Song of Hope 희망가

희망가 | 국악 버전 Song of Hope AYAGEUM

이 풍진 세상을 만났으니
너의 희망이 무엇이냐
부귀와 영화를 누렸으면
희망이 족할까
푸른 하늘 밝은 달 아래 곰곰이 생각하니
세상만사가 춘몽 중에
또다시 꿈 같도다

이 풍진 세상을 만났으니
너의 희망이 무엇이냐
부귀와 영화를 누렸으면
희망이 족할까

담소화락에 엄벙덤벙
주색잡기에 침몰하랴
세상만사를 잊었으면
희망이 족할까
세상만사를 잊었으면
희망이 족할까

Upon encountering this world of trouble,
what of your hope?
If you enjoyed wealth and fame,
Would your hope be enough?
Under the bright moon in an azure sky,
Carefully wondering
Everything in this world amidst spring's spell,
seems again, like a dream.

Upon meeting this world of troubles,
what of your hope?
If you enjoyed wealth and glory,
will your hope be enough?
(Spring on East Mountain, seems like a dream
Even if I live a life of a hundred years, In the morning, it's shrounded in mist.) (Lee Son-hee version)*

Would you lose yourself In light banter and pleasantries
seek gratification in game, drink and sensuality?
If you immersed yourself in worldly things,
Would your hope be satisfied??

Upon encountering this world of trouble,
what of your hope?
If you enjoyed wealth and fame,
Would your hope be satisfied?

*Lyrics can vary by performers

With some help, found this Namu.wiki entry below right away. I let chrome do the computer translation of the summary/overview below. I left what I consider at least one mistake in their translation; this rubella world (이 풍진 세상) doesn't seem appropriate:

https://namu.wiki/w/%ED%9D%AC%EB%A7%9D%EA%B0%80#toc

A classic popular song that was released in Korea in 1921 and became very popular in the 1930s . The original song is 'Love Divine', based on an English dance song, and included in American Jeremiah Ingalls' 1805 hymn collection (The Christian Harmony). The hymn is titled 'Garden Hymn' or ' The Lord into His Garden Comes '. It is widely known.

This song was introduced to Japan in 1910, and a female teacher named Misumi Suzuko (三角錫子) added her own poem to the song to commemorate female students from her school who died in a boat capsize accident, calling it "The Roots of Pure White Mt. Fuji " (眞白き富士). It is a requiem song calledの根), sung by four students at the school at their memorial service.[1] Song selected for The Absolute Sound 2022

In Korea, in 1910, Lim Hak-cheon, a Christian believer, wrote the lyrics with the lyrics below, titled This Rubella World, and was composed by two folk singers, Park Chae-seon and Lee Ryu-saek.[2] was announced in 1921. It was introduced under various titles in several sheet music books. It was sung by many musicians, singers, and folk singers at the time and spread as a popular song, and the titles of original lament songs such as 'Prodigal Son' were changed to 'Hope Song'. In particular, it became widely known as the record of Korea's first popular singer, Chae Gyu-yeop, in 1930

In fact, this song did not have a unified title. Accordingly, it was called This Rubella World, etc., based on the first verse of the lyrics, and then came to be called . In a word, it can be seen as a folk song of the time. The lyrics are also in the link above, and since it was a popular song in the 1930s, the lyrics of the song are also really dark. It can be seen as a song about the sadness of a people without a country.

"We must say no," Seoul Defense Chief

According to a report in South Korea's English language Hankyoreh, US unrealistic expectations of South Korea are amazingly meeting public resistance from the hard right wing ideologue Defense Minister Sin Won-sik. Seems like the US Army Pacific Commander got the idea that the powerful South Korean armed forces might be used in an actual military confrontation with China over Taiwan as they were when dictator Park Chung-hui sent ROK combat forces to South Vietnam to support the US during the Vietnam war. Good luck with that. "From September 1964 to March 1973, South Korea sent some 350,000 troops to Vietnam." wikipedia

‘We must say no’: Seoul defense chief on Korean, USFK involvement in hypothetical Taiwan crisis

The linked article really represents a public breach in the US directed US/Japan/South Korea tri-lateral partnership against China much earlier than I expected. It's definitely worth a full read. I had thought such official South Korean defense policy expressions would await Yoon exiting the presidential office.

I saw a suggestion in one of the links I cited yesterday, that Japan might be expected by the US to be made a member of the UNC. (The UN Command is not really a UN institution but historical artifact from the Korean conflict created by the allies when Russia was boycotting the Security Council). These US notions are so out of touch with the current East Asian situation, it's frightening. I remember Yoon saying at one point he could foresee circumstances when Japanese armed forces might come to South Korea. This is absurd. I don't think Kurt Campbell has any real understanding of northeast Asian geopolitical reality, although one can find him posturing as such along with various media and think tank "experts" almost daily.

Ironically, in South Korea in recent years, it has been the conservative position, that the ROK armed forces could not afford to dissipate their resources by participating in anti-China military confrontations associated with Taiwan, because the North Korean threat was too pressing. Yoon having no real experience in such matters and not a traditional South Korean conservative politician simply abandoned mainstream South Korean policy views toward Japan and China with little thought. One has to wonder whether South Korean trade losses related to semiconductors and other high tech related to decoupling or delinking (whatever the phrase du jour) are playing a role. Shin could just be going out on a limb, with President Yoon, at his own risk, in the position to disavow those views under the right US pressure.

Perhaps Shin or Yoon got some sort of indirect message from the Chinese to state his position, while the US was busy trying to intimidate China in recent weeks culminating in Blinken's visit.

Jeffrey Sachs on Kishida Speech to Congress; Asian NATO?

🇺🇸JEFFREY SACHS:

[Commenting on the remarks made by Japanese PM Fumio Kishida, who warned the US Congress of China's 'growing threat to global peace'.]

"It is a shame—first of all—for a Japanese Prime Minister to come to the US Congress and speak that way.

Really, it's a… pic.twitter.com/1OtqgHP2ft

— Sony Thang (@nxt888) April 18, 2024

Yoon's party suffered a great loss in the April 10, general elections for the National Assembly. A recent Korea gallup poll showed his approval rating at 23 percent. I suppose that is better than Kishida's 16 percent. While these two do their best to alienate China, their currencies are suffering probably because their market relations with China are suffering. China is the number one trading power in Asia. I heard some cocky pro-American pundit in the Philippines trying to sell the Marcos anti-China pitch and the new US military buildup in the Philippines particularly in Luzon across from Taiwan. He cited South Korea as an example of confronting China by joining the tri-lateral partnership with Japan and the US and doing well. News bulletin to the Philippines, South Korea isn't "doing well." In fact, Yoon presiding over a crashing economy and a currency dropping like a stone, along with his popularity, requested his principal ministers and presidential officials to resign, except those in the national security sector (go figure - these are the pro-US insiders directing the US Indo-Pacific agenda). This is ironic in that the National Security Advisors office is suspected of interfering in the defense ministry's independent legal investigation of the drowning death of marine corporal Choi last year. This pretty much fits within Yoon's MO of interfering in investigations whenever he takes a mind to. Some pundits suggest this scandal, which included sending the former defense minister to Australia as ambassador to get him out of the country, quickly, could be one thread leading to Yoon's undoing. Obviously the Yoon "vegetable administration" is in panic mode.

Guess what? Yoon is having a problem getting conservatives to come forward to volunteer to take these posts. So someone allegedly (probably Yoon's wife, the problematic first lady) suggested democrats take the two most important posts, including Prime Minister and Chief of Staff. The rumor was denied by the presidential office. Next, Yoon proposed a meeting with democratic party leader Lee Jae-myung in a five minute phone call Friday. Lee, who directed his party's landslide victory in the Assembly elections, is invited by Yoon to meet with him, to recommend ministers, presidential office staff, etc., as well as policies to deal with current domestic crises. Yoon has never met with the opposition leader of the majority party in the national assembly during the two years thus far of his administration. So now that his dysfunctional administration is virtually paralyzed, Yoon wants the opposition leader he is still trying to put in prison, and has been trying to put in prison for years, to come forward with his party, to solve Yoon's political and economic crises. Yoon has run out of other people to blame for his series of political blunders, so he wants the democrats to come forward so they can take the blame for him. LOL.

The national security problem in Asia is more serious. This editorial describes the predicament of a re-arming Japan allied with the US blaming tensions there on China.

Has Korea, too, crossed the Rubicon on China?

In December 2022, the Japanese government revised three state documents regarding national defense. These revisions would allow the Japanese state to allocate 2% of its national GDP to the defense budget by the year 2027, effectively doubling the national defense budget in five years. As Takeuchi predicted, the US and Japan are cooperating on all fronts to formulate the framework for a NATO-like military alliance in East Asia. At Camp David in August of last year, the US moved to include South Korea in a trilateral alliance network. In November of last year, the leaders of the US, Japan and the Philippines held a summit in Washington, DC, where they criticized China’s aggressive behavior in the South China Sea.

In a speech addressing the US Congress last week, Japanese Prime Minister Kishida Fumio emphasized that Japan was the US’ “global partner.” On April 11 and 12, the US, South Korea and Japan conducted joint naval exercises in the East China Sea, which is directly above Taiwan. According to press releases published by the US Indo-Pacific Command and the Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force, the exercises involved large-scale anti-submarine drills and deployed the USS Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier and three US destroyers, Japan’s Ariake-class destroyer, and South Korea’s ROKS Seoae Ryu Seong-ryong Aegis-equipped destroyer. On April 6 and 7, the US, Japan, the Philippines and Australia conducted joint exercises in the South China Sea.

The US’ strategy is clear. The US-South Korea-Japan trilateral alliance will respond to a conflict in the Taiwan Strait while the quadrilateral alliance of the US, Japan, Australia and the Philippines will respond to any threats in the South China Sea. As the key ally backing up the US in the Indo-Pacific, Japan lies at the crux of this strategy. The US-Japan alliance is no longer just a slogan. It is now a military partnership with the ability to steer global affairs. It is also a sign that the US will make increasing demands of South Korea in the days to come.

In hindsight, it’s clear that Japan had been preparing itself to cross the Rubicon. At that point, Tokyo had already made a resolution. But what about Korea? Faced with such a colossal problem, the strategy of balanced foreign affairs and not rocking the boat are more important than ever. Yet the Yoon administration has unwittingly steered us in one direction. If we attempt to turn back now, the country will look foolish. Yet if we continue in our current trajectory, we’ll be torn apart. Between a rock and a hard place. The country is in a precarious situation.

I think I can safely predict that the results of confronting China in East Asia with a US directed, NATO like structure, ad hoc, rickety and dangerous as it appears to be, is unlikely to advance the interests of the participants. One might look to the current state of US Nato expansion efforts in Ukraine as an omen of things to come. How beneficial was that for Europe?

It was Shinzo Abe's goal to make Japan great again. I've read accounts that suggested the Indo-Pacific strategy in the South China Sea was his idea. I guess Kishida will attempt to carry out the offensive armaments buildup of Japan, without bothering to amend the constitution. The Kyodo news article tries to characterize Kishida as a "dovish moderate." What nonsense.

Biden and Blinken's LDP pals making offerings again to the Japanese empire war criminals who bombed Pearl Harbor, invaded China, raped Nanking, colonized Korea, killed hundreds of American POWs in the jungles of Indochina... oh no big deal, they're on our side now. JFC. https://t.co/el7PeewvJx

— Tim Shorrock (@TimothyS) April 21, 2024

Added 4.24

Another analysis from South Korea that will never be heard by Biden and his desperate Washington Blob, who only want military superiority and colonial control in Asia. "Why Korea shouldn’t welcome Japan’s newly beefed up defense cooperation with US." https://t.co/5PL4O3MjYt

— Tim Shorrock (@TimothyS) April 23, 2024

Compelling history-South China Sea

Cambridge PhD- "The US is lawless." Deliberately refused to resolve Chinese territorial claims against Japan after WWII. The Philippines is a US colony. France stole the Paracel and Spratly Islands. Historically the Philippines has no claim. The US, France, and UK never listened to their international law experts. The US has been trying to contain China since WWII.

Who has sovereignty over the disputed South China Sea islands? Where do the roots of the current controversy lie? One renowned scholar's relentless quest through the archives of three Western players has led to startling discoveries. Professor Anthony Carty was born in Ireland in 1948. He pursued his studies at Queen's University Belfast, University College London, and Cambridge University, where he obtained his Ph.D. From 2011 until the end of 2018, he delved into a century of archives kept by foreign affairs departments in France, the UK, and the U.S. concerning the South China Sea. He published his findings in two papers five years ago, based on which a Chinese book titled 'The History and Sovereignty of the South China Sea' was published. During an exclusive interview, Prof. Carty told Liu Xin that these governments understood the disputed islands belonged to China, but they had been bluffing for strategic reasons. "They need to be confronted."

I've cued the video to the six minute mark to start. The first six minutes is background on the scholar and where and how he worked to obtain the historical archives. Not only is this video compelling, but if you listen to whole interview, you will know more about the history of US policy in the South China Sea than any western journalist has reported to date. Western governments and media have been lying about this situation for a long time.



There is a similar provenance to US/UK/Japanese arguments against the "one china" policy allegedly the official US policy toward Taiwan. There is an argument that "title" to Taiwan was not given up by the allied powers after WWII because the San Francisco Treaty did not deal with the issue. It has actually been argued "legally" that title to Taiwan still rests with the United States. I wrote about this at the link below.


One China Policy legal review claims the Allies have title to Taiwan

The professor's interview is so important I'm concerned it will either be ignored or disappear from youtube.


— 語必忠信 行必正直

Yoon Seok-yeol - Han Dong-hun lawfare party loses general election in S. Korea

(Source-MBC live news 4.10) Democratic Party including their 13 representatives from the proportional ticket- 174 plus Cho Guk's Inovation Party with 12 proportional representatives totals 186.

PPP (conservative party) including proportional representatives- 109 representatives.

Lee Jae-myung, democratic party leader, and Cho Guk, Innovation Party leader, have been victims of sustained prosecutions from Yoon's office when he was Prosecutor General, which continued during his presidency (still 3 years left on his term of office) with Han Dong-hun as Justice Minister, and then the party leader for the conservative PPP. Lee Jae-myung had to direct party campaign efforts in between court appearances on trumped up criminal charges. The former Justice Minister Chu Mi-ae, won a seat as democratic representative. She was forced to resign after she failed to get Yoon dismissed for ethical misconduct during the Moon administration. Yoon was only suspended for two months. After his injunction was overruled by an appellate court, Yoon resigned to run for the presidency.


Notable conservatives who won seats included Ahn Chul-soo, (I regard him as an Elon Musk/ Andrew Yang type conservative) but he's always discussed as a potential presidential contender. The former PPP party leader Lee Jun-seok, was elected. He had been forced out of the PPP for receiving alleged sexual favors, after his support for Yoon resulted in Yoon's election as president. LJS ran independently and was elected. Na Kyang-won, a former floor leader in the assembly for the conservative party, won a seat. Na, a leading conservative female PPP leader is regarded as a potential presidential contender also. Yoon brushed her off after his election as president..


Lee Nak-yeon, the former democratic party prime minister under the Moon Jae-in administration, a subak (DINO), ran independently and lost.


Potentially wielding 180 votes or more on the floor of the next National Assembly, the democrats plus Cho Guk, can fast track legislation and overcome presidential vetoes filibusters. Han and Yoon and the conservative pundits are trying to spin this conservative loss positively and save Han Dong-hun's career by saying that at least the dems didn't get 200 votes. If they had they would be able to amend the constitution, override vetoes and/or initiate impeachment proceedings against Yoon unilaterally.

So Yoon is a lame duck now for the next three years. Wih any conservative defections he won't may not be able to stop any special investigation bills of the first lady, his ministers, or former ministers and prosecutors. I'm sure he will go back to only strategy he has, lawfare, trying to put opposition leaders, and other opponents of his policies in prison.

edit- MBC is now reporting 175 Democratic Party seats won, plus Cho Guk's 12 equals 187.


Note correction April 11. 200 votes needed to override presidential veto. Corrections to text noted in strikeover or italics.