From: seo@capone.ccsm.uiuc.edu (Jong-Wook Seo)
Subject: Re: Don't Preach! (LONG)
Organization: Microelectronics Lab - Univ. of Illinios
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 00:45:08 GMT


Before I post another bullshit, I'd like to bring my regret putting little 
bit too strong title to everybody.
I'll follow your way of posting little bit.

In article <1992Dec15.213932.11950@eng.umd.edu>,
dskim@eng.umd.edu (Daeshik Kim) writes :

>        Your preach was one of the very conflicting one
>        with your article subject ever since GMT's disapearance.
Expected!
Although, the appearance of GMT wasn't.

>In article <BzBA6A.4o5@news.cso.uiuc.edu> seo@capone.ccsm.uiuc.edu 
(Jong-Wook  Seo) writes:
>>Another person asked "If they made their money legally, what's the 
>>problem?". .... Anyway, who are 'THEY?

>        You got the 'Another person' right here.

>        And my answer is: He/she who made the money their family is spending.
You were talking about the"Orange-Jok", who are not the people you are 
saying here.
(Let me say more about this below.)

>>Let me tell you the real story.

>        Just tell me a story but don't preach.
Easily expectable one!

>>...reason why Korean public has criticized the "Orange-Jok" is NOT because
>>they are .. It is because of the so-called economy driving policy in Korea.

>        And the above reason is why I said they are criticizing the
>        wrong target.  Please read my posting carefully.
From which of your article can I get the idea about what the right target is?
Then, I'll read it many times very carefully.
(Although, I have done so.)

>>[low-tax-to-rich] economic development. (I hope you have heard about this
>>you don't start to talk about the validity or effectiveness or even morality 
>>of this policy. From any of your previous postings, I haven't seen any 
>>implications about this.)

>        I'm legally Korean and spend almost 25 years in Korea; but
>        of course, I know the above; 
What do you mean by 'but'.
(If it was mistake of not important, ignore.)

>         and I also know that your
>        [low-tax-to-rich] is not exact statement; rather, it's
>        low-tax-to-the-reinvestment; and there were lots of abuse on this.
If you want to talk about "Jae-Too-Ja Chock-Jin-Bup" by 
low-tax-to-the-reinvestment, it is completely different stuff and not important.
So, could you give me some kind explanation about it?

>        And you're welcomed to criticize the abuser, which is different
>        from the OJ.
I got a feeling that you have some confusion about the character or 
definition (If I use some meaning-only word.) of the so-called 
"Orange-Jok".
So, could you please give me some idea about what the "Orange-Jok" you are 
talking about is?
(They are not simply the people who drink orange juice for breakfast, as 
you may already know.
They are not the 'ordinary' people who enjoy the "Ap-Goo-Jung" business 
area, either.)

>        And the above reason does not justify why OJ deserve those
>        shit; only reason I can think of is the GENERALIZATION of
>        those who spend their money on luxurious items would have
>        made their money via not right way or illegally; however,
>        as far as I know if they make their own money, they wouldn't
>        be OJ, right?
Exactly!
That is the main, maybe the only, reason why I put something I called 
'redundant'.
I imagine you want to say that the "Orange-Jok" don't deserve the SHIT 
because they are NOT the people who make the money which they are 
spending, right?
However, that is the very reason why I think they deserve it.

One more. 
I have never criticized their parents who give them money to spend just 
for that.
It is quite natural for a parent to give their kids some money if they are 
asked and if they have enough money.
I understand it. ("In-Ji-Sang-Jung")


>>...[Korean Econ. Policy deleted]...
>>Now, under this circumstance, the money made under unfair tax policy 
>>should be 'persuaded' to reinvest in reproduction, NOT to 'buy whatever 
>>they want'.

>        Nobody persuades one to buy whatever they want.
I imagine you know what I intended to mean by the sentence.
And, I hope.

>        Please do not distort my prev. posting with this BS.
Could you please tell me which one do you mean by 'my prev. posting', 
which is distorted by the 'bullshit'?

>        I said they don't deserve the criticism because of the
>        fact that they bought what they want.
This time, for the first time ever, I ask you not to distort my 'bullshit' 
to limit the implications.
From which part of my posting, did you get the idea that I am saying that 
'they deserve the criticism because of the fact that they bought what they 
want.'
They deserve their critics because they spend money without doing anything 
to make it.
If you don't accept this kind of ethics, forget it.
I don't want to ask you to share the same thing.
That is Korean ethics, and it works in some extent.
Many Korean individuals prefer that ethics, too.
(If you have any objecting logic based on your individualism mentioned so 
far, please tell me.)

>>The only way is just by publicizing their wrong lifestyle whenever they 
>>forget this.
>        So what's your definition of wrong lifestyle and
>        right one?
Wrong one?  That of "Orange-Jok"
Right one?   That of "non-Orange-Jok".
The definition of "Orange-Jok"?   I asked you to tell me about it before.
I am waiting for it.
(Why don't I first tell you the definition I have?
I imagine you are expert on that.
You have talked about it since long time ago.
I just studied.)

>>This is how your 'motherland'... This is how the country with full of
>>'stupid' people who don't even know how the f*** important the cultural
>>diversity is has increased its national economic size...
>>They, our people, are not stupid like you dare to insult to be so.
>>They have been living really hard time to develop national economy, not 
to 
>>learn what the individualism is about.

>        I'm lost here; O.K. I'm KOREAN CITIZEN from Seoul so my people
>        is STUPID SEOUL PEOPLE, so WHAT'S YOUR PEOPLE WHO ARE >NOT STUPID?
I expected you can figure out the reason why I put accent by writing 
'stupid' instead of just stupid.
By doing so, I tried to say that the image of 'stupid' was forced to be 
put to Korean people by some people.
(This is very popular way of writing, I think, and I usually use this kind 
of thing whenever I use a word to imply slightly different meaning or 
nuance from its generally known.
Actually, in this part, as you may imagine by the words used (for example 
, cultural diversity), I directed other people.
But, no problem.)
If above explanation doesn't get you back, I am lost.
So, if not, please tell me in a little bit easier way to understand.

>>He has tried to apply American ethics to Korea directly and indirectly.

>        Nope, I haven't tried American ethics and I don't know
>        what that is.  
Your denial accepted.
Sorry about that.

>        I haven't even given out any single example
>        or any similar thing to support my thought on that
>        useless and worthless criticism on OJ.
I can imagine what you want to say, but could you please tell this part 
again in an easier way for me?

>>[some irrelavent example about the confusion of rich family]
>>(The reason why I put this 'redundant' stuff is what has been said by you 
>>is about ethics, not the personal reality.)

>        I don't get this again.  Maybe I'm too stupid to understand the   
>         above.
Right, that was really irrelevant if you haven't tried to apply American 
ethics to Korea directly and indirectly.

>>Folks do not preach.

>        I don't understand the above again; are you trying to
>        say they don't preach in Korea but force the others?
Your kind.
Anyway, as you may imagine, that was just to talk to somebody who I think 
try to apply American ethics to Korea directly and indirectly not to do so.
(If you feel I am forcing other people to follow my way of thinking from 
the word 'not to do so', that is not right.
I think you are very allergic about this.
Actually, I am, too.
I want to tell them that there are some Korean people who don't feel nice 
about the impression they have gotten from some of the articles posted by 
certain people in this news group rather frequently.)
If you are not among them, sorry about the confusion I brought to you.


-- 
>        Daeshik Kim     H: (703) 273-1517 O: (703) 689-5878
>        DAESHIK.KIM@sprintintl.sprint.com       dskim@eng.umd.edu
>        /PN=Daeshik.Kim/O=SprintIntl/ADMD=Telemail/C=US/@Sprint.com



Jong-Wook Seo

Newsgroups: soc.culture.korean