, history, etc. He is purely materialistic. He wants better material life. So, Korean thinks his race and culture are dispensable and hardly worth keeping IF he can find a better material life somewhere else. (One thing that is ‘Korean’ or ‘Confucian’ about him is that he is willing to sacrifice his good job as doctor for a better life for his son. That parental concern for children is more a Chinese-Korean-Japanese-Confucian thing than a Western thing. But such ‘Asian-ness’ seems short-sighted. After all, even if his ‘sacrifice’ will offer better material life for his children, they will likely grow up to forget the identity, language, and culture of their ancestors. And no identity and culture can be preserved this way. So, there is a paradox here. The father’s concern for his children is ‘Korean’ or ‘Asian’ in the Confucian sense, but this act of parental devotion removes the children from their ancestral homeland & culture and raises them in another nation where they will have an entirely different identity and set of loyalties.) So, a globo-Korean is someone who will give up thousands of yrs of history for bigger car and bigger house, for his kids if not necessarily for himself. Globo-Korean parent’s message to his kids seem to be: “Forget your own race, culture, and history IF you can go to the West and live in a bigger house and drive fancier car.” A globo-Korean father will give up his kids to foreign mates if he can have better material life in the US.

    Koreans bitch and whine about social pressure in Korea, but the reason why there is so much pressure is because the very people who complain incessantly about the pressure are themselves total materialists who only care about status, money, and etc. And even though they say they want to FLEE Korea and go to America for easier life, it is really for more money, at least for their kids. What about their kids losing identity, culture, language, and etc? They don’t care because they see Korean-ness as inferior and hardly worth preserving. All they care about is materialism.

    It’s ironic. Koreans bitch and complain about how Japanese tried to eradicate Korean identity and culture. But Koreans are now doing it to themselves. They do it through plastic surgery and hair-dyeing. Japanese forced Koreans to change names to Japanese onese, but they didn’t force Koreans to change their looks. But now, Koreans feel that their physical features bestowed by their ancestors are so ugly that they must be altered through surgery or hair dye… or by race-mixing.

    Koreans worship mixed-raced Koreans, esp with whites and blacks, as superior. Eurasian kids are generally taller and have western features. And Blasian kids are bigger, stronger, and more manly and even in NFL. In contrast, pure-blooded Koreans are seen as ugly, weak, and inferior. Korean women feel ugly and go for plastic surgery and hair-dyeing. Korean men desperately ape black rappers in the hope that acting ‘ghetto’ and worshiping NBA stars will make them ‘cool and sexy’ too even though no one cares about them. Indeed, globalism has made even Korean women look down on Korean men as ‘losers’.

    Koreans accuse Japanese of trying to erase Korean identity and names, but Koreans are happy to lose their identity and become ‘Americans’ or ‘Canadians’. They are happy to throw away 1ooos of yrs of identity. And 80% of Koreans say they wanna leave Korea permanently and become something else. And majority of Korean women want to marry non-Korean men and mix blood. So, they are more eager to erase Koreanness. The great irony is that what Japanese tried to do was NOTHING compared to what Koreans do to themselves. Koreans accuse Japanese of trying to compromise Korean-ness, but surely even the Japanese never went so far as Koreans are doing it to themselves as the globo-collaborators of the US empire that would prefer to turn Korea, Philippines, Taiwan, and Japan into something like Hawaii or Puerto Rico.

    Koreans even got rid of the meaning of minjok, a concept without which they are nothing. Just think about it. North Koreans are totally different from South Koreans in politics, economics, education, alliances, and etc. Yet, every Nork is just as Korea as a real Koron in the South. Why? Because of common ethnicity rooted in blood and history. But the South have given up on this, so it will fill up with ‘new Koreans’ from other nations who feel zero affinity with North Koreans. If a bunch of Filipinos come to SK and become ‘new Koreans’, why would they feel any affinity with North Koreans? Even as ‘new Koreans’, they will feel more affinity with Filipinos in Philippines. Also, look at overseas Chinese. They’ve been in South East Asian nations for a long time. Even even as ‘Malaysians’ and ‘Indonesians’, they don’t really identify with the native populations. As SK fills up with Chinese as ‘new Koreans’, the chances are that these Chinese ‘new koreans’ will continue to feel closer to China, a truly great civilization, than to Korea, a culturally insignificant nation that just made some money selling smart phones.

    Korean women all want to become white, marry white men or black men, and have Eurasian kids. They feel inferior as Koreans. And Korean men are rejected by Korean women and must find foreign brides from poor nations who don’t speak Korean. Korean campaign of self-erasure goes far beyond what the Japanese ever tried to do.
    So, globalist sex culture in Korea has led to the women going ‘me so horny, me so horny’ and the men going ‘me so lonely, me so lonely’(or ‘ronri’ if Japanese).

    Thus, globalism has turned SK into a nation of self-erasure.

    Read More
  115. @Marc Zhang
    "In my opinion, east asia lacks “creativity
    because it largely lacks sexual fire and a culture which is conducive to or at the very least not antagonistic to this drive). "

    It's your opinion only because you're ignorant - the region lays claim to the greatest traditions of letters and fine arts in the world, as well as the best modern movies and the only viable export culture outside of the Anglosphere - see the sheer abundance of wapanese and Koreaboos throughout the West.

    I have to agree with this (at least in part, I’m not qualified to judge East Asia’s traditions of letters and fine arts)…I’m not much interested in it myself, but at the level of popular culture East Asia has enormous appeal for many Westerners (anime, manga, certain genres of movies etc.). Maybe this will eventually be true for high culture as well, there was a lot of interest in and admiration of China among Enlightenment thinkers, maybe something like this could happen again.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    "I’m not much interested in it myself, but at the level of popular culture East Asia has enormous appeal for many Westerners (anime, manga, certain genres of movies etc.)."

    I think that stuff is cultish fandom.

    Most Americans are not into anime and manga.

    Hong Kong action movies were in vogue at one time, but it was a cult cinema thing, not a mainstream thing.

    That said, there are figures like Tarantino who act as a bridge to sub-cultures. I think he introduced many Americans to trash 70s movies and trash asian cinema(in KILL BILL which is awful).
  116. @Peter Frost
    What’s your opinion about the role of Christianity in all of this?

    The problem is not so much Christianity as post-Christianity, i.e., an ideology that has evolved out of Christianity and that has largely replaced it. I suppose you could call it "universalism" or "human rights-ism."

    Even if Jesus had never existed, something like Christianity would have developed in the Roman Empire. This was an empire that demanded two things from its subjects: renunciation of violence as a means of personal advancement, and submission of smaller collective identities (the family, the clan, the ethny) to the higher universal authority of Rome. Consequently, Roman civilization favored pacifism and universalism, and these qualities became embedded in its spiritual environment.

    We see a similar evolution of religion in East Asia with Buddhism, although the Chinese Empire, unlike the Roman Empire, largely remained an outgrowth of its founding people. The Romans tried to Romanize their conquered peoples, but ended up creating a new universalistic culture, and it was this culture that favored the rise of Christianity.

    I am advocating executing what policies are necessary in order to destroy certain aspects of traditional asian culture, and then to reconstruct them in a more positive manner.

    Most experiments fail to produce their anticipated results. Sometimes, this is because not all of the conditions are in place. Sometimes, this is because the theory sucks.

    So you should start with a small number of guinea pigs and then scale up if your experiment turns out O.K. If you start with an entire country (e.g., South Korea), you won't have a backup copy in case things go wrong. Well, you will have the North Koreans, and I guess they'll be more than happy to take over ...

    Anyway, you seem to have forgotten one detail. This experiment is not in your hands. It's in the hands of the South Korean government. All you can do is buy popcorn and watch it happen.

    If you want to know what your government is planning for you and your children, just click on this link: http://thumb.mt.co.kr/06/2015/12/2015122721551652955_1.jpg

    Yes, this is the South Korea that your children will inherit. Nice, isn't it, to live in a democratic country that carries out the will of the people ...

    Thank you for your reply. I agree that something like Christianity would probably eventually have evolved in the Roman empire anyway. But to me at least this means that in many way Christianity is a religion more suited to an empire…it’s a bad fit for a modern democratic nation state (but then those will probably soon be a thing of the past anyway).

    Read More
  117. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @German_reader
    I have to agree with this (at least in part, I'm not qualified to judge East Asia's traditions of letters and fine arts)...I'm not much interested in it myself, but at the level of popular culture East Asia has enormous appeal for many Westerners (anime, manga, certain genres of movies etc.). Maybe this will eventually be true for high culture as well, there was a lot of interest in and admiration of China among Enlightenment thinkers, maybe something like this could happen again.

    “I’m not much interested in it myself, but at the level of popular culture East Asia has enormous appeal for many Westerners (anime, manga, certain genres of movies etc.).”

    I think that stuff is cultish fandom.

    Most Americans are not into anime and manga.

    Hong Kong action movies were in vogue at one time, but it was a cult cinema thing, not a mainstream thing.

    That said, there are figures like Tarantino who act as a bridge to sub-cultures. I think he introduced many Americans to trash 70s movies and trash asian cinema(in KILL BILL which is awful).

    Read More
    • Replies: @Daniel Chieh
    Form my empirical knowledge, anime is almost as popular with video games, making it a huge segment of popularity. That said, I have my issues with anime that it no longer seems to be attempting much in the way of originality. Most shows are copies of one another, or with significant overlaps.

    There's very little effort at creativity. There's a very clear effort at monetization.

    This is generally true of almost all modern media, though, I feel.
  118. @Anon
    "I’m not much interested in it myself, but at the level of popular culture East Asia has enormous appeal for many Westerners (anime, manga, certain genres of movies etc.)."

    I think that stuff is cultish fandom.

    Most Americans are not into anime and manga.

    Hong Kong action movies were in vogue at one time, but it was a cult cinema thing, not a mainstream thing.

    That said, there are figures like Tarantino who act as a bridge to sub-cultures. I think he introduced many Americans to trash 70s movies and trash asian cinema(in KILL BILL which is awful).

    Form my empirical knowledge, anime is almost as popular with video games, making it a huge segment of popularity. That said, I have my issues with anime that it no longer seems to be attempting much in the way of originality. Most shows are copies of one another, or with significant overlaps.

    There’s very little effort at creativity. There’s a very clear effort at monetization.

    This is generally true of almost all modern media, though, I feel.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anon
    Manga and anime have been utter crap for yrs.

    Japanese manga developed in 60s and 70s from artists who wanted to make movies but couldn't. So, they told their stories in comic book form. These were really like movie storyboards, and some were quite good.

    This is damn good story, and I'd love to see a movie version of it:

    http://www.mangareader.net/alisa-of-the-silver-hair/1

    So, the original manga artists were inspired by novels and cinema. They had cultural knowledge apart from comic stuff.

    And the artistic peak of anime, the 1980s, also had artists drawing influence from cinema, myths, and etc.

    Miyazaki's LAPUTA is a wonder of wonders.

    But then, we had generations that grew up on a diet of little else but anime, manga, videogames, and etc. So, the stuff just began to cannibalize itself, by the early 90s, became almost totally worthless. Not only worthless but harmful. I mean children should not grow up to something so vapid, mindless, and soulless. It's like sniffing glue.
  119. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    One odd thing about Korea is it is the only non-great civilization among the Notable Nations. South Korea has become world-famous for some of its brands. And North Korea is regularly in the news as a ‘rogue state’, the last stalinist holdout.

    So, Korea has entered the global-stage, for good or ill.
    Also, certain Korean-Americans have gained prominence as academics and journalists. Both Bush and Obama administration has its Korean-American flunky collaborators of the GLOB empire.

    I read Soviets came to value Koreans. When USSR and Red China were allies, the great hope was that the great white power and great yellow power would work together to spread revolution. But China and Russia had a massive falling out. So, Russia came to see Korea as their Asian link, especially since Japan was a staunch US ally.
    Also, Koreans in Russia proved to be loyal, docile, obedient, and capable. They were useful as dogs who did as told. US felt the same way about Korean troops in the Vietnam War. Koreans are like dogs who do as told. They may have reasonable high IQ, but their culture is childlike, immature, brutish, and tarded. So, Koreans don’t have a culture of higher intellect and emotional control. So, Koreans, ever childlike, seek a master to follow and serve. So, US Koreans became useful tools of US empire, and Russian Koreans became loyal dogs of Soviet Communism.

    Anyway, when we look at all the notable nations on the World Map, they are linked with some greatness.

    Great Britain. Shakespeare, Locke, industrial revolution, the list is limitless.

    US. Continuation of British Civilization. Did more in 200 yrs than most nations in 2000 yrs.

    France: tons of art, music, ideas, science, and etc.

    Germany: Beethoven, Kant, Nietzsche, chemistry, modern university, etc.

    Italy: Roman legacy, Renaissance, great food and wine, design, cinema, etc.

    Russia: Tchaikovsky, Dostoevsky, Tolstoy, Russian Revolution(great event even if evil), defeated Napoleon and Hitler, and etc.

    Iran: Persian empire and legacy. Arguably the originators of rule of law.

    China: Middle Kingdom, Confucianism, Chop Suey

    India: Hinduism, Buddhism, spirituality of all kinds, music, architecture, curry.

    Turkey: Ottoman Empire.

    Jews and Israel: The Chosen People, Bible, Einstein, medicine, etc.

    Japan: unique culture and sensibility, adaptive creativity, first Asian nation to modernize, inspiration for rest of Asia in industrial transformation.

    But Korea? Supposedly, it has 2,000 yrs of history. It does have a history of art, literature, politics, and etc. But would the world have missed out on anything if Korea had never existed? Even when Westerners visited pre-modern Japan, they were impressed by the arts and culture of these strange people. But no visitor to Korea was impressed by anything. One American veteran who’d been in Korea after WWII said if God wanted to measure the temperature of the world, he would stick the thermometer in Korea.

    Even today, despite Korea’s products in cars and phones, the world wouldn’t miss anything essential if Korea were to vanish overnight. After all, people can buy Japanese or German cars than Korean ones. And people can use Apple phones than samsung phones. Or up-and-coming cheaper Chinese phones that I hear are almost as good.

    [MORE]

    All those civilizations mentioned above have greatness apart from economic power. Even if Jews lost all the wealth, they have a great cultural and historical heritage.
    Same could be said of Italians, Iranians(Persians), Russians, and etc.

    But remove South Korea’s economic prowess and North Korea’s ‘bad boy’ antics, and there is nothing to interest the world about Korea(even though some Korean cinema of recent times have been noteworthy in insight and artistry). There is no greatness apart from the economy, which btw, only belongs to the South. Also, even though the transformation of South Korea from agricultural society to industrial society was dramatic and impressive, its economy is still not much compared to true heavy hitters like Japan and Germany.

    Among all the notable nations, Korea has no cultural heritage of world significance.
    Mention most notable nations, and we associate them with something called World Culture, a contribution with worldwide significance. Who doesn’t know Shakespeare? Who doesn’t know Beethoven? Who doesn’t know of Persian Empire as the glory of the Ancient World? Who doesn’t know of samurai and Japanese garden? And Kurosawa.
    But mention Korea.. and there is nothing of world cultural significance.

    Could this explain Korea’s mania for stuff like Christianity, globalism, ‘Cool Korea’, and fanaticism? A people without a culture of their own must borrow from another. Now, if they are creative and subtle like the Japanese, they will take another culture and revise/refine/redesign it into something else, indeed to the point where it turns into a kind of originality. What Japanese did with elements of Chinese architecture is amazing. It fully made it their own.
    But Koreans seem never to have developed such a sensibility. Since they lacked originality, they didn’t come up with their own stuff. Since they lacked sensibility, they didn’t take something Other and turn it into something truly original. (Or maybe they did long ago, but then cultural dogmatism took over and stifled any innovation. Supposedly, Koreans developed a unique ‘scientific’ phonetic system of writing, but then, they failed to produce anyone like Shakespeare to shake the world.)
    Anyway, if a people lack originality, they must take from others. And if they lack sensibility, they can’t improve on the original. So, the ONLY way to own it is through sheer lunk-headed fanaticism. And come to think of it, Korean Christianity seems pretty stupid. Did it create anyone like Martin Luther? And Korean communism was surely the most mind-numbingly stupid, and the fat Kims are still in power. Now, there could be good Korean artistic, cultural, and etc stuff, but people in the West have not gotten it because Korean simply isn’t an international language. Indeed, youtube allows us to sample cultural stuff, pop-folk-or-art, from all over the world, and it seems there’s a lot of good stuff we never knew about because the media and academia neglected most stuff.
    But it’s probably true that Korea, compared to Japan and China, was relatively lackluster in ideas, arts, culture, and stuff. Even Mao, loony as he was, did something interesting with communism. Even Ho Chi Minh became a world figure. But Kims of North just seem like fat tards with head stuffed lame stalinism and family-first-ism. Park of South Korea was a remarkable leader — he seems to have inspired Putin to some degree — , but Singapore’s Lee was a better purveyor of the Asian Development Model.
    Korea has produced many bright students but hasn’t produced a world renowned scientist or innovator. At best, Koreans have been good at copying what the West originated. Also, if the Japanese took Western products and even improved on them with new design and engineering, we don’t see this among Koreans. They are just good alternatives to Western or Japanese products.

    Christianity is fading all over the world. Communism and classic leftism are dead. Nationalism is being eroded by globalism, internet, mass emigration, and etc.
    Now, if a Korean wants to own some greatness, where is it to be found? Whatever cultural heritage Koreans have, it’s not world class stuff. They can’t look to the past.
    Supposedly, there was a great king long ago and a great admiral.

    But the king’s reform didn’t really go anywhere, and the admiral’s greatness was associated only with a historical event that meant a lot to Korea maybe but not to world history. (In contrast, certain other battles had tremendous historical repercussions.)

    Also, even though Korea is a notable power, its relevance depends on being a ‘shrimp among whales’. It has no autonomy of importance. France in its glory would have been great regardless of other nations. But Korea’s significance depends on being caught in the web of the great powers. It is a ball tossed around by the big boys. It is a glo-ball. And this especially so since it is still divided, still occupied by US military, and still totally servile to US agenda. And yet, it now does more business with China, and it is afraid to anger the Chinese.. though, all said and done, it must follow the US.

    Given its lack of autonomous power and true sovereignty, maybe Koreans have figured their ONLY claim to ‘greatness’ is to go full-global and be the fastest ball to be passed around the big boys. So, if in the past, it resisted being used like a ball, now it wants to be the hyper ball zipping around all players and all the world. From Hermit Kingdom to Hermes Highway.

    And this means total abandonment of nationhood in favor of globalhood.
    So, forget about ‘minjok’. Cut the racial ties to the past. Use plastic surgery and hair colors to look like foreigners, whites, or Japanese cartoon characters. Imitate blacks and just wallow in rap lunacy. Market K-pop all over Asia and gain popularity as the Asians who look ‘most white’ and most like ‘anime characters’. Emigrate in huge numbers to US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Give up Korean identity and take on new names and identity. Since Koreans relish the right to move to other Better nations like the US, Canada, and New Zealand, they figure other peoples should have the right to move to Korea. After all, such is the ‘free trade’ of peoples. If Koreans want the right to move to other nations, then it must allow other nations to move to Korea. If Koreans want to give up their own identity and become ‘new Americans’ or ‘new New Zealanders’, then non-Koreans should be given the right to be ‘new Koreans’. So, the hell with history, heritage, roots, and identity. Become totally Mercurian and zip all around the world and morph into something else. (Also, if immigrants want to come to Korean to become ‘Korean’, maybe Korea is as ‘cool’ as Americanism. After all, ‘everyone’ wants to go to America and be ‘American’. So, maybe the fact that non-Koreans wanna come to Korea to become ‘Korean’ makes Korea like a mini-imitation America. That makes Korea more ‘cool’.)
    And K-pop softens the mind for such attitude since it is the trans-racial fantasy of ridding oneself of ugly Koreanness and using plastic surgery, cosmetics, and hair color to become ‘white’ or whatever. Christianity may also have prepared the way for this. Even though Christians may be opposed to much of globalist culture and hedonism, their impact was to make Koreans identify mainly with global Christian community and with characters in the Bible than with their own ethnos, history, and ancestors. Christians may read the Bible and know more about Jews in Old Testament than of their own ancestors. I think Koreans are big in missionary zeal.

    Also, there is the inferiority complex of being ‘uncool’. Being so slavish and dependent on approval of others, Koreans came to realize that the biggest concept in Western Pop Culture is ‘cool’. Since Koreans don’t have anything ‘cool’, they hired a bunch of homos to concoct a ‘cool’ culture, and the result of K-pop where idols have been made up by homos into girly boys and white-wanna-be’s.
    Also, Korean-Americans in LA, in this age of easy air travel and internet connection, prolly spread all that ghetto rap culture to Seoul. Since Koreans have no ‘cool’ content of their own, they ape and imitate the ‘cool’ of blacks.
    Addicted to the soma of ‘cool’-ness, Koreans may no longer feel a connection to their parents and ancestors who were so ‘uncool’ and ‘unhip’.

    Another thing. Koreans may be the easiest people to manipulate. Why? Because people with massive inferiority complex and massive chip on their shoulder have an obvious vulnerability. They want attention, approval, and recognition. So, if you offer them a bit of praise, flattery, and acceptance, they become total dogs. Paradoxically, the more you inflate their ego, the more their ego becomes enslaved to your praise.

    People with real confidence and autonomy don’t need others to stoke their ego. Take Bob Dylan. He didn’t care what others thought. He believed in himself, even when the crowd was booing at Newport. And Kubrick had his own vision too and stuck by it.
    They are like Howard Roark in THE FOUNTAINHEAD.

    But Koreans are like Peter Keatings of the world. Always craving attention, approval, and recognition. Always dependent on external validation. So, if you want to own such doggeroos, all you have to do is shower them with praise.

    So, if the West goes to Korea, “Oh my, you now have ‘gay pride’ parades? And you have multi-culturalism? We are soooooo proud of you. You are almost as ‘evolved’ as we are.”, then the servile Koreans are wagging their tails like dogs and jumping up and down with joy for having been recognized by the West as an ‘advanced progressive nation’.

    Korons are like Peter Keating. Since PC now dominates the West, Korons will go full-PC just to win praise and attention from the West for being so ‘evolved’.

    Now, if Korons had any sense, they’d realize that there is a sense of culture more important than greatness, significance, relevance, and etc.
    In the end, a worth of a culture is the collective memory of a family of people on a certain that has become sacred to them. And when Koreans had the concept of ‘minjok’ that bound them to their forebears, they had cultural value of autonomy. Regardless of what the world thinks, ethnic consciousness ties one to others of the national family in the present who are connected to the ancestors of the past.
    That is really the core of culture, and it is most important. After all, no civilization gained greatness overnight. For them to become great, they first had to form into a collective family and gain ownership of territory. Such a people may or may not become great, but what matters most is they exist at all. Consider the proud Chechens. They are part of any great world culture, but they have kept their ethny, and they find great core meaning in that.

    Unlike the histories of the notable nations, Korean history seems less dramatic except in the Japanese invasion of 16th century and 20th century when all hell broke loose.
    The two most prominent figures who are mentioned most, King Sejong and Admiral Yi, represent two strategies. The King seems to have been relatively open-minded and curious about the world. And maybe Koreans today feel that Korea could have done more if it had heeded the king’s example and learned more from other peoples instead of just shutting off the outside world. But, surely there is a difference between learning from the world and surrendering to the globalist tide that threatens to wipe out meaningful national identities all over the world.
    The example of the admiral is different. He defended the nation from invasion. His example would indicate Koreans should seek closer ties to China as the main ally and defend Korea from foreigners.
    Today’s Koreans seem to characterize only the Japanese as the ‘bad foreigners’, which is convenient since the famous admiral fought the Japanese. Rising PC taboos likely forbid Koreans from badmouthing non-Koreans, so the only approved target left is the Japanese(even though this may be changing too under US pressure that wants closer ties between Japan and SK against China). And maybe for this reason, South Korean policy goes out of its way to be contrary to Japanese in every way. So, if Japanese won’t accept mass immigration, South Korea will do the opposite. But this is so stupid. Koreans may think they are spiting Japan by adopting a different strategy, but in the end, Japan will remain Japan whereas Korea will be invaded by foreigners. Koreans don’t want to be invaded by ‘bad racist Japanese ideas’, but they will be invaded by other races. But since everything negative is associated with Japan, Koreans may have a knee-jerk attitude of doing the opposite of whatever Japan does. It’s sort of like Ireland. Seeing itself as the noble victim of ‘racist imperialist Britain’, the Irish went out of its way to be leftist, ‘progressive’, and go full retard in globalist department. Maybe it has something to do with Freud’s theory of Narcissism of Small Differences.

    A nation really be treated like a family. If you belong to a modest family surrounded by rich families, it is understandable that you want your family to be rich too. But a family, rich or poor, has intrinsic value as one’s family. And that’s what matters most.
    But globo-Korons are too obsessed with ‘greatness’, with becoming the shrimp-whale, that they don’t value the real bone in their mouth. Like the delusional dog, they want the dog in the reflection in water.

    Read More
    • Agree: Daniel Chieh
    • Replies: @anon

    Also, Koreans in Russia proved to be loyal, docile, obedient, and capable. They were useful as dogs who did as told. US felt the same way about Korean troops in the Vietnam War. Koreans are like dogs who do as told. They may have reasonable high IQ, but their culture is childlike, immature, brutish, and tarded. So, Koreans don’t have a culture of higher intellect and emotional control. So, Koreans, ever childlike, seek a master to follow and serve. So, US Koreans became useful tools of US empire, and Russian Koreans became loyal dogs of Soviet Communism.
     
    Agree with this completely, although I believe that east asians as a whole tend to show this trait. This is why I advocate multiculturalism for korea/east asia; not because its the "cool", "trendy" thing to do, rather because korean/east asian people need to have their cultures sent through the crucible, korean/east asian people need to be exposed to the brutality, primitiveness, and in some cases superiority of other cultures in the world which will subsequently tear apart their fragile and artificially constructed world which allows their various social psychopathies to grow unhindered like mushrooms in the a dark room. Only when korean/east asian people are exposed to the rest of the world (in all its ugliness and beauty) and forced to deal with it will they begin to mature collectively. Unlike what you have proposed in your previous comments, more nationalism (IE insularity) is NOT what korea needs; intense insularity is the entire reason that koreans are childlike and emotionally immature. Were historically if east asia was in more intense and frequent contact with the rest of the world then they would have been forced to culturally evolve to become more worldly and sentient, instead of the highly intelligent children that they have evolved to be today. Fortunately the west through its heavy handed imperialism and cruelty disabused 19th century east asia of its navel gazing and illusions of grandeur and forced them to become tougher, more worldly and more realistic to deal with the menace of western imperialism; which is actually a process that is still underway today. In this globalizing world, each subsequent generation of east asian people (through exposure to global media, immigration, positive AND negative contact with foreigners, etc) will become more and more sharp, competent, socially savvy and aware and hopefully in time will be able to shed their cloistered, inexperienced and childlike mindset. A sharper, more sentient and socially competent populace will in turn be able to both project as well as defend its interests much more easily, as opposed to a quasi-autistic and socially untested population that east asia is currently composed of.

    In case I haven't already made it clear enough, I will restate my views on multiculturalism. Multiculturalism is good for east asia in the same way that western imperialism was good for east asia; multiculuralism is good for east asia precisely because it is so bad. Asian people's biggest weakness is complacency and a tendency to atrophy, ossify and look inwards; multiculturalism is perfect because it will pull asian people out of their comfort zones and force them to evolve as a culture (Masculinity is but one aspect of this, but asian culture as a whole needs to evolve, which in fact it has been since the 19th century, I only support an acceleration of this process). When I advocate multiculturalism in east asia, contrary to what some people here think, I am not talking about kumbaya, drum circles and rainbows; rather I am talking about the gauntlet, a crucible, and trial by fire.

    Some people here think that multiculturalism will grow legs in asia and get completely out of control; but I think many of these people saying this are projecting their own (white/western) psychology on the matter and may or may not be truly familiar with the psychology of asian people. The fact of the matter is, multiculturalism grew legs in the west precisely because westerners are liberal and openminded to begin with (yes im aware of the jewish involvement, but jews only capitalized on an existing tendency in the white psychology, they didnt create a pathology out of nowhere); asian people on the other hand are famously introverted, "conservative" and closeminded. While asian people may tolerate and even tepidly embrace multiculturalism for a while; once it begins to get out of hand they will reject it much much faster than westerners have.
  120. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Daniel Chieh
    Form my empirical knowledge, anime is almost as popular with video games, making it a huge segment of popularity. That said, I have my issues with anime that it no longer seems to be attempting much in the way of originality. Most shows are copies of one another, or with significant overlaps.

    There's very little effort at creativity. There's a very clear effort at monetization.

    This is generally true of almost all modern media, though, I feel.

    Manga and anime have been utter crap for yrs.

    Japanese manga developed in 60s and 70s from artists who wanted to make movies but couldn’t. So, they told their stories in comic book form. These were really like movie storyboards, and some were quite good.

    This is damn good story, and I’d love to see a movie version of it:

    http://www.mangareader.net/alisa-of-the-silver-hair/1

    So, the original manga artists were inspired by novels and cinema. They had cultural knowledge apart from comic stuff.

    And the artistic peak of anime, the 1980s, also had artists drawing influence from cinema, myths, and etc.

    Miyazaki’s LAPUTA is a wonder of wonders.

    But then, we had generations that grew up on a diet of little else but anime, manga, videogames, and etc. So, the stuff just began to cannibalize itself, by the early 90s, became almost totally worthless. Not only worthless but harmful. I mean children should not grow up to something so vapid, mindless, and soulless. It’s like sniffing glue.

    Read More
  121. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    When it comes Korean demography, the main problems seems not to be that Koreans in the countryside are having kids with foreign women. Rather, Korean women in the cities are not getting married and having children.

    Since most Koreans live in urban areas, if urban Korean women had 2 kids each, the half-Korean kids in the country-side wouldn’t amount to much in relation to the national whole. So, the bigger threat than MORE FOREIGNERS is FEWER KOREANS(who are also lost by emigration).

    Why are urban women reluctant to marry? It could be due to the universalization of status and style. Even though most people in Korea are not rich and will never be rich, they all have access to stylish dress, gadgets, and cosmetics. That stuff is affordable even to the non-rich. It’s like even black welfare mothers in the US are into style of hair-weaves, fingernail polish, and etc.

    Also, everyone has a TV, even a big TV. And on TV, there are idealized soap operas, movies, and gossip about rich people, ‘cool’ people, hip people, etc. So, the life of privilege has been normalized as fantasy for everyone. And since even un-rich people can afford to dress well and look ‘good’ — and even afford plastic surgery — , they want the very best from life. Or they don’t want it at all. If they can find the ideal husband, they will. If not, they prefer the fantasy on TV. Also, with loosening sexual mores, women no longer need to be married to hook up and live the sex-and-city-lifestyle.
    Also, instant internet connection with relatives in US, Canada, and elsewhere may fill them with dreams of moving to another nation and maybe even marrying foreign man. Especially since Korea has given up on the concept of minjok, there is no need to feel any attachment to the nation. Or to preserve one’s racial inheritance. After all, plastic surgery and K-pop promote far-and-wide the desirability to look less Asian and more Western. Such fantasies cut one’s consciousness from ancestors who looked too Asian and ‘ugly’. And since the concept of ‘minjok’ is gone in education and national-cultural consciousness, there is little sense that the Korean territory is sacred homeland for Korean people. It is no longer to Koreans what Israel is to Jews. It is just a piece of global real estate. Anyone can buy in, and anyone can bail out. It’s all about dollars and cents. It’s also the Americanization and Canadaization of Korea as the US and Canada will sell off entire properties to the highest bidder. Once US went from settler/pioneer narrative to immigrant narrative, the US is just some big real estate property to trade among the highest bidders or to squat-and-occupy among the hordes of migrants.

    [MORE]

    Modern entertainment, gadgets, and affordable dress/cosmetics universalize ‘status’ even to those without privilege. So, even the underprivileged — and most people are underprivileged — end up having unrealistically high standards of success in jobs and marriage. Since university education has been made near-universal for Koreans, all Koreans want good clean jobs. If they can’t have it, they want to commit suicide or emigrate(flee) than stick around and do ‘dirty’ job alongside lowly foreigners from poor nations. And since every single woman can afford a wide screen TV that beams the Ideal Romantic Life on soap operas, they want to marry someone who is like that ideal beau on TV. TV has become ‘reality’. Since most men don’t measure up to those idealized standards, women don’t want them.

    If urban Korean women could be convinced to come back down to ground, maybe things will change and demography will rebound. If Korean men could be convinced to take ‘uncool’ jobs, maybe they will be more content too and settle down. But the universalization of style and status has spoiled many Koreans, even those without privilege. They seem to feel shame if they don’t have the ‘good’ stuff. And as foreigners become ever more associated with ‘lowly jobs’, those jobs will lose more appeal. And as Korean parents only want to have successful children they can brag about(for status points), they won’t have kids unless they can be assured of academic success. This is what happens when everything is status-ized, materialized, and economi