Trip to Germany
in [Europe]
|
Prev: Paris metro Navigo "decouverte" pass now available for tourists
Next: cost of tobacco in the Canaries?
From: Hatunen on 14 Oct 2007 13:45 On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 23:48:46 +0200, Doesn't Frequently Mop <deepfreudmoors(a)eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote: >Make credence recognised that on Thu, 11 Oct 2007 23:46:54 -0700, >Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net> has scripted: > >>On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 16:58:57 -0700, >>"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evgmsop(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > >>>Hmmmm.... >>>1) We may have improved somewhat since the early twentieth >>>century, but to the rest of the world (and to many of our >>>own citizens) the U.S. is still a nation of comparative >>>cultural barbarians! >> >>Oh, yes. The Europeans displayed their culture in 1914 and again >>in 1936 (Spanish civil war, a most cultural affair), and 1935 >>(Italy invades Ethiopia, apparently to help the Ethipians learn >>to appreciate opera), and let's not neglect all the European >>support for Hitler's anti-semitism, shall we?. >> >>Who else? The pre-war Japanese? > >Gawd, winding the clock back this far is surreal. Were you guys even >alive in 1935? Is it your position that one need only study history back to one's birth date? I concess that I wasn't alive until 1937. But the events of the 1930s are still haunting the world. -- ************* DAVE HATUNEN (hatunen(a)cox.net) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
From: Doesn't Frequently Mop on 14 Oct 2007 17:35 Make credence recognised that on Sun, 14 Oct 2007 10:45:45 -0700, Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net> has scripted: >On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 23:48:46 +0200, Doesn't Frequently Mop ><deepfreudmoors(a)eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote: > >>Make credence recognised that on Thu, 11 Oct 2007 23:46:54 -0700, >>Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net> has scripted: >> >>>On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 16:58:57 -0700, >>>"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evgmsop(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>>>Hmmmm.... >>>>1) We may have improved somewhat since the early twentieth >>>>century, but to the rest of the world (and to many of our >>>>own citizens) the U.S. is still a nation of comparative >>>>cultural barbarians! >>> >>>Oh, yes. The Europeans displayed their culture in 1914 and again >>>in 1936 (Spanish civil war, a most cultural affair), and 1935 >>>(Italy invades Ethiopia, apparently to help the Ethipians learn >>>to appreciate opera), and let's not neglect all the European >>>support for Hitler's anti-semitism, shall we?. >>> >>>Who else? The pre-war Japanese? >> >>Gawd, winding the clock back this far is surreal. Were you guys even >>alive in 1935? > >Is it your position that one need only study history back to >one's birth date? I concess that I wasn't alive until 1937. But >the events of the 1930s are still haunting the world. So are those of the year 0000. -- --- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- --
From: Doesn't Frequently Mop on 14 Oct 2007 17:41 Make credence recognised that on Sun, 14 Oct 2007 10:38:39 -0700, Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net> has scripted: >On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 00:18:08 +0200, Doesn't Frequently Mop ><deepfreudmoors(a)eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote: > >>Make credence recognised that on Sat, 13 Oct 2007 14:55:40 -0400, >>"Frank F. Matthews" <matthews942(a)comcast.net> has scripted: >> >>>In any case I see no characteristics stable enough that I would view >>>them as racial. The racism of the Japanese clearly appears cultural and >>>not racial. >> >>It's just the same thing, isn't it? > >Not at all. "Racial" gnerally refers to characteristics >determined by heredity, dark skin, all that sort of thing. >"Cultural" refers to social things, arts, foods, sports, >religion, and all. With the Japanese, being born into the 'race' is what counts. Sure, that means you are going to look a certain way, and will be expected to act in a certain way, and thus it's racial and cultural. Not a good example for the English definition of racist though. The Japanese are just fucked up. -- --- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- --
From: JohnT on 14 Oct 2007 18:29 "Doesn't Frequently Mop" <deepfreudmoors(a)eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote in message news:fr25h31ql9mt0ndo8mo90qp3cavpo1aq66(a)4ax.com... > Make credence recognised that on Sun, 14 Oct 2007 10:45:45 -0700, > Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net> has scripted: > >>On Fri, 12 Oct 2007 23:48:46 +0200, Doesn't Frequently Mop >><deepfreudmoors(a)eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote: >> >>>Make credence recognised that on Thu, 11 Oct 2007 23:46:54 -0700, >>>Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net> has scripted: >>> >>>>On Thu, 11 Oct 2007 16:58:57 -0700, >>>>"EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque)" <evgmsop(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>> >>>>>Hmmmm.... >>>>>1) We may have improved somewhat since the early twentieth >>>>>century, but to the rest of the world (and to many of our >>>>>own citizens) the U.S. is still a nation of comparative >>>>>cultural barbarians! >>>> >>>>Oh, yes. The Europeans displayed their culture in 1914 and again >>>>in 1936 (Spanish civil war, a most cultural affair), and 1935 >>>>(Italy invades Ethiopia, apparently to help the Ethipians learn >>>>to appreciate opera), and let's not neglect all the European >>>>support for Hitler's anti-semitism, shall we?. >>>> >>>>Who else? The pre-war Japanese? >>> >>>Gawd, winding the clock back this far is surreal. Were you guys even >>>alive in 1935? >> >>Is it your position that one need only study history back to >>one's birth date? I concess that I wasn't alive until 1937. But >>the events of the 1930s are still haunting the world. > > So are those of the year 0000. There wasn't a year 0000. BC 1 was followed by AD 1. Neither the Greeks nor the Romans were able to iterate. -- JohnT
From: JohnT on 14 Oct 2007 18:31
"Doesn't Frequently Mop" <deepfreudmoors(a)eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote in message news:o035h3plunmgr00nsu4h1mkgpb585iiqvf(a)4ax.com... > Make credence recognised that on Sun, 14 Oct 2007 10:38:39 -0700, > Hatunen <hatunen(a)cox.net> has scripted: > >>On Sun, 14 Oct 2007 00:18:08 +0200, Doesn't Frequently Mop >><deepfreudmoors(a)eITmISaACTUALLYiREAL!l.nu> wrote: >> >>>Make credence recognised that on Sat, 13 Oct 2007 14:55:40 -0400, >>>"Frank F. Matthews" <matthews942(a)comcast.net> has scripted: >>> >>>>In any case I see no characteristics stable enough that I would view >>>>them as racial. The racism of the Japanese clearly appears cultural and >>>>not racial. >>> >>>It's just the same thing, isn't it? >> >>Not at all. "Racial" gnerally refers to characteristics >>determined by heredity, dark skin, all that sort of thing. >>"Cultural" refers to social things, arts, foods, sports, >>religion, and all. > > With the Japanese, being born into the 'race' is what counts. Sure, > that means you are going to look a certain way, and will be expected > to act in a certain way, and thus it's racial and cultural. > > Not a good example for the English definition of racist though. The > Japanese are just fucked up. Using your definition, so are Australians! -- JohnT |