As for the 'global village' argument... I am not sure if you ever spent time around any kind of minority groups, but my experience tells me that the stronger the push from the outside to abandon one's culture and roots (and thus - uniqueness), the stronger the resistance. I have known emigrant groups in foreign countries placing a much stronger value on their 'uniqueness' than the same people while in their own country. Not sure how this will translate wrt globalization, but I will not be surprised if the trend to remain 'distinct' will grow stronger the more borders between nations crumble. Historical examples abound (Basks, Irish, Scots, to name just a few.)

Take Koreans for example, since this seems to be the underlying trend here. Are they any less proud to be 'Koreans' now than 20 years ago? Or 50 years ago? Will they be any less proud in 10 or 20 years? Will they stop referring to themselves as 'Koreans' and becoming generic 'World Citizens'? Will they always cultivate their specific uniqueness and culture or will they switch to Esperanto and make BigMac their national cousine? Will they want to have their own Baduk Association, or will they be happy for it to be silently absorbed into some Global Umbrella?

The irony here seems to be rather thick. Europeans claiming minority status sort of stretches credulity a bit, but I guess that makes sense from a latter-day occidental point of view. Normative arguments about what ought to be the case given certain cultural sensitivities seem extremely misplaced in this context. Honestly, using the cultural-invasion card here is just bad form. Forgive me for being presumptuous, but in this part of the hemisphere I think it would be best to considered ourselves as guests rather than hosts when it comes to this wonderful game.

How does it feel having the shoe on the other foot?

I am ambifootuous... if that's even a word.
Sometimes I even wear shoes on my hands... just for the heck.
So you can't intimidate me!

Seriously - some thoughts:
1) No irony was intended in that particular post.
2) Europeans ARE a minority where world population is concerned. And certainly where Go population is concerned. The goal is to change this, so lets not get locked into an inferiority complex and/or a submissive mindset.
3) Cultural uniqueness and the fear of losing it is not necessarily restricted to minorities. America and the illegal immigration is a good example here.
4) I will have hard time considering myself a 'guest' on my own continent and in my own tournaments. So being submissive is out. Being polite but confident is much better in my book. People don't tend to respect people who don't respect themselves.
5) And Finally: I have not opened this particular door. I just peaked what might lie behind. Feel free to have a different opinion, as I assume you do.

PS... and here is your shoe back. Its too small for me.

The West needs to catch up with East and there's no other path than to acknowledge the disparity and work toward competing against the best of the best.

if there is Brtish Closed golf.. i wouldnt waste my time watching the game and i am not the only one.

But you might have to give up your original citizenship to get citizenship of another country. Several countries do not allow double citizenships. That is a reason of choosing not to get an European one.

yes...it is wrong to have youth or women tournament in my opinion. but who am i to say..
that is why i do not pay money to view their games. i only enjoy Pure open games where skill is the only thing that decide the outcome.

hanguk kiwon events do not put any restrictions. if you are strong enough then you may try to be korean professional. then you can enter all events. there are many foreigner who successfully earned korean 1D. they are allowed to enter the torunament if they wish.

I don't know, and its not important for this argument. I'm sure you wouldn't watch my golf clubs championship either, yet one exists and it's closed to club members only. Do you object?

If you only object to closed championships that are spectator events then I find your argument even more peculiar.

i am talking about geographical restriction in go tornament which is just like a special olympic for the handycapped people which has no value in go community other than put medel on a #1 handycap and make him smile.

for the good of go community such tournament (geographically restrictede torunaments) should be stopped.

for the good of go community such tournament (geographically restrictede torunaments) should be stopped.

Many people enjoy themed tournaments. Local players enjoy national championships, women enjoy female championships, children enjoy youth championships. Why on earth is it good for the go community to stop having events that people enjoy?

women, children is pretty good theme.
but i am against geographical theme that is used to restrict stronger player.

yes...it is wrong to have youth or women tournament in my opinion. but who am i to say..

but i am against geographical theme that is used to restrict stronger player.

Why? It is an event that people enjoy, why should we stop them from having it?

Out of interest, would you feel the same way about a "White people only" tournament, provided of course that the "White" people eligible were enjoying it?

Out of interest, would you feel the same way about a "White people only" tournament, provided of course that the "White" people eligible were enjoying it?

Honestly not trying to troll here, but to open up the sorts of issues closed tournaments could create.

Although I think "white people only" would be a rather stupid restriction, I don't see why not. As long as such restrictions are not institutionalized at an official level.

It's like freedom of speech, Voltaire's philosophy: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Why? It is an event that people enjoy, why should we stop them from having it?