|
|
|
A century or so ago, the British Empire, operating on a global scale,
intervened in the affairs of China. Their envoy, seeking a more
liberal attitude in that country, demanded audience with their head of
state. He was told by them that he must 'submit' a humble remonstrance
and be careful in future about his manners and not be so "offensively
vile" with their sovereign dignity.
Well, the envoy had command of gun boats - and China did not. While
the envoy was very used to addressing other people within his country
with respect, even when, personally, they didn't deserve it, and
addressed them as "Your Humble Servant" and "My Honourable Friend"; he
got even more offensive. Things got out of hand and he had to send in
the 'peace keeping troops'.
One of the civil rights which he succeeded in enforcing was the right
of every person in China to smoke opium.
The English had developed a taste for tea - a mildly addictive
substance - and imported a lot of it. The problem was that the Middle
Kingdom of China had no need of anything from them. They forced the
people of north east India to give up farming and instead to cultivate
opium - a highly addictive substance - and then sold it to China;
well, gave them an offer they couldn't refuse.
You probably know very well that the western economy is walking the
ledge of economic collapse. Thousands of con men, banks and others
have taken advantage of your innocent greed, pulled the plug and
walked away with a stash. Taxes are being used to plug the hole: Taxes
raised my nominally independent, sovereign and democratic governments.
Interest rates have to be kept low, to keep money circulating in the
system while producers are reluctant to invest. The usual consequences
of that is inflation - a decline in the supply of goods with an
increasing supply of money.
However, China is so efficient at producing goods that we can keep up
supply by importing from them - at such cheap prices. If they cut off
supply, inflation would go through the roof
With the Greek flame being jostled and put out by criminals, I heard a
PR man snigger: "The Chinese don't know anything about PR".
You have no idea what a sophisticated culture they have. The decadent
west is not their audience and we are behaving like "offensively vile"
imperialists.
Any country that cannot allow the Greek flame to pass through their
country without insult should humbly apologise for their incompetence.
Donal
PS Greek and Gaelic are each dialects of Sanskrit. The envoy
mentioned above was Irish.
|
| |
| |
PS Greek and Gaelic are each dialects of Sanskrit. The envoy
mentioned above was Irish.
And you're called Donal?
And the eighth Earl of Kincardine was Irish?
And I have a bridge for sale...
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.
|
| |
| |
Salahoona wrote:
<snip the Opium Wars review>
Donal
PS Greek and Gaelic are each dialects of Sanskrit.
What a knowledgable cunt you are Donal.
M.
|
| |
| |
donal25@utvinternet.com (Salahoona) wrote in
news:e30d728b-fd87-44d7-9f54-28ff16d5f96a@n14g2000pri.googlegroups.com:
One of the civil rights which he succeeded in enforcing was the
right of every person in China to smoke opium.
Well, in the nearly two intervening centuries, the Chinese have
certainly gotten over the idea of civil rights.
--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com
|
| |
| |
*KNOB*
|
| |
| |
On Apr 14, 5:34 pm, Michael O'Neill <o...@bwahahaha.indigo.ie> wrote:
Salahoona wrote:
<snip the Opium Wars review>
What a knowledgable cunt you are Donal.
The last time I looked, the appendage was still there, Michael. It is
getting smaller.
Donal
M.
|
| |
| |
ISawYourMotherLast@Night.invalid (Cork Soaker) wrote in news:fu03nq$8bc$1
@registered.motzarella.org:
*KNOB*
Maybe he just made a simple typo in his Subject:, intending it to be
"Apologist for China."
--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com
|
| |
| |
On Apr 14, 5:32 pm, "William Black" <william.bl...@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:
And you're called Donal?
And the eighth Earl of Kincardine was Irish?
And I have a bridge for sale...
A guy admitted in Court that he had stolen a rope. He had no idea
there was a pig at the end of it. What the hell use is a bridge
without a river?
Donal O'Sullivan Beara
--
William Black
I've seen things you people wouldn't believe.
Barbeques on fire by the chalets past the castle headland
I watched the gift shops glitter in the darkness off the Newborough gate
All these moments will be lost in time, like icecream on the beach
Time for tea.
|
| |
| |
On Apr 14, 6:19 pm, "Cork Soaker" <ISawYourMotherL...@Night.invalid>
wrote:
*KNOB*
I twist it, langer.
|
| |
| |
Salahoona wrote:
A century or so ago, the British Empire, operating on a global scale,
intervened in the affairs of China. Their envoy, seeking a more
liberal attitude in that country, demanded audience with their head of
state. He was told by them that he must 'submit' a humble remonstrance
and be careful in future about his manners and not be so "offensively
vile" with their sovereign dignity.
Well, the envoy had command of gun boats - and China did not. While
the envoy was very used to addressing other people within his country
with respect, even when, personally, they didn't deserve it, and
addressed them as "Your Humble Servant" and "My Honourable Friend"; he
got even more offensive. Things got out of hand and he had to send in
the 'peace keeping troops'.
One of the civil rights which he succeeded in enforcing was the right
of every person in China to smoke opium.
The English had developed a taste for tea - a mildly addictive
substance - and imported a lot of it. The problem was that the Middle
Kingdom of China had no need of anything from them. They forced the
people of north east India to give up farming and instead to cultivate
opium - a highly addictive substance - and then sold it to China;
well, gave them an offer they couldn't refuse.
You probably know very well that the western economy is walking the
ledge of economic collapse. Thousands of con men, banks and others
have taken advantage of your innocent greed, pulled the plug and
walked away with a stash. Taxes are being used to plug the hole: Taxes
raised my nominally independent, sovereign and democratic governments.
Interest rates have to be kept low, to keep money circulating in the
system while producers are reluctant to invest. The usual consequences
of that is inflation - a decline in the supply of goods with an
increasing supply of money.
However, China is so efficient at producing goods that we can keep up
supply by importing from them - at such cheap prices. If they cut off
supply, inflation would go through the roof
Inflation through the roof, much weaker currencies, no buying from China
and indigenous manufacturing made economically viable again.
You better hope the West's economy remains strong.
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London
|
| |
| |
Bert Hyman wrote:
donal25@utvinternet.com (Salahoona) wrote in
news:e30d728b-fd87-44d7-9f54-28ff16d5f96a@n14g2000pri.googlegroups.com:
Well, in the nearly two intervening centuries, the Chinese have
certainly gotten over the idea of civil rights.
And we are following their successful lead.
Yes, Capitalism does not need democracy and Human Rights to be
successful. It's called 'Fascism'.
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London
|
| |
| |
On Apr 14, 6:28 pm, Bert Hyman <b...@iphouse.com> wrote:
ISawYourMotherL...@Night.invalid (Cork Soaker) wrote in news:fu03nq$8bc$1
@registered.motzarella.org:
Maybe he just made a simple typo in his Subject:, intending it to be
"Apologist for China."
--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | b...@iphouse.com
A bit too pat.
|
| |
| |
dirk.bruere@gmail.com (Dirk Bruere at NeoPax) wrote in
news:66hsg1F2kr5jgU3@mid.individual.net:
Bert Hyman wrote:
And we are following their successful lead.
Unfortunately.
Yes, Capitalism does not need democracy and Human Rights to be
successful.
Sure it does.
It's called 'Fascism'.
Well, fascism certainly isn't capitalism.
It's just another flavor of authoritarian (or even totalitarian)
collectivist system, which tries to distinguish itself by pretending
to allow private ownership while imposing strict state control.
Any "success" a fascist system achieves will be short lived.
--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com
|
| |
| |
Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:
Bert Hyman wrote:
And we are following their successful lead.
Yes, Capitalism does not need democracy and Human Rights to be
successful. It's called 'Fascism'.
Currently being implemented with vigour by a "socialist" government.
--
Moving things in still pictures!
|
| |
| |
On Apr 14, 9:18 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bru...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Bert Hyman wrote:
One of the civil rights which he succeeded in enforcing was the
right of every person in China to smoke opium.
And we are following their successful lead.
Yes, Capitalism does not need democracy and Human Rights to be
successful. It's called 'Fascism'.
The final solution all over again. It may be better than property
porn, sex porn and food porn. I read that, in the UK, they have
stopped kids who are overweight from riding on seaside donkeys. Then I
remembered I had lived in a place where everybody went around on
donkeys. I can remember no fat people at all at all.
We may be approaching a cowardly new world. Why should the people of
China earn less than we? Just flick a switch.
Donal
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/- Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London
|
| |
| |
Salahoona wrote:
PS Greek and Gaelic are each dialects of Sanskrit. The envoy
mentioned above was Irish.
No they aren't, they simply have very tenuous link with Sanskrit, like
all Indo-European languages. Go and look up 'dialect' in a dictionary.
|
| |
| |
Bert Hyman wrote:
dirk.bruere@gmail.com (Dirk Bruere at NeoPax) wrote in
news:66hsg1F2kr5jgU3@mid.individual.net:
Unfortunately.
Sure it does.
Well, fascism certainly isn't capitalism.
It's just another flavor of authoritarian (or even totalitarian)
collectivist system, which tries to distinguish itself by pretending
to allow private ownership while imposing strict state control.
Any "success" a fascist system achieves will be short lived.
It's worked in China for 25 years.
If it works for another 25 it will leave China as a superpower with no
rival.
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London
|
| |
| |
Salahoona wrote:
On Apr 14, 9:18 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bru...@gmail.com>
wrote:
The final solution all over again. It may be better than property
porn, sex porn and food porn. I read that, in the UK, they have
stopped kids who are overweight from riding on seaside donkeys. Then I
remembered I had lived in a place where everybody went around on
donkeys. I can remember no fat people at all at all.
We may be approaching a cowardly new world. Why should the people of
China earn less than we? Just flick a switch.
No reason why people in China should (ultimately) earn less than anyone
else. It's how they do it that matters.
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London
|
| |
| |
On Apr 14, 9:36 pm, "John of Aix" <j.mur...@libertysurf.fr> wrote:
Salahoona wrote:
No they aren't, they simply have very tenuous link with Sanskrit, like
all Indo-European languages. Go and look up 'dialect' in a dictionary.
Tenuous is your own opinion of the taxonomy and perhaps your own grasp
of reality.
I am happy with the word 'dialect': Shall we say that Gaelic, Greek
and Sanskrit have, among others, a common origin? No I guess not - go
and split hairs with someone else.
Greek and Gaelic are each dialects of Sanskrit. That is good enough
for me. Whoever you are.
Donal
|
| |
| |
Salahoona wrote:
On Apr 14, 9:36 pm, "John of Aix" <j.mur...@libertysurf.fr> wrote:
Tenuous is your own opinion of the taxonomy and perhaps your own grasp
of reality.
Tenuous is the word, a few words can be traced to Sanskrit the rest
not..
I am happy with the word 'dialect': Shall we say that Gaelic, Greek
and Sanskrit have, among others, a common origin? No I guess not - go
and split hairs with someone else.
Go and look up 'dialect' in the dictionary before talking more bollocks.
Greek and Gaelic are each dialects of Sanskrit.
Utter tosh.
|
| |
| |
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 09:11:09 +0200, "John of Aix"
<j.murphy@libertysurf.fr> wrote:
Salahoona wrote:
I am happy with the word 'dialect': Shall we say that Gaelic, Greek
and Sanskrit have, among others, a common origin? No I guess not - go
and split hairs with someone else.
Go and look up 'dialect' in the dictionary before talking more bollocks.
A language is a dialect with an army.
|
| |
| |
The idea of apologising to the Chinese for pointing out their appalling
record on human rights is entirely repugnant. It would be like apologising
to the British over Bloody Sunday.
--
J/
SOTW: "Wrecking Ball" - Emmylou Harris
www.tolife.shadowcat.name
|
| |
| |
Westprog wrote:
The idea of apologising to the Chinese for pointing out their appalling
record on human rights is entirely repugnant. It would be like apologising
to the British over Bloody Sunday.
Right, and if these Chinese are so sophisticated, why are they still
eating with sticks?
|
| |
| |
On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 09:11:09 +0200, "John of Aix"
<j.murphy@libertysurf.fr> wrote:
I am happy with the word 'dialect': Shall we say that Gaelic, Greek
and Sanskrit have, among others, a common origin? No I guess not - go
and split hairs with someone else.
A language is a dialect with an army.
That is kind of true when comparing similar languages. Not Greek, Gaelic and
Sanskrit though!
Allan
|
| |
| |
Cork Soaker wrote:
*KNOB*
Why, yes, you are.
|
| |
| |
Tibet has been one of the provinces of China since pre-history. It is
only since the sixteenth century that a local a governing clique took
hold. Their governance can be compared to the Stanford prison
experiment and, almost, to the brief Protestant domination of Northern
Ireland.
To insist, with outrageously bad manners, that China 'restore' human
rights in Tibet is just an expression of ignorance. There 'were' no
human rights in Tibet - forced nakedness and sexual humiliation had
been one of the means of control the clique used (see the Stanford
experiment and Abu Ghraib, US prison guards)
I make no apology at all for our Revolution of 1916.
Donal
On Apr 15, 9:50 am, "Westprog" <westp...@hottmail.com> wrote:
The idea of apologising to the Chinese for pointing out their appalling
record on human rights is entirely repugnant. It would be like apologising
to the British over Bloody Sunday.
--
J/
SOTW: "Wrecking Ball" - Emmylou Harris
www.tolife.shadowcat.name
|
| |
| |
On Apr 14, 9:17 pm, Dirk Bruere at NeoPax <dirk.bru...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Salahoona wrote:
Inflation through the roof, much weaker currencies, no buying from China
and indigenous manufacturing made economically viable again.
You better hope the West's economy remains strong.
I wouldn't bank on it.
Donal
--
Dirk
http://www.transcendence.me.uk/- Transcendence UK
Remote Viewing classes in London
|
| |
| |
On Apr 15, 8:11 am, "John of Aix" <j.mur...@libertysurf.fr> wrote:
Salahoona wrote:
Tenuous is the word, a few words can be traced to Sanskrit the rest
not..
Go and look up 'dialect' in the dictionary before talking more bollocks.
Utter tosh.
Myopic.
Gaelic and Sanskrit are not just common languages; they are a common
culture. I'm not going to look up my written records for you to add
to your stamp collection, but the hunger strike - the ritual of
fasting outside an offensive door in order to speed up a
reconciliation - had been practiced in Ireland and India until the
nineteenth century.
When Bobby Sands died on hunger strike, the whole Indian Parliament
stood in respect.
Lose the dictionary.
Donal
|
| |
| |
On 16 Apr, 11:31, Salahoona <dona...@utvinternet.com> wrote:
Gaelic and Sanskrit are not just common languages; they are a common
culture. I'm not going to look up my written records for you to add
to your stamp collection, but the hunger strike - the ritual of
fasting outside an offensive door in order to speed up a
reconciliation - had been practiced in Ireland and India until the
nineteenth century.
You really do need to read a good basic book on historical
linguistics. Sanskrit is one of many languages in the Indo-European
family. Gaelic is a modern language which did not descend from
Sanskrit, rather they have common origins. You can see this easily if
you look at the Celtic family of languages which are all Centum rather
than Satem languages like Sanskrit.
The split between the identifiable ancestors of most modern European
languages and the ancestor of Indo-Iranian languages like Sanskrit and
Persian is pretty old. Sanskrit and Homeric Greek are already clearly
quite different.
Whether any useful "Indo-European" culture has survived all that time
is a little doubtful, but that's quite a separate question from
language.
April McMahon's "Understanding Language Change" is a good
introduction, though flawed in places.
Francis
|
| |
| |
....
A language is a dialect with an army.
That is kind of true when comparing similar languages.
It's true up to a point. But if language A is spoken and written, and used
for official and boring purposes, and language B is used mostly orally, and
the speakers of B use A in writing, then it's reasonable enough to call B a
dialect of A. The reason that A wins out in certain areas over B might well
be due to an army in the first place.
Not Greek, Gaelic and Sanskrit though!
They are as related as all the European languages, which is to say way back
in the mists of time they might have had a common origin - apart from Basque
and (I think) Hungarian.
--
J/
SOTW: "Wrecking Ball" - Emmylou Harris
www.tolife.shadowcat.name
|
| |
| |
Scrobh "Westprog" <westprog@hottmail.com>:
...
A language is a dialect with an army.
It's true up to a point. But if language A is spoken and written, and used
for official and boring purposes, and language B is used mostly orally, and
the speakers of B use A in writing, then it's reasonable enough to call B a
dialect of A.
You're almost there. There is a language, and both A and B are
dialects of the language. The language is all of the dialects, there
is no reference language of which all others are dialects. For that
matter, written language is arguably another dialect, since no one
actually speaks the way we write.
Where it gets awkward is at the point where dialect groups become
language groups. There is close enough to a continuity between the
north of Scotland to Kerry for instance. Sadly the East Ulster Irish
dialect is pretty much gone, but Scots Gaelic and Donegal Irish
speakers can often make sense to each other. Donegal speakers can talk
to Connacht who talk to Kerry, but Kerry and northern Scots Gaelic
aren't mutually intelligible. The differences, in both writing and
spoken language, are distinct enough that the distinction between
Irish and Scottish Gaelic is pretty clear.
A language really is a dialect with an army. Dialect A gains dominance
because all those official and boring purposes are important, dealing
with dull topics like property rights and succession, and backed by
the law, which is backed by the force of the state. Remember all those
penal laws and oaths in our history? They had to be taken in English.
Irish and English are clearly different languages. English and Scots
not so much perhaps. The bias to power means the English will minimise
the differences, the Scots will overstate them. The mistake the
English make is in assuming their favoured dialect is any more *the*
dialect than any of the others.
The reason that A wins out in certain areas over B might well
be due to an army in the first place.
They are as related as all the European languages, which is to say way back
in the mists of time they might have had a common origin - apart from Basque
and (I think) Hungarian.
Finnish, Estonian, Hungarian and a handful of others are related and
non-IE. Basque is an isolate, AFAIK it has no living relatives.
|
| |
| |
...
A language is a dialect with an army.
It's true up to a point. But if language A is spoken and written, and used
for official and boring purposes, and language B is used mostly orally,
and
the speakers of B use A in writing, then it's reasonable enough to call B
a
dialect of A. The reason that A wins out in certain areas over B might
well
be due to an army in the first place.
It may give some the chance to claim the unwirtten form isn't a language but
it doesn't make it so. There are many languages which haven't got written
forms and others which had no written form or no standard written forms
until recently. Hence just because someone doesn't write in their language
it doesn't actually mean it is not a language. There could be various
reasons why a written form didn't develop or isn't encouraged.
They are as related as all the European languages, which is to say way
back
in the mists of time they might have had a common origin - apart from
Basque
and (I think) Hungarian.
Well quite I'm not suggesting they aren't related. But Greek and Gaelic as
dialects of Sanskrit was a daft claim by the ther poster.
Allan
|
| |
| |
Scrobh "Westprog" <westprog@hottmail.com>:
Irish and English are clearly different languages. English and Scots
not so much perhaps. The bias to power means the English will minimise
the differences, the Scots will overstate them. The mistake the
English make is in assuming their favoured dialect is any more *the*
dialect than any of the others.
Quite agree and the statement can be totally altered by saying Scots is
clearly a different language from Irish whilst Scottish Gaelic is less so.
Hence what is perceived as a language may well be dependent on how closely
related it is to the perceiver's language. English speakers have no problem
regarding other closely related languages as being languages in their own
right (eg Irish, Gaelic and Manx) but may have a problem with Scots as it
is sib to English. Though I don't think you can blame "the English" for the
pessure that was put on both Gaelic and Scots from especially the 1880s. The
campaigns against both languages emanated from within Scotland itself.
Allan
|
| |
| |
Scrobh "allan connochie" <conncohies@noemail.com>:
Quite agree and the statement can be totally altered by saying Scots is
clearly a different language from Irish whilst Scottish Gaelic is less so.
Hence what is perceived as a language may well be dependent on how closely
related it is to the perceiver's language. English speakers have no problem
regarding other closely related languages as being languages in their own
right (eg Irish, Gaelic and Manx) but may have a problem with Scots as it
is sib to English. Though I don't think you can blame "the English" for the
pessure that was put on both Gaelic and Scots from especially the 1880s. The
campaigns against both languages emanated from within Scotland itself.
That's no surprise. One of the things we learn from Irish history is
that not all of the Gall live in Sasana...
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 22:48:19 GMT, "allan connochie"
<conncohies@noemail.com> wrote:
Quite agree and the statement can be totally altered by saying Scots is
clearly a different language from Irish whilst Scottish Gaelic is less so.
*Much* less so.
Hence what is perceived as a language may well be dependent on how closely
related it is to the perceiver's language. English speakers have no problem
regarding other closely related languages as being languages in their own
right (eg Irish, Gaelic and Manx)
I do hope that you're not trying to claim that Irish, Gaelic or Manx
are linguistically related to English except for loan words passing
between the Celtic languages and English because they are more
certainly *not* closely related...geographically close
yes...linguistically not particularly...
Nik
----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 22:48:19 GMT, "allan connochie"
<conncohies@noemail.com> wrote:
*Much* less so.
The point stands though. I understand some of the Scottish Gaelic dialects
are quite closely related to Irish. Historically weren't the written forms
basically pretty much identical? Likewise with Scots it depends on what form
of Scots is being spoken. Many people speak a mixmax of Scots and Scottish
Standard English but there are regions (eg like here in the Borders or in
the North-East among other places) where there are plenty of people who
switch easily between SSE and a heavy dialect of Scots. Dependent on the
type of Scots used Swabesh carried out tests which showed Scots can be
further from Standard English than Danish is from Norwegian. As others have
pointed out it is often a political or national decision as to what is | | |
