it filled my room with a red haze that made it difficult to read.

In the shape of a giant chicken?

Anyway, I still have that particular flag and so it means a lot to me, as I've clung to this complex my whole life. I realize that no one who sees the flag knows about this significance it has for me, and it means something quite different to them...but at the core I'm a pretty narcissistic person, so I don't let that bother me.

And, just to be clear, I'm not claiming you're doing a bad thing, or have bad intentions.

I'm just saying it's a failure of our Western Society that we don't view other genocidal regimes with equal repulsion as we do the Nazis.

Nobody gives a #### about the Armenians (then or now) and Hitler actually cited that as to why he could get away with the Holocaust. Hell, the Turks won't even admit they slaughtered the Armenians, just like the Japanes won't admit a lot of their atrocities in Asia.

The Soviet government was a pretty nasty piece of work for sure, but the Russian people were after all our allies in the largest war we've ever fought, so I don't think commemorating their contribution to our mutual victory is out of order.

The Soviet government was a pretty nasty piece of work, no doubt, but the Russian people were after all our allies in the largest war we've ever fought, so I don't think commemorating their contribution to our mutual victory is out of order.

Then fly the Russian flag. The Soviet regime killed far more of its own people than the Nazis ever did. Lenin and Stalin did everything Hitler did, before he did it, and in greater scale.

The hammer and sickle has nothing to do with the Russian people. It was an alien regime impose by a small party of thugs and ideological lunatics.

I have family who died in Stalin's camps. The hammer and sickle is every bit as offensive to me as a Swastika is to somebody who lost family in the Holocaust.

You mean 100% consciously in control? Cause if so, try telling that to someone who is clinically depressed.

I think that's different, but for folks with normal brain chemistry and no nutrional deficiencies its simply a matter of choosing to be happy.

Lottery winners vs. paraplegics

You mean 100% consciously in control? Cause if so, try telling that to someone who is clinically depressed.

They shouldn't have chosen to be depressed obviously.

Thank you for apologizing. No worries, I've been called worse ;-)

I could make a list if you like.

i think you're making stuff up.

That's only what I've read.

huh, well i'm sure there are more than a couple of posters here who could point you to some things you could read about what a soulless, crushing place the US is. so i guess it depends on what you want to believe.

I could live in Norway in the summers, but I'd probably commit suicide by the end of January if I had to endure the 5-6 hours of daylight in the winter.

Scandanavians spend months of the winter in Thailand for a reason other than the child sex.

I think that's different, but for folks with normal brain chemistry and no nutrional deficiencies its simply a matter of choosing to be happy.

I still don't agree with you, but with the above caveat added, I will say that it's not a crazy position to hold.

Best country: Bhutan.

huh, well i'm sure there are more than a couple of posters here who could point you to some things you could read about what a soulless, crushing place the US is. so i guess it depends on what you want to believe.

Of course. I'm just saying it's foolish to think some Nordic paradise exists.

But, I do think it's true that those countries can be very harsh to people that don't toe the "englightened progressive" line.

e.g. homeschooling has been effectively banned in Sweden, causing families to leave the country. A pastor in Sweden was convicted for hate speech for saying homosexuality is wrong (which was mimicked more recently by Canada).

Scandanavians spend months of the winter in Thailand for a reason other than the child sex.

That's what they want you to believe.

I had an interesting conversation with the one Norewgian I've met in my life. He couldn't wrap his head around the whole aboriginal issue in Canada.

Also his name was Leif, which confused me at first because when we met he simply stuck out his hand and said "Leif". I wasn't entirely sure if he was telling me his name or offering a Nordic blessing of long life.

huh, well i'm sure there are more than a couple of posters here who could point you to some things you could read about what a soulless, crushing place the US is. so i guess it depends on what you want to believe.

Of course. I'm just saying it's foolish to think some Nordic paradise exists.

nobody's saying that. there you go again.

and even if it turns out that by every metric some nordic country was better than the US it wouldn't make that country heaven on earth, it would just make it a better place to endure the treadmill of existence.

I met a guy who had one Lapp parent, and one Basque parent. That is nonusual.

I had an interesting conversation with the one Norewgian I've met in my life. He couldn't wrap his head around the whole aboriginal issue in Canada.

Well, a big part of the success of the Scandinavian countries has been their shocking homogeneity (until very recently). It's much, much, much, easier to build a culture of solidarity and equality when everyone is pretty much the same.

The other interesting thing about Scandinavian countries is while they tax income heavily, they generally don't tax capital gains at an equally high rate. Most Scandinavian countries tax cap gains and dividends at ~30%.

Therefore, the rich (who can convert income into cap gains) don't face as high a tax rate as the middle class. It is actually the broad working and middle class that foot the bill for the extensive welfare state.

The hammer and sickle has nothing to do with the Russian people. It was an alien regime impose by a small party of thugs and ideological lunatics.

The Solzhenitsyn claim...

Not buying it, from Ivan the Awesome to Peter the Great to Putin, Russia has always a thing for autocratic thugs.

Soviet-style Communism was as much an outgrowth of Russian socio-political cultural as Nazism was of Germany's.

In some ways Russia has acted as a funhouse mirror evil twin of the US- they pushed out their physical frontiers subjugating/exterminating the "natives" as they did so, the shining city on the hill/new Jerusalem conceit- most westerners are not aware that Russians/ especially muscovites saw themselves that way- (although technically speaking they did not see Moscow as a New Jerusalem, but as a new Constantinople...)
They were a geographically large country, that spent the last quarter of the 19th century mopping up the last of the native resistance and embarking on a breathtaking industrialization surge- hell just prior to WWI they had overtaken US in the laying of railroad tracks- they freed their "slaves" (serfs) the same decade we did ours

Not buying it, from Ivan the Awesome to Peter the Great to Putin, Russia has always a thing for autocratic thugs.

None of those autocratic thugs murdered 10-25% of their starting population over 3 decades.

Equating Soviet Communism to a run of the mill tyrant is a monsterous historical fiction. All decent people should be just as appalled by the actions of the Soviet Communists under Lenin and Stalin as they are by the Third Reich. You can add Mao's regime, Pol Pots's Khmer Rouge and Ataturk's Turkish regime to the same pile.

You can add Mao's regime, Pol Pots's Khmer Rouge and Ataturk's Turkish regime to the same pile.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Say what you want about Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire during the First World War but Ataturk has no business being lumped in with that filth above. The Turkish Republic wasn't even established until 1923.

Hell, the Turks won't even admit they slaughtered the Armenians, just like the Japanes won't admit a lot of their atrocities in Asia.

Most countries are like that, and even if country does admit stuff- like the US admits essentially annihilating native cultures- large chunks of the people will still deny (as many Americans deny that we exterminated the amerindians... or simply accuse anyone of mentioning it as being anti-american).

My wife (Chinese, who HATES the government in Beijing mind you) was never ever more infuriated with me than when I brought up Tibet- she'd made some comment about how China would never ever go and invade a foreign country like Iraq- and I not so innocently said, "well maybe not in the last 25 years or so, but hell Tibet was an independent country that you invaded and occupied-and that was this century" she said that was not true, that I was lying, Tibet was part of China, it had always been part of China... she then found internet sites (Chinese ones) saying just that..and kept showing them to me. (In China the people are taught that Tibet was a Chinese province, but during the course of the troubles facing China in the 19th and early 20th century the province became subjugated by feudalistic religious fanatics, eventually necessitating the restoration of order (and justice) by the Peoples Army- the "Tibetans" are either Chinese who are adherents of this cultlike religion or tribal remnants of old feudalistic cultures that need to be modernized/civilized.

One part of the Chinese national-self image is that they are NOT AND HAVE NOT BEEN THE AGGRESSORS- (and for much of the past 2-3 centuries that's actually true- but not in the case of Tibet) the reality of their conquest/occupation/subjugation and ongoing absorption of Tibet is in complete 180 degree opposition to that self-concept - they are unable to accept it - just as many Americans to this day insist that nothing happened at My Lai-

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Say what you want about the Armenians living in the Ottoman Empire during the First World War but Ataturk has no business being lumped in with that filth above. The Turkish Republic wasn't even established until 1923.

Apologies then to Mr. Ataturk. Who was in charge when the Armenians were slaughtered? I thought Ataturk was the de facto ruler?

Eddie Izzard: Dressed to Kill

And Hitler ended up in a ditch, covered in petrol, on fire, so, that's fun! I think that's funny, ‘cause he was a mass-murdering ########. And that was his honeymoon as well! Double trouble!

"Eva, let's marry."

"Where should our honeymoon be?"

"Well, in a ditch, covered in petrol, on fire. I've already arranged it upstairs."

"Oh, how romantic, Adolf."

"Yes, I thought!"

Fun! What a bastard! And he was a vegetarian, and a painter, so he must have been going, "I can't get the ####### trees… Damn! I will kill everyone in the world!"

And he was a mass-murdering ########, as many important historians have said. But there were other mass murderers that got away with it! Stalin killed many millions, died in his bed, well done there; Pol Pot killed 1.7 million Cambodians, died under house arrest at age 72, well done indeed! And the reason we let them get away with it is because they killed their own people, and we're sort of fine with that. “Ah, help yourself,” you know? “We've been trying to kill you for ages!” So kill your own people, right on there. Seems to be… Hitler killed people next door... “Oh… stupid man!” After a couple of years, we won't stand for that, will we?
Pol Pot killed 1.7 million people. We can't even deal with that! You know, we think if somebody kills someone, that's murder, you go to prison. You kill 10 people, you go to Texas, they hit you with a brick, that's what they do. 20 people, you go to a hospital, they look through a small window at you forever. And over that, we can't deal with it, you know? Someone's killed 100,000 people. We're almost going, "Well done! You killed 100,000 people? You must get up very early in the morning. I can't even get down the gym! Your diary must look odd: “Get up in the morning, death, death, death, death, death, death, death – lunch- death, death, death -afternoon tea - death, death, death - quick shower…"

Hell, the Turks won't even admit they slaughtered the Armenians, just like the Japanese won't admit a lot of their atrocities in Asia.

The atomic bomb memorial in Hiroshima is pretty striking in this regard, as the museum does acknowledge the atrocities committed by the Japanese in a way that you don't usually see.

Who was in charge when the Armenians were slaughtered?

No one remembers.

Apologize then. Who was in charge when the Armenians were slaughtered? Wasn't Ataturk the de facto ruler?

No. He was a battlefield commander during the war and, more specifically, was in Gallipoli throughout 1915.

No one remembers.

That's was exactly Herr Hitler's point.

Not buying it, from Ivan the Awesome to Peter the Great to Putin, Russia has always a thing for autocratic thugs.

None of those autocratic thugs murdered 10-25% of their starting population over 3 decades.

Equating Soviet Communism to a run of the mill tyrant is a monsterous historical fiction.

Tell that to the Circassians among others, the only thing that really separated Stalin from some earlier Russian leaders was that technology allowed him to kill/displace more.

Ivan's Oprichnina was like a test run of Stalin's later great purge.

In an earlier thread you made a comment about the Arabs being uncivilized and incapable of democracy- the same assertion can be MORE EASILY made of Russia and Russians.

No. He was a battlefield commander during the war and, more specifically, was in Gallipoli throughout 1915.

My bad then. But whoever was in charge, #### him!

In an earlier thread you made a comment about the Arabs being uncivilized and incapable of democracy- the same assertion can be MORE EASILY made of Russia and Russians.

I didn't say they were uncivilized, I said their civilization and culture do not currently seem suitable to sustain democracy.

You certainly can make the same point about Russia. Russia loves a strong man.

That doesn't mean even the worst strong man is the same as a systematically genocidal regime. Putin's a thug and an autocrat, but he's not 1% of the way to Joe Stalin level evil. There's lots of countries in the world today I'd like to live in less than Putin's Russia. I don't know if there's a country in history I'd like to live in less than Stalin's Russia.

Apologies then to Mr. Ataturk. Who was in charge when the Armenians were slaughtered? I thought Ataturk was the de facto ruler?

Shame on you, the guy who usually gets the blame (if anyone does) is Enver Pasha, who after WWI was kicked out of Turkey by Ataturk and promptly traveled to Moscow to make nice with Lenin (which makes a nice Kevin Bacon style connection between the bolsheviks and the Armenian genocide that I thought you'd find irresistible- of course Pasha later turned on the Soviets and attempted to form an "army of Islam" in Russia's Caucasus regions)

Who was in charge when the Armenians were slaughtered?

Enver Pasha. A reasonably famous (or infamous) fellow in Turkish history.

Shucks, beat by 5 seconds.

Russia loves a strong man.

As does conservative America.

Putin's a thug and an autocrat, but he's not 1% of the way to Joe Stalin level evil.

Hell most other Soviet leaders weren't near Stalin's level for that matter.

Really?

Most of our ancestors made a conscious decision to come here, despite a lot of hardship, because they thought it was a great country. Most of us have ancestors, or family members and friends, who fought to keep this a great country.


Yeah but you didn't choose your ancestors either, they just happened. Again I struggle to feel pride for things just thrust upon me and not earned. Saying proud to be an American is like saying I'm proud to have won the lottery.

Lots of countries have reasons to be proud, that's true. But to say an American has no reason to be proud is crazy.

Sure, I guess. When I travel abroad and someone says "Oh, you are American" I always feel like saying "Yeah, I was born there and live there but whatever your impressions are, good or bad, I have very little to do with them. It's just the letters on my passport".

Sure, I guess. When I travel abroad and someone says "Oh, you are American" I always feel like saying "Yeah, I was born there and live there but whatever your impressions are, good or bad, I have very little to do with them. It's just the letters on my passport".

Funny, my first instinct is to hold up my hands and say "Not my fault, dude. Let it go!"

Most countries are like that, and even if country does admit stuff- like the US admits essentially annihilating native cultures- large chunks of the people will still deny (as many Americans deny that we exterminated the amerindians... or simply accuse anyone of mentioning it as being anti-american).

QFT

if anybody thinks we glorious americans are somehow immune to denial, just check out the filipino conflict.

british (boer war) and germans and soviets don't have anything on us. it featured torture, genocide and concentration camps.

In November 1901, the Manila correspondent of the Philadelphia Ledger reported:"The present war is no bloodless, opera bouffe engagement; our men have been relentless, have killed to exterminate men, women, children, prisoners and captives, active insurgents and suspected people from lads of ten up, the idea prevailing that the Filipino as such was little better than a dog...."

estimates of filipinos killed are as high as a million.

there are some accounts of filipinos visiting atrocities on american soldiers too, but if that is raised as some kind of justification for the awful behavior of a country that's supposed to be all about equality and democracy, i don't see it. ymmv.

It's very interesting to me that reasonable people will fly the Soviet flag, but express disapproval of those who fly the Confederate flag, and absolute shock and horror (justified) if someone flew a Nazi flag, or a German Flag that included the swastika.

There's a Chinese restaurant in Venice, CA called "Mao's Kitchen", with a certain number of dishes with names like "Model Citizen Noodle Soup" and "Long March camp fry".

The food is good, so I eat there when I'm in the neighborhood, but I'm always struck by the incongruity of the name and the seeming indifference that people have to the reality that Mao was, to borrow from Eddie Izzard, a "mass-murdering ########\" ...

if anybody thinks we glorious americans are somehow immune to denial, just check out the filipino conflict.

Or just note how many times people only quote *American dead* when talking about casualties of the Iraq and Af-Pak wars.

Here's a good example, an article that basically slags off the Norwegian legal system for not being English.

That is a gross mischaracterization of the content of that article. It barely mentions the Norwegian legal system. It mostly discusses why everyone is afforded a defense in a criminal case, and merely states that what the lunatic mass murdered is allowed in Norway would not happen in England, because it is not really a defense.

Then again, if I wanted an unbiased commentary on England, I would not look for it from a Flynn.

Funny, my first instinct is to hold up my hands and say "Not my fault, dude. Let it go!"

Just curious, have you ever actually been treated poorly abroad as a result of being American? I've traveled abroad a fair amount and never have received that reaction. Closest thing I ever encountered was a few teenagers outside a mosque in Indonesia asking me what my religion was in a vaguely threatening way. It was a pretty crowded area, but I was the only white guy around (and clearly the only Jew), it was getting dark, and I decided to get out of there.

Or just note how many times people only quote *American dead* when talking about casualties of the Iraq and Af-Pak wars.

A while back there was panel on the History Channel (back before they started spewing ancient alien astronaut nonsense) which was discussing Hiroshima/Nagasaki/Operation Downfall- and one guy kept arguing that the bombs saved more lives (specifically anticipated American casualties) than were killed by the bombs... one guy kept saying that's not true (over an over again- boy was he annoying)

and one guy said essentially, "I don't know if more Japanese died as a result of the bombs than American soldiers would have died if we invaded, but I do know this to an absolute moral certainty, compared to Operation Downfall, the bombs saved JAPANESE lives. Upwards of 240,000 Japanese died on Okinawa, if Downfall went into effect you could increase that 10, 20, 100 fold easy. Do you know how many Russians died during Operation Barbarossa? Troops? Civilians?
That is what Japan would have become- sure we would not have deliberately starved our prisoners to death like the Germans did theirs- but the Japanese were already starving- and it would have gotten worse, much worse before it was all over- the agricultural disruption caused by an actual large scale ground invasion would have been fantastically genocidal- the bombs had NOTHING on that."

Just curious, have you ever actually been treated poorly abroad as a result of being American?

Me, no, but then I've only ever been "abroad" to Mexico and Canada (the French part, the English part doesn't count as abroad, and besides I regard people from provinces like Ontario and Alberta as being more American than people from Alabama). I may be making a Business trip to Africa this upcoming year though...

It barely mentions the Norwegian legal system. It mostly discusses why everyone is afforded a defense in a criminal case, and merely states that what the lunatic mass murdered is allowed in Norway would not happen in England, because it is not really a defense.

That's all well and good, but where the writer went massively off track is the trial isn't about his guilt. It's about his sanity. The writer talks about how this wouldn't be allowed in England, with the implication (to me, anyway) that good English justice would not tolerate the ravings of a mass murder. But Breivik is not defending himself against the charges which he has admitted, but that he is sane, and his fantasies of beheading the former Prime Minister of Norway and how he wants to be martyred are relevant to deciding whether he is sane or not.

There's a Chinese restaurant in Venice, CA called "Mao's Kitchen", with a certain number of dishes with names like "Model Citizen Noodle Soup" and "Long March camp fry".

yeah, there's one in my neighborhood in LA too. i always thought that 'Mao' is common enough in chinese that it wouldn't have strong political overtones. never saw the menu, so didn't know about the names of the dishes. i'm surprised that they haven't caught some sh-t for it from other elements in the chinese american community. do the chinese here in the US care about that?

could you imagine a joint called 'fidel's famous black beans and plantains' in miami?

That's all well and good, but where the writer went massively off track is the trial isn't about his guilt. It's about his sanity.

It's about both. Breivik has pleaded not guilty, claiming the killings were justified. That is what he is ranting about.

He's admitted the charges but claimed diminished responsibility under the necessity defense (that he had to kill all those government workers/young Labour activists to save his people, yada yada). Obviously the court will reject that and he will be convicted. So the fight is over his sanity, with the prosecution claiming he is insane (therefore spending the rest of his days in a mental hospital) and Breivik claiming he is, in fact, sane (spending the rest of his days in prison, which he desperately wants). Since a large portion of the debate is whether you can actually be sane while holding his views, being able to spell out his views is relevant to judging his sanity. The writer didn't take that into account.

do the chinese here in the US care about that?

not really. The Cubans here are mostly refugees/exiles from Castro's regime. The Vietnamese here are mostly refugees/exiles from Ho Chi Minh's regime. The Chinese here are more like the Mexican Americans here, I mean some are political/religious refugees, but by and large they are like any immigrant community, they came here to make a better life not because they are forced out and want a base of operations to retake their homeland...

OTOH my wife was surprised the first time she was in NYC's chinatown and saw a store selling little statues of Chiang Kai-Shek- he is most definitely taught/regarded as a major villain by mainlanders...

okay, but when i visit chinatown in s.f. i notice there are some buildings flying the red banner with the hammer and sickle and other buildings flying the nationalist flag (the one that would fly in taiwan). is there some kind of proxy conflict being played out there? are there competing communities?

okay, but when i visit chinatown in s.f. i notice there are some buildings flying the red banner with the hammer and sickle and other buildings flying the nationalist flag (the one that would fly in taiwan). is there some kind of proxy conflict being played out there? are there competing communities?

Yes. The Chinese Americans who have been here awhile, especially those that fled China in 1949, and the immigrants of the 50's and 60's (heavily from Taiwan) tend to be pro-Nationalist. More recent immigrants tend to be pro-PRC (or Chi-Com if you want to make me nostalgic).

BTW, never buy any Chi-Com ammunition(Norinco). They use low quality brass that jams.

Until you try the food.

I once had to spend a month in Moscow closing a PE deal. What horrific food. I realize it all tastes like ####, but must you actually form it all into the shape of a turd?*

*Sprinkled in dill.

You can't ask why do Americans privelege American lives in jobs without asking why do you privelege the lives and well being of your kids over starving kids in the Sudan?

Has privilege (I'll spell it correctly, just for fun) always been a verb as well as a noun? I ask that without snark, but rather out of wonder. I heard some academic on, I think, NPR use it as such just yesterday evening, I think, & marveled at what I'd heard, because it struck me as bizarre. Maybe I've been living under a rock for my entire life, though.

My home is filled with Clemson and Northwestern paraphenalia, but nary a single American flag

Keep em coming, Smitty!

Has privilege (I'll spell it correctly, just for fun) always been a verb as well as a noun? I ask that without snark, but rather out of wonder. I heard some academic on, I think, NPR use it as such just yesterday evening, I think, & marveled at what I'd heard, because it struck me as bizarre.

It's used as a verb mainly by sociologists, cultural anthropologists, people like that. It's often a good signal that it's okay to stop listening, because you might get dumber if you keep paying attention.

Disclaimer: I am a liberal arts academic, and I have found myself using privilege as a verb at least once. It was recently and I don't recall the details. Generally I fight the good fight for fact-based research, like in sabermetrics: data if data can be gathered, no flights of fancy in the absence of data. It isn't a popular position.

Keep em coming, Smitty!

Mrs. Smith hates you. Mr. Smith and Visa think you are a raging success.

And the joke's on me, because just now I found that using privilege as a verb gave me a good construction in what I was writing, so I did it. I'm analyzing data, though!

Has privilege (I'll spell it correctly, just for fun) always been a verb as well as a noun? I ask that without snark, but rather out of wonder. I heard some academic on, I think, NPR use it as such just yesterday evening, I think, & marveled at what I'd heard, because it struck me as bizarre.

I'm not sure which seems more pretentiously annoying, using "privilege" as a verb or a non-Latino radio announcer saying "Chee-LAY" instead of "Chilly" when he wouldn't dream of substituting "Deutschland" for "Germany" or "Frahnce" for "France".

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Keep em coming, Smitty!

Mrs. Smith hates you. Mr. Smith and Visa think you are a raging success.

Just don't give her any ideas....

Here's another great reason to love the US. Besides, incarcerating a greater pct of its population more than any other country of course.

Here's another great reason to love the US. Besides, incarcerating a greater pct of its population more than any other country of course.

But Uncle Sam ain't killin them boys. Only putting them on the plantat...er...in a jail.

It's used as a verb mainly by sociologists, cultural anthropologists, people like that. It's often a good signal that it's okay to stop listening, because you might get dumber if you keep paying attention.

And indeed, now that you say that I recall that the individual I heard on the radio was some kind of ethno-musicologist or something. THe fact that AFAIK I'd never heard it before shows how long it's been (approaching 30 years) since I've spent any time in an academic environment, I suppose. Now that I work on an Air Force base, I'm far more likely to hear militaryese, of course. (If I come across "task" as a verb one more time -- for all I know it's not unusual in a number of walks of life, but I swear I never encountered it till I started working here -- I'll probably go berserk.)

The number of expressions that cause me to automatically tune out the speaker or writer continues to grow -- privilege as a verb, impact as a verb, "going forward" ...

It's used as a verb mainly by sociologists, cultural anthropologists, people like that. It's often a good signal that it's okay to stop listening, because you might get dumber if you keep paying attention.

Merriam-Webster has the verb form of privilege dating to the 14th century. So, I'd have to say it's a perfectly cromulent verb, though certainly a good bt stuffy/wonky.

I think I've used privilege as a verb once or twice in papers. Though I do feel like a bit of a ponce when I do.

Luckily with the search function in Word I can find out where!
And, of course, it is on my chapter about Sexuality and the Body in forming 17th century Manhood.

The one-sex model privileges comparisons between male and female bodies rather than more ambiguous, and more common, comparisons between male bodies.

Ah, perhaps more interesting is this excerpt from a History of the Court of King James written in the 1620s which is quoted in another chapter.

"Certaine other FAMILIES of faire & Noble descent shining in the light of their owne fortune, glories, birth, yet shadowed from the glorious luster and splendor of COURT he lifted up with greatest glory to a more conspicuous light & sight of all, seated in a more eminent THEATRE of greatnesse, and with power, authoritie, command, as all other PRINCELY soveraigne befits, graces, favours, privileged them."

EDIT: of course that writing seems pretty stodgy even by 17th century standards.

v
I'm not sure which seems more pretentiously annoying, using "privilege" as a verb or a non-Latino radio announcer saying "Chee-LAY" instead of "Chilly" when he wouldn't dream of substituting "Deutschland" for "Germany" or "Frahnce" for "France".

Unlike "Spain" or "Germany", "Chile" doesn't have a commonly-used anglicized version of the name, so I don't see the problem using the local pronunciation, or a general approximation of it. I say "Hahm-boorg" not "Ham-burg", "Ih-rahn" not "Eye-ran", and "Bogota" doesn't rhyme with "Pagoda". On the other hand, I say "Kiev" not "Kyiv" and "Leghorn" not "Livorno".

Unlike "Spain" or "Germany", "Chile" doesn't have a commonly-used anglicized version of the name, so I don't see the problem using the local pronunciation, or a general approximation of it. I say "Hahm-boorg" not "Ham-burg", "Ih-rahn" not "Eye-ran", and "Bogota" doesn't rhyme with "Pagoda". On the other hand, I say "Kiev" not "Kyiv" and "Leghorn" not "Livorno".

I think we've discussed it before here, but it seems like these things change randomly over time. It doesn't seem like anyone says "Turin" anymore. That's one I've noticed throughout my life as my uncle is from Turin. He's always called in Turino naturally, but my entire Anglophone family, as well as media/atlases had called it Turin up until recently. Was it the Olympics that changed things?

I think we've discussed it before here, but it seems like these things change randomly over time. It doesn't seem like anyone says "Turin" anymore. That's one I've noticed throughout my life as my uncle is from Turin. He's always called in Turino naturally, but my entire Anglophone family, as well as media/atlases had called it Turin up until recently. Was it the Olympics that changed things?

Yet no one says Roma, or Venezia, or Firenze.

BTW, I thinkm we've discussed everything here before. We need more history threads, and not just WW2. Something about the HRE, or Louis XIV.

Something about the HRE, or Louis XIV.

Seeing as my repeated attempts to hi-jack threads in the direction of 17th century masculinity continually fail, I could get behind either (though I'd be more spectator than participant).

It's definitely Turin to me. Also Bombay not Mumbai.

It's definitely Turin to me. Also Bombay not Mumbai.

Istanbul or Constantinople?

Seeing as my repeated attempts to hi-jack threads in the direction of 17th century masculinity continually fail,

I'm down! You just have to start us off, because I know nothing about it. Give me a few nuggets to bloviate about.

Also: Burma, not Myanmar.

Also: I think I was the first person here to use privilege as a verb. Had no idea it had stodgy or middlebrow or otherwise negative associations.

For the record, "privileged" as a verb spread like wildfire during the late 60's / early 70's. It was begun by an assortment of hardcore feminists and other radicals, and very quickly picked up by every possible sort of left wing academic. The rest of us mocked it to no end at the time, but we never had a chance of stopping it.

Myanmar.

Is that the discount pharmacy?

Russell Peters has a bit on Bombay/Mumbai which basically amounts to "if they were set on changing it why did they take so long? Were they waiting to make absolutely sure the British weren't coming back?"

Since it's what I'm working on at the moment (and it's at least mildly interesting to me), age and manhood was a bit of a tricky thing in the 17th century. In the "ages of man" section of medical texts "youth" sometimes lasted up until the age of 45. It was a bit more functionally than chronologically defined, which I actually think is a useful way of thinking about it. Of course there's obvious reasons for having a set age for adulthood, and defining adulthood functionally is riddled with all kinds of problems, but set ages are quite arbitrary. Part of my thesis takes the position that the Duke of Buckingham was being impeached for being a youth and therefore not a man, and therefore not qualified to lead England in 1626 (despite the fact he was 34 at the time). Though I guess I should add technically he wasn't being impeached for that, but rather that was the motivation for the movement and the language of youth was used to weaken his position.

Other fun tidbits that may be fun to explore...
England's actually a fairly remarkable place in Europe for gender in the period
1) Continental observers are always shocked at how much freedom unmarried women had. (ie. they could step out with men unsupervised and go to parties, pubs, walks into the woods)

2) In England (unlike most of the continent) a publicly expressed intention to marry counted as a "valid, though imperfect" form of marriage. Which unsurprisingly led to plenty of pre-marital sex. And equally unsurprisingly led to many disputes over what constituted a "publicly expressed intention to marry". Which is great for us because court records are a primary source for this stuff. Gifts are especially important in this regard. Accepting a gift from a fellow could be quite literally legal grounds for him to have sex with you. And on the flip side giving a girl a gift could make you liable for any bastard she later has.

3) Dueling is kind of different in England too, it's far less popular than in Italy or France. It's an Italian import so there's an element of xenophobia in the resistance to it, as well as the fact that the crown dislikes it as something that's supplanting from it the role of arbiter in matters of honour. James in particular (as what might be called a pacifist King, or the closest thing possible in the 1600s) was against dueling so any young men at court who wanted to duel had to catch a ferry over to the continent to do it. Which tended to give time for calmer heads to prevail.

Its weird - most of the Chinese cities have been fixed - Beijing/Peking, Guangzhou/Canton, Nanjing/Nanking, etc. However, Hong Kong and Taipei were not. Hong Kong should be something like "Shang Gong" and Taipei should be "Taibei" - the "pei," which means "north" is the same Chinese character as the "bei" in Beijing.

Just curious, have you ever actually been treated poorly abroad as a result of being American?

I've gotten some odd looks on the streets of London, notably in and around the Edgeware Road area. But nothing that made me terribly uncomfortable. The most discomfort while travelling abroad was probably over dinner in Sweden, with the host and local resources, during the second Bush admin.

I suspect the change from "Turin" to "Turino" has a lot to do with the 2006 Winter Olympics. A world wide broadcast of a "Turino 2006" logo will make a lot of people change their reference to the city.

I still feel bad for an incident that happened last year in St. Malo, France. Me and some Canadian friends bumped into a couple of 30-something American women who upon introducing themselves entered into a lengthy, unsolicited apology for being American and the awfulness of the Republican Congress. I forget why (probably I was a healthy mix of annoyed and drunk), but I made some comment that implied I was a firm supporter of the Republican party (which I'm not), and they soon walked away awkwardly. I guess I felt like I didn't come to France to talk about American politics...anyway, I'm sure I am their story for being treated rudely as Americans overseas.

Its weird - most of the Chinese cities have been fixed - Beijing/Peking, Guangzhou/Canton, Nanjing/Nanking, etc. However, Hong Kong and Taipei were not. Hong Kong should be something like "Shang Gong" and Taipei should be "Taibei" - the "pei," which means "north" is the same Chinese character as the "bei" in Beijing.

The issue with Chinese cities is that the pronunciation of the Wade-Giles spelling is not at all the intuitive one. However, I consider Taipei, Hong Kong and, yes, Canton, to have become the English proper names for those cities and thus perfectly legitimate.

Me and some Canadian friends bumped into a couple of 30-something American women who upon introducing themselves entered into a lengthy, unsolicited apology for being American and the awfulness of the Republican Congress.

When travelling in Europe, it's often an unspoken urge to just sort throw up the hands and say "not it! Blame Ohio, man!"

On the other hand, every cabbie I've ever met in the north of England, from Liecester to Manchester to Nottingham (the knife crime capital of the UK!) loves America and dreams of vacationing here and driving Route 66. Every last one of them! It's like a mania or something. I hadn't the heart to tell them how bad R66 has degraded over the years.

I met American backpackers that had Canadian flags stitched to their packs in order to head off trouble, but I've never had any issues. I've met plenty of nutjobs (the Turk who told me that the Jews planned 9/11, the Indian guy that ran me down just to tell me how much he admired George Bush, the French girl that told me that 100% of the American media was controlled by a conservative conspiracy) but they were all polite. I've run into multiple variations of, "I hate your country and what it stands for, but that doesn't mean I won't be nice to you." The rudest folks I've met were probably young liberal Europeans. As I said above, I overhead some really hateful #### about Americans. (Not nearly as much as I heard about Israelis, by far the most hated of all the people on the backpacking trail)

In SE Asia I found that America is still mostly associated with awesome things, like Michael Jordan and Spiderman, and off the tourist trail, where white faces aren't totally common, being American was almost like being a celebrity. We'd go to nightclubs and get offered drinks by multiple strangers.

When travelling in Europe, it's often an unspoken urge to just sort throw up the hands and say "not it! Blame Ohio, man!"

Yeah, I've felt this way. I've also felt the urge to deride my hosts as cheese-eating surrender monkeys. The thing that really bothers me is that many Europeans only give America credit for the bad things (being a war-mongering bully) and never for the good things (the honorable wars we've fought, jazz, Hollywood, and such).

I've been to many countries and have never been treated poorly because I'm a Yank, not even in Cuba or France. But, man, when Bush was president people weren't shy about telling me how much they loathed him whereas I'm very content not to think or discuss America or its politics at all when I travel.

On the other hand, every cabbie I've ever met in the north of England, from Liecester to Manchester to Nottingham (the knife crime capital of the UK!) loves America and dreams of vacationing here and driving Route 66.

You know, I've noticed this, too. The Brits have a weird fascination with Route 66.

Part of my thesis takes the position that the Duke of Buckingham was being impeached for being a youth and therefore not a man, and therefore not qualified to lead England in 1626 (despite the fact he was 34 at the time).

This seems totally unbelievable to me. Wasn't everyone dying at that age anyway?

Wasn't everyone dying at that age anyway?

No. A life expectancy of ~35 was generated by a lot of people dying at <1, and lot more <5 (childhood disease like mumps, measles, etc.).

Probably half the people didn't live past age 5. After that, people lived a fairly normal life span. Not like today, but 40 y.o.'s weren't dropping dead en masse unless there was a plague.

Look at the signers of the Declaration of Independence.

http://www.usconstitution.net/declarsigndata.html

Lot's of them lived to be quite old

Nottingham (the knife crime capital of the UK!)

I actually live in (I'm told) one of the worst neighbourhoods in Nottingham. It's felt pretty safe to me so far. Well, except for that whole weekend where people were fire-bombing police stations...but that was mostly harmless fun.

Probably half the people didn't live past age 5. After that, people lived a fairly normal life span.

Quite true, and a good example of the misleading use of the arithmetic mean. Similarly, the examination of preserved records suggests that the average life span in the Roman Empire was about 18.5 years for me, 18 years for women, but that doesn't mean the cities were filled with teenagers. Just lots of deaths in the first year.

Quite true, and a good example of the misleading use of the arithmetic mean. Similarly, the examination of preserved records suggests that the average life span in the Roman Empire was about 18.5 years for me, 18 years for women, but that doesn't mean the cities were filled with teenagers. Just lots of deaths in the first year.

Yup. A bunch of zeros really effs up your average.

You know, I've noticed this, too. The Brits have a weird fascination with Route 66.

Must be because, as far as I can tell, the entire ####### island is a giant traffic congestion.

This seems totally unbelievable to me. Wasn't everyone dying at that age anyway?

What snapper said and also some medical texts took a very narrow view of what a "man" was. Essentially it was a narrow window in middle age where you had matured past your impulsive days, established a household, but still had some gas in the tank. Of course 45 is the most extreme the range goes. According to some "experts" you were a man at 15. The other element in all of this is the rules of apprenticeships. They often lasted well into the 20s, during which you lived in your master's home with quasi-servant status, (thus preventing you from meeting the self-sufficient requirement for being a man) and you were not allowed to marry (thus preventing you from meeting the household leadership requirement for bein a man) or have sex (good luck with that one). So you'd have large groups of the population that weren't just culturally, but more or less legally non-adults well into their 20s.

All of which plays into how you can successfully challenge a person's claim to manhood through charging them with "youth". Adulthood wasn't so much an age as it was an achievement.

Yeah, I've felt this way. I've also felt the urge to deride my hosts as cheese-eating surrender monkeys. The thing that really bothers me is that many Europeans only give America credit for the bad things (being a war-mongering bully) and never for the good things (the honorable wars we've fought, jazz, Hollywood, and such).

It was a lot worse during the latter Bush years, especially after Abu Gharib and Gitmo, etc. I also find that even well schooled Europeans often haven't the slightest clue as to how basic voting and representation works in the US - much as most Americans have no idea how Euro assemblies work. The best conversations I've had overseas (about politics, at least) involve me explaining the details of our voting process, the distinction between the Executive and the Legislative, etc, and actual intelligent conversation from that.

It probably helped that I always answered their "I hate George W. Bush" comments with "Not nearly as much as I do, buddy."

I actually live in (I'm told) one of the worst neighbourhoods in Nottingham.

My time in Nottingham was rather pleasant, once I got past being the only guy on the entire project and thus suddenly living alone in a small apartment in Nottingham for 3 months. Rented a motorcycle. Rode the Peak District and Wales. Managed not to die while blowing through roundabouts in the wrong direction. Good times.

Part of my thesis takes the position that the Duke of Buckingham was being impeached for being a youth and therefore not a man, and therefore not qualified to lead England in 1626 (despite the fact he was 34 at the time).

That reminds me of when a farmer I worked for for a few days when I was 14 told me that I wasn't a man, I was just a boy, and as a result I didn't deserve a man's wage......so he paid me $25/day plus meals.

That reminds me of when a farmer I worked for for a few days when I was 14 told me that I wasn't a man, I was just a boy, and as a result I didn't deserve a man's wage......so he paid me $25/day plus meals.

That's what's wrong with Canada. Utter nonsense. Being 14 never stopped anyone from ruling England.


Sam - Where in Nottingham did you live? If you remember. I've only been to the North Coast of Wales, and into Anglesey and down to Aberystwyth (hope I'm remembering how to spell that right), but I thought it was some of the most beautiful country I've ever seen.

As far as being treated well/poorly abroad, I've mostly been sneered at by other English speakers (Brits, folks from SA, NZ). The French have always been nice to me when I've visited, but I also speak very good French. And in Asia in 08/09, everyone got really excited, pointed and said, "OBAMA!!!" (Note: I am not white. Hahaha)

I do think it's interesting though that I'm extremely American-sounding once I open my mouth, and I'm pretty light-skinned so I certainly don't look typically, say, African, but because I'm black I think I'm not assumed to be American automatically when I'm in Vietnam or China (or at least, before the 08 election).

No one's really been nasty to me in my travels. A few Koreans were, but that seemed mostly xenophobic - ie, they had a problem with me being not-Korean more than bothering to pinpoint where I was from - and Koreans I met in saunas usually just shouted incorrect countries at me. "Bangladesh!" "No..." "Vietnam!" "No..." "Malaysia!" "No, I'm from New York." "New York? No!" "Yes."

Heh, this happened a lot.

I always find it pretty fascinating to be a black American overseas, to say the least.

It probably helped that I always answered their "I hate George W. Bush" comments with "Not nearly as much as I do, buddy."

I did this too! People really did think I MUST have loved him when I traveled. People do tend to win elections, like, 80-20% in S. Korea though...

A few months ago I met a Vietnamese German guy. Born in Vietnam and adopted as a baby by a German family. Which was a bit confusing at first. We met because we have the same landlord and he thought we'd get on, so the landlord said to me "meet them at this pub at 7, look for two German guys, one is blond and the other has black hair". So naturally when a blond guy and a Vietnamese guy walk into the pub I look back to my book and keep waiting. A little help please!

The thing that really bothers me is that many Europeans only give America credit for the bad things (being a war-mongering bully) and never for the good things (the honorable wars we've fought, jazz, Hollywood, and such).

In response to myself, I've found that one of the best ways to get people curious and happy about meeting me was to say that I was from California, rather than America. Everyone on Earth knows what California is, and that it has movie stars, beach babes and surfing. It's a good way to trigger positive images and associations in the mind of the foreigner.

Sam - Where in Nottingham did you live?

City Center. The Icehouse high rise apartments. Walking distance for everything excepting Wales, which is friggin' gorgeous. I never even try spelling Welsh names or towns. It's just hopeless.

To follow-up on what I just said, when I went to the Great Wall (which, somehow, has a Subway near one of its entrances; eat fresh!), I got to the wall, and it was a. freezing cold (like 15 degrees and windy, because it was January and, you know, it's on a mountain) and b. about 8 am.

I stepped onto the wall thinking "OMG Great Wall of China" and two vendors show up and immediately go "OBAMA OBAMA." Being used to this by this point, I smiled (note: they didn't actually think I was him or whatever, that's just their frame of reference for folks like me). They asked for a picture (or, more accurately, sort of wrestled me into one; I'm not complaining, it was pretty funny) and then gave me 2 free beers.

At eight AM, when it was fifteen degrees.

Note: no bathrooms or trash cans on the Great Wall. So that was a very, very uncomfortable and cold three hours, but I'll take a free beer most any time.

I know this is cultural, though. It's not acceptable here in Manhattan to see an Indian person and just shout "Gandhi!!!!!!!!!!!" That would make for a whole lot of shouting on the subway. Haha.

In response to myself, I've found that one of the best ways to get people curious and happy about meeting me was to say that I was from California, rather than America. Everyone on Earth knows what California is, and that it has movie stars, beach babes and surfing. It's a good way to trigger positive images and associations in the mind of the foreigner.

I the risk of sounding like a stereotypically snobby douche, I do think telling people I'm from New York City when they ask me where I'm from helps. A lot of people I meet abroad have been there or want to go there so it's an easy point of conversation.

City Center. The Icehouse high rise apartments.

I think I know that place!
Right near the Ice Rink and the Old Angel Inn right? When were you there? A friend of mine was in the house band at the Old Angel. He says he must have played there a million times.