Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

apnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 739 posts

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#571

Post by hugh-avherald »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #539
falseprofit wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure the military is ignoring the constitution. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe they’re supposed to follow the president’s orders.

I'm not an expert on South Korean constitutional law. But from the parts that others have quoted here, if the legislature declares an end to the martial law, that's the end of the martial law. The military should not then be obeying the president's orders to impose martial law, because the martial law is over . In the US, military officers take their oaths to obey the constitution, not the president. I don't know if…

The Korean Constitution says that once the legislature declares an end to martial law, the President "shall comply". The military has to obey the President's orders until that time though, and 'shall comply' has two flaws: (a) it doesn't contemplate what happens if he doesn't and (b) it contemplates time passing, but doesn't specify the duration. These flaws are moot, because the President has complied.

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#572

Post by Polizeiposaune »

kijin wrote: post #441
cassepipe wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Last time I checked, access to the national assembly palace was being blocked : https://bsky.app/profile/sung-il-kim.com/post/3lcfskluuwc26 Any idea how and why it was unblocked ? Anyone with more context ? EDIT: This is the first I cannot think of any reason for getting a downvote... ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

The police kept the protesters out, but eventually let in most members of the national assembly and their staff after checking their ID. Martial law is about using the military to control civilian activities. The police are civilian. Their order is to maintain peace, not to interfere with people who have legitimate business at the facility. If Yoon really wanted to preempt the national assembly, he should have sent i…

It appears that the South Korean constitution has a few provisions relating to legislative immunity:

---

Article 44

1. During the sessions of the National Assembly, no member of the National Assembly shall be arrested or detained without the consent of the National Assembly except in case of flagrante delicto.

2. In case of apprehension or detention of a member of the National Assembly prior to the opening of a session, such member shall be released during the session upon the request of the National Assembly, except in case of flagrante delicto.

Article 45

No member of the National Assembly shall be held responsible outside the National Assembly for opinions officially expressed or votes cast in the Assembly.

---

(from https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Republic_of_K... linked elsewhere in this thread; "flagrante delicto" is a legal term of art for "being caught in the act". These provisions are similar to ones found in Article I section 6 of the US constitution.).

Edit to give additional credit where it's due:

According to the US Library of Congress, the US Speech or Debate clause is derived from a similar provision in the English Bill of Rights of 1689 and was adopted as part of the US constitution without much discussion.

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S6-C1-3-...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#574

Post by meiraleal »

dyauspitr wrote: post #469
zelon88 wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The paradox is; Society should benefit everyone equally. If it doesn't, then the ones who are not benefiting have a social responsibility to adjust it until it does. By hook or by crook, for better or worse. Equity is usually pretty difficult to swallow for those who are benefiting inequitably. But the thing is, if it's not working for everyone, it isn't working at all and it should probably be broken the rest of the…

This is presumptively assuming that being a homemaker is an objectively “worse” position. I think a lot of women would disagree with that position, possibly the majority. Equity cannot mean that everyone works in an office, it should also mean that women that want to stay at home should be able to without being forced into a corporate world by the economy/circumstances.

> Equity cannot mean that everyone works in an office, it should also mean that women that want to stay at home should be able to without being forced into a corporate world by the economy/circumstances

Make it the law then. Housewives having an equal share of their husbands' income only when the husband is in a good mood is not a place we as society want to get back to.

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#575

Post by hyeonwho4 »

dtquad wrote: post #60
cdiamand wrote: post #25

Can someone familiar with South Korean politics give us some context for what is happening here?

1. Very low trust in politicians after it was revealed former president Park Geun-hye was secretly a crypto-Christian cult member despite claiming to be atheist. 2. South Korea has a bizarre large-scale "gender war" going on that extents into mainstream society. Imagine the Western online MRA/redpill/incel vs. radfem circles but as core identities in national politics. For some reason a high-trust society has decided…

Re: 2. The "gender war" is greatly exaggerated and much astroturfed. Marriage rates have been dropping for decades because Koreans in their 20s and 30s cannot maintain the economic expectations of their parents. (Korean norms require a condo before marriage, when the going rate for condos is 30x median salary. Young people usually start their careers at below-median salaries.)

The way the "gender war" appeared was that Yoon was more popular among men, and this was reported in the international news, then Korean news reporters reported on the international news, legitimizing the story of a gender gap.

This primed Korean journalists to look for further signs of conflict between the genders, which were then amplified out of proportion by international journalists looking for a story. Korean journalists see the international stories as more trustworthy, and now they report as if there is a gender war.

There is a heavy selection bias among journalists to look for spicy gender stories, where the actual participants are the fringe of an online "movement". The Korean press club doesn't seem to understand or account for these biases. In real life there isn't much "war".

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#576

Post by michaelt »

soraminazuki wrote: post #541
falseprofit wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not sure the military is ignoring the constitution. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe they’re supposed to follow the president’s orders.

Militaries in liberal democracies should protect the constitution, even if that means disobeying the president.

The thing is, if you're planning a coup with military backing, you don't do it when your most rule-abiding, law-respecting general is in town. You send that guy to guard the Alaskan border or whatever, and instead recruit a general who's a maverick rules-breaker and who gets on well with you personally.

So the military should respect the constitution, but when it comes to a coup you'll get whichever general respects the constitution the least.

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#577

Post by rrrrrrrrrrrryan »

bluGill wrote: post #455
JoshTriplett wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If it isn't in you it means you are carefully suppressing it. This is false and excessively cynical. There are genuinely good people who have values and live up to those values, without hypocrisy, and that doesn't mean they have "carefully suppressed" desires to do otherwise.

They have desires all the time. Most of them will admit it. their actions prove their success at the suppression.

We all have conflicting desires. You might desire a healthy physique while simultaneously desiring a hamburger.

But do you want to want the hamburger? Or do you want to want a salad? Which do you, the person (not the animal), really want?

With a bit of reflection, it's not so difficult to figure out what you as a person really want, and it's often different than your lower level primal drives.

Those who choose to eat the salad haven't suppressed anything - they've simply aligned their actions with their higher order desires.

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#578

Post by meiraleal »

cassepipe wrote: post #42
rvz wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You edited your low-effort take into another still unargumented low-effort take... I see that you are not new here so you probably know what to expect for your comment, HN doesn't look kindly of flamebait. I am hijacking your comment in the hope that you and others will read the link I post here from a military historian whose articles end up regularly on the front page of HN. It adresses the question of US foreign a…

> It adresses the question of US foreign adventurism and why the situation is different today. I.e why Iraq and Ukraine is not the same. It also give you a framework to think about international order.

The Russian internet is full of well-crafted content like this, with the opposite view. Both are propaganda.

Re: South Korean president declares martial law, parliament votes to lift it

#580

Post by macintux »

lfmunoz4 wrote: post #514
jmyeet wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because we've collectively been propagandised out of any sense of class consciousness. We don't have class solidarity with our fellow workers. Instead we see ourselves as Jeff Bezos-in-waiting, "temporarily embarrassed millionaires" [1]. We have been manipulated into hyper-individualism and division across pointless lines like race or gender identity as a means of preventing labor solidarity. Depending on which count…

Sounds like over philosophizing, could it just be that corruption (i.e, are Biden/Harris the most qualified people in the USA to run the country? If not that is a form of corruption.) is at an all time high, and inequality is growing. If you look at US elections you see the educated elite in NY and CA verses the rest of the country.

It's hard to imagine that corruption is a rational, or even irrational, reason to vote in Trump.

And the easiest way to reduce inequality is to raise taxes on the rich, which voters also apparently don't support if they're voting Republican.

Post reply on HN