June Cho very kindly featured in her latest piece on Media Daum some of the English-language blogs that expressed gratitute for Korea’s help in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. There’s an interesting debate going on in the comments section, too.
-
English Books on Korea... and More!
-
Visit My Brother's Film Review Site
33 Comments
The comment section is very insightful. Most seem to say something along the lines of “We need to spend money to earn good will from America.”
It’s typically nationalistic, without serious consideration for humanitarian reasons of why, for example, many Americans donate money to victims of calamities.
My father used to say that some of the finest features of the Western civilization were humanism and what he called the “gentlemanliness” of Westerners. He would cite the example of Titanic where some of the richest of men gave up their lives so that some of the poorest of women and children could get on lifeboats first, “women and children first.”
A typical Korean reaction, he’d say, is “every man for himself” contrary to the stereotype of “groupism” (picture Seinfeld’s George Costanza character and a fire alarm — yes, that episode).
By the way, one of my blogs was mentioned as well. While I appreciate the exposure (I am already getting hits and comments from South Korea), I don’t think the writer read through the rest of my blog, which is generally critical of the current South Korean administration.
James
aka Guns and Butter
aka The Asianist
My father used to say that some of the finest features of the Western civilization were humanism and what he called the ??gentlemanliness?? of Westerners.
Gimme a break… that’s high comedy!
Let me give you some “incidents” of not-so-gentle Western behaviour contrary to the Titanic-example: Auschwitz, Treblinka and Sobibor. The white Aryans at the gas chambers cried also: “Women and children first!”
I think what Guns and Butter cites as “gentlemanliness” is explained quite well in the book “What Went Wrong” by Bernard Lewis. The book is about Islam and the clash of modernity. He gives numerous examples of what GB father’s observed, such as an Austro-Hungarian Emperor allowing a woman to pass on the street to the amazement of the visiting Arab diplomat.
Come on Suger Shin, your logic is about par with Shakuhachi.
Sugar Shin:
Let me repeat:
My father used to say that some of the finest features of the Western civilization were humanism and what he called the ??gentlemanliness?? of Westerners.
No one is saying that the Western civilization produced only angels.
A typical Korean reaction, he??d say, is ??every man for himself?? contrary to the stereotype of ??groupism?? (picture Seinfeld??s George Costanza character and a fire alarm ?? yes, that episode).
Ok, guys, my reaction was a little over the top. But what bothered me was GB’s generalization of a hypothetical Korean behaviour and his father’s hypothetical reaction to it. All thesis, no proof. Is there no “gentlemanliness” in other cultures and civilizations on par with Western civilizations?
I dismay this sort of Western superiority argumentation or indirect hints leading to the Western superiority conclusion.
The looting, rape and murders in New Orleans showed Koreans don’t have a monopoly on??every man for himself,?? an argument for which you gave no evidence whatsoever.
Pulling rank is tacky.
Maybe. But when another is snide enough to purport to speak for “people,” such a retort is warranted, I think. I would be less irritated if one were honest enough to say “I will… if you did this…” rather than anoint oneself “the Speaker of the People” and pronounce judgments.
Sadly, I think that this might actually happen, and that New Orleans, after a few months have passed, is just going to be by treated by middle america as a burdensome new Indian reservation irrelevant to their lives.
And, yet, donations and help continue to stream into the region from your maligned “Middle America.”
There are legitimate questions, however, whether the rest of the tax-paying public needs to, in effect, subsidize and insure those who continue to insist on living in areas with high risk of natural disasters (that includes not just New Orleans, but also areas along the Mississippi in the Midwest, yes, home to many “Middle Americans”).
I would say ??doesn??t even come close,?? at the least, is debatable, since ??adjusting?? can mean a wide range of things.
On the contrary, there are specific mathematical ways to adjust for GDP per capita through PPP. Again, if you don’t know already, I suggest you look up PPP, a basic economic concept. Also, there is much research into the issue of charity-giving in context of disposable income (though it’s been a while since I examined such data).
Mr. Editorials in Major Newspapers (god help you if you mean the Korea Times)…
I don’t write for Korean newspapers (perhaps in the future when I have more time):
I have written op-eds for, let’s see:
The Asian Wall Street Journal
The Wall Street Journal Online
The Seattle Times
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer
Proceedings
Defense Review
RealClearPolitics
… and a few journals of more academic nature. I also have a recurring guest column in the Seattle Times (which, incidentally, prevents me from writing for many other newspapers due to contractural obligations).
you still haven??t backed up your initial assertion that ??A typical Korean reaction, he??d say, is ??every man for himself????? except for that bit about holding doors at department stores…
First of all, read carefully. I did not make the “assertions.” My father observed such things. It is true that I largely endorse his view on the matter, however.
He [Lewis] gives numerous examples of what GB father??s observed, such as an Austro-Hungarian Emperor allowing a woman to pass on the street to the amazement of the visiting Arab diplomat.
Perhaps a little background is in order. My father is Korean. He was, in fact, a Korean diplomat. Just like the Arab diplomat in the Lewis book, my father, who lived through the Japanese occupation, the Korean War and the industrialization in Korea, found much in the West astonishing (he worked in dozens of countries, too many to count).
He still lives in Korea, after his retirement. As much as he loves his country and is proud of its enormous economic and political accomplishments (he himself went from a literally starving war refugee to negotiating treaties with the most powerful countries in the world), he is painfully aware of the shortcomings of his country and culture.
I also grew up in Korea, before I chose to be a Westerner (more specifically, an American). If I seem to think highly of Western civilization in general, and of the United States especially, it is because I DO. That does not mean I think of Koreans (or Asians) as somehow inferior. But cultures, as difficult as they are to define, have positive and negative aspects.
There are areas in which Western civilization excels. Nowhere outside the West is charity as pervasive and as earnest as in the West. That says something of the culture, and cannot be simply ascribed to economic explanations alone (after all, we aren’t Marxists, are we?). Much the same for status of women and minorities (political, religious and ethnic).
Both my father and I have seen how Koreans often behave in calamities (my father much longer than I, of course). Rarely, if ever, do we observe or find episodes like the Titanic one I mentioned. He and I were in Korean buildings when fire alarms went off more than once. How the George Costanza character behaved in one of the Seinfeld episodes (fire in a building full of elderly and children) matched the scene perfectly.
This might be comedy when on TV, but a very sad sight in real life, an indication of some of the more negative aspects of Korean society.
James
aka Guns and Butter
aka The Asianist
But what bothered me was GB??s generalization of a hypothetical Korean behaviour and his father??s hypothetical reaction to it.
Not hypothetical at all. My father and I have observed this phenomenon at great length (my father since before the Korean War). I don’t know, I guess something about being pushed or shoved aside while trying to hold doors open for others (particularly women) at Korean department stores, for example, seems to bring out such opinions.
Is there no ??gentlemanliness?? in other cultures and civilizations on par with Western civilizations?
Good question. Why don’t you answer for us? Tell me of another current civilization where women hold such high status outside the Western civilization.
The looting, rape and murders in New Orleans showed Koreans don??t have a monopoly on??every man for himself,?? an argument for which you gave no evidence whatsoever.
First of all, New Orleans isn’t exactly representative of the finest ideals of “Western civilization” per se. There are some other factors to consider:
1. “The looting, rape and murders” were not as widespread as hinted by the media, which generally sensationalizes such occurrences (or rumors of the same).
2. No one is suggesting that Koreans “have a monopoly” on anything, contrary to the persistent strawman attacks.
3. Tell me of any notable incident like the Titanic episode where Korean men of status gave lives so that Korean women and children of poverty could survive.
Look, I don’t want to turn this into a Korea vs. the West thread at all (as there are many wonderful cultural traits in Korea that are missing in the West), but Korean culture isn’t perfect and what it often lacks is the Western sense of “chivarlry” (or “gentlemanliness”) toward women, for example.
Nor is unselfish humanitarianism a pervasive trait in Korea. I haven’t seen the latest figures, but I don’t think the per capita charity giving in South Korea comes even close to that of Western countries even after adjusting for GDP per capita and PPP.
James
aka Guns and Butter
aka The Asianist
Maybe. But when another is snide enough to purport to speak for ??people,?? such a retort is warranted, I think. I would be less irritated if one were honest enough to say ??I will?? if you did this????? rather than anoint oneself ??the Speaker of the People?? and pronounce judgments
I’m just going to say, no “maybe,” you bungled here, and it wasnt’ at all warranted. In fact, I can’t see how, rhetorically, this has done anything at all to convince those of us that might be on the fence with respect to your views (except counter to the way you intended). Nobody wants to listen to a know it all, and appeals to authority, especially when you insist on citing yourself as the authority. don’t really count for much in this kind of discussion.
We’re free to disagree. I just think what you said was bad form, and not even bad form in an interesting or funny way, but the lamest, laziest sort of bad form.
You made an assertion in the guise of your father’s “observation.” I really don’t care about your or your father’s backgrounds. I’m an American, and know many, many Koreans here in Korea who donate to charities out of religious conviction or plain empathy. You attempt to equate charitable giving with “gentlemanliness,” Western superiority and exiting burning buildings, all shallow analogies. Every country has shortcomings, but you’re obviously out of touch with Korean society to claim that a “typical Korean reaction” is??every man for himself.??In 2002, KBS raised 8.1 million won in its yearly charity campaign. That’s from one charity alone, and there are several here outside of the churches and temples. I’m finding it ironic that as a caucasian American in Korea I’m sticking up for the people you descended from, but you sound mighty white, in the worst way, with your Rudyard Kipling-eque pronouncements.
GB - just to point out two things:
Some of these very “Westerners” will argue that this “chivalry toward women” you mention is another form of sexism.
The charity-to-per-capita-GDP ratio has its limits. For a dude who earns $100 a week, $10 is more valuable to him than is $1,000 to a dude who earns $10,000. Both are 10% of their income, but they are not the same.
As a sidenote, maybe people will take your comments more seriously if you got off your western cultural high horse for a while.
Wooj:
Some of these very ??Westerners?? will argue that this ??chivalry toward women?? you mention is another form of sexism.
Yeah, and I am sure that’s why they flock to Asia, Africa or the Middle East to live. I am sure women everywhere much prefer the “non-sexism” of Asia, Africa or the Middle East over the “sexism,” i.e. chivalry, of the West.
I realize that the ill-effects of radical feminism has run amok in the West, particularly on American academe, but to suggest men of wealth and status giving way to women and children of poor on Titanic as being “sexist” is truly beyond pale.
Get real. I am not suggesting that the West is the utopia, but quite clearly the standing of women in the West is generally much higher than that outside the West.
The charity-to-per-capita-GDP ratio has its limits. For a dude who earns $100 a week, $10 is more valuable to him than is $1,000 to a dude who earns $10,000. Both are 10% of their income, but they are not the same.
You clearly did not understand what I wrote, did you? Let me repeat:
I don??t think the per capita charity giving in South Korea comes even close to that of Western countries even after adjusting for GDP per capita and PPP.
If you know what PPP stands for, your “concern” is accounted for. Besides, surely you are not arguing that the S. Korean GDP per capita is 1/10th that of the US? ROK is surely a “middle-income” country, rapidly rising to “high-income” status. So there is no economic excuse for low charity giving.
As a sidenote, maybe people will take your comments more seriously if you got off your western cultural high horse for a while.
I didn’t know you spoke for “people.” My comments and my editorials in major newspapers are taken quite seriously by enough people, thanks.
James
aka Guns and Butter
aka The Asianist
My comments and my editorials in major newspapers are taken quite seriously by enough people, thanks.
Pulling rank is tacky.
As far as the looting and violence in New Orleans, it really is sick. I don’t think these people have any idea how much their use of this disaster as an opportunity to get a free ipod or settle old scores is going to prevent the people with the resources and money needed to rebuild the city from ever coming back again. But …
What makes me more uneasy is the already palpable callousness and indifference towards the people of New Orleans that is discernable practically even before the funerals have started. Commentators like Jack Shafer at Slate and Joel Garreau at the Washington Post have already adopted a “too bad, tough shit, let it rot” attitude, in addition to the more famous “bulldoze the place” comments of Congressman Hastert and the “they’re better off anyway comments” of Barbara Bush. Sadly, I think that this might actually happen, and that New Orleans, after a few months have passed, is just going to be by treated by middle america as a burdensome new Indian reservation irrelevant to their lives.
The point, GB, is that you mention the general concept of “Western civilization” while criticizing what you deem “Korean nationalism” (which btw I do think deserves criticism sometimes), thereby implying that a more fundamental difference between “Asian civilization” and “Western civilization” may be the reason behind the “nationalism” while ignoring the transient, environmental factors that may also be in play. Your citing of “gentlemanliness” worsens the suspicion because it is not directly related to the issue of humanitarian aid and therefore seems to be stated only to reinforce your generalized contrast between civilizations.
As for your initial assertion that charity given by Korea doesn’t even come “close to that of Western countries even after adjusting for GDP per capita and PPP,” I would say “doesn’t even come close,” at the least, is debatable, since “adjusting” can mean a wide range of things.
JYC- “pulling rank”? What rank? Maybe he can go write in his “comments and editorials in major newspapers” that “Koreans give aid for nationalistic causes while western civilization on the other hand has things like humanism and gentlemanliness” for his very serious readers.
Speaking of “strawmen,” Mr. Editorials in Major Newspapers (god help you if you mean the Korea Times), you still haven’t backed up your initial assertion that “A typical Korean reaction, he’d say, is ‘every man for himself’” except for that bit about holding doors at department stores, which is pretty weak for such a generalization, although it did give you an opening to belittle Koreans, particularly males.
I??m just going to say, no ??maybe,?? you bungled here, and it wasnt?? at all warranted.
So you say. Let me repeat the original exchange and let others decide who “bungled”:
As a sidenote, maybe people will take your comments more seriously if you got off your western cultural high horse for a while.
I didn??t know you spoke for ??people.?? My comments and my editorials in major newspapers are taken quite seriously by enough people, thanks.
Nobody wants to listen to a know it all…
Ad hominem is usually a sign of a weak argument.
In 2002, KBS raised 8.1 million won in its yearly charity campaign.
Did you write “8.1 million won” — as in about $8,000? That’s all KBS raised in one year?
I??m finding it ironic that as a caucasian American in Korea I??m sticking up for the people you descended from, but you sound mighty white, in the worst way, with your Rudyard Kipling-eque pronouncements.
Sure, sure, I am a twinkie-sellout and you are an egg with yellow-fever. Do you have anything else other than more middle school ad hominem attacks?
What exactly is “sounding white”? You mean I should instead “sound yellow” instead? You know, with a “funny” accent and with constant bowing to fit a stereotype of what a “yellow man” ought to sound like?
If, on the other hand, you mean to suggest that I write like Kipling, thank you so much. That is such an enormous, albeit unwitting (apparently), compliment.
Okay, I gotta go to bed now, it’s late EST.
You really are pompous and have nothing of importance to say about Koreans. Nighty-night.
This thread is rapidly aging, but:
Ad hominem is usually a sign of a weak argument.
God, you’re really grasping at straws here. You made an appeal to authority, and that authority is ultimately yourself. I think that can reasonably be described as being a “know it all,” so why is this an ad hom? More importantly, what does that have to do with the point I made that you rely on irrelevant appeals to authority on an issue (i.e. some theoretical essential difference between “Korea” and the “West”) where you don??t actually have any? Most of us have also lived in both countries, and speak both languages. Many of us are like yourself, American citizens of Korean descent (notwithstanding the allegations of treason and disloyalty by some reactionaries on this blog). There’s no reason that you’re going to have some inside knowledge on the differences between “Korea” and the “West” that nobody else here does.
I know it’s a relatively minor issue, but really, if you’re going to stand up and preach about grandiose topics like the nature of “Korea” and the “West” you should at least check to see that your fly isn’t open first.
You really are pompous and have nothing of importance to say about Koreans. Nighty-night.
Failing reason, he falls back to ad hominem.
You really ought to look that up in a dictionary.
JYC:
You made an appeal to authority, and that authority is ultimately yourself.
How? What I did was to present a view based on observations that my father and I share about Korea and the West.
In contrast, you called me a “know it all,” a name-calling, clearly with an intent to denigrate ME rather than engage or attack my argument. That is a classic case of “ad hominem.” Maybe you can look that up on Wikipedia too.
some theoretical essential difference between ??Korea?? and the ??West??
“Theoretical,” eh? Aside from personal observations from someone like my father who lived through much of modern Korean history from Japanese occupation and on AND had the rare opportunity to observe a variety of Western nations at length (not to mention my comparatively meager experience), there are OBSERVABLE differences I mentioned, namely, low charity giving per capita, adjusted for GDP per capita and PPP in comparison to that in the West (there are other cultural differences, not simply explained by economic explanations, that can be quantified — for example, adoption rate of children by unrelated (by blood) adults, political, economic and social standing of women and ethnic minorities and on and on).
Are you suggesting instead that such observable differences are simply random phenomenon?
You refuse to engage the issue and the “data,” if you will and continue to engage in name-calling. That, to me, is a sign of a weak argument. You’d rather make ME an issue, rather than the substance of my arguments.
Many of us are like yourself, American citizens of Korean descent…
I am that — an American of Korean descent — and more. I was also formerly Korean. My first langugage was Korean. My first “culture” if you will was Korean… And a very traditional Korean at that.
(notwithstanding the allegations of treason and disloyalty by some reactionaries on this blog
I have no idea what you are talking about. You’ll have to explain that one to me.
There??s no reason that you??re going to have some inside knowledge on the differences between ??Korea?? and the ??West?? that nobody else here does.
So we all share the same views, then? What’s the point of discussion and debate since you have, based on some magic knowledge unknown to me, declared that I, an individual distinct from you, have no reason to know more or less about the topic at hand.
By that logic, I guess all the people who grew up in the US should have the same knowledge base about America, and there is no point in one person attempting to debate or inform another.
I know it??s a relatively minor issue, but really, if you??re going to stand up and preach about grandiose topics like the nature of ??Korea?? and the ??West?? you should at least check to see that your fly isn??t open first.
Again with the personal attack. And what exactly are you impugning with the “your fly isn’t open first” remark?
I understand that you don’t like my arguments, yet instead of presenting counter arguments and evidence, you spend more of your words attacking ME personally.
Galantry, chivalry or genetlemanliness or counting the amount of given charity per capita has not much to do with the concept of humanism. Humanism had its roots in the Christian spehre of European philosophers. Bernard Lewis’ observation of forementioned Austrian-Hungaro emperor is an example of a gentleman with a heart of stone. The same emperor led his people to a senseless war in the trenches - breaking the hearts of millions of women by sending them to the butchering field of World War I, whilst not caring a shit about their deaths. I would call him a “gentle” SOB.
There’re different codes of behaviour for different ages and cultures. Comparing the codes of behaviour of different civilizations without taking the cultural, historical backrounds into account is s sign of ignorance.
Furthermore I can’t see a logic in comparing the (South) Korean civilization with a “Western civilization”. The West is as diverse as the Far East. A comparison of a whatever kind of Wstern civilization vs. a whatever kind of Far Eastern civilization would have been a fairer game. Islam, Buddhism, Confucianism or Animism influenced civilizations differ but that doesn’t make them naturally “ungentle”.
The level and higher standing of women and children in society took the West hellovalot pain and was a slow process - it’s an achievement of industrialization in the 18th-19th century and due to the progress of liberal democracy.
I don’t care about the observations/ opinions of GB’s father and GB himself. But spouting such an unproofed, hypothetical bullshit degrading all Koreans as a selfish lot is laughable. Yes, this is an ad hominem attack. Romans used to watch for fun at poor half naked guys cutting each other to stripes in the colosseum arena - glory to the gentle whackos from the West!!!
Galantry, chivalry or genetlemanliness or counting the amount of given charity per capita has not much to do with the concept of humanism.
Leaving other issues aside for the moment, I’d argue that pervasiveness of charity has much to do with humanism.
Bernard Lewis?? observation of forementioned Austrian-Hungaro emperor is an example of a gentleman with a heart of stone. The same emperor led his people to a senseless war in the trenches - breaking the hearts of millions of women by sending them to the butchering field of World War I, whilst not caring a shit about their deaths. I would call him a ??gentle?? SOB.
Magnificent oratory! Except for one inconvenient fact. The Lewis excerpt is from an Ottoman emissary describing the Austrian emperor of 1665. As you know, I am sure, WWI took place some two and a half centuries later. That’s one long-living emperor.
Nice having a “know it all” around, isn’t it?
By the way, there is no proof that Emperor Franz Josef (the Austrian emperor and the Hungarian king who ruled when WWI began) did “not care a shit about their deaths.”
Franz Josef was popular among the empire’s subjects until his death in the middle of the war. He was particularly known for attempting to grant Slavs in the empire self-rule (prevented by his German and Magyar nobles).
His rule was celebrated as that of a “liberal monarchy” (participation of different ethnicities in governing) particularly in light of subsequent rise of highly nationalistic fascism in both Austria and Hungary (and persecution of ethnic minorities).
Islam, Buddhism, Confucianism or Animism influenced civilizations differ but that doesn??t make them naturally ??ungentle??.
More straw man, since I said or implied no such thing.
The level and higher standing of women and children in society took the West hellovalot pain and was a slow process - it??s an achievement of industrialization in the 18th-19th century and due to the progress of liberal democracy.
Only, the seeds for high status of women date back much longer to the days of ancient Greco-Roman civilizations (Roman women could inherit property and divorce freely, for example). Even in 50 BC, the West was ahead in the game of rights for women.
But even if one were to accept your logic that only industrialization and liberal democracy led to such a situation, why is it that industrialization and liberal democracy just happened to have occurred in the West first?
Much of the rest of your statements is more personal attack. I’ve endured enough ad hominem, so I won’t respond to any more personal attacks. If you got the “stuff,” argue the substance. Otherwise, like I wrote before, ad hominem is a sign of a weak argument.
Note that I haven’t made any derogatory remarks about YOU. I’ve criticized what you wrote instead without calling you names. Perhaps if you were a gentleman, you’d kindly reciprocate.
Oh, I haven’t read Lewis’ book. So, my bad, that I’ve guessed the “Austrian-Hungaro emperor” metioned in comment #4 was Franz Josef.
Cause in the 17th century there was no official “Austrian-Hungaro empire”. The emperor of that time was the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire (Heiliges R??misches Reich deutscher Nation). BTW, that gentle Habsburgian emperor from the 17th century left Vienna and the fighting against the Ottoman-Turks was done by his minions and the Polish king.
Is there no ??gentlemanliness?? in other cultures and civilizations on par with Western civilizations?
Good question. Why don??t you answer for us? Tell me of another current civilization where women hold such high status outside the Western civilization.
Your “feministic” answer to my rhetorical question!
Islam, Buddhism, Confucianism or Animism influenced civilizations differ but that doesn??t make them naturally ??ungentle??.
More straw man, since I said or implied no such thing.
My reaction to your “feministic” answer.
Only, the seeds for high status of women date back much longer to the days of ancient Greco-Roman civilizations (Roman women could inherit property and divorce freely, for example). Even in 50 BC, the West was ahead in the game of rights for women.
Questionable theory. Women rights for female Roman slaves?
Much of the rest of your statements is more personal attack. I??ve endured enough ad hominem, so I won??t respond to any more personal attacks. If you got the ??stuff,?? argue the substance. Otherwise, like I wrote before, ad hominem is a sign of a weak argument.
Note that I haven??t made any derogatory remarks about YOU. I??ve criticized what you wrote instead without calling you names. Perhaps if you were a gentleman, you??d kindly reciprocate.
Look, wiseass, I’m not a gentleman. And I love ad hominem attacks against arrogant banana-punks like you. And my oratory is always heart-throbbingly good although I don’t write editorial for important newespapers and journals.
But even if one were to accept your logic that only industrialization and liberal democracy led to such a situation, why is it that industrialization and liberal democracy just happened to have occurred in the West first?
They West had luck. The West is ahead of the technological and scientific race for 500 years. But civilizations rise and fall.
China, for centuries, was much ahead of any civilization on this planet. The Far East could have luck as well. Maybe for the next 5 centuries. Hold your breath, GB!
Oh, I haven??t read Lewis?? book. So, my bad
And yet, it didn’t stop you from referring to the book in an authoritative fashion.
Cause in the 17th century there was no official ??Austrian-Hungaro empire??. The emperor of that time was the emperor of the Holy Roman Empire (Heiliges R??misches Reich deutscher Nation).
And yet, you continue to attempt to give history lessons (but I can use the German lessons, thanks). Und das heilige r?mische Reich war weder heilig noch r??misch.
Good question. Why don???t you answer for us? Tell me of another current civilization where women hold such high status outside the Western civilization.
I figure you wouldn’t answer this question seriously, because you know what’s true. Women enjoy much higher status in the West than they do elsewhere.
Questionable theory. Women rights for female Roman slaves?
Not questionable at all. Roman legal concepts formed the basis of European (and later American) legal tradition. Roman law protected rights of women in a number of specific ways.
Sure, Rome was an ancient civilization and had slaves (who didn’t back then?). But let’s compare apples to apples. Roman free women had specific legal rights that surpassed those in other contemporary civilizations (or, for that matter, many non-Western civilizations of much more recent vintage).
They West had luck… But civilizations rise and fall.
“Luck” is what losers blame when others win.
But, for once, I agree with you on one thing — of course, civilizations rise and fall. I never maintained otherwise.
Contrary to the straw man position, I never mainted that the West or its civilization is inherently superior. It is very possible that the West may fall in the future and others may rise in its place. Likely, however, that won’t happen in my life time, and thank goodness for that.
China, for centuries, was much ahead of any civilization on this planet.
That’s a fascinating subject actually that warrants its own space — why China lost its technological advances of, say, the 14th Century (I touch on that briefly in my next column).
Look, wiseass, I??m not a gentleman. And I love ad hominem attacks against arrogant banana-punks like you.
I think a “punk” is someone who, unable to argue like an adult, engages in childish name-calling.
Well, you’ve clearly established that you are not a gentleman. Neither are you, apparently, in possession of the politeness and dignity prized in Korean culture. What exactly are you? Confused? The worst of both worlds?
Oh, and I much prefer the term “twinkie” over “banana.”
I think we’re done here. At least I am. As a wise man once said, “Don’t try to teach a pig how to sing. It will annoy the pig and it still won’t be able to sing.”
James
aka Guns and Butter
aka The Asianist
I’ve been away for a while, and I know this thread has become crusty and stale but:
YADDAH X3 …
In contrast, you called me a ??know it all,?? a name-calling, clearly with an intent to denigrate ME rather than engage or attack my argument. That is a classic case of ??ad hominem.?? Maybe you can look that up on Wikipedia too.
I put the link up to Wikipedia because you don’t seem to understand why your denoting yourself as an authority on this issue, and your appeals to authority in general are mistaken. I had thought an encyclopedia article would be simpler for you to grasp, and more concisely written than anything I could readily provide, but even in this I seem to have misjudged you. I’ll see if I can find a comic book that shows why appeals to authority are not compelling.
You are just not an authority on the issue, at least no more than anybody else here. Your work history doesn’t make your opinion any more weighty, so your recourse to credentialism is irrelevant. Since you’ve been so persistent about it, I really can’t hold any longer that it’s an honest mistake and will say just you’re being obstinately dumb (There, that’s an ad hom).
If you were Paul Krugman and we were discussing international trade, deference would be due. If you were Noam Chomsky and we were disccussing linguistics, likewise, his credentials, his employment as a linguistics professor at MIT, etc., all would command respect from amateurs. However, being a top economist and linguist respectively don’t mean that they’re necessarily right about anything as social commentators, and you would laugh if Chomsky said “You better take me seriously, I’m a linguist at MIT!”. For the same reason, when we’re discussing a non-techie topic that everybody here is familiar with, your credentials are really irrelevant, and demanding deference for them is lame beyond comprehension.
I wasn’t really going out of my way to insult you personally, so you might want to get down off that cross now. I’m satisfied that I’ve shown why part of your reasoning is flawed in a very elementary way. I said you were a know it all, because you insist that one holds your views to be authoritative without any good reason why. I don’t think that’s engaging in personal attacks.
JYC:I put the link up to Wikipedia because you don??t seem to understand why your denoting yourself as an authority on this issue…Where do I claim myself as an “authority” on anything?I??m satisfied that I??ve shown why part of your reasoning is flawed in a very elementary way.Self-satisfaction, at best. You simply declaring so does not make it so (in fact, in a way, you are engaging in the very behavior that you accuse me of — I think psychologists call that “projection,” but since I am not an “authority” on psychology, I leave it to others to make a more definitive clinical judgment).I said you were a know it all…I don??t think that??s engaging in personal attacks.Perhaps YOU need to read the wikipedia entry on Ad Hominem, or better yet, “personal attack.”
You clearly chose to make issue with the messenger (me) rather than the message (the subject at hand). You could’ve disagreed with my observation or view (or that of my father) with your own observations to the contrary (if any) or other evidences (that would, for example, counter why charity giving or adoption outside families might be low other).
Instead, even now, you are making ME the issue, not the subject at hand.
James
aka Guns and Butter
aka The Asianist
arrogant banana-punks like you
??????! Somebody’s been called out for “not thinking like a Korean”!
dogbert:??????! Somebody??s been called out for ??not thinking like a Korean??!Ja, some people already made that clear with the remark that I “sound mighty white.”
I am still trying to figure out what that exactly means. I have, however, heard some African-Americans call other African-Americans who speak grammatically proper English as “sounding white.” So I guess it’s a good thing.
And apparently I make “Kipling-sque” remarks. While I really appreciate that unwitting compliment, I really seriously doubt that I write like Kipling at all. One only wishes.
James
aka Guns and Butter
aka The Asianist
I??m guessing Kiplingesque as in the poem White Man??s Burden, but I think you??re educated enough to have already understood this. At least I hope so, though from what I??ve seen so far, maybe it??s optimistic to assume that you will ever get a semblance of a clue.
Otherwise, I??m content that the explanation I??ve provided about the problems inherent in the following:
My comments and my editorials in major newspapers are taken quite seriously by enough people, thanks.
?? has been more than sufficient by now.
Bye now.
test