Well, Typepad, in its infinite wisdom, won't let me put up my own comment, since the spam filter thinks it's spam. And there's not even any profanity in there, nor multiple links. Ah. Typepad. Like Korea, I'm grandfathered in and Google already has given me love. How can I leave?
The comment, in response to Quius, is perhaps post-worthy, anyway, since it's more than a response to him alone, I guess.
Quius -
I don't have a problem with you posting on my site. Here are you comments, available for people to see, no? Just don't abuse the space and think about what you say. For example, why are 8 comments in a row from you, 3 in a row in a single post here? Could you not say what you needed to say in a single comment? Or was the problem the typical one...you thought of something to say and write it. Then 5 minutes later, wanted to add something. Then again 5 minutes later? Literally, your posts here are exactly 5 minutes apart. How about thinking careflly about what you say before composing it?
Speaking of which, you sound young and have little experience with critical thinking or constructin logical arguments. Most of your reasoning to explain quite large patterns in the world are based on anecdotal evidence, and completely subjective criteria.
On the level of logic, most of what you say sounds like sheer defenseiveness out of emotion, rather than a logical response. For example, in your other comments, you are angry that I am critical of Korea. Your response is that "it's the same" or "worse" in other countries, so I shouldn't criticize. That's irrelevant. As I said in the "Why Be Critical" post, I am talking about Korea, and criticizing certain problems in society on the basis of its own stated values and principles, and if the comparison IS international in nature, that is only because the culture positions itself as an international player, a "hub" of something, a "multicultural" society (yes, that is the new one these days), or simply a place that needs to undergo "globalization."
I may sound angry in my recent posts, but the emotion rests atop some sort of valid argument in most cases. Whether I'm talking about why "intelligent design" is stupid in US culture, or merely pointing out the anti-Semitic nature of what is published in Korean newspapers, making a mock newspaper piece using the same logic as the Korean ones, or saying that the extreme visa restrictions means I think ppl should go to another country to teach English, am critical of the "Korean Wave" or what have you, all of these have some very specific arguments beneath them.
If I were to simply use anectdotal evidence and make sweeping generalizations like you do ("nowhere is more racist than Russia!"), then I'd say, based on my bad experience with a Korean girlfriend, that "all Korean girls are X" or based on a bad employer that "all Koreans are lying, cheating con artists" or anything involving making generalizations about the entire group based on anecdoctal and unrepresentative behavior.
It is a valid opinion, however, to say, based on extensive experience working in, and having researched sufficiently about, the Korean education system to say, as I have before, that one reason Koreans do in general lack critical thinking skills is because this is not only not really taught in schools (although lip service is now paid to it), it is, in a practical sense, discouraged because of the hierarchical nature of the classroom, teaching styles, and intense, test-based curriculum.
This is a reasonable thing to say. It doesn't rely on foggy, vague concepts such as "culture" because that word is so ill-defined and overused that it is nearly a meaningless statement to say, "Koreans tend to lack critical thinking skills because of Korean culture." What is being said here? That it has been taught in a certain way for 5,000 of history? That this is a problem in customs? In the family? In governmental practices? Laws? See the problem?
When I make my criticisms, I try to force myself to say exactly what I mean, define my terms. If you read any of my extensive posts about certain subjects, you won't see me making generalizations without making clear both the EXTENT to which I make them, as well as the GROUNDS upon which I make them.
So when I talk about interracial dating and the illogic of passing judgement as to the "good" or "bad" reasons behind a couple meeting, I simply state that this is mere racism. Unless one is psychic, one can't know why people meet, nor does one know all the perhaps equally "bad" reasons non-interracial couples meet, e.g. he likes redheads, she likes him because of his money, he likes big breasts, they both like Star Trek.
Similarly, there may be patterns observable in terms of how stereotypes and social statuses lead to patterns of people dating, but you can't take one's personal opinions or distaste for a certain pattern and apply it to individual cases. Even the best social psychology or sociology doesn't explain what A person thinks about B. That's psychology, and information that you don't have access to.
And that's one of many arguments I've had on this site, and I mostly tend to disagree with people defensive of certain ways of thinking that they a) haven't examined closely, and b) are simply emotionally, rather than logically attached to. So Korean nationalists, white guys bristling at me thinking that talking about "white privilege" = being racist, people caught up in proving their ultimate victimhood, people caught up in the silly minutiae of identity politics – these are the people I tend to run into on the site.
In any case, that's my read of things, and my suggestions to you to think about. Try to ground what you say with a bit more concrete definitions, a bit more evidence than mere anecdote. And run that through the filter of "is this a mere defensive emotional response, or is there a logical flaw I am responding to?"
I'll be the first to admit that I privilege logical arguments over emotional ones when it comes to Korea. There's a place for emotional responses, but frankly, I don't think this does much to solve concrete problems of the type I tend to talk about, nor will they actually help Korean society move itself into the position of being international, cosmopolitan, or multicultural anytime soon.
And frankly, with the low birth rate, need for both cheap and specific kinds of labor, the draw of a developing China and a developed Japan, and many other factors, I don't think Korea can afford to be short-sighted or xenophobic much longer.
Anyway, the final point is that if I truly hated Korea, I'd have left a long time ago and washed my hands of it. Which is, unfortunately, what more people will tend to do after the 1-2 year point. What can most help Korea, on several levels, are foreigners who can help translate, advocate, represent, and interpellate Korea to the outside world, who understand Korea on a higher level than just the mostly superficial interactions of the many people who will spend a single stay here doing mostly the same thing in their 20's.
But what is frightening to me is that people like me – who start out with a deep interest in the language and culture – tend to burn out and often even hate Korea after realizing that not only is there no place for an experienced outsider here, but they are actually not even wanted.
Anyway, this is a long comment and I'll leave it at that. Please try to keep your thoughts to single comments per post, so as to leave room in the recent comments section for others' comments to appear.
Thanks.
