Alex Gratzek

A Policy of Musihada (무시하다) and Muyong (무용)

Alex Gratzek
September 24

My early contributions to The Korea Times largely revolved around inter-Korean relations and the futility of ‘negotiations’ with North Korea. Every North Korean dictator since Kim Il-Sung have proven themselves to be faithless negotiators. Every ‘roadmap’ to better relations that is laid out inevitably proves to be a dead end. North Korea has proven itself willing to take constantly but not actually deliver.

When Kim Jong-un was a new leader, he was given the benefit of the doubt but he proved himself to be in the same duplicitous mold as his forebears. If North Korea is ever serious about improving relations then it should be the one to take the appropriate steps to create the conditions for fruitful negotiations.

Recently, North Korea launched cruise missiles in one of its sad but predictable attempts to remain relevant on the world stage. Instead of giving in to what the North Koreans want, participation in conferences, concessions and legitimacy, it’s time for a new approach. That should be the policy of Musihada (ignoring) and 무용(futility). Let me explain.

One of the major reasons for the sudden collapse of The Soviet Union was economic. Oil prices hit highs in the late 70’s before declining throughout the 80’s. The Soviet Union’s economy was not efficient and its shortcomings had been covered by oil prices.

However, that was not the only economic issue. The Soviet Union was also bogged down in Afghanistan (79-89) while at the same time, President Ronald Reagan started to expand the Cold War into space. It was a confluence of economic pressures that caused The Soviet System to buckle and collapse.

In this most recent North Korean provocation, North Korea flexed its ‘military might’ to intimidate South Korea and Japan by launching missiles into the East Sea. The traditional response would be to see diplomats shuttling around the region, making plans for conferences and laying out ‘steps to ease tensions.’

Instead of dignifying the endless North Korean provocations with inane diplomatic dribble or asking North Korea to stop, the provocation should be treated with the disdain it deserves. South Korea is playing into North Korean hands by always letting it determine whether to ratchet tensions up or down. It’s time to flip the script.

When questioned by reporters about North Korea, President Moon should make it clear he has more pressing issues on his plate like the economy, jobs and corona than dealing with the gadfly North Koreans. He should refer questions regarding North Korea to a more junior member of his administration, preferably someone who is perceived as a bit off kilt, or even mad.

Ignoring the North Korean and treating them with disdain is only one prong of the new approach. The other prong is driving home the futility of North Korea’s efforts and the high costs. If North Korea fires two cruise missiles, then South Korea should fire double that number in North Korea’s direction.

Even better would be to get Japan to fire off its own missiles in coordination with South Korea. A united diplomatic front would prevent the traditional North Korean policy of playing its neighbors off against each other.

The percentage of North Korean GDP eaten up by these tests is significantly larger than either Japan or South Korea’s hypothetical response would be. It’s time to ratchet up the economic pressures, currently limited to sanctions, to include tit for tat responses to North Korean missiles to try and provoke them into an arms race.

It should be made clear to North Korea that South Korea is willing to go into an arms race but there is one key difference, South Korean has the economic capacity to support a race. It took decades for North Korea to develop its cruise missiles, rockets and nuclear capabilities. Imagine how disheartening it would be for North Korean’s if South Korea were to announce its own quest for nuclear weapons.

There would be hemming and hawing by the international community but South Korea would be accepted as a nuclear power while North Korea would still be treated as a pariah. South Korea’s respect in the world community, scientific prowess and level of economic development means it efforts would bear fruit mucher quicker than North Korea.

The North Korean people underwent untold privations to get nuclear weapons. They were held up to the North Korean as the prize for all those lean years. The quick speed which South Korea could go nuclear would certainly undercut the North Korean regime’s propaganda and domestic standing. Were the years of privation worth it if South Korea could achieve the same thing in a year or two with no suffering?

Of course, a nuclear arms race in Northeast Asia is not something China wants to see. They may have tolerated or even tacitly supported North Korea’s nuclear ambitions as a means of getting the Americans tied down in solving an intractable diplomatic dispute.

However, if the choice becomes either a nuclear free North East Asia or an Northeast Asia consumed by an arms race, the obvious answer for China is a Northeast Asia where it holds the nuclear monopoly. A quest for South Korea’s own nuclear arsenal would light a fire under President Xi’s ass to bring all of China’s weight to bear on North Korea.

North Korea has always tried to sell its threats as being somewhat credible because they are ‘crazy.’ However, they are perfectly rational and that’s one of the reasons they play the crazy card. But once you play your trump card repeatedly, it loses its effect. It’s time for South Korea to start playing its trump cards to break the status quo. South Korea has tried the direct approach to denuclearizing the Korean Peninsula but it’s time for an indirect approach.

Graveyard of Empires- Part III

In my last column Graveyard of Empires- Part II, I wrote “I’d wager heavily on the American supported Afghan government collapsing followed by a period of turmoil and infighting.” I was right on the money although the speed of the collapse was surprising.

The Afghanistan Governments fall in 2021 was eerily reminiscent of The Taliban’s fall in 2001 but it is simply the way Afghanistan is- huge swings in momentum are the norm . What’s important to remember about Afghanistan- is that there are so many factions and ethnic groups which are constantly pulling together and ripping apart in a constant kaleidoscope of changing alliances depending on evolving circumstances. There is no such thing as strange bedfellows in Afghan politics.

After 9/11, all the warlords, tribal chiefs, and players of note knew the hammer was going to drop. Support for the Taliban ebbed away as the various power brokers defected in the face of American money, airpower and fury. It was a no brainer for most. Momentum swung decisively behind the American backed Northern Alliance. The diehard Taliban fought and died and those who survived fled to their home turf in Southern Afghanistan to regroup and await the ebb tide.

But the Americans overstayed their welcome and if anything can unite the disparate peoples of Afghanistan, it’s an outsider. It took 20 years of constant low level warfare for that tide to turn but as it did, The Taliban surged forward. There was no sense of Afghanistan as a nation and hence no motivation for the average soldier in the Afghan National Army to fight. Plus, The Taliban were offering money to join or go home.

What happens next? Well, I suspect the Taliban gorged and will be quite busy trying to consolidate their territory and power. Do they call a traditional Jirga, an assembly of representatives of tribes and people, in an attempt to forge some kind of permanent peace deal with autonomy for the various groups or do The Taliban try to purge all the collaborators who can’t escape, rollback women’s rights, and continue the persecution of minority sects and people?

If they go the first route, then there’s a chance a peaceful equilibrium to develop organically from within Afghanistan. There are signs of hope that this may be the case. When they took over in 1996, they seized the former Communist Leader of Afghanistan from a UN compound, tortured him, castrated him and then dragged his body through the city. In contrast, former President Karazai recently met with Taliban officials for political talks. Also, The Taliban executed the leader of ISIS in Afghanistan but as far as I know, no other high profile figures.

If they go the second route, then their quick takeover will come to bite them in the ass. The Afghan National Army deserted, it was not destroyed and all those men remain potential fighters. They may not have fought for the idea of Afghanistan, but I’d wager they’d fight for their village, home, sect or ethnic group. The tighter The Taliban clench their fist and centralize control, the more resistance they will create opening up options for President Biden.

Anti-Taliban elements are already regrouping in the areas which had been the domains of The Northern Alliance while in the cities, there are protests in cities against the uncouth rule of The Taliban. If the Taliban are going to be replaced militarily or changed politically, its going to come from a home grown movement such as these. This plays into one of America’s traditional strengths- throwing money behind different players to advance it’s agenda.

The one silver lining in the whole Afghanistan debacle was the introduction of girls education. After two decades of American influence, the genie is out of the bottle and may play a moderating influence in the near future but we must nurture that seed. To that end must open dialogue with more moderate factions of The Taliban. Who are The Taliban more likely to listen to- Al Qaeda extremists from abroad who broke the law of Pashtuli, causing The Taliban to lose power and 20 years of war or their wives, daughters and mothers? Let us not forget the 19th amendment was passed in the USA because a mother told her son in the Tennessee state legislature to vote for ratification.

What matters now is the new facts on the ground and having a working relationship with The Taliban. Traditionally, most of the killing starts when the routing occurs. I haven’t heard or seen wide scale killing and looking at the airport, there is chaos from people fleeing but not chaos from The Taliban going in to butcher everyone. The recent attack on the airport highlights this, it was an ISIS attack, not a Taliban attack. The lack of Taliban attacks is a signal to America- let’s keep dialogue open and hopefully a sign of Taliban moderation. Or it could just be a ploy to get the Americans out before the bloodletting begins.

It’s important to remember the ancient Indian idea of Rajamandala. It holds that bordering states are most likely to be hostile while states with no shared border are friendly states. Afghanistan is in a rough neighborhood with stronger powers pushing their own agendas while America, being so far away, has the most minimal of interests in Central Asia, namely don’t attack us again. It took twenty years for America and Vietnam to establish relations following The Fall of Saigon but in Afghan politics, there are no strange bedfellows.

A Wasted Crises

(Originally written May 18, 2020)

A common refrain in politics is so never let a good crisis go to waste. As a Political neophyte, President Trump can be excused from being aware of this saying and attempting to ensure some good emerges from the aftermath of the Corona Debacle.

The problem with Trump and the Republicans is that they have nothing to offer as far as new ideas for America. It has become the party of NO and the only thing they push for is increased tax cuts and deregulation- neither of which is in the interest of the majority of Americans..

On Health care, the Republican idea is to destroy Obamacare. On the environment, deregulation to allow polluters to poison America’s land, water and air. For social security? Cuts for the neediest. Taxes? Cuts for the wealthy.

Instead of using the Pandemic as a means to draw Americans together in order to overcome the obstacle, President Trump has continued to play politics laying blame on President Obama and stoking divisiveness. When former President Bush spoke in generic terms on the need for America unity, President Trump lashed out at him as if it were a personal attack instead of a call for unity from one of America’s elder statesmen.

After 9/11, President Bush took the time to unify Americans against the threat posed by Islamic extremists. During the Great Recession, President Obama took efforts to minimize the effects for all Americans by orchestrating via the bailout.

FDR dealt with the double whammy of the Great Depression and The Second World War- from the first came the modern American social safety net while the second yielded American economic and military preeminence following the conclusion of The Second World War.

President Truman picked up when FDR died and found America and The Soviet Union eyeing each other warily. President Truman used the threat of Soviet domination as a rallying cry to wring more funds from Congress in order to finance America’s efforts to contain the Soviet Union.

Furtherback, Abraham Lincoln used the secession of the South to abolish slavery, create a stronger and more unified Union, oversaw the economic expansion of the United States and generally leave America stronger than when he took over.

Instead of learning from his predecessors, President Trump has so far only sought to use Corona as a means to divide America by stoking the culture wars which have plagued America for the last couple decades. Instead of encouraging people to continue quarantining and wearing masks and taking other basic steps to battle Corona, President Trump has been fanning the cultural wars by encouraging people to demand that their states be reopened, to hell with Corona and the dangers it poses under the guise of their ‘freedoms.’

Former Presidents had a vision of the more perfect Union they wanted and worked towards it. Trump only has the thought of the economy and his own re-election on his mind rather than Americans struggling now and the future well being of America.

Despite surrounding himself with ‘the best people’ it looks like Trump will let this crisis pass with nothing to show for the many thousands of lives lost except for more American carnage and internal turmoil.

At this point, Corona has killed more people than the VietCong in Vietnam. However, the domestic social upheaval caused by the Vietnam War did result in badly needed social reforms.

I would like to see some good come out of Corna such as a respect for labor and a strengthened working class, a green new deal, an expanded social safety net, or frankly anything which seeks to turn this tragedy into anything remotely positive.

A great leader would rise up to the challenge posed by Corona and leave America in a stronger position. A passable leader would combat corona and maintain America’s status quo. Instead we have Trump whose inept policies stoke divisness and threaten the foundation on which America’s greatness is built.

Please see my article #Capitalism: A New Paradigm.

Stepping back from the precipice of Civil Strife

As I worked from home the other day, I called my dad who told me he was contemplating turning on the TV. I was a bit surprised because he isn’t the kind of person to spend his day watching television. Intrigued, I turned on the TV to suddenly recoil in horror as I watched a mob, incited by the demagogue known as President Trump, ransack the Capitol building to protest his election loss from two months before.

It used to be, your candidate lost, you sulked but soon went back to life. However, apparently the new normal is to throw temper tantrums, disparage victors as illegitimate, or at worst participate in some casual insurrection. One ancient Roman wrote “deep are the wounds inflicted by internal strife.” Only after internal civil strife did the Roman Republic fall. Those words are truer today than ever before.

Civil strife and insurrection are nothing new in America. Shay’s Rebellion in 1786-1787 exposed the weakness of the Articles of Confederation and gave rise to the Constitution, which for now, still governs our land. The order established by The Constitution faced its own most serious rebellion in the form of The War of Southern Secession and Aggression from 1861-1865.

The confederacy held that since The Union was freely entered into, so it could be freely exited out of. confederate leaders, unable to stomach the election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860, put a match to the kindling by firing on Fort Sumter in 1861. The resulting Civil War killed over 600,000 Americans on both sides and wrought destruction, especially in che confederacy as General Sherman famously made Georgia howl.

The war, although resulting in death and destruction, helped serve as a catalyst for the expansion of railroads, jump started the exponential growth of America’s industrial base, established it as a significant naval power and enhanced the power of The Federal Government. In today’s world, any new Civil War many on the right seem to eagerly welcome, would be nothing short of cataclysmic doom for America’s domestic prosperity and international standing.

No doubt there was a small fringe there just for the excitement and mayhem, but most seem to have been fervent Trumpist supporters intent on installing him as dictator for life. No, any new civil war and its peace, and that’s IF the war ever ended, would be tremendously devastating. Let’s take a look at a couple of historical cases.

The French Revolution of 1787 swept away the Ancien Regime, led to mob rule under Robespierre when too many heads suddenly found themselves detached from bodies. Eventually, Napoleon proclaimed himself Emperor, a kind of benevolent Emperor all things considered. He saved the Revolution from continued terror under Robespierre and instituted needed reforms in France and abroad at the point of french bayonets. Ultimately, he was defeated after decades of war but the impact of the revolution was ingrained and France and influenced the rest of Europe. A key thing to remember was that the French Revolution did not see society turning on each-other and if anything the common bonds forged in the struggle helped cement the ideas of liberty, equality and fraternity which govern France today.

When it was evident that The Confederacy was doomed in 1865, some Southerners approached General Lee, to sound him out about forming a guerilla insurgency to continue the war. Lee shot down the notion outright because he recognized that such an action would just prolong the misery of the nation and prevent national reconciliation. He also was against the erection of memorials and monuments to The Confederacy, correctly seeing they would become rallying points for malcontents. His prestige and authority meant his word was final. Sadly he died in 1870 within a couple decades confederate monuments and statues were erected, and the battle flag of the confederacy emblazoned on many southern states.

However, in today’s balkanized media market and the proliferation of paramilitary groups, there is seemingly no individual, other than the demagogue known as “President” Trump who can control these terrorists, insurrectionists, and militias but Lord knows he won’t do it. Societal trust and cohesion in America, never a strength to begin with, would collapse and likely never recover with a these damn militias, conspiracy theorists, and crazies going even crazier and probably turning on eachother. Already, many on the fringe right were turning on each other and saying the Capitol insurrectionists were antifa; despite all evidence to the contrary.

Any new “Civil War” would likely just be a replay of Beirut in the 1980’s or the Iraqi insurgency in the early 2000’s. A constant low level violence, bombings, shelling, and gunfire as different groups tusseled. As living with masks and the corona virus became the new normal, so would checkpoints and becoming familiar with which areas were safe and off limits.

In the 1990’s, there was a budding militia movement in America with events like Ruby Ridge and Waco arising as Government Agents collided with far right militia groups. The culmination of this distrust of Government was the Oklahoma City Bombing in 1995. The devastation and innocent killed, in a major American city, helped undercut the sympathy for the paramilitaries and the far right. However, that was a long time ago and largely out of the American national consciousness.

Even in the 1990’s, America has never been so far down the path towards another Civil War as it is now. I can only hope that the treasonous behavior and shocking images of the Capitol Building by the “Law & Order” Party will shock sane American’s into coming back to their senses and realizing how fragile this democracy we have is.

Antifa and BLM are nowhere near the level as these insurrectionists. BLM is working for change within the system as witnessed in Georgia while ANTIFA by definition, only arises in opposition to fascism. These MAGA supporters are traitors and have shown that for the sake of power, they are willing to burn down everything they claim to love. The whole lot of them should be in jail for years and forever stripped of their right to vote as is befitting for the kindred spirits of Benedict Arnold.

I hope this serves as a wake up call to Americans who are lukewarm and those who were wavering in their support of Trump. If the Rubicon is crossed, or Pandora’s Box opened, there is no going back to the past and no guarantees for the future. We either unify or the most powerful country in the world falls victim to its own internal strife, becoming a ‘shithole’ nation in the process. I hope the fever trip is finally ending.

Aircraft Carrier- Korea’s White Elephant

In previous centuries, white elephants were a status symbol in Southeast Asia. Monarchs were keen on possessing white elephants because they symbolized the power and justness of his rule while also signaling that the lands were blessed with peace and prosperity.

Eventually, white elephants began to be given by monarchs to sideline their potential rivals. The elephant served as a mark of the monarch’s favor but at the same time, the upkeep costs and time dedicated to maintaining the elephant meant the recipient had little time or money left for political maneuvering and scheming.

In more modern times, the term white elephant has come to mean an expensive project which fails to deliver or becomes very expensive to maintain.

I can’t help but feel South Korea’s decision to obtain an aircraft carrier will prove to be a modern day example of a white elephant. Before I delve into that, let’s take a brief look in history for other examples.

Prior to World War I, there was a revolution in naval warfare with the advent of the Dreadnought class battleships in 1906. They became the mark of great powers and if you didn’t have them, then you were “falling behind.”

Well, sure enough, Austria-Hungary, a nation which was falling from the rank of great powers, spent heavily on Dreadnoughts to maintain appearances. During WWI, the Dreadnoughts accomplished naught for Austria-Hungary despite the enormous resources dedicated to building and maintaining the ships.

By World War II in 1939, Dreadnoughts, which required huge investments in technology, money, labor and men, were obsolete thanks to the advent of the aircraft carrier although battleships were still being built. At Pearl Harbor, the weakness of battleships was demonstrated because carrier-based planes could cripple much of the American Fleet while the Japanese carriers were hundreds of miles away.

Let’s move on to the aftermath of WWII. Following the war, Great Britain emerged from the war battered but still standing. However, the resources devoted to defeating Nazi Germany meant that Great Britain was a “great power” only because the USSR and the U.S. treated it as such. In reality, its best days were behind it.

A British government document from the 1950s explained that without nuclear weapons “… we would sacrifice immediately and in perpetuity our position as a first-class power … have to rely on the whim of the United States for the effectiveness of the whole basis of our strategy.”

The decision to obtain nuclear weapons was made and by 1952 the British possessed a nuclear capability, ostensibly giving it the freedom to act independently of the United States. However, the weapons did not prove as useful as anticipated as would soon be seen.

In 1956, Britain, acting in conjunction with Israel and France, seized the Suez Canal from Egypt. The British and French were forced to withdraw by American and Soviet pressure despite Britain being in possession of nuclear weapons.

I can’t help but feel as if Korea’s desire to obtain an aircraft carrier is more the result of a desire for national prestige rather than any overriding need. Specifically, with Japan commissioning two aircraft carriers in 2015 and 2017 while China has also been on a carrier building spree. Korea feels that without this symbol of national prestige, it will look weak.

However, this is not a race Korea should be entering. Simply looking at the size of Japan and China’s economy and population when compared to South Korea should give it pause from entering the race. It’s not an expense South Korea can bear as easily nor is it crucial to national survival.

Simply looking at geography should highlight the limited use of an aircraft carrier for Korea. Aircraft carriers are mainly used for force projection and are best used in the wide open expanses of the ocean where they can hide in the vastness. Korea has China to one side and Japan to the other ― these constricted waters are far from ideal for an aircraft carrier to operate in.

Furthermore, it’s widely held that three carriers are needed for a viable carrier force. One to be cruising the oceans, one preparing to cruise the oceans and a third undergoing maintenance and repairs after its voyage.

Does Korea really want to expend resources on two more carriers which will have a limited usefulness when the primary threat South Korea faces is a land invasion from North Korea?

From my readings on the issue, it appears the intended role is for the carrier to provide a mobile platform in case of a surprise attack on South Korean air force bases by North Korea. To me, that seems a pretty weak reason. North Korea’s economy can’t support a long drawn-out war let alone knock out South Korea with a surprise attack.

Korea itself is essentially an unsinkable aircraft carrier. If Korea wants to ensure that its planes aren’t knocked out at its known airbases, then it should look to utilize its mountainous terrain and take a page from the North Korean playbook on autarky.

North Korea has recognized its weakness and used complex tunnel networks in its mountains to protect its armed forces from bombing. A South Korean network of secret tunnels for its planes might not be a glamorous symbol of national prestige like an aircraft carrier but it’s much more practical for South Korea.

When I studied in South Korea at Sungkyunkwan a decade ago, one of my professors introduced the Korean saying “when the whales fight, the shrimp suffers” to me. Korea should recognize its limitations and plan accordingly rather than attempting to swim with the whales.

An aircraft carrier might be a symbol of national pride but with the advent of anti-ship missile technology, the usefulness of aircraft carriers has diminished like the battleships of a previous era. I can’t help but feel that South Korea should seriously re-evaluate its decision to acquire an aircraft carrier.

An Unholy Abomination

By Alex Gratzek

One technological issue facing America and the world at large today is the threat posed by algorithms. These algorithms, when coupled with Facebook and YouTube, pose a threat to public civil discourse in America and by extension, to democracy itself.

Platforms such as these are eager to keep users online and engaged as long as possible. Being corporations, their motive is to maximize profits, with any thought of public service a distant second at best. To this end, they use algorithms to promote similar but slightly more extreme videos or conspiracy theories, aiding in the delusions of those who go down that rabbit hole. Once down that rabbit hole, it’s hard to escape from it.

Algorithms need to be tweaked to present a more balanced and nuanced view of topics. If one were to end up watching a video exploring the supposed merits of the Flat Earth Theory, then the next video should point out every inane aspect of the Flat Earth Theory instead of promoting more flat earth videos.

These algorithms send the viewer into the rabbit hole of more conspiracy theories. Here, in the most delusional recesses of the internet, an unholy abomination has been born. It reminds me of the alien-monster in the 1982 John Carpenter classic “The Thing.” In the movie, an alien life form is able to absorb and imitate other life forms, becoming an abominable amalgamation of multiple animals.

The abomination is the new conspiracy theory group Q-Anon. Some of its adherents are running for office and they make the fringe 2010 Tea Party look sane by comparison. One can only hope that all the Q-Anon linked candidates get crushed in the election to prevent the “none-sense” from becoming established in mainstream American political discourse.

However, as much as I can hope, I won’t hold my breath. The sad part is, the promise of all the world’s information and knowledge at one’s fingertips has not played out as expected. The advent of so much information has made it nearly impossible to find “the truth.”

Every Tom, Dick, Harry and Jane can make a YouTube video espousing views that the coronavirus is linked to 5G, that Obama was born in Kenya, that the world is secretly controlled by lizard people ― or that the world is really controlled by a cabal of satanic pedophiles who are lizard people ― that Bill Gates is trying to control us via microchips implanted in us by an as of yet uncreated vaccine, that George Soros is secretly financing Antifa to overthrow the government and subordinate America to the U.N. or that Goya Beans are the best bean product on the market today or other utter nonsense.

Sending people down these rabbit holes brings them into contact with other like-minded individuals who are prone to conspiracy theories, so you have the confluence of flat earthers, anti-vaxxers, 5G and corona conspiracy theorists leading to the bastard abomination of a conspiracy theory represented by Q-Anon. It hasn’t yet met a conspiracy theory it can’t co-opt into its grand pantheon of nonsense.

In the olden days, the crazies would stereotypically be dirty hobos or homeless people eating cans of beans while carrying around cardboard signs proclaiming the imminent demise of the world. People would steer clear.

Now, every person who spouts conspiracy theories can find other like-minded people on the internet who, other than their fervent excuses for conspiracy theories, appear to be normal, making these conspiracy theories more palatable to the main stream.

To successfully battle this would likely mean less clicks, likes, views, ratings, an uproar about “muzzling free speech” and by extension a hit on profits, but it will keep the foundations of society on solid ground.

This should be paramount to tech companies as a strong societal foundation will ensure future profits, but the problem with the American version of capitalism is its emphasis on immediate monetary gain above all else. Companies should be free to pursue profits but not at the expense of societies’ health

As an example, Facebook has rightly been under close scrutiny for its role in running deliberately misleading or outright false political ads. When a legitimate company like Facebook runs blatantly misleading or false ads, it only serves to legitimize “The Paranoid Style in American Politics,” and may I dare add delusional, which has become increasingly prevalent in America.

The fact that Facebook is running such ads is horrifying. During World War II, Goebbels, Hitler’s chief of propaganda, said “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” With Facebook incessantly bombarding its users with false or misleading information, the threat of lies becoming truth to many increases. Many already are taking these conspiracy theories as truth.

Instead of tackling real issues, time is being spent and wasted on birtherism, face masks and other rubbish. Algorithms need to be redesigned to ensure contrasting views are exposed to people instead of other conspiracies or similar but increasingly extreme like-minded videos.

(Un)Compassionate Release

During the 1970’s and 1980’s, crime rates in America skyrocketed. In response, governments at the state and Federal level took actions to combat this rise in crime at the tail end of this crime pandemic in the early and mid 1990’s. Most famously, California enacted the 3 strikes law. Essentially, it said that any person who committed 3 felonies would be locked for life as they were considered career criminals/persistent offenders. It was around this time that Hillary Clinton famously spoke of “super predators.”

Of course, the average citizen would not be in favor of so-called ‘super predators’ to be loose lurking on the streets. On the surface, it looked good and appealed to citizens who wanted safer cities. 30 years later, the faults of 3 strikes are becoming evident.

Most of those who were locked up were young men. Young men in their late teens and early 20’s are naturally more inclined to the sort of life that operates on the wrong side of the law. As one ages and gains maturity, the less likely one is to commit crimes; especially violent crimes. Instead of being sentenced and released on an individual basis, three strikes laws applied a one size fits all approach to crimes. There was no nuance towards the sentencing of individuals and it showed. Judges’ hands were tied by arbitrary sentencing guide lines which robbed judges of their ability to approach each case before them on a unique basis.

One man, Curtis Wilkerson, was locked up for 25 years because his 3rd strike involved stealing a pair of socks valued at $2.50 during the mid 1990’s. His previous offenses had been him serving as a lookout guy during robbery in the early 1980’s. His sock offense, occuews almost 15 years after his original run ins with the law, and he was sentenced to 25 years in prison.

As reported in The Rolling Stone magazine on March 17th, 2013

“Have you heard the one about the guy who got life for stealing a slice of pizza? Or the guy who went away forever for lifting a pair of baby shoes? Or the one who got 50 to life for helping himself to five children’s videotapes from Kmart? How about the guy who got life for possessing 0.14 grams of meth? That last offender was a criminal mastermind by Three Strikes standards, as many others have been sentenced to life for holding even smaller amounts of drugs, including one poor sap who got the max for 0.09 grams of black-tar heroin.”

Curtis was arrested at 33 years old and sentenced to 25 to life. His first chance at parole would not come until he was 58 years old, for a pair of socks. It’s an absurd situation.

However, governments have come to realize the mistakes that accompanied the 3 strikes approach. As prisoners age, their chances of recidivism drops but the cost of housing them increases as their health deteriorates. The deterioration of one’s health is a natural occurrence as one ages but being kept in prison certainly isn’t conducive to good health.

In part because of The Great Recession and budget cuts, but also because of a public backlash against mass incineration, efforts have been made to reduce the prison population in order to reduce costs by releasing these aging felons back into the general population.

At face value, it seems like the compassionate thing to do. However, delve a bit deeper and it becomes apparent that these individuals are being shafted by the system yet again. After being locked up for decades, they are being thrown back to the streets to a totally changed environment. These men are finding themselves suddenly free after decades behind bars.

After that long behind bars, some will have become institutionalized. Essentially, they have spent so much time in prison that they are dependent on the structure it provides and no longer able to operate on their own. That is not to say all are institutionalized or that the mentality of institutionalization can’t be overcome but it is definitely an issue. They lack the skills to operate in the world today and would likely find themselves with menial low paying jobs if they can land jobs and, with their deteriorating health, does not hold for good long term employment prospects.

Furthermore, humans are by nature, social animals. After being locked up for so long, the friends and acquaintances that these offenders had before they went in for long bids have atrophied. Relationships and friendships require meeting, breaking bread and other actions to maintain the relationships. After being locked up for decades, those who are ‘compassionately’ released are entering back into a society with likely few or even no friends left, no skills, no prospects and for most, at best family members who they can turn to who have also aged. The next generation of the family is alien to them since those on the inside have been missing from every important milestone in the next generations life.

This is far from a compassionate release. It is, if anything, an uncompassionate release. These people, having not worked in decades except in prison where they receive cents an hour, can’t draw a pension or social security. They are being thrown back into society where they will be a burden. The Government has a responsibility to these people. Having locked them up during their prime working years, it goes without saying that the government has some responsibility for their well being in the years remaining to them.

Coming Collapse: Part 2

In my first Coming Collapse piece which was published in The Korea Times, I wrote how the coming of man was the harbinger of death for megafauna around the world in prehistoric times. As man’s technological prowess has improved, so has his ability to wrought destruction on the finely tuned planet we call home, Earth.

Over the last few decades, the size of fish caught off of Florida and around the world has shrunk. Why? Because man has overexploited fisheries to such an extent that we are causing natural selection at an accelerated rate. Big fish make good trophies for the wall or a hearty dinner while smaller fish are thrown back to pass on their DNA.

The same goes for lobsters. It used to be common to catch specimens which weighed several pounds. Now, lobsters are caught as soon as they come of age and are no longer protected by regulations. 1 pound lobsters are the new norm while in olden times they would be considered runts.

New technologies have allowed for the oceans to be over conquered exploited. Knowing man’s insatiable desire for protein, it isn’t inconceivable to think that oceanic ecosystems will be affected. The acidification of ocean water is already underway due to the use of fossil fuels and this will inevitably distort the status quo if not outright causing oceanic ecosystems to collapse while microplastics and plastics are increasingly abundant.

As human kind destroys the Earth, there is a growing chorus calling for man to spread to the stars and colonize other planets like Mars. One such voice is Elon Musk of the Company Space X. Also, in a similar vein, Senator Rand Paul called for the terraforming of Mars in order to make it eventually suitable for human habitation. This is crazy talk.

On Earth, where 7 billion plus humans live, Senator Rand Paul denies that climate change is an issue or could be caused by humans yet he calls for man made climate change on alien planets. He is so close but yet completely unaware of his hypocrisy and absurdity.

In the early 90’s, man tried to create an artificial enclosed Earth in an attempt to experiment with the practicality of living in small enclosed areas in space. The experiment was the biodome project. The project tried to mimic Earth’s various ecosystems to replicate Earth in an enclosed environment with different ecosystems represented.

However, the experiment failed. As mentioned, Earth took billions of years to evolve to its current state. To think man can imitate such a complex wonder is a testament to man’s hubris and delusions of grandeur.

To point out one problem, the trees in the biodome would not grow. Why not? To grow upright and strong, trees need wind. Without wind, they grow weak and droopy. Despite all of man’s technological prowess, we can’t grow trees in an enclosed environment and we can’t grow wood in a lab. There are some things man will never master.

Now people are acting like parasites on the Earth. We have conquered nature, throwing off the natural order of things, upsetting the finely tuned equilibrium of Earth. As we change the Earth’s equilibrium, we have no idea what the new equilibrium will be but as a betting man, I’d wager it wouldn’t be as conducive to human kind as it is now. The point I am trying to make is we have a finely tuned planet that supports us. Instead of looking to space for a new home, we should take care of the one we have now which is perfectly suited for us.

Only when mankind can live in harmony with the Earth should we look towards outer space for future colonies. Until then, anything established is likely doomed to failure. Let’s turn to the colonization of the Americas for a historical perspective.

The Norse colonized Iceland successfully and then unsuccessfully attempted the colonization of Greenland along with forays to North America. The colony on Iceland succeeded but the ones in Greenland failed while the forays to North America were never intended as permanent settlements. Why?

Iceland, Denmark and Norway lacked the population base and resources to support Greenland Colonies let alone even more remote colonies in North America. They were simply too far, isolated and the colonizers were bringing European ways with them which were unsuited to the new ecosystems to which they found themselves. They survived for a while but eventually withered on the vine and went extinct as the Earth’s climate cooled during the so-called Little Ice Age.

If colonies were established on Mars, they’d need massive support and supplies from Earth to become established and continued support thereafter. If we destroy Earth’s ability to sustain us, which looks increasingly likely, any colony on Mars would wither and die. It’s best for humans to focus on taking care of our current home rather than looking dreamily towards the stars for our species salvation.

Political Progression

By Alex Gratzek- Originally published in The Korea Times.

Over the centuries, a positive development among international relations and domestic politics has been the increased respect of the sanctity of diplomats and political opponents from harm.

In ancient times, diplomats were sometimes harmed or molested, but not always. During the Persian-Greek Wars, the Spartans threw two Persian diplomats down a well as depicted in the movie “300.”

Later, having ascribed their bad luck to these misdeeds, the Spartans sent two of their elder statesmen to the Persian shah as a kind of sacrificial lamb in order to wipe away their “bad juju.” The shah sent them back to Sparta as he did not want the bad juju associated with killing diplomats.

In medieval times, the great khan of the Mongols, Ghenghis Khan, sent diplomatic and trade envoys to the Khwarezm Empire. They were killed by a local governor. The great khan sent another envoy demanding the ruler of the empire punish the responsible governor and make amends.

The emperor chopped off two of their heads and sent the third envoy to report the tale. The Khwarezm Empire and the emperor were both soon ended by the scourge of god for the violation of diplomatic sanctity.

In the times of the Roman Empire, political struggles usually ended in the slaughter of the opponent and his supporters. Think of the first triumvirate of Caesar, Pompey and Crassus. It ended in bloodshed.

The second triumvirate of Augustus Caesar, Marc Antony and Leipidus also ended in bloodshed with Antony and Cleopatra dead. The junior partner in the trimuarative, Lepidus, eventually died of old age.

When his death was announced, it took Romans by surprise that he had not been killed in civil strife decades before. Leipidus’s survival till old age was an exception to the rule of slaughtering your enemies and crucifying your opponents.

Even in more modern times, the sparing of political opponents hasn’t always been the norm. In czarist Russian times, one claimant to the throne during the Time of Troubles was lucky to escape with his life to political exile in the desolate frigid wastes of Archangel. Other losers of political struggles were broken on the wheel, tortured, strangled or met other horrible fates.

During the time of Stalin, millions of citizens were sent to the gulags but Stalin also destroyed every possible opponent in the Soviet hierarchy multiple times over. He moved on the leftists under Trotsky and then the rightists under Bukharin, eliminating them by using the precursor to the KGB, the NKVD. At the time of his death in 1953, Stalin was preparing yet another purge against his supposed enemies.

However, his death interrupted the planned purge and his successor was Kruschev. Following the debacle and loss of face during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kruschev’s opponents in the Politburo organized a coup and forced him from power into a comfortable exile into a country dacha rather than the wholesale indiscriminate purges as in Stalin’s times.

That new reality, that “Now everything is different. The fear is gone, and we can talk as equals” was perhaps one of his greatest contributions to the Soviet system.

However, since then Russia has regressed. During the Cold War, spying was a natural part of the game. Spies would be captured and later traded away for spies captured from the other side. Now, President Vladimir Putin is steadily sending FSB agents, the successor to the KGB abroad in order to kill opponents in violation of the unwritten rules.

In North Korea, political opponents are still killed as was seen with the assassination of Kim Jong-nam, the half-brother to Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un. While in China, political opponents of President Xi Jinping have been driven from the party and imprisoned.

On the flipside, you have seen a great political progression in South Korea. In previous decades, it seemed as if street fighting was the only form of political protest which would be heeded. However, South Korea has shown itself to be a well-developed, mature and established democracy following the peaceful protests that led to Park Geun-hye’s removal from office and her eventual imprisonment for corruption.

In America, it seems that politics are regressing. President Donald Trump has threatened to imprison his enemies, made a statement which could be interpretated as asking for the second amendment people to take care of Hillary Clinton and has used the power of his office to harass his political opponents.

Hopefully this proves to be a temporary aberration, just a Trumpian phenomenon which will not take root in the American political system. I would hate to see America on the same level as North Korea, China and Russia when it comes to the treatment of diplomatic and political opponents. God willing, America can keep it together a few more months and the trajectory to a shit hole nation can be arrested.

The Absurdity: Part 2

Last time I wrote about the daily minutiae of my life in Korea, I was primarily concerned with taxis and bananas. I want to update you on those two issues which have driven me bananas for so long along with a couple of new issues which as an outsider on the margins of Korean society, drive me bananas.

First of all, I must thank E-Mart for starting to sell two bananas at a time for 990 won. It beats the single bananas at Starbucks for 1,500 and is much better than having to buy 10 bananas at once knowing I will throw half of them out. I would like to think my hard hitting article caused this recent development but I don’t think I can take credit for that.

However, I wish the geniuses at E-mart would stop wrapping the bananas in plastic bags. I understand the desire to protect the bananas but I just wish there was some natural skin that could protect bananas in lieu of the plastic? If only there was a tough natural skin that covered bananas which was biodegradable and wouldn’t pollute the oceans.

On the taxi front, I recently tried to grab a taxi home from Itaewon to HBC. The taxi driver initially welcomed me as my friend had a suitcase, but as soon as HBC was mentioned, he told us to get out. I politely refused and referenced the law which doesn’t allow him to refuse service.

We proceeded to the police station, where the police, admitted that he was breaking the law but insisted I get out so he could go sit and wait along the main road of Itaewon for a long haul ride as my destination was to close.

Last time I suggested arming elderly people with smartphones in order to ticket the numerous illegally parked cars in HBC. Thankfully this issue has largely been eliminated due to increased parking enforcement but I would like to see the Itaewon Police patrolling the main road along which Itaewon taxis park.

Too often taxis just sit along the main road of Itaewon refusing service to customers causing congestion and slower service from those taxi drivers who are willing to pick up and drop off customers anywhere. If they refuse to take customers, they should not be allowed to sit idly by on the mainroad of Itaewon.

The newest issue I found myself thinking about arose as I make plans to leave Korea; namely the issue of my E-2 VISA. Thank god The Korea Times doesn’t pay me or else I might be in violation of the E-2 which only permits me to teach conversational English. I may be mistaken but as I understand, I can’t pursue business or other money making opportunities.

Many expats, such as myself have ended up loving our time in Korea and stayed long behind our initial expectation of a year or two. However, E-2 Visas preclude myself from pursuing other money making opportunities in my spare time. If Korea is truly serious about improving its economy and making it more dynamic, then a natural step would be to unleash the creative energies of its expat population instead of limiting opportunities.

As long as E-2 visa holders are able to fulfill their main job duties, then they should be free to pursue other ventures. Many people who would consider staying in Korea decide to leave because of the limited opportunities imposed by the E-2 Visa. If they can turn their hobby into a business, then why limit them?

This should be allowed, especially to those who have lived in Korea for an extended period of time. Instead, many foreigners refuse to start a registered business or operate in a gray area, robbing the Korean government of tax revenue.

My other gripe with the E-2 visa is its limitations to ‘conversational english.’ I recently finished my masters in TESL and many times in class, discussions would veer back to the absurdity of this stipulation. I don’t remember a single professor who was not horrified by this. Korean kids are being done a disservice by being limited to conversational english.

Although the ‘conversational english’ seems pretty broad with a certain amount of leeway, it isn’t necessarily a limb I would care to venture out on as I really do enjoy living in Korea. Kids need to have more than the ability for playground communication, or conversational English. What is also needed is academic English; specifically

“the genre of English used in the world of research, study, teaching and universities” or as another put it ‘Academic English refers to words and practice that are not necessarily common or frequently encountered in informal conversation and circumstances.”

Granted, such concerns don’t arise for younger children as the focus is building a strong foundation to build on in the future. However, for older students, I find myself hampered by the limitations of ‘conversational english.’ Their minds are ready to be debating, writing, creating arguments and academic terms which fall beyond the pale of ‘conversational english.’

After living in Korea for nine years, bananas, taxis and the E-2 VISA have been driving me bananas. I just had to get all of this off my chest. However, my experiences with Korea aren’t strictly negative as there are many things about this country which I love and are the reasons I have stayed in Korea for as long as I have.

One thing which struck me very early in my stay in Korea was the periodic cleaning up of trash on school grounds and neighboring areas. I think it is great as this fosters a sense of community and responsibility amongst the children for their neighborhoods. It also gives them the ability to empathize with janitors and other people on the lower stratum of society who must clean up daily. Having to pick up the trash and litter generated by other students I would imagine quickly turns littering into an action which will bring about peer pressure to prevent.

I can’t help but compare the action of Korean kids with my experience in the American school system. I would be periodically punished with having to walk around school picking up trash but it was never a school wide effort. The act of picking up trash was used as a punishment instead of as a moment to teach empathy and responsibility.

Furthermore, you have people like the White House Advisor, Stephen Miller who would intentionally create a mess in High School and leave his trash for others to clean up. Instead of empathizing with people who have lower status jobs, he justified his actions as being necessary to create jobs and work for the janitors at his high school. He is truly a little shit with no empathy or understanding of those outside of his bubble of privilege. For that, I do admire what Korea is teaching their youths. I wish America would imitate some aspects of the many wonderful things I have seen in Korea.