Heo Ji-woong, once again expresses anger in a long post: "Just don't mention Gwangju" [Star Issue]

*This content was translated by AI.

Writer and broadcaster Heo Ji-woong once again shared his thoughts regarding the controversy involving students from Baejae High School's baseball team who chanted slogans reminiscent of the Starbucks 'the 18th Tank Day' debate.

In a lengthy post on the 2nd, Heo Ji-woong wrote: "There is a pattern in recent hate controversies. An incident occurs. It becomes public. Outrage explodes. Follow-up reports and attention continue. Criticism arises that this has gone too far. At this point, 'lexica' politicians appear. They engage in what amounts to secondary victimization and blur the issue, claiming things like 'the freedom to drink coffee.' They expand and reproduce the controversy, turning it into a political tool favorable to their faction." He added, "What if there were swift and precise punishment? If it could be resolved early according to principles? It is difficult. There is no space in Korea that does not insult or discriminate against Gwangju and Jeolla Province. The only difference lies in how large, trivial, or frequent such acts are. When someone says, 'I empathize with the pain of Gwangju,' it becomes the most effective form of insult. It's all like air. In other words, it is culture. Punishing based solely on increased public attention would violate fairness."

He continued: "Politics played a significant role. For a long time, only slogans and insults were exchanged. The struggle to comfort and aid victims ultimately pushed Gwangju into an eternal swamp of secondary victimization." He pointed out, "A hate culture that is not limited to specific support bases has formed, repeated, and strengthened. Once rooted as culture, it is nearly impossible to resolve with greater anger and punishment. There are limits even in setting examples. 'Lexica' politicians have learned and evolved methods of leveraging public opinion for examples. Having sown the seeds of hate, they intend to harvest them."

Heo Ji-woong stated: "If there is genuine will to resolve this, we must strike at the root. Legislation is needed to regulate hate speech coming from politicians—not targeting all citizens, but specifically politicians and high-ranking public officials. That is the true precise coordinate. It serves as an example. If recognized as hate speech, it must cause irreversible harm to the respective politician." He added, "If that proves difficult and stagnant, why not simply stop anyone from talking about Gwangju? If we are not going to resolve hate issues, wouldn't it be a better life for both sides if we simply forget each other?"

Previously, regarding the Baejae High School Starbucks cheer controversy, Heo Ji-woong said: "What Gwangju needs is not pity, sympathy, or support. It is consent. Recognition as equal citizens." He remarked, "May's Gwangju and Jeolla Province remain objects of mockery. Children who do not know history consume them as memes. When stopped, they view it as suppression. Even without understanding the context, because Gwangju is naturally seen as a vulnerable party."

He further noted: "There are no consequences for mocking Gwangju. There is also sarcasm suggesting, 'You've endured for so long, you can endure more; but what if you don't?' For a long time, Gwangju was either the target of slogans or mockery. It has never been treated as equal."

Meanwhile, some students from Baejae High School's baseball team previously caused controversy on the 29th of last month during a match against Gwangju Jeil High School at Seoul Mokdong Stadium in the 81st Cheongryonggi National High School Baseball Championship and Weekend League King of Kings Tournament. They chanted "Let's go to Starbucks" toward the opposing dugout.

Gwangju Jeil High School protested through the umpires, who warned Baejae High School. Baejae High School issued an apology statement, and it is reported that the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education launched an investigation while the Korea Baseball Softball Association is considering disciplinary action.

There is a pattern in recent hate controversies. An incident occurs. It becomes public. Outrage explodes. Follow-up reports and attention continue. Criticism arises that this has gone too far. At this point, 'lexica' politicians appear. They engage in what amounts to secondary victimization and blur the issue, claiming things like 'the freedom to drink coffee.' They expand and reproduce the controversy, turning it into a political tool favorable to their faction.

What if there were swift and precise punishment? If it could be resolved early according to principles?

It is difficult. There is no space in Korea that does not insult or discriminate against Gwangju and Jeolla Province. The only difference lies in how large, trivial, or frequent such acts are. When someone says, 'I empathize with the pain of Gwangju,' it becomes the most effective form of insult. It's all like air. In other words, it is culture. Punishing based solely on increased public attention would violate fairness.

Politics played a significant role. For a long time, only slogans and insults were exchanged. The struggle to comfort and aid victims ultimately pushed Gwangju into an eternal swamp of secondary victimization.

The process by which politicians create hate culture is as follows: They insult. It passes. Next time, they insult more severely. If it becomes a problem, they issue explanations. When escape seems impossible, they apologize. Insults and discrimination repeat, determining who and what can be hated. The boundaries of acceptable expression are set. Bullying is bad, but still, since it's them, we know about it—a label is stamped. Thus, a hate culture not limited to specific support bases forms, repeats, and strengthens.

Once rooted as culture, it is nearly impossible to resolve with greater anger and punishment. There are limits even in setting examples. 'Lexica' politicians have learned and evolved methods of leveraging public opinion for examples. Having sown the seeds of hate, they intend to harvest them.

If there is genuine will to resolve this, we must strike at the root. Legislation is needed to regulate hate speech coming from politicians—not targeting all citizens, but specifically politicians and high-ranking public officials. That is the true precise coordinate. It serves as an example. If recognized as hate speech, it must cause irreversible harm to the respective politician.

If that proves difficult and stagnant, why not simply stop anyone from talking about Gwangju? No one among Gwangju residents welcomes being raised or lowered as a regional hate incident. For decades, we have repeatedly reinforced the stigmatizing effect of being labeled a national outcast. Who would like that? Originally, only symbols remained; it was already forgotten and abandoned in reality. If we are not going to resolve hate issues, wouldn't it be a better life for both sides if we simply forget each other?

<© STARNEWS. All rights reserved. No reproduction or redistribution allowed.>

*This content was translated by AI.