Yet Another Night of Aggression   2008-06-27 11:58

Protesters and the police clashed violently once again last night. As if water cannons and fire extinguishers weren't enough, bricks and stones flew in both directions. A number of People -- both citizens and riot police -- were hit by these and sent to hospitals. At least one man suffered substantial head injury, and numerous limbs are reported to have been broken. Since yesterday, the situation is quickly getting out of control. Organizing NGO's urged angry protesters to keep the peace even as the police went about exerting violence, but it's hard to control a crowd of 20,000 especially if few of them even belong to the NGO's in question. It seems that a lot of citizens are finally reaching the limits of their patience, after fifty straight nights of demonstration with no result whatsoever. A few dozen citizens pooled their money to buy eggs, which they urged others to throw instead of bricks and stones. But when they ran out of eggs, angry protesters turned to bricks once again.

A few individuals were also witnessed beating up a member of the riot police (see picture below). I don't know what the poor guy did to provoke anger, but this kind of behavior is clearly unacceptable. Not only are most policemen simply following orders from higher up, but violence on our side also gives the government a perfect excuse to use more violence against us. The government and a few pro-government media have already begun to paint demonstrators as a lawless mob of communists and antisocials. Most of us can't afford to let them have their way. The police should arrest these violent individuals instead of all those innocent men, women and and teenagers!

Having said that, however, I can understand how the citizens in the front row must be feeling right now. They -- I mean, we -- have been asking for the same things for over seven weeks now. Don't import foodstuff that a lot of People think are unsafe; or at least put in place proper regulations so that whoever trades unsafe food can be held responsible. Don't take universal health care away from us; we don't want to live in one of the only two countries in the developed world that doesn't have universal health care. (The other one is the U.S.) Don't privatize essential utilities such as electricity and gas, as long as it is absolutely clear that prices will go up -- and especially if a large chunk of the money from the sale of these public corporations is likely to go into the pockets of President Lee's family and friends. Think before messing with public education; we're not gonna let our children become subjects/victims of unreasonable policy experiments. And how has the government responded? In my very first post, I said that the government had totally ignored our petitions. The same is true even now, when the month of June is nearly over. President Lee and his officials did make a few apologies and new proposals, but any intelligent person could see that their promises were nothing but a slightly different way of talking about the same unjust policies. What did we get? Nothing but disappointment. What did we lose? Seven weeks of our time, over one thousand injured, and possibly a life lost or two. (That's right, the "theory" that a protester's death was covered up has yet to be refuted. The person who started that theory got arrested, and the administrator of an online forum dedicated to finding out the truth is missing since a couple of weeks ago. We can't help but continue to suspect that something dirty is going on!) Many citizens are now feeling that there's no point continuing to try and talk, in a civilized manner, with the current administration. If you want somebody to listen to you, you shout. When that person looks like he didn't hear you, you shout even louder. You shout from different directions. You wave at him, frantically if you're desperate. But if the dumb buy still doesn't listen, and you absolutely need to make him listen, what do you do? You give him a slap.

Almost every society recognizes the right of self-defense. If you're being attacked, and the only way you can protect yourself is to use violence against the attacker, then you are justified in using violence -- so long as the amount of violence you use is appropriate for the occasion. Now, the law doesn't say anything helpful about the situation in Korea now. One day, the government says that citizens should only demonstrate on the sidewalk; the next day, protesters on the sidewalk get arrested for holding small flags. Anti-government demonstrators get arrested for the slightest hint of aggression; pro-government thugs, on the other hand, can beat us up and go free. Whether or not it is okay to use violence in trying to breach the barricade around the Blue House, and if so, how much violence is justifiable, is no longer a question of law but a question of conscience and higher principles. Do President Lee's current policies (and other policies he is likely to introduce in the 4 years and 8 months that remain of his term) pose threats to the livelihood of ordinary citizens that are significant enough to justify aggression in trying to prevent it? Are we justified in trashing a section of the police barricade? Beating up a few officers who stand in our way to democracy? Smashing the windows of pro-government corporate headquarters? Breaking into the Blue House? Staging some sort of old-fashioned revolution?

I have no answer to these questions, and I don't think I'm qualified to give one. Rights and freedoms are difficult to compare with injuries and lives; some would die for democracy but others have families to look after. Yesterday around 2:30 a.m., a mother with a baby stood in front of the water cannons and ordered the police to leave. Not being cruel enough to shoot water cannons at the baby, the police pulled back and the cannons stopped. When the story of this mother became known, fierce debates ensued as to whether or not the mother's decision was right. Is she a hero who saved hundreds of others from injury, or was she a reckless woman who exposed her son to danger? My view is that there isn't a single logical answer in this case. Morality sometimes demands that we make a difficult choice, based on nothing but the dictates of our own conscience. And in such a case, who is there to cast the stone? The mother may have done the right thing; or she may have wronged her son. In either case, it is not for mere bystanders to pass a judgment on her right now. If there is a right answer (and I'm convinced that there is), we will have to let history tell it. The same is true of using aggression against the government. Each person should decide for himself/herself what is justified and what is not, and take full responsibility for his/her choices. NGO's can only ever provide rough guidelines; at the critical moment, it is our own conscience we should listen to.

(Update: Please read my "Calm before the Storm" for clarification on this topic.)

The coalition of NGO's is planning a public discussion this evening, in which they will decide upon the next course of action. But as I said, individual citizens are not bound by whatever decision the NGO's might make, because most of them are participating of their own accord. If you want peace, protest peacefully; we still have a lot of candles to burn. If you're more passionate, do something about that ugly barricade. Or if you want to call it quits and go back to your usual life, again, nobody's stopping you. But one thing must be remembered: we'll be making important choices in the coming days, and each of us will have to take responsibility for those choices. Peaceful protesters should remember that their petitions are unlikely to be answered. More aggressive folks should accept that they are likely to get prosecuted. And when all of us come together, we'll get where we'll get, as history unfolds itself. Did the Americans who dumped tea into Boston Harbor on that cold winter night knew what they were getting into?

» Comments are Closed.