On 2024-03-22, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:engaging,
Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> writes:
On 2024-03-12, jerryfriedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
Scott Dorsey wrote:
jerryfriedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
I thought it was good but not great. The story and characters were=
criticizing 19th-and the magic system was original. One problem was that =
andcentury colonialism and especially the Opium Wars seemed too easy =
book inout of date. And nothing was said about China's conquests or = suppression
of dissent.
Or other forms of oppression.
Those problems were EXACTLY why I was surprised it didn't get a = nomination.
Because those problems are very much advantages for promoting the =
people, orChina. That's what I found so boggleworthy.
Seems strange to me. Maybe there's something that only Chinese =
States.people very knowledgeable about Chinese culture, would object to.
I just finished reading it. The plot of _Babel_ is very much
pro-Chinese. But the theme is much more questionable. I would argue
that when you map the modern world onto the conflicts of _Babel_,
China is the best analog for Britain, even more than the United =
https://www.thinkchina.sg/being-black-china-loving-something-doesnt-alway= s-love-you-back
While it's changing rapidly, China remains strongly xenophobic. Now
that they are expanding into the rest of the world, the racism and >>>nationalism of the xenophobia are a definite problem. The incident in >>>_Babel_ of British children encountering Robin (Chinese) for the first >>>time is one that is very often reported by foreigners in China today
when they stray outside their normal habitats. I don't know how true
it is anymore, but it is still being said that most Chinese have never >>>encountered a foreigner or some one of different race in person in
their lifetime.
I find this difficult to believe. Leaving aside the ubiquity of
western entertainment in China, my folks have travelled
in China in the past and have reported no xenophobia (in
fact, due to their white hair, they were treated as
superstars in some smaller communities).
Most of my discussions of racism in China have centered on black
racism so perhaps I was overly general. White skin is prized in
China, but incidents like this are very commonly reported by blacks.
A nice modern report from a black who loves China is
=
Another older report: >https://www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/article/black-tourist-china
I haven't looked much at academic research, but just casually looking
now I encountered
https://africansinchina.net/race-racism-in-research/
which has lots of discussion and pointers. Eg.
contemporary research regarding online constructions of identity
in China reports that there is an overriding perception that
Africans/blacks are not only economically and culturally inferior,
but also a threat to the racial purity of the Chinese nation (Shen
2009; Lan 2016; Zhang 2019, Wang 2019).
(General point of this report, with a certain degree of validity, is
that "racism" is a Western concept)
China was tremendously insular in the past but is opening up rapidly.
Social attitudes are slow to change, though.
When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the >instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so
a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow,
were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
the core.=20
During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian >people".
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:Tatars
When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the >>instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so
a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow,
were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
the core.=3D20
A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar=20
things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
had different notions of horsepower, also.
In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to convince >Soviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how =
were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this =was
needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out and
the problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian >>people".
Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian insularity >besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the=20 >outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard to >erase.
On 23 Mar 2024 16:36:13 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:Tatars
When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the >>>instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so
a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these >>>vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow, >>>were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
the core.=3D20
A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar=20 >>things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
had different notions of horsepower, also.
In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to convince >>Soviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how =
were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this =was
needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out and >>the problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was >>>immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian >>>people".
Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian insularity >>besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the=20 >>outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard to >>erase.
Watching that historical documentary /Aleksander Nevskii/ shows them
attacked from both East and West. What's not to be paranoid about?
So, I am reading Rebecca Kuang's _Babel_ to see just what it was that the >Hugo Committee may have objected to, and I find it extremely pro-Chinese.
It is strongly against British imperialism and against the Opium War, and
the Chinese government of the time may not have been very strong but was >determined.
If her previous works were anti-Chinese, I don't know. But this seems >sufficiently against that that I would expect it would more than make up
for that.
This book, I might add, is also very well written and extremely entertaining >and was just a great read that thoroughly deserved a Hugo. If it had been
on the ballot I would have voted for it. Is there hope for a Nebula maybe? >There were some odd technical problems which all could have been accounted >for by the differences between our universe and theirs but which did seem a >little glaring. But it was still great.
--scott
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:so
On 23 Mar 2024 16:36:13 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the >>>>instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, =
Moscow,a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these >>>>vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in =
similar=3D20were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
the core.=3D3D20
A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had =
convincethings to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
had different notions of horsepower, also.
In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to =
=3DSoviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how =3D >>Tatars
were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this=
andwas
needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out =
Russianthe problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should >>>>not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was >>>>immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the =
insularitypeople".
Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian =
the=3D20besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in =
tooutside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard =
erase.
Watching that historical documentary /Aleksander Nevskii/ shows them
Ahem.
There was a constant state of border wars for a thousand
years in eastern europe, which culminated in WWII. Rus
expanded and contracted throughout those years.
Assuming a soviet propaganda film is an accurate
depiction of historic Rus seems fraught.
attacked from both East and West. What's not to be paranoid about?
Eisenstein was pushing patriotism - how else but to extrapolate
from an historical episode and embellish it a bit for propoganda
purposes?
Since the Visigoths sacked Rome, everyone in europe has
invaded pretty much everyone else at some point in time
and the catholic church was usually either implicitly or
explicitly involved.
On 5 Mar 2024 01:35:28 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
So, I am reading Rebecca Kuang's _Babel_ to see just what it was that the >>Hugo Committee may have objected to, and I find it extremely pro-Chinese. >>It is strongly against British imperialism and against the Opium War, and >>the Chinese government of the time may not have been very strong but was >>determined.
I think I've heard that the issue isn't the current work but that
she's written stuff critical of China in the past.
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the
instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so
a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow,
were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
the core.=20
A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar
things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
had different notions of horsepower, also.
In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to convince Soviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how Tatars were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this was needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out and
the problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian
people".
Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian insularity besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the
outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard to erase.
Mad Hamish <newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
On 5 Mar 2024 01:35:28 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
So, I am reading Rebecca Kuang's _Babel_ to see just what it was that the >>> Hugo Committee may have objected to, and I find it extremely pro-Chinese. >>> It is strongly against British imperialism and against the Opium War, and >>> the Chinese government of the time may not have been very strong but was >>> determined.
I think I've heard that the issue isn't the current work but that
she's written stuff critical of China in the past.
Which would be even WORSE because it would be punishing her for "reforming" and finally writing something less critical.
Whatever it was, it was sure a mess.
--scott
On 3/23/2024 12:36 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:so
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the
instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, =
Moscow,a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in =
convincewere carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to=20
the core.=3D20
A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar
things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
had different notions of horsepower, also.
=20
In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to =
TatarsSoviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how =
waswere just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this=
andneeded is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out =
Russianthe problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
=20
During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the =
insularitypeople".=20
Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian =
tobesides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the
outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard =
erase.
Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. It sits in the middle of a vast
plane without natural barriers; contrast to the US, which has a friendly
ally to the north, and a weak nation to the south, and vast ocean moats
in east and west.
Russian paranoia is based on bitter experience.
On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:15:35 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/23/2024 12:36 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the
instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so >>>> a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow, >>>> were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
the core.=20
A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar
things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
had different notions of horsepower, also.
In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to convince
Soviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how Tatars >>> were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this was >>> needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out and >>> the problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian >>>> people".
Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian insularity
besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the
outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard to >>> erase.
Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. It sits in the middle of a vast
plane without natural barriers; contrast to the US, which has a friendly
ally to the north, and a weak nation to the south, and vast ocean moats
in east and west.
Russian paranoia is based on bitter experience.
Indeed.
But does it explain the racism? That's what it was brought up here to
do.
And does it excuse (or explain) their attempts to seize their
neighbors' land -- thus opening themselves up to retribution.
Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. [snip]
On 3/26/2024 11:36 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:15:35 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/23/2024 12:36 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the
instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so >>>>> a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow, >>>>> were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
the core.=20
A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar
things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
had different notions of horsepower, also.
In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to convince >>>> Soviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how Tatars >>>> were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this was >>>> needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out and >>>> the problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should >>>>> not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian >>>>> people".
Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian insularity >>>> besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the
outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard to >>>> erase.
Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. It sits in the middle of a vast
plane without natural barriers; contrast to the US, which has a friendly >>> ally to the north, and a weak nation to the south, and vast ocean moats
in east and west.
Russian paranoia is based on bitter experience.
Indeed.
But does it explain the racism? That's what it was brought up here to
do.
And does it excuse (or explain) their attempts to seize their
neighbors' land -- thus opening themselves up to retribution.
Russian Racism I can't speak on. Russia has a 'Manifest Destiny'
complex known as 'Russki Mir', or 'Russian World', in which it
desires to spread its Orthodox, authoritarian culture to the
rest of the world. [1]
[I note that America, and earlier European colonial powers
are/were guilty of similar hubris.
As for expansionism, when you have no geographical barriers
between you and your perceived enemies, one vital defense is
creating buffer zones, pushing out until you *do* reach
geographical barriers.
In article <utv0n1$1uobn$1@dont-email.me>,
Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
As for expansionism, when you have no geographical barriers
between you and your perceived enemies, one vital defense is
creating buffer zones, pushing out until you *do* reach
geographical barriers.
Expansion is counter-productive until the whole world is encompassed
because longer borders are correlated with more neighbours. An easier >solution is to place the entire Russian population in a single well
guarded fortress in some secret remote region.
In article <utv0n1$1uobn$1@dont-email.me>,
Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
As for expansionism, when you have no geographical barriers
between you and your perceived enemies, one vital defense is
creating buffer zones, pushing out until you *do* reach
geographical barriers.
Expansion is counter-productive until the whole world is encompassed
because longer borders are correlated with more neighbours. An easier solution is to place the entire Russian population in a single well
guarded fortress in some secret remote region.
In article <utv2pf$d1h$1@reader1.panix.com>,
James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:
In article <utv0n1$1uobn$1@dont-email.me>,
Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
As for expansionism, when you have no geographical barriers
between you and your perceived enemies, one vital defense is
creating buffer zones, pushing out until you *do* reach
geographical barriers.
Expansion is counter-productive until the whole world is encompassed
because longer borders are correlated with more neighbours. An easier
solution is to place the entire Russian population in a single well
guarded fortress in some secret remote region.
There are 120 million Russians in Russia (not every person in
Russia is Russian). Each Russian is about one tenth of a cubic
metre. 12 million cubic metres is a cube less than 220 metres on
an edge. Even if we double the volume, that is a cube less than
three football fields on a side. Easy to hide in mountains or
deep beneath the sea.
On 3/25/2024 4:15 PM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
[snip-snip]
Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. [snip]
Would you happen to remember where you read this claim? I wonder if it included the Crimean Khanate's raids into Russia, Poland-Lithuania and
other regions in the 15-18th centuries. There were well over a hundred
major raids, which resulted in the capture and enslavement of hundreds
of thousands of people. (Estimates vary, but it seems likely that the
grand total was over 1 million, possibly over 2 million.)
On 3/26/2024 1:53 PM, Ahasuerus wrote:
On 3/25/2024 4:15 PM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
[snip-snip]
Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. [snip]
Would you happen to remember where you read this claim? I wonder if it
included the Crimean Khanate's raids into Russia, Poland-Lithuania and
other regions in the 15-18th centuries. There were well over a hundred
major raids, which resulted in the capture and enslavement of hundreds
of thousands of people. (Estimates vary, but it seems likely that the
grand total was over 1 million, possibly over 2 million.)
I got it from the Peter Zeihan video I linked. While he is a more than
a little cavalier with his claims, always picking the most click-baity version, the point remains:
By the late 1970s, the leader of this group [he top tier of the
intelligence services], Yuri Andropov, had privately come to the
quiet conclusion that the Soviet Union had lost the Cold War.
Ascending to national leadership in 1982, he and his disciples,
Konstantin Chernenko and Mikhail Gorbachev, began an internal
debate about how to manage defeat with honor.
Thirty-four months [sic] after the Germans invaded the Soviet Union[June 1941], the Red Army swept away the final German resistance and
Russia has been invaded A LOT, which is why their gunshy of anything
which makes them feel less safe, justified or not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Russia
lists 19 events, 14 since 1800.
Contrast to the US, with just 1 in the past 200 years. (The
Aleutian campaign in WW2).
On 3/26/2024 1:53 PM, Ahasuerus wrote:
On 3/25/2024 4:15 PM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
[snip-snip]
Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. [snip]
Would you happen to remember where you read this claim? I wonder if it
included the Crimean Khanate's raids into Russia, Poland-Lithuania and
other regions in the 15-18th centuries. There were well over a hundred
major raids, which resulted in the capture and enslavement of hundreds
of thousands of people. (Estimates vary, but it seems likely that the
grand total was over 1 million, possibly over 2 million.)
I got it from the Peter Zeihan video I linked. While he is a more than
a little cavalier with his claims, always picking the most click-baity version, the point remains:
Russia has been invaded A LOT, which is why their gunshy of anything
which makes them feel less safe, justified or not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Russia
lists 19 events, 14 since 1800.
Contrast to the US, with just 1 in the past 200 years. (The
Aleutian campaign in WW2).
On 3/26/2024 1:14 PM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 3/26/2024 1:53 PM, Ahasuerus wrote:
On 3/25/2024 4:15 PM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
[snip-snip]
Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. [snip]
Would you happen to remember where you read this claim? I wonder if it
included the Crimean Khanate's raids into Russia, Poland-Lithuania and
other regions in the 15-18th centuries. There were well over a hundred
major raids, which resulted in the capture and enslavement of hundreds
of thousands of people. (Estimates vary, but it seems likely that the
grand total was over 1 million, possibly over 2 million.)
I got it from the Peter Zeihan video I linked. While he is a more than
a little cavalier with his claims, always picking the most click-baity version, the point remains:
Russia has been invaded A LOT, which is why their gunshy of anything
which makes them feel less safe, justified or not.
And anyone else doing anything Russia didn't order them to do makes them feel less safe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Russia
lists 19 events, 14 since 1800.
Contrast to the US, with just 1 in the past 200 years. (The
Aleutian campaign in WW2).
2 if you start in 1800 as with Russia. (War of 1812.)
In article <utvr5f$2el55$1@dont-email.me>,
Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 3/26/2024 1:14 PM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 3/26/2024 1:53 PM, Ahasuerus wrote:And anyone else doing anything Russia didn't order them to do makes them
On 3/25/2024 4:15 PM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
[snip-snip]
Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. [snip]
Would you happen to remember where you read this claim? I wonder if it >>>> included the Crimean Khanate's raids into Russia, Poland-Lithuania and >>>> other regions in the 15-18th centuries. There were well over a hundred >>>> major raids, which resulted in the capture and enslavement of hundreds >>>> of thousands of people. (Estimates vary, but it seems likely that the
grand total was over 1 million, possibly over 2 million.)
I got it from the Peter Zeihan video I linked. While he is a more than
a little cavalier with his claims, always picking the most click-baity
version, the point remains:
Russia has been invaded A LOT, which is why their gunshy of anything
which makes them feel less safe, justified or not.
feel less safe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Russia2 if you start in 1800 as with Russia. (War of 1812.)
lists 19 events, 14 since 1800.
Contrast to the US, with just 1 in the past 200 years. (The
Aleutian campaign in WW2).
There were multiple British raids (and in fact the New Orleans campaign
was an attempted invasion) during 1814.
On 3/25/24 2:18 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Mad Hamishÿ <newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
On 5 Mar 2024 01:35:28 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
So, I am reading Rebecca Kuang's _Babel_ to see just what it was
that the
Hugo Committee may have objected to, and I find it extremely
pro-Chinese.
It is strongly against British imperialism and against the Opium
War, and
the Chinese government of the time may not have been very strong but
was
determined.
I think I've heard that the issue isn't the current work but that
she's written stuff critical of China in the past.
Which would be even WORSE because it would be punishing her for
"reforming"
and finally writing something less critical.
Whatever it was, it was sure a mess.
--scott
As I noted elsewhere, the good news is that all this resulted in a lot
of publicity for the book, which could well reach a wider audience than
if it *had* won the Hugo.
On 3/25/2024 11:29 PM, Evelyn C. Leeper wrote:
On 3/25/24 2:18 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Mad Hamishÿ <newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
On 5 Mar 2024 01:35:28 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
So, I am reading Rebecca Kuang's _Babel_ to see just what it was
that the
Hugo Committee may have objected to, and I find it extremely
pro-Chinese.
It is strongly against British imperialism and against the Opium
War, and
the Chinese government of the time may not have been very strong but >>>>> was
determined.
I think I've heard that the issue isn't the current work but that
she's written stuff critical of China in the past.
Which would be even WORSE because it would be punishing her for
"reforming"
and finally writing something less critical.
Whatever it was, it was sure a mess.
--scott
As I noted elsewhere, the good news is that all this resulted in a lot
of publicity for the book, which could well reach a wider audience than
if it *had* won the Hugo.
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
pt
TLDNR: Putin feels Russia isn't safe unless it can
reconstruct the Soviet Union and regain suzerainty over
the former Warsaw Pact. Russia won't stop, so it has
to be stopped.
Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> writes:Union, so
On 3/26/2024 11:36 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:15:35 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
=20
On 3/23/2024 12:36 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the >>>>>> instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet =
Moscow,a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in =
towere carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist =
convincethe core.=3D20
A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar
things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
had different notions of horsepower, also.
In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to =
TatarsSoviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how=
this waswere just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that =
out andneeded is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered =
shouldthe problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians =
Russiannot mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the =
insularitypeople".
Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian =
thebesides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in =
hard tooutside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are =
vasterase.
Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. It sits in the middle of a =
friendlyplane without natural barriers; contrast to the US, which has a =
moatsally to the north, and a weak nation to the south, and vast ocean =
in east and west.=20
Russian paranoia is based on bitter experience.
Indeed.
=20
But does it explain the racism? That's what it was brought up here to
do.
=20
And does it excuse (or explain) their attempts to seize their
neighbors' land -- thus opening themselves up to retribution.
Russian Racism I can't speak on. Russia has a 'Manifest Destiny'
complex known as 'Russki Mir', or 'Russian World', in which it
desires to spread its Orthodox, authoritarian culture to the
rest of the world. [1]
[I note that America, and earlier European colonial powers
are/were guilty of similar hubris.
Up until 1895 or so, the US was very insular and refused to
involve themselves in foriegn events and politics, even in
central and south america. Since then, not so much.
On 3/26/2024 4:14 PM, Cryptoengineer wrote:it=20
On 3/26/2024 1:53 PM, Ahasuerus wrote:
On 3/25/2024 4:15 PM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
[snip-snip]
Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. [snip]
Would you happen to remember where you read this claim? I wonder if =
and=20included the Crimean Khanate's raids into Russia, Poland-Lithuania =
hundred=20other regions in the 15-18th centuries. There were well over a =
hundreds=20major raids, which resulted in the capture and enslavement of =
=20of thousands of people. (Estimates vary, but it seems likely that the=
grand total was over 1 million, possibly over 2 million.)=20
I got it from the Peter Zeihan video I linked. While he is a more than
a little cavalier with his claims, always picking the most click-baity
version, the point remains:
I have now read Chapter 6 of Zeihan's 2020 book _Disunited Nations_. He=20 >makes a lot of bold claims like:
By the late 1970s, the leader of this group [he top tier of the intelligence services], Yuri Andropov, had privately come to the
quiet conclusion that the Soviet Union had lost the Cold War.
Ascending to national leadership in 1982, he and his disciples,
Konstantin Chernenko and Mikhail Gorbachev, began an internal
debate about how to manage defeat with honor.
The notion that Chernenko, Brezhnev's confidant for over 20 years, was=20 >Andropov's disciple is ... truly revolutionary.
Or:
Thirty-four months [sic] after the Germans invaded the Soviet Union=20[June 1941], the Red Army swept away the final German resistance and=20 >entered Berlin [April 1945].
Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
TLDNR: Putin feels Russia isn't safe unless it can
reconstruct the Soviet Union and regain suzerainty over
the former Warsaw Pact. Russia won't stop, so it has
to be stopped.
I do not believe this is true at all. Putin considers the USSR to have
been weak, and Lenin as having made compromises that wouldn't have been
made by a stronger leader. Putin does not want to reconstruct the Soviet Union, he wants to reconstruct the Russian state of Ivan the Terrible. --scott
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 19:43:36 -0400, Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com>
Thirty-four months [sic] after the Germans invaded the Soviet Union=20[June 1941], the Red Army swept away the final German resistance and=20
entered Berlin [April 1945].
OK, 46 months (4x12 - 2). This is essentially correct, as it was the
fall of Berlin that removed Hitler and led to the German surrender. It
is even more correct from the Soviet (and, no doubt, current Russian)
perspective.
The point that should be made is that without lend-lease, the
Germans would still occupy moscow and rule the former Rus.
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
pt
Cryptoengineer wrote:
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
December 1814 not count?
On 3/27/2024 10:14 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:That is debatable.ÿ Lend-lease helped but even without it there is good reason to believe the CCCP would have at least regained all their lost territory.ÿ It just would have taken longer and a larger body count.
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 19:43:36 -0400, Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com>
Thirty-four months [sic] after the Germans invaded the Soviet Union=20 >>>> [June 1941], the Red Army swept away the final German resistance and=20 >>>> entered Berlin [April 1945].
OK, 46 months (4x12 - 2). This is essentially correct, as it was the
fall of Berlin that removed Hitler and led to the German surrender. It
is even more correct from the Soviet (and, no doubt, current Russian)
perspective.
The point that should be made is that without lend-lease, the
Germans would still occupy moscow and rule the former Rus.
Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org> wrote:
Cryptoengineer wrote:
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
December 1814 not count?
I think you mean August of that year. More recently there was an
invasion of Pennsylvania in June and July 1863.
Some might also count January 2021. Is it an invasion of all
participants were US citizens? One person there was carrying the
flag of the nation (not US state) of Georgia, though he was probably
just confused.
I agree with Scott. Lend-Lease not only moved thousands of tanks and
other vehicles and planes into the Soviet Union, the Soviets also
learned how to build advanced weaponry.
On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
December 1814 not count?
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
pt
Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org> wrote:
Cryptoengineer wrote:
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
December 1814 not count?
I think you mean August of that year. More recently there was an
invasion of Pennsylvania in June and July 1863.
Some might also count January 2021. Is it an invasion of all
participants were US citizens? One person there was carrying the
flag of the nation (not US state) of Georgia, though he was probably
just confused.
Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness doesn't.
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 18:03:12 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> writes:
On 3/26/2024 11:36 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:15:35 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
On 3/23/2024 12:36 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the >>>>>>> instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so >>>>>>> a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow, >>>>>>> were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to >>>>>>> the core.=20
A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar >>>>>> things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we >>>>>> had different notions of horsepower, also.
In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to convince >>>>>> Soviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how Tatars
were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this was
needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out and >>>>>> the problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should >>>>>>> not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was >>>>>>> immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian >>>>>>> people".
Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian insularity >>>>>> besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the >>>>>> outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard to >>>>>> erase.
Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. It sits in the middle of a vast >>>>> plane without natural barriers; contrast to the US, which has a friendly >>>>> ally to the north, and a weak nation to the south, and vast ocean moats >>>>> in east and west.
Russian paranoia is based on bitter experience.
Indeed.
But does it explain the racism? That's what it was brought up here to
do.
And does it excuse (or explain) their attempts to seize their
neighbors' land -- thus opening themselves up to retribution.
Russian Racism I can't speak on. Russia has a 'Manifest Destiny'
complex known as 'Russki Mir', or 'Russian World', in which it
desires to spread its Orthodox, authoritarian culture to the
rest of the world. [1]
[I note that America, and earlier European colonial powers
are/were guilty of similar hubris.
Up until 1895 or so, the US was very insular and refused to
involve themselves in foriegn events and politics, even in
central and south america. Since then, not so much.
That's because it was pursuing its Manifest Destiny and Taking Up the
White Man's Burden while settling the country.
It expanded these interests overseas once the mainland was subdued.
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness doesn't.
Okay, how about Pancho Villa's attack on Columbus, New Mexico in
March, 1916?
Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
TLDNR: Putin feels Russia isn't safe unless it can
reconstruct the Soviet Union and regain suzerainty over
the former Warsaw Pact. Russia won't stop, so it has
to be stopped.
I do not believe this is true at all. Putin considers the USSR to have
been weak, and Lenin as having made compromises that wouldn't have been
made by a stronger leader. Putin does not want to reconstruct the Soviet Union, he wants to reconstruct the Russian state of Ivan the Terrible.
This is the first time I've noticed Keith posting in this group. He
usually hangs out in r.a.sf.fandom, but that group makes this one look
busy, and its recently been taken over by Dr Who fans and AI generated
posts.
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
I agree with Scott. Lend-Lease not only moved thousands of tanks and
other vehicles and planes into the Soviet Union, the Soviets also
learned how to build advanced weaponry.
Although we definitely tried to avoid sharing anything too advanced with them. At the end of the war we were still shipping them tanks with
prewar British radio designs that were several generations behind what
we were using. Not that they needed any, with the T-34 being probably
the best tank of the war according to my father.
That incident with the B-29 was not the result of lend-lease but was
probably the greatest technology transfer to the Soviets short of the
atomic bomb.
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org> wrote:
Cryptoengineer wrote:
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
December 1814 not count?
I think you mean August of that year. More recently there was an
invasion of Pennsylvania in June and July 1863.
1814 definitely counts, although we really needed a new capitol building anyway.
The 1863 invasion is kind of a special case because it depends on whether
you define the invaders as US citizens or not. Since the war was about
who was a citizen and who wasn't, and the US won, I think it fair to define them as rebellious citizens. My Confederate-supporting high school history teacher would not do so, however.
Some might also count January 2021. Is it an invasion of all
participants were US citizens? One person there was carrying the
flag of the nation (not US state) of Georgia, though he was probably
just confused.
Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness doesn't.
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness doesn't.
Okay, how about Pancho Villa's attack on Columbus, New Mexico in
March, 1916?
Was Pancho Villa an authorized representative acting on behalf of the
Mexican government? Or was he acting as a private citizen?
I seem to recall that Villa had previously been a representaive of the Mexican government but that at some point he had gone out on his own,
and I think that was before 1916 but I cannot recall precisely.
Cryptoengineer wrote:
This is the first time I've noticed Keith posting in this group.
He usually hangs out in r.a.sf.fandom, but that group makes this
one look busy, and its recently been taken over by Dr Who fans and
AI generated posts.
If it's been taken over, I haven't noticed. I've set up filters to
block anything Dr. Who related, which may be overkill but works.
Was Pancho Villa an authorized representative acting on behalf of
the Mexican government? Or was he acting as a private citizen?
On 3/27/2024 5:46 PM, Tim Illingworth wrote:
On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
December 1814 not count?
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
pt
It was certainly an invasion, but 'one' is not 'many'.
The point is, Russia has the notion of 'we're
going to get invaded again, unless we push out
the borders'. The US doesn't - its last mainland
invasion was over 200 years ago.
Putin, and other Russian propagandists, are fond
of saying things like 'Russia has no border', meaning
that neighboring states independence is an unfortunate
circumstance which needs fixing.
Once again, learn about 'Russki Mir' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_world
The only solution I can see is the breakup of Russia.
I listened to a youtube lecture of someone from the finnish military who studieds russia all his life, and he agreed with the deeply rooted
paranoia of russia, and that it explains a lot about why they act the
way they do.
I think that in order to get long lasting peace in europe, the russian people need to go through some kind of public shaming like germany in
WW2 in order to create a longing for peace and democracy.
It has to come from within, based on a collective, cultural realization
that Tsars won't build a happy country. If it is pushed from above and outside, like after the soviet union fell, the system will fall again,
since the people haven't internalized democracy.
Another way for peace, as you say, is to break up russia and confiscate
all major weapons. Moscow and the west will probably be a european
oriented country, the rest will be factured between various small
warlords and revert to their "*stan" names.
The risk will still be though, that the moscow + west will again fall
into tyranny after a decade or two.
In 1066, was William the Conquerer an authorized representative acting
on behalf of the French government?
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 3/27/2024 5:46 PM, Tim Illingworth wrote:
On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
December 1814 not count?
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
pt
It was certainly an invasion, but 'one' is not 'many'.
The point is, Russia has the notion of 'we're
going to get invaded again, unless we push out
the borders'. The US doesn't - its last mainland
invasion was over 200 years ago.
Putin, and other Russian propagandists, are fond
of saying things like 'Russia has no border', meaning
that neighboring states independence is an unfortunate
circumstance which needs fixing.
Once again, learn about 'Russki Mir'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_world
The only solution I can see is the breakup of Russia.
I listened to a youtube lecture of someone from the finnish military who studieds russia all his life, and he agreed with the deeply rooted
paranoia of russia, and that it explains a lot about why they act the way they do.
Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
Cryptoengineer wrote:
This is the first time I've noticed Keith posting in this group.
He usually hangs out in r.a.sf.fandom, but that group makes this
one look busy, and its recently been taken over by Dr Who fans and
AI generated posts.
If it's been taken over, I haven't noticed. I've set up filters to
block anything Dr. Who related, which may be overkill but works.
I've been posting to rasfw intermittently for decades. But in this
thread I've been posting to rasff, and failed to notice that the
thread was being crossposted to rasfw. Peter is still in my killfile,
so I only see his posts when someone quotes them. As I've said
before, I'm willing to remove him from my killfile if he he emails
me an apology. (He's never been blocked from my email.)
The Who-related posts in rasff have mostly died down. Peter is right
about some of the Who-related posts being generated by ChatGPT, but
that was pretty universally condemned even by the Whovians.
In article <l6l7vlFn3uoU1@mid.individual.net>,
Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:
On 2024-03-28, D <nospam@example.net> wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024, Cryptoengineer wrote:
On 3/27/2024 5:46 PM, Tim Illingworth wrote:
On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
December 1814 not count?
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not. >>>>>>
pt
It was certainly an invasion, but 'one' is not 'many'.
The point is, Russia has the notion of 'we're
going to get invaded again, unless we push out
the borders'. The US doesn't - its last mainland
invasion was over 200 years ago.
Putin, and other Russian propagandists, are fond
of saying things like 'Russia has no border', meaning
that neighboring states independence is an unfortunate
circumstance which needs fixing.
Once again, learn about 'Russki Mir'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_world
The only solution I can see is the breakup of Russia.
I listened to a youtube lecture of someone from the finnish military who >>> studieds russia all his life, and he agreed with the deeply rooted
paranoia of russia, and that it explains a lot about why they act the way >>> they do.
obSF: _The Moon Goddess and the Sun_, Kingsbury was a 1986 novel that
as one thread had an immersive virtual reality "game" used for
Americans to understand this "deeply rooted paranoia of Russia" and
the related addiction to strong-man dictatorships.
The novel was actually a very good collection of ideas for the time, a
Favorite bookcase book, that failed as a novel, IMO, due to its
lack of coherence. It was an expansion of an earlier Hugo nominated
novella and added more neat ideas but lost its plot focus.
Kingsbury didn't write much but he had nice fresh ideas.
Chris
This might be the Finnish briefing from above; I found it very interesting:
https://ricochet.com/1214468/finnish-intelligence-officer-explains-the-russian-mindset/
I think Kingsbury's _Courtship Rite_ is a great book, but it seems to be almost forgotten now.
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:and=3D20
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 19:43:36 -0400, Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com>
Thirty-four months [sic] after the Germans invaded the Soviet = Union=3D20[June 1941], the Red Army swept away the final German resistance =
entered Berlin [April 1945].
OK, 46 months (4x12 - 2). This is essentially correct, as it was the
fall of Berlin that removed Hitler and led to the German surrender. It
is even more correct from the Soviet (and, no doubt, current Russian) >>perspective.
The point that should be made is that without lend-lease, the
Germans would still occupy moscow and rule the former Rus.
On 3/27/2024 4:09 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:with
Lynn McGuire <lynnmcguire5@gmail.com> wrote:
=20
I agree with Scott. Lend-Lease not only moved thousands of tanks and
other vehicles and planes into the Soviet Union, the Soviets also
learned how to build advanced weaponry.
Although we definitely tried to avoid sharing anything too advanced =
them. At the end of the war we were still shipping them tanks with
prewar British radio designs that were several generations behind what
we were using. Not that they needed any, with the T-34 being probably
the best tank of the war according to my father.
=20
That incident with the B-29 was not the result of lend-lease but was
probably the greatest technology transfer to the Soviets short of the
atomic bomb.
The Soviet's also built the best ground attack aircraft of WW2. The=20 >biggest advantage of Lend-Lease to the CCCP was in logistics. Most of=20 >their trucks and railroad equipment was Lend-Lease.
On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
=20December 1814 not count?
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
=20
pt
=20
On 3/27/2024 4:03 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:building
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org> wrote:=20
Cryptoengineer wrote:
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
December 1814 not count?
I think you mean August of that year. More recently there was an
invasion of Pennsylvania in June and July 1863.
1814 definitely counts, although we really needed a new capitol =
whetheranyway.
=20
The 1863 invasion is kind of a special case because it depends on =
aboutyou define the invaders as US citizens or not. Since the war was =
who was a citizen and who wasn't, and the US won, I think it fair to = define
them as rebellious citizens. My Confederate-supporting high school = history
teacher would not do so, however.
=20
Some might also count January 2021. Is it an invasion of all=20
participants were US citizens? One person there was carrying the
flag of the nation (not US state) of Georgia, though he was probably
just confused.
Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness doesn't.
Agreed, insurrection is not invasion.
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:44:51 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 3/27/2024 4:03 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org> wrote:
Cryptoengineer wrote:
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has >>>>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
December 1814 not count?
I think you mean August of that year. More recently there was an
invasion of Pennsylvania in June and July 1863.
1814 definitely counts, although we really needed a new capitol building >>> anyway.
The 1863 invasion is kind of a special case because it depends on whether >>> you define the invaders as US citizens or not. Since the war was about
who was a citizen and who wasn't, and the US won, I think it fair to define >>> them as rebellious citizens. My Confederate-supporting high school history >>> teacher would not do so, however.
Some might also count January 2021. Is it an invasion of all
participants were US citizens? One person there was carrying the
flag of the nation (not US state) of Georgia, though he was probably
just confused.
Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness doesn't.
Agreed, insurrection is not invasion.
I find it amazing how many people are still niggling about this.
Why is it so hard to believe that Russia, given its situation, has
been invaded more often than the USA? Is there a contest on to see
which country has been invaded most often? Is there a prize at stake?
As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
pure and simple.
The interesting question is whether States can use their newly granted authority to bar candidates from local office (but not for
President/VP) can bar candidates from Senate and House races? Although
they are part of the Federal gummint, they /do/ represent the State,
after all.
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:46:50 -0400, Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org>
wrote:
On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
December 1814 not count?
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
pt
As a "nigglened edge case", it would. If it had happened and was not
part of the War of 1812 which, in a time when communications were far
from instantaneous, dragged on for a bit.
And thanks for illustrating that even a clear point can be ignored by
people fanatically insistent on refuting it.
This might be the Finnish briefing from above; I found it very interesting:
https://ricochet.com/1214468/finnish-intelligence-officer-explains-the-russian-mindset/
On 3/26/2024 2:11 PM, James Nicoll wrote:
In article <utv2pf$d1h$1@reader1.panix.com>,
James Nicoll <jdnicoll@panix.com> wrote:
There are 120 million Russians in Russia (not every person in
Russia is Russian). Each Russian is about one tenth of a cubic
metre. 12 million cubic metres is a cube less than 220 metres on
an edge. Even if we double the volume, that is a cube less than
three football fields on a side. Easy to hide in mountains or
deep beneath the sea.
Sounds like a good start.
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
Was Pancho Villa an authorized representative acting on behalf of
the Mexican government? Or was he acting as a private citizen?
Does it matter? If a bunch of armed foreigners working together cross
the US border to use force against Americans, that's an invasion.
In 1066, was William the Conquerer an authorized representative acting
on behalf of the French government?
As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
pure and simple.
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:46:50 -0400, Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org>
wrote:
On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
December 1814 not count?
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
pt
As a "nigglened edge case", it would. If it had happened and was not
part of the War of 1812 which, in a time when communications were far
from instantaneous, dragged on for a bit.
And thanks for illustrating that even a clear point can be ignored by
people fanatically insistent on refuting it.
On 3/28/24 12:21 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
pure and simple.
So now opposition to US foreign policy is "treason." I've heard that
line too often before. "Love it or leave it."
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:14:01 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 19:43:36 -0400, Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com>
Thirty-four months [sic] after the Germans invaded the Soviet Union=20 >>>> [June 1941], the Red Army swept away the final German resistance and=20 >>>> entered Berlin [April 1945].
OK, 46 months (4x12 - 2). This is essentially correct, as it was the
fall of Berlin that removed Hitler and led to the German surrender. It
is even more correct from the Soviet (and, no doubt, current Russian)
perspective.
The point that should be made is that without lend-lease, the
Germans would still occupy moscow and rule the former Rus.
Actually, an article on lend-lease in one of the military history
magazines I subscribe to concluded that, without lend-lease, it would
indeed have taken a year longer for the Soviet Union to defeat Germany
in the East and occupy Berlin.
But, of course, had Germany been in the war that long, the first
atomic bomb would have gone to Berlin, not Hiroshima. Berlin would
never have been occupied (well, not until the radiation was low
enough).
The Germans planned on a lightning-fast campaign that would seize
everything on the run and end the war in the East before the snow
fell. This turned out to be overly optimisitic; one might even say "pollyannish". Lack of Lend-Lease would not have changed this; it was
a consequence of the Five Ps:
Poor Planning Prevents Proper Performance
That lightning-fast campaign was a 1.3 million man army, supposedly the >largest army ever put together. The Nazis almost made it to Moscow
before the snow but got bogged down in Ukraine destroying 12,000 ??? >villages and killing 12 million ??? Ukrainians. I guess that the Nazis >wanted to make sure that they could retreat without getting sniped at
the entire way back like Napoleon's army that lost 400,000 men
retreating from Moscow.
On 3/28/2024 11:02 AM, Paul S Person wrote:It
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:14:01 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:
=20
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 19:43:36 -0400, Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com>
Thirty-four months [sic] after the Germans invaded the Soviet = Union=3D20[June 1941], the Red Army swept away the final German resistance = and=3D20
entered Berlin [April 1945].
OK, 46 months (4x12 - 2). This is essentially correct, as it was the
fall of Berlin that removed Hitler and led to the German surrender. =
Russian)is even more correct from the Soviet (and, no doubt, current =
=20perspective.
The point that should be made is that without lend-lease, the
Germans would still occupy moscow and rule the former Rus.
Actually, an article on lend-lease in one of the military history
magazines I subscribe to concluded that, without lend-lease, it would
indeed have taken a year longer for the Soviet Union to defeat Germany
in the East and occupy Berlin.
=20
But, of course, had Germany been in the war that long, the first
atomic bomb would have gone to Berlin, not Hiroshima. Berlin would
never have been occupied (well, not until the radiation was low
enough).
=20
The Germans planned on a lightning-fast campaign that would seize
everything on the run and end the war in the East before the snow
fell. This turned out to be overly optimisitic; one might even say
"pollyannish". Lack of Lend-Lease would not have changed this; it was
a consequence of the Five Ps:
=20
Poor Planning Prevents Proper Performance
That lightning-fast campaign was a 1.3 million man army, supposedly the=20 >largest army ever put together. The Nazis almost made it to Moscow=20
before the snow but got bogged down in Ukraine destroying 12,000 ???=20 >villages and killing 12 million ??? Ukrainians. I guess that the Nazis=20 >wanted to make sure that they could retreat without getting sniped at=20
the entire way back like Napoleon's army that lost 400,000 men=20
retreating from Moscow.
On 3/28/2024 9:21 AM, Paul S Person wrote:has
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:44:51 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
=20
On 3/27/2024 4:03 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org> wrote:
Cryptoengineer wrote:
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia =
not.been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has =
building
December 1814 not count?
I think you mean August of that year. More recently there was an
invasion of Pennsylvania in June and July 1863.
1814 definitely counts, although we really needed a new capitol =
aboutanyway.
The 1863 invasion is kind of a special case because it depends on = whether
you define the invaders as US citizens or not. Since the war was =
definewho was a citizen and who wasn't, and the US won, I think it fair to=
probablythem as rebellious citizens. My Confederate-supporting high school = history
teacher would not do so, however.
Some might also count January 2021. Is it an invasion of all
participants were US citizens? One person there was carrying the
flag of the nation (not US state) of Georgia, though he was =
doesn't.just confused.
Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness =
=20
Agreed, insurrection is not invasion.
I find it amazing how many people are still niggling about this.
=20
Why is it so hard to believe that Russia, given its situation, has
been invaded more often than the USA? Is there a contest on to see
which country has been invaded most often? Is there a prize at stake?
=20
As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
pure and simple.
=20
The interesting question is whether States can use their newly granted
authority to bar candidates from local office (but not for
President/VP) can bar candidates from Senate and House races? Although
they are part of the Federal gummint, they /do/ represent the State,
after all.
With the current SC they will try to rule such that MAGA people cannot=20
be barred but everyone else can be. :P
On 3/28/24 12:21 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
pure and simple.
So now opposition to US foreign policy is "treason." I've heard that=20
line too often before. "Love it or leave it."
On 3/28/24 12:14 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:46:50 -0400, Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org>
wrote:
=20
On 3/27/2024 7:47 AM, Cryptoengineer wrote:=20
December 1814 not count?
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
pt
As a "nigglened edge case", it would. If it had happened and was not
part of the War of 1812 which, in a time when communications were far
from instantaneous, dragged on for a bit.
=20
And thanks for illustrating that even a clear point can be ignored by
people fanatically insistent on refuting it.
And now you're treating getting the month wrong as being "fanatically=20 >insistent."
*plonk*
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
Was Pancho Villa an authorized representative acting on behalf of
the Mexican government? Or was he acting as a private citizen?
Does it matter? If a bunch of armed foreigners working together cross
the US border to use force against Americans, that's an invasion.
What if it's only one armed foreigner?
In 1066, was William the Conquerer an authorized representative acting
on behalf of the French government?
He was the French government. L'etat, c'etait lui.
--scott
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 14:44:57 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 3/28/2024 9:21 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
On Wed, 27 Mar 2024 17:44:51 -0700, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
On 3/27/2024 4:03 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:Agreed, insurrection is not invasion.
Tim Illingworth <tim@smofs.org> wrote:
Cryptoengineer wrote:
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has >>>>>>>> been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not. >>>>>>December 1814 not count?
I think you mean August of that year. More recently there was an
invasion of Pennsylvania in June and July 1863.
1814 definitely counts, although we really needed a new capitol building >>>>> anyway.
The 1863 invasion is kind of a special case because it depends on whether >>>>> you define the invaders as US citizens or not. Since the war was about >>>>> who was a citizen and who wasn't, and the US won, I think it fair to define
them as rebellious citizens. My Confederate-supporting high school history
teacher would not do so, however.
Some might also count January 2021. Is it an invasion of all
participants were US citizens? One person there was carrying the
flag of the nation (not US state) of Georgia, though he was probably >>>>>> just confused.
Does not count, for the same reason that 1863 unpleasantness doesn't. >>>>
I find it amazing how many people are still niggling about this.
Why is it so hard to believe that Russia, given its situation, has
been invaded more often than the USA? Is there a contest on to see
which country has been invaded most often? Is there a prize at stake?
As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
pure and simple.
The interesting question is whether States can use their newly granted
authority to bar candidates from local office (but not for
President/VP) can bar candidates from Senate and House races? Although
they are part of the Federal gummint, they /do/ represent the State,
after all.
With the current SC they will try to rule such that MAGA people cannot
be barred but everyone else can be. :P
That's not what they ruled so far -- for purely local offices, at
least.
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:04:27 -0400, Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com>
wrote:
On 3/28/24 12:21 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
pure and simple.
So now opposition to US foreign policy is "treason." I've heard that
line too often before. "Love it or leave it."
No -- but acting as an agent of a foreign power when you have sworn an
oath to the USA (not just pledged allegiance, sworn an oath as part of
taking an office, such as, oh, Reprentative or Senator or President,
among many others) can be, depending on what the foreign power is up
to and if you allow your allegiance to that power to influence your
official performance.
On Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:04:27 -0400, Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com>
wrote:
On 3/28/24 12:21 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
As to Jan 6 2021 -- if Trump is/was, in fact, an agent of Putin (as
many of his supporters appear to be, given their eagerness to gift
Putin Ukraine), then it was not an insurrection -- it was treason,
pure and simple.
So now opposition to US foreign policy is "treason." I've heard that=20 >>line too often before. "Love it or leave it."
No -- but acting as an agent of a foreign power when you have sworn an
oath to the USA (not just pledged allegiance, sworn an oath as part of
taking an office, such as, oh, Reprentative or Senator or President,
among many others) can be, depending on what the foreign power is up
to and if you allow your allegiance to that power to influence your
official performance.
On 28 Mar 2024 22:40:08 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Keith F. Lynch <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
Scott Dorsey <kludge@panix.com> wrote:
Was Pancho Villa an authorized representative acting on behalf of
the Mexican government? Or was he acting as a private citizen?
Does it matter? If a bunch of armed foreigners working together cross >>>the US border to use force against Americans, that's an invasion.
What if it's only one armed foreigner?
In 1066, was William the Conquerer an authorized representative acting
on behalf of the French government?
He was the French government. L'etat, c'etait lui.
He was the Norman government, Philip I was the French government.
Regardless of nigglined edge cases, the point remains. Russia has
been invaded many times in history, while the US mainland has not.
On 3/27/2024 10:14 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:That is debatable. Lend-lease helped but even without it there is good >reason to believe the CCCP would have at least regained all their lost >territory. It just would have taken longer and a larger body count.
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 19:43:36 -0400, Ahasuerus <ahasuerus@email.com>The point that should be made is that without lend-lease, the
Germans would still occupy moscow and rule the former Rus.
I agree with Scott. Lend-Lease not only moved thousands of tanks and
other vehicles and planes into the Soviet Union, the Soviets also
learned how to build advanced weaponry.
I really doubt that Trump actually takes orders from Moscow, but
he does seem to admire Putin, and its possible that Putin has
kompromat on him, which bends his actions even if not given
explicit instructions.
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:19:41 -0700, Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
A book I read recently asserted that, by 1914 (it was written in
1896), the world would be a shambles, all states would be dissolved,
all denomination likewise, and the world would be ruled from
Jerusalem, by a partnership between the Saxons (that is, the Ten Lost
Tribes) and the Jews (as junior partners, of course).
Believing you are God's Chosen People probably fed into WASP racism,
but it didn't cause it.
So was this "British Israelism" (a la Herbert W Armstrong but not
invented by him) or something else?
These days it mostly exists in the song "Jerusalem" and practically
nowhere else in the UK - though I heard of one branch of the
philosophy / theology including the United States as part of "the
promise"
I distinctly remember the line "You know the
'rockets' red glare? the bombs bursting in air? Well those were OUR
rockets and OUR bombs - but we don't advertise that much to our
American friends these days!"
On 27 Mar 2024 13:19:56 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote: >>Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
TLDNR: Putin feels Russia isn't safe unless it can
reconstruct the Soviet Union and regain suzerainty over
the former Warsaw Pact. Russia won't stop, so it has
to be stopped.
I do not believe this is true at all. Putin considers the USSR to have >>been weak, and Lenin as having made compromises that wouldn't have been >>made by a stronger leader. Putin does not want to reconstruct the Soviet >>Union, he wants to reconstruct the Russian state of Ivan the Terrible. >>--scott
If that is true then what is Putin doing invading Ukraine?
Since as the map from Britannica shows: >https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ivan-the-Terrible
while Ivan's Russia was a fairly big place it DIDN'T include St
Petersburg, the Baltic states, Belorus or nearly all of Ukraine.
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
On 27 Mar 2024 13:19:56 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
TLDNR: Putin feels Russia isn't safe unless it can
reconstruct the Soviet Union and regain suzerainty over
the former Warsaw Pact. Russia won't stop, so it has
to be stopped.
I do not believe this is true at all. Putin considers the USSR to have
been weak, and Lenin as having made compromises that wouldn't have been
made by a stronger leader. Putin does not want to reconstruct the Soviet >>> Union, he wants to reconstruct the Russian state of Ivan the Terrible.
--scott
If that is true then what is Putin doing invading Ukraine?
Since as the map from Britannica shows:
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ivan-the-Terrible
while Ivan's Russia was a fairly big place it DIDN'T include St
Petersburg, the Baltic states, Belorus or nearly all of Ukraine.
Oh, I don't think he wants to stop there. I don't think Ivan did either.
But it is true that Peter the Great is the person that Mr. Putin is so frequently quoting and making comparisons with, even if his policies seem more like those of Ivan's.
--scott
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:19:41 -0700, Paul S Person ><psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
A book I read recently asserted that, by 1914 (it was written in
1896), the world would be a shambles, all states would be dissolved,
all denomination likewise, and the world would be ruled from
Jerusalem, by a partnership between the Saxons (that is, the Ten Lost >>Tribes) and the Jews (as junior partners, of course).
Believing you are God's Chosen People probably fed into WASP racism,
but it didn't cause it.
So was this "British Israelism" (a la Herbert W Armstrong but not
invented by him) or something else?
These days it mostly exists in the song "Jerusalem" and practically--=20
nowhere else in the UK - though I heard of one branch of the
philosophy / theology including the United States as part of "the
promise"
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> writes:
On Tue, 26 Mar 2024 18:03:12 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) >>wrote:
[I note that America, and earlier European colonial powers
are/were guilty of similar hubris.
Up until 1895 or so, the US was very insular and refused to
involve themselves in foriegn events and politics, even in
central and south america. Since then, not so much.
You mean like vs. Spain or Mexico? Or dozens of aboriginal tribes? Or >>Hawaii? (I'll grant - the US paid $$$ for French Louisiana and Alaska)
At least in terms of square mileage the US took more territory than
anybody but Russia (their main gain being Siberia) and with the
exception of the Phillipines - kept it all. (On the Phillipines, in
1941 Manila was considered the 6th biggest city in the United States
and many Americans in 1946 were shocked that the Filipinos preferred >>independence to statehood)
Note that I specified 1895 or so. The spanish american war in 1898
changed that, and WWII (isolationism still existed up to the
first WWI).
Confiscating the major weapons is the real problem. Picking up nuclear weapons and carrying them off would cause all kinds of international and logistical issues, and someone might decide to launch them rather than
give them up. They're probably already poorly maintained and unreliable,
but that could just mean that instead of blowing up their intended
target, they'll blow up somebody else.
Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
Confiscating the major weapons is the real problem. Picking up
nuclear weapons and carrying them off would cause all kinds of
international and logistical issues, and someone might decide to
launch them rather than give them up. They're probably already
poorly maintained and unreliable, but that could just mean that
instead of blowing up their intended target, they'll blow up
somebody else.
In all the history of the Thing, only Bilbo -- I mean, Ukraine --
has voluntarily given it up, and that took all our help...
On 4/2/2024 6:08 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:have
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
On 27 Mar 2024 13:19:56 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
TLDNR: Putin feels Russia isn't safe unless it can
reconstruct the Soviet Union and regain suzerainty over
the former Warsaw Pact. Russia won't stop, so it has
to be stopped.
I do not believe this is true at all. Putin considers the USSR to =
beenbeen weak, and Lenin as having made compromises that wouldn't have =
Terrible.made by a stronger leader. Putin does not want to reconstruct the = Soviet
Union, he wants to reconstruct the Russian state of Ivan the =
either.=20--scott
If that is true then what is Putin doing invading Ukraine?
Since as the map from Britannica shows:
https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ivan-the-Terrible
while Ivan's Russia was a fairly big place it DIDN'T include St
Petersburg, the Baltic states, Belorus or nearly all of Ukraine.
Oh, I don't think he wants to stop there. I don't think Ivan did =
seemBut it is true that Peter the Great is the person that Mr. Putin is so
frequently quoting and making comparisons with, even if his policies =
more like those of Ivan's.
--scott
Putin has said "Russia borders do not end."
https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/1746784252312891463?s=3D20
There's a notion in Russia that its 'superior culture'
should be expanded first to any place which had or had
a Russian presence, and later to everywhere. That
includes all of former the USSR and Warsaw Pact, Alaska,
California, and many western European countries.
Muskovy delenda est.
Jeff Urs <jeff.urs@gmail.com> wrote:
Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
Confiscating the major weapons is the real problem. Picking up
nuclear weapons and carrying them off would cause all kinds of
international and logistical issues, and someone might decide to
launch them rather than give them up. They're probably already
poorly maintained and unreliable, but that could just mean that
instead of blowing up their intended target, they'll blow up
somebody else.
In all the history of the Thing, only Bilbo -- I mean, Ukraine --
has voluntarily given it up, and that took all our help...
And I'll bet they regret giving them up. What a great lesson for
other nuclear powers who are being urged to give them up.
Also, if I was Bilbo I would have kept the One Ring. But then I've
always been a packrat. And a ring takes up much less space than a
bunch of nuclear weapons and their launchers.
On Thu, 4 Apr 2024 00:51:47 -0000 (UTC), "Keith F. Lynch" <kfl@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
Jeff Urs <jeff.urs@gmail.com> wrote:
Gary McGath <garym@mcgath.com> wrote:
Confiscating the major weapons is the real problem. Picking up
nuclear weapons and carrying them off would cause all kinds of
international and logistical issues, and someone might decide to
launch them rather than give them up. They're probably already
poorly maintained and unreliable, but that could just mean that
instead of blowing up their intended target, they'll blow up
somebody else.
In all the history of the Thing, only Bilbo -- I mean, Ukraine --
has voluntarily given it up, and that took all our help...
And I'll bet they regret giving them up. What a great lesson for
other nuclear powers who are being urged to give them up.
Also, if I was Bilbo I would have kept the One Ring. But then I've
always been a packrat. And a ring takes up much less space than a
bunch of nuclear weapons and their launchers.
Bilbo, left to himself, would have kept the One Ring. Or died trying.
It took Gandalf partially unmasking himself and cowing Bilbo to get
Bilbo to give it up.
Putin has said "Russia borders do not end."
https://x.com/BBCSteveR/status/1746784252312891463?s=20
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:14:27 -0400, CryptoengineerLost
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/2/2024 2:11 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:19:41 -0700, Paul S Person
<psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
=20
A book I read recently asserted that, by 1914 (it was written in
1896), the world would be a shambles, all states would be dissolved,
all denomination likewise, and the world would be ruled from
Jerusalem, by a partnership between the Saxons (that is, the Ten =
Tribes) and the Jews (as junior partners, of course).=20
Believing you are God's Chosen People probably fed into WASP racism,
but it didn't cause it.
So was this "British Israelism" (a la Herbert W Armstrong but not
invented by him) or something else?
=20
These days it mostly exists in the song "Jerusalem" and practically
nowhere else in the UK - though I heard of one branch of the
philosophy / theology including the United States as part of "the
promise"
Really? Blake wrote the poem used as lyrics in 1808. British Israelism
came quite a bit later, and didn't gain much traction until the 1870s.
Obviously I know when Blake was writing his poetry but no question it
was adopted by the BI types as "theirs".
I never did understand how it became a political text (notably by the
British Labour party) having first encountered it in Chariots of Fire.
On Wed, 03 Apr 2024 08:25:55 -0700, Paul S Person ><psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
Actually, I think it existed up to WWII as well.
There is a /reason/ that the attack on Pearl Harbor is credited with >>bringing the USA into the war in Europe.
Really? I would have thought the most important thing of that week was >Hitler's declaration of war on the United States which certainly
directly brought the USA into the war in Europe.
It was basically Hitler's submarine war against the US in the spring
of 1942 that really brought home to the US what they were fighting
for.
No question the soc.history.what-if types have repeatedly debated in
the 25+ years I've been part of it what would have happened following
the US declaration of war on Japan if Hitler had NOT declared on the
United States - and the Axis DIDN'T commit Germany to declaring war on >anybody UNLESS Japan were attacked which 7 Dec 1941 rendered moot.
Without the German declaration FDR had a problem since he and
Churchill had agreed to "Germany first" as early as the Placentia Bay >conference.
They then give their song, starting out with a rousing "The British,
the British, the British are best, so up with the British and down
with the rest". Well, that's how I remember the lyrics, anyway.
Still, American naval unpreparedness to counter the U-boat menace was
a strong stimulus to securing the North Atlantic.=20
No question the soc.history.what-if types have repeatedly debated in
the 25+ years I've been part of it what would have happened following
the US declaration of war on Japan if Hitler had NOT declared on the
United States - and the Axis DIDN'T commit Germany to declaring war on >>anybody UNLESS Japan were attacked which 7 Dec 1941 rendered moot.
That's an interesting alt-history point. I suspect that "the enemy of
my friend is my enemy" would have brought us into the European
conflict eventually.
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:14:27 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/2/2024 2:11 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:19:41 -0700, Paul S Person
<psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
A book I read recently asserted that, by 1914 (it was written in
1896), the world would be a shambles, all states would be dissolved,
all denomination likewise, and the world would be ruled from
Jerusalem, by a partnership between the Saxons (that is, the Ten Lost
Tribes) and the Jews (as junior partners, of course).
Believing you are God's Chosen People probably fed into WASP racism,
but it didn't cause it.
So was this "British Israelism" (a la Herbert W Armstrong but not
invented by him) or something else?
These days it mostly exists in the song "Jerusalem" and practically
nowhere else in the UK - though I heard of one branch of the
philosophy / theology including the United States as part of "the
promise"
Really? Blake wrote the poem used as lyrics in 1808. British Israelism
came quite a bit later, and didn't gain much traction until the 1870s.
Obviously I know when Blake was writing his poetry but no question it
was adopted by the BI types as "theirs".
I never did understand how it became a political text (notably by the
British Labour party) having first encountered it in Chariots of Fire.
On Mon, 08 Apr 2024 08:36:36 -0700, Paul S Person ><psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
They then give their song, starting out with a rousing "The British,
the British, the British are best, so up with the British and down
with the rest". Well, that's how I remember the lyrics, anyway.
Such a great song - and in the verses you don't cite they insult just
about every other nation in Europe.
Oh and by the way - the reason you had trouble finding it was that
it's actually "The English, the English..." rather than the British.
Mark me down as a Flanders and Swann fan.
In article <uv1miv$3nsoi$1@dont-email.me>,
Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:14:27 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/2/2024 2:11 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:19:41 -0700, Paul S Person
<psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
A book I read recently asserted that, by 1914 (it was written in
1896), the world would be a shambles, all states would be dissolved, >>>>>> all denomination likewise, and the world would be ruled from
Jerusalem, by a partnership between the Saxons (that is, the Ten Lost >>>>>> Tribes) and the Jews (as junior partners, of course).
Believing you are God's Chosen People probably fed into WASP racism, >>>>>> but it didn't cause it.
So was this "British Israelism" (a la Herbert W Armstrong but not
invented by him) or something else?
These days it mostly exists in the song "Jerusalem" and practically
nowhere else in the UK - though I heard of one branch of the
philosophy / theology including the United States as part of "the
promise"
Really? Blake wrote the poem used as lyrics in 1808. British Israelism >>>> came quite a bit later, and didn't gain much traction until the 1870s.
Obviously I know when Blake was writing his poetry but no question it
was adopted by the BI types as "theirs".
I never did understand how it became a political text (notably by the
British Labour party) having first encountered it in Chariots of Fire.
It was a huge favorite in England long before the film. It's been called
England's second national anthem'. It was my school hymn back in the
60s, and hearing a thousand people singing it in Wells Cathedral during
our carol service is a favorite memory.
Pt
I cannot think of it outside of the "Buying A Bed" sketch:
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:14:27 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/2/2024 2:11 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:19:41 -0700, Paul S Person
<psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
A book I read recently asserted that, by 1914 (it was written in
1896), the world would be a shambles, all states would be dissolved,
all denomination likewise, and the world would be ruled from
Jerusalem, by a partnership between the Saxons (that is, the Ten Lost
Tribes) and the Jews (as junior partners, of course).
Believing you are God's Chosen People probably fed into WASP racism,
but it didn't cause it.
So was this "British Israelism" (a la Herbert W Armstrong but not
invented by him) or something else?
These days it mostly exists in the song "Jerusalem" and practically
nowhere else in the UK - though I heard of one branch of the
philosophy / theology including the United States as part of "the
promise"
Really? Blake wrote the poem used as lyrics in 1808. British Israelism
came quite a bit later, and didn't gain much traction until the 1870s.
Obviously I know when Blake was writing his poetry but no question it
was adopted by the BI types as "theirs".
I never did understand how it became a political text (notably by the
British Labour party) having first encountered it in Chariots of Fire.
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:14:27 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/2/2024 2:11 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 08:19:41 -0700, Paul S Person
<psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
A book I read recently asserted that, by 1914 (it was written in
1896), the world would be a shambles, all states would be dissolved, >>>>> all denomination likewise, and the world would be ruled from
Jerusalem, by a partnership between the Saxons (that is, the Ten Lost >>>>> Tribes) and the Jews (as junior partners, of course).
Believing you are God's Chosen People probably fed into WASP racism, >>>>> but it didn't cause it.
So was this "British Israelism" (a la Herbert W Armstrong but not
invented by him) or something else?
These days it mostly exists in the song "Jerusalem" and practically
nowhere else in the UK - though I heard of one branch of the
philosophy / theology including the United States as part of "the
promise"
Really? Blake wrote the poem used as lyrics in 1808. British Israelism
came quite a bit later, and didn't gain much traction until the 1870s.
Obviously I know when Blake was writing his poetry but no question it
was adopted by the BI types as "theirs".
I never did understand how it became a political text (notably by the
British Labour party) having first encountered it in Chariots of Fire.
It was a huge favorite in England long before the film. It's been called >England's second national anthem'. It was my school hymn back in the
60s, and hearing a thousand people singing it in Wells Cathedral during
our carol service is a favorite memory.
Pt
Oh and by the way - the reason you had trouble finding it was that
it's actually "The English, the English..." rather than the British.
That makes perfect sense, given that some of those other nations are
the Welsh, the Scots, and the Irish.
Mark me down as a Flanders and Swann fan.
/The Complete Flanders & Swann/ is one of my most treasured CDs.
--=20
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 21:11:59 -0000 (UTC), Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:14:27 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/2/2024 2:11 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
These days it mostly exists in the song "Jerusalem" and practically
nowhere else in the UK - though I heard of one branch of the
philosophy / theology including the United States as part of "the
promise"
Really? Blake wrote the poem used as lyrics in 1808. British Israelism >>>> came quite a bit later, and didn't gain much traction until the 1870s.
Obviously I know when Blake was writing his poetry but no question it
was adopted by the BI types as "theirs".
I never did understand how it became a political text (notably by the
British Labour party) having first encountered it in Chariots of Fire.
It was a huge favorite in England long before the film. It's been called
England's second national anthem'. It was my school hymn back in the
60s, and hearing a thousand people singing it in Wells Cathedral during
our carol service is a favorite memory.
And in modern times was adopted by the British Labour party as their
anthem. I've never heard it sung live but have heard numerous
recordings of it - not sure if I heard it before Chariots of Fire or
not.
On 15/04/2024 02.17, The Horny Goat wrote:
On Mon, 8 Apr 2024 21:11:59 -0000 (UTC), Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 16:14:27 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
On 4/2/2024 2:11 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
Obviously I know when Blake was writing his poetry but no question itThese days it mostly exists in the song "Jerusalem" and practically >>>>>> nowhere else in the UK - though I heard of one branch of the
philosophy / theology including the United States as part of "the
promise"
Really? Blake wrote the poem used as lyrics in 1808. British Israelism >>>>> came quite a bit later, and didn't gain much traction until the 1870s. >>>>
was adopted by the BI types as "theirs".
I never did understand how it became a political text (notably by the
British Labour party) having first encountered it in Chariots of Fire. >>>>
It was a huge favorite in England long before the film. It's been called >>> England's second national anthem'. It was my school hymn back in the
60s, and hearing a thousand people singing it in Wells Cathedral during
our carol service is a favorite memory.
And in modern times was adopted by the British Labour party as their
anthem. I've never heard it sung live but have heard numerous
recordings of it - not sure if I heard it before Chariots of Fire or
not.
I first encountered it on ELP's _Brain Salad Surgery_, which came out well before _Chariots of Fire_ did. AAMOF, I've never seen "Chariots". <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_Salad_Surgery>
In article <mcko0jlcbol6djm4mtvdgtsqldb3rpkea7@4ax.com>,
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
I distinctly remember the line "You know the
'rockets' red glare? the bombs bursting in air? Well those were OUR
rockets and OUR bombs - but we don't advertise that much to our
American friends these days!"
[Hal Heydt]
Congreve rockets and mortar rounds with the fuse cut too short,
repsectively.
In article <mcko0jlcbol6djm4mtvdgtsqldb3rpkea7@4ax.com>,
The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
I distinctly remember the line "You know the
'rockets' red glare? the bombs bursting in air? Well those were OUR
rockets and OUR bombs - but we don't advertise that much to our
American friends these days!"
[Hal Heydt]
Congreve rockets and mortar rounds with the fuse cut too short,
repsectively.
Would the fuses have been too short if they were trying for air bursts
to kill the guys on the walls?
It was a huge favorite in England long before the film. It's been called >>>> England's second national anthem'. It was my school hymn back in the
60s, and hearing a thousand people singing it in Wells Cathedral during >>>> our carol service is a favorite memory.
And in modern times was adopted by the British Labour party as their
anthem. I've never heard it sung live but have heard numerous
recordings of it - not sure if I heard it before Chariots of Fire or
not.
I first encountered it on ELP's _Brain Salad Surgery_, which came out well >> before _Chariots of Fire_ did. AAMOF, I've never seen "Chariots".
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_Salad_Surgery>
Until this thread, the only place I'd known of it at all was the ELP >version. Also until this thread, I didn't know it was in Chariots of
Fire (because I also haven't seen it, but the movie instrumental theme
is a nice piece of work).
| Sysop: | Tetrazocine |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, VIC, Australia |
| Users: | 8 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 56:01:15 |
| Calls: | 47 |
| Files: | 21,492 |
| Messages: | 63,705 |