Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [existlist] Re: In brief

Expand Messages
  • bartleyoreg@aol.com
    Louise, I work as a volunteer in a middle school, there 13-14 years old, anyway I help in the American history class.? Currently we are studying the
    Message 1 of 28 , Dec 5 3:03 PM
      Louise, I work as a volunteer in a middle school, there 13-14 years old, anyway I help in the American history class.? Currently we are studying the Delectation of Independence.? I get very excited about this document, sorry knowing you're British!, anyway I believe it could be agrued that this document changed history more then any other document in the last 230 years.? It makes me proud to be an American, to see that those values, while we may have not lived up to them, where the values we believed were important as a people.? That part of being an American, is having that as our core.? I am getting anywhere close?
      Michael


      -----Original Message-----
      From: louise <hecubatoher@...>
      To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 2:44 pm
      Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief






      --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, bartleyoreg@... wrote:
      >
      > Thank you Louise for your thoughful response, I can see that you
      have thought deeply about this and I do want to understand your
      point of view.? On a side note I more interested in understanding
      other people posting then having or winning an agrument with them.?
      Anyway, while I can see the concept of race, what is race even,
      would be of interest to scholars besides that it seems in our
      present world that race is not that important.
      > Michael

      Michael, I have a love of argument, if it is conducted in good
      spirit, and those of us who are regular contributors at existlist
      seem to my perception moving ever closer to the attainment of such
      an ideal, whilst the list is also continueing to welcome new
      members. So I even feel a little happier tonight, contemplating the
      road ahead. With regard to the concept of race in our present
      world, it is not important to the many, but is very important for a
      few. Racial instincts, though, manifest in a non-intellectual way
      all the time. I think it would be greatly to the benefit of society
      if this were acknowledged, and an interest in discussing race could
      flourish, instead of the current situation, in which the mention of
      the topic in mainstream quarters tends to evoke immediate
      embarrassment or hostility. And may readily lead straight to the
      police cell, and the courts. The hysterical and offensive outbursts
      of those with little to say that stands up to any scrutiny would
      soon be eclipsed, if serious people were shown due respect. Louise

      >
      >
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: louise <hecubatoher@...>
      > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 1:15 pm
      > Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Yes, Michael, I agree, ethics is part of philosophy. The point I
      am
      > making is that the concept of race is European, not Semitic, and
      > that this way of asserting racism, i.e., to express communal
      Jewish
      > solidarity by introducing the confusion of the racial
      > term, 'Semitism', is potentially harmful to the attempts of other
      > racial groups to practise legitimate defence of their interests.
      It
      > seems to me to prove prejudicial even to the Jewish people
      > themselves. Their unique kind of community in diversity owes a
      good
      > deal to an idea of racial purity, but the foundation for this idea
      > is religious. The power of the concept 'anti-Semitic', to inhibit
      > free thought and impose the tendency for self-censorship on
      European
      > peoples is part of the total battle, the undoubtedly horrifying
      > history of bigotries, pogroms, recriminations, intrigue and war.
      > Until the reality and importance of the concept of race is better
      > understood, the argument here may easily be missed. Only time
      > reveals the full meanings of history. Louise
      >
      > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, bartleyoreg@ wrote:
      > >
      > > What makes you say this, please explain!? Isn't ethics part of
      > philosophy?? A view we have towards people that not an ethical
      issue
      > or concern.? How we treat people because of what they are, ie
      black,
      > women, English, only because that trait, that is not a ethical
      issue
      > or concern.? On the face of your posting it seems to be kind a
      very
      > strange statement.
      > > Michael
      > >
      > >
      > > -----Original Message-----
      > > From: louise <hecubatoher@>
      > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
      > > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 12:35 pm
      > > Subject: [existlist] In brief
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > From a philosophical viewpoint, anti-Semitism is a mythical
      > concept,
      > > frequently used as a political weapon.
      > >
      > > Louise
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >






      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • eupraxis@aol.com
      Delectation of Independence Gotta watch that spell check. Gets you every time. Wil ... From: bartleyoreg@aol.com To: existlist@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, 5 Dec
      Message 2 of 28 , Dec 5 3:43 PM
        Delectation of Independence




        Gotta watch that spell check. Gets you every time.

        Wil




        -----Original Message-----
        From: bartleyoreg@...
        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 5:03 pm
        Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: In brief

























        Louise, I work as a volunteer in a middle school, there 13-14 years old, anyway I help in the American history class.? Currently we are studying the Delectation of Independence.? I get very excited about this document, sorry knowing you're British!, anyway I believe it could be agrued that this document changed history more then any other document in the last 230 years.? It makes me proud to be an American, to see that those values, while we may have not lived up to them, where the values we believed were important as a people.? That part of being an American, is having that as our core.? I am getting anywhere close?

        Michael



        -----Original Message-----

        From: louise <hecubatoher@...>

        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com

        Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 2:44 pm

        Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief



        --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, bartleyoreg@... wrote:

        >

        > Thank you Louise for your thoughful response, I can see that you

        have thought deeply about this and I do want to understand your

        point of view.? On a side note I more interested in understanding

        other people posting then having or winning an agrument with them.?

        Anyway, while I can see the concept of race, what is race even,

        would be of interest to scholars besides that it seems in our

        present world that race is not that important.

        > Michael



        Michael, I have a love of argument, if it is conducted in good

        spirit, and those of us who are regular contributors at existlist

        seem to my perception moving ever closer to the attainment of such

        an ideal, whilst the list is also continueing to welcome new

        members. So I even feel a little happier tonight, contemplating the

        road ahead. With regard to the concept of race in our present

        world, it is not important to the many, but is very important for a

        few. Racial instincts, though, manifest in a non-intellectual way

        all the time. I think it would be greatly to the benefit of society

        if this were acknowledged, and an interest in discussing race could

        flourish, instead of the current situation, in which the mention of

        the topic in mainstream quarters tends to evoke immediate

        embarrassment or hostility. And may readily lead straight to the

        police cell, and the courts. The hysterical and offensive outbursts

        of those with little to say that stands up to any scrutiny would

        soon be eclipsed, if serious people were shown due respect. Louise



        >

        >

        > -----Original Message-----

        > From: louise <hecubatoher@...>

        > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com

        > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 1:15 pm

        > Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief

        >

        >

        >

        >

        >

        >

        > Yes, Michael, I agree, ethics is part of philosophy. The point I

        am

        > making is that the concept of race is European, not Semitic, and

        > that this way of asserting racism, i.e., to express communal

        Jewish

        > solidarity by introducing the confusion of the racial

        > term, 'Semitism', is potentially harmful to the attempts of other

        > racial groups to practise legitimate defence of their interests.

        It

        > seems to me to prove prejudicial even to the Jewish people

        > themselves. Their unique kind of community in diversity owes a

        good

        > deal to an idea of racial purity, but the foundation for this idea

        > is religious. The power of the concept 'anti-Semitic', to inhibit

        > free thought and impose the tendency for self-censorship on

        European

        > peoples is part of the total battle, the undoubtedly horrifying

        > history of bigotries, pogroms, recriminations, intrigue and war.

        > Until the reality and importance of the concept of race is better

        > understood, the argument here may easily be missed. Only time

        > reveals the full meanings of history. Louise

        >

        > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, bartleyoreg@ wrote:

        > >

        > > What makes you say this, please explain!? Isn't ethics part of

        > philosophy?? A view we have towards people that not an ethical

        issue

        > or concern.? How we treat people because of what they are, ie

        black,

        > women, English, only because that trait, that is not a ethical

        issue

        > or concern.? On the face of your posting it seems to be kind a

        very

        > strange statement.

        > > Michael

        > >

        > >

        > > -----Original Message-----

        > > From: louise <hecubatoher@>

        > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com

        > > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 12:35 pm

        > > Subject: [existlist] In brief

        > >

        > >

        > >

        > >

        > >

        > >

        > > From a philosophical viewpoint, anti-Semitism is a mythical

        > concept,

        > > frequently used as a political weapon.

        > >

        > > Louise

        > >

        > >

        > >

        > >

        > >

        > >

        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        > >

        >

        >

        >

        >

        >

        >

        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        >



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






















        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • tom
        What I said was that there were greater probabilities of certain strenghths and weaknesses appearing among races, but that many individuals will very much
        Message 3 of 28 , Dec 5 5:02 PM
          What I said was that there were greater probabilities of certain strenghths and weaknesses appearing among races, but that many individuals will very much overlap. Its like saying that as a group, men are taller than women. However, there are numerous women over 6 feet, and some guys around 5 feet. Jewish and oriental students are more likely to be on the honor roll. Blacks are more likely to be the winners in track and field competition, and us white guys have the highest % of serial killers.Certain diseases are more prevalent among certain races.
          Tom
          ----- Original Message -----
          From: bhvwd
          To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 5:31 PM
          Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief


          --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, eupraxis@... wrote:
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > At most, we could say that there is a greater probability of a
          person of a given race being more intelligent, more industrious, or
          more prone to crime than a person from another race.
          >
          > Tom,
          >
          > What race(s) would be dull-witted, lazy and felonious, pray tell?
          Shall we measure cranial widths and bumps as well?
          >
          > Wil
          > Ah Phrenology. I kept a head on my desk for several years. When I
          was tempted to digress from rational treatment I could always look
          at that perfect head. It was all wrong but it looked good. Bill
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > -----Original Message-----
          > From: tom <tsmith17_midsouth1@...>
          > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 4:45 pm
          > Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: In brief
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > Michael,
          >
          >
          >
          > I agree with you that understanding other people's point of view is
          more important than winning an argument with them. To understand the
          reality of the world, it's very helpful to understand that people
          have various opinions. Some may be due to the nation they live in,
          their family, various complexers they have etc;but in any case the
          diversity of views is the reality. Certainly some physical and mental
          characteristics are more dominant in some races than others; but
          there is so much overlap that its impossible to characterize an
          individual by his or her race. At most, we could say that there is a
          greater probability of a person of a given race being more
          intelligent, more industrious, or more prone to crime than a person
          from another race.
          >
          > Tom
          >
          >
          >
          > ----- Original Message -----
          >
          > From: bartleyoreg@...
          >
          > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          >
          > Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 4:23 PM
          >
          > Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: In brief
          >
          >
          >
          > Thank you Louise for your thoughful response, I can see that you
          have thought deeply about this and I do want to understand your point
          of view.? On a side note I more interested in understanding other
          people posting then having or winning an agrument with them.? Anyway,
          while I can see the concept of race, what is race even, would be of
          interest to scholars besides that it seems in our present world that
          race is not that important.
          >
          > Michael
          >
          >
          >
          > -----Original Message-----
          >
          > From: louise <hecubatoher@...>
          >
          > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          >
          > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 1:15 pm
          >
          > Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief
          >
          >
          >
          > Yes, Michael, I agree, ethics is part of philosophy. The point I am
          >
          > making is that the concept of race is European, not Semitic, and
          >
          > that this way of asserting racism, i.e., to express communal
          Jewish
          >
          > solidarity by introducing the confusion of the racial
          >
          > term, 'Semitism', is potentially harmful to the attempts of other
          >
          > racial groups to practise legitimate defence of their interests.
          It
          >
          > seems to me to prove prejudicial even to the Jewish people
          >
          > themselves. Their unique kind of community in diversity owes a
          good
          >
          > deal to an idea of racial purity, but the foundation for this
          idea
          >
          > is religious. The power of the concept 'anti-Semitic', to inhibit
          >
          > free thought and impose the tendency for self-censorship on
          European
          >
          > peoples is part of the total battle, the undoubtedly horrifying
          >
          > history of bigotries, pogroms, recriminations, intrigue and war.
          >
          > Until the reality and importance of the concept of race is better
          >
          > understood, the argument here may easily be missed. Only time
          >
          > reveals the full meanings of history. Louise
          >
          >
          >
          > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, bartleyoreg@ wrote:
          >
          > >
          >
          > > What makes you say this, please explain!? Isn't ethics part of
          >
          > philosophy?? A view we have towards people that not an ethical
          issue
          >
          > or concern.? How we treat people because of what they are, ie
          black,
          >
          > women, English, only because that trait, that is not a ethical
          issue
          >
          > or concern.? On the face of your posting it seems to be kind a
          very
          >
          > strange statement.
          >
          > > Michael
          >
          > >
          >
          > >
          >
          > > -----Original Message-----
          >
          > > From: louise <hecubatoher@>
          >
          > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
          >
          > > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 12:35 pm
          >
          > > Subject: [existlist] In brief
          >
          > >
          >
          > >
          >
          > >
          >
          > >
          >
          > >
          >
          > >
          >
          > > From a philosophical viewpoint, anti-Semitism is a mythical
          >
          > concept,
          >
          > > frequently used as a political weapon.
          >
          > >
          >
          > > Louise
          >
          > >
          >
          > >
          >
          > >
          >
          > >
          >
          > >
          >
          > >
          >
          > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          > >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >





          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • tom
          I m very much a fan of the Declaration of Independance also. Of course, the point of newspeak George Orwell made was how beautiful words can still be
          Message 4 of 28 , Dec 5 5:15 PM
            I'm very much a fan of the Declaration of Independance also. Of course, the point of 'newspeak' George Orwell made was how beautiful words can still be admired, while the practical aplication of such statement can gradually be changed. The very Americans who talk the most about our heritage, freedom etc are very often the ones that in reality promote agendas like getting in fights around the world and building a massive police state at home; and these were the things that guys like Washington and Jefferson saw as totally opposed to the new vision on which the US was founded. Shaun Hannity starts his radio show with "Let Freedom Ring" and has "Freedom Concerts", but his idea of freedom goes no further than going to the Judeochristian church of your choice, and investing in the 401k of your choice. Yesterday, Hannity had Bill Bennett as 1 of his guests, and Bennett was Drug Czar under Bush1. Freedom is used by these guys as another excuse for imperialistic aggression.

            Tom



            ----- Original Message -----
            From: bartleyoreg@...
            To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 5:03 PM
            Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: In brief


            Louise, I work as a volunteer in a middle school, there 13-14 years old, anyway I help in the American history class.? Currently we are studying the Delectation of Independence.? I get very excited about this document, sorry knowing you're British!, anyway I believe it could be agrued that this document changed history more then any other document in the last 230 years.? It makes me proud to be an American, to see that those values, while we may have not lived up to them, where the values we believed were important as a people.? That part of being an American, is having that as our core.? I am getting anywhere close?
            Michael

            -----Original Message-----
            From: louise <hecubatoher@...>
            To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
            Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 2:44 pm
            Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief

            --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, bartleyoreg@... wrote:
            >
            > Thank you Louise for your thoughful response, I can see that you
            have thought deeply about this and I do want to understand your
            point of view.? On a side note I more interested in understanding
            other people posting then having or winning an agrument with them.?
            Anyway, while I can see the concept of race, what is race even,
            would be of interest to scholars besides that it seems in our
            present world that race is not that important.
            > Michael

            Michael, I have a love of argument, if it is conducted in good
            spirit, and those of us who are regular contributors at existlist
            seem to my perception moving ever closer to the attainment of such
            an ideal, whilst the list is also continueing to welcome new
            members. So I even feel a little happier tonight, contemplating the
            road ahead. With regard to the concept of race in our present
            world, it is not important to the many, but is very important for a
            few. Racial instincts, though, manifest in a non-intellectual way
            all the time. I think it would be greatly to the benefit of society
            if this were acknowledged, and an interest in discussing race could
            flourish, instead of the current situation, in which the mention of
            the topic in mainstream quarters tends to evoke immediate
            embarrassment or hostility. And may readily lead straight to the
            police cell, and the courts. The hysterical and offensive outbursts
            of those with little to say that stands up to any scrutiny would
            soon be eclipsed, if serious people were shown due respect. Louise

            >
            >
            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: louise <hecubatoher@...>
            > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
            > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 1:15 pm
            > Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Yes, Michael, I agree, ethics is part of philosophy. The point I
            am
            > making is that the concept of race is European, not Semitic, and
            > that this way of asserting racism, i.e., to express communal
            Jewish
            > solidarity by introducing the confusion of the racial
            > term, 'Semitism', is potentially harmful to the attempts of other
            > racial groups to practise legitimate defence of their interests.
            It
            > seems to me to prove prejudicial even to the Jewish people
            > themselves. Their unique kind of community in diversity owes a
            good
            > deal to an idea of racial purity, but the foundation for this idea
            > is religious. The power of the concept 'anti-Semitic', to inhibit
            > free thought and impose the tendency for self-censorship on
            European
            > peoples is part of the total battle, the undoubtedly horrifying
            > history of bigotries, pogroms, recriminations, intrigue and war.
            > Until the reality and importance of the concept of race is better
            > understood, the argument here may easily be missed. Only time
            > reveals the full meanings of history. Louise
            >
            > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, bartleyoreg@ wrote:
            > >
            > > What makes you say this, please explain!? Isn't ethics part of
            > philosophy?? A view we have towards people that not an ethical
            issue
            > or concern.? How we treat people because of what they are, ie
            black,
            > women, English, only because that trait, that is not a ethical
            issue
            > or concern.? On the face of your posting it seems to be kind a
            very
            > strange statement.
            > > Michael
            > >
            > >
            > > -----Original Message-----
            > > From: louise <hecubatoher@>
            > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
            > > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 12:35 pm
            > > Subject: [existlist] In brief
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > From a philosophical viewpoint, anti-Semitism is a mythical
            > concept,
            > > frequently used as a political weapon.
            > >
            > > Louise
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            > >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >

            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • bartleyoreg@aol.com
            opps! I knew I should have used the dictionary! In a message dated 12/5/2008 3:43:45 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, eupraxis@aol.com writes: Delectation of
            Message 5 of 28 , Dec 5 5:30 PM
              opps! I knew I should have used the dictionary!


              In a message dated 12/5/2008 3:43:45 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
              eupraxis@... writes:







              Delectation of Independence

              Gotta watch that spell check. Gets you every time.

              Wil

              -----Original Message-----
              From: _bartleyoreg@bartley_ (mailto:bartleyoreg@...)
              To: _existlist@yahoogrouexistl_ (mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com)
              Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 5:03 pm
              Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: In brief

              Louise, I work as a volunteer in a middle school, there 13-14 years old,
              anyway I help in the American history class.? Currently we are studying the
              Delectation of Independence.Louise, I work as a volunteer in a middle school,
              there 13-14 years old, anyway I help in the American history class.? Currently we
              are studying the Delectation of Independence.<WBR>? I get very excited about
              this document, sorry knowing you're British!, anyway I believe it could be
              agrued that this document changed history more then any other document in the
              last 230 years.? It makes me proud to be an American, to see that those
              values, while

              Michael

              -----Original Message-----

              From: louise <_hecubatoher@hecubatohhe_ (mailto:hecubatoher@...) >

              To: _existlist@yahoogrouexistl_ (mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com)

              Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 2:44 pm

              Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief

              --- In _existlist@yahoogrouexistl_ (mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com) ,
              bartleyoreg@, bart

              >

              > Thank you Louise for your thoughful response, I can see that you

              have thought deeply about this and I do want to understand your

              point of view.? On a side note I more interested in understanding

              other people posting then having or winning an agrument with them.?

              Anyway, while I can see the concept of race, what is race even,

              would be of interest to scholars besides that it seems in our

              present world that race is not that important.

              > Michael

              Michael, I have a love of argument, if it is conducted in good

              spirit, and those of us who are regular contributors at

              seem to my perception moving ever closer to the attainment of such

              an ideal, whilst the list is also continueing to welcome new

              members. So I even feel a little happier tonight, contemplating the

              road ahead. With regard to the concept of race in our present

              world, it is not important to the many, but is very important for a

              few. Racial instincts, though, manifest in a non-intellectual way

              all the time. I think it would be greatly to the benefit of society

              if this were acknowledged, and an interest in discussing race could

              flourish, instead of the current situation, in which the mention of

              the topic in mainstream quarters tends to evoke immediate

              embarrassment or hostility. And may readily lead straight to the

              police cell, and the courts. The hysterical and offensive outbursts

              of those with little to say that stands up to any scrutiny would

              soon be eclipsed, if serious people were shown due respect. Louise

              >

              >

              > -----Original Message-----

              > From: louise <hecubatoher@hec>

              > To: _existlist@yahoogrouexistl_ (mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com)

              > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 1:15 pm

              > Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              > Yes, Michael, I agree, ethics is part of philosophy. The point I

              am

              > making is that the concept of race is European, not Semitic, and

              > that this way of asserting racism, i.e., to express communal

              Jewish

              > solidarity by introducing the confusion of the racial

              > term, 'Semitism', is potentially harmful to the attempts of other

              > racial groups to practise legitimate defence of their interests.

              It

              > seems to me to prove prejudicial even to the Jewish people

              > themselves. Their unique kind of community in diversity owes a

              good

              > deal to an idea of racial purity, but the foundation for this idea

              > is religious. The power of the concept 'anti-Semitic' is religious. Th

              > free thought and impose the tendency for self-censorship on

              European

              > peoples is part of the total battle, the undoubtedly horrifying

              > history of bigotries, pogroms, recriminations, intrigue and war.

              > Until the reality and importance of the concept of race is better

              > understood, the argument here may easily be missed. Only time

              > reveals the full meanings of history. Louise

              >

              > --- In _existlist@yahoogrouexistl_ (mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com) ,
              bartleyoreg@ wrote:

              > >

              > > What makes you say this, please explain!? Isn't ethics part of

              > philosophy?? A view we have towards people that not an ethical

              issue

              > or concern.? How we treat people because of what they are, ie

              black,

              > women, English, only because that trait, that is not a ethical

              issue

              > or concern.? On the face of your posting it seems to be kind a

              very

              > strange statement.

              > > Michael

              > >

              > >

              > > -----Original Message-----

              > > From: louise <hecubatoher@>

              > > To: _existlist@yahoogrouexistl_ (mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com)

              > > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 12:35 pm

              > > Subject: [existlist] In brief

              > >

              > >

              > >

              > >

              > >

              > >

              > > From a philosophical viewpoint, anti-Semitism is a mythical

              > concept,

              > > frequently used as a political weapon.

              > >

              > > Louise

              > >

              > >

              > >

              > >

              > >

              > >

              > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              > >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              >

              > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              >

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




              **************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
              favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
              (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • eupraxis@aol.com
              Tom, Well, I understand the save, but this is all still prejudice, in my opinion, if you are explaining such differences (even if they were accurate) as caused
              Message 6 of 28 , Dec 5 5:36 PM
                Tom,

                Well, I understand the save, but this is all still prejudice, in my opinion,
                if you are explaining such differences (even if they were accurate) as caused
                by a "race" factor. Second and third generation Asians do not show any marked
                difference with the student population as a whole, leading one to assume that
                there is a cultural/'nurture' factor at work here. 'Blacks', qua Black, "are
                not likely to be the winners in track and field competition"; tall, long-legged
                people are. See Aristotle on attribution of cause.

                Mutatis mutandis.

                In any case, one could roll one's eyes and accuse me of deliberately being
                difficult, were it not of the fact that the problem here is with the actual
                concept of RACISM ITSELF, and that includes the delicate matter of the 'ism' of
                race. Using race as a thing-unto-itself, as a virtual metaphysic, as a natural
                difference in the great chain of being or the tree of life, etc., is a racist
                act, regardless of whether this is done as it were benignly.

                Let us not forget, this topic has been broached here alongside such other
                questions as racial identity as patriotism, ethnic cleansing, forced mono-ethnic
                societies, and the so forth. The 'bad others', so far, seem to have been South
                Asians and Near Asians. What talents/stigmata do they have? Good at school,
                but bad fashion sense?

                I do not attribute any of this to you, of course. I try not to attribute any
                of this to Louise, either, since I believe that she is mistaken and not
                malevolent. I live in the deep South, USA. My patience for these has long ago been
                tapped out.

                Wil

                In a message dated 12/5/08 7:02:24 PM, tsmith17_midsouth1@... writes:

                > What I said was that there were greater probabilities of certain strenghths
                > and weaknesses appearing among races, but that many individuals will very
                > much overlap. Its like saying that as a group, men are taller than women.
                > However, there are numerous women over 6 feet, and some guys around 5 feet. Jewish
                > and oriental students are more likely to be on the honor roll. Blacks are
                > more likely to be the winners in track and field competition, and us white guys
                > have the highest % of serial killers.Certain diseases are more prevalent
                > among certain races.
                > Tom
                >
                >
                >




                **************
                Stay in touch with ALL of your friends: update your AIM, Bebo,
                Facebook, and MySpace pages with just one click. The NEW AOL.com.
                (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000012)


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • bhvwd
                ... course, the point of newspeak George Orwell made was how beautiful words can still be admired, while the practical aplication of such statement can
                Message 7 of 28 , Dec 5 6:44 PM
                  --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  > I'm very much a fan of the Declaration of Independance also. Of
                  course, the point of 'newspeak' George Orwell made was how beautiful
                  words can still be admired, while the practical aplication of such
                  statement can gradually be changed. The very Americans who talk the
                  most about our heritage, freedom etc are very often the ones that in
                  reality promote agendas like getting in fights around the world and
                  building a massive police state at home; and these were the things
                  that guys like Washington and Jefferson saw as totally opposed to the
                  new vision on which the US was founded. Shaun Hannity starts his
                  radio show with "Let Freedom Ring" and has "Freedom Concerts", but
                  his idea of freedom goes no further than going to the Judeochristian
                  church of your choice, and investing in the 401k of your choice.
                  Yesterday, Hannity had Bill Bennett as 1 of his guests, and Bennett
                  was Drug Czar under Bush1. Freedom is used by these guys as another
                  excuse for imperialistic aggression.
                  > Tom I have hope for you , even if you lapse into self absorption
                  and putrid rhetoric. Please continue to expunge and we will happily
                  accomidate your demise. I write my sort of immersables and report
                  that the better men I have known have hung their butts out. Imagine
                  the courage of exclamination, get the point!Bill
                  > Tom
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > ----- Original Message -----
                  > From: bartleyoreg@...
                  > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                  > Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 5:03 PM
                  > Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: In brief
                  >
                  >
                  > Louise, I work as a volunteer in a middle school, there 13-14
                  years old, anyway I help in the American history class.? Currently we
                  are studying the Delectation of Independence.? I get very excited
                  about this document, sorry knowing you're British!, anyway I believe
                  it could be agrued that this document changed history more then any
                  other document in the last 230 years.? It makes me proud to be an
                  American, to see that those values, while we may have not lived up to
                  them, where the values we believed were important as a people.? That
                  part of being an American, is having that as our core.? I am getting
                  anywhere close?
                  > Michael
                  >
                  > -----Original Message-----
                  > From: louise <hecubatoher@...>
                  > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                  > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 2:44 pm
                  > Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief
                  >
                  > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, bartleyoreg@ wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Thank you Louise for your thoughful response, I can see that
                  you
                  > have thought deeply about this and I do want to understand your
                  > point of view.? On a side note I more interested in understanding
                  > other people posting then having or winning an agrument with
                  them.?
                  > Anyway, while I can see the concept of race, what is race even,
                  > would be of interest to scholars besides that it seems in our
                  > present world that race is not that important.
                  > > Michael
                  >
                  > Michael, I have a love of argument, if it is conducted in good
                  > spirit, and those of us who are regular contributors at existlist
                  > seem to my perception moving ever closer to the attainment of
                  such
                  > an ideal, whilst the list is also continueing to welcome new
                  > members. So I even feel a little happier tonight, contemplating
                  the
                  > road ahead. With regard to the concept of race in our present
                  > world, it is not important to the many, but is very important for
                  a
                  > few. Racial instincts, though, manifest in a non-intellectual way
                  > all the time. I think it would be greatly to the benefit of
                  society
                  > if this were acknowledged, and an interest in discussing race
                  could
                  > flourish, instead of the current situation, in which the mention
                  of
                  > the topic in mainstream quarters tends to evoke immediate
                  > embarrassment or hostility. And may readily lead straight to the
                  > police cell, and the courts. The hysterical and offensive
                  outbursts
                  > of those with little to say that stands up to any scrutiny would
                  > soon be eclipsed, if serious people were shown due respect.
                  Louise
                  >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > -----Original Message-----
                  > > From: louise <hecubatoher@>
                  > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                  > > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 1:15 pm
                  > > Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Yes, Michael, I agree, ethics is part of philosophy. The point
                  I
                  > am
                  > > making is that the concept of race is European, not Semitic,
                  and
                  > > that this way of asserting racism, i.e., to express communal
                  > Jewish
                  > > solidarity by introducing the confusion of the racial
                  > > term, 'Semitism', is potentially harmful to the attempts of
                  other
                  > > racial groups to practise legitimate defence of their
                  interests.
                  > It
                  > > seems to me to prove prejudicial even to the Jewish people
                  > > themselves. Their unique kind of community in diversity owes a
                  > good
                  > > deal to an idea of racial purity, but the foundation for this
                  idea
                  > > is religious. The power of the concept 'anti-Semitic', to
                  inhibit
                  > > free thought and impose the tendency for self-censorship on
                  > European
                  > > peoples is part of the total battle, the undoubtedly horrifying
                  > > history of bigotries, pogroms, recriminations, intrigue and
                  war.
                  > > Until the reality and importance of the concept of race is
                  better
                  > > understood, the argument here may easily be missed. Only time
                  > > reveals the full meanings of history. Louise
                  > >
                  > > --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, bartleyoreg@ wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > What makes you say this, please explain!? Isn't ethics part
                  of
                  > > philosophy?? A view we have towards people that not an ethical
                  > issue
                  > > or concern.? How we treat people because of what they are, ie
                  > black,
                  > > women, English, only because that trait, that is not a ethical
                  > issue
                  > > or concern.? On the face of your posting it seems to be kind a
                  > very
                  > > strange statement.
                  > > > Michael
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > -----Original Message-----
                  > > > From: louise <hecubatoher@>
                  > > > To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                  > > > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 12:35 pm
                  > > > Subject: [existlist] In brief
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > From a philosophical viewpoint, anti-Semitism is a mythical
                  > > concept,
                  > > > frequently used as a political weapon.
                  > > >
                  > > > Louise
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                • Paul Jacobson
                  Actually one could argue that the Declaration Of Independence was indeed Delectable ........ PJ ... From: bartleyoreg@aol.com To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                  Message 8 of 28 , Dec 5 7:45 PM
                    Actually one could argue that the Declaration Of Independence was indeed "Delectable"........
                    PJ

                    ----- Original Message -----
                    From: bartleyoreg@...
                    To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Friday, December 05, 2008 7:30 PM
                    Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: In brief


                    opps! I knew I should have used the dictionary!


                    In a message dated 12/5/2008 3:43:45 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
                    eupraxis@... writes:

                    Delectation of Independence

                    Gotta watch that spell check. Gets you every time.

                    Wil

                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: _bartleyoreg@bartley_ (mailto:bartleyoreg@...)
                    To: _existlist@yahoogrouexistl_ (mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com)
                    Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 5:03 pm
                    Subject: Re: [existlist] Re: In brief

                    Louise, I work as a volunteer in a middle school, there 13-14 years old,
                    anyway I help in the American history class.? Currently we are studying the
                    Delectation of Independence.Louise, I work as a volunteer in a middle school,
                    there 13-14 years old, anyway I help in the American history class.? Currently we
                    are studying the Delectation of Independence.<WBR>? I get very excited about
                    this document, sorry knowing you're British!, anyway I believe it could be
                    agrued that this document changed history more then any other document in the
                    last 230 years.? It makes me proud to be an American, to see that those
                    values, while

                    Michael

                    -----Original Message-----

                    From: louise <_hecubatoher@hecubatohhe_ (mailto:hecubatoher@...) >

                    To: _existlist@yahoogrouexistl_ (mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com)

                    Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 2:44 pm

                    Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief

                    --- In _existlist@yahoogrouexistl_ (mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com) ,
                    bartleyoreg@, bart

                    >

                    > Thank you Louise for your thoughful response, I can see that you

                    have thought deeply about this and I do want to understand your

                    point of view.? On a side note I more interested in understanding

                    other people posting then having or winning an agrument with them.?

                    Anyway, while I can see the concept of race, what is race even,

                    would be of interest to scholars besides that it seems in our

                    present world that race is not that important.

                    > Michael

                    Michael, I have a love of argument, if it is conducted in good

                    spirit, and those of us who are regular contributors at

                    seem to my perception moving ever closer to the attainment of such

                    an ideal, whilst the list is also continueing to welcome new

                    members. So I even feel a little happier tonight, contemplating the

                    road ahead. With regard to the concept of race in our present

                    world, it is not important to the many, but is very important for a

                    few. Racial instincts, though, manifest in a non-intellectual way

                    all the time. I think it would be greatly to the benefit of society

                    if this were acknowledged, and an interest in discussing race could

                    flourish, instead of the current situation, in which the mention of

                    the topic in mainstream quarters tends to evoke immediate

                    embarrassment or hostility. And may readily lead straight to the

                    police cell, and the courts. The hysterical and offensive outbursts

                    of those with little to say that stands up to any scrutiny would

                    soon be eclipsed, if serious people were shown due respect. Louise

                    >

                    >

                    > -----Original Message-----

                    > From: louise <hecubatoher@hec>

                    > To: _existlist@yahoogrouexistl_ (mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com)

                    > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 1:15 pm

                    > Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief

                    >

                    >

                    >

                    >

                    >

                    >

                    > Yes, Michael, I agree, ethics is part of philosophy. The point I

                    am

                    > making is that the concept of race is European, not Semitic, and

                    > that this way of asserting racism, i.e., to express communal

                    Jewish

                    > solidarity by introducing the confusion of the racial

                    > term, 'Semitism', is potentially harmful to the attempts of other

                    > racial groups to practise legitimate defence of their interests.

                    It

                    > seems to me to prove prejudicial even to the Jewish people

                    > themselves. Their unique kind of community in diversity owes a

                    good

                    > deal to an idea of racial purity, but the foundation for this idea

                    > is religious. The power of the concept 'anti-Semitic' is religious. Th

                    > free thought and impose the tendency for self-censorship on

                    European

                    > peoples is part of the total battle, the undoubtedly horrifying

                    > history of bigotries, pogroms, recriminations, intrigue and war.

                    > Until the reality and importance of the concept of race is better

                    > understood, the argument here may easily be missed. Only time

                    > reveals the full meanings of history. Louise

                    >

                    > --- In _existlist@yahoogrouexistl_ (mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com) ,
                    bartleyoreg@ wrote:

                    > >

                    > > What makes you say this, please explain!? Isn't ethics part of

                    > philosophy?? A view we have towards people that not an ethical

                    issue

                    > or concern.? How we treat people because of what they are, ie

                    black,

                    > women, English, only because that trait, that is not a ethical

                    issue

                    > or concern.? On the face of your posting it seems to be kind a

                    very

                    > strange statement.

                    > > Michael

                    > >

                    > >

                    > > -----Original Message-----

                    > > From: louise <hecubatoher@>

                    > > To: _existlist@yahoogrouexistl_ (mailto:existlist@yahoogroups.com)

                    > > Sent: Fri, 5 Dec 2008 12:35 pm

                    > > Subject: [existlist] In brief

                    > >

                    > >

                    > >

                    > >

                    > >

                    > >

                    > > From a philosophical viewpoint, anti-Semitism is a mythical

                    > concept,

                    > > frequently used as a political weapon.

                    > >

                    > > Louise

                    > >

                    > >

                    > >

                    > >

                    > >

                    > >

                    > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                    > >

                    >

                    >

                    >

                    >

                    >

                    >

                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                    >

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

                    **************Make your life easier with all your friends, email, and
                    favorite sites in one place. Try it now.
                    (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000010)

                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






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



                    No virus found in this incoming message.
                    Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
                    Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.14/1832 - Release Date: 07/12/29 09:57 Õ


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • jimstuart51
                    All, I feel the posts in this thread have been thoughtful and constructive, especially given the sensitive nature of the subject matter. One central issue is
                    Message 9 of 28 , Dec 7 6:07 AM
                      All,

                      I feel the posts in this thread have been thoughtful and
                      constructive, especially given the sensitive nature of the subject
                      matter.

                      One central issue is the question of whether to engage in a
                      philosophical discussion of racism, assuming the concept of race to
                      be a valid concept, is itself to fall into racist attitudes. Thus Wil
                      writes:

                      "In any case, one could roll one's eyes and accuse me of deliberately
                      being difficult, were it not of the fact that the problem here is
                      with the actual concept of RACISM ITSELF, and that includes the
                      delicate matter of the 'ism' of race. Using race as a thing-unto-
                      itself, as a virtual metaphysic, as a natural difference in the great
                      chain of being or the tree of life, etc., is a racist act, regardless
                      of whether this is done as it were benignly." (45883)

                      As against this, Louise calls for philosophers to accept the concept
                      of race as valid and to address this matter more thoroughly than
                      before:

                      "Racial instincts, though, manifest in a non-intellectual way all the
                      time. I think it would be greatly to the benefit of society if this
                      were acknowledged, and an interest in discussing race could flourish,
                      instead of the current situation, in which the mention of the topic
                      in mainstream quarters tends to evoke immediate embarrassment or
                      hostility. And may readily lead straight to the police cell, and the
                      courts. The hysterical and offensive outbursts of those with little
                      to say that stands up to any scrutiny would soon be eclipsed, if
                      serious people were shown due respect." (45874)

                      I think both these view can be accommodated if the philosophical
                      discussion centres on the question whether or not the concept of race
                      is a valid concept.

                      On one side, the more scientifically-orientated philosophers may
                      argue that race is a `natural kind' term which can be used to pick
                      out, in an objective way, individuals who fall under one or other
                      racial category.

                      On the other side, the more subjectively-orientated philosophers may
                      argue that the whole idea of a natural-kind concept is dubious. They
                      would argue that the concepts we use answer to our interests, and if
                      we view a conceptual distinction as not being in our interests than
                      that distinction is to be rejected as invalid.

                      Nietzsche argued for this latter view when pouring score on those
                      ascetic individuals who put a disinterested `will to truth' above all
                      else. He views such individuals as weak and `anti-life'. Of course
                      the irony here is that the concept of race was one which featured in
                      Nietzsche's writings. Whilst I would not consider Nietzsche a racist,
                      he seems to come out as a `benign racist' according to Wil's
                      criterion, as he seems to accept the validity of the concept of race.

                      Another irony is that for Louise, she wishes the concept of race to
                      be discussed for cultural reasons. She is concerned that the British
                      white culture is not allowed to die out. Leftists and liberals are
                      often keen to defend the rights of minority cultures to survive
                      untainted by Western imperialism and capitalism. Western liberals
                      like myself feel that the native Indians of America and the
                      Aborigines of Australia have a right to protect their own culture
                      from extinction, but we feel uneasy when white British people argue
                      for the same right of protection.

                      I have some sympathy for those traditional cultures who do not wish
                      to be subsumed by Western capitalism. I don't want a MacDonalds in
                      every primitive village, or the top television companies beaming out
                      their lies from a television in every public meeting place.

                      On the other hand wishing to preserve one's own culture or race in
                      some sort of `pure' form makes me very uneasy as well.

                      Louise may say that all races are different but equal, however most
                      people who argue that races are different also view them as unequal.
                      Those cases where one race has aggressively attempted to destroy
                      another race are often case where the aggressor views the individuals
                      of their opponent race as not fully human – not even human at all. In
                      fact all war and killing seems to involve the combatants as being
                      brain-washed to see their enemies as lacking in humanity. (I have
                      just seen the excellent film "The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas" (USA
                      2008, director Mark Herman) which illustrates such attitudes very
                      well.)

                      The way forward, in my view, if for the philosopher to argue that all
                      human beings – whatever their racial or cultural background – are
                      fully human, and, as such, are equally valuable in themselves, and,
                      because of this, deserve to be treated with benevolence and respect,
                      as `ends in themselves, and never as means'. Kant argued for this
                      view in theory, but I gather that in practice he was not quite able
                      to see some foreigners as fully human.

                      Jim
                    • tom
                      Louise may say that all races are different but equal, however most people who argue that races are different also view them as unequal. Those cases where one
                      Message 10 of 28 , Dec 7 6:37 AM
                        Louise may say that all races are different but equal, however most
                        people who argue that races are different also view them as unequal.
                        Those cases where one race has aggressively attempted to destroy
                        another race are often case where the aggressor views the individuals
                        of their opponent race as not fully human - not even human at all. In
                        fact all war and killing seems to involve the combatants as being
                        brain-washed to see their enemies as lacking in humanity. (I have
                        just seen the excellent film "The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas" (USA
                        2008, director Mark Herman) which illustrates such attitudes very
                        well.)Jim

                        I read a Tolstoy quote once saying that as long as we have slaughter houses we'll have front lines. The hunting gatherring party, the first social group was bounded as to everything outside of us is game.Making a blood sacrafice to the tribal God. Tribal people r so much more closely connected with each other than we. Civiliozed people lack the same unity that tribals share. However, the very closeness with each other as compared to civilized cats is matched by the willingness to align wit the emerging value
                        Tom.

                        Tom
                        ----- Original Message -----
                        From: jimstuart51
                        To: existlist@yahoogroups.com
                        Sent: Sunday, December 07, 2008 8:07 AM
                        Subject: [existlist] Re: In brief


                        All,

                        I feel the posts in this thread have been thoughtful and
                        constructive, especially given the sensitive nature of the subject
                        matter.

                        One central issue is the question of whether to engage in a
                        philosophical discussion of racism, assuming the concept of race to
                        be a valid concept, is itself to fall into racist attitudes. Thus Wil
                        writes:

                        "In any case, one could roll one's eyes and accuse me of deliberately
                        being difficult, were it not of the fact that the problem here is
                        with the actual concept of RACISM ITSELF, and that includes the
                        delicate matter of the 'ism' of race. Using race as a thing-unto-
                        itself, as a virtual metaphysic, as a natural difference in the great
                        chain of being or the tree of life, etc., is a racist act, regardless
                        of whether this is done as it were benignly." (45883)

                        As against this, Louise calls for philosophers to accept the concept
                        of race as valid and to address this matter more thoroughly than
                        before:

                        "Racial instincts, though, manifest in a non-intellectual way all the
                        time. I think it would be greatly to the benefit of society if this
                        were acknowledged, and an interest in discussing race could flourish,
                        instead of the current situation, in which the mention of the topic
                        in mainstream quarters tends to evoke immediate embarrassment or
                        hostility. And may readily lead straight to the police cell, and the
                        courts. The hysterical and offensive outbursts of those with little
                        to say that stands up to any scrutiny would soon be eclipsed, if
                        serious people were shown due respect." (45874)

                        I think both these view can be accommodated if the philosophical
                        discussion centres on the question whether or not the concept of race
                        is a valid concept.

                        On one side, the more scientifically-orientated philosophers may
                        argue that race is a `natural kind' term which can be used to pick
                        out, in an objective way, individuals who fall under one or other
                        racial category.

                        On the other side, the more subjectively-orientated philosophers may
                        argue that the whole idea of a natural-kind concept is dubious. They
                        would argue that the concepts we use answer to our interests, and if
                        we view a conceptual distinction as not being in our interests than
                        that distinction is to be rejected as invalid.

                        Nietzsche argued for this latter view when pouring score on those
                        ascetic individuals who put a disinterested `will to truth' above all
                        else. He views such individuals as weak and `anti-life'. Of course
                        the irony here is that the concept of race was one which featured in
                        Nietzsche's writings. Whilst I would not consider Nietzsche a racist,
                        he seems to come out as a `benign racist' according to Wil's
                        criterion, as he seems to accept the validity of the concept of race.

                        Another irony is that for Louise, she wishes the concept of race to
                        be discussed for cultural reasons. She is concerned that the British
                        white culture is not allowed to die out. Leftists and liberals are
                        often keen to defend the rights of minority cultures to survive
                        untainted by Western imperialism and capitalism. Western liberals
                        like myself feel that the native Indians of America and the
                        Aborigines of Australia have a right to protect their own culture
                        from extinction, but we feel uneasy when white British people argue
                        for the same right of protection.

                        I have some sympathy for those traditional cultures who do not wish
                        to be subsumed by Western capitalism. I don't want a MacDonalds in
                        every primitive village, or the top television companies beaming out
                        their lies from a television in every public meeting place.

                        On the other hand wishing to preserve one's own culture or race in
                        some sort of `pure' form makes me very uneasy as well.

                        Louise may say that all races are different but equal, however most
                        people who argue that races are different also view them as unequal.
                        Those cases where one race has aggressively attempted to destroy
                        another race are often case where the aggressor views the individuals
                        of their opponent race as not fully human - not even human at all. In
                        fact all war and killing seems to involve the combatants as being
                        brain-washed to see their enemies as lacking in humanity. (I have
                        just seen the excellent film "The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas" (USA
                        2008, director Mark Herman) which illustrates such attitudes very
                        well.)

                        The way forward, in my view, if for the philosopher to argue that all
                        human beings - whatever their racial or cultural background - are
                        fully human, and, as such, are equally valuable in themselves, and,
                        because of this, deserve to be treated with benevolence and respect,
                        as `ends in themselves, and never as means'. Kant argued for this
                        view in theory, but I gather that in practice he was not quite able
                        to see some foreigners as fully human.

                        Jim





                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • eupraxis@aol.com
                        Jim, Thanks for the post. Many writers before the last Century, with all of its horrors and the hindsight gleaned from them, have used the concept of race in
                        Message 11 of 28 , Dec 7 7:20 AM
                          Jim,

                          Thanks for the post.

                          Many writers before the last Century, with all of its horrors and the
                          hindsight gleaned from them, have used the concept of race in one way or another.
                          Kant says some very terrible things about black Africans; Engels writes about the
                          small brains of American aboriginals; Nietzsche talks about the hot Latin
                          races, and so on. These statements are not part of a formal theory, but were
                          rather part and parcel of a naive prejudice held by the mainstream in the West
                          that were never examined thoroughly. Since the advent of Nazism and other overt
                          racist movements, the concept of race has been examined in all relevant fields,
                          including recently in the genetic sciences. The conclusion wrought from all
                          of these fields is that "race" is a street notion, an intellectual slang with
                          no formal veracity, a way to group family resemblances but not to associate
                          anything otherwise unusually innate to them vis-a-vis others, other than a
                          propensity to have gas after eating cheese or to develop a rare kind of anemia, etc.


                          Thus race is a term the importance of which is only to be gleaned from its
                          context, especially in writings since the 19th Century. I prefer never to use
                          it, except for phrases like "human race" and the like.

                          If we look at a writer like Spengler, whom I admire, we see how he developed
                          a very sophisticated way of understanding race as a trans-morphic secondary
                          characteristic of 'man'. If one takes a look at his monumental "Decline of the
                          West", you will see how he understands race as something that changes over
                          time. Humanity is thoroughly 'plastic' for Spengler. He contended against the
                          notion of racial superiority.

                          Even Nietzsche, whose remarks are nearly always more 'rhetorical' than
                          formal, anyway, associates the behavior of 'races' with their culinary practices and
                          weather, rather than with some virtually occult 'essence'. Perhaps those who
                          eat too many sausages have a different mood than those who eat a 'Continental
                          breakfast'? Dunno...

                          I have always found it remarkable how racists here in the US have warned
                          against the polluting of American culture by "blacks", when the obvious fact of
                          the matter is that American culture is totally infused with black culture, and
                          always has been since there was a discernible American culture in the first
                          place! While I understand the fear of a MacDonalds being on every street corner
                          of London, it is nevertheless the case that American culture (R&B, blues, rock
                          and roll, etc.) has already so affected British popular culture as to be, by
                          now, indissociable from it. For many years, there were more white Brit kids
                          from Liverpool listening to recordings of Albert King, T-Bone Walker or Muddy
                          Waters than kids from Long Island, where I grew up.

                          In any case, you offer us two basic alternatives: either to argue about race
                          from within its own controversy (what is race, is there race?), or to argue
                          about race from the oblique position of ethics and politics, if we assume, as a
                          prior condition, that all persons deserve respect. I, for one. would welcome
                          either, as I have no doubt that the conclusions of both would lead in a
                          parallel direction.

                          Wil



                          In a message dated 12/7/08 8:09:36 AM, jjimstuart1@... writes:


                          > All,
                          >
                          > I feel the posts in this thread have been thoughtful and
                          > constructive, especially given the sensitive nature of the subject
                          > matter.
                          >
                          > One central issue is the question of whether to engage in a
                          > philosophical discussion of racism, assuming the concept of race to
                          > be a valid concept, is itself to fall into racist attitudes. Thus Wil
                          > writes:
                          >
                          > "In any case, one could roll one's eyes and accuse me of deliberately
                          > being difficult, were it not of the fact that the problem here is
                          > with the actual concept of RACISM ITSELF, and that includes the
                          > delicate matter of the 'ism' of race. Using race as a thing-unto-
                          > itself, as a virtual metaphysic, as a natural difference in the great
                          > chain of being or the tree of life, etc., is a racist act, regardless
                          > of whether this is done as it were benignly." (45883)
                          >
                          > As against this, Louise calls for philosophers to accept the concept
                          > of race as valid and to address this matter more thoroughly than
                          > before:
                          >
                          > "Racial instincts, though, manifest in a non-intellectual way all the
                          > time. I think it would be greatly to the benefit of society if this
                          > were acknowledged, and an interest in discussing race could flourish,
                          > instead of the current situation, in which the mention of the topic
                          > in mainstream quarters tends to evoke immediate embarrassment or
                          > hostility. And may readily lead straight to the police cell, and the
                          > courts. The hysterical and offensive outbursts of those with little
                          > to say that stands up to any scrutiny would soon be eclipsed, if
                          > serious people were shown due respect." (45874)
                          >
                          > I think both these view can be accommodated if the philosophical
                          > discussion centres on the question whether or not the concept of race
                          > is a valid concept.
                          >
                          > On one side, the more scientifically- On one side, the more scien
                          > argue that race is a `natural kind' term which can be used to pick
                          > out, in an objective way, individuals who fall under one or other
                          > racial category.
                          >
                          > On the other side, the more subjectively- On the other side, the more
                          > argue that the whole idea of a natural-kind concept is dubious. They
                          > would argue that the concepts we use answer to our interests, and if
                          > we view a conceptual distinction as not being in our interests than
                          > that distinction is to be rejected as invalid.
                          >
                          > Nietzsche argued for this latter view when pouring score on those
                          > ascetic individuals who put a disinterested `will to truth' above all
                          > else. He views such individuals as weak and `anti-life'. Of course
                          > the irony here is that the concept of race was one which featured in
                          > Nietzsche's writings. Whilst I would not consider Nietzsche a racist,
                          > he seems to come out as a `benign racist' according to Wil's
                          > criterion, as he seems to accept the validity of the concept of race.
                          >
                          > Another irony is that for Louise, she wishes the concept of race to
                          > be discussed for cultural reasons. She is concerned that the British
                          > white culture is not allowed to die out. Leftists and liberals are
                          > often keen to defend the rights of minority cultures to survive
                          > untainted by Western imperialism and capitalism. Western liberals
                          > like myself feel that the native Indians of America and the
                          > Aborigines of Australia have a right to protect their own culture
                          > from extinction, but we feel uneasy when white British people argue
                          > for the same right of protection.
                          >
                          > I have some sympathy for those traditional cultures who do not wish
                          > to be subsumed by Western capitalism. I don't want a MacDonalds in
                          > every primitive village, or the top television companies beaming out
                          > their lies from a television in every public meeting place.
                          >
                          > On the other hand wishing to preserve one's own culture or race in
                          > some sort of `pure' form makes me very uneasy as well.
                          >
                          > Louise may say that all races are different but equal, however most
                          > people who argue that races are different also view them as unequal.
                          > Those cases where one race has aggressively attempted to destroy
                          > another race are often case where the aggressor views the individuals
                          > of their opponent race as not fully human – not even human at all. In
                          > fact all war and killing seems to involve the combatants as being
                          > brain-washed to see their enemies as lacking in humanity. (I have
                          > just seen the excellent film "The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas" (USA
                          > 2008, director Mark Herman) which illustrates such attitudes very
                          > well.)
                          >
                          > The way forward, in my view, if for the philosopher to argue that all
                          > human beings – whatever their racial or cultural background – are
                          > fully human, and, as such, are equally valuable in themselves, and,
                          > because of this, deserve to be treated with benevolence and respect,
                          > as `ends in themselves, and never as means'. Kant argued for this
                          > view in theory, but I gather that in practice he was not quite able
                          > to see some foreigners as fully human.
                          >
                          > Jim
                          >
                          >
                          >




                          **************
                          Stay in touch with ALL of your friends: update your AIM, Bebo,
                          Facebook, and MySpace pages with just one click. The NEW AOL.com.
                          (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000012)


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • jimstuart51
                          Wil, Thanks for your post – I find myself in agreement with just about everything you have written on this subject. I ll just comment specifically on this
                          Message 12 of 28 , Dec 7 9:17 AM
                            Wil,

                            Thanks for your post – I find myself in agreement with just about
                            everything you have written on this subject.

                            I'll just comment specifically on this section from your post:

                            "While I understand the fear of a MacDonalds being on every street
                            corner of London, it is nevertheless the case that American culture
                            (R&B, blues, rock and roll, etc.) has already so affected British
                            popular culture as to be, by now, indissociable from it. For many
                            years, there were more white Brit kids from Liverpool listening to
                            recordings of Albert King, T-Bone Walker or Muddy Waters than kids
                            from Long Island, where I grew up."

                            I, myself, am not too concerned about American culture dominating
                            over here. I consider myself rather a `counter-culture' person
                            anyway, quite happy to embrace things which are often explicitly
                            reactions against the mainstream culture, whether British or American.

                            More than anything else, I consider myself to be a European rather
                            than English or British. I see myself as part of the intellectual
                            culture of Europe which started with the Ancient Greeks, then moved
                            to the Romans, and more than anything else I see myself as a product
                            of the Enlightenment.

                            I found myself feeling a sense of pride when I read Zizek writing:

                            "What makes modern Europe unique is that it is the first and only
                            civilisation in which atheism is a fully legitimate option, not an
                            obstacle to any public post. This is most emphatically a European
                            legacy worth fighting for. (Violence, p. 118)

                            I suppose I also feel myself to be a continuation of a tradition of
                            English radicalism which embraced such groups as the Quakers, the
                            Chartists and the early trade unionists.

                            Referring to myself as European tends to annoy British/English
                            nationalists and patriots. However they themselves seem to be on
                            tricky ground when asked if they are primarily English or British.

                            I note that Louise sometimes refers to herself as `British' and
                            sometimes as `English'. This is only likely to annoy anybody who is
                            Scottish or Welsh. As you know, England has conquered both Wales and
                            Scotland at some time or other, and today there are many Welsh and
                            Scottish nationalists who wish to defend their Welsh and Scottish
                            culture from the English imperialists.

                            Sometimes these Welsh and Scottish nationalists talk of the English
                            as a different race!

                            Finally, moving from culture back to race, I can honestly say that to
                            me race is a total non-issue. I see people as human beings primarily
                            and hardly notice the colour of their skin. Just as I would be
                            perfectly happy for my children to be gay, I would be perfectly happy
                            for them to have loving relationships with individuals from different
                            racial and cultural backgrounds.

                            Perhaps it could be argued that I am so unconcerned about cultural
                            and racial only because I have never suffered at the hands of a
                            stronger cultural or racial aggressor. Certainly being male, white,
                            heterosexual, middle class and European, I acknowledge that I am
                            probably not the best person to talk on the subject of the oppression
                            of minorities.

                            Jim
                          • Aija Veldre Beldavs
                            ... not really interested in race issues, as i don t see how anyone actually conversant with modern genetic DNA research can be a racist. racism is outdated
                            Message 13 of 28 , Dec 7 9:59 AM
                              > most
                              > people who argue that races are different also view them as unequal.
                              > Those cases where one race has aggressively attempted to destroy
                              > another race are often case where the aggressor views the individuals
                              > of their opponent race as not fully human – not even human at all.
                              > Jim

                              not really interested in race issues, as i don't see how anyone actually
                              conversant with modern genetic DNA research can be a racist. racism is
                              outdated bad science and the cumulative result of colonialist thought
                              (maybe also a specialized result of elitist or wanna-be ruling class
                              thinking).

                              i don't see racism as necessarily connected to nationalism at all.
                              nationalism, as most things, may be either destructive and hateful of
                              others or a positive unifying force which respects the positive
                              nationalism of others.

                              i don't think racism has been either a primary or universal frame of
                              reference in relation to the other, as there is ample evidence for
                              non-racist contact among archaic populations in low population density
                              areas.

                              first of all racism involves a belief in father-right and sexual purity,
                              but humans are just as related to the bonobo (whose society is not based
                              on "sexual selection") as to the larger chimpanzee. there are
                              populations, as in pre-Christian northern Eurasia, where sexual purity
                              was not necessarily demanded of females, and father right is not
                              necessarily primary. in low population density areas the primary
                              consideration is likely to be female fertility as a value rather than
                              virginity, and children are going to be valued as valuable additions to
                              the group as long as they contribute and support group norms. native
                              Americans for example kidnapped also white children when there were not
                              enough in the tribe.

                              here's an interesting article that speaks of current attitudes as
                              deriving from earlier pagan views:
                              http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/may/18/iceland

                              northeastern Europe is a good example of genetic diversity going back to
                              the aboriginal populations, which for the sake of simplicity may be seen
                              as for the first thousands of years as Finnic, Baltic, and Scandinavian
                              - each of them with complex timespace diverse subgroup developments.
                              there are graves of spouses of different genetic type backgrounds. even
                              in the 9th - 12th c. alliances were not made on the basis of race. thus
                              the (Baltic Finnic) Livs might ally themselves with a (Indo-Euroean
                              speaking) Balt tribe against an (Baltic Finnic) Estonian tribe or
                              another Balt tribe, but in the next round might find themselves
                              switching alliances.

                              organized military aggression in northeastern Europe is introduced by
                              Indo-European military raider bands, of whom the Scandinavian Vikings
                              are best known. the Sami of northern Europe, an archaic Europoid
                              population with both "western" and "eastern" genetics (true also of the
                              East Baltic), were unprepared for the aggression of the Iron Age on
                              warrior culture marauder raiders resulting in folklore about the
                              "Tchudes" as portrayed in the Sami Norvegian film "Pathfinder" (1987).
                              if sometimes the portrayal of Tchudes comes close to the portrayal of
                              cannibalistic ogres "stallu" that does not have to be taken as evidence
                              of innate racism. aggression, rather than race, is the primary reason
                              for characterizing the raiders as not human. friendly contacts with
                              anthropomorphically dissimilar groups does not seem to result in racism.

                              in short, i think even to modern times aggression against a particular
                              population is much more fundamentally political in the E. Baltic area,
                              rather than intrinsically racially motivated. both the Finnish and
                              Latvian peoples in particular had tragic civil war political types of
                              conflicts dividing primarily brother against brother as defender of
                              either the so-called "reds" or "whites." i think Finland is an
                              excellent example of a country that in recent times has fully come to
                              terms with its history (that is how it was, and those were the factors
                              from a systems point of view) and in research seems to welcome all new
                              evidence without feeling its core threatened, resulting in a much more
                              integrated population.

                              aija
                            • eupraxis@aol.com
                              Jim, Thanks. Again, I am in agreement with your basic enframing of the topic. Wil ... ************** Stay in touch with ALL of your friends: update your AIM,
                              Message 14 of 28 , Dec 7 10:04 AM
                                Jim,

                                Thanks. Again, I am in agreement with your basic enframing of the topic.

                                Wil

                                In a message dated 12/7/08 11:21:06 AM, jjimstuart1@... writes:


                                > Wil,
                                >
                                > Thanks for your post – I find myself in agreement with just about
                                > everything you have written on this subject.
                                >
                                > I'll just comment specifically on this section from your post:
                                >
                                > "While I understand the fear of a MacDonalds being on every street
                                > corner of London, it is nevertheless the case that American culture
                                > (R&B, blues, rock and roll, etc.) has already so affected British
                                > popular culture as to be, by now, indissociable from it. For many
                                > years, there were more white Brit kids from Liverpool listening to
                                > recordings of Albert King, T-Bone Walker or Muddy Waters than kids
                                > from Long Island, where I grew up."
                                >
                                > I, myself, am not too concerned about American culture dominating
                                > over here. I consider myself rather a `counter-culture' person
                                > anyway, quite happy to embrace things which are often explicitly
                                > reactions against the mainstream culture, whether British or American.
                                >
                                > More than anything else, I consider myself to be a European rather
                                > than English or British. I see myself as part of the intellectual
                                > culture of Europe which started with the Ancient Greeks, then moved
                                > to the Romans, and more than anything else I see myself as a product
                                > of the Enlightenment.
                                >
                                > I found myself feeling a sense of pride when I read Zizek writing:
                                >
                                > "What makes modern Europe unique is that it is the first and only
                                > civilisation in which atheism is a fully legitimate option, not an
                                > obstacle to any public post. This is most emphatically a European
                                > legacy worth fighting for. (Violence, p. 118)
                                >
                                > I suppose I also feel myself to be a continuation of a tradition of
                                > English radicalism which embraced such groups as the Quakers, the
                                > Chartists and the early trade unionists.
                                >
                                > Referring to myself as European tends to annoy British/English
                                > nationalists and patriots. However they themselves seem to be on
                                > tricky ground when asked if they are primarily English or British.
                                >
                                > I note that Louise sometimes refers to herself as `British' and
                                > sometimes as `English'. This is only likely to annoy anybody who is
                                > Scottish or Welsh. As you know, England has conquered both Wales and
                                > Scotland at some time or other, and today there are many Welsh and
                                > Scottish nationalists who wish to defend their Welsh and Scottish
                                > culture from the English imperialists.
                                >
                                > Sometimes these Welsh and Scottish nationalists talk of the English
                                > as a different race!
                                >
                                > Finally, moving from culture back to race, I can honestly say that to
                                > me race is a total non-issue. I see people as human beings primarily
                                > and hardly notice the colour of their skin. Just as I would be
                                > perfectly happy for my children to be gay, I would be perfectly happy
                                > for them to have loving relationships with individuals from different
                                > racial and cultural backgrounds.
                                >
                                > Perhaps it could be argued that I am so unconcerned about cultural
                                > and racial only because I have never suffered at the hands of a
                                > stronger cultural or racial aggressor. Certainly being male, white,
                                > heterosexual, middle class and European, I acknowledge that I am
                                > probably not the best person to talk on the subject of the oppression
                                > of minorities.
                                >
                                > Jim
                                >
                                >
                                >




                                **************
                                Stay in touch with ALL of your friends: update your AIM, Bebo,
                                Facebook, and MySpace pages with just one click. The NEW AOL.com.
                                (http://www.aol.com/?optin=new-dp&icid=aolcom40vanity&ncid=emlcntaolcom00000012)


                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • louise
                                ... Tom, No, actually, I am arguing that before one proceeds to question whether there are measurable differences between races, one should ascertain the
                                Message 15 of 28 , Dec 7 10:11 AM
                                  --- In existlist@yahoogroups.com, "tom" <tsmith17_midsouth1@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > Louise may say that all races are different but equal, however most
                                  > people who argue that races are different also view them as unequal.

                                  Tom,

                                  No, actually, I am arguing that before one proceeds to question whether
                                  there are measurable differences between races, one should ascertain
                                  the meaning of human equality. It is a spiritual or philosophical
                                  reality, not necessarily a scientific one. The divorce of science from
                                  a feeling for the sacredness of life is at the root of our modern
                                  malaise. A sweepingly general statement, but reasonable, I think.

                                  Louise
                                • louise
                                  Jim: I note that Louise sometimes refers to herself as `British and sometimes as `English . This is only likely to annoy anybody who is Scottish or Welsh. As
                                  Message 16 of 28 , Dec 7 2:27 PM
                                    Jim: "I note that Louise sometimes refers to herself as `British' and
                                    sometimes as `English'. This is only likely to annoy anybody who is
                                    Scottish or Welsh. As you know, England has conquered both Wales and
                                    Scotland at some time or other, and today there are many Welsh and
                                    Scottish nationalists who wish to defend their Welsh and Scottish
                                    culture from the English imperialists.
                                    Sometimes these Welsh and Scottish nationalists talk of the English
                                    as a different race!"

                                    Welsh and Scottish nationalists who are annoyed by my description of
                                    myself as either British or English would be most untypical, surely,
                                    since I am obviously both, and legitimately so. Of course they are
                                    likely to be annoyed when Britain and England are named as though
                                    interchangeable, for this shows disrespect to the Scots and Welsh (as
                                    ignoring their existence) and to many Northern Irish folk who value
                                    their British nationality. There is a difference between a human
                                    being and a nation! I myself find it irritating or embarrassing when
                                    no distinction is made between the two. As for being different
                                    races, well, that might be an interesting discussion. The tribal
                                    origins of the various people who have inhabited the British isles
                                    both before and after the Norman conquest is a complex study. I am
                                    reading a book about the Vikings at the moment, and their impact on
                                    the Christian English. Fearful stuff. Louise
                                  • jimstuart51
                                    Aija, Thank you for your thoughtful and informative post. Let me comment on a couple of the sections from your post: Aija: not really interested in race
                                    Message 17 of 28 , Dec 8 12:52 PM
                                      Aija,

                                      Thank you for your thoughtful and informative post. Let me comment on
                                      a couple of the sections from your post:

                                      Aija: not really interested in race issues, as i don't see how anyone
                                      actually conversant with modern genetic DNA research can be a racist.
                                      racism is outdated bad science and the cumulative result of
                                      colonialist thought (maybe also a specialized result of elitist or
                                      wanna-be ruling class thinking).

                                      Jim: Racism may indeed be "outdated bad science," but there is still
                                      quite a lot of it about, particularly amongst those without a
                                      scientific education. I am only interested in racism to the extent
                                      that I think there is still work to be done, both intellectual and
                                      practical, to eliminate it.

                                      Aija: i don't see racism as necessarily connected to nationalism at
                                      all. nationalism, as most things, may be either destructive and
                                      hateful of others or a positive unifying force which respects the
                                      positive nationalism of others.

                                      Jim: It would be nice if nationalism were predominantly "a positive
                                      unifying force which respects the positive nationalism of others."
                                      However my own experience is that it is usually "destructive and
                                      hateful of others." Perhaps, if like the Finns, we can learn from
                                      history, then nationalism can be a force for good. Perhaps each of us
                                      can be proud of our nation's greatest achievements, whilst
                                      acknowledging our nation's worst behaviour (both past and present).
                                      Unfortunately the propaganda apparatus in most countries manages to
                                      portray the nation as always in the right. Further, individuals seem
                                      to have a strong subconscious desire to convince themselves that
                                      their social group (i.e. their nation) is the good guys. Also, in
                                      most countries at most times, it is considered unpatriotic to
                                      question the correctness of one's nation's foreign policy.


                                      What you write about "father right and sexual purity" is most
                                      interesting. I agree that those societies where pagan traditions
                                      dominated seem to have emerged in a more healthy state than those
                                      where Christian attitudes predominated. In Britain, Christian moral
                                      attitudes are the biggest hindrance to genuine ethical progress.


                                      Finally, the article on Iceland was interesting, although I wonder to
                                      what extent the recent catastrophic failure of the Icelandic banks
                                      will change things. Also, for a bleaker view of Iceland, I recommend
                                      the film "Jar City" (Iceland 2008 Dir Baltasar Kormakur).

                                      Jim
                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.