From: mj03@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (MINHO JO)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.korean
Subject: RE:RE %%%%%%% THE LONESOME LOSER DJ
Date: 2 Jan 93 02:14:21 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <86042@ut-emx.uucp>, btlee@emx.cc.utexas.edu (Byungtae Lee) writes:
 Mr. Minho Jo writes:
>Subject: %%%%%%  T H E   L O S E R,   DJ    (Also, To: Mr. Han-jung Kim)
>:Basically,  I for sure admit YS's win.   But I have different viepoints from
>:the Byungtea's analysis in postelection analysis.    The main point of
>:Byungtae'sanalysis was superficial to me,  for instant,  DJ and Minju didn't
>:have scientific and analytical approaches for the election and they have
>:limited political structures,  and so on.    At least,  his analysis was
>:practical and pinpointing to me.
>
>
>           Now, I am very confused with your thread. I can not figure out
>          why you have consitently attacked my view and why my analysis was
>          superficial to you because your the following analysis is not much
>          different from what I have posted.


           As you can see from many of my previous posts,  basically I
           admit the results of the election.  Result is result unless there
           was no illegal voting counting committed.  Thus, loser is loser,
           and winner is winner.   But,  I don't
           admit the people chose a right president.   The reasons are
           as follows, including the previous posts:


           I never attacked you.  I want you to distinguish diffrences between
           attack and diffrent opinions.     You are still too sensitive
           to others' comments.



>    1. Regionalism:
>          I never denied this. Rather I said that because of this, he was
>          doomed to fail as soon as he split the opposition party in 1987.
>          For this, I said I cann't forgive his political sin to exploit
>          regionalism from the opposition side. Before this, we could blame
>          the ruling party because they have exploit since Park. However, after
>          this, there have been no difference.


           You are talking about the 87 election, not talking about
           regoinalism that was prevail in the 92 election.  You didn't
           pointed out regionalism exploited by YS in the 92 election.
           You were only talking about DJ's regional basis.
           You condemed DJ's regional limitations rather than condeming
           YS's dirty schems to make bad use of Jyuck Gam Jung.

           DJ admitted
           his mistake on the 87 split and said to people "sorry" which was
           a part of new DJ.   DJ was not trying to provoke Jyuk gam Jung.
           I and also the people beleive that DJ did most fair and clean play.
           On the other hand,  in addition to YS's betrayal
           joining Gunbari Dang,  he committed another sin, Jyuck Gam jung in
           the last election.   YS's main target was on Kyungsang Do.
           His main election activites were made in TK and PK.  In addition,
           he was trying to trigger Jyuck Gam Jung by saying, "If you TK
           and PK people vote for Juyoun Jung,  DJ will be president.
           What a dirty approache !   Is it scientific approache.

           I want to say again,  "as long as Jyuck Gam Jung is prevail
           in such a small country, Korea,  the people never can not real
           president for people,  and a well qualified president"





>
>    2. Pusan Plot
>          You have been stuck to this incidents very much.
>          In fact, before this, there was general forcasting that YS would win
>          and was leading. But because of this, many people thought the result
>          was not predictable. We know the result.
>          Even without this incidents, Dj could not win.

          I have already explained dramatic changes of impect on
          the election results, showing the results of polls day by day.
          This is my analysis.   If you don't agree with that,  I don't
          want to force you to follow my opnion.  This is a democratic, isn't
          it ?



>   3. Junggook YeunHap
>          I took this example for unrealistic, unscientific approach
>          of Dj's side. What's the essence of New DJ Plan?
>          It was mainly to let "conservative" people that DJ is not so radical,
>          not communist...... Then how could they made the explicit ally with
>          the group which conservative (or ignorant by your term) poeple think
>          is the most radical in Korea.]


           I don't think this is a matter of scientific and unrealistic.
           The radical group had already separated from the Jungook Yeunhap
           (JY).   So DJ decided to be coorperative with JY.  DJ was right.
           But, what DJ only made mistake about was that DJ misunderstood the
           conservative mature now enough to tell what is true and what faked.

           YS started to find fault with DJ by JY's coorperation,  saying "
           DJ is a dangerous communism follower,  and Minju Dang is dangerous"

           What a dirty paly !   This is bad products made by Gunbari to attact
           DJ.   YS who had condemned the Yongong JoJak against Gunbari,
           himself made bad
           use of it in the election to be president.   Unfortunately, the
           conservative seemed to believe it.   The conservative are still
           not mature to accept democarcy.






>   4. Your conclusions:
>          How can you SUDDENLY expect  something ggod from "EGGHEADED"
>          or "EMPTY BRAINED" YS?


       Oh gosh,  I've never expected good results from the empty brain.
       Read the previous conclusion carefully.    I just said that I will
       see how they YS will solve the problems.  BTW,  I said several
       times before, "I hope YS does a good job in the future" as a normal
       greetings.    How can I expect good results from empty brain ?






>
>   5. the UNANSWERED MY Questions
>
>         a. Still I did not here why I am a "far-right-extremist"?
>            I've never heard your definition.

          Sorry,  I need more time to know you more.



>         b. What aspects of your analysis are more "in depth" or not superfical
>            than mine?


           You can see easily based on the previous posts and the above.


>   6. General comment
>        This thread seems pretty much of reconcilation. However, for me good
>        discussion means making differences clear rather than retreating
>        without suffcient explanation.


     Oh Goodness !     I don't only have reconceilation in mind,  but also
     there is no reason I have to make reconceilation.  You still don't
     understand my political standpoint and philasophy.

     I wanna trust your brain which can be able to tell what is diffrent.







                     Minho Jo, Lehigh University
                     Computer Integrated Manufacturing Lab,
                     Industrial Engineering Department



My Ultimate goal is to achieve "Warm-Hearted Human Integratred Society"