Skip to main content

Give Dennis Rodman a Break

I've been watching the media firestorm over Dennis Rodman's recent visit to North Korea, and I gotta say, I'm solidly on the pro-Dennis Rodman side. This post is not satire - I seriously think the media should give him a break.

First, let's talk about the press conference. It was obvious to me from the get-go that he was drunk (which doesn't excuse anything - just an observation). His "spokesperson" should have pulled him away from the mike before he said anything dumb. But if you listen to what he did say, he actually made a reasonable point - Chris Cuomo from CNN probably doesn't know a damn thing about North Korea, whereas Dennis Rodman has actually set foot in the hermit nation four times in the past year. Yeah, what he said could easily be interpreted as implying that Kenneth Bae did something wrong, and that's why he's in prison, but what he actually said was (courtesy of CNN itself), "Do you understand what he did in this country? ... No, no, no, you tell me, you tell me. Why is he held captive here in this country, why?" It's a valid question to Chris Cuomo - how much of the situation that you're yelling about do you actually understand?

Are we really naïve enough to think that Dennis Rodman went to North Korea as a mere publicity stunt? Clearly there are way easier ways of getting PR from the safety of America. In fact, here's a good one - playing armchair quarterback for foreign policy from the CNN "news" desk and deliberately provoking outrage and putting American citizens (i.e., Dennis Rodman and his crew) in a very uncomfortable position while they're still in an extremely dangerous nation. Good job, Chris Cuomo. You think he's free to say whatever he wants while his minders and government officials watch? Would you have the balls to venture into sensitive foreign policy from a press conference in Pyongyang?

Anyway, the real reason I support Dennis Rodman is because, along with the trip by the New York Philharmonic back in 2008, Dennis Rodman's visits have been the most incredible cultural exchanges with North Korea in literally decades. Dennis Rodman is not a politician. He's not trying nor pretending to be a politician. For better or worse, he has the best access to North Korea out of everyone in America, and possibly the world. And I believe him when he talks about cultural diplomacy through basketball.

The main arguments against his visits are the usual: you're supporting a tyrant, you're legitimizing a monstrous regime, you're just being used as a PR prop, etc. And the people with this opinion will suggest the following course of action instead: do nothing. Which is why I fully support what Dennis Rodman did, because it's incredibly simple. Here's what Dennis Rodman did:

Something.

We can analyze this thing till the end of time, yet we still know so little about North Korea. In the midst of that uncertainty, without political motives, Dennis Rodman took a chance and did something. That's how humans deal intelligently with the world - they act under uncertainty and then respond to the information they attain. It's easy to sit back and yell about how interacting with our enemies is so damaging, yet deliberately provoking them and/or avoiding contact is somehow better? Obama got the same treatment from the conservative media back in 2008 when he said that he would meet "rogue leaders" without preconditions. The right was all over that. Same thing every single time he's bowed to a foreign leader or dignitary (the Saudi Arabian King, the emperor of Japan, the President of Mexico, the President of Cuba, along with a few others). Now the same people are having a hissy fit because Dennis Rodman bowed to Kim Jong Un. What would you suggest as an alternative? Is it better to go into an unfamiliar country with unfamiliar customs and just do whatever you feel like, and deliberately not show respect to that country's people and leaders? Have you considered the possibility that one can be respectful without automatically becoming subservient?

Learning about other cultures brings the world closer together and makes it a better place. That goes for North Koreans (even if they're the hand-selected elite) interacting with American basketball players, and it goes for Americans (even if they're strangely dressed heavily tattooed former basketball celebrities) meeting with the leaders of our sworn enemies. I have a very hard time believing that middle aged basketball players playing a few games with North Koreans is somehow endangering the fate of Americans in North Korea, or the tenuous relationship itself. It's just basketball, man. You gotta start somewhere.

So with that, I'm with Dennis. Way to go, man. What you did really was historic.

Just one thing - please, please, try not to sing anymore.

Peace.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Korean Is Hard For Native English Speakers

A couple of days ago, as an experiment, I wrote my first blog post ever in a non-English language. It was an attempt to explain some of the reasons that Korean is hard to learn for native English speakers, so I figured I might as well try to write it in Korean. Those of you who actually read Korean can see how awkward the attempt was =).

In any case, the post came from an email conversation I had with The Korean from Ask a Korean, a fantastically well-written blog about all things Korea from the perspective of a Korean who moved to the United States during high school. Since I tend to geek out on language things, I figured I might as well post part of that conversation. An edited version follows.

---------

Out of the languages that I've attempted to learn so far, Korean has been the hardest. I've done a lot of meta thinking about learning Korean, and I think there are a number of reasons it's difficult for non-Koreans (and especially Westerners) to learn:

1) Obviously, the…

영어가 모국어인 사람들은 왜 한국어를 배우기가 어려운 이유

이 포스트는 내 처음 한국어로 블로그 포스트인데, 한국어에 대하니까 잘 어울린다. =) 자, 시작합시다! 왜 외국사람에게 한국어를 배우기가 어렵다? 난 한국어를 배우고 있는 사람이라서 이 문제에 대해 많이 생각하고 있었다. 여러가지 이유가 있는데 오늘 몇 이유만 논할 것이다.

1. 분명히 한국어 문법은 영어에 비해 너무 많이 다른다. 영어는 “오른쪽으로 분지(分枝)의 언어"라고 하는데 한국어는 “왼쪽으로 분지의 언어"이다. 뜻이 무엇이나요? 예를 보면 이해할 수 있을 것이다. 간단한 문장만 말하면 (외국어를 말하는 남들은 간단한 문장의 수준을 지낼 수가 약간 드물다), 간단한 걸 기억해야 돼: 영어는 “SVO”인데 한국어는 “SOV”이다. “I’m going to school”라고 한국어로는 “저는 학교에 가요"라고 말한다. 영어로 똑바로 번역하면 “I’m school to go”이다. 두 언어 다르는 게 목적어와 동사의 곳을 교환해야 한다. 별로 어렵지 않다. 하지만, 조금 더 어렵게 만들자. “I went to the restaurant that we ate at last week.” 한국어로는 “전 우리 지난 주에 갔던 식당에 또 갔어요"라고 말한다. 영어로 똑바로 번역하면 “I we last week went to restaurant to again went”말이다. 한국어가 왼쪽으로 분지 언어라서 문장 중에 왼쪽으로 확대한다! 이렇게 좀 더 쉽게 볼 수 있다: “전 (우리 지난 주에 갔던 식당)에 또 갔어요”. 주제가 “전"이고 동사가 “갔다"이고 목적어가 “우리 지난 주에 갔던 식당"이다. 영어 문장은 오른쪽으로 확대한다: I (S) went (V) to (the restaurant (that we went to (last week))) (O). 그래서 두 숙어 문장 만들고 싶으면 생각속에서도 순서를 변해야 된다.

2. 첫 째 점이니까 다른 사람을 자기 말을 아라들게 하고 싶으면, 충분히 …

Don't Take Korean Language Advice From Kyopos

I'm not sure why it took me so long to figure this out, but the last people you should take Korean language advice from are kyopos (foreign-born or raised Koreans). That being said, if you do follow their advice, you will get many laughs from Koreans. Some of my personal favorites, all of which actually happened to me:

- When I first got to Korea, I was at some open-air event, and during a break I started talking to one of the hosts. He said he was only a part-time host, so I asked him what his full-time job was, and he said "백수" (which is slang for "unemployed guy"). I asked him what that was, and he replied, "Comedian". So then the next few people I met, I proudly told I was a baeksu. (Edit: Actually, this guy was Korean Korean, not kyopo.)

- Next, a kyopo who lived in the apartment I moved into back in 2010 asked me what I was doing in Korea, and I told him I was starting a company, and asked how to say that in Korean in case people ask. He told me…