From: underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe)
Subject: Freedom of Speech
Organization: Miners for a Heart of Gold
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 92 02:27:31 GMT

In article <la9qklINN2po@jethro.Corp.Sun.COM>
melindac@thedarktower.Corp.Sun.COM (Melinda Cheung) writes:
>		underdog@leland.Stanford.EDU (Dwight Joe) :
>		> No.  Generally, I do not call any specific person a 
>		> "savage", for example.
>		> There is a difference in the following.  What I 
>		> generally say is,
>		>     I.  The Nazis are savages.
>		>         The Chinese-cu are savages.
>		> This is different from what Chinese-cu savages 
>		> frequently say.  For example,
>		> they say,
>		>    II.  Dwight is a f*ck*r and a J*p wanna-be.
>		>         Jane Woo is a wh*t* *ssk*ss*r.
>		> Category I is _not_ a personal attack.  Category II 
>		> _is_ a personal attack. There is a difference.
>...
>Good point. Dwight, I'd like your answer to this. If you remain silent,
>I'll apply your logic that silence = consent.

Don't put words into my mouth.

Silence on the part of an individual indicates nothing; however, silence
on the part of a statistically representative sample of people would
indicate something.

For example, the silence that we "hear" from the Chinese-cu with regard
to Tibet indicates that many Chinese-cu, at least apathetically,
condone the atrocities that are occurring yearly in Tibet.  Of course,
the proof is in the pudding.  Just log onto some of the predominantly
Chinese-cu newsgroups, and you, Ms. Cheung, will find that there are
Chinese-cu who deny the atrocities committed by the Chinese-ge against the
Tibetan and who, in fact, support the forced annexation of Tibet
(and Taiwan).

>
>Dwight, is okay for me to say that all Stanford students are narrow-minded,
>ill-informed and bigotted?? After all, I'm directing my comments at a group
>of people, not individuals.

I'll take this opportunity to indicate a fundamental difference
between Chinese-cu thought and Western (and Japanese) thought.

Ms. Cheung.  If _you_ choose to make that assessment about all Stanford
students, then I _support_ your _right_ so.  I would not agree with your
assessment or even the premise of your assessment, but I _support_
100% your _right_ to air your views.  We can all learn from views that,
radical as they might be, differ from our own.

I (1) would _not_ attack you personally, (2) would not harrass you personally,
(3) would _not_ flood your e-mail box, (4) would _not_ maraude you from
newsgroup to newsgroup, etc.

This is in stark contrast to the Chinese-cu view of the world.  If they
don't like the views of a particular person, they think that it is
all right to (1) attack him personally, (2) harrass him personally,
(3) flood his e-mail box, (4) maraude him from newsgroup to newsgroup, etc.

On a grander scale, this savage view of the world manifests itself
clearly in the form of Chinese-cu support for the Chinese gov't's stated
intention to use military force (including nuclear weapons) to invade
Taiwan on the very minute that the Taiwanese people verbally declare
the independence of their nation.  The Chinese-cu have no notion of
the values conveyed in the Bill of Rights.  It's no surprise that the
the West formed Amnesty International, an organization based on principles
that are beyond the comprehension of most Chinese-cu.

We as Americans (and Asian-Americans) should strongly support the
principles of the Bill of Rights.  As a consequence, we should strongly
support the RimPac92 military exercises, in which Japan will participate
for the very first time with S. Korea and the USA; these nations should
do everything in their power to ensure that the Chinese-cu keep their
sticks and stones away from Taiwan when it declares independence and
away from the rest of Southeast Asia.

We Americans must "teach" the Chinese-cu that they must respect the
rights and freedoms (including the right of self-determination) of 
people.  We must back up our commitment with the full arsenal of Western
and Northeast Asian military technical might.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seikatsu no imi wa nan desu ka.            \|  |`      | Don't buy from Toyota;
Shitte itara oshiete kuremasen ka.          | -+-      | especially, don't buy
                                           /| / \      | from Capitol Toyota in
Copyright 1992.                                        | San Jose, California.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.korean,soc.culture.asian.american,soc.culture.asean