. But what the show thinks is irrelevant to what we decide is right in the real world, and anyone has the right to apply the same reasoning to their opinion of a fictional character.
The opinion of the SK people is all the matters to my argument and what they think of him. They think highly of him, that is a fact not an opinion. They democratically elected his daughter their first woman President (very paternalistic society). Whether the economic boon was directly due to him or not, it was under his watch and they give him credit, and are willing to overlook his torture/oppression/murder. That is the most relevant point to my argument.
I am not following your going to war/reunification of Korea line of reasoning.
I left part of the citation from my post because the point made there is still true. Even if Starbuck is an angel or some other divine agent, people will still draw their own conclusions, no matter what the characters shout out on behalf of the writers.
The south Korean people have since discovered that capitalism is not the cornucopia promised, and the supposed Communist propaganda about the inevitability of capitalist crisis was simply education. This woman was first elected by the ruling class, then sold to the populace. The chances that her real platform, the one she really wants to carry out, is the one she ran on are pretty miniscule. The assumption that the new Park's election is an unreserved endorsement of the old Park is not as easily justified as you seem to think. I hope you're wrong, because I would hate to despise the people of south Korea.
The assumption that FDR is widely endorsed as a leader despite his many atrocities suffers from two problems. First, his domestic program, the New Deal, has been under attack from the beginning and it's destruction is well underway. Second, FDR's criminal acts during WWII (most notably mass internment of Nisei) have actually been widely condemned, not endorsed. FDR is widely hated, especially for things that are not criminal, such as making an alliance with the USSR against the Nazis.
It is hard to openly apologize for slavery, but as a matter of fact, insofar as it is possible to propagate Lincoln hate without giving the game away, it is done. It was not an accident that Argo won Best Picture over Lincoln. It is obligatory to announce that Lincoln suspended habeas corpus, etc., always in the most invidious way possible.
Whatever the merits your analysis of the show's intentions, your real life comparisions show shameless bias.
PS The US militarists seem to like repeat the mantra about how no army has conquered Afghanistan in history. I suppose it sounds like a good excuse. But, as a matter of historical fact, Alexander the Great did conquer Afghanistan. It was called Bactria then, and Greek kings ruled for quite a long time. Also, the Mongols succeeded, so well that their descendants, called the Hazaras, are still a major ethnic group in Afghanistan. I'm sure the US Army Generals like to imagine they are the equivalent of Alexander the Great. But in practice they are more like the Mongols, which is why they can't build a reliable puppet state. Mongols were barbarians, not builders of civilized societies. (Terminological note: "barbarian" in this context has mostly to do with being a nomadic society, and "civilized societies" in this case is rather literally about societies that live in cities.)