2,99 €
Mehr erfahren.
- Herausgeber: tredition
- Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
- Sprache: Englisch
The Purge Revolution — It began with two words on Truth Social. In the Korean media, the U.S.–Korea summit was hailed as a “Summit.” Trump, however, labeled it a “meeting.” That one word drew the line between protocol, prestige, and trust. On that day—no military honor guard, Blair House vacated, only the wind dancing over the runway—two words flashed on Trump’s Truth Social: Purge and Revolution. To Western audiences, the gravity is immediate: internal purge, systemic revolt. This was never a throwaway joke. It was the opening salvo of unofficial diplomacy, one that shifts investment flows, alliance structures, and trust ratings. This book maps the past 100 days around that message. From South Korea’s legislative, media, and budget-authority consolidation into a totalitarian control loop, to the shock waves in religious freedom, to the organizing of Nepal’s Gen Z uprising—seemingly disparate events converge toward the axis of Purge / Revolution. “News speaks of today, but power designs tomorrow.” How a single line from Trump can reshape ceremony orders, guest rankings, investment projections, tariff tone, swap accords, and defense packages — and why the shadow cast by those words deepens as Korea slides into Chinese dependence, censorship framing, and debt-driven redistribution. From the 1997 financial crisis to ESG and supply chains, platform censorship to CBDC and digital identity, and the politics behind “swap = not money but a credit of hegemony”—all, in one sweep. The Purge Revolution does not amplify conspiracies. It lets you discern them. In its final chapter, you will ask:“Where do we stand — within a camp where freedom breathes, or on the ladder of control?” This is a real-time journalistic-political essay, written by one witness over 100 days, threading together events in South Korea and the world. Venezuela’s stolen elections and drug cartels, Puerto Rico’s landing drills, symbolic treatment of Korea vs. Poland in the U.S., how EU regulation twists global AI and platform order, and how a single act against religious freedom rings a totalitarian alarm. The Purge Revolution emerged from one message on Trump’s feed: WHAT’S GOING ON IN SOUTH KOREA? It becomes our shared inquiry — a personal, urgent, diary-like political essay. “For them, borders may be debated — but freedom is nonnegotiable.” Perhaps the moment to defend South Korea’s last free habitat draws near.
Das E-Book können Sie in Legimi-Apps oder einer beliebigen App lesen, die das folgende Format unterstützen:
Seitenzahl: 492
Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2025
Ähnliche
The Purge
Revolution
© 2025 Yeong Hwan Choi
Website: https://books2read.com/ap/8vA679/Yeong-Hwan-Choi
Druck und Distribution im Auftrag des Autors:
tredition GmbH, Heinz-Beusen-Stieg 5, 22926 Ahrensburg, Deutschland
Das Werk, einschließlich seiner Teile, ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Für die Inhalte ist der Autor verantwortlich. Jede Verwertung ist ohne seine Zustimmung unzulässig. Die Publikation und Verbreitung erfolgen im Auftrag des Autors, zu erreichen unter: Republic of Korea, Cheongsaseo-ro 54/70, 35213 Seo-gu, Daejeon, Republic of Korea, Germany .Kontaktadresse nach EU-Produktsicherheitsverordnung: [email protected]
Table of Contents
Title Page
Copyright Page
The Purge Revolution: A Hundred Days That Shook South Korea
July 2, 2025
“Writing to survive was never permitted.”
July 3, 2025
July 4, 2025
July 5, 2025
July 14, 2025.
To President Trump,
FBI Director Kash Patel,
CIA Director John Ratcliffe
July 14, 2025
Secretary Marco Rubio
July 21, 2025
To Director Gabrd of the DNI and Attorney General Pam Bondi,
July 27, 2025
July 29, 2025
August 8, 2025
August 15, 2025
August 22, 2025
August 24, 2025
August 25, 2025
August 28, 2025.
August 30, 2025.
September 2, 2025.
September 3, 2025.
September 6, 2025.
September 6, 2025.
September 7, 2025.
September 9, 2025.
September 10, 2025.
September 11, 2025
September 12, 2025
September 13, 2025
September 15, 2025
September 16, 2025
September 17, 2025
September 18, 2025
September 19, 2025
September 22, 2025
September 23, 2025
September 24, 2025
September 25, 2025
September 26, 2025
We Live Within Our Own Habitats
A Hundred Days That Shook
South Korea
Yeong Hwan Choi
July 2, 2025
11 a.m. My father called. His voice was steady.
“Your uncle passed away. Come by and bow at least once.”
Silence held for a moment. I tried to imagine the weight behind his voice. There was no grief. If there were a handbook for what to say at such a time, he had opened to the first page.
“Do I have to go?” The words rose to my throat but stayed there. Even if I went, under the name of family there would only be strained ties. The last conversation I recalled with my uncle was years ago, during Chuseok. (the Korean autumn harvest holiday, similar to Thanksgiving).
“Plenty of complaints at work? The longer you work, the more you dislike people.”
We never spoke again after that. I wasn’t especially sad, but through the receiver came the stench you catch when you lean too close to spoiled fish.
While I hesitated, my father went on.
“He died alone at home. We couldn’t reach him. When the door was opened, the smell was unbearable. Must have been some time.”
“Alone.” “The door opened.” “The smell.”
Death is an event. To die alone is a sentence. And that sentence is always declarative.
My uncle was rotting. His organs had ruptured, his fluids had dried, his mouth sealed with blackened blood. Shells left under the name of family. Conversations never spoken. Anger left at room temperature. And now, only after death, a kind of justification.
It was the outcome of no one touching anything. That is family. A closed door for each other. When someone knocks, no one answers. Only when the door itself decays do they rush in, drawing tears from their pockets.
I had nothing to take out.
Only an empty drawer. I had never put feelings inside, so nothing could be removed. He was my father’s brother, and I was his nephew. But a sentence is only a relation, not a meaning.
While on the call, I caught my reflection. My eyes looked darker than usual. People sometimes prove they are alive when facing another’s death. I had no wish to prove it that way. Still I lingered, and my father spoke again.
“I’ll go in the afternoon. What about you?”
At some point the call ended. The screen went black. I set the phone down on the desk and opened the window. Air came in. There was no smell here.
If I had spoken to him earlier, perhaps my uncle would not have died alone. Yet people now gather to perform a ritual. What a strange act. Was it for the dead, or a show to protect appearances? Nietzsche once wrote that most morality was born of power. In my mid-thirties, I was beginning to understand what that meant.
Since leaving my job, I have lived with books for company. Before stepping out the front door, I paused for a minute of prayer. If there is a god, may he judge that man well.
In the end, I did not go to the funeral. Wearing black and bending at the waist would have been a play. Not responsibility, only the mimicry of conscience. Guilt always arrives late. That is why it rings false.
And in the end, it hardly matters who the dead was. Society always demands the same script.
Black suits. Tears. A condolence book. A single white chrysanthemum.
Grief does not belong on a stage. Why does no one say it.
At the bookstore I lowered my head again. One full minute.
“May he be less alone in the sky.”
I picked up a book. Schopenhauer’s The World as Will and Representation. Even that book says humans exist to help one another. I do not believe it. At times a human is not needed by another human. Under the sky no one lives another’s life.
Family. Friends. Love.
All pass.
And no one followed.
Humans do not feel emotions.
They did not speak of them.
They only behaved as if they did.
The age of emotional surplus moved by current, not depth.
It did not appear as the outcome of awareness.
Through the filtering of law and morality,
emotions traveled into the pipe system of a habitat.
A drain built by human hands formed its center.
Release mattered more than absorption.
So emotions did not pool.
They had to leave.
They had to flow.
At a speed that could be measured. Toward the habitat without leaving suspicion.
PVC or PE conduits carried the shape of language and empathy.
Slopes were calculated.
Only when the flow matched the gradient did social order seem stable.
People lived by performing emotions that belonged to the system.
That performance certified their humanity.
Emotion was a social particle, assigned and circulated.
Ignorance absorbed it easily.
Agitation packaged consolation and empathy as commodities.
Society used the stream. Politicians seized power from it.
And yet, there were always those who opened the chamber themselves.
They carried pain but refused to shape it.
They waved off comfort.
In the ancient square, they did not join the chorus.
In the square of revolution, they did not shout.
At the sight of tears, they did not bend.
For the structure to remain, there had to be people who withheld flow, who refused to follow.
For them, the drain was not a passage toward the habitat.
Society feared the ones who saw that gap.
They exposed the falsity of power, morality, justice, success, and love when stripped of words.
Emotions that never reached the habitat were emotions the age could not accept.
They were not released.
Not explained.
Not consoled.
Only their traces slipped into the sewer.
Through treatment plants, they returned with new labels.
“You’ll be fine.” “Someone said it before.” “You too? Me too.”
The processed emotion was drunk like tap water.
But the waste never disappeared.
Only its name changed.
No one held emotion. Everyone drained it.
At last, the feelings that settled on the impermeable layer rose back.
In cracks where the pipes could not reach, in slopes no one could design, in currents no one could measure.
I remained there too.
And so,
I had to write.
“Writing to survive was never permitted.”
After leaving my job, I often went to bookshops.
The sight of books aligned on shelves allowed me to catch my breath.
What I held in my hands was proof that someone else had already struggled through words.
The market economy was honest.
Books that sold remained.
Books that remained, sold.
People dislike the labor of thinking.
They prefer to consume, to live with less strain.
Capitalism caught that desire precisely.
Capital devoted itself to designing the slope of the conduit, and people called that design freedom. When money dictates direction, it deceives less than people do.
I had no wish to condemn the order of survival.
Not “to live,” but “to live on.”
Still, I would pause between the aisles and rest my eyes on the shelves.
Today again, after thirty minutes of wandering, I chose a few volumes from philosophy.
Once opened, they were not much different.
They claimed reason and logic, yet painted their pages with strokes of sympathy.
Insight was missing.
Material wealth took the blame, again and again.
Perhaps one heretic’s book might be hiding here.
A book most would not reach for.
A book few would even touch.
A book that endured in silence.
I hoped at least one such volume remained.
It did not need to be read.
Its presence alone was enough.
Because it carried more than what had already slipped away.
The forbidden writings showed themselves first in form,
their voices telling when the cracks began.
Today again, the bookstore opens at ten and closes at twenty-two.
Writing to survive means enduring thoughts that are not permitted.
Perhaps that is why such writings arrive late.
Humans who prefer instant reward do not linger on them.
They grab books in haste, return to the same shelves, and turn the page before thought can arrive.
White light stretches from entrance to ceiling.
Aisles kept in line. Vents maintaining temperature. An announcement breaking the quiet.
People submit to random order.
Phrases everyone can agree on—words that sell interpretation without dismantling the self.
They were not honest.
I began to see why this country is fragile in the face of collective feeling, why no one seems able to press a conviction to the end.
We say water flows.
But to flow it needs a structure.
Someone builds it.
The rest only follow.
Pipes have gradient, pressure, and loss.
Watching the water move through them gave people relief.
When impurities are filtered and what remains strikes the throat,
emotion is easily outsourced.
And still, people do not ask.
“Why think of such things?”
“Even one day is hard enough.”
The age of agitation is here.
Emotions are assigned.
Roles are distributed.
The more the state controls,
the more empathy becomes a commodity,
and sentiment, a duty-free good.
They called this flow the right way to live.
Once movement begins,
the art of stopping is forgotten.
The head of water before release.
The stagnant pool after discharge.
That,
was what I needed.
People cast tender looks even at objects without life.
They held their smartphones, stroked the glass, and emotion shifted easily, even without the reciprocity of living things.
If artificial intelligence can mimic language and absorb its structure, then inanimate matter can also reproduce emotion much like humans do.
If feelings can be performed without hormones, there is little ground to claim they are anything different.
This was not sewage, nor clean water destined for a reservoir.
The more emotions were assigned by a system, the more sorrow grew alike, and anger erupted in unison.
Collective sentiment stalled the machinery of the state.
Human emotions were being formatted.
They consumed them, and forgot what they were.
When had it begun?
Was there ever a moment when feeling was defined only if blood moved, the brain fired, and nerves flared?
Or had it always been so, unquestioned?
Some words prick easily. A drama brings tears, a ballad lingers, and people take such reactions as proof of being alive.
They equate emotion with evidence of life—pain confirms vitality, sorrow confirms humanity.
But empathy, when measured in sales, became political gain.
Algorithms predicted it.
Which means emotion does not belong only to the living.
As long as people cling to the old belief—that emotion is owned by those alive, licensed by the body—they will miss the larger flow.
Even now, many believe feeling is nothing more than hormones, nerves, chemistry within cells.
The corpses of sentiments press down.
A graveyard of words.
“Money will be spent. Debt will be made.” A government releases funds under the slogan of serving its people.
Speak of stability, and it is greed.
Speak of restraint, and it is incompetence.
Yet the ignorant crowd applauds.
We trust the direction of flow because it hurts less.
Responsibility spreads thin. No one has to measure the velocity.
Still, something stood out.
The richer grew wealthier, climbing to safer ground.
Emotion, then, could never be treated as private property.
In Korea especially, decisions of self were priced by others.
Identity was built from numbers assigned externally.
That became concept.
Emotion was restored as simulation.
Only after that departure did emotion turn into narrative.
Only then did critique begin to work, aligned against an outside system.
Consciousness living in the depth of structure—rare for a human governed by sentiment.
July 3, 2025
I meant to go to the bookstore, but didn’t.
The heat was heavy. Damp, sticky, without reason to move.
I picked up an iced Americano at a nearby café and went back home.
By the time I sat in the chair, the sweat had already cooled.
These days I don’t turn on the news.
Power smiles. Lies stay composed. Truth is always weary.
After a clumsy impeachment, the current regime took the country with ease.
They carried no guns. Instead, they turned a single word into insurrection, and reversed a single interpretation into rebellion.
Say “fraudulent election,” and half the public was threatened with the label of traitor.
It was fear.
Ask how this differs from the broadcasts of the Chinese Communist Party or North Korea, and the head tilts slightly.
Perhaps that was the point—to make people give up.
Suspicion, without movement.
Distrust, without words.
In the name of judicial reform they dismantled the prosecutors’ office, seized the legislature and the executive.
They stacked the Supreme Court, eroding the separation of powers, as in Venezuela.
When every charge was deferred, judges and courts stood powerless.
But the American gaze on South Korea was different.
So was Europe’s.
At the G7, the eyes of leaders revealed how fragile this government was.
Money to the North had already been admitted.
As for election fraud, a simple disclosure of the voter rolls would settle it. To avoid that single act, they hand out cash to citizens and tighten control of the press.
To hide is to admit something exists.
To erase is to leave a record.
To stay silent is to acknowledge.
I left the cup half-drunk on the window ledge.
Outside, the heat lingered. Right now, indifference felt a little more honest than reading.
At two in the afternoon I flipped through a few foreign channels.
The headline said Korean companies were on the verge of collapse.
Tariffs had landed hard, and in the middle of it the National Assembly sided with the unions.
The “Yellow Envelope Law,” they called it—paraded as a defense of workers, cursed as a veto defied. But talk of protecting workers meant little. Lifting one class upward was a way of justifying collision with capital.
When capital leaves, the space hollows out.
And in that hollow, the state steps in.
The state rescues itself first, before its people.
Now the list is long. Repeal of the National Security Act.
Mandatory pension payments from high school students.
Eighteen trillion borrowed from the central bank.
Scholarships cut, coupons scattered.
Revenue thins.
Debt piles up.
The Kospi climbs.
Property rises again.
Most people don’t see that the republic has already cracked.
It has always been this way.
And will be again.
NPC(Non-Playable Character) breathe at a fixed pace, nod at partisan news, march in the same rhythm to the polls.
Children yet unborn will inherit debt.
The young are test subjects for state policy.
Bubbles never announce themselves early.
What the printed money buys is a passing hallucination.
That is the national character: distance from reality, ease of persuasion, a crowd left unmoved.
Especially those in their forties and fifties.
Trained spectators.
For me, that was the harshest shock.
News spreads of a possible U.S. troop withdrawal from South Korea. Few can predict the economic shock that would follow. After the disputed election, Washington no longer treats Seoul as a strategic partner. Foreign capital leaves when security fades. An economy walks on thin ice. Who will stay behind.
International observers watch the government’s moves. A report reached a corner of the press room in Washington. Staffers for a handful of senators and representatives glanced at it. There are whispers the document reached the State Department and the DNI. But a document is only paper.
What was needed was a crowd in the streets and the will of a public.
Some went to Myeong-dong and shouted “Stop the Steal.”
America has not replied.
If the United States steps in, it will be for its own gain. In that sense, South Korea may already be a diminished ally.
It might be better to become America’s fifty-first state. The left would call it a colony, call it shame. But I wanted no part of China’s creeping system. Better ruthless capitalism than the hypocrisy of communism.
Left-wing celebrities stay silent on North Korean nuclear waste. Naver and Kakao erase its routes from maps. The press cooperates with censorship. Schools look away. Bureaucrats trade favors while selling grand ideals.
Here, the voice of falsehood is louder than truth. The speed of agitation outruns the internet. Truth remains for the few. I have nothing I can do, yet thoughts multiply. There is no one to share them with. So I keep a diary. On paper, at least, I try to hold on to a world of my own.
I take a sip of coffee.
Its bitterness lingers.
Soon it is time to sleep.
Maybe it’s the heat. For more than a month, sleep will not come. Imagining a tomorrow inside a collapsing country has been harder than expected.
July 4, 2025
A German YouTube channel with 25 million subscribers streamed a video under the title “Korea is Finished.” The thumbnail showed the national flag melting into flames. It had been some time since I last watched the German version, but the Korean-dubbed edition forced itself into my screen.
Decline from collapsing birthrates.
Cuts in defense.
Breakdown of the economic system.
I read the comments. They carried the cadence of the young. You could tell from their phrasing. “I’m leaving.” “I’ve already lost all attachment to this country.” Mentions of gender conflict. Disputes between older generations tied to pensions and younger ones carrying the burden. A resignation that the wish for something better here had long vanished.
After watching, I went to a bookstore. I picked up nothing. Just turned a few pages and left. The sunlight outside looked unusually white.
Collapse is never only disappearance. Destruction can sometimes be the prelude to creation. If the identity of South Korea disintegrates entirely, perhaps what follows could be a country more culturally varied. A place where people who cannot easily speak to one another still live side by side. Where they fight, debate, negotiate, and endure as a community. What must end is the present version of collectivism, where speaking the same language has only deepened the failure to understand.
We live on a narrow strip of land, with no basic resources, leaning too heavily on geography as if it were enough. No one called the arrangement abnormal. The problem was not capitalism, which thrives on competition. It was the collectivism peculiar to this country—people who live by the eyes of others, stripped of any sense of their own will. From time to time, I felt like a foreigner with blue eyes, looking at Korea from the outside.
I was drifting away from the habitat. The urge to understand faded. The will to fix it thinned. Hearing the cracks of collapse, I wondered if waiting for a new structure, however strange, was the more natural posture.
Inside, professors appeared in number, persuading citizens that low birthrates were a blessing. Inverse logic packaged as foresight. Demographers and economists spoke as if they could read the future from a string of numbers. Yet the future is not data. Their lectures and videos seemed less about prediction and more about sales. The problem was not whether they were right or wrong, but the way they framed it. To some, falling birthrates signaled the habitat’s decline. To others, they could be recast as opportunity.
Across the Pacific, in a habitat where different faces moved through the streets, the Federal Reserve kept rates steady. Trump called for a cut to one percent. Most Americans still sided with the Fed. They leaned on the dot plot, pointed to independence, invoked expertise. An institution built from the private sector, but in practice it worked like any bureaucracy. Bureaucrats are always slow. Markets move quickly. The trailing data they release may inform, but mostly it serves as cover, a defense against blame.
President Trump is a businessman. He reacts on instinct, quick to reverse an argument, unafraid to discard logic if it slows him down. After seven years of working with civil servants, the contrast is sharp. The culture is different, but the results often feel more direct than the weight of old bureaucracy. Here, too, the country is filled with people trained in the humanities, talking in circles, offering theories without action. The logic of population utility is unsound. In the demographic pyramid, those over sixty already make up more than sixty percent. This is a country without young people. What can the elderly build among themselves?
If the population consists only of those beyond childbearing years, the next stage is predictable. Foreign capital from Southeast Asia or China will move in. Land will be bought. Jobs will shift. Customs will bend. A national identity dissolves not with noise but through this kind of quiet rearrangement.
The resilience of the U.S.–Israel relationship comes from the Jewish community. A people marked by history, yet their influence in America is not conspiracy. In a nation where lobbying is part of politics, their grip on advertising and finance makes them indispensable patrons of power. The detour matters. Just as Jews shape parts of American society, Southeast Asia and Korea already live under the weight of another influence: the Chinese diaspora. Their reach is steady, and their leverage is often decisive.
The demographic pyramid has long been inverted. There is no strength left to absorb change, no time to fail and recover. Population utility is irrelevant in terms of GDP. This country never built its future on patents or original technologies. Its strength came from producing fast, selling fast. But technology is still the work of human hands. Fewer people means stalled production. Stalled production leads to national decline. And yet, they keep saying their generation still holds the center, convinced the world is still turning because of them.
I do not know where that certainty comes from. Words grow ornate, while the ground beneath them deteriorates. In this society, fame means applause even for the obscene. The structure does not change with the times. If my book had been famous, heads would have nodded without a trace of criticism. “That must be right,” they would have said. No context. No thought.
I pictured the scene in my head. Korea is such a place. A country of collectivism, where people lack the instinct to judge for themselves. Watching them, I learned to step back from words. Just as the thought began to fade, I came across a book in the store. At last, something different. Its title: The Dangerous Philosophy Book. The cover was plain. The author, a professor. I expected no authority in that.
The table of contents listed its provocations. “Humans have no free will.” “Humans feel nothing for others.” “Animals do not suffer.” “Goodness is luck.” “It is permissible to kill infants.” “It is better never to be born.” “The state should not exist.” Bold titles, meant to provoke. Yet the text itself did not attack. Its structure was familiar. Each chapter began with an example, then built an argument. Swift’s satire. Yoo Young-chul’s murders. The philosopher’s zombie. Laplace’s demon. Wittgenstein’s beetle.
In my own book, Value Error, I had used figures like these. Anyone who has wrestled with philosophy would recognize them. But this book did not explain philosophy. It dismantled it, piece by piece, in the reader’s mind. Emotions. Convictions. Ethics. All the things assumed to be natural. That is what I liked. Common, safe thoughts hold little interest.
I read for two hours, then closed it. It was enough. Relief came from knowing there are others who see the world in this way.
That is why it was dangerous.
And that is why it was philosophy.
As soon as I returned home, I caught a single line from The Wall Street Journal.
“In 2024 alone, Chinese warships crossed into Korean waters 330 times.” Each time, the line of defense shifted a little. Some called it an intrusion. Others said it was only an exercise. No one stopped them. And as always, no one took responsibility.
The sky was no different. One hundred thirty aircraft cut across the sea winds. The only thing that came back was another press release.
Everyone knows. Outside a narrow few, this country speaks no words. China launches carriers as it pleases, erects structures as if nothing is happening. The number of people asking what they are building falls by the day. Around the same time, several Korean firms began surrendering shares. It looked as if they belonged to no one. No one admitted to selling. Names changed quietly. Owners shifted.
I could not understand why this country is so silent, why it empties itself. Then I recalled a sentence I had read earlier in the day: “The state is best when it is least.” At that moment, the words overlapped with the sea.
I plan to send a letter tomorrow. Today I spent about three hours on it. There isn’t much to say from a collapsing country. Yet if these letters one day form a single dossier, perhaps it could serve America’s interests and offer Korea a new blueprint.
The first recipient will be Ambassador Mosre H Tan, who served as international judicial envoy during Trump’s first administration. Beyond his Korean roots, I have no real reason to trust him. But to them, Korea is less an ally than an external variable, replaceable at any time. That is why I chose to send it first to someone who shares a trace of the same origin. After that, it will go directly to President Trump.
Even if the world runs on predation, even if it behaves like a swarm of animals moved only by impulse, somewhere, someone might read my sentences to the end. The words I write are a small act of resistance to that possibility, a voice sounding from outside a powerless state.
I know the Korea most people want is not the Korea I want. But I will dismantle this structure in my own way, record it, and testify to it. That is why I write. And that is why I am still alive.
The letter will likely say this: that between the 2020 U.S. presidential election and the 2022 Korean presidential election, there was a strange resonance. At the center of it, fraud. Ballots flown in on a Korean Air cargo plane.
The letter will ask for that link to be investigated. It will urge that Korea’s collapse not be delayed any longer. It will request that the country be reshaped in a way that works to America’s advantage. Left as it is, the nation will collapse into the future designed by the left. Their method is simple: dismantle what already exists and paint their framework over the fragments.
Two paths come to mind. One is the most unrealistic yet most peaceful: Korea becomes the 51st state of the United States. The constitution overturned. The collectives that outsourced their emotions reset. The other is realistic, but destructive: war. Sanctions.
The second is more likely. Korea cannot survive on domestic demand. Once trade stops, the system rots from within. It is a signal no one hears, and it leaves no blood on anyone’s hands. If America leads, if other developed nations align, the falsehood of the current regime could be erased, and with it, the brittle shell of the old order would disappear too.
Then, this land could be rewritten by the young, who speak a language neither of the establishment nor of the left.
That is what I hoped for.
Collapse as the beginning of birth.
The cold precision of the world.
July 5, 2025
Does life ever bring good things? The world does not move by cause and effect. Some believe outcomes follow choices, but randomness is the law and uncertainty is the routine of nature. Inside that, I kept coming apart. Relationships drifted. Money stopped flowing. Love did not stay long.
The heavier the gloom, the slower the body moved. Over a year and a half, I self-published more than twenty books. The last one came out on May 2. Two months have passed. Since then, my thoughts have stiffened. Words resist, whether spoken or written. A doctor might call it an illness. To me it feels closer to the idea that survival itself has no meaning. Yet, even in that state, the sense that something must still be written rose again.
I cut my hair. Once, I used to walk to the salon on my way to work, a twenty-minute trip. Now there is no reason for that effort. No need to arrange my appearance. No one left to persuade, no one whose favor to win. The more carefully I prepare, the clearer the emptiness inside shows. In front of the mirror, illusion surfaces before the neat hair does. Shaving, ironing shirts, angling the light at forty-five degrees—better to leave the edges undone.
After trimming the hair I had left uncut for three months, I returned and began to move slowly through the tasks waiting for me.
First, it was a letter to a former ambassador. I cut words, selected sentences, and made sure I understood the intent myself before sending it. I have no expectation that the letter will change anyone’s mind. I revise it only with the faith that even a 0.1 percent chance is worth chasing.
That was all I could do.
During Trump’s second term, South Korea faced a 25 percent tariff. On YouTube, some called it the price of an anti-American line. Others insisted Japan had suffered the same and that the government was not at fault. Neither was entirely wrong. Neither was right. The order of nations was shifting only under the weight of power.
The problem is that Korean stocks have not yet fallen. Retail investors will learn later what they are already losing. Steel and automobiles will be struck. That is inevitable. The leftist government will justify even that through the language of equality.
The truth remains: the current regime has little to do with American interests. Yet if Washington chooses to intervene in the Korean card, what strategic advantage could it secure?
I wanted to keep a record, to the very end, of how this government behaves.
To Ambassador Morse H. Tan
I write this letter knowing it may be an imposition. My name is [Name], a former civil servant in the Republic of Korea with seven years of public service, now in my mid-thirties and working as a writer. I recall your service as part of the international monitoring mission during Korea’s recent presidential election, when you voiced deep concerns about the state of Korean democracy. Since then, I have believed you to be one of the few who can distinguish between the surface and the interior of this country.
Today the Republic of Korea is becoming a platform increasingly absorbed by China across politics, security, and the economy. In 2024 alone, Chinese naval vessels entered Korean waters 330 times. More recently, China has deployed aircraft carriers and begun constructing structures at sea. Yet the Korean government has issued no protest, no analysis, no response. Silence has become assent. The shadow of China now reaches well beyond the border and into the Korean habitat itself.
The economy is under similar strain. At the end of 2024, the government announced a plan to borrow 18 trillion won to fund cash handouts of 250,000 won per person. It also intends to implement a wage equalization policy under the banner of “equal pay for equal work.” Capital tied to China remains untouched, while the freedom of domestic capital is curtailed through loan restrictions and tightened LTV ratios, effectively paralyzing market functions. Outwardly, however, the administration continues to brand this as “democracy,” creating a structure that makes Western engagement difficult.
As you know, the government leans strongly toward Beijing, in practice closer to an anti-American line than an allied one. Even after facing 25 percent tariffs from Washington, the administration turns to populism at home to preserve support. Korean media, aligned with the regime, distort the measure as a “trade war,” while the ruling party and affiliated civic groups stoke anti-American sentiment for political gain.
Ambassador,
The reason I write under these circumstances is clear. I wish to propose a strategic framework that would serve American interests while also opening a path to dismantle the current system in Korea.
First, the Republic of Korea depends on exports, not domestic consumption. Tariffs and restrictions on technology transfer alone could exert decisive pressure on the government.
Second, the current administration has cut defense spending while leaving the question of U.S. troop presence unsettled. This allows Washington to frame the regime as a threat to the security gains the United States derives from the regional order in Northeast Asia.
Third, the irregularities surrounding the 2020 U.S. election—such as Korean Air ballot transfers and the opaque role of A-WEB—could be raised as an international issue, creating grounds to challenge the 2025 Korean election.
Fourth, the true benefit for the United States lies not in a shallow change of government but in fostering political forces that share pro-American values and markets.
This letter is the first step. I intend to send messages also to President Trump and to members of his cabinet. At times an emotional appeal may resonate, but America moves under the banner of MAGA, and for most Americans Korea is viewed only as one country in Asia. I will therefore write not with sentiment but with reason, presenting proposals that yield tangible benefits to the United States while outlining ways to restructure Korea. To this end, I have attached a document in the form of a strategic report, such as those handled by the NSC or the State Department.
As a Korean citizen, in a country where the media, judiciary, legislature, and administration have all been seized, I have no choice but to lean on outside hands. Many young people have taken to the streets, but history shows that revolutions and civic movements succeed only when anchored by powerful support and a clear center of gravity.
On the threshold of Korea’s turn toward totalitarianism,
thank you for reading these words.
July 5, 2025
From the Republic of Korea
[Attachment]
Korea is a central hub of the Indo-Pacific strategy. Its geography links Guam, Japan, and Taiwan, forming both a chain of liberal alliances and the forward line of deterrence against China. If Korea falls, Taiwan is left isolated. Japan faces pressure from both east and west. In the end, the entire American defense perimeter in the Western Pacific could fracture.
From a military perspective, such collapse would trigger a cascading decoupling. Allies would rapidly lose confidence in U.S. security guarantees.
If the United States does not intervene now, within a decade Korea will be fully absorbed into China’s sphere of influence. The result would be strategic defeat not only in the South China Sea but in the East China Sea as well.
If the United States does intervene, and if the current leftist, anti-American government in Seoul is replaced, several tangible gains would follow.
Tangible Gains for the United States
1. Expansion of U.S. LNG and Shale Gas Exports
If Korea reverses its subsidies for renewables and the phase-out of nuclear power, U.S. energy producers could secure over $5 billion in annual export opportunities.
2. Strengthening of Defense and Aerospace Contracts
The rebuilding of Korea’s military would generate contracts worth tens of billions of dollars for American firms such as Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Northrop Grumman—directly feeding back into domestic job growth.
3. Acceleration of Strategic Decoupling from China in Advanced Technologies
Korea’s semiconductor and battery industries remain tightly bound to China. A shift toward integration with U.S. supply chains would allow Washington to reorient production around American interests. Such a move could give the United States a five- to ten-year lead over China in semiconductors, AI, and battery technologies.
4. Political Leverage: A Diplomatic Victory for President Trump
Completing the alliance realignment that eluded the Biden administration would cement Trump’s second term as a decisive turn in Asia strategy. This would strengthen Republican claims to foreign policy leadership ahead of 2028, while building the foundation for a global anti-China coalition.
Further Explanation / 1. The Prospect of Immediate Export Gains for U.S. Energy
The Korean government is pressing ahead with a rapid nuclear phase-out and a forced shift toward solar generation. The policy weakens energy security at its core. Korea is one of the rare countries where peak demand for electricity exceeds LNG reserves, leaving the grid structurally fragile. Yet Seoul is doubling down on Chinese solar panels and battery technologies while reducing the volume of U.S. LNG imports. The tilt benefits Beijing, not Washington. A policy shift toward a diversified, reality-based energy mix would reverse this imbalance. For the United States, it would unlock steady LNG and shale gas exports, worth billions annually, and position American energy as a cornerstone of Korea’s long-term stability.
––––––––
––––––––
While U.S. shale gas carries a higher unit cost than supplies from Australia or Qatar, its value lies in stability of supply and the reduction of geopolitical risk.
Under a conservative administration, imports of American gas could be positioned as the emblem of a “pro-U.S. energy alliance.”
Beyond fuel itself, such imports extend to technology transfer, operational management, and financial product development. The opportunities would not only benefit defense firms like Lockheed Martin, but also energy and engineering giants such as GE, Chevron, Cheniere Energy, and ExxonMobil, all of which could secure major contracts within Korea.
Further Explanation / 2. Security and Economic Costs of Korea’s Military Weakening, and the Prospect of Recovery After Regime Change
The current defense posture of the Republic of Korea is dismantling the central pillar of the liberal security order that the United States has built over decades. Since the Moon administration, and deepened further under the present government, this trend has created critical gaps:
· The erosion of joint operational readiness with U.S. Forces Korea, which reduces the credibility of extended deterrence in Northeast Asia.
· The diversion of defense budgets away from conventional force modernization, leaving vulnerabilities in missile defense, naval capacity, and air power.
· A growing reliance on rhetorical “peace initiatives” that provide cover for Chinese and North Korean military advances.
For the United States, these developments translate into direct strategic losses. The weakening of Korea’s defense structure increases the burden on U.S. forces in the Pacific, raises the cost of maintaining deterrence, and undermines confidence among allies such as Japan and Taiwan. Economically, it reduces opportunities for U.S. defense contractors and constrains supply chains linked to aerospace and advanced weapons systems.
A regime change in Seoul, however, would allow for rapid recovery. With a pro-U.S. government, Korea’s defense spending could be reoriented toward joint force integration, missile defense expansion, and procurement from U.S. defense firms. This would both restore the credibility of the alliance and secure tens of billions of dollars in contracts that feed back into U.S. industry and employment.
✔ The Republic of Korea Has Become an Unreliable Ally in Containing China
· Accelerated Transfer of Wartime Operational Control: Under the pretext of reducing reliance on the U.S. command structure, the government is in practice setting conditions that weaken the deployment value of U.S. forces.
· Defense Budget Reduction: In 2024, defense spending grew only 4.4 percent, the lowest increase on record, with defense expenditure as a share of GDP continuing to decline. During the same period, Germany and Japan more than doubled their allocations.
· “Do Not Fight, Avoid Instead” Controversy: The president told frontline units that “not fighting is victory,” a remark that spread demoralization and a culture of tactical withdrawal among soldiers.
· Submissive Posture Toward China and North Korea: Over 300 Chinese naval incursions into Korean waters and dozens of North Korean missile provocations have drawn no forceful response. The silence has eroded deterrence and weakened alliance cohesion.
✔ Immediate U.S. Gains After a Regime Change
Rebuilding the Intelligence Alliance (U.S.–ROK–Japan Trilateral Cooperation)
· Block the bypass routes through Korea that China currently exploits for AI, cyber warfare, and satellite tracking.
· Intelligence effect: significantly increase the efficiency of joint operations conducted by the NSA, DIA, and the Defense Intelligence Agency.
Flexibility in U.S. Strategic Asset Deployment
· Shift from politically sensitive “withdrawal debates” to strategic expansion, building a Guam–Okinawa–Busan power linkage system.
· Secure Korea as a pivotal point for maintaining long-term U.S. hegemony.
✔ Alignment with the Trump Administration
· President Trump, during his first term, upheld the principles of “normalizing defense cost-sharing” and “security as a transaction.”
· The current South Korean government undermines the alliance in ways favorable to China and North Korea—forcing the U.S. to shoulder costs while simultaneously blocking strategic benefits.
· After a regime change, once defense cost-sharing negotiations resume, President Trump will have the legitimate grounds to pressure Korea—achieving three outcomes simultaneously: reduced U.S. defense expenditures, increased U.S. arms sales, and sustained geopolitical dominance in the Pacific.
Further Explanation / 3. Accelerating U.S.–China Decoupling and Korea’s Strategic Shift – Proposal for 51st State Incorporation or Strategic Quasi-Incorporation to Restore Technological Sovereignty
South Korea is an industrial powerhouse, ranking within the top five globally in advanced sectors such as semiconductors, displays, batteries, secondary cells, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and quantum technologies. However, under the current populist government, Seoul is reinforcing its dependency on China-centric supply chains, thereby entrenching the following structural vulnerabilities:
If Korea’s technological sovereignty falls under China’s influence, U.S. technological dominance in East Asia will collapse.
––––––––
✔ With Regime Change, South Korea Can Emerge as a Core U.S. Technology Partner
South Korea’s conservative bloc and younger tech professionals strongly prefer cooperation with the U.S.-Japan-Taiwan-India–centered technology bloc (TSI Alliance). Following the collapse of the current populist left-wing government, Korea can immediately pivot into a technology-security–aligned state, with the following outcomes:
·CHIP 4 Alliance Revitalization: Reintegration into the U.S.-centered semiconductor supply chain.
·IRA Integration: Secure designation as a beneficiary of the Inflation Reduction Act, enabling structural cooperation with U.S. EV and battery industries.
·AI/Quantum Standards (NQA): Establishment of intergovernmental sharing protocols in AI and quantum, contributing to U.S.-led global standard-setting.
South Korea did not grow under communism but within a free technological order—its natural orientation is to return to that framework.
✔ Strategic Proposal: What are the benefits to the United States if Korea is designated as either the “51st state”or a “technology-alliance protectorate”?
✔ Proposal Format: Three-step options to minimize U.S. diplomatic burden
Step 1 — Quasi-Incorporation: Designate Korea as an “Alliance Protectorate” for technology, economic, and cyber-security sectors by U.S. congressional approval.
Step 2 — Merger via Referendum: A popular vote in Korea, held under the leadership of domestic liberal-conservative forces, to approve formal union.
Step 3 — Diplomatic Annexation Protocol: Favor a Hawaii-style model, invoking an “international liberation” rationale to provide political cover.
✔ Background of the Proposal: Why South Korea Is Becoming a Client State of China
Currently, South Korea’s real estate sovereignty is being distorted.
Status: Penetration of Korean real estate by foreign capital (primarily Chinese state-owned funds)
As of 2023, Chinese ownership (including state-owned enterprises and funds) has reached a record 72% in key areas such as Seoul, Incheon, Jeju, and Busan.
Many acquisitions are made not for residence but through indirect purchases via SASAC (State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission) or state-owned banks.
Meanwhile, South Korean citizens face severe restrictions due to LTV (Loan-to-Value) and DSR (Debt Service Ratio) caps, effectively depriving them of opportunities to purchase homes.
The result: a colonial reversal, where Korean youth are reduced to tenants, while Chinese investors become landlords.
In other words, “economic annexation” has already begun before “geopolitical annexation.”
South Korea is already functioning as a forward base absorbed by Chinese capital, and this should be analyzed by the United States as a strategic flaw in its anti-China containment line.
• The current South Korean regime is dismantling national defense, transferring assets to foreign (Chinese and overseas Chinese) control, and reducing its youth to rental tenants – a government that has effectively abandoned the nation.
• In this state, South Korea is becoming less a supporter of U.S. military assets and more a liability.
• However, if the “Korea as the 51st State” framework were realized, the following transformations could occur simultaneously.
Current vs. After U.S. Integration
Military
Current: Demands for early OPCON transfer, weakened defense, risk to civilians
After: U.S. operational command secured, stable Pacific defense line
Real Estate
Current: $220B worth of assets dominated by Chinese capital
After: Asset recovery via confiscation/exchange laws + youth housing priority programs
Economy
Current: Pro-China exports, U.S. tariff damage
After: Direct entry into U.S. domestic market + dollar-based restructuring
Ideology
Current: Populism, pro-China system
After: Pro-U.S., anti-China alignment; transition to free-market governance
Tax & Fiscal System
Current: Deficit spending, rising debt risk → spillover concerns in U.S. markets
After: Stabilization under U.S.-aligned fiscal discipline
Governance
Current: Media, judiciary, legislature captured → de facto one-party state
After: Restored as a U.S.-aligned democracy with international legitimacy
South Korea is no longer a free-market–based nation,
and has degenerated into a “risk state” rather than an ally.
✔ Strategic Path for U.S.–Korea Symbiosis: Korea’s Autonomous “Governance Restoration” and America’s Leadership Revival
––––––––
Inducing Internal Autonomous Reform
·Elimination of election fraud &reform of electoral system (citing U.S. election monitoring reports on Korean elections)
·Enactment of fiscal rules &spending restraint (U.S. Treasury technical support agreement)
·Education &judicial reform; eradication of communist narratives (strengthened exchanges with CPAC/U.S. think tanks)
Proposal for a U.S.–Korea Joint Operating System
·Establishment of a U.S.–Korea Joint Economic Recovery Mechanism → an “Asian Marshall Plan” in character
·Political Impact: President Trump’s “Alliance Restoration” diplomacy would stand in decisive contrast to Biden’s failures.
(1) Failures of the Biden Administration
·Ambiguous foreign policy line &continued alignment with leftist regimes
·Domestic inflation, weakened defense spending, diminished leverage against China
·Decline in U.S.–Korea alliance credibility
(2) Diplomatic Triumph of a Trump Second Term
·Collapse of Korea’s leftist regime &U.S.-led restructuring of a tech alliance
·Expansion of America First → restoration of free-market order &technological supremacy
·Trump builds an international image as the “Architect of the Anti-Communist Line of Defense.”
✔ Trump’s Transition to a Peace-Framing Strategy
Premise:
South Korea has failed to preserve its sovereignty due to electoral fraud (via A-WEB’s mail/early voting system) and China’s influence.
Key Narrative:
President Trump is “the U.S. president who secured the widest global influence without starting wars.” His Korea integration strategy is not an invasion but a peaceful rescue of a collapsing ally.
Core Points:
·No Military Invasion → Integration via referendum and treaty approval, not declaration of war
·No Economic Exploitation → Mutual market access & joint technology utilization
·No Cultural Suppression → Korean language, culture, and legal framework partly preserved; Hawaii/Puerto Rico model applicable
High Propaganda Value → One decisive move to block Asian communism, reaffirming U.S. leadership in the free world
Strategic Legacy:
·Trump could be remembered as the “21st-century Reagan”, who contained communism in Asia without war.
·Emphasizes partnership with a Korean right-wing, youth-led governance structure.
·Post-integration, U.S. would gain a partner already harmonized with U.S. military, businesses, and culture — unlike Ukraine or Israel, Korea is a self-sufficient, proactive ally, not a dependent aid-recipient.
✔ Conclusion
President Trump can become the first tech-economic pacifist against communist expansion in Asia.
South Korea has collapsed politically, but its technology remains alive. By liberating Korea, President Trump achieves victory not with guns but with technology and order — the fastest path for America to secure and sustain technological supremacy.
July 14, 2025.
The sky split open. It felt, for a moment, like punishment from nature. A small umbrella was in my bag, yet my shoulders and sleeves were soaked in minutes. The walk to the library would take fifteen minutes. My pace slowed. Reading a book felt like a luxury I could no longer justify. I turned back. No reason, only the sense that pushing through the downpour for a book carried its own irritation.
At home I bought a lottery ticket. Without expectation. The absence of expectation didn’t even feel unusual. On the screen, a banner appeared at Incheon Airport. It welcomed Ambassador Mos Tan. The sliding doors opened. A roar broke out. The sound was heavy, like thunder. People waved American and Korean flags. Some cried, their faces flushed. They all carried the same look—faces that believed in something, or perhaps only wanted to believe.
Morse Tan waved, smiling. He must have known. The people cheering him had already lost their foothold in this country. I watched the screen without raising a fist, without shouting. Only watching. The louder the voices grew, the tighter my throat felt. A foreign envoy, received as though he were salvation. Was this hope, or was it defeat? No one could answer. I could not answer. Yet one thing was certain: I was not the only one who thought this way. In an abnormal time, even his arrival passed for consolation.
I realized then—America still had not sent an ambassador to Korea. Trump’s second administration, it seemed, no longer regarded this government as an ally. There is no news of it. Only fragments on YouTube and X. Even if one speaks, few will listen. At best, they pretend to listen. There is also Gordon Chang, who assisted the international election monitors. His face appears often on Fox News. He joins Steve Bannon’s War Room, one of the few in East Asia who can speak the language of Washington conservatives in his own region. Like Ambassador Mos Tan, his name surfaces as a possible envoy to Seoul.
Still, a question lingers: why do they speak of Korea at all, beyond the project of containing China?
Trump was never a conventional politician. He brought outsiders into official posts, turning commentators into bureaucrats. Ambition often takes the form of constant visibility.
Yesterday, the former president was taken back into custody. Reports say his cell measures about 107 square feet. Each day he receives a single half-liter of cold water.
Meanwhile, men with criminal records take their seats in the cabinet. Those who once spoke of markets and of pushing back against China will be arrested one after another, accused of inciting rebellion. Judges and prosecutors bend to political power, their professions stripped bare.
Now one man decides everything. Around him, more bow than resist. When he raises his head, the order simply changes.
How did Korea come to this point?
I had to keep writing.
Some are taken away, and those who write are forgotten.
I turned from the screen and looked out the window, then thought of the White House across the Pacific. Even if the one in that room never sees this letter. Still, I am speaking to the most powerful by the weakest means.
If this letter reaches him, I hope it strikes like the words of an unnamed boy soldier who once steeled General MacArthur’s resolve.
To President Trump,
Rain fell over Korea all day. I listened to the drops striking the window and thought of the White House across the Pacific. I send this letter to you there.
Korea is neither a Jewish nation nor a people born of Puritan ideals. Yet in 1948, with the Syngman Rhee government, with American aid, and with blood spilled in the Korean War, the Republic came into being. In its essence, it is not so different from Israel. Not myth, but survival. A country that rose because America gave its hand.
Now, in 2025, I have some sense of the world you are building. You judged that trade under the name of neoliberal order only multiplies America’s debt, leaving jobs and daily life unprotected. You believe that the order of the world must be set through the restraint of China and the force of national priority. Not with Obama’s logic that free trade would tame Beijing. Not with Biden’s words that checked China but never touched it. You are opening a different order, grounded in the currency America prints and the arms it carries.
From that vantage, it is unclear what meaning Korea holds for the United States today. I write only as a Korean. I also know the chance of this letter reaching you is almost none. Yet the streets of Seoul are filled with voices. They shout for freedom. They call for the former president to be saved.
The current leftist government deceives its people under the banner of serving them. It shouts of justice while dismantling the rule of law and seizing power. After taking control of the legislature, the judiciary, and the executive, it now uses the frame of “insurrection” to purge anyone who resists its creed. Most of them stand with pro-China and pro-North Korean groups. They speak lightly of cutting defense budgets and returning wartime operational control, only to glance nervously at Washington when the consequences surface.
From my small desk I know little compared to what you see. Yet if one were to count the real borders that touch China, Korea remains the most precarious. Geography and strategy make it a front line where China can be checked.
This land was once split under trusteeship during the Cold War, divided by the reach of Moscow and Washington. The division left a wound that has not healed. Yet in the memory of South Koreans, General MacArthur—the commander of U.S. and UN forces against the war launched by the North—remains a figure honored as a hero.
The world often works with the dual nature of quantum mechanics. Empires have plundered under the pretext of interests, yet there is also the will to defend a nation. MacArthur made his mistakes, his strategic missteps. But what endures in the minds of Korea’s conservative citizens is this: the Incheon Landing, the reversal of the war’s tide, and the survival of a country that still lives under democracy.
I write now as that student soldier once did, the one who changed a general’s mind with his resolve to defend Korea. I seek your judgment in the same way. But unlike that boy, I do not wish to plead, protect us. A nation that cannot move on its own has no ground to lean on foreigners. Even if one were to cry out for help, it would mean little if it did not align with America’s interests and purpose. In the end, such matters shift with the mood of the American people and the freedom of its president.
Freedom is not a favor granted by the state. It is an inalienable right given by God, and no government can justify its obstruction under any pretext. That is what makes America great. It is also the root of conservatism.
The conservative ethic is not about ordering or controlling the people. It begins with a question: will society function if government does nothing? From there it turns to autonomy, responsibility, ownership, and the unbound freedom of speech and faith. In today’s Korea, these values have disappeared. The state dictates what one eats, how one speaks, and even what one must think. It calls this “democratization.” You and I know what it really is.
It is the denial of freedom. It is another name for totalitarianism.
This country has traded away its liberty alongside dictatorship.
The market.
Justice.
Security.
What they now call a “state” is a machine that raises taxes to erase the middle class and fold everyone into poverty. It writes rules to punish anyone who holds a different creed. Obedience is praised as virtue. Criticism is branded as extremism.
During your first term, the Moon administration used deception. They held up photographs with Kim Jong-un in one hand and borrowed your name with the other. Not out of respect, but to consume your influence for their survival. They were neither honest nor honorable. The same cowardice persists. They cut defense in the name of peace. They jail opponents in the name of justice. They paralyze markets in the name of equality.
Stocks are pumped with printed money. Real estate climbs higher. The darker reality is elsewhere: the Communist Party of China and the order of Pyongyang seep into daily life. Chinese buyers acquire farmland and high-rise apartments in Gangnam. Visa waivers ease their entry. Laws on grain management pass to favor foreign ownership of soil. North Korean propaganda cartoons circulate freely, wrapped in cultural exchange.
The system they now control has become a simple tool of rule. Too simple.
Mr. President,
this is not a plea to safeguard the Republic of Korea. That claim itself has been stripped of dignity, reduced to suspicion.
I know what they truly fear. It is not American intervention. It is America’s harsh indifference. The deeper Korea sinks into a communist order, the more it must face tariffs, downgrades, export controls, exclusion from financial cooperation. Every legal measure should be brought to bear.
There are two levers against them: the fraudulent election and illicit transfers to the North in defiance of UN resolutions. The first is simple. Provide the voter rolls and the matter is settled. But here, any call to verify early voting is drowned out as conspiracy. The press shouts, and the crowd joins.
