"Dad, they say if you have money, you don't have to wait in line"... The wavering nation of 'Dreams and Hope'

Controversy Over Amusement Park 'Free Pass' Expands
"Natural in Capitalism" vs "Too Early for Children"
Core Human Ownership Principle 'First-Come, First-Served' Under Debate

An amusement ride that everyone wants to ride. Would it be fair if the right to ride before the person in front by paying an 'extra fee' was sold? The so-called 'pass controversy' has been stirring online public opinion for several days.

A pass is a premium ticket sold at popular amusement parks. It is much more expensive than a regular ticket, but customers who purchase this ticket have the right to bypass the waiting line and use the ride first. However, controversy has erupted as concerns have been raised that selling passes violates the right to equality.

Are amusement park passes just cutting in line?

The 'pass controversy' was ignited by remarks from Professor Jae-Seung Jeong, a neuroscience professor at KAIST, who appeared on SBS's 'Master in the House' on the 2nd. At that time, Professor Jeong mentioned passes sold by popular attraction companies such as Lotte World, Everland, Caribbean Bay, and Ocean World, asking, "What values will children learn when they see this at a young age?"

He pointed out, "It is natural that people who line up first receive the service first. In this case, the right to cut in line is given to those who pay more money," adding, "This is a space where children learn that society treats people with money differently from those without."

After the broadcast, heated debates continued on online communities and social networking services (SNS). Some argued that the product infringes on the constitutionally guaranteed right to equality, while others countered that there is no basis to restrict a company's free economic activities.

Disney avoided pass controversy through meticulous design

Disneyland. [Image source=Pixabay]

In fact, the origin of the pass is Disneyland, the world's largest attraction company. Customers who purchase Disney's 'FastPass' can use rides without waiting in line during a limited time. FastPass is already an official product applied universally across Disneylands worldwide. There are various types such as FastPass, FastPass+, and MaxPass. However, there is no pass controversy among Disneyland visitors. Why is that?

The reason lies in Disney's careful design. Disney also anticipated customer complaints when they first planned FastPass. Accordingly, Disney made every effort to secure the 'legitimacy' of FastPass.

First is the appropriate price. In other words, to convince regular customers of the 'right to cut in line,' a suitable price must be found. For example, the 'Super Duper Pass,' which allows unlimited use of Disneyland without any waiting lines over five days, was sold for as much as $3,000 to $5,000 (approximately 3.95 to 6.6 million KRW).

Second is separating regular customers from VIP customers. Disney separated the flow of these two groups in various ways, such as providing FastPass customers with separate entrances or allowing them to use emergency exits. This minimized the 'discomfort' felt by regular customers.

'First-come, first-served' is a strong principle of ownership... but boundaries are increasingly blurred

Since ancient times, humanity has placed great importance on being first. Astronaut Buzz Aldrin planting the American flag as the first person to land on the moon. [Image source=Yonhap News]

The pass controversy in Korea and Disneyland's FastPass system both show how taboo it is in human society to bypass the 'first-come, first-served' principle. At the same time, they are evidence that our society has always created practices to bypass waiting lines.

The relationship between first-come, first-served and ownership was the subject of an entire book titled Mine by American legal scholar Michael Heller. According to Heller, humanity has almost instinctively agreed on the principle that 'the first to occupy owns.'

This principle is widely applied from the use of public facilities to business relationships. For example, children take turns on playground swings on a first-come, first-served basis, and the best seats on an airplane belong to those who take them first. The 'primogeniture' system of passing property to the eldest child is also an example of the first-come, first-served logic. Attempts to cut in line or bypass waiting inevitably face strong social backlash.

At the same time, humans have always been preoccupied with bypassing waiting lines. They buy scalped tickets at a premium, sell better airplane seats at higher prices, or even hire part-time workers to stand in line for them. Amusement parks also cleverly twist the first-come, first-served principle by selling passes. While the first-come, first-served principle remains a strong social agreement, it no longer necessarily directly translates into ownership.

Heller sees clarifying the increasingly ambiguous 'acquisition of ownership' as a major challenge. He emphasized, "When we face difficult dilemmas in areas where ownership is not well established, our task is to piece together limited ownership logic and design tools," adding, "Careful attention to the process of acquiring ownership will be the best choice to save the planet and protect freedom in areas such as greenhouse gas emissions and data."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.