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

621–630 of 739 posts

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

#621

Post by dyauspitr »

anigbrowl wrote: post #614
dyauspitr wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It is objectively worse in that the job doesn't come with cash flow. In an enlightened relationship where domestic duties are valued and all decision-making (including financial) is mutual and based on good faith, that'd work great. In reality if one person has all the cash income the relationship is usually massively skewed in their favor.

[flagged]

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

#622

Post by dyauspitr »

meiraleal wrote: post #574
dyauspitr wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Aren’t all assets in a marriage already equally owned?

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

#623

Post by mrguyorama »

yadaeno wrote: post #599
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #511

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the rationale of the 2nd Amendment in the US Constitution becomes clear About the one thing this situation does not need is armed randos taking matters into their own hands. Currently, Seoul is in a constitutional crisis. The President is required to lift martial law. He has not yet done so. If people on the streets started shooting at each other, he'd have legitimate reason to send in the military. Korea's lack of…

GP was responding to a hypothetical situation where the military does not care about the law and supports the president unconditionally. In this situation does the 2nd amendment make sense?

No, because by resisting at all you are already criminal, so why does it matter that you are legally allowed to own firearms when 2A supporters insist that banning firearms does not limit access to firearms?

A tyrannical state will not care that you are "legally" allowed to own firearms, and rebels do not get rights.

Also, I'll believe the claim that 2A is to prevent tyranny when I see it, because most of the time when you ask someone who supports the 2nd amendment about slave revolts, you tend to find out how little they care about "tyranny"

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

#624

Post by hackable_sand »

bluGill wrote: post #602
MrMcCall wrote: post #459

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me just acknowledge the excellence of JoshTriplett's comment and add a bit of my own. What you are really saying (not that you have the wherewithall to admit it) is you don't believe this can be done, and therefore no one can do it. In other words, you don't believe we can self-evolve into being better people, much less being beyond temptation to selfishness at the expense of others. And so, by believing this, yo…

It can be and is done. However it is only by careful effort as your base nature will sometimes do something that isn't a good thing. You are the same type of human as everyone else. There isn't anything special about Stalin that made him evil, all the evil in him could come out of you in the right situation. (and he thought he was doing good).

It doesn't take much effort or care at all to be genuine and good.

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

#625

Post by lenocinor »

carabiner wrote: post #534
kevstev wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't read it regularly, but The Economist is a great source that covers pretty much every corner of the world. In fact I don't subscribe because its just a firehose, and I just can't keep up with the internal squabbling of parties all over the world. I went to check to see if its available online- even via my local library, but it seems The Economist was pulled from major online sites around 2023 due to their pric…

Related: 'The Economist' To Halt Production For Month To Let Readers Catch Up https://theonion.com/the-economist-to-halt-production-for-mo... I can't imagine reading every issue cover to cover unless it's really relevant to your work.

I’ve been reading most articles in The Economist every week for 20 years. It’s not really relevant to my work. I don’t read every article thoroughly, though. There are some I don’t mind skimming, some I usually skip that are speculation about the future, and also when you’re up to date sometimes articles contain redundant info to bring relative newcomers up to speed.

It certainly has issues in the depth of its coverage, the simplistic endings of its articles, occasional culture war snipes, and lots of other stuff. It’s far from perfect. But for my money it’s still the best general world news source out there, and I check most of them out regularly. I have so many conversations with coworkers and people I meet about their home countries that I just couldn’t without reading The Economist.

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

#626

Post by mitthrowaway2 »

nullhole wrote: post #513
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One could argue that the invocation of the Emergencies Act in Canada (in response to protests against COVID safety measures) resembles martial law I'd agree with this characterisation.

>> One could argue that the invocation of the Emergencies Act in Canada (in response to protests against COVID safety measures) resembles martial law > I'd agree with this characterisation. I consider it an occupation of the capital. If re-establishing public order by forcing lawbreakers to leave is martial law, then so be it. It needed to happen. There have been successful long-running protests in Ottawa in the past…

> It needed to happen.

This is independent of the claim that it didn't happen ("Zero countries in the West enacted anything resembling martial law"). We're just talking about whether martial law was imposed, not whether it was unjustified.

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

#627

Post by etiam »

blitzar wrote: post #316
etiam wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure that's a worst case scenario? Pyongyang has clearly decided to get their troops current live combat experience and is soliciting military assistance from a larger aggressive dictatorship, which is however very busy elsewhere right now. That reason would be awful, and most likely the consequences too, but it's not readily obvious to me that the timing would be.

The South marching north would force China into the conflict and the West would very tentitatively stand by while South Koreans were being fed into a meat grinder. Should South Korea manage to unify North & South it would bankrupt them. The North marching South would get little to no support from their allies and would be repelled rapidly before returning to the current status quo. So yes, I am sure. Neither sides al…

I mostly agree with what you say, but I'm concerned about the middle point.

By a curious geographical coincidence, neither North Korea nor North China nor North Post-USSR are known for their independent reality-based reporting and I take it as a given that North Korea would never start a war of aggression. If the North should ever march South (again) it will of course be as a completely righteous response against intolerable provocation and aggression from its eternal enemy, as confirmed by media duly approved by Moscow and Beijing.

They're looking more ready and eager to do that by the month, and with the present Global political situation, the respect for current status quo seems to be at a low.

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

#628

Post by derefr »

philistine wrote: post #609
derefr wrote: post #510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Should South Korea manage to unify North & South it would bankrupt them. What if they didn't do that (at first), but instead (as an intermediate step) annexed the north as a colony with its own economy but South Korean governorship; and then opened said colony to worldwide foreign aid? This would be very similar to the short-term arrangement negotiated between West Germany and East Germany after the fall of the Ber…

East Germany was a tenth the economic strength of West Germany. North Korea is a hundredth the strength of South Korea, and not because South Korea is far more advanced than West Germany. It's one of the richest country in the world, right next to one of the poorest. Unification in any sense at this point is suicide by the South. The misery inflicted upon the southern Koreans will be immeasurable if both countries ar…

Isn’t the answer, then, to just give North Korea 10x as long as a “managed” colony before unification?

---

Or, alternately, given that literally everything in NK would need to be rebuilt at some point... rather than "swallowing the elephant whole", they could take incremental bites: annex a few miles of North Korea into themselves; revitalize/gentrify that part; repeat. Slowly, over 50 years.

(How? At the end of the war, they'd do a census, figuring out where every NK citizen lived as of the end of the war. Then, for each annexation, anyone already living in the annexed area as of the end of the war, would automatically become a South Korean citizen. Anyone who moved to the area after the end of the war would not, and would instead be required to vacate northward, with the SK government compensating them for the [very low value of the] home they're being displaced from, per eminent domain.)

Of course, any NK citizen would be free to apply at any time for a South Korean visa — just like a citizen of any other country can. They wouldn't be especially prioritized.

And an NK citizen would also be equally free to apply for a visa to move to literally anywhere else — possibly as a refugee. SK would probably encourage this and even assist with it.

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

#629

Post by s1artibartfast »

exe34 wrote: post #521
s1artibartfast wrote: post #480

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I recall correctly, I thought there was some legal provision in the US for the military to disobey unconstitutional orders. If it doesn't exist de jure , I suppose it always exists de facto , both in the US and elsewhere. I think it is always interesting when the curtain gets pulled back to reveal how all of our political systems and norms simply overlay the fact that power is the ultimate law of the land.

it's interesting that very few people would admit this, that society is founded upon violence.

Violence is a big part of it, but I used the word power specifically because I think it is more accurate.

Violence is a major form of power, but so are utility and persuasion.

You can persuade or pay people to things that you can't threaten or force them into.

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

#630

Post by JetSpiegel »

giardini wrote: post #429
wruza wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

crypto-Christian cult Had to look that up and wasn’t disappointed…

I was disappointed b/c it was not clear. OP could have instead stated: "...former president Park Geun-hye was secretly a religious cult member." which is shorter and clearer.

But "crypto" is Greek, everybody loves subrosa communication.
Post reply on HN