Recently, "SNL Korea" has generated a lot of controversy.

[SNL Palm Hani's parody controversy]

Recently, "SNL Korea" has generated a lot of controversy. The controversy over the parody of Palm Hani and the controversy over the parody of the retirement age has created controversy over the freedom of expression and its limits.

Freedom of expression and its limitations are legally and academically organized. However, not all of those limits are clearly defined by law, and there are different 說.

It is ambiguous to move beyond the positive law to compliance (compliance with norms) at the level of social norms. This is because it is necessary to examine the extent to which a positive evaluation can be received without being criticized from the standpoint of universalism, considering not only the constitution, positive law, and precedents, but also customs and even unfair convention.

For example, how far should we guarantee if we mimic her dim Korean while parodying Vietnamese-Australian Pam Hani?

How far should we guarantee if we imitate Han Kang's unique accent and expression while parodying the Nobel Prize-winning author?

On the other hand, how far should we guarantee if we make sexual jokes while parodying the drama "Jungnyeoni", which depicts the life of a Gukgeuk actor, as "Yoo-nyeoni"?

Parodying Palm Hani does not make it illegal. However, when making a normative evaluation of this, negative evaluations can come out. On the other hand, there are still people who do not accept the negative evaluation.

In the case of the Palm Hani parody, many people protest that it is "racism, foreign discrimination." Regarding these protests, there is a counterargument, "If a democratic society cannot allow even this much parody, is it a democratic society?"

"If a democratic society cannot allow even this parody, is it a democratic society?" is a parody mockery of those in power and power who suppress freedom of expression, but it is an inappropriate counterargument in situations where the strong and the powerful suppress the parody mockery.

The same goes for the counterargument, "It's just satire, why?" It's a very inappropriate counterargument. Satire refers to "about the strong" as satire, because "about the weak" becomes violence, not satire.

Insisting on the issue of racism, foreign discrimination, and mockery of the weak, "Can't a democratic society allow even this much parody?" and asking, "Why, it's just a satire?" demonstrate that the concept of 少數 and discrimination in Korean society as a whole is thin and the lack of awareness of social power relations and structural oppression.

In fact, discrimination is very severe in Korea. Many Koreans misunderstand that discrimination is not severe because Korea does not have much physical violence, based on the degree of violence in discriminatory acts.

When assessing the severity of discrimination, the severity of discrimination is measured based on the degree of physical violence like the Allport Scale, but even minor discrimination based on mindset is also measured by how widespread discrimination exists when discrimination exists anyway.

For example, Korea and Japan have the highest percentage of people who do not welcome and refuse when they ask "whether black or Southeast Asian Muslims will welcome them when they move to their neighbors."

The refusal to allow ordinary people of different races to move in is also the most repulsive in the world, but it is even more repulsive to accept refugees into the house.

This is why Korea is classified as a "selfish and racist country" and has a reputation. Of course, it is not based on the severity of physical violence, but on the degree to which the "mindset" rejects different races, different cultures.

However, most Koreans are unaware of the widespread existence of discrimination in Korean society.

Such insensitivity to discrimination and lack of awareness of social power relationships lead to so many people who are insensitive to parody mockery of foreigners and minorities. Even intellectuals are not interested in it.

In a media interview, Roh Jung-dae, a sociology professor at Hansung University, said, "Unlike the media, freedom of expression is important, so I think we need to have a more flexible gaze than looking at it with too strict standards."

It is absurd to hear such words and sophistry from a sociology professor who asked, "I'm just a satirical cartoonist, why?" regarding parody of the weak. Please read the satirical cartoons on Namuwiki.

Having a form of satire does not make all satire. In some cases, it becomes violence, not satire. The view of freedom of expression by a professor at Noh Middle School is very wrong.

When entertainment programs are parodying the weak, strict standards should be applied. Generous standards and flexible gaze are the normative standards to focus on parodying powerful people or strong people.

Noh seems to be arguing that strict standards should be applied when it comes to media and political expressions. It is a very wrong attitude. When it comes to media and political expressions, rather generous standards should be applied.

This is because it is the norm of a universal free democratic society.

Freedom of speech and political expression is the most widely guaranteed freedom of expression. However, in Korea, there are many cases where freedom of expression is applied in the opposite way like a professor at Noh Middle School.

In other words, Korean society too strictly controls the freedom of expression of the powerful or the strong, and narrows the scope of guarantees. Sometimes, the crime of insult to the president and defamation of the president are mentioned.

On the other hand, the freedom of expression for the weak is overly generous and the scope of guarantees is broad. Not many people take issue with the Palm Hani parody. This is not the only problem like Palm Hani.

Once or twice, I would have expected our society to self-purify through discussion without thinking about criticizing. However, this discrimination continues to occur repeatedly without being corrected. So we must take issue.

It was once controversial that students at Uijeongbu High School presented a blackface under the name of "Kwanjjak Boys." Intent to mock