-a spawn of the "does Africa accept me" post-

I am African. And most of you don't have a problem with my sayin' that.

That said, aren't American whites "Europeans"? All of 'em are European immigrants right?

But I know a lot of Europeans would feel offended by a white American claimin' to be European. The majority of Europeans go out of their way to disassociate from all things American.

The relationship between European countries and America is similar to a parent-child relationship. So regardless of how little respect Europeans have for Americans, their connection is set in stone.

To add, I'm always hearin' 'bout the popularity of wto and anti-American protests in European countries and I gotta ask, "Aren't they the ones who invented capitalism and white supremacy in the first place?"

American whites and European whites same 'o same 'o?...just geographically disconnected?

definetly not the same, i'm a european white (greece) and i cannot see many similarities in mentality, attitude, or how we have been raised.

"We" may have invented white supremacist thinking (and slavery and a lot of other evil things...), but at least most of us have abandoned it by now.
Although you can see a noticeable movement to the right in European politics lately. But that has more to do with our attitude towards immigrants and their failure to integrate in our society; not necessarily people of color, although they'll probably suffer the consequences for it.
Even right wing politicians are claiming that they have no problem at all with foreign people, as long as they adept well to our culture.
The white - black relationship over here in the Netherlands is still far from optimal, but it seems to be far better than in the US.

And you are rigth: America seems to be the fucked up beyond recognition version of Europe.

That's all the incoherent blabber I can give you for now. Stay tuned for more, as fuel will undoubtedly will be added to the fire of this discussion. I hope so at least. Picking on the USA has become one of my favorite pastimes.

(and of course I responded to the wrong message as well... it was in reply of the initial post here ok?)

>"We" may have invented white supremacist thinking (and
>slavery and a lot of other evil things...), but at least
>most of us have abandoned it by now.

Oh really? That's news to me!

>Although you can see a noticeable movement to the right in
>European politics lately. But that has more to do with our
>attitude towards immigrants and their failure to integrate
>in our society; not necessarily people of color, although
>they'll probably suffer the consequences for it.
>Even right wing politicians are claiming that they have no
>problem at all with foreign people, as long as they adept
>well to our culture.

hmmm... why do I see a contradiction here...?

>The white - black relationship over here in the Netherlands
>is still far from optimal, but it seems to be far better
>than in the US.
>And you are rigth: America seems to be the fucked up beyond
>recognition version of Europe.
>
>That's all the incoherent blabber I can give you for now.
>Stay tuned for more, as fuel will undoubtedly will be added
>to the fire of this discussion. I hope so at least. Picking
>on the USA has become one of my favorite pastimes.

The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. The United States has only improved upon the foundation as set forth by collective Europe. That's why the emphasis in the educational system here is on European history cuz that is the root of America.

>>"We" may have invented white supremacist thinking (and
>>slavery and a lot of other evil things...), but at least
>>most of us have abandoned it by now.
>
>Oh really? That's news to me!

Yeah I suppose it sounds a little strange. But it counts for me and my friends, as well as my parents and their friends and as far as I know the rest of my family too. Regardless of what our ancestors may have done or invoked.
And I do realize that not all Europeans are like us *they should be though*. However I think that what you call white supremacy, is actually xenophobia in Europe, which of course can be expressed in racist reasoning and acting. I say that because most agression here seems to be directed at newcomers/immigrants, who are not frowned upon for the color of their skin, but more for their culture, which, according to lots of (in my opinion silly) people is a threat to Dutch culture, whatever that may be. Immigrants who already have been here for a while, and adopted our manners, language and "culture", are taking less hate. At least that's what I think I see.

Now don't think I agree with the point of view I described here, but I do think it's different from white supremacist thinking.

I hope I made my previous story a little clearer with this, I know it was kind of self-contradictory.

>The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. The United States
>has only improved upon the foundation as set forth by
>collective Europe. That's why the emphasis in the
>educational system here is on European history cuz that is
>the root of America.

I would hardly call it an improvement. The USA's so-called democracy is the subject of daily ridicule and disbelief here. And this morning I coincidentally read a nice article in the newspaper about the new abstinence program by the Bush government. I almost started crying for what the USA is doing to the world, by discouraging the use of condoms or the pill as means of safe sex. Does Bush want everybody in the world to die of AIDS?

I'm sorry, but this shit is really making me angry.

>Yeah I suppose it sounds a little strange. But it counts for
>me and my friends, as well as my parents and their friends
>and as far as I know the rest of my family too. Regardless
>of what our ancestors may have done or invoked.
>And I do realize that not all Europeans are like us *they
>should be though*. However I think that what you call white
>supremacy, is actually xenophobia in Europe, which of course
>can be expressed in racist reasoning and acting. I say that
>because most agression here seems to be directed at
>newcomers/immigrants, who are not frowned upon for the color
>of their skin, but more for their culture, which, according
>to lots of (in my opinion silly) people is a threat to Dutch
>culture, whatever that may be. Immigrants who already have
>been here for a while, and adopted our manners, language and
>"culture", are taking less hate. At least that's what I
>think I see.
>
>Now don't think I agree with the point of view I described
>here, but I do think it's different from white supremacist
>thinking.

Funny but I see a problem with your statements. The newcomers/immigrants aren't accepted until they intergrate into the present society BUT according to you they still catch hate. It seems obvious to me why that would be. That line of thinking is no different than what goes on in the United States. The immigrants to this country are encouraged to intergrate... meaning to adapt to the ways of the "majority". However the fact remains that one has to devalue of downplay one's original culture and philosophies in order to be accepted and even then one is truly not embraced. I don't see the difference.


>I would hardly call it an improvement. The USA's so-called
>democracy is the subject of daily ridicule and disbelief
>here. And this morning I coincidentally read a nice article
>in the newspaper about the new abstinence program by the
>Bush government. I almost started crying for what the USA is
>doing to the world, by discouraging the use of condoms or
>the pill as means of safe sex. Does Bush want everybody in
>the world to die of AIDS?

When I said improvement I didn't mean it like I personally approve. Quite to the contrary. From my vantage point it just seems like the United States has taken the philosophies of many Europeans scholars and thinkers and has built upon their previous ideas to foster the American way of life. Whether Europe collectively agrees or not... the root of the United States is European.

>"We" may have invented white supremacist thinking (and
>slavery and a lot of other evil things...), but at least
>most of us have abandoned it by now.

*Scoff* at you claimin' that you've abandoned ship.
How so?

>Although you can see a noticeable movement to the right in
>European politics lately. But that has more to do with our
>attitude towards immigrants and their failure to integrate
>in our society; not necessarily people of color, although
>they'll probably suffer the consequences for it.

Newsflash: The majority of immigrants are people of color. Y'all don't want any immigrants because y'all scared that they're gonna dilute the white population. By the way, why are you so concerned about the necessity for them to integrate anyways? See, that right there reeks of eurocentrism....The need to impose one's culture over another is a European invention.

>Even right wing politicians are claiming that they have no
>problem at all with foreign people, as long as they adept
>well to our culture.

Seriously....lessons in cultural propriety are needed. Y'all want immigrants to assimilate because you believe that your culture is superior?

>The white - black relationship over here in the Netherlands
>is still far from optimal, but it seems to be far better
>than in the US.
>
>And you are rigth: America seems to be the fucked up beyond
>recognition version of Europe.

Are you sure 'bout this?
What's ironic is that Europeans hate us and yet, they're the ones consuming American pop culture. Europe is the yin to America's yang.

I agree that my first post was self-contradictory and incoherent. In my second one I think I was more able to clarify myself, though this is still a discussion and nothing that I say should be pinned on me...

Which reminds me: stop saying "y'all" please. You're breaking my snobbish paternalistic left-wing intellectual heart by implying that I am afraid of and mean to immigrants.

Borders *physical as well as social* are a big pain in my ass.

>Borders *physical as well as social* are a big pain in my ass.

Imagine the borders that the immigrants seeking a "better future" meet every day.. both physical: an excelent example is the wall in Ceuta right between Europe and Afrika, and mental: politics/laws, being labeled as an illegal human being, certain right wing groups. It's an EFFED up situation and all the politicians are willing to do (the Spain and EU's president Aznar) is to build more barriers for the immigrants, not understanding that it will only cause more and more problems..

>
>Newsflash: The majority of immigrants are people of color.

are they? i'd like to see some figures. i know that a tremendous amount of emigration comes from eastern europe.

i say this bc i know for example, despite the cliches, that most of the illegal immigrants in the US are Canadians (presumably whites).


The need to impose one's culture over
>another is a European invention.

is it? from when?


>>Even right wing politicians are claiming that they have no
>>problem at all with foreign people, as long as they adept
>>well to our culture.

but is this any worse than saying a foreigner can never assimilate for reasons of blood lineage?


Y'all
>want immigrants to assimilate because you believe that your
>culture is superior?

but is the question superiority? i mean, you could be a total relativist, and still think that your community's mores are worth preserving through the local governing institutions to the point that foreigners will have to adapt to your ways to live amongst you.


>What's ironic is that Europeans hate us and yet, they're the
>ones consuming American pop culture.

yeah, i said that to an af-am friend of mine: you consider yourself a victim of america and yet to went to see star wars and the sum of all fears. how ironic to be consuming YT pop culture when you hate em.

seriously tho, people all over the world hate american hegemony and consume american pop culture. and let's not forget the extent to which american pop culture is af-am pop culture. nor should we forget the extent to which the popularity of (af)am pop culture is a function of american imperialism. like wheat and milk, american companies dump pop culture in third world countries until the markets are broken.

ps. why o why, mfreeman, are you using this rush limbaughesque argument about oh, europeans hate america but they eat big macs? while my own tastes in pop culture are perfectly in line with my politics, i think it's a little much to say europeans are hypocritical to protest the wto when they sent eminem to the top of the charts.

pps. thanks for the help the other day. one day i will stop trying to do clever things with my computer.

>are they? i'd like to see some figures. i know that a
>tremendous amount of emigration comes from eastern europe.

One of the reasons why I made post 107. I'm far more concerned with the discrimination of non-Europeans.

>i say this bc i know for example, despite the cliches, that
>most of the illegal immigrants in the US are Canadians
>(presumably whites).

But the thing is, treatment of immigrants is also racist in itself. Because of their whiteness, they don't experience the same form of institutional racism that's imposed on Latino, Blacks and Asians.

>The need to impose one's culture over
>>another is a European invention.
>
>is it? from when?

Well...since the start of European civilization, Europeans felt the need to go into foreign lands to spread their "civilized" ways.

>but is the question superiority? i mean, you could be a
>total relativist, and still think that your community's
>mores are worth preserving through the local governing
>institutions to the point that foreigners will have to adapt
>to your ways to live amongst you.

I think it is a question of cultural superiority, at least Europeans' assertion of that. It's fine if they want to preserve their traditions but to claim that your traditions are unmatched by any other is cultural elitism/snobbery at its worst.

I mean really...why is it that VanGogh, Bodacelli, Voltaire and Beethoven is common knowledge to East Asians, Latin Americans and all other groups but Europeans don't have the same mutual respect of other cultures? The respect/admiration is one-sided.

>
>seriously tho, people all over the world hate american
>hegemony and consume american pop culture. and let's not
>forget the extent to which american pop culture is af-am pop
>culture. nor should we forget the extent to which the
>popularity of (af)am pop culture is a function of american
>imperialism. like wheat and milk, american companies dump
>pop culture in third world countries until the markets are
>broken.
>
>ps. why o why, mfreeman, are you using this rush
>limbaughesque argument about oh, europeans hate america but
>they eat big macs? while my own tastes in pop culture are
>perfectly in line with my politics, i think it's a little
>much to say europeans are hypocritical to protest the wto
>when they sent eminem to the top of the charts.

Actually, I agree with you there. It's better being a self-professed hypocrite than blissfully ignorant.

>pps. thanks for the help the other day. one day i will stop
>trying to do clever things with my computer.

No problem.

>>are they? i'd like to see some figures. i know that a
>>tremendous amount of emigration comes from eastern europe.
>
>One of the reasons why I made post 107. I'm far more
>concerned with the discrimination of non-Europeans.


ok, but i'm not sure that your original remark about most immigration being people of color is true. it may be, but i'm not sure that it is. so i'm not sure you're right to say "Y'all don't want any immigrants because y'all scared that they're gonna dilute the white population." there was a just a movie at the human rights watch festival about discrimination against pourtugese in france, for example, and i know that eastern european immigrants are treated pretty badly in western europe. so i question those comments.


>>The need to impose one's culture over
>>>another is a European invention.
>>
>>is it? from when?
>
>Well...since the start of European civilization, Europeans
>felt the need to go into foreign lands to spread their
>"civilized" ways.


when was the start of european civilization? and when did europeans think of themselves as civilized and needing to go to foreign lands to spread this civilization?

i suspect that it's in fact a back-formation. i'm only familiar with a few cases (eg pourtugese/angola, british/india) but the notion of a civilizing mission came long after the initial encounter during the Age of Exploration, and after the balance of power was decisively in favor of europeans. and this long, long, long after a) the birth of european civilization, and b) engagements with the non-european world.



>I mean really...why is it that Van Gogh, Bodacelli, Voltaire
>and Beethoven is common knowledge to East Asians, Latin
>Americans and all other groups but Europeans don't have the
>same mutual respect of other cultures? The
>respect/admiration is one-sided.


i don't know if botticelli is common knowledge in east asia, but i would also point out that in fact there has been a tremendous amount of western study of the non-western world. think about napoleon in egypt or richard burton or the asiatic society or max muller. i know, i know, you're going to quote edward said at me, but the point is that the respect, admiration and interest existed.

and i'll also point out that today, you and i *and the local peoples* know about angkor wat, khajuraho or the cave paintings in north africa bc of western inquiry/research.

i'll skip the obvious examples of picasso and whistler and talk about me. i'm only research-level literate in english and maybe french. i've never completely read a grown up book in a non-western language, even when i lived in the third world. every single thing i know about trade btw axum and india or cambodian sculpture or the great monuments of zimbabwe, i had the chance to learn bc of a long history of western interest in the non-western world. the reason i know the names of say, Ibn Khaldun, Murasaki Shikibu and Bhaskara is bc some YT was interested before me.

>ok, but i'm not sure that your original remark about most
>immigration being people of color is true. it may be, but
>i'm not sure that it is. so i'm not sure you're right to
>say "Y'all don't want any immigrants because y'all scared
>that they're gonna dilute the white population." there was
>a just a movie at the human rights watch festival about
>discrimination against pourtugese in france, for example,
>and i know that eastern european immigrants are treated
>pretty badly in western europe. so i question those
>comments.

Well...If eastern european immigrants are treated poorly, ethnic groups (with coloured complexions and from greater distances) are screwed even that much more.

>when was the start of european civilization? and when did
>europeans think of themselves as civilized and needing to go
>to foreign lands to spread this civilization?
>
>i suspect that it's in fact a back-formation. i'm only
>familiar with a few cases (eg pourtugese/angola,
>british/india) but the notion of a civilizing mission came
>long after the initial encounter during the Age of
>Exploration, and after the balance of power was decisively
>in favor of europeans. and this long, long, long after a)
>the birth of european civilization, and b) engagements with
>the non-european world.

I'm gonna have to back out on this one because I don't know enuff about ancient civilizations to speak on it....

But a general thought:
Who were the ones financing exploration and on a mission to colonize distant lands? Sure, the Japanese also joined in on this colonial scheme BUT their interest in building the East Asia Prosperity Sphere was only confined to East Asia. On the other hand, the Brits and the French stepped outside of their boundaries and wished to conquer coloured persons not only because of their interest in expansion but also because they felt the need to civilize barbarians.


>
>i don't know if botticelli is common knowledge in east asia,

haha...looks like I spelled his name wrong.

>but i would also point out that in fact there has been a
>tremendous amount of western study of the non-western world.
> think about napoleon in egypt or richard burton or the
>asiatic society or max muller. i know, i know, you're going
>to quote edward said at me, but the point is that the
>respect, admiration and interest existed.

But only among scholars who are a small minority of the population.

>and i'll also point out that today, you and i *and the local
>peoples* know about angkor wat, khajuraho or the cave
>paintings in north africa bc of western inquiry/research.

Seriously tho'....you are an exception to the rule. How many white Americans/Blacks/Europeans/Asians/etc know/have access/have interest in those things? Very few. The general population is what concerns me.

>i'll skip the obvious examples of picasso and whistler and
>talk about me. i'm only research-level literate in english
>and maybe french. i've never completely read a grown up
>book in a non-western language, even when i lived in the
>third world. every single thing i know about trade btw axum
>and india or cambodian sculpture or the great monuments of
>zimbabwe, i had the chance to learn bc of a long history of
>western interest in the non-western world. the reason i
>know the names of say, Ibn Khaldun, Murasaki Shikibu and
>Bhaskara is bc some YT was interested before me.

Again, you're not normal...and take that as a compliment. Mention "The Tale of Genji" to anyone and expect a blank face.

I still stand on my belief that mutual respect is lacking. As proof, why is it that the study of European languages and cultures is universal? Everybody and their mommas wanna speak French, eat French, travel French and yet Andreas from Germany could give a tick's ass 'bout learnin Chinese?

On
>the other hand, the Brits and the French stepped outside of
>their boundaries


what boundaries? and who decides?


and wished to conquer coloured persons not
>only because of their interest in expansion but also because
>they felt the need to civilize barbarians.


you're wrong. this is a back-formation. as i said, the discourse on civilizing the barbarian came long after the initial contacts. it came after the balance of power shifted. same thing with arabs and east africa, once the power was all on one side, the contempt followed.

see, not only are you accepting a later view as an earlier one, you're also ignoring the history and power that "we" had. europe didn't sail the world to civilize anyone, they used the civilizing mission as an excuse to continue what they were doing at a point when they knew that the natives were getting restless. when "we" first encountered "them", the technology gap wasn't that great, and the attitudes were quite different.

>
>>but i would also point out that in fact there has been a
>>tremendous amount of western study of the non-western world.
>> think about napoleon in egypt or richard burton or the
>>asiatic society or max muller. i know, i know, you're going
>>to quote edward said at me, but the point is that the
>>respect, admiration and interest existed.
>
>But only among scholars who are a small minority of the
>population.

no, not just scholars, but the people who funded them, which is far more important, and the people who consumed popularizations of their work. the popularity of chinoiserie or omar khayyam was much more general.


>>and i'll also point out that today, you and i *and the local
>>peoples* know about angkor wat, khajuraho or the cave
>>paintings in north africa bc of western inquiry/research.
>
>Seriously tho'....you are an exception to the rule. How many
>white Americans/Blacks/Europeans/Asians/etc know/have
>access/have interest in those things? Very few. The general
>population is what concerns me.


no, what i was saying there is that the general population around khaj, angkor wat, etc know about them *today* bc of westerners.




>Again, you're not normal...and take that as a compliment.
>Mention "The Tale of Genji" to anyone and expect a blank
>face.


and these people know who botticelli is?

look, the only reason i know what the tale of the genji is because was on the syllabus at my university. and i could name exactly one botticelli painting. so that's about equal. in fact, i would go on to say that i think anyone who can name three paintings by botticelli knows who murasaki is.



>I still stand on my belief that mutual respect is lacking.
>As proof, why is it that the study of European languages and
>cultures is universal? Everybody and their mommas wanna
>speak French, eat French, travel French and yet Andreas from
>Germany could give a tick's ass 'bout learnin Chinese?

no, i don't think so. how many people in China are learning French... or Dutch? forget about Basque. people learn the languages of economic power, it has little to do with respect or admiration. i mean, there was a tremendous boom in the study of japanese during the 80's, that's not bc everyone started admiring Endo all of a sudden. and it also has to do with the fact that the french or the americans promote the study of their language in a way that the chinese or the ibo don't. there's an alliance francaise in every big city, there's no alliance ibo.

and many an andreas has indeed learned chinese. there's a major center for the study of my own obscure and marginal language in norway, but where will you find centers for the study of norwegian in the third world?

>what boundaries? and who decides?

the physical/cultural boundaries that separate one region from the other. the reason why we differentiate Africa from Europe from Asia. Who decides? Well...that's a hard question..I don't know.

>you're wrong. this is a back-formation. as i said, the
>discourse on civilizing the barbarian came long after the
>initial contacts. it came after the balance of power
>shifted. same thing with arabs and east africa, once the
>power was all on one side, the contempt followed.

Well...i'm not sure I agree with that. Even today, there's a stigma of foreignness that's attached to Middle Easterners/Asians/Africans. This stigma is an extension/continuation of the past. And, peep the early texts/art of Europeans who documented distant lands...also, the west was always described as the center with all other areas defined according to its relation to the west, which explains why the East came to be known as the Far East/Orient.

Even with the first contacts, cultural chauvanism was evident.

>see, not only are you accepting a later view as an earlier
>one, you're also ignoring the history and power that "we"
>had. europe didn't sail the world to civilize anyone, they
>used the civilizing mission as an excuse to continue what
>they were doing at a point when they knew that the natives
>were getting restless.

It came more from a need to strengthen their authority. Their arrogance motivated exploration. They should have taken into the account that they might be unwelcome visitors. Some places wished to preserve autonomy but Europeans asserted their way into their lands anyways.

when "we" first encountered "them",
>the technology gap wasn't that great, and the attitudes were
>quite different.

Actually, I'm not so sure 'bout that either. The introduction of rifles began the process of westernization. And again, the attitude was that of "they're different" rather than "we're different" even when they were the guests.

>>>but i would also point out that in fact there has been a
>>>tremendous amount of western study of the non-western world.
>>> think about napoleon in egypt or richard burton or the
>>>asiatic society or max muller. i know, i know, you're going
>>>to quote edward said at me, but the point is that the
>>>respect, admiration and interest existed.

If there is admiration, why is it that Europeans don't adopt the cultural/social products of other countries in the same way that others have adopted theirs? Westernization is a mainstream process. Easternization? Never even heard of the word.

Go to any European country. There's hardly any Eastern influences in the physical environment. Whereas in Japan, Brazil, Ghana, westernization is evident.

>>But only among scholars who are a small minority of the
>>population.
>
>no, not just scholars, but the people who funded them, which
>is far more important, and the people who consumed
>popularizations of their work. the popularity of
>chinoiserie or omar khayyam was much more general.

The scholars and those who fund them are associated with higher institutions, which means that they are in the minority.

>>>and i'll also point out that today, you and i *and the local
>>>peoples* know about angkor wat, khajuraho or the cave
>>>paintings in north africa bc of western inquiry/research.

Who? On the behalf of the general American public, I have no idea who wat or khajuraho are. On the other hand, name some Europeans and I guarantee that Americans will have some idea who you're referring to.

>>Seriously tho'....you are an exception to the rule. How many
>>white Americans/Blacks/Europeans/Asians/etc know/have
>>access/have interest in those things? Very few. The general
>>population is what concerns me.
>
>
>no, what i was saying there is that the general population
>around khaj, angkor wat, etc know about them *today* bc of
>westerners.

And again, I'm saying that they are a small minority of the collective population.

>
>
>
>>Again, you're not normal...and take that as a compliment.
>>Mention "The Tale of Genji" to anyone and expect a blank
>>face.
>
>
>and these people know who botticelli is?

Yup....there was even a reference to Botticelli in "Clueless". Michaelangelo, DaVinci, Mozart, Shakespheare and other European artists/philosophers are all household names in America. America has an interest in Europe. French and German are taught in schools. Everyone wants to look European. Everyone buys European. Everyone dreams of traveling to France. Europe is romanticized.

>look, the only reason i know what the tale of the genji is
>because was on the syllabus at my university. and i could
>name exactly one botticelli painting. so that's about
>equal. in fact, i would go on to say that i think anyone
>who can name three paintings by botticelli knows who
>murasaki is.

I'd have to disagree. Even if someone cant name three titles, they still know of him. Everyone knows who Beethoven is but few can name his symphonies. And those who can name-drop are regarded as "cultured". There's a certain admiration that comes with being "cultured" in the European arts.


>no, i don't think so. how many people in China are learning
>French... or Dutch?

But China still admires the west. And, they don't have to know the language to study French literature (which comes translated).

forget about Basque. people learn the
>languages of economic power, it has little to do with
>respect or admiration.

Yes, that's a good point but also, take into the account what economic relationships are based on...the relationship between the exploited/exploiter...there's a power structure at work here, one that is based on white supremacy.


i mean, there was a tremendous boom
>in the study of japanese during the 80's, that's not bc
>everyone started admiring Endo all of a sudden.

A superficial trend right? On the other hand, westernization/interest in Europe(America) is set in stone.

and it also
>has to do with the fact that the french or the americans
>promote the study of their language in a way that the
>chinese or the ibo don't. there's an alliance francaise in
>every big city, there's no alliance ibo.

That's cause the French have more clout.

>and many an andreas has indeed learned chinese. there's a
>major center for the study of my own obscure and marginal
>language in norway, but where will you find centers for the
>study of norwegian in the third world?

Again, I'm not denying that there are *some* Europeans with interest in foreign cultures. But, I'm more interested in taking a survey of all Europeans to see if they have any interest in Africa or the Middle East.
>
>
>
>
>

and i'm glad to see that.

But what i feel you are being very certain about but with little true knowledge is:
>And again, I'm saying that they are a small minority of the
>collective population. (who knows about distant cultures)

I think it's mostly an assumption from your side. Like i said in another post, of course the approach is more or less eurocentric in european countries (depending alot on the "greatness"/"importance" of the country - for example there is more in france than in norway), but distant cultures are still given much more respect and time to study than in USA. And I mean specially within the children's school. And within the society as a whole (excluding the university, because it is more an elite thing, and becomes even more eurocentric than other centres for learning). I probably say it because i'm biased because i come from a small & insignificant european country (and as a scandinavian country we like to stand on the sideline, choose not to join world wars and give nobel's peace awards to "nobel" people - and for example take the side of Palestina because there are enough support given to Isreal as it is already).

thusly, having made my point, i digress *talking like a brittish snob*.. (sortof to prove my point of the elite)

->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->
    you will always go where the arrow points.

pen jakke:          , , , (snip),
                         (snip), (tungtvann feat pen jakke)

quickly, i think you misread my post. i don't want to waste time repeating myself, but:


>the physical/cultural boundaries that separate one region from the other. the reason why we differentiate Africa from Europe from Asia. Who decides? Well...that's a hard question..I don't know.


are you going to indict the Moors, Zhang He and the Turks as well? the peoples aroudn the Red Sea who traded with South and Southeast Asia? i mean, where is this heading? no one should have ever set sail?


>Well...i'm not sure I agree with that. Even today, there's a
>stigma of foreignness that's attached to Middle
>Easterners/Asians/Africans.


girl, how can you possibly argue against a back-formation by saying there are prejudices today?!?! a back-formation is precisely projecting *today's* prejudices back onto the past.



This stigma is an
>extension/continuation of the past. And, peep the early
>texts/art of Europeans who documented distant lands...


i have. i cited two specific examples, the british in india and the pourtugese in angola. i could give citations but this needs to be more serious on both sides to go to that extent.



>
> when "we" first encountered "them",
>>the technology gap wasn't that great, and the attitudes were
>>quite different.
>
>Actually, I'm not so sure 'bout that either. The
>introduction of rifles began the process of westernization.


slow down. to consider one of my examples from above, the battle of panipat used rifles before any process of westernization.



>If there is admiration, why is it that Europeans don't adopt
>the cultural/social products of other countries in the same
>way that others have adopted theirs? Westernization is a
>mainstream process. Easternization? Never even heard of the
>word.


come on. i'm sure you can think of a hundred ways in which western culture as adopted the social and cultural products of the east. i gave some examples up above, i could have as easily said look at bocaccio or the number 0 or linguine or the Cantos. why would you want to act like we've westernized while they have not adopted things from us, and thereby reverse all the *amazing* scholarship that has been done in the last 50 years? i mean, this is *precisely* what YT believes, that we are mimic men and they are self-made. it's utter nonsense. i find it mind-boggling that you would repeat this argument.



>
>Go to any European country. There's hardly any Eastern
>influences in the physical environment. Whereas in Japan,
>Brazil, Ghana, westernization is evident.


Granada? Moscow?


>
>>>But only among scholars who are a small minority of the
>>>population.
>>
>>no, not just scholars, but the people who funded them, which
>>is far more important, and the people who consumed
>>popularizations of their work. the popularity of
>>chinoiserie or omar khayyam was much more general.
>
>The scholars and those who fund them are associated with
>higher institutions, which means that they are in the
>minority.


actually, omar khayyam was *popular*. mass printings. and that's just one example. if we include material culture, the examples are innumerable.

for that matter, people who know about botticelli in china are also an extremely small minority.



>
>>>>and i'll also point out that today, you and i *and the local
>>>>peoples* know about angkor wat, khajuraho or the cave
>>>>paintings in north africa bc of western inquiry/research.
>
>Who? On the behalf of the general American public, I have no
>idea who wat or khajuraho are. On the other hand, name some
>Europeans and I guarantee that Americans will have some idea
>who you're referring to.


you are missing my point. for the third time around, i'm talking about the people who actually live in the VICINITY. that's why i said *local peoples*. that was my point. the people living near khajuraho or angkor wat in contemporary times didn't know about them until western inquiry.



>Again, I'm not denying that there are *some* Europeans with
>interest in foreign cultures. But, I'm more interested in
>taking a survey of all Europeans to see if they have any
>interest in Africa or the Middle East.

i'm more interested in you knowing where angkor wat and khajuraho are. seriously. bc i also think that your mission to indict YT for insufficient respect for the Wonders of the Third World is... well, uninteresting, besides being in some ways unfair. who cares what YT thinks? why bother taking a survey of all Europeans? i'm far, far, far -- actually, this was my great epiphany of 1988, but anyway -- interested in actually addressing the materials themselves than indicting YT for not knowing them. and, i must also say, in historical terms, YT often knew more about the rest of the world than we knew about each other, which leaves a bitter taste in my mouth. so, mlle freeman, each one teach one. here's and here's .

Thanks for the links.

>Who were the ones financing exploration and on a mission to
>colonize distant lands?


and actually, what mission to colonize distant lands? the east india trading company was for trade, ditto dutch east india trading co. the colonizations in the east came about over centuries as the power gap widened. and even in the west, columbus didn't set out looking for colonies.

and btw, as sanjay subrahmanyam has shown with the world from the red sea to points east, europeans were actually poaching pre-existing trade routes developed by traders around the red sea. for that matter, the chinese too funded long distance exploration, viz. zheng he going to madagascar. i think that a fuller view of the non-western world will make your arguments about european uniqueness less tenable. why would you wish to erase the long history of peoples of color stepping outside their boundaries?

>>and i'll also point out that today, you and i *and the local
>>peoples* know about angkor wat, khajuraho or the cave
>>paintings in north africa bc of western inquiry/research.
>
>Seriously tho'....you are an exception to the rule. How many
>white Americans/Blacks/Europeans/Asians/etc know/have
>access/have interest in those things? Very few. The general
>population is what concerns me.

why you keep talking about europe without having been there?
The general population of USA have extremly little knowledge about distant cultures. You'd be surprised of how most europeans know much about distant cultures.. we learn more about it than they do in USA, in school, from parents, it is more a part of the life: knowing at least the basic facts from history worldwide (ancient to present).. of course not free from european point of view, but compared to america's school system, it's supposed to be much more open.

heh now i'm only jumping in as soon as i find something i know is wrong, i don't mean to do that.. i'll try to get into this discussion in a better way

>I still stand on my belief that mutual respect is lacking.

You are right there, at least to a big degree.. like the quote in guerilla_love's sig says: it says something like "when western methodes and thinking is seen as the only thing that is valid, something is very wrong". The methodes of the western world is often (definitely not always, specially not now in these days! but still often) seen as the best thing - and when it is like that, there's no mutual respect.

>>say "Y'all don't want any immigrants because y'all scared
>>that they're gonna dilute the white population."

no, it isn't exactly about that. It may be like that in the most extreme le pen-like cases, but I know from my country and other european countries of the same nature (mountain people - isolated, remote), that the argument is that they don't want anything foreign in their area. They see it as a threat. Because of that, in norway there are two expressions (who sometimes go hand in hand, but not always): racism and "fear of things foreign" (it has it's own word). To explain the difference, the first is pure hate, the second is more about fear (and an attempt to solve it by removing/stopping the "threat")

I don't know _HOW_ honest they are when they say "I don't mind a pakistani, as long as he lives a norwegian life style and lives a honest life just like the next norwegian" - but that is what many/most of those who have "fear of things foreign" say.

i'd guess that in my country about 50%+ have that "fear of things foreign" (to varying degrees from person to person) within them.


>Well...If eastern european immigrants are treated poorly,
>ethnic groups (with coloured complexions and from greater
>distances) are screwed even that much more.

Eastern europeans are treated similarly to for example asians (but africans remains the most negative - they are as different as you can get). The eastern europeans arrive as illegal immigrants, and when they wait for their papers to be dealt with by authorities, there have been cases of romanians and bulgarians (often Rom people) stealing - and that has become the stereotype placed on them.

See, what many say about the "fear of things foreign" is: As long as it's bellow the Alps, it is bad. It is negative. They are theifs and if not, they are at least a threat. (in france, i guess they'd say "As long as it's outside the borders of europe, it's bad")

>>but i would also point out that in fact there has been a
>>tremendous amount of western study of the non-western world.
>> think about napoleon in egypt or richard burton or the
>>asiatic society or max muller. i know, i know, you're going
>>to quote edward said at me, but the point is that the
>>respect, admiration and interest existed.

but in most cases (specially the more "government-funded" ones) i doubt it was a honest respect, and i doubt the respect lasted for long or was accepted by the leaders of the european cultures themselves. you know how the people, and even more the elite, used to look at different cultures back in the day (paintings of how africa was, britain's half-hearted respect for indian cultures (i think))

in our lifetime (and since the beginning of the last century, i think) it is very different, more respect - i think it came with the fall of the european empires/powers (specially UK).

i know plenty of greeks/greek orthodox churches/.....

if you're asking me, i've never been to the states, but i went to an international school and met a lot of greek-americans, and they bear no resemblence to greek-greeks, they are americans who take into account they're heritage but do not think or live the same way.

c'mon here. be real. of course they bear some resemblance. some traditions, some language, some appearance, etc.

ya can't shed it completely

u were just overwhelmed by the american side of their culture

but i think, for example, that they would share more of yr culture than say, a native zimbabwe

ok, i suppose you're kinda right, but the language means nothing, australians speak english too but they're completely different from americans,
traditions? ok, but again the same as any other orthodox country

what i'm trying to say is there is a completely different mentality, greeks are not big fans of the americans and have not been assimilated into the culture that most european countries have adapted to, on the most part our own identity has been preserved.
i personally have problems identifiying and connecting with a lot of the greek-americans that come over here, they have a very warped image of what greece is like, it is NOT like astoria!!

It's about perspective. Living high on the hog can make it challenging to look inward at your own faults when you have a bird's eye view of everyone else's.

As far as Euros and American Whites...shit they aren't even close to being the same. European ethnic groups all have very different cultures. By in large, American whites have become their own distinct ethnic group with their last ties to their homeland being their surnames.

It's not where you are from , it's where you are at, and where you are at can define you.

" If we can't learn to live together despite the turmoil of past generations we are doomed." -Stern

"And where today is the stable community that would sustain such a couple, where one can be both poor and diginified and raise one's children with decency and hope... If the answer is education, does our society adequateley provide that tool of self-improvement to the less well off?"-- Sidney Poitier

" I'm not mad 'cus I'm losing! I'm mad 'cus I don't know how to win!" --Kevin Curtis Daniels Jr.

"And herein lies the tragedy of the age: not that men are poor,-all men know something of poverty; not that men are wicked,-who is good? Not that men are ignorant, -what is Truth? Nay, but that men know so little of men."
W.E.B. Dubois

Would somone please define white American culture? Most of the whites I know identify with their european ancestry. Irish americans celebrate St pats, Polish,Italians,Jewish have their own culture etc.

I'm sure if they had to move to Russia or Ireland tomorrow they would have some issues..just because you drink Guiness, have an Uncle who can play the pipes, cheer on the Green Isle in the World cup, and can sing Ole Danny Boy in a local Pub doesn't mean you are steeped in Irish Culture- if that's the case then I might be Irish. The same rings true for other identities.

American= Mutt. An ecletic mix of msny cultures with a Eurocentric cosmopolitian glaze. This is reflected in our music and our dialect of English.




" If we can't learn to live together despite the turmoil of past generations we are doomed." -Stern

"And where today is the stable community that would sustain such a couple, where one can be both poor and diginified and raise one's children with decency and hope... If the answer is education, does our society adequateley provide that tool of self-improvement to the less well off?"-- Sidney Poitier

" I'm not mad 'cus I'm losing! I'm mad 'cus I don't know how to win!" --Kevin Curtis Daniels Jr.

"And herein lies the tragedy of the age: not that men are poor,-all men know something of poverty; not that men are wicked,-who is good? Not that men are ignorant, -what is Truth? Nay, but that men know so little of men."
W.E.B. Dubois

OK you have proven that White-Americans are not Irish , polish, Itlaian etc. Please tell me what is White-American (not the defintion of an American) Culture.

It is an eclectic, shallow mix of world cultures combined with a eurocentric glaze.



" If we can't learn to live together despite the turmoil of past generations we are doomed." -Stern

"And where today is the stable community that would sustain such a couple, where one can be both poor and diginified and raise one's children with decency and hope... If the answer is education, does our society adequateley provide that tool of self-improvement to the less well off?"-- Sidney Poitier

" I'm not mad 'cus I'm losing! I'm mad 'cus I don't know how to win!" --Kevin Curtis Daniels Jr.

"And herein lies the tragedy of the age: not that men are poor,-all men know something of poverty; not that men are wicked,-who is good? Not that men are ignorant, -what is Truth? Nay, but that men know so little of men."
W.E.B. Dubois

that's a big generalization. there are many different combinations which provide variations. one of my best friends in high school was a mostly german/italian mix (with other stuff thrown in) and their household was quite different from mine, which is mostly swedish and irish (with others thrown in). yeah, we're mutts, but all mutts don't act and look the same.

we need to stop looking at people as labels like "white" or "black" or "yellow" or whatever and more as people. there are definite culture differences that should be recognized and celebrated. think of all the kids on your block when you grew up. imagine if i met one of them today and assumed you were exactly like them because you came from the same block. how can you now do that about white americans whose ancestors came over here from many different countries in europe anywhere from 1 to 6 generations ago?

But to ignore the power of influence among peers peer groups would be wrong as well. There will be a core of shared values. That is the fabric of community.



" If we can't learn to live together despite the turmoil of past generations we are doomed." -Stern

"And where today is the stable community that would sustain such a couple, where one can be both poor and diginified and raise one's children with decency and hope... If the answer is education, does our society adequateley provide that tool of self-improvement to the less well off?"-- Sidney Poitier

" I'm not mad 'cus I'm losing! I'm mad 'cus I don't know how to win!" --Kevin Curtis Daniels Jr.

"And herein lies the tragedy of the age: not that men are poor,-all men know something of poverty; not that men are wicked,-who is good? Not that men are ignorant, -what is Truth? Nay, but that men know so little of men."
W.E.B. Dubois

yeah, but i think you have to get pretty general about what those core values are in order for them to apply to ALL white americans. and the more general you get they apply elsewhere.

but, since USA is an eclectic shallow mix of world cultures combined with an eurocentric glaze(!!), it is impossible to avoid generalizing (as it is always when you try to find the charectaristics of cultures anyways). If you don't want to go with the generalization, you would have to focus on the diversity of the different cultures instead, which i think you try to do(?). But I think that for example the irish pub-drinkers and the polish polka-dancers and the italian pizza restaurant owners honestly aren't very connected to their true roots all that much, they are often living up to stereotypes and sometimes so much that they end up as parodies. (I can say that for my own people, too: norwegians in USA... those who were born and raised in USA and still stick to their roots can be crazy... insane.. just insane)

i agree with firebrand.... the common eurocentric glaze is so present in all american subcultures that it is the best characterization to use.

Once again you have given a definition of American. Please give me a definition that we could decipher for White Americans. The definition you have given any body in America could fall into. I am looking for White American only.

When did their people come ashore? The longer your American roots the closer you are to my explanation- no matter what the race. If you are refering to new arrivals...their values will remain more inline with their home country's for a generation or so...maybe 3.

" If we can't learn to live together despite the turmoil of past generations we are doomed." -Stern

"And where today is the stable community that would sustain such a couple, where one can be both poor and diginified and raise one's children with decency and hope... If the answer is education, does our society adequateley provide that tool of self-improvement to the less well off?"-- Sidney Poitier

" I'm not mad 'cus I'm losing! I'm mad 'cus I don't know how to win!" --Kevin Curtis Daniels Jr.

"And herein lies the tragedy of the age: not that men are poor,-all men know something of poverty; not that men are wicked,-who is good? Not that men are ignorant, -what is Truth? Nay, but that men know so little of men."
W.E.B. Dubois

Which brings us back to my original point there is not a definition of White america. This is a term that is loosely said about many different people of some European decent I.e. Irish, Italian, Polish etc. A person could easily switch from white american to what ever they our mixed with. Why because White American is not one definitive or distict culture.

Although I see what you are saying. This could mean that there are just multiple definitions. That's not necessarily bad per se.
It's hard to give anyone a label, because there are so many factors that go into making us who we are, but to deny that there aren't a set of core values would be crazy.

Allow me to use an illustration that really isn't entirelly topical, but it can help define the scope of convo:

Take three women.

1. One is a 35 year old scotch-irish red head born and raised in savannah, Ga- living in Marietta, Georgia who is widowed with 3 children. She has a bit of Polish on her dad's side, but they were from chicago, so they didn't see them much, but her mom's side fought in every major American war.

2. 18 Year old College student from Macon, Georgia attending the University of Ga. Her parents are both from North Carolina, she has Jewish ancestry, but they are Southern thru and thru. They no longer go to temple on Friday or Saturday, and she is a former cheerleader for her highschool.

3. A 65 year old Southern Belle from Alabama. She comes from a rich French family down by Biloxi, and her late husband owned many assetts. She is a sweet old lady with a rustic southern charm and wit.


...Now let's take these three ladies, have them meet at a Georgia Bulldog football booster's meeting, and then again in a Grocery store in Athens, Ga. If you saw these ladies walking along talking and having a grand ole time- wouldn't you think they were family? Well, if you could mistake them for family-don't you think they can be classified as a somewhat homogenous culture?

They are alike because they are white, and from the south. I seen it a dozen times.

" If we can't learn to live together despite the turmoil of past generations we are doomed." -Stern

"And where today is the stable community that would sustain such a couple, where one can be both poor and diginified and raise one's children with decency and hope... If the answer is education, does our society adequateley provide that tool of self-improvement to the less well off?"-- Sidney Poitier

" I'm not mad 'cus I'm losing! I'm mad 'cus I don't know how to win!" --Kevin Curtis Daniels Jr.

"And herein lies the tragedy of the age: not that men are poor,-all men know something of poverty; not that men are wicked,-who is good? Not that men are ignorant, -what is Truth? Nay, but that men know so little of men."
W.E.B. Dubois

No,I would not mistake them for family.

I guess this doesn't apply to you. I do it all the time, and people have done it to me when hanging with friends or people who appear to be of the same group as me.



" If we can't learn to live together despite the turmoil of past generations we are doomed." -Stern

"And where today is the stable community that would sustain such a couple, where one can be both poor and diginified and raise one's children with decency and hope... If the answer is education, does our society adequateley provide that tool of self-improvement to the less well off?"-- Sidney Poitier

" I'm not mad 'cus I'm losing! I'm mad 'cus I don't know how to win!" --Kevin Curtis Daniels Jr.

"And herein lies the tragedy of the age: not that men are poor,-all men know something of poverty; not that men are wicked,-who is good? Not that men are ignorant, -what is Truth? Nay, but that men know so little of men."
W.E.B. Dubois

>I'm sure if they had to move to Russia or Ireland tomorrow
>they would have some issues..just because you drink Guiness,
>have an Uncle who can play the pipes, cheer on the Green
>Isle in the World cup, and can sing Ole Danny Boy in a local
>Pub doesn't mean you are steeped in Irish Culture- if that's
>the case then I might be Irish.

>The same rings true for other identities.

Yep, Jamericans included

Tight!


" If we can't learn to live together despite the turmoil of past generations we are doomed." -Stern

"And where today is the stable community that would sustain such a couple, where one can be both poor and diginified and raise one's children with decency and hope... If the answer is education, does our society adequateley provide that tool of self-improvement to the less well off?"-- Sidney Poitier

" I'm not mad 'cus I'm losing! I'm mad 'cus I don't know how to win!" --Kevin Curtis Daniels Jr.

"And herein lies the tragedy of the age: not that men are poor,-all men know something of poverty; not that men are wicked,-who is good? Not that men are ignorant, -what is Truth? Nay, but that men know so little of men."
W.E.B. Dubois

in my hometown people really maintain their german, polish & norwegian cultures

really it depends on the individual family and the immiediate environment- whether its conducive or not to the specific culture

*smiles at "norwegian culture"*
hehe... he....hahah!
HAHAHA!!

..you get the point :) ...coming from a real norwegian.
at least when it comes to norwegians in USA (i can't speak for other european cultures, but i assume)

edit: sorry, i was to quick.. i didn't see the second line.
yep, how the focus on their roots are in their upbringing must have alot to say with how to relate to "home" and what to look at yourself as. But no matter how much and hard you try (see, the thing is that many often try too hard), if you don't live in the original culture, you can never become like it. From the examples i've seen, often people become a strange amputated (and perhaps even confused) twist & mix of their original culture and the american culture.

that the result of the mix is bad

it's not. it's just different.

like the original post said, i dont want to be associated with USA, and that is why i'm arguing with you now;)

we probably also disagree because whether they have a norwegian culture or not depends on each person's personal definition of 'culture' and 'cultural heritage'.

to me, a culture is generally and basically mostly confined to one area where the people who share the culture live next to eachother. a culture that belongs to a people (an ethnicity) can't live on on another continent (i mention "people" and "ethnicity" to exclude religions and other faiths that have stronger rules to how the culture has to be compared to the lack of rules of change in an ethnical culture).. a culture that lives on in a different place is in most cases being too much changed.... and cultures also constantly change, making it difficult for a culture to be the same on two different locations on two different continents. And in USA's case, on top of what i've said already, my impression is that the white culture in USA have made the culture you represent in many cases superficial/shallow. that's what i'm saying-

you said
"in my hometown people really maintain their german, polish & norwegian cultures"

in my country, norway, the location of the real norwegian culture, the norwegian americans are seen as many times more american than norwegian - the elements of norway that they have left in them (which vary from person to person, like you said, depending on their upbringing) are often twisted/over-exposed representations of norway.

what i try to say is that they are not the same as the original culture. the norwegian-ness they have in them is more on the surface (perhaps symbolically), while the real substance, what is behind the surface, is the american culture.

but of course, if they spend years and even settle down in norway, it will probably be easier for them to live a life in the norwegian culture than for example for someone coming from south america.

but u, living in spain, call yr own self norwegian

what about yr kids?

etc.

it's different, but one stems from the other. so, for example, a norwegian american generally would have cultural differences in their upbringing from, say, a korean american

>but u, living in spain, call yr own self norwegian
>what about yr kids?

yeah.. but i am home in norway now, after living for two years in spain. And the short two years have left an impact, "challenging" my norwegian culture abit.

If my kids would grow up in spain, even with us talking norwegian in our home, they would be 90% spanish and 10% norwegian. If i was very conscious about making them stick to their norwegian heritage, they would become 75% spanish 25% norwegian at best - and as they raise their kids, even if they try hard, that percentage of norwegianness will decrease, unless they actually spend large parts of their lives in norway. If, after many generations, they still try hard to maintain their norwegianness, it easily becomes only as the stereotypical surface statement that i talked about (at least in the case of norwegians abroad)

>it's different, but one stems from the other. so, for
>example, a norwegian american generally would have cultural
>differences in their upbringing from, say, a korean american

Mh that's true, a person of norwegian heritage (even if it is 10 generations back) is a person of norwegian heritage. But the true connection to norwegian culture is in most cases so minimal or removed that it is basically just a political statement, _almost_ like how some african americans say they are africans. (not exactly the same because norwegian americans have different reasons for using their heritage as a statement than african americans - and it probably isn't very political compared to af-ams)

->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->
    you will always go where the arrow points.

pen jakke:          , , , (snip),
                         (snip), (tungtvann feat pen jakke)

u're neglecting the americans who stay in isolated pockets- our cities are full of chinatowns and greektowns and hispanic sections and african american sections etc etc etc, with their own churches, schools, restaurants, stores, employers, .... it is very possible to move here without ever learning english or returning back home

of course, that's not always the case, there is also a certain degree of integration and integrated neighborhoods, more often among people of european ancestry, but......

thus the hyphen- they're not plain old norwegian, not plain old american, but, as u mentioned, a combination of the two, which often has characteristics completely independent of the others

anyway, i think we're discussing a very small detail, but it's one that i've been quite emotional about in the past, in the process of reckoning out my whiteness in brown settings

there is a post of mine in the archives called "can you be culture-less?" that relates to all this jazz

but i was truly amazed by the degree of integration i saw in europe- very drastically different from america.

i haven't experienced the (insert nationality here)-americans as they are living in the isolated pockets, so i ignore how they appear to other americans.

So i want to get to agree with you.. can we agree that for example the russian-americans (in general, specially those who haven't integrated very much) are a subculture within the american culture? They are not russians anymore, althou they do have russian heritage and try to keep their russian culture alive. They live in USA, but they are not the mainstream culture, they have their own sub-culture which is heavily influenced by Russia.

>thus the hyphen- they're not plain old norwegian, not plain
>old american, but, as u mentioned, a combination of the two,
>which often has characteristics completely independent of
>the others

Yep, i agree with that. However, on top of what you said, i still do think that USA has had a more "fresher" influence on them than their original culture (since their lives have been spent in America, no matter how pocketed they have been living), making them at best slightly more american than (insert nationality here). Except for the straight off the boat immigrants, of course.

can you agree with that?

>anyway, i think we're discussing a very small detail, but
>it's one that i've been quite emotional about in the past,
>in the process of reckoning out my whiteness in brown
>settings

i can understand that
were you almost doomed to marry a brown man? :) (we can take this to the inbox if you want)

I'll try to check out the post in the archives

>but i was truly amazed by the degree of integration i saw in
>europe- very drastically different from america.

Yes? I think it is very much because of what i said before, that racism isn't as institutionalized in Europe. It is more about the money.. and even on that topic, my country (and other scandinavian countries) is can be heaven to the poor man - we are a welfare state deluxe. Because of that, and the fact that immigrants are (but have been more in the past, i think) given financial backup in the beginning, few immigrants are allowed to enter, but many of those who do soon do it very well. The problems, at least within the pakistani minority, is more about cultural identity and being a minority than it is about the system holding you down (of course the system DOES favorize ethnically norwegians much, and being a minority automatically puts you in a europe-wide stereotype of being poor and therefore criminal, althou efforts are being used to stop it - you see job offerings saying "Individuals of immigrant background are encouraged to apply.")

There's been very loud country-wide debates about integration, with "foreign-fearers" often saying immigrants are accepted as long as they integrate as much as possible. Most won't fully integrate, many live a double-life where they are western at work but they live their own culture at home and with family.

There have been many debates about issues like how to deal with what is seen as a crime in norway but is more commonly accepted in other cultures (and then those acts being done by immigrants in norway).. they (intellectuals, representatives of immigrants and the police) have agreed to aproach it with very much respect but still following the norwegian law. In some cases it means they walk on a thin line.

There's been written long books about it. The conclution in a famous one is that cultural variety has to be charished and encouraged and accepted, and it WILL be, as long as the norwegian authorities and norwegian people show respect and understanding. Like he said it himself: "This conclution is written as propaganda for an open ghetto solution where the moral is decentralized and where the thousand flowers are allowed to flourish, where cultural conflicts occurs of necessity because anything else would require a brutal cultural unidirection that is directed by the state."

....but it depends on who is integrating. It is easier for an eastern european - to them it becomes almost like an european going to america, there is a larger difference for a person from sri lanka.

->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->
    you will always go where the arrow points.

pen jakke:          , , , (snip),
                         (snip), (tungtvann feat pen jakke)

we do agree, we're just standing at different angles to the same beast (so to speak)

in america there is a stereotype that most violent crimes are committed by young black men, so much of the work of crime prevention and law enforcement is focused accordingly. anybody who is not a young black man can get out of an accusation, for the most part. and people feel justified in suspecting all young black men of being criminals.

it's really very hard to see. many of the crimes that send poor people to prison for many years of their youth are committed just as frequently by richer kids, but the richer kids are considered to be "just going through a phase"

...

yes, america is the more recent and most readily identifiable culture, and u could call the mix an american subculture. russian americans and russians, for example, share the same history, but not the same current culture

...

was i destined to marry a brown man? not necessarily. i am very sensitive to words that come from white mouths- i get offended very easily and tend to judge most white americans as ignorant and disgusting. but i do know a few white (actually, european) men that i could see myself with had i not been married already.

actually, in truth, i am very strict in my politics and few people can fit in my scope enuf to get along on an extended basis. my husband is the perfect mix for me because he shares most of my views, but comes at them from a completely different perspective/history/culture, so we can learn/grow/develop a lot from each other.

there are some big differences between the cultural histories of black and white americans. if african relinquish their african history they become black americans, one of the most disrespected cultural groups on the globe, whereas when white americans relinquish their ancestry they rise in their social status as americans. there is also the issue of voluntarism- where some people relinquish their cultures by choice more than others. much african culture was lost against the will of the people, and some europeans surrendered their culture for political reasons. my family, for example, was russiana nd jewish and arrived at the onset of the cold war, a baaaaaad time to be speaking russian............. consequently, my father didn't know his father was born in russia, or even that he was jewish, until he was an adult with a teenage daughter

you are so brilliant. really, i think so. thank you for all the good info and points of view you brought into discussions!


oh, and i'll cosign on that

peace

i mean.. agree. dont always agree with him of course, but this time i agree 100%.

hi Federisco! good to see you 'round and to see that, once again, we agree on a point of view.

peace

i was going to say it, but then i thought i shouldnt because i was cosigning to you cosigning to firebrand.. hehe it would be a cosign on too many levels

good to see you, Casm!

->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->
    you will always go where the arrow points.

pen jakke:          , , , (snip),
                         (snip), (tungtvann feat pen jakke)

When I lived in Brooklyn I had a chat with this guy on a visa, from Italy. Brooklyn has a big Italian American community and that's what I knew. This native Italian guy made a point to differentiate so-called American Italians and himself. He blasted the racist attitudes of the Italian Americans. He told me to visit Italy to see the difference.

Toni Morrison once said that the first word immigrants learn when they come to the US is nigger. I don't fully agree with that statement but I do agree that immigrants buy into a certain social hierachy and see themselves as better than Black and other folks. America is supposed to be a land of opportunity and many immigrants come here seeking a better life. They are often blinded by what other Americans refuse to admit and that is the system is really no better than other countries. The American "dream" is a nightmare for many Americans, esp. institutionalized racism, poverty and other social ills that exist in other countries.

My Italian friend was right. When I met him he immediately addressed this issue. The American dream is an illusion. People the world over see the same dream, esp. through the media and buy into that. Americans are the most blinded (notice I didn't specify white).

as a black woman who has stayed in Italy I know for a fact that there IS a lot of disdain for africans, and most that emigrate into Italy will not find the opportunities to obtain suitable jobs. Many of the african women that come into Italy are forced to prostitute themselves (may be interesting to see this in relation to Italian mens'affinity of black women) and this made it a particularly troublesome experience for me. Similar to the Romanies, in Italy, Africans are looked down upon consequently because are not given the opportunity to flourish...

sadly true. here in Brazil, a lot of afro descendant women meet italian/german/swiss tourists who promise them a better life in europe. they come back and take these women with them. there, many of them end up ill, some of them even end up dying, for the disdain and racism they have to endure is way too heavy and they eventually fail. the ones that dare to break free from the lives imposed by their "husbands" end up prostituting themselves to get the money to come back home. if they seek for help in those nations governments, all they hear is "you came here at your own risk, don't play the victim now".

my okp's homie Nettrice got a point tho as in acknowledging the way many immigrants behave before the flawned american dream.

peace yall

>When I lived in Brooklyn I had a chat with this guy on a
>visa, from Italy. Brooklyn has a big Italian American
>community and that's what I knew. This native Italian guy
>made a point to differentiate so-called American Italians
>and himself. He blasted the racist attitudes of the Italian
>Americans. He told me to visit Italy to see the difference.

See....I don't buy into this.

I notice that a lot of Europeans claim that that racial categories aren't a big deal in their countries. Funny, considering that they gave birth to the concept of European standards of beauty. My Korean friend spent a year in Germany...not a day went by without him bein' discriminated by muthafuckas on the basis of his Asian features.

goes to Korea?

What happens?

>goes to Korea?
>
>What happens?

Ever seen south koreans? Or any east asians for that matter?
East Asians with their inferiority complexes (as a result of western contact) are obsessed with dyein their hair blond, goin' on massive diets to slim down, havin' plastic surgery to make their features more european, buyin european brand-names....blah, blah, blah....they worship all things european.

Cultural imperialism, eurocentrism, and westernization at its worst.

And, do Germans hold Korean culture in high esteem? No.

he gets discriminated against for his European features, Shimmy. it's exactly the same. and if you'll follow me, there's a room full of postcolonial theorists waiting to hear from you.

i think the root of the misunderstanding is that europe's racism is different from USAs. Racism and "fear of things foreign" in USA seem more institutionalized and generally more widespread.. something that isn't talked about, but everybody knows about, and many (including many of the european immigrants) benefit from it. One example of that is how in USA, your race ("black"/"white".. "poor"/"rich") often determines your social level(?) much more than it is in Europe

I think (as an european who's now been both in the north and the south) that Europe's racism is in most cases (not all, but most) more located within the authorities and the politics. Not as much within everyday life and business life in a _widespread_ way as it is in USA --- instead, socially, it is more located within certain groups.

"Fear of foreigners", however, is becoming more widespread, fuelled by certain types of politicians. I think this movement (le pen-style) i making western europe (and then probably eastern europe along with it) more the way it is in USA. (But that's another post.....)

>i think the root of the misunderstanding is that europe's
>racism is different from USAs. Racism and "fear of things
>foreign" in USA seem more institutionalized and generally
>more widespread.. something that isn't talked about, but
>everybody knows about, and many (including many of the
>european immigrants) benefit from it. One example of that is
>how in USA, your race ("black"/"white".. "poor"/"rich")
>often determines your social level(?) much more than it is
>in Europe

Well...the reason why intra-racism in European countries doesn't reach the level of America is because they are nowhere near as racially diverse as us.

Asians, Blacks and Latinos, the groups subjected to the most racism in America, barely even qualify as minorities in Europe. If these coloured folks ain't even there, how can they be discriminated against?

European racism is more apparent in foreign policy rather than what goes on in the homeland.

>
>"Fear of foreigners", however, is becoming more widespread,
>fuelled by certain types of politicians. I think this
>movement (le pen-style) i making western europe (and then
>probably eastern europe along with it) more the way it is in
>USA. (But that's another post.....)

I think that fear is historically and characteristically European.

just some things to wonder though...

Do more college educated continental africans and diasporan africans get accepted for European visas as compared to american visas? Because income level is still directly related to education.

On what terms are the Africans in Europe accepted in their social class? I mean, Bill Gates has money but not everyone with the same income level accept as a part of their social class.

>Well...the reason why intra-racism in European countries
>doesn't reach the level of America is because they are
>nowhere near as racially diverse as us.

Yes, many countries in europe are not as ethnically diverse as some areas in USA, but please...
LONDON! Paris. Amsterdam. München.

The reason why intra-racism in European countries doesn't reach the level of America is because large groups of people descending from different cultures (with their ways of life combined with the fact that most immigrants are poor and are not treated well by European society and therefore end up in the lower classes, resulting in a somewhat correct but usually over-emphasized stereotype of immigrants being thiefs/criminals and plain forward negative contributions to society) haven't been found in european societies for as long as in USA. USA's history of treating "others" within their own country is also different, and unlike Europe, i think the past is more present in USA today compared to how Europe's past is present in Europe today.

but..... i think if europe doesn't change its politics towards immigrants now, racism will become more and more institutionalized.
>
>Asians, Blacks and Latinos, the groups subjected to the most
>racism in America, barely even qualify as minorities in
>Europe.

What? Wrong
It's true that the representation of different groups of peoples are different in european countries than in USA (and of course it is also different from country to country, for example southern europe has many north african immigrants, while northern europe has many eastern european immigrants - not saying that eastern europeans aren't present in south europe or north africans aren't present in north europe).
But please. I went to school right next to the largest vietnamese "colony" in my country. Norway's largest minority is the pakistani, who first came to the country 30 years ago (i say that to remind you about how large numbers of minorities is a new phenomenon in many european countries, unlike USA). There are many of african descent (amongst those there probably is a big majority who only live here at the moment, planning to go home eventually).. you meet "african norwegians" in small towns as far up north as way above the polar circle. The african minority, they are also present. Less from south america, but they are also abit present (my new neighbour who arrived today is from colombia).

>European racism is more apparent in foreign policy rather
>than what goes on in the homeland.

I dont know.. Certain corporations, yes. Politicians, yes (just by being an european leader, and you can say just by being european, you support racism). But what is most obvious to me is what goes on in the homeland.

Read up on immigration into south europe (gibraltar, ceuta and the spanish coastline that faces morocco - and also italy and how it deals with ships filled to the edges with people who try to reach europe) and how the politicians, the right wing, deals with it. Read about the banlieues in france (where also poor french are living) and perhaps also the förortorna in sweden (similar to french banlieues, only not as extreme).

>I think that fear is historically and characteristically
>European.

Mh... i can at least speak for northern europe - the mountain cultures, the isolated cultures.

on the personal level it is an own mindset, an own type of personality that you keep seeing - "me, mine, us, we, not them, only us, they are threat, we are the true people, the real, they are a threat"

It takes some generations of working against it to be able to silence it. many are opposing it, so it will work

->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->
    you will always go where the arrow points.

pen jakke:          , , , (snip),
                         (snip), (tungtvann feat pen jakke)

american anything means the intersection of american popular culture and another culture

italian americans are just that; people who are both italians and americans

since they live in USA, american culture is definitively more present, often affecting what they have left of their original culture (how much it is affected and in which way depends on how much focus has been given to it in their life, and in which way focus has been given to it).

but.. i'll stop jumping on your back ;) this is the third time in a row i think

american culture? it is a combination of a pop culture and individualistic ethic and a multitude of other cultures.

some european culture is learned not from the families but from the culture at large

even the language is often an amalgamation of words from other languages

compared to the east coast, the city where i grew up looks like germany. the architecture is completely different. sure, a city looks like a city, but there is definitely a lot of european culture that has been carried forward.

federisco, i'm happy to discuss my views on things because everything is subject to change.

That that Italian guy showed me more respect than the Italian Americans I knew, esp. working in Bensonhurst (Brooklyn).

I don't believe that any other country is free from racism but I do believe that many Americans are blinded.

>That that Italian guy showed me more respect than the
>Italian Americans I knew, esp. working in Bensonhurst
>(Brooklyn).

That's just one person though. And, even tho' he isn't racist towards Blacks, it's possible that he discriminates other races.

>I don't believe that any other country is free from racism
>but I do believe that many Americans are blinded.

I think Europeans are just as blind.

fight what you think is ignorance with something that is ignorance (you also have one friend, remember?).. that just makes it double up ignorant, and you just end up ignoring the real questions

that's how it looks like to me, same for Shimmy's reply to you and your reply to her.

thats the way it looks like to me.

>When I lived in Brooklyn I had a chat with this guy on a
>visa, from Italy. Brooklyn has a big Italian American
>community and that's what I knew. This native Italian guy
>made a point to differentiate so-called American Italians
>and himself. He blasted the racist attitudes of the Italian
>Americans. He told me to visit Italy to see the difference.

cuz the Italian I know talks about how racism is openly accepted in Italy. it's pretty much the norm to refer to someone by a racial characteristic.

I think the relationship between Americans of Euro descent and Europeans is akin to the relationship between African Americans and Africans. I know plenty of African immigrants that look down on African Americans, and think that they give Africans a bad name.

When "Afrikans" sold Afrikan Americans into slavery many years ago they gave up there right to judge Afrikan Americans. With the richess and innovative history and the struggles through slavery and the wars Afrikan Americans have fought and died for in a country considered them less the a man and the Civil Rights movement. In case they have not figured it out yet.

Africans sold Africans into slavery, not African-Americans. And you can't hold today's Africans responsible for a crimes committed centuries ago.

Technically that is True Afrikans were selling Afrikans. Which still does not deny the fact that Afrikan Americans were created from Afrikans. The point is in reposne to Afrikan immigrants that look down on Afrikan Americans. Also ,I think any one is blaming them for crimes commited centurys ago. Afrikans when they did the trading, they helped create a strong and proud race of Afrkan Americans. The original point was to respond to:
>"I know plenty of African immigrants that look down on African Americans, and think that they give Africans a bad name."

We should learn to tolerate and try to understand all race, color or creed of people.

True, that.

*scoff*
I expected you to like this "It's a Small World"-esque line:

We should learn to tolerate and try to understand all race, color or creed of people.

That's interesting, because I expected you to scoff at such a basic expression of human decency.

Before we get into discussions of tolerance, all races need to be levelled.

You skippin to step 5 when step 1 ain't even realized.

that is what it looks like, yep.

>Before we get into discussions of tolerance, all races need
>to be levelled.
>
>You skippin to step 5 when step 1 ain't even realized.

What do you mean by "levelled"?

I agree with you.

exactly.

only the africa/african-american relationship is a bit complicated by history- it's a reclamation in a different sense

interestingly, both with the africanamerican-african and europeanamerican-european "dillemas", the conclutions are made by the okayplayers with an "-american" at the end of the name of their general group

isn't as integrated as europe

people retain their histories more overtly

popular belief (corporate-sponsored more than poular, actually), there's no such thing as "Europeans". America, as far as its political system is concerned, is not the child of "Europe", it's the child of the UK (the system was made for WASPs by WASPs). And "Europe" didn't invent capitalism, England did. Not that the other countries didn't follow...

As for high-browed Europeans clowning Americans for their lack of culture, which is their (our) main point of contention...well, when I remember this interview of ten candidates to the Democratic investiture in 88 or so, and not one of them being able to name three European capitals, I can't help but think they (we) got a point. But most of the times, I consider those rants to be just what they are, the bitter complaint of losers. "Yeah, you kick our collective ass left and right and there's nothing we can do about it, but we're more CULTURED. So there!"

Is assimilation a bad thing?!

European assimilation?

Well, if it was really about not getting into wars and learning to know other Europeans better and all that hippie shit, I guess it wouldn't be bad.

But the so-called European construction process is not about that at all. It never has, and it never will be.

>Is assimilation a bad thing?!

Depends.

To me, it is a VERY bad thing for us black folk (the decendants of slaves that never even asked to be here, not African or Carrabien immigrants). The fact that we were forced here and had to make due with the little we had grants me the opinion that we owe this country nothing... and shouldn't ever have to "assimilate" since we didn't migrate here for a "better life" we created one ourselves in the face of opression and hatred.

As for other folks who migrate somewhere for a better life, I think assimilation isn't much of a bad thing. But when one's own ethnic culture becomes pratically nonexistant then I think it's a bad thing.

Example: Irish-Americans are proud Americans. They love their country (the US). They celebrate the 4th and participate in other U.S. traditions, but they also care for their own Irish culture. Within "American culture" (if there's such a thing) they have their own subculture of being uniquely seen as both an Irish and an American.

As for the original question posed, obviously "white" people ARE of European deceant. I think many don't at all like the "European" tag but certainly recognize and cherish their German, Irish, Italian, etc. origin. To me, ethnicity is not something that can be changed/evolved once you are born into a given ethnic group.

So to me, we as black folk (wherever in the World we reside) are Africans. That is not something that can be changed (no matter how far away from generation wise we are). We are Africans because that is our blood. It is our (ethnic) heritage. Regardless of how you talk, how many perms you buy, or any other factors, you're still an African. So whether you act like Bryant Gumbel or Talib Kweli, you're still the same.

So in essense, we are Africans by ethnicity. But were Americans by culture. So this is when the "African American" label comes in (I know some of us don't really care for that label for obvious reasons (including myself at times) but it's still the culture we are in whether we oppose it or not).

I hope I've made myself clear. "black" people are "Afro"/African-(place culture/national citizenship here- American (US), Cuban, etc.) or just (place culture here) and of African deceant.

"white" people are of European deceant. So even as Americans, their ethnic origin can be "renounced" in name only. So a "white" man that claims to be American and only American but has German great-great-grandparents is really a German-American.


Peace and Love
-Ren

Assimilation has nothing to do with owing anybody anything. The fact is, it's the only way to make it in this country. Insulate yourself and your ethnic group from society, you insulate yourself from the prosperity you could possibly become a part of.

not just english

english came in pockets as did everyone else european

my original point was this:

there's no such thing as a European identity. There are nations in Europe, which all have a culture and a language. Language and culture may define an identity, but certainly not being born on the same continent. Granted, there are commonalities between European countries, but they're mostly economic: to put it more bluntly, they all follow the capitalist economic and political model, and got rich (and still do) by exploiting and raping the rest of the world. That doesn't constitute an identity. For instance, while being French defines me to some extent (which obviously doesn't mean I agree with whatever France as a nation did and still does), I never considered myself "European". Nor "White". Furthermore, considering oneself "White" or "European" (in America or any part of the World) is strictly a political stance. A racist one, at that (to me, at least).

To develop this further...somebody like Afkap could tell you more about it, but there's truly no such thing as being "African" either. Or to be more precise, anyone outside America calling oneself "African" is making a political statement, which has nothing to do with ethnicity. Furthermore, in America itself, "African" is not an ethnicity either, it's a culture. And to some extent, a political statement, too.

>there's no such thing as a European identity. There are
>nations in Europe, which all have a culture and a language.
>Language and culture may define an identity, but certainly
>not being born on the same continent. Granted, there are
>commonalities between European countries, but they're mostly
>economic: to put it more bluntly, they all follow the
>capitalist economic and political model, and got rich (and
>still do) by exploiting and raping the rest of the world.
>That doesn't constitute an identity. For instance, while
>being French defines me to some extent (which obviously
>doesn't mean I agree with whatever France as a nation did
>and still does), I never considered myself "European". Nor
>"White". Furthermore, considering oneself "White" or
>"European" (in America or any part of the World) is strictly
>a political stance.


any identity is a political statement tho. i mean, european nations have culture*S* and language*S*: to identify onself as french rather than basque is a political choice. and even the process by which one language/culture became the normative one for the nation was a political process -- the creation of the age of nationalism. so, i disagree with your idea that calling yourself "european" is a political stance while calling yourself french is value-neutral.

beyond that, of course there are commonalities in europe beyond their economic systems. i mean, there was a europe culture before capitalism. for one example, there was a time when through out europe, latin was the language of learning.

and i would even say that on one hand, you can say the industrial revolution is an english invention -- though isn't it a product of the scottish enlightenment? -- but you could also say it's a child of the renaissance or the protestant reformation (weber?). and the fact that it spread like wildfire through europe but took a much longer time to take root beyond says something about the common european culture.

>any identity is a political statement tho. i mean, european
>nations have culture*S* and language*S*: to identify onself
>as french rather than basque is a political choice.

when you're basque, that is. Thus we're dealing with a rather limited number of people. But I'm nitpicking (and probably swimming in treacherous waters, too).

>and
>even the process by which one language/culture became the
>normative one for the nation was a political process -- the
>creation of the age of nationalism. so, i disagree with
>your idea that calling yourself "european" is a political
>stance while calling yourself french is value-neutral.
>

You've got a point. I'm not a regionalist, and that's definitely a political value. But the difference is that if the building of an (old) nation like France is indeed a political process, it's also based on much deeper roots: a common territory, with political fronteers corresponding to geographical ones (contrary to what De Gaulle said, France never stood between Dunkerque and Tamanrasset), and very similar languages/dialects (because, frankly, if you except Basque and maybe Breton...). Plus, there's such a thing as History. I'm far from an expert, but I'd say France has been France since the days of Henri IV, ie for around 400 years. It might have been a powerful political statement to call yourself French when you were born in Navarre at the time, but nowadays it's just stating the obvious. Just like a Yoruba landing foot on American shores in 1700 wasn't American or African-American or Black for that matter, but nowadays...you get my point.

Europe, as it is conceived nowadays, is purely political and economical. Until "we" speak the same language from Madrid to Warsaw, it will remain that way. I don't think it's going to happen anytime soon...and call me reactionnary, but I'm not looking forward to that day.

>beyond that, of course there are commonalities in europe
>beyond their economic systems. i mean, there was a europe
>culture before capitalism. for one example, there was a
>time when through out europe, latin was the language of
>learning.
>

...of the elite. More precisely, the political and economical elite. Just as English is the corporate language of choice nowadays.

>and i would even say that on one hand, you can say the
>industrial revolution is an english invention -- though
>isn't it a product of the scottish enlightenment? -- but you
>could also say it's a child of the renaissance or the
>protestant reformation (weber?). and the fact that it
>spread like wildfire through europe but took a much longer
>time to take root beyond says something about the common
>european culture.

...of the elite. I mean, yeah, the kings in Spain, Austria, France and wherever else were blood-brothers. Does it mean Kant is the product of the same culture as, say, Voltaire?

But I'll be honest and admit I would lie if I said I've never wondered about it myself. There are indeed common traits after all, which can be summed up by saying that Western Europe as a whole did put the world in the fucked up state in which it is now. I just refuse to see that as the product of a common "culture". Or even worse, a common ethnical background. I like to think it's the result of a privileged geographical situation (privileged if you're really keen on conquering the world and mess it up for everybody, that is).

>Europe, as it is conceived nowadays, is purely political and
>economical. Until "we" speak the same language from Madrid
>to Warsaw, it will remain that way. I don't think it's going
>to happen anytime soon...and call me reactionnary, but I'm
>not looking forward to that day.


no, but i don't know why "we" speaking the same language is the index of "we" belonging to the same culture. does that mean the swiss, the spanish, the belgians etc don't have a common culture?

the notion that a common language is what constitutes a nation is so 19th century, not to mention has proven deeply problematic. while i was searching around for info on le verlan, i found a with a list of a slew of minority languages, including ones i'd never heard of. now, you might say that some of them are pretty close to standard french, but are they closer than dutch is to german?

i mean, i don't know what you mean by common territory, but europe surely has geographical boundaries that have contained a shared cultural space. and as for history, France may have been existence for 400 years -- though i thought y'all harked back to Clovis, ha ha -- but was there a system to make everyone learn french before napoleon? and what about giving algerian jews french citizenship, i mean what is the idea of france there? or a person of pourtugese or arab descent in the banlieus?


>>beyond that, of course there are commonalities in europe
>>beyond their economic systems. i mean, there was a europe
>>culture before capitalism. for one example, there was a
>>time when through out europe, latin was the language of
>>learning.
>>
>
>...of the elite. More precisely, the political and
>economical elite. Just as English is the corporate language
>of choice nowadays.

yes, and no. more precisely the language of science, philosophical inquiry, high art etc. i mean, martial was from spain. but this ignores the enormous effect of latin on "vernacular" languages. and that's just one example. and btw, i know from anglophone colonies that english culture has indeed given me something in common with jamaicans and nigerians. i would not hesitate to speak of global english literature, and neither do most critics.



>>and i would even say that on one hand, you can say the
>>industrial revolution is an english invention -- though
>>isn't it a product of the scottish enlightenment? -- but you
>>could also say it's a child of the renaissance or the
>>protestant reformation (weber?). and the fact that it
>>spread like wildfire through europe but took a much longer
>>time to take root beyond says something about the common
>>european culture.
>
>...of the elite. I mean, yeah, the kings in Spain, Austria,
>France and wherever else were blood-brothers. Does it mean
>Kant is the product of the same culture as, say, Voltaire?
>
>But I'll be honest and admit I would lie if I said I've
>never wondered about it myself. There are indeed common
>traits after all, which can be summed up by saying that
>Western Europe as a whole did put the world in the fucked up
>state in which it is now. I just refuse to see that as the
>product of a common "culture". Or even worse, a common
>ethnical background. I like to think it's the result of a
>privileged geographical situation

well, you can't just refuse tho. i mean, culture matters. bc it wasn't just geography, or the experience of the adjacent lands under the eastern orthodox church wouldnt have been so different. and the adoption of ideas on technology or democracy in the non-western world would have also been different. the meiji reformation is unique. and think of protestantism spreading like wildfire or voltaire holing up all over europe and corresponding with catherine the greak and frederick, i mean the renaissance and the enlightenment were pan-european.

now, you may say that harold bloom is unpleasantly ideologically motivated when he makes a book called the western canon, but the thing is that unpleasant ideology is not new, it's pretty old, and it's amazing the extent to which what is considered canonical has been stable.

yo, i think that the eu should hire me to write advertising copy. ha ha

one thing i know from reading about the uk, is that the creation of the eu has allowed subnational ethnicities suppressed (suppressed, mofo!) under 19th century nationalism (or if you take linda colley's argument, bribed by the booty of empire) are rearticulating themselves. this is why there was a movement to devolve authority and create the scottish and welsh parliaments.

i'd be surprised if there weren't similar from other eu countries. comments?

I just have one indeed, cause I don't have the time to read all this (and I'm not saying that in an insulting way, I truly mean it). I'm surprised the article doesn't mention the brilliant role the E.U. played in the dismemberment of the Yugoslavian federation and the subsequent independance of Croatia and Bosnia and Slovenia and all them...

>no, but i don't know why "we" speaking the same language is
>the index of "we" belonging to the same culture. does that
>mean the swiss, the spanish, the belgians etc don't have a
>common culture?
>

Well, because I firmly believe that language shapes and structures the way people think. Why is there such a specific school of philosophy in Germany, for instance (Kant, Hegel, Marx, Nietszche et al)?

And yes, spanish and belgians have "a" common culture, just as you and me have "a" common culture (I mean, we both listen to hip hop, for instance), because culture travels. But besides that, they have quite a few things to differentiate them, enough for me to say that they don't belong to the same culture. Just like my culture is not hip hop.

>the notion that a common language is what constitutes a
>nation is so 19th century

Yeah, I know, I'm old school like that

>while i was searching around for info on le
>verlan, i found a
>french govt site with a list of a slew of minority languages,
>including ones i'd never heard of. now, you might say that
>some of them are pretty close to standard french, but are
>they closer than dutch is to german?
>

Ha. This is very funny. You act as if languages like Langue d'Oil (!) or even Basque and Breton and Corse were widely used. Well, I don't know if you ever went to Rennes or Bayonne, but if you did, I know you heard mostly French in the streets. The number of people truly identifying themselves as only Basque, and not French, ie claiming independance, is actually very limited. The same can be said for Corses. And it's the two main, or to be exact, the two only regions claiming independance.

But even considering those people...and coming back to my main point since the beginning of this conversation. Do you think pro-independance Basques see themselves as "Europeans"?

And all the overseas languages? Personally, I don't have any problem with a Guadeloupean or a Kanak NOT considering self French (not that I have a problem with them doing so either, but if they do, they will speak French, and not only Creole or Kanak).

>i mean, i don't know what you mean by common territory,

Well, for France, I mean the metropole. A territory delimited by natural fronteers, like the Alps, the Pyrenees, the Ardennes, the seas and the Rhin. My knowledge in Geography is too limited to tell you what those natural fronteers are for Germany or Netherlands.

>and
>what about giving algerian jews french citizenship, i mean
>what is the idea of france there?

Ha again. I think you're actually getting my point. It was a by-product of a very fucked up idea of France, the Colonial Empire idea (I guess you know by now I'm not a fervent supporter of colonialism).

> or a person of pourtugese
>or arab descent in the banlieus?
>

What about them? they speak French, you know? Granted, in the case of people of Arab descent, France probably doesn't do enough to allow them to consider themselves as French if they want to. But I don't see where you're going with this.

>bc it wasn't just geography, or the experience of the
>adjacent lands under the eastern orthodox church wouldnt
>have been so different. and the adoption of ideas on
>technology or democracy in the non-western world would have
>also been different. the meiji reformation is unique.

Hmmm...you lost me, here.

>yo, i think that the eu should hire me to write advertising
>copy. ha ha

and I think you still got some work to do to convince me, kid

>And yes, spanish and belgians have "a" common culture, just
>as you and me have "a" common culture (I mean, we both
>listen to hip hop, for instance), because culture travels.
>But besides that, they have quite a few things to
>differentiate them, enough for me to say that they don't
>belong to the same culture.


just to clarify, i meant that there is a swiss nation even tho there isn't just one language in switzerland, just as there is a spanish nation tho they have more than one language, ditto belgium. even if you insist on dismissing the minority languages/ethnicities of france bc they do not constitute very many speakers, you can't do the same with catalan. it's no more incongruous for a radical basque to be part of europe than it is to be part of france, and in fact it may be less incongruous for him to be part of the same political unit as his basque brothers in spain.

we began with you saying, europe can't have a culture in common because it doesn't have a language in common. my point was that most nations in europe are already multilingual and multiethnic.



The number of people truly identifying
>themselves as only Basque, and not French, ie claiming
>independance, is actually very limited. The same can be said
>for Corses. And it's the two main, or to be exact, the two
>only regions claiming independance.


wasn't there a breton movement up to the 70's? and anyway, word on the polisci street is that the coming of europe will see stronger subnational articulations.




>>bc it wasn't just geography, or the experience of the
>>adjacent lands under the eastern orthodox church wouldnt
>>have been so different. and the adoption of ideas on
>>technology or democracy in the non-western world would have
>>also been different. the meiji reformation is unique.
>
>Hmmm...you lost me, here.


Europe had a cultural/intellectual heritage in common that permitted the seeding of ideas of the Renaissance/Enlightenment/Industrial Revolution with a speed that simply didn't happen in places which did not have the same heritage.


...


aside:
>Ha. This is very funny. You act as if languages like Langue
>d'Oil (!)

as an aside: what exactly is langue d'oil? and langue d'oc = occitane = provecale, correct? i thought i read somewhere that provencale and catalan were mutually comprehensible, how close are they?

>just to clarify, i meant that there is a swiss nation even
>tho there isn't just one language in switzerland, just as
>there is a spanish nation tho they have more than one
>language, ditto belgium. even if you insist on dismissing
>the minority languages/ethnicities of france bc they do not
>constitute very many speakers, you can't do the same with
>catalan.

Which would be a good argument if Catalans really wanted to be a part of the Spanish nation. But it's not the case. They actually claim their independance, and are coming closer and closer to it, and a central part of their claim is them having their own language. And associated culture (as well as being the richest area in the country, too). As for Belgium, the dissensions between the two communities are also a constant burden.

>it's no more incongruous for a radical basque to
>be part of europe than it is to be part of france, and in
>fact it may be less incongruous for him to be part of the
>same political unit as his basque brothers in spain.
>

Maybe, but it doesn't change the fact that his goal is to have Pays Basque recognized as a nation. Europe as a political unit might be a tool to strive toward this goal, but it won't become his cultural identity.

>we began with you saying, europe can't have a culture in
>common because it doesn't have a language in common. my
>point was that most nations in europe are already
>multilingual and multiethnic.
>

Most?


>aside:
>>Ha. This is very funny. You act as if languages like Langue
>>d'Oil (!)
>
>as an aside: what exactly is langue d'oil? and langue d'oc
>= occitane = provecale, correct? i thought i read somewhere
>that provencale and catalan were mutually comprehensible,
>how close are they?

Well, linguists traditionally separate all the dialects that predated French into two broad currents, a classification based on the way "Oui" was pronounced: in the northern part of France (north of the Loire), you had la Langue d'Oil, which included germanic influences, and in the southern part, la Langue d'Oc.

Provencal, Occitan and Catalan are dialects that were part of the Langue d'Oc, and they're all fairly close. My father is from Narbonne and knows Occitan, and indeed understands Provencal or Catalan.

cuz i meant to reply to something very different

wasn't very explicit, I admit. Is that what you meant?

.

>popular belief (corporate-sponsored more than poular,
>actually), there's no such thing as "Europeans". America, as
>far as its political system is concerned, is not the child
>of "Europe", it's the child of the UK (the system was made
>for WASPs by WASPs). And "Europe" didn't invent capitalism,
>England did. Not that the other countries didn't follow...
>
lol. get some knowledge man. That's hilarious. I probably know more about the US than you know about Europe. England didn't invent capitalism. Capitalism has been there forever. Just because there such a thing as "Manchester Capitalism" doesn't mean that you can ascribe the invention of capitalism to England.
Moreover have you have heard of Puritans or Calvanists? Go and get some knowledge sucker.

>As for high-browed Europeans clowning Americans for their
>lack of culture, which is their (our) main point of
>contention...well, when I remember this interview of ten
>candidates to the Democratic investiture in 88 or so, and
>not one of them being able to name three European capitals,
>I can't help but think they (we) got a point. But most of
>the times, I consider those rants to be just what they are,
>the bitter complaint of losers. "Yeah, you kick our
>collective ass left and right and there's nothing we can do
>about it, but we're more CULTURED. So there!"

Ever heard of John Winthorp? That's what I call culture lol. And The US is build on his ideologies... As a result, Europe is definitely more "cultured" than the US. Europe sucks sometimes, but I prefer living in Europe. There is no such city as Rome, Paris, Barcelona or London in the US.

____________________________________________________________________________________________

"Soccer was invented by European ladies to keep them busy while their husbands were cooking" - Hank Hill

At least I know 4 different languages and don't have to pay for it..

To quote nighttripper from post #12:

"But most of the times, I consider those rants to be just what they are, the bitter complaint of losers. "Yeah, you kick our collective ass left and right and there's nothing we can do about it, but we're more CULTURED. So there!"

Exhibit A:

>At least I know 4 different languages and don't have to pay
>for it..

Yeah, but if it wasn't for us you'd only know 1 language - German.

You know, I might actually take you snobby Eurotrash assholes more seriously with your "Europe is more 'cultured' than the US" bullshit if you weren't all such whores for American pop culture.

_______________________________________________________________________________________

"Soccer was invented by European ladies to keep them busy while their husbands were cooking" - Hank Hill

we see one common thread for both americans and europeans: ignorance!

hey, why don't you all get together and make a new race, the Ignorans! Whoa dude, cool!

That's some tough talk coming from someone on the other side of the world who's still bowing and scraping to the Queen of England and spends all his free time on an American web site trying to be down with us ignorant Americans.

____________________________________________________________

"Bunch of savages in this town" - Clerks

you'll be president of that new club for sure if ya keep that up.

Great, and you can be Queen of New Zealand... oh wait, the Queen of England already lords over you backwater sheephearding panzies. Why don't you kiwi's grow some balls already and cut the colonial umbilical cord? How appropriate that your national symbol is a bird that doesn't fly... 'nuff said.

40th Street Black knocks 'em out...
_________________________________________________________________

"Bunch of savages in this town" - Clerks

i just spent the last 2 months in america, checking for myself, and it was just as i suspected:

you have some beautiful, nice, friendly people there too. as does europe. in fact, i'm in london now. and the dumbass quota is pretty much the same both sides of the atlantic.

(oh, but i've never, ever, performed any kind of "bowing or scraping" for the Queen. no ceremonies ever. not once. i mean... you'd know this if you'd ever been near my home country instead of just pretending you knew what goes on there.. americans do a LOT more worshipping of their flag than kiwis do of big Liz, trust me. you know the pledge of allegiance? yeah. i don't even know what 'god save the queen' sounds like, unless you're talking sex pistols. but hey, you didn't need yet another example of your own ignorance highlighted, i'm sure.)


..oh, and in the US and the UK.... why are the ignorant ones always the loudest?


(......insert indignant retort below, and my case is closed. and thats goodbye for another two months... at least.)

>i just spent the last 2 months in america, checking for
>myself, and it was just as i suspected:
>you have some beautiful, nice, friendly people there too. as
>does europe.

Thanks for telling me what I already know Sherlock. Very insightful.

>in fact, i'm in london now. and the dumbass
>quota is pretty much the same both sides of the atlantic.

And you just filled the quota for your side of the pacific. Congratulations.

>(oh, but i've never, ever, performed any kind of "bowing or
>scraping" for the Queen. no ceremonies ever. not once.

Wow, you're a regular William Wallace, aren't you? But if you Kiwis are really so averse to groveling to your Queen as good loyal subjects should, then why do you continue to keep her as your Royal Sovereign and head of state? You can't have it both ways, or else you just end up looking like a bunch of hypocrites.

>i mean... you'd know this if you'd ever been near my home
>country instead of just pretending you knew what goes on
>there..

I don't "pretend" to know anything about what goes on in your home country; I *know* that despite your alleged pride in your own national identity you are still British subjects who owe allegiance to the British Crown, and that collectively you are all free to change this whenever you wish, but you choose not to. This makes it seem rather ironic when you call Americans and Europeans ignorant while your own country clings to an ignorant European Queen in a particularly ignorant European tradition. I mean, I think the British are pretty ridiculous for keeping the whole British Monarchy thing going, but at least it's understandable, considering that they're actually BRITISH... but what's New Zealand's excuse? As Obi-wan said, "Who's the more foolish, the fool, or the fool who follows him?"

>americans do a LOT more worshipping of their flag
>than kiwis do of big Liz, trust me.

Yeah, but Americans worship OUR flag, not someone else's flag, and not some foreign monarch. NZ on the other hand still bows down to 'big Liz' as its Royal Sovereign whether you want to admit it or not. And you don't even have your own flag, you just have the Union Jack with a few stars added. How imaginative. Let me give you a little tip: the British Empire is dead. Sic transit gloria; let it go and move on, otherwise the rest of the world will continue to view you guys as less of an actual nation than as some sort of subordinate backwater British branch office.

>you know the pledge of allegiance? yeah.

You mean the one that was found uncostitutional by a federal court recently? Yeah.

You know the Oath of Allegiance to the Queen that you require your MP's to take (i.e. that they take on your behalf)? Yeah.

>i don't even know what 'god save the
>queen' sounds like, unless you're talking sex pistols. but
>hey, you didn't need yet another example of your own
>ignorance highlighted, i'm sure.)

Never mind the bollocks, that doesn't change the fact that you're a subject of the British Crown and owe your allegiance to the Queen. That being the case, not knowing what 'god save the queen' sounds like is either ignorance on your part or just a very pathetic gesture of rebellion unworthy of the mention of the Sex Pistols in the same breath. If you were really serious about your own national identity and pride, you and your Kiwi mates would grow some balls and cut your ties with big Liz and the British. But for all your big talk you're just a bunch of complacent cowards whose insecurity, lack of initiative, and blind adherence to outdated traditions leaves you as pathetic groveling subjects of a foreign monarch in a backwater outpost clinging to the faded glory that was once the British Empire. But hey, you didn't need yet another example of your own ignorance highlighted, i'm sure.

>..oh, and in the US and the UK.... why are the ignorant ones
>always the loudest?

I don't know, why don't you ask big Liz while you're in London groveling at her feet like the spineless subject of a foreign monarch that you are?

>(......insert indignant retort below, and my case is closed.
>and thats goodbye for another two months... at least.)

Good, maybe it'll be another 2 months before you go getting all up in other people's business when it ain't got nothing to do with you. Don't start none, won't be none.




40th Street Black knocks 'em out...
____________________________________________________________________________________________

"You tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is: Never try." - Homer Simpson

"Bunch of savages in this town" - Clerks

We can't go to a republic as our nation is built upon the Treaty of Waitangi, which was signed between England and a whole lot of Maori chiefs (who ended up being suckered). If we said fuck the commonwealth then that would make the treaty null and void...that ain't a good thing because without the treaty race relations would definitely get a shitload worse in this country.

As for bowing down to the Queen and all your other bullshit...fuck you man, true kiwis don't bow to anyone or anything...it's why the (Sir) Edmund Hilary conquered Everest, why we kick ass at sailing around the world, why it was a kiwi who first broke the 4 minute mile, and why it was a kiwi that split the atom.

Finally, we're moving a way slowly, but things take time...you can't be knighted in this country anymore, the highest honour is the New Zealand Order of Merit, and if you get there the company you'll keep is pretty awe-inspiring.

I got into it with Tohunga after he butted in on a convo that had nothing to do with him or NZ and said some stupid shit about my home, so then I came right back at him with some stuff about NZ, then it got a little bit hectic... my apologies for that, I was gunning for Tohunga and ended up slandering all Kiwis; that wasn't my original intention, but anyways I apologize, I didn't really mean all that shit.


>We can't go to a republic as our nation is built upon the
>Treaty of Waitangi, which was signed between England and a
>whole lot of Maori chiefs (who ended up being suckered). If
>we said fuck the commonwealth then that would make the
>treaty null and void...that ain't a good thing because
>without the treaty race relations would definitely get a
>shitload worse in this country.

I heard about that treaty but I didn't know all the details... Anyway, couldn't you guys just re-negotiate another treaty so as to become a republic and NOT screw over the Maoris this time? I'm just asking, I don't know all the complications that would entail.

>As for bowing down to the Queen and all your other
>bullshit...fuck you man, true kiwis don't bow to anyone or
>anything...it's why the (Sir) Edmund Hilary conquered
>Everest, why we kick ass at sailing around the world, why it
>was a kiwi who first broke the 4 minute mile, and why it was
>a kiwi that split the atom.

... and you're also the best rugby players in the world, I hear. Again, sorry about that; that bowing down to the Queen shit was directed at Tohunga, sorry that you caught the crossfire... I forgot that there was another Kiwi on OKP.

>Finally, we're moving a way slowly, but things take
>time...you can't be knighted in this country anymore, the
>highest honour is the New Zealand Order of Merit, and if you
>get there the company you'll keep is pretty awe-inspiring.

Sounds like a step in the right direction.

Anyway, sorry about the bullshit. I'll refrain from slandering your homeland from now on.

Apology much appreciated...
The problem with re-negotiating another treaty is that Maori are not one as such...Ngati Porou don't necessarily see eye to eye with Ngai(Kai)Tahu, nor Tainui with Ngati Awa (or any other combination). Maybe once all the treaty grievances have been settled then maybe, because Maori and Pakeha will be on a level-playing field, but the in-fighting between Maori will always be a problem, so too the infighting between Pakeha (strictly speaking that is everyone else, those of European, Samoan, Africa or Asian descent...technically they are all pakeha), so speaking as just one, seeing as having the Queen as the head of state doesn't really make any difference to day to day life in Aotearoa, why go changing?

Oh yeah, and while we still probably do have the best rugby players in the world, I'm a little scared that come Saturday night the fucking Aussies (no offense to any fucking Aussies out there intended) may show us again why playing as a team may count for a little bit extra...sigh

And your comments, basically, make Americans look more like assholes, than it does make Kiwis look like.. anything.

Next time you try and insult somebody, leave their home country out of it, please. This just makes us Americans look even more racist and reactionary than anybody else on Earth. I feel embarrassed to claim the same homeland as you, when you vent such bigoted hatred.

Love, a fellow American.

You responded to it, so I assume you did... so my response to you is - shut the fuck up.

>And your comments, basically, make Americans look more like
>assholes, than it does make Kiwis look like.. anything.

Those comments, while out of line, were in response to unprovoked and out of line comments made by a Kiwi about America - so where's your righteous indignation over that? Oh right, you've "travelled through New Zealand", so you're like an honorary Kiwi now or something and have to protect them from being picked on by the ugly American... Whatever man; Kiwi's are tough, they can take care of themselves. te_pakeha put me in line, and I admitted I was out of line and apologized - case closed. So shut the fuck up.

>Next time you try and insult somebody, leave their home
>country out of it, please.

Yeah, I already said that I would - so shut the fuck up.

>This just makes us Americans look
>even more racist and reactionary than anybody else on Earth.

Racist? I never said anything about his "race" - so shut the fuck up.

>I feel embarrassed to claim the same homeland as you, when
>you vent such bigoted hatred.

So tell people you're from Canada and shut the fuck up.

>Love, a fellow American.

Shut the fuck up.

_________________________________________________________________

"You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me? You talkin' to me?
Then who the hell else are you talkin' to? You talkin' to me?
Well I'm the only one here. Who do you think you're talking to?
Oh yeah? Huh? Ok." - Travis Bickle, Taxi Driver

with a clever, creative name like UserName, I expect you to have the sense/intelligence to detect humor and sarcasm.

>As for bowing down to the Queen and all your other
>bullshit...fuck you man, true kiwis don't bow to anyone or
>anything...it's why the (Sir) Edmund Hilary conquered
>Everest, why we kick ass at sailing around the world, why it
>was a kiwi who first broke the 4 minute mile, and why it was
>a kiwi that split the atom.

I'm sure NZ is a great country (no sarcasm here) but these examples you gave don't testify to its actual significance.

I mean....it's nice that a kiwi runs fast and all but there's far more to NZ than that.

Don't get me wrong, Aotearoa is all good more for what we do (and have) within rather than what the rest of the world sees...The people rock, the land itself rocks, but I think most people will say the same thing about their homeland. I just had to come in and defend my nation, that's all...there are good people and good places all over the globe, I wasn't meaning to make any kinda supremacy statements.

.

>Exhibit A:
>
>>At least I know 4 different languages and don't have to pay
>>for it..
>
>Yeah, but if it wasn't for us you'd only know 1 language -
>German.
>

If you're gonna quote me, please don't follow it with such obviously revisionnist historical statements. Leave that to Roberto Benigni.

>You know, I might actually take you snobby Eurotrash
>assholes more seriously with your "Europe is more 'cultured'
>than the US" bullshit if you weren't all such whores for
>American pop culture.
>

Despite the superfluous name-calling, this actually has some truth to it.

>"Soccer was invented by European ladies to keep them busy
>while their husbands were cooking" - Hank Hill

That, on the other hand, is strictly bullshit. Escpecially coming from shoulder-pads-and-helmets-wearing sissies.

>If you're gonna quote me, please don't follow it with such
>obviously revisionnist historical statements. Leave that to
>Roberto Benigni.

I didn't mean that as a "historical statement", it was just a quick jab at his smarmy attitute. Sorry if I offended you, I didn't mean it to be taken so literally that way.


>>"Soccer was invented by European ladies to keep them busy
>>while their husbands were cooking" - Hank Hill

>That, on the other hand, is strictly bullshit. Escpecially
>coming from shoulder-pads-and-helmets-wearing sissies.

Well if you don't know who Hank Hill is, he's just a cartoon character. Again, this was just a joke, it wasn't meant to be taken literally.

>To quote nighttripper from post #12:
>
>"But most of the times, I consider those rants to be just
>what they are, the bitter complaint of losers. "Yeah, you
>kick our collective ass left and right and there's nothing
>we can do about it, but we're more CULTURED. So there!"
>
lol.

>Exhibit A:
>
>>At least I know 4 different languages and don't have to pay
>>for it..
>
>Yeah, but if it wasn't for us you'd only know 1 language -
>German.

I don't think so. My pops is from France & my mother from Italy.

>You know, I might actually take you snobby Eurotrash
>assholes more seriously with your "Europe is more 'cultured'
>than the US" bullshit if you weren't all such whores for
>American pop culture.
>
That's just why I'm listening to French hiphop, German dance music & British rock music, go on vocation to Barcelona, London etc. & read Eco, Grass, Donne & Marlowe.

>I don't think so. My pops is from France & my mother from
>Italy.

And who rescued France from the Germans? Right.

>That's just why I'm listening to French hiphop, German dance
>music & British rock music, go on vocation to Barcelona,
>London etc. & read Eco, Grass, Donne & Marlowe.

And I guess that's why you're on an American musicians' website right now. And here's a hint: "French hiphop" is still American pop culture, just like rock music is originally American pop culture. Get over it.


40th Street Black knocks 'em out...
____________________________________________________________________________________________

"Soccer was invented by European ladies to keep them busy while their husbands were cooking" - Hank Hill

hip-hop is "Black" culture

... and that rock n' roll is originally "Black" culture as well, but he was focusing on America in general, so I kept it at that level... so OK, I'll edit: hip-hop is Black American culture, how about that?

that passes my quality control test.

ps- re hip hop is black culture.


why do you think americans listen to latino music?
why do you think people in asia listen to american pop?
why do you think people in england listen to dub?

simple.
culture spreads over the world, it represents the ideals of people who have adapted their own way of life. you can't help someone liking what you've created. deal with it. plus you sound so self righteous. hiphop is black culture, so because your black, you invented hiphop? personally?
bullshit

okay admit it, you hate white people. in fact-hold up, you hate everyone!
ive heard you talk shit on every single group of people i can think of. you are a bigot. jus' coz you think your educated doesn't mean your any better than that.




no comment please, this is my last post

>>I don't think so. My pops is from France & my mother from
>>Italy.
>
>And who rescued France from the Germans? Right.

"You" didn't save nobody. Btw did you know that you're speakin a Germanic language which core words are French, Latin & Scandinavian in origin? If there wasn't "us", you wouldn't even speak that language. I love that kind of argumentation. It's so fuckin simple...

>
>>That's just why I'm listening to French hiphop, German dance
>>music & British rock music, go on vocation to Barcelona,
>>London etc. & read Eco, Grass, Donne & Marlowe.
>
>And I guess that's why you're on an American musicians'
>website right now.

I like Hi-tek, Rakim & Nas. That's why I'm here.

>
And here's a hint: "French hiphop" is
>still American pop culture, just like rock music is
>originally American pop culture. Get over it.
>
Just like disco music is of European origin. Isn't disco music a root of HipHop?

>"You" didn't save nobody.

Neither did the French, but I digress...

"I" didn't say that "I" saved anybody. I said that "we", as in "we Americans", saved you fucking panzies after you rolled over like dogs to the Germans. And I say "we" Americans because you seem to have issues with "we" Americans as a whole, not just me. If you're gonna generalize and try to lay your issues with American culture as a whole on me personally, then don't start getting all fucking nitpicky when I generalize things in the same way myself.

>Btw did you know that you're
>speakin a Germanic language which core words are French,
>Latin & Scandinavian in origin? If there wasn't "us", you
>wouldn't even speak that language. I love that kind of
>argumentation. It's so fuckin simple...

By Jove! Are you telling me that English has its roots in other European languages? What a revelation! Thanks for letting me in on that little secret, genius. And if that's the case, then maybe you can also tell me why the French, Germans, Italians, and most other Europeans are all so uptight now that this Pan-European language of Germanic roots with core words of French, Latin & Scandinavian origin is coming back home and becoming so pervasive throughout Europe, and in reaction you guys are trying to fight it with stupid bullshit like calling e-mail "courier electronique" and other dumb shit like that? I mean what's the big deal, if it wasn't for "you", we wouldn't even speak that language. Your "fucking simple" argument just got a little complicated, slick...

>I like Hi-tek, Rakim & Nas. That's why I'm here.

Oh, so then you do have an appreciation for American culture? Why didn't you just say so from the beginning? You could have saved yourself the embarrasment, and saved us all some time.

>Just like disco music is of European origin. Isn't disco
>music a root of HipHop?

Kind of... this is what Davey D had to say on the subject:

"NY's Black radio station began to position themselves so they would appeal to a more affluent, older and to a large degree, whiter audience. ... young people found themselves being excluded especially when bubble gum and Europeanized versions of disco music began to hit the air waves. To many, this style of music lacked soul and to a large degree sounded too formulated and mechanical... With all this happening a void was created and hip hop filled it... Point blank, hip hop was a direct response to the watered down, Europeanized, disco music that permeated the airwaves..."

So yeah, sure, European disco did kind of help to bring about hip hop, but not in a way I think you'd want to take credit for. Either way, disco music is an offshoot of funk music, which is of American origin. So your point is... ?

>Okayplayer.com is based on hate, envy & jealousy.

No, you're mistaking us with France.

>Conscious HipHop is nothin but fascism in disguise.

Fascism: another lovely gift European culture has given to the world. How proud you must be.


40th Street Black knocks 'em out...
____________________________________________________________________________________________

"Soccer was invented by European ladies to keep them busy while their husbands were cooking" - Hank Hill

>>"You" didn't save nobody.
>
>Neither did the French, but I digress... "I" didn't say that
>"I" saved anybody. I said that "we", as in "we Americans",
>saved you fucking panzies after you rolled over like dogs to
>the Germans. And I say "we" Americans because you seem to
>have issues with "we" Americans as a whole, not just me. If
>you're gonna generalize and try to lay your issues with
>American culture as a whole on me personally, then don't
>start getting all fucking nitpicky when I generalize things
>in the same way myself.
>
nope. I just have a problem with people who use the plural maiestatis. I never say "we" or "us" when referring to topics like that one.

>>Btw did you know that you're
>>speakin a Germanic language which core words are French,
>>Latin & Scandinavian in origin? If there wasn't "us", you
>>wouldn't even speak that language. I love that kind of
>>argumentation. It's so fuckin simple...
>
>By Jove! Are you telling me that English has its roots in
>other European languages? What a revelation! Thanks for
>letting me in on that little secret, genius.

I knew you wouldn't get it. Irony is a stylistic device which is obviously totally unknown in the US.

> And if that's
>the case, then maybe you can also tell me why the French,
>Germans, Italians, and most other Europeans are all so
>uptight now that this Germanic language with core words of
>French, Latin & Scandinavian origin is coming back home and
>becoming so pervasive throughout Europe, and in reaction you
>guys are trying to fight it with stupid bullshit like
>calling e-mail "courier electronique" and other dumb shit
>like that? I mean what's the big deal, if it wasn't for
>"you", we wouldn't even speak that language. Your "fucking
>simple" argument just got a little complicated, slick...
>

see above. Btw one word: "Superstrat". If you know a bit about the Middle English period you'll know what I mean - The English peeps didn't like it all. Nowadays the same thing happens again - in a different way. Europeans don't like that. Language determines the way you think. Compared with languages like French, Italian, German, etc American English is fuckin simple.

>>I like Hi-tek, Rakim & Nas. That's why I'm here.
>
>Oh, so then you do have an appreciation for American
>culture? Why didn't you just say so from the beginning?
>You could have saved yourself the embarrasment, and saved us
>all some time.

I like certain artists. That doesn't necessarily mean that I like American culture in general. Logics.

>>Just like disco music is of European origin. Isn't disco
>>music a root of HipHop?
>
>Disco music is an offshoot of funk music which is of
>American origin. So your point is... ?
>

lol. That's just why the first synthi artists came from Europe..

>
>40th Street Black knocks 'em out...

and then himself.

>nope. I just have a problem with people who use the plural
>maiestatis. I never say "we" or "us" when referring to
>topics like that one.

Hey good for you.

>I knew you wouldn't get it. Irony is a stylistic device
>which is obviously totally unknown in the US.

You don't get it, do you? Sarcasm is obviously totally unknown in Europe.

>see above. Btw one word: "Superstrat". If you know a bit
>about the Middle English period you'll know what I mean -
>The English peeps didn't like it all. Nowadays the same
>thing happens again - in a different way. Europeans don't
>like that. Language determines the way you think. Compared
>with languages like French, Italian, German, etc American
>English is fuckin simple.

You *really* don't get it, do you? Amazing, simply amazing... I thought you supposedly knew what irony was? Oh well... Anyway, I thought English was this complex hybrid Germanic language with French, Latin & Scandinavian elements, yet now you tell me that compared to French, Italian and German its "fuckin simple"? Make up your fucking mind, asshole. (And yeah, "courier electronique" is SO much more complex than "e-mail", it conveys SO much more thougth and insight... how could anyone have ever managed with just plain old American English "e-mail", it's just so "fuckin simple" - LOL)

Oh yeah, if Europeans are so morally opposed to this cultural imperialism that's encroaching on their complex, elegant languages and threatening to impede their thought processes with "fuckin simple" American English, then why the fuck did they go all over the Earth and do the same fucking thing to the rest of the world? Do you realize how "fuckin simple" French, Italian, German, etc are compared to some of the indigenous languages they've essentially eradicated throughout the globe?
Karma's a bitch, motherfucker.

>I like certain artists. That doesn't necessarily mean that I
>like American culture in general. Logics.

Whatever; you like hip hop, which means that there are aspects of American culture which you like. Just admit it instead of being such a fucking hypocrite.

>lol. That's just why the first synthi artists came from
>Europe..

And that proves that disco music wasn't an offshoot of funk music how? Oh, and since you think European disco was so influential to hip hop, I must admit, you're absolutely right. Here's what Davey D had to say on the subject in "The Origins of Rap (as told by Davey D)":

"NY's Black radio station began to position themselves so they would appeal to a more affluent, older and to a large degree, whiter audience. ... young people found themselves being excluded especially when bubble gum and Europeanized versions of disco music began to hit the air waves. To many, this style of music lacked soul and to a large degree sounded too formulated and mechanical... With all this happening a void was created and hip hop filled it... Point blank, hip hop was a direct response to the watered down, Europeanized, disco music that permeated the airwaves."

So yeah, Eurotrash disco did have a fundamental role in the origin of hip hop after all.

>Okayplayer.com is based on hate, envy & jealousy.

No, you must be mistaking us with France.

>Conscious HipHop is nothin but fascism in disguise.

Fascism: another lovely gift that European culture has given to the world. How proud you must be.


40th Street Black knocks 'em out...
____________________________________________________________________________________________

"Soccer was invented by European ladies to keep them busy while their husbands were cooking" - Hank Hill

>>nope. I just have a problem with people who use the plural
>>maiestatis. I never say "we" or "us" when referring to
>>topics like that one.
>
>Hey good for you.
>
>>I knew you wouldn't get it. Irony is a stylistic device
>>which is obviously totally unknown in the US.
>
>You don't get it, do you? Sarcasm is obviously totally
>unknown in Europe.

Why did you respond to this? Silly boy.

>
>>see above. Btw one word: "Superstrat". If you know a bit
>>about the Middle English period you'll know what I mean -
>>The English peeps didn't like it all. Nowadays the same
>>thing happens again - in a different way. Europeans don't
>>like that. Language determines the way you think. Compared
>>with languages like French, Italian, German, etc American
>>English is fuckin simple.
>
>You *really* don't get it, do you? Amazing, simply
>amazing... I thought you supposedly knew what irony was? Oh
>well... Anyway, I thought English was this complex hybrid
>Germanic language with French, Latin & Scandinavian
>elements, yet now you tell me that compared to French,
>Italian and German its "fuckin simple"? Make up your fucking
>mind, asshole.

Are you retarded? Quantity isn't quality. logics. Another key word for idiots like you: dissociation.

>
>>I like certain artists. That doesn't necessarily mean that I
>>like American culture in general. Logics.
>
>Whatever; you like hip hop, which means that there are
>aspects of American culture which you like. Just admit it
>instead of being such a fucking hypocrite.
>
Whatever lol.. you're at a loss for arguments, aren't you? lol

>>lol. That's just why the first synthi artists came from
>>Europe..
>
>And that proves that disco music wasn't an offshoot of funk
>music how? Oh, and since you think European disco was so
>influential to hip hop, I must admit, you're absolutely
>right. Here's what Davey D had to say on the subject in "The
>Origins of Rap (as told by Davey D)":
>
>"NY's Black radio station began to position themselves so
>they would appeal to a more affluent, older and to a large
>degree, whiter audience. ... young people found themselves
>being excluded especially when bubble gum and Europeanized
>versions of disco music began to hit the air waves. To many,
>this style of music lacked soul and to a large degree
>sounded too formulated and mechanical... With all this
>happening a void was created and hip hop filled it... Point
>blank, hip hop was a direct response to the watered down,
>Europeanized, disco music that permeated the airwaves."
>
>So yeah, Eurotrash disco did have a fundamental role in the
>origin of hip hop after all.

lol. Europop ain't disco music. Get some knowledge boy.

>
>>Okayplayer.com is based on hate, envy & jealousy.
>
>No, you must be mistaking us with France.
>
oh no. I'm right.

>>Conscious HipHop is nothin but fascism in disguise.
>
>Fascism: another lovely gift European culture has given to
>the world. How proud you must be.

lol. fascism has been there forever. Do you know what fascism means and where it comes from?

>
>40th Street Black knocks 'em out...

nope. You knocked yourself out.

>Why did you respond to this? Silly boy.

Because you somehow seemed to miss the fact that my overt sarcasm quite clearly indicated that I "got it" all along and promptly threw it right back in your face... but if you didn't get it the first time, I doubt you'll get in now.

>Are you retarded? Quantity isn't quality. logics. Another
>key word for idiots like you: dissociation.

You're not too bright, are you? OK, let me dumb it down to a level a simpelton like you can understand... how is English so "fuckin simple" when, as you pointed out, it is a blend of Germanic, French, Latin & Scandinavian languages? That makes it complex *by definition*; it's got nothing to do with quantity vs. quality moron, it's about complex vs. simple. Dissociate that, asshole.

>Whatever lol.. you're at a loss for arguments, aren't you?
>lol

You admit that you like a distinctly American cultural phenomena which at the present time happens to be the most dominant force in American pop culture, yet you still claim that you don't like American culture "in general", all the while posting this self-contradicting load of horseshit on an American website related to said American cultural phenomena. Yeah, good argument there, slick.

>lol. Europop ain't disco music. Get some knowledge boy.

Eurotrash is Eurotrash.

>>>Okayplayer.com is based on hate, envy & jealousy.
>>No, you must be mistaking us with France.
>oh no. I'm right.

Yet you're still here, aren't you? It never fails... like I said before, if you Eurotrash idiots weren't such whores for American pop culture I might actually take you hypocritical assholes more seriously.

>lol. fascism has been there forever. Do you know what
>fascism means and where it comes from?

Well the roots of the word are Latin, so I guess that means it comes from the wonderfully complex minds of Europeans
unfettered by the "fuckin simple" thought processes imposed by American English. Again, congratulations on that - way to go, Europe!

(BTW, I love your grossly overstated generalizations - Fascism has been there "forever"; Brilliant. Simply brilliant!)


40th Street Black knocks 'em out...
____________________________________________________________________________________________

"You tried your best and you failed miserably. The lesson is: Never try." - Homer Simpson

"Bunch of savages in this town" - Clerks

>>Why did you respond to this? Silly boy.
>
>Because you somehow seemed to miss the fact that my overt
>sarcasm quite clearly indicated that I "got it" all along
>and promptly threw it right back in your face... but if you
>didn't get it the first time, I doubt you'll get in now.
>
Again you did respond...

>>Are you retarded? Quantity isn't quality. logics. Another
>>key word for idiots like you: dissociation.
>
>You're not too bright, are you? OK, let me dumb it down to
>a level a simpelton like you can understand... how is
>English so "fuckin simple" when, as you pointed out, it is a
>blend of Germanic, French, Latin & Scandinavian languages?
>That makes it complex *by definition*; it's got nothing to
>do with quantity vs. quality moron, it's about complex vs.
>simple. Dissociate that, asshole.

For beginners: A soup with three ingredients isn't necessarily better than a soup with only one ingredient. Quantity ain't quality. English lost its system of full inflections, it's dissociated (you don't even know what it means...) and due to the GVS its pronounciation is fuckin simple.

>
>>Whatever lol.. you're at a loss for arguments, aren't you?
>>lol
>
>You admit that you like a distinctly American cultural
>phenomena which at the present time happens to be the most
>dominant force in American pop culture, yet you still claim
>that you don't like American culture "in general", all the
>while posting this self-contradicting load of horseshit on
>an American website related to said American cultural
>phenomena. Yeah, good argument there, slick.
>
That's the difference between Americans & Europeans. Europeans are able to differentiate.

>>lol. Europop ain't disco music. Get some knowledge boy.
>
>Eurotrash is Eurotrash.

perfect argument.
>
>>>>Okayplayer.com is based on hate, envy & jealousy.
>>>No, you must be mistaking us with France.
>>oh no. I'm right.
>
>Yet you're still here, aren't you? It never fails... like I
>said before, if you Eurotrash idiots weren't such whores
>for American pop culture I might actually take you
>hypocritical assholes more seriously.

lol.

>>lol. fascism has been there forever. Do you know what
>>fascism means and where it comes from?
>
>Well the roots of the word are Latin, so I guess that means
>it comes from the wonderfully complex minds of Europeans
>unfettered by the "fuckin simple" thought processes imposed
>by American English. Again, congratulations on that - way to
>go, Europe!

you guys are so damn simple. It's like "Oh fascism is a Latin word, so the whole concept must be a European invention". That's what I call brilliant.

>(BTW, I love your grossly overstated generalizations -
>Fascism has been there "forever"; Brilliant. Simply
>brilliant!)
>
it's just another word for oppression. get some knowledge retard.

>For beginners: A soup with three ingredients isn't
>necessarily better than a soup with only one ingredient.
>Quantity ain't quality. English lost its system of full
>inflections, it's dissociated (you don't even know what it
>means...) and due to the GVS its pronounciation is fuckin
>simple.

For some strange reason you remain stuck on this quantity vs. quality thing, when I've already explained why it has nothing to do with this. Whatever. And anyway, English lost the full inflections and all that largely thanks to the influx of French, so we're just trying to return the favor.

>That's the difference between Americans & Europeans.
>Europeans are able to differentiate.

If by "differentiate" you mean being whores for American pop culture while simultaneously claiming to hate American culture "in general", then yeah, you might have a point there.

>>Eurotrash is Eurotrash.
>
>perfect argument.

Exactly.

>you guys are so damn simple. It's like "Oh fascism is a
>Latin word, so the whole concept must be a European
>invention". That's what I call brilliant.

Again, you somehow failed to get my overt sarcasm; I guess this fuckin simple language is just too complicated for you to grasp.

>it's just another word for oppression. get some knowledge
>retard.

You think fascism and oppression are synonyms? English is a little more complex than that, moron.

>>For beginners: A soup with three ingredients isn't
>>necessarily better than a soup with only one ingredient.
>>Quantity ain't quality. English lost its system of full
>>inflections, it's dissociated (you don't even know what it
>>means...) and due to the GVS its pronounciation is fuckin
>>simple.
>
>For some strange reason you remain stuck on this quantity
>vs. quality thing, when I've already explained why it has
>nothing to do with this. Whatever.

You didn't get it. Even though it's a "complex hybrid of Latin, French, Scandinavian & Greek" doesn't make English a complex language at all. It's ecclectic and very very simple, but please see below

>And anyway, English
>lost the full inflections and all that largely thanks to the
>influx of French, so we're just trying to return the favor.
>

You should read Henry Sweet's book on morphology. He'll give you some reasons (GVS, Northern Cities Shift, Analogy etc.)

>>That's the difference between Americans & Europeans.
>>Europeans are able to differentiate.
>
>If by "differentiate" you mean being whores for American pop
>culture while simultaneously claiming to hate American
>culture "in general", then yeah, you might have a point
>there.
>

I didn't say that I hate American culture in general. I said I like certain artists. Please differentiate idiot

>>>Eurotrash is Eurotrash.
>>
>>perfect argument.
>
>Exactly.

Some knowledge for you: Jean-Jacques Perrey & Pierre Henry, first artists who used the moog synthesizers in 1965- 1972. When was that funk era again?

>
>>you guys are so damn simple. It's like "Oh fascism is a
>>Latin word, so the whole concept must be a European
>>invention". That's what I call brilliant.
>
>Again, you somehow failed to get my overt sarcasm; I guess
>this fuckin simple language is just too complicated for you
>to grasp.

you wish. Please don't try to be sarcastic. I doesn't work.

>>it's just another word for oppression. get some knowledge
>>retard.
>
>You think fascism and oppression are synonyms? English is a
>little more complex than that, moron.

hahaha. Fool. Maybe you should have attended a Latin course. For beginners like you: Fasciem corripere = to take over, to oppress; oppressio, onis = oppression. Get some knowledge you little idiot. Btw I know four languages and I didn't have to pay for anything. Funny, isn't it?!

This " Nerd" and the "40th street black" have to be the two most ignorant examples of their respective cultures possible.

Why do we let them go on sporting this ignorance? Anybody??

It's my fuckin right to be ignorant. WE are not causin harm to anyone. So shut the fuck up.

Shut the fuck up.

>You didn't get it. Even though it's a "complex hybrid of
>Latin, French, Scandinavian & Greek" doesn't make English a
>complex language at all. It's ecclectic and very very
>simple, but please see below

No you don't get it; you're still stuck on this idea that the structure of English somehow makes it of lesser "quality" than these other languages - if you think English is so fuckin simple, go read some Joyce and then get back to me.

>I didn't say that I hate American culture in general. I said
>I like certain artists. Please differentiate idiot

You're a fucking hypocrite; get over it.

>Some knowledge for you: Jean-Jacques Perrey & Pierre Henry,
>first artists who used the moog synthesizers in 1965- 1972.
>When was that funk era again?

Are you still stuck on this disco music vs. europop thing? I really don't give a fuck; like I said, eurotrash is eurotrash.

>you wish. Please don't try to be sarcastic. I doesn't work.

Of course it works, you're just too fucking stupid to get it, but that's a whole other issue.

>hahaha. Fool. Maybe you should have attended a Latin course.
>For beginners like you: Fasciem corripere = to take over, to
>oppress; oppressio, onis = oppression. Get some knowledge
>you little idiot.

Christ you really are a fucking moron. You see, in the "fuckin simple" English language, words can carry more complex meanings than their roots from Latin, French etc. indicate, which is why your little excercise fails to mention that fascism refers to that lovely political philosophy and movement that you wonderfully cultured Europeans developed, while oppression can be caused by any number of things that have absolutely nothing to do with fascism. That's the difference between Americans and Europeans; Americans are able to differentiate. You guys are so damn simple. Get some knowledge boy.

>Btw I know four languages and I didn't
>have to pay for anything. Funny, isn't it?!

Yeah, it's funny how after all that free education you're still so fucking stupid. But hey, you got what you paid for, so at least you broke even.


40th Street Black knocks 'em out...
____________________________________________________________________________________________

"Soccer was invented by European ladies to keep them busy while their husbands were cooking" - Hank Hill

>No you don't get it; you're still stuck on this idea that
>the structure of English somehow makes it of lesser
>"quality" than these other languages - if you think English
>is so fuckin simple, go read some Joyce and then get back to
>me.

I guess James Joyce is difficult to read due to things like the stream of consciousness, inner monolog and intertextuality. The language ain't no problem at all.

>>I didn't say that I hate American culture in general. I said
>>I like certain artists. Please differentiate idiot
>
>You're a fucking hypocrite; get over it.

sorry boy.

>
>>Some knowledge for you: Jean-Jacques Perrey & Pierre Henry,
>>first artists who used the moog synthesizers in 1965- 1972.
>>When was that funk era again?
>
>Are you still stuck on this disco music vs. europop thing? I
>really don't give a fuck; like I said, eurotrash is
>eurotrash.

please don't get off the topic. European disco & dance music is a root of HipHop. Ask Jeff Mills or others.

>
>>you wish. Please don't try to be sarcastic. I doesn't work.
>
>Of course it works, you're just too fucking stupid to get
>it, but that's a whole other issue.

If you really had been sarcastic, you could relax and watch me makin a fool of myself. Unfortunately you're still insisting on being sarcastic. Sarcastic people know when it's over. It really doesn't work boy. Get along with it.


>Christ you really are a fucking moron. You see, in the
>"fuckin simple" English language, words can carry more
>complex meanings than their roots from Latin, French etc.
>indicate, which is why your little excercise fails to
>mention that fascism refers to that lovely political
>philosophy and movement that you wonderfully cultured
>Europeans developed, while oppression can be caused by any
>number of things that have absolutely nothing to do with
>fascism.

lol. really? Your distinction doesn't wash. Oppression and fascism are deeply connected (both theoretically & politically)and can be used as synonyms. At least in German & in French. Maybe you should spend more time at school and read books by Marcuse & Adorno instead of ranting around like a little idiot. oops I forgot: Idiots like you don't know Marcuse & Adorno. When it comes to philosophy Americans can't compete. You mind is limited to think the easy way.

>That's the difference between Americans and
>Europeans; Americans are able to differentiate. You guys are
>so damn simple. Get some knowledge boy.
>
lol.

>Yeah, it's funny how after all that free education you're
>still so fucking stupid.

Of course Mr. "English is a complex hybrid...." lol

>I guess James Joyce is difficult to read due to things like
>the stream of consciousness, inner monolog and
>intertextuality. The language ain't no problem at all.

I thought your whole point was that language determines the way you think; funny how Joyce could construct such complex thoughts with such a fuckin simple language.

>please don't get off the topic. European disco & dance music
>is a root of HipHop. Ask Jeff Mills or others.

I realize this. You're taking this way too seriously... no sense of humor.

>If you really had been sarcastic, you could relax and watch
>me makin a fool of myself. Unfortunately you're still
>insisting on being sarcastic. Sarcastic people know when
>it's over. It really doesn't work boy. Get along with it.

Really, no sense of humor at all. What a shame...

>lol. really? Your distinction doesn't wash. Oppression and
>fascism are deeply connected (both theoretically &
>politically)and can be used as synonyms. At least in German
>& in French.

We're talking about English moron. They are not synonyms in English.

>Maybe you should spend more time at school and
>read books by Marcuse & Adorno instead of ranting around
>like a little idiot. oops I forgot: Idiots like you don't
>know Marcuse & Adorno. When it comes to philosophy Americans
>can't compete. You mind is limited to think the easy way.

I guess that's why Marcuse had to flee you Euro-fascists and moved to America and wrote most of his major works in the U.S. after he became a U.S. citizen. Oh, the irony...

>>I guess James Joyce is difficult to read due to things like
>>the stream of consciousness, inner monolog and
>>intertextuality. The language ain't no problem at all.
>
>I thought your whole point was that language determines the
>way you think; funny how Joyce could construct such complex
>thoughts with such a fuckin simple language.

see, you're not able to differentiate. Compared with French & German English is simple..

>>please don't get off the topic. European disco & dance music
>>is a root of HipHop. Ask Jeff Mills or others.
>
>I realize this. You're taking this way too seriously... no
>sense of humor.
>
>>If you really had been sarcastic, you could relax and watch
>>me makin a fool of myself. Unfortunately you're still
>>insisting on being sarcastic. Sarcastic people know when
>>it's over. It really doesn't work boy. Get along with it.
>
>Really, no sense of humor at all. What a shame...

don't even try it. it doesn't work.
>
>>lol. really? Your distinction doesn't wash. Oppression and
>>fascism are deeply connected (both theoretically &
>>politically)and can be used as synonyms. At least in German
>>& in French.
>
>We're talking about English moron. They are not synonyms in
>English.

For beginners: A Synonym (synonomos) is a word with the same OR very similar meaning. For further information please consult your local linguistics lecturer. Moreover you should put focus on the teachings of de Saussure, Derrida & Barthes. We're in the 21th century. Structuralism rulz. The meaning of a word depends on the context.

>>Maybe you should spend more time at school and
>>read books by Marcuse & Adorno instead of ranting around
>>like a little idiot. oops I forgot: Idiots like you don't
>>know Marcuse & Adorno. When it comes to philosophy Americans
>>can't compete. You mind is limited to think the easy way.
>
>I guess that's why Marcuse had to flee you Euro-fascists and
>moved to America and wrote most of his major works in the
>U.S. after he became a U.S. citizen. Oh, the irony...

and returned to Europe when the US became what it is today: An "uncultured" nation. yep, that's irony.

English is a simple language which limits it to simple thought, yet it's used to construct the complex thoughts evoked by the works of Joyce; fascism and oppression are synonyms but don't really mean the same thing; European philosophers are an example of why Europe is more cultured than America, yet prominent European philosophers move to America and produce their seminal works living in America as American citizens... blah blah blah. Don't you ever get tired of your own bullshit? Give it up already.. it should be easy, you're French - surrender is in your blood.

>surrender is in your blood.

thank you very much, I've achieved my goal. About 75% of my posts were pure bullshit and I knew. America is indeed Europe's child.

>thank you very much, I've achieved my goal. About 75% of my
>posts were pure bullshit and I knew.

Me too... I know about the influence of European music on hiphop (Kraftwerk, etc.), I was just fuckin' with you. You're a funny dude.

>America is indeed
>Europe's child.

Indeed. God bless America / Viva La France!

hip-hop, jazz, gospel and other genres are Black artforms with roots in African musical/oral traditions.

One white man's word against the entire historical process of the black hip-hop movement?

really? this argument is gettin borin. please don't use synthezisers, mpcs, behringers, etc. anymore. Don't sample Bob James & David Axelrod anymore. HipHop is an ecclectic artform. Even though you guys don't like it, disco & club music is a root & an important part of hiphop.

no disco & club music ---> no dj

Kool Herc

...'nuff said.

Very good Mr. Sarcastic. Please read my response to your "whatever" post.

>really? this argument is gettin borin. please don't use
>synthezisers, mpcs, behringers, etc. anymore. Don't sample
>Bob James & David Axelrod anymore. HipHop is an ecclectic
>artform. Even though you guys don't like it, disco & club
>music is a root & an important part of hiphop.


No offense but what you just said is the wackest shit I've heard in a minute.

And yes, the argument gets boring for those of you with no interest in black culture. From your replies, looks like you're ready to talk a mouthful when the topic of European culture/what belongs to Europeans comes to the table.

Synthesizers and everythang else you named are synthetic/inaminate/decorative objects. Hard for you to believe but hip-hop is most valued for its humanistic quality. What you just said is as wack as sayin the mic is the root of emcees.

Rap is a BLACK artform that emerged from BLACK communities out of a need to express BLACK political oppression. Betta recognize.

History of hip-hop by Davey D:

Nowadays if you ask most people to give a definition of "rap", they're likely to state that it's the reciting of rhymes to the best of music. It's a form of expression that finds its roots imbedded deep within ancient African culture and oral tradition.

Throughout history here in America there has always been some form of verbal acrobatics or jousting involving rhymes within the Afro-American community. Signifying, testifying, Shining of the Titanic, the Dozens, school yard rhymes, prison 'jail house' rhymes and double Dutch jump rope' rhymes are some of the names and ways that various forms of rap have manifested.

Modern day rap music finds its immediate roots in the toasting and dub talk over elements of reggae music. In the early 70's, a Jamaican dj known as Kool Herc moved from Kingston to NY's West Bronx. Here, he attempted to incorporate his Jamaican style of dj which involved reciting improvised rhymes over the dub versions of his reggae records. Unfortunately, New Yorkers weren't into reggae at the time. Thus Kool Herc adapted his style by chanting over the instrumental or percussion sections of the day's popular songs. Because these breaks were relatively short, he learned to extend them indefinitely by using an audio mixer and two identical records in which he continuously replaced the desired segment.

In those early days, young party goers initially recited popular phrases and used the slang of the day. For example, it was fashionable for dj to acknowledge people who were in attendance at a party. These early raps featured someone such as Herc shouting over the instrumental break; 'Yo this is Kool Herc in the joint-ski saying my mellow-ski Marky D is in the house'. This would usually evoke a response from the crowd, who began to call out their own names and slogans.

As this phenomenon evolved, the party shouts became more elaborate as dj in an effort to be different, began to incorporate little rhymes-'Davey D is in the house/An he'll turn it out without a doubt.' It wasn't long before people began drawing upon outdated dozens and school yard rhymes. Many would add a little twist and customize these rhymes to make them suitable for the party environment. At that time rap was not yet known as 'rap' but called 'emceeing'. With regards to Kool Herc, as he progressed, he eventually turned his attention to the complexities of djaying and let two friends Coke La Rock and Clark Kent (not Dana Dane's dj) handle the microphone duties. This was rap music first emcee team. They became known as Kool Herc and the Herculoids.


Now, up to this point, all this needs to be understood with regards to Hip Hop. Throughout history, music originating from America's Black communities has always had an accompanying subculture reflective of the political, social and economic conditions of the time. Rap is no different.


Hip hop is the culture from which rap emerged. Initially it consisted of four main elements; graffiti art, break dancing, dj (cuttin' and scratching) and emceeing (rapping). Hip hop is a lifestyle with its own language, style of dress, music and mind set that is continuously evolving. Nowadays because break dancing and graffiti aren't as prominent the words 'rap' and 'hip hop' have been used interchangeably. However it should be noted that all aspects of hip hop culture still exists. They've just evolved onto new levels.

More on daveyd's website.

Please school y'self on cultural propriety.

nearly meaningless.. how can you use so many words to express so little meaning? we're all effin related, america is the child of europe... argh

>nearly meaningless.. how can you use so many words to
>express so little meaning?

You have no sense of humor, do you?

>we're all effin related, america
>is the child of europe... argh

Yeah, MFreeman already said that several times, including once within this sub-discussion, so your comment was just as meaningless as said sub-discussion, if not moreso. Way to go.

I'm 'bout to bust a kidney over here....

>"You" didn't save nobody. Btw did you know that you're
>speakin a Germanic language which core words are French,
>Latin & Scandinavian in origin? If there wasn't "us", you
>wouldn't even speak that language. I love that kind of
>argumentation. It's so fuckin simple...

Doesn't this give further evidence that Americans are
*similar* to Europeans, which was the point of this thread?

**************
By the way, lemme let you in on a lil secret:
I know American whites differ from Europeans culturally. My main point was to expose that they're both cultural chauvanists....and I think this thread gives plenty proof of that.

read post #140

I read that post, along with 137, 138, 139, 140, 141...I know this is weird but usually I read posts numerically.

My reply is in reaction to your collective responses.

>Doesn't this give further evidence that Americans are
>*similar* to Europeans, which was the point of this thread?

It sure does.

>**************
>By the way, lemme let you in on a lil secret:
>I know American whites differ from Europeans culturally. My
>main point was to expose that they're both cultural
>chauvanists....and I think this thread gives plenty proof of
>that.

Exactly! Of course Americans are cultural chauvanists, but when Europeans of all people accuse us of this yet try to deny that it applies to them as well, when the're the ones we learned the whole game from, then that shit just doesn't fly. I was just having a little fun pointing it out to this idiot.

___________________________________________

"Bunch of savages in this town" - Clerks

And yes, I'm still chucklin as I type. You're fking hilarious.

>And here's a hint: "French hiphop" is
>still American pop culture

i don't think french hiphop artists from the banlieus(sp) talk about gold chains, fast cars and mansions - you know, french hiphop simply isn't american pop culture..

(if you were on some american irony that i can't understand, my bad)

>i don't think french hiphop artists from the banlieus(sp)
>talk about gold chains, fast cars and mansions

Neither do the Roots. So your point is...?

>- you know, french hiphop simply isn't american pop culture..

It's an American art form performed in French and with certain French cultural nuances thrown into the mix, but the core art form is still distictly American.

>Neither do the Roots. So your point is...?

My point was in the next sentance (french hiphop simply isn't american pop culture).. And for my other post, I've got a sence of humor I just don't understand everything in a foreign language

>To quote nighttripper from post #12:
>
>"But most of the times, I consider those rants to be just
>what they are, the bitter complaint of losers. "Yeah, you
>kick our collective ass left and right and there's nothing
>we can do about it, but we're more CULTURED. So there!"
>
>Exhibit A:
>
>>At least I know 4 different languages and don't have to pay
>>for it..
>
>Yeah, but if it wasn't for us you'd only know 1 language -
>German.
>
"Us"? You were involved in WW II? Funny, even the older generation spends some time on the net..

>lol. get some knowledge man. That's hilarious. I probably
>know more about the US than you know about Europe.

Maybe, maybe not. Who cares, though?

>England
>didn't invent capitalism. Capitalism has been there forever.
>Just because there such a thing as "Manchester Capitalism"
>doesn't mean that you can ascribe the invention of
>capitalism to England.

Dude, one thing's for sure, you don't know squatt about history, to be saying shit like "Capitalism has been there forever". So, in the Middle-Age, under the feodal system, in a rural-only economy, Capitalism was there?

The conquest of the Americas inaugurated capitalism, but it really started in the 18th century, when the technological level they'd reached enabled Western Europe countries to fully exploit the natural resources of their colonies (and God knows they did fully exploit them...). But capitalism as we know it today (though it's obviously changing), with its associated model of government, was birthed by the Industrial Revolution of the 19th century. England was leading the movement, and came up with the concept of the so-called "parliamentary democracy".

Get a grip, nitwit, then come back to me.

>Moreover have you have heard of Puritans or Calvanists? Go
>and get some knowledge sucker.
>

Yes, I've heard of them. What's your point?

>Ever heard of John Winthorp? That's what I call culture lol.
>And The US is build on his ideologies... As a result, Europe
>is definitely more "cultured" than the US.

For starters, it's John Winthrop, you dumbass. Then, "as a result" is a phrase that's used by sane people to express a link of causality between two propositions. And I, like every sane people who would be reading this, fail to see the relation between John Winthrop's influence on the US and Europe being more "cultured", you lunatic (haha, I made a funny).

Also, please undulge me, where were John Winthrop and the Puritans from already?

>Europe sucks
>sometimes, but I prefer living in Europe. There is no such
>city as Rome, Paris, Barcelona or London in the US.

Who cares where you prefer living, you moron?

Well, matter of fact, I do, so that I never get a chance to meet you...

And I, like
>every sane people who would be reading this, fail to see the
>relation between John Winthrop's influence on the US and
>Europe being more "cultured",

i think it's american puritanism and religiosity v european urbanity and freethinking. he has a point.

are there european analogues to the importance of the religious right in the us? the attorney general annointed himself with olive oil at his inauguration, for pete's sake. and i think the religiosity is intimately entwined with anti-intellectualism and a suspicion of cities as sites for secular learning. i mean, would "pointy headed intellectuals" or dan quayle's foaming about the "cultural elite" even be an insult in europe?

>i think it's american puritanism and religiosity v european
>urbanity and freethinking. he has a point.
>

A very broad and moot one, then.

>are there european analogues to the importance of the
>religious right in the us? the attorney general annointed
>himself with olive oil at his inauguration, for pete's sake.
> and i think the religiosity is intimately entwined with
>anti-intellectualism and a suspicion of cities as sites for
>secular learning. i mean, would "pointy headed
>intellectuals" or dan quayle's foaming about the "cultural
>elite" even be an insult in europe?
>

Well, it depends. If you're talking France or Poland, for instance. Jean Jaures or Maurras and the Action Francaise (and Le Pen, nowadays) .

>>i think it's american puritanism and religiosity v european
>>urbanity and freethinking. he has a point.
>>
>
>A very broad and moot one, then.

i'm not so sure. i mean, the suspicion towards high culture/metropolitan life/ shapes the us in everything from the difference in funding for the arts to transportation patterns.



>>are there european analogues to the importance of the
>>religious right in the us? the attorney general annointed
>>himself with olive oil at his inauguration, for pete's sake.
>> and i think the religiosity is intimately entwined with
>>anti-intellectualism and a suspicion of cities as sites for
>>secular learning. i mean, would "pointy headed
>>intellectuals" or dan quayle's foaming about the "cultural
>>elite" even be an insult in europe?
>>
>
>Well, it depends. If you're talking France or Poland, for
>instance. Jean Jaures or Maurras and the Action Francaise
>(and Le Pen, nowadays) .


yeah, but. i mean, the influence of le pen is far smaller than the influence of the religious right in the us. us policy is far more right wing than in france, definately on the national level. and on the local level -- do y'all still have fights over darwinism being taught in schools? murders of abortion providers?

the action francaise as far as i know (which isn't far) was a small party. and also, was it anti-paris, i.e. anti-metropolis? did it explicitly de-fund the cities at the expense of rural areas?

i wasn't saying that europe doesn't have its own religious/fascist/ parties, but that the religiosity and anti-intellectualism have been far more important in american politics. the suburbanization of america to an extent that didn't happen in europe happened bc cities never had the same place in the american imagination as in europe (see peter hall's cities of tomorrow).

>i'm not so sure. i mean, the suspicion towards high
>culture/metropolitan life/ shapes the us in everything from
>the difference in funding for the arts to transportation
>patterns.
>

transportation patterns? Tell me more. It sounds interesting.

>yeah, but. i mean, the influence of le pen is far smaller
>than the influence of the religious right in the us. us
>policy is far more right wing than in france, definately on
>the national level. and on the local level -- do y'all
>still have fights over darwinism being taught in schools?
>murders of abortion providers?
>

No and no. But coming back to my original claim, that's just France. I wouldn't be so sure if we were talking Poland or Ireland.

>the action francaise as far as i know (which isn't far) was
>a small party. and also, was it anti-paris, i.e.
>anti-metropolis? did it explicitly de-fund the cities at
>the expense of rural areas?
>

Yes, it was/is definitely anti-Paris, anti-intellectuals, anti-cosmopolitism. And it was a small party, just like the FN is a small party nowadays, as opposed to what the recent brainwashing convinced people of, but the ideas that it defends are far-more widespread than the party itself. As I read recently in a good hip hop magazine (one of the only press sources which addressed the issue correctly), the problem in France is not that there are 20% of fascists, but that there is 20% of fascism in every French.

>>i'm not so sure. i mean, the suspicion towards high
>>culture/metropolitan life/ shapes the us in everything from
>>the difference in funding for the arts to transportation
>>patterns.
>>
>
>transportation patterns? Tell me more. It sounds
>interesting.


suburbanization even around the cities has spread far more than in europe bc the premium placed on preserving the city core wasn't very high and the investments in infrastructure simply weren't made. los angeles is getting a subway *now*. peter hall's cities of tomorrow has a good comparison of europe v america, attitudes over time.



>Yes, it was/is definitely anti-Paris, anti-intellectuals,
>anti-cosmopolitism. And it was a small party, just like the
>FN is a small party nowadays, as opposed to what the recent
>brainwashing convinced people of, but the ideas that it
>defends are far-more widespread than the party itself.

yeah, but are there religious programming channels like the 700 club and clerical counterparts to Jerry Falwell ? like in poland, the church is def important, but you also have explicitly anti-church mags like jerzy urban's which are wildly popular. mocking the religious right in mass culture simply doesn't go over in the us. or consider what kind of nudity is shown on european television.

which is getting a little off-track. bc honestly, the whole notion of the loserishness of being provincial, of facing the metropolis, of valuation of high culture just doesn't exist in the us. i mean, compare the new york review of books and the tls. or bookchat with apostrophe. or just compare book sales. book sales are as high in the uk as in the us, with a fraction of the population. there's simply no question that anti-intellectualism is far stronger in american life.

and since i have it next to me, here's something from the american translator of claire malroux, otherwise known to okp activist as samuel delaney's ex-wife:


May rain drizzles on the beautiful
headlines confirming Francois Mitterand's
election. We have Reagan. ...
Aspiring heads of state are literate
here, have favorite poets, can explain
the way structuralists obliterate
a text. They read at night. They're still all men.
Now poppy-studded meadows of Provence
blazon beyond our red sardine-can car.



and that's the difference between us.

>>lol. get some knowledge man. That's hilarious. I probably
>>know more about the US than you know about Europe.
>
>Maybe, maybe not. Who cares, though?
>
>>England
>>didn't invent capitalism. Capitalism has been there forever.
>>Just because there such a thing as "Manchester Capitalism"
>>doesn't mean that you can ascribe the invention of
>>capitalism to England.
>
>Dude, one thing's for sure, you don't know squatt about
>history, to be saying shit like "Capitalism has been there
>forever". So, in the Middle-Age, under the feodal system, in
>a rural-only economy, Capitalism was there?
>
It's called Middle Ages. Let's be nitpicking.

>The conquest of the Americas inaugurated capitalism, but it
>really started in the 18th century, when the technological
>level they'd reached enabled Western Europe countries to
>fully exploit the natural resources of their colonies (and
>God knows they did fully exploit them...). But capitalism as
>we know it today (though it's obviously changing), with its
>associated model of government, was birthed by the
>Industrial Revolution of the 19th century. England was
>leading the movement, and came up with the concept of the
>so-called "parliamentary democracy".
>
Ever heard of mercantilism? Capitalism has been there forever. Just because it got its name in the 18th century doesn't mean that it didn't exist before. btw why is capitalism a Latin word?
Cuz it sounds better? nope.

>
>>Moreover have you have heard of Puritans or Calvanists? Go
>>and get some knowledge sucker.
>>
>
>Yes, I've heard of them. What's your point?
>
>>Ever heard of John Winthorp? That's what I call culture lol.
>>And The US is build on his ideologies... As a result, Europe
>>is definitely more "cultured" than the US.
>
>For starters, it's John Winthrop, you dumbass. Then, "as a
>result" is a phrase that's used by sane people to express a
>link of causality between two propositions. And I, like
>every sane people who would be reading this, fail to see the
>relation between John Winthrop's influence on the US and
>Europe being more "cultured", you lunatic (haha, I made a
>funny).

I typed it wrong. So what? Winthrop left Europe for a reason. They didn't want him in Holland & England. Puritans are right-wing assholes. Right-wing assholes lack of such a thing as culture. So he settled in the US. It's the foundation of the US.

>
>Also, please undulge me, where were John Winthrop and the
>Puritans from already?
>
Holland, Germany, Switzerland & you're right.... mainly from England.

>>Europe sucks
>>sometimes, but I prefer living in Europe. There is no such
>>city as Rome, Paris, Barcelona or London in the US.
>
>Who cares where you prefer living, you moron?
>
>Well, matter of fact, I do, so that I never get a chance to
>meet you...

if you so choose.. but it's ok, I wouldn't like to be surrounded by an asshole like you either.

>>
>>Also, please undulge me, where were John Winthrop and the
>>Puritans from already?
>>
>Holland, Germany, Switzerland & you're right.... mainly from England.

That area (north of the alps, basically) has been known for being more or less (but mostly more) puritanistic ever since long before even the countries of europe were shaped.

You said that english wasn't the birthplace of capitalism, but isn't puranism the culture that created capitalism? That makes England a part of it, along with Holland, Germany, Switzerland and so on..

tell me if i'm wrong

>>>
>>>Also, please undulge me, where were John Winthrop and the
>>>Puritans from already?
>>>
>>Holland, Germany, Switzerland & you're right.... mainly from England.
>
>That area (north of the alps, basically) has been known for
>being more or less (but mostly more) puritanistic ever since
>long before even the countries of europe were shaped.
>
>You said that english wasn't the birthplace of capitalism,
>but isn't puranism the culture that created capitalism? That
>makes England a part of it, along with Holland, Germany,
>Switzerland and so on..
>
>tell me if i'm wrong

Puritanism is just a branch of Calvinism. Capitalism wasn't invented by England. They improved that "concept", but invented it? hell no.

Well Im black British, but mixed race because my mother is Welsh. And I would say there are Americans and there are Americans. George Bush is American, Seinfeld is American, but then again so is Talib Kweli. I find those Americans that travel in Europe and accross the rest of the continent of America to be idiots, complete buffons. But some people Ive met where my aunties live in LA and New Jersey? Quite clued up, pretty educated. Seems to me like Bushs Americans are content to cream the crop of their European Roots while living richly of the exploitative nature with which they treat the more Southern parts of their continent

>Ever heard of mercantilism? Capitalism has been there
>forever.

No. Just because you're repeating this doesn't make it more true. Mercantilism has about as much in common with capitalism as a chariot has with a Porsche. The main idea of mercantilism was to achieve economic self-sufficiency. Need I say more?

>Just because it got its name in the 18th century
>doesn't mean that it didn't exist before. btw why is
>capitalism a Latin word?
>Cuz it sounds better? nope.
>

Great argument, Einstein. The noun helicopter has Grecian roots. Does it mean Saukrates and Platon were flying from Sparta to Athens or whatever?

>>Well, matter of fact, I do, so that I never get a chance to
>>meet you...
>
>if you so choose.. but it's ok, I wouldn't like to be
>surrounded by an asshole like you either.

Says the guy who added "go and get some knowledge sucker" after spitting his ridiculous claims on capitalism

>>Ever heard of mercantilism? Capitalism has been there
>>forever.
>
>No. Just because you're repeating this doesn't make it more
>true. Mercantilism has about as much in common with
>capitalism as a chariot has with a Porsche. The main idea of
>mercantilism was to achieve economic self-sufficiency. Need
>I say more?

lol @ that definition of mercantilism. you definitely need to get some knowledge. Ever heard of the Fugger family? As long as money was involved, capitalism was there. Industrial revolution etc. represent just the peak of that development.
>
>>Just because it got its name in the 18th century
>>doesn't mean that it didn't exist before. btw why is
>>capitalism a Latin word?
>>Cuz it sounds better? nope.
>>
>
>Great argument, Einstein. The noun helicopter has Grecian
>roots. Does it mean Saukrates and Platon were flying from
>Sparta to Athens or whatever?

lol again. That's the difference. Greek roots vs. Latin origin. The word "Capitalism" wasn't invented in the 18th century. You probably do not even know what "caput, capitis" or "capitalis, e" mean, but that's a different topic.

>
>>>Well, matter of fact, I do, so that I never get a chance to
>>>meet you...
>>
>>if you so choose.. but it's ok, I wouldn't like to be
>>surrounded by an asshole like you either.
>
>Says the guy who added "go and get some knowledge sucker"
>after spitting his ridiculous claims on capitalism.

Please get some REAL knowledge. Your arguments are hilarious. Moreover your knowledge of the Middle Ages is limited to some basic knowledge which isn't even worth paying attention to.

>>>Just because it got its name in the 18th century
>>>doesn't mean that it didn't exist before.

>The word "Capitalism" wasn't invented in the 18th century.

These two statements were uttered by your oh-so-knowledgeable ass. You may have knowledge, but you lack memory, homey.

For the record, from Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry: cap·i·tal·ism
Pronunciation: 'ka-p&-t&l-"iz-&m, 'kap-t&l-, British also k&-'pi-t&l-
Function: noun
Date: 1877
: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market

Don't weep, my nerdish friend, you were kinda right the second time. The word capitalism wasn't invented in the 18th century, but in the 19th. After two guys named Marx and Engels wrote a book that identified what it was.

Also, mercantilism isn't about "the private or corporate ownership of capital goods", dude.

>You probably do not even know what "caput, capitis"
>or "capitalis, e" mean, but that's a different topic.
>

Yeah, right. Like, you're the only guy in the world who took latin courses. Spare me, please.

>>>>Just because it got its name in the 18th century
>>>>doesn't mean that it didn't exist before.
>
>>The word "Capitalism" wasn't invented in the 18th century.
>
>These two statements were uttered by your
>oh-so-knowledgeable ass. You may have knowledge, but you
>lack memory, homey.
>
>For the record, from Merriam-Webster:
>
>Main Entry: cap·i·tal·ism
>Pronunciation: 'ka-p&-t&l-"iz-&m, 'kap-t&l-, British also
>k&-'pi-t&l-
>Function: noun
>Date: 1877
>: an economic system characterized by private or corporate
>ownership of capital goods, by investments that are
>determined by private decision, and by prices, production,
>and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by
>competition in a free market
>
>Don't weep, my nerdish friend, you were kinda right the
>second time. The word capitalism wasn't invented in the 18th
>century, but in the 19th. After two guys named Marx and
>Engels wrote a book that identified what it was.
>
Maybe you should attend a philosophy & history course. I highly recommend reading Horatius Flaccus.

>Also, mercantilism isn't about "the private or corporate
>ownership of capital goods", dude.
>
Of course it isn't. But your definition of "Mercantilism" was far beyond reality.

>>You probably do not even know what "caput, capitis"
>>or "capitalis, e" mean, but that's a different topic.
>>
>
>Yeah, right. Like, you're the only guy in the world who took
>latin courses. Spare me, please.

ok boy. Knowledge hurts sometimes. Stay true to your myths.

"cultured"?

I have a hint of what you mean but I'm askin' anyways.

The word "cultured" asserts that Europeans have superior knowledge and refined tastes in relation to _______. This is the root of eurocentrism.

>"cultured"?
>
>I have a hint of what you mean but I'm askin' anyways.
>

I mean, Europeans make fun of Americans because, as a whole, the level of education is superior here than in the US. There are economic reasons for that, namely the fact that superior education isn't as expensive. But the main reason is that the US are very self-centered as a country. They don't give a fuck about anything that happens outside.

With all that said, I'm having all those convos above, because I share the exasperation of some Americans to hear snobbish European intellectuals make these claims while not producing anything worthwhile since...Proust, maybe? Whereas there has definitely been an interesting American litterature in the 20th century.

>The word "cultured" asserts that Europeans have superior
>knowledge and refined tastes in relation to _______. This is
>the root of eurocentrism.

If your _______ is supposed to replace "Non Whites" or "Black People" like I guess it is, then you did indeed totally miss my point. Europeans, when they're bad-mouthing uncultured Americans, don't think of Black people at all. They think George W Bush. Or Sylvester Stallone. Or movies like Independance Day.

I can't really blame them for criticizing these, but what do we have to be proud of in our current cultural production, and who among our current politicians, is the questions they should ask themselves before doing so.

>I mean, Europeans make fun of Americans because, as a whole,
>the level of education is superior here than in the US.
>There are economic reasons for that, namely the fact that
>superior education isn't as expensive. But the main reason
>is that the US are very self-centered as a country. They
>don't give a fuck about anything that happens outside.


dude, WHY is education subsidized in europe more than in it is in the US? it didn't just "happen." it's about what different places *value*. the US just doesn't value equity or education as much.


>With all that said, I'm having all those convos above,
>because I share the exasperation of some Americans to hear
>snobbish European intellectuals make these claims while not
>producing anything worthwhile since...Proust, maybe? Whereas
>there has definitely been an interesting American
>litterature in the 20th century.

i disagree completely and VOCIFEROUSLY. what interesting american literature compare to what uninteresting european literature? not producing anything worthwhile since proust? primo levi, sartre and john banville, for three random examples.

my life would be a barren desert if i didn't have access to English papers, poets, magazines, books etc. i don't read fiction much, but there is simply no question that there have been many more important and excellent British poets than American ones.

this is a country where robert hass became poet laureate and i have rest my case.

>dude, WHY is education subsidized in europe more than in it
>is in the US? it didn't just "happen." it's about what
>different places *value*. the US just doesn't value equity
>or education as much.
>

Well, I never really deny that. Notice that I didn't reply to your post #77. My point in that particular exchange with you was related to the only thing I've been defending here, ie that attitudes toward education and religion in European countries weren't exactly uniform. I can agree with you, though, overall education is more valued here.

>i disagree completely and VOCIFEROUSLY. what interesting
>american literature compare to what uninteresting european
>literature? not producing anything worthwhile since proust?
>primo levi, sartre and john banville, for three random
>examples.
>
>my life would be a barren desert if i didn't have access to
>English papers, poets, magazines, books etc. i don't read
>fiction much, but there is simply no question that there
>have been many more important and excellent British poets
>than American ones.
>

Relax. My statement was definitely too broad, because unlike you, I'm mostly interested in fiction. I haven't read Levi, nor Banville. I've read some of Sartre, though, and he is extremely overrated.

Just for fun, I decided to think of two random lists of American and French 20th century novelists (Proust is not 20th century to me):

Dos Passos
Faulkner
Norman Mailer
Dashiell Hamett
Chester Himes
Raymond Chandler
Ralph Ellison
James Ellroy
Jim Harrison
Jerome Charyn
Richard Ford
Saul Bellow
Philip Roth

vs

Aragon (who I like a little)
Mauriac
Camus (...)
Marguerite Duras (I'm having trouble keeping composure while writing this...)
Philippe Djian (mwahahaha...)

>this is a country where robert hass became poet laureate and
>i have rest my case.
>

hmmm, since when do we give a fuck about laureates?
it's like saying hip hop isn't worth shit because SisQo won a grammy in the category...

>Just for fun, I decided to think of two random lists of
>American and French 20th century novelists (Proust is not
>20th century to me):
>
>Dos Passos
>Faulkner
>Norman Mailer
>Dashiell Hamett
>Chester Himes
>Raymond Chandler
>Ralph Ellison
>James Ellroy
>Jim Harrison
>Jerome Charyn
>Richard Ford
>Saul Bellow
>Philip Roth
>
>vs
>
>Aragon (who I like a little)
>Mauriac
>Camus (...)
>Marguerite Duras (I'm having trouble keeping composure while
>writing this...)
>Philippe Djian (mwahahaha...)


dude, did you just say norman mailer v camus?

::::boggle::::

dude, come on. and if you're going to put in a chester himes or a raymond chandler, what about simenon?

and where is marcel ayme or marguerite yourcenar (duras was a scary thing to say) or queneau or perec or colette (speaking of les plaisirs de la chair) ?

i'm not saying i like all of the above, but i like almost none of your list, and half are not close to canonical importance. why can't you accept french superiority, dammit?! : P

random aside: jean gabin and i have a date to see that movie about transporting pork across paris, based on a marcel ayme novel. i am excited.

>dude, did you just say norman mailer v camus?
>
>::::boggle::::
>

Camus is mightily boring. And heavy-handed. Norman Mailer wrote at least one great novel.

>dude, come on. and if you're going to put in a chester
>himes or a raymond chandler, what about simenon?
>

Simenon is cool. You're right, I should give him some credit.

>and where is marcel ayme or marguerite yourcenar (duras was
>a scary thing to say) or queneau or perec or colette
>(speaking of les plaisirs de la chair) ?
>

Mentionning Duras, I'll admit, was a joke.

Queneau and Perec are amusing, but extremely gimmicky. Which is the main default of most 20th century French litterature (Boris Vian could be filed in the same category).

Colette is for girls. And girls only.

>i'm not saying i like all of the above, but i like almost
>none of your list, and half are not close to canonical
>importance. why can't you accept french superiority,
>dammit?! : P
>

Because they don't have the strength of exoticness to me, maybe? (and I know...pot:kettle)

>random aside: jean gabin and i have a date to see that movie
>about transporting pork across paris, based on a marcel ayme
>novel. i am excited.

Oh, puh-leaze, as they say. Don't you DARE like that crap. Even worse than Gabin, Louis De Funes is in that horrible, horrible piece of trash (that they play every six months on french tv, to make things worse)

>-a spawn of the "does Africa accept me" post-
>
>I am African. And most of you don't have a problem with my
>sayin' that.
>
>That said, aren't American whites "Europeans"? All of 'em
>are European immigrants right?
>
>But I know a lot of Europeans would feel offended by a white
>American claimin' to be European. The majority of Europeans
>go out of their way to disassociate from all things
>American.
>
I don't think so. But if a fuckin retard like ashcroft or bush was claimin to be European I'd feel offended. They are TRUE Americans.

>The relationship between European countries and America is
>similar to a parent-child relationship. So regardless of how
>little respect Europeans have for Americans, their
>connection is set in stone.

I disagree to some extent. Two words: Calvinists & Puritans

>
>To add, I'm always hearin' 'bout the popularity of wto and
>anti-American protests in European countries and I gotta
>ask, "Aren't they the ones who invented capitalism and white
>supremacy in the first place?"
>
again that capitalism thing. Capitalism has been there forever.

>American whites and European whites same 'o same 'o?...just
>geographically disconnected?

Ask my girlfriend. She's black and from the US. I'm white and her first "non-black" boyfriend.

>-a spawn of the "does Africa accept me" post-
>
>I am African. And most of you don't have a problem with my
>sayin' that.


well, i would find it problematic.


>That said, aren't American whites "Europeans"? All of 'em
>are European immigrants right?


after a certain number of generations, don't you stop being an immigrant?


>To add, I'm always hearin' 'bout the popularity of wto and
>anti-American protests in European countries and I gotta
>ask, "Aren't they the ones who invented capitalism and white
>supremacy in the first place?"


yes, well, there were protests against capitalism since the beginning of capitalism, no? the luddites, the diggers etc. but also, people at the top of the capitalist heap start having different feelings when they are no longer at the top, and europeans are conscious that the world now lives under PaX Americana.



>American whites and European whites same 'o same 'o?

europeans have better produce in the grocery stores, and if you'll look on GD, you will see that a people should be judged by their grocery stores.

i'm kidding, but while YT is YT wrt to racism, and i find claims that europe is less racist to be laughable, i think it's very important to remember that europe is much more left-wing than the us.

>i think
>it's very important to remember that europe is much more
>left-wing than the us.

yep, it is. Therefore it's "more cultured".

>well, i would find it problematic.

"I'm African, African, not African Merican, I take it back to my origin, tho' I wasn't born in Ghana, Africa's my momma......"

not dp's xact words, but you get where I'm goin' with this.

>after a certain number of generations, don't you stop being
>an immigrant?

Actually, I don't think so. Everyone here (with the exception of indigeneous native americans) are immigrants.


>yes, well, there were protests against capitalism since the
>beginning of capitalism, no? the luddites, the diggers etc.
> but also, people at the top of the capitalist heap start
>having different feelings when they are no longer at the
>top, and europeans are conscious that the world now lives
>under PaX Americana.

While I agree that there schisms among Europeans, I still think it's appropriate to analyze them as a collective whole.

And, I think their hate of American capitalism is convenient and comes from their realization that they're no longer on top. If they had the upper-hand, I doubt they'd have any probs with commercialism.

>
>i'm kidding, but while YT is YT wrt to racism, and i find
>claims that europe is less racist to be laughable, i think
>it's very important to remember that europe is much more
>left-wing than the us.

Yeah...I agree that they tilt towards the left. But the way I see it, they remind me of Democrats whose humanitarian agenda is superficial. They protest all social ills that they're responsible for manufacturing.

P.S.
Boy am I glad you're here.

>And, I think their hate of American capitalism is convenient
>and comes from their realization that they're no longer on
>top. If they had the upper-hand, I doubt they'd have any
>probs with commercialism.

It's not so much the commercialism (we love that too over here, believe me) but the Imperialism. They way America is imposing it's "moral" standards on the rest of the world is what we have the biggest problem with.

And I know that Europe does it to, but to a much lesser extent.

>>well, i would find it problematic.
>
>"I'm African, African, not African Merican, I take it back
>to my origin, tho' I wasn't born in Ghana, Africa's my
>momma......"
>
>not dp's xact words, but you get where I'm goin' with this.


yeah, i know where you're going, except i think it obscures more than it clarifies. but i've said it



>>after a certain number of generations, don't you stop being
>>an immigrant?
>
>Actually, I don't think so. Everyone here (with the
>exception of indigeneous native americans) are immigrants.


are the bantu in south africa immigrants? i mean, at what point do people stop being immigrants? i'd say at the point when they are no longer recognizable to people of the culture they left as being one of them.



>>yes, well, there were protests against capitalism since the
>>beginning of capitalism, no? the luddites, the diggers etc.
>> but also, people at the top of the capitalist heap start
>>having different feelings when they are no longer at the
>>top, and europeans are conscious that the world now lives
>>under PaX Americana.
>
>While I agree that there schisms among Europeans, I still
>think it's appropriate to analyze them as a collective
>whole.
>
>And, I think their hate of American capitalism is convenient
>and comes from their realization that they're no longer on
>top. If they had the upper-hand, I doubt they'd have any
>probs with commercialism.


well, but they did. i mean, look, it was a european named karl marx who wrote one of the first critiques of capitalism. there were socialists all over europe, and i should also say that the french workers party was co-founded by marx's haitian son-in-law, paul larfargue, and the british communist party was co-founded by the indian r p dutt. i mean, europeans *suffered* under capitalism, and the dark satanic mills of manchester before it was exported to the colonies.




>>i'm kidding, but while YT is YT wrt to racism, and i find
>>claims that europe is less racist to be laughable, i think
>>it's very important to remember that europe is much more
>>left-wing than the us.
>
>Yeah...I agree that they tilt towards the left. But the way
>I see it, they remind me of Democrats whose humanitarian
>agenda is superficial. They protest all social ills that
>they're responsible for manufacturing.


I *wish* the Democrats were as left-wing as the main European parties. we'd have socialized medecine. but of course they should protest the ills their govt's are manufacturing. that's precisely their ethical responsibility.

i don't know, motivation is whatever to me. like my homey voltaire said, a man could be virtuous to impress his mistress but who cares? he's being virtuous and that's what counts. sure the europeans would protest less about the US if they weren't also experiencing powerlessness, but so what? i mean, wouldn't you protest less if you weren't an urban af-am? i'd protest less if i was a colored girl. so what if part of our protest is for our own gain? our gain counts too.

>are the bantu in south africa immigrants? i mean, at what
>point do people stop being immigrants?

I don't there's an end to immigrant status. To disclaim that status is like deleting one's history.

i'd say at the point
>when they are no longer recognizable to people of the
>culture they left as being one of them.

But we are physically and socially recognizable...that should account for something.


>
>well, but they did. i mean, look, it was a european named
>karl marx who wrote one of the first critiques of
>capitalism. there were socialists all over europe, and i
>should also say that the french workers party was co-founded
>by marx's haitian son-in-law, paul larfargue, and the
>british communist party was co-founded by the indian r p
>dutt. i mean, europeans *suffered* under capitalism, and the
>dark satanic mills of manchester before it was exported to
>the colonies.

Yeah....Marx championed socialism. But what bothers me is that he was only concerned with intra-European working-class. Anti-capitalism only became an issue when "Europeans" suffered from its consequences.

And to add, the glorification of European philosophers give Europeans further reason to assert their superiority. Marx did not invent socialism. Socialism was present in other societies long before he mapped out his theory. It's like a concept doesn't get approved until it gets authorized by the white man.


>i don't know, motivation is whatever to me. like my homey
>voltaire said, a man could be virtuous to impress his
>mistress but who cares? he's being virtuous and that's what
>counts. sure the europeans would protest less about the US
>if they weren't also experiencing powerlessness, but so
>what? i mean, wouldn't you protest less if you weren't an
>urban af-am? i'd protest less if i was a colored girl. so
>what if part of our protest is for our own gain? our gain
>counts too.

That's true.

>>are the bantu in south africa immigrants? i mean, at what
>>point do people stop being immigrants?
>
>I don't there's an end to immigrant status. To disclaim that
>status is like deleting one's history.


but that's to elasticize the definition of being an immigrant to the point of nullity. if you're going to go that route, the native americans were immigrants, too, right? so is everybody outside of kenya.




> i'd say at the point
>>when they are no longer recognizable to people of the
>>culture they left as being one of them.
>
>But we are physically and socially recognizable...that
>should account for something.


mmm... i don't know what you mean by "socially" recognizable but physically recognizable counts for nothing imo. if that counted, i'd be turkish in spain, tuareg in tunisia, tamil in france, dominican in the us and moroccan in italy, bc that's what i was physically recognizable as.




>
>>
>>well, but they did. i mean, look, it was a european named
>>karl marx who wrote one of the first critiques of
>>capitalism. there were socialists all over europe, and i
>>should also say that the french workers party was co-founded
>>by marx's haitian son-in-law, paul larfargue, and the
>>british communist party was co-founded by the indian r p
>>dutt. i mean, europeans *suffered* under capitalism, and the
>>dark satanic mills of manchester before it was exported to
>>the colonies.
>
>Yeah....Marx championed socialism. But what bothers me is
>that he was only concerned with intra-European
>working-class. Anti-capitalism only became an issue when
>"Europeans" suffered from its consequences.


i don't know enough marx to debate you, but what i've always understood was that the point isn't that only european suffering counts, the point is that capitalism as a stage of production has to be gone through before one gets to socialism, so those nations who were still feudal had to industrialize through the capitalist model first.


>
>And to add, the glorification of European philosophers give
>Europeans further reason to assert their superiority. Marx
>did not invent socialism. Socialism was present in other
>societies long before he mapped out his theory. It's like a
>concept doesn't get approved until it gets authorized by the
>white man.


well, why isn't identifying pre-capitalist forms of governance with european theories a form of begging for the authority of the white man's theories?

>Yeah....Marx championed socialism. But what bothers me is
>that he was only concerned with intra-European
>working-class. Anti-capitalism only became an issue when
>"Europeans" suffered from its consequences.
>

that's simply not true. Marx denounced colonialism and imperialism as the most elaborate form of capitalism.

>
>that's simply not true. Marx denounced colonialism and
>imperialism as the most elaborate form of capitalism.


bc i'm pretty sure he defended british colonialism as necessary to bring asia from feudalism to capitalism.


England, it is true, in causing a social revolution in Hindostan, was actuated only by the vilest interests, and was stupid in her manner of enforcing them. But that is not the question. The question is, can mankind fulfil its destiny without a fundamental revolution in the social state of Asia? If not, whatever may have been the crimes of England she was the unconscious tool of history in bringing about that revolution.

i.e. colonialism is sad but necessary.

considering colonialism as "necessary", in the historical materialism sense of the word (ie inevitable), is hardly defending it, don't you think?

but you're right, though. I mixed up Lenin and Marx.

in one sentence.

if you have never spent significant time in both europe AND america, both two of the most multicultural and multiracial cultures on the planet, then shaddup right now on this topic. because they both have the best of human nature and the worst of human nature on display, in all respects.

so, in conclusion: there are assholes all over the world.

do we really need to know more than this? deal with them, when you can, as you see fit. anything else could lead to you, yourself, building more unnecessary prejudice in your head.

as long as people realise that you can see just as many diffrent cultures in London as you can in LA, and that both spots have similar amounts of assholes who take issue with this fact, then it's pretty irrelevant to question where the assholes' great-great-grandfathers decided to call home. on all sides.

the past is concrete. now lets get the future looking nice before it turns to stone too please.

Co
sign

Thank you for the ice bucket.

>if you have never spent significant time in both europe AND
>america, both two of the most multicultural and multiracial
>cultures on the planet, then shaddup right now on this
>topic. because they both have the best of human nature and
>the worst of human nature on display, in all respects.

They're the most multi-racial areas and yet, minorities don't have representation in government.
And it doesn't take an actual visit to Europe to know what's goin down over there. We have plenty of history books, magazines, journals, newspapers and other sources that tell me where it stands.

>so, in conclusion: there are assholes all over the world.

Yes...but the assholes in power are the ones doin the most harm.

>do we really need to know more than this? deal with them,
>when you can, as you see fit. anything else could lead to
>you, yourself, building more unnecessary prejudice in your
>head.
>
>as long as people realise that you can see just as many
>diffrent cultures in London as you can in LA, and that both
>spots have similar amounts of assholes who take issue with
>this fact, then it's pretty irrelevant to question where the
>assholes' great-great-grandfathers decided to call home. on
>all sides.
>
>the past is concrete. now lets get the future looking nice
>before it turns to stone too please.

Instead, let's focus on the present by tryin to reverse the effects of the past.

Now get to the back of the line.

>They're the most multi-racial areas and yet, minorities
>don't have representation in government.

No, despite what your plenty of history books, magazines, journals, newspapers and other sources tells you, minorities have had some for a while and are getting more representation in governments. That said, the situation for minorities (usually immigrants.. up to third generation, normally first or second generation) is very bad in most european countries. But before you put a label on "Europe", it's best to wait and see how the so-called "new citizens", who are and will become a part of the authorities, will change the different countries. Last year my country got its first politician who has a so-called "immigrant background" (second generation, meaning her parents migrated to norway and she was born here), and her main cause is to be the voice of the minorities.

>And it doesn't take an actual visit to Europe to know what's
>goin down over there. We have plenty of history books,
>magazines, journals, newspapers and other sources that tell
>me where it stands.

Do you honestly believe that your plenty of books and magazines and tv shows tells you where it stands?!

>>so, in conclusion: there are assholes all over the world.
>
>Yes...but the assholes in power are the ones doin the most
>harm.

word. One thing is an asshole.. another thing is an asshole with power....

>>They're the most multi-racial areas and yet, minorities
>>don't have representation in government.
>
>No, despite what your plenty of history books, magazines,
>journals, newspapers and other sources tells you, minorities
>have had some for a while and are getting more
>representation in governments. That said, the situation for
>minorities (usually immigrants.. up to third generation,
>normally first or second generation) is very bad in most
>european countries. But before you put a label on "Europe",
>it's best to wait and see how the so-called "new citizens",
>who are and will become a part of the authorities, will
>change the different countries. Last year my country got its
>first politician who has a so-called "immigrant background"
>(second generation, meaning her parents migrated to norway
>and she was born here), and her main cause is to be the
>voice of the minorities.

Actually, I wouldn't call that progress. I mean, we have Condie and Powell in office, both of whom claim to have the interests of minorities at heart. Puttin a handful of coloured folks in office gives the false illusion of progress.

just cos you ain't travelled somewhere and wanna judge them anyways. fucking narrowbrain, put down the books and go have a look for yourself.

...and is it not better to have the assholes in supposed power, where everyone can see what they're doing (european style) as opposed to in big business, where they run shit anyway, but with no control (US style)?? ...think about that one.

but anyway. u sound resentful, as if u haven't actually travelled, + therefore took offense at what i said. so i'mma stick with my first statement: explore both spots then get back to us, otherwise, shut up and stop spewing what you read into half baked ideas.

>just cos you ain't travelled somewhere and wanna judge them
>anyways. fucking narrowbrain, put down the books and go have
>a look for yourself.

I don't hafta travel to Germany or France to understand eurocentrism.

And the books I read are authored by your very own so I don't doubt their accuracy.

>...and is it not better to have the assholes in supposed
>power, where everyone can see what they're doing (european
>style) as opposed to in big business, where they run shit
>anyway, but with no control (US style)?? ...think about
>that one.

Both are equally bitch. Neither is better than the other.
And from what you just said, looks like you admitted to Europe's ego-trip which was the very point of this post.

>but anyway. u sound resentful, as if u haven't actually
>travelled, + therefore took offense at what i said. so i'mma
>stick with my first statement: explore both spots then get
>back to us, otherwise, shut up and stop spewing what you
>read into half baked ideas.

That's what you got from my reply? Recharge your batteries chump cos your perception's laggin. And when I plan to travel, best believe that Europe is at the bottom of my list.

Breathe in, out....Now get steppin and come back when you're ready for the big leagues.

But as an unbiased third party... you sound like the stupid one here.

I've spent time in every continent. And Tohanga is more on point than you and your Ameri-centric cronies. This may be because I consider myself 'English' (even though my ancestors are from mali through and through)... who knows.

Please, drop that eurocentric style of "we are better"... grow some compassion, brothers and sisters. Love those who love you.

and an unusual post like this one booms to 70+ replies:)

I will try to answer some of the questions (without having read the entire post yet, so i am sorry if i repeat) as best as i can (...tired..).

>But I know a lot of Europeans would feel offended by a white
>American claimin' to be European. The majority of Europeans
>go out of their way to disassociate from all things
>American.
>
>The relationship between European countries and America is
>similar to a parent-child relationship. So regardless of how
>little respect Europeans have for Americans, their
>connection is set in stone.

It's a complicated connection.. LexM used to have a quote from franz fanon: "Two centuries ago, a former European colony decided to catch up with Europe. It succeeded so well that the United States of America became a monster, in which the taints, the sickness, and the inhumanity of Europe have grown to appalling dimensions."

There are many sides to this (and that quote only focuses on america), but it is the most obvious truth to see from europe today. USA outgrew the _combined culture of many cultures_ that it originally came from, probably because USA went their own direction after the area became independent (on top of that, what would eventually become USA was a different culture even from the beginning of the colonization). So, USA soon became the largest world force, and after WWII it returned to its mother, Europe, and started the massive influencing (which brought the modernisation into the next phase, you can say, and really started up the partnership called THE WEST). That makes countries and cultures such as the culture of my country, a small north european ex-viking-middle-age-farming-and-fishing culture, end up swallowed in USA's culture.

That is the first reason- usa has a gross culture, and it becomes even grosser when it meets other cultures (even the european cultures). Many used to love it before, but as time went on it decreased ("like a fallen God, who proved to be no God at all, but the monster that caused most of the ills in the world today" -norwegian musician). Today, some love it (specially the young), most don't give a damn (because they have ignorant american mindsets without knowing it, perhaps?), and many others straight forward hate it (or.. they oppose it, to say it more nicely).

>To add, I'm always hearin' 'bout the popularity of wto and
>anti-American protests in European countries and I gotta
>ask, "Aren't they the ones who invented capitalism and white
>supremacy in the first place?"

No, I wouldnt be surprised if that is american media who portrays it like that. I think (and it's my impression as an euro) that the majority of those who fight and oppose the WTO and have "anti-american protests" are very aware of how much their own country is tied into the actions. It would be likely that they focus on USA, if that is what they do, to show they don't want to be a part of that culture/movement, because they are aware of what it causes (they are aware that their own country has a hand in the corporate ills worldwide because of American influence, or them being a part of THE WEST).

Europeans fight what they see as the worst, so i'm trying to explain to you what, how and why they see as the worst. Today, luckily Europe isn't the monster it used to be, far from. It is a monster, but on a much smaller scale. America is now the definitive worst monster-
To add on, I see ALOT more demonstrations and actions towards the actions of THE WEST (meaning: USA+Europe+Wannabes) than towards USA alone ---- so much that the anti-american demonstrations and actions that only focus on USA are outweighted.

The POTENTIAL unequally greater "hate" towards USA than towards Europe, that can be found for example in the anti-american demonstrations, is because europeans tend to be arrogant (for lack of better word). In fat american accent: "Hey, At Least They're Not As Arrogant As the Americans!". That is abit how it is, to me.

>American whites and European whites same 'o same 'o?...just
>geographically disconnected?

Both nasty, one (Europe) with an unmatched (and hopefully never to be matched) nasty past but only somewhat nasty present compared to the other one (because of it being a part/founder/main contributor of THE WEST, which supports american political world dominance), the other one (USA) with a present so nasty that outweighs the current nastiness of the former (Europe).

Also, politically, many say that USA and Europe (the EU specially) are likely to turn their backs to eachother, or perhaps go even further than that, sometime in the future. Politically, one of the main reasons why Europe is following USA (except for both being a part of the modern movement called THE WEST) is because USA is the dominating force in the world today. There are different reasons for why they follow USA in different places in europe. One part of Europe wants to follow the steps of USA, hoping it can bask in the glory or perhaps even pretend (and dream about that) THEY are the world dominators (Blair). The other part follow the steps because of the benefits (after all, USA is the continuation of European culture and are the best alternative around), but are still careful not to get too attached (the EU).

If you want to go down to the personal level, you'll get even more and larger differences.. just let me say that there are large differences.

sorry i replied so long, and sorry for making it so that basically all paragraphs could have been an answer to each of your question (so read it all as one answer, not an answer to each question).

peace

America beat Europe at its own game. Now Europe is trying to flip the script, on some "we're not playing anymore." Bull Shit.

>America

the leaders/movement

>beat Europe

the leaders/movement

>at its own game.

so far i understand and agree

>Now Europe is trying
>to flip the script, on some "we're not playing anymore."
>Bull Shit.

do you mean the leaders or the man on the street this time?

but that would mean he forgot where Germany is.

and if it's not about soccer, then it's about right-wing politics. in which case i'd have to agree. church and state are sucking each other off day and night in the US... and i bet there are redneck politicians all over europe who just wish they were born in Texas.

it's funny really... LA has South Central, London has Brixton, both spots had race riots in the 80's, and both these spots still don't give a flying fuck about the other. but the white politicians, sure, they'll be learning and building off each other over the oceans every day of the week.

fucking sad state of shit, and it's not helped by us younger cats trying to stitch these two bitches even tighter. break it the fuck apart, damnit. redneck america and redneck europe both need to be broken down into factions and buried under an ocean of compassion and common sense, real soon.

stop using soccer, youre in the land of footie.

>fucking sad state of shit, and it's not helped by us younger
>cats trying to stitch these two bitches even tighter. break
>it the fuck apart, damnit. redneck america and redneck
>europe both need to be broken down into factions and buried
>under an ocean of compassion and common sense, real soon.

if -redneck- means both the attitude of people on the grassroot AND the imperalist ideas in the heads of leaders, i see you

if you come by norway and Oslo on your travels around, hit us up! ..we have a kingsize guest bed, and my mother's homemade bread tastes good :)

->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->
    you will always go where the arrow points.

pen jakke:          , , , (snip),
                         (snip), (tungtvann feat pen jakke)

there is not a "race" of "whites" . i am considered to be white, but im russian, (which isint europe), semitic (which is can be considered asian or afrikan) irish( which isint Anglo Saxon, it is seperate), and itailian(which actully has some african in it from a period in italys history when a afrikan king took over, and many poeple were born of mixed races, contributing to he fact that some italians have very dark complexions and nappy hair) so, am i white?

I'm regret to tell you that, according to some clever okayactivists, you're nothin but a "Caucasian Devil". Welcome to the club. Race is indeed a societal construct, but I guess only a few Europeans know about that. The majority still believes in such a concept as race. Anyway, it's a good post, but don't hope to meet with approval.

i dont, i hope to be met with oppisition, laugh in there face for their ignorance, and go to find a cypher to kick some ymes in

although i see the need for generalization in this discussion, i don't think you can expect it to result in a correct representation of europe.. the same can probably be said about "americans", but the thing with europe is that it consists of a wiiiiide range of different cultures, nations, ethnic groups and ideas. from east to west, north to south.

there just isn't one common perception of e.g. immigrants throughout europe, every country has their own politicians and their own range of opinions, and one country doesn't give a damn about what another country is doing (except in the context of EU, with spanish president aznar trying to fight immigration).

so when someone talks about racism in germany, france or italy - it doesn't represent *europe* in any way, only the country mentioned. thought i should put that into the discussion, my bad is somebody has mentioned it before..

I like that thread. It could go triple platinum.

well, maybe only double platinum

I made it, but why doesn't it feel good.....

cuz it was boring as fuck. no entertainment at all.

I've your responses along with most of the others.
My lack of response comes from a combo of carpal tunnel and "lazy American syndrome"(as you folks put it).

I'll be back when my head clears.

peace.

I didn't ask you to respond to anything. I was havin an inner monolog.

people are individuals and should be judged as individuals. i understand your question and it revealed a different angle on my own beliefs. thanks!

Europe & the US aren't different at all. But that's no matter of colour. History is repeating. Blame it on man kind.

thats exactly what i was thinking, whoever started this thread stated it in question form. it really sux that we hold these conversations in the first place. man kind sux but unlike some, i dont think mankind is inherently evil. i really couldnt argue either way, but something inside me says we are good people gone astray. i wonder what everyone else thinks.

"insert 'you'll think im enlightened when you read this' saying"

bang on bwoy!

..with the ability to cause too much more than our hands should be responsible for. i like life simple, because then our hands hold only as much as they are able to hold without loosing the grip of something.

->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->       ->
    you will always go where the arrow points.

pen jakke:          , , , (snip),
                         (snip), (tungtvann feat pen jakke)

Total and complete cosign on that one