 | | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Thank you. (...) No idea what you're trying to say there. (...) Yes. The US is a mixed economy, not a libertarian one, or an anarcho capitalist one, or even a plain old capitalist one. Therefore its policy is not what you would see from any of (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) That appears to be exactly what I did say. Put that way it's untrue and flat out wrong for me to have said it and I admit it without any prevarication, denial, or hiding behind "bad wording" defense. I am heads down on something (you can tell (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Not "as they see fit." That again imputes capitalist values and a hierarchical structure to the actions of communist leadership. "For the common good" is more accurate. Now, *in practice*, it has often *been* "as they see fit," true...but (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Slavery and theft indeed. How objective you are. Materialism in western society is the current norm. You should not feel that anything else is "immoral". It must be asked why the US victimises this country due to what you call "immoral" (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Daniel Jassim writes: <snip> I'm fairly happy with the accuracy of my characterization: you made a statement placing the entire blame for Cuba's woes here with the US instead of with their failed system, when challenged, (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) OK. Fair enough. If a system fails to live by its principles in extremis and acts in immoral ways, then it isn't perfect. But we can still quite easily judge it to be morally far superior to a system that systematically acts immorally. (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) But it isn't clear at the extremities whether your implication of morality is correct. For instance, during the recent discusion of the handling of Ender by the powers that be, you acknowledged that they were not clearly evil because of the (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) We both have. (...) Lead me to water, then, and I'll drink. The well is dry if all your going to do is argue that Communism will always fail, no matter what, though you cannot possibly prove it in a million lifetimes. You're keen on telling (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
(...) I had the same problem with the UK press too when Bush came to power. But, so far, he has demonstrated the ability to prove his critics correct. On a basic level, he does make great entertainment. I loved the shots of him the other day playing (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Sum of total happiness will be higher, per capita. There may be individual excursions from the mean. In fact there better be! (...) Communism can't be democratic, freemarket systems can't be dictatorial. (...) Unless it is moral to dispose of (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I would reword that as "if your personal values say that others do not have the right to dispose of you and your property as they see fit". Wouldn't you agree? (...) Did you or someone you are closely related to live in a communist bloc (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Patently untrue, the core of the argument has been addressed elsewhere in the thread. I would say, rather, that you are the one obfuscating at present. (...) Not trying hard enough, apparently. (...) I've given my arguments elsewhere in the (...) (23 years ago, 30-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
(...) Well, it often seems to be all high heat, but it's definitely not all desert (in fact, around here, its often more all swamp.) james (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
(...) Heh. Not just traffic laws. In any case, I think some of the smog laws may have relaxed since you were here, but I can't confirm that. I'll have to do a little looking to see what I can find out. Dave! (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
I can't remember the laws offhand, as it has been over 5 years since I lived there, but I remember seeing some insanely stupid traffic laws on the books. (...) -- | Tom Stangl, iPlanet Web Server Technical Support | Netscape Communications Corp | A (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
(...) Truly! I'm surprised to learn that the law says otherwise in PA. Could you indicate a specific other-than-tailpipe law in PA? You've really gotten me curious about this. Dave! (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
If you were as heavily into cars as I was, it would be plenty of reason. The hoops I have to jump through to get my main car to pass smog are insane in California. In just about any other state, all they care about is tailpipe emissions (the only (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
(...) Which smog laws, out of curiosity? I know in some sections of the state they don't even inspect cars for emissions. By the way--that (of all things ) is a pretty goofy reason not to live in PA (not that you really *need* a reason to choose not (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
(...) the Republicrats all around, but at least the Democrats tax-and-spend, instead of Republican borrow-and-spend (or "spend and borrow") tactics. At least with the former we feel the consequences right away and aren't fooled into supporting the (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
GOOOOD question. I've tried to convince her that TX is a really big state, it's not ALL high heat/desert, but she just doesn't want to move there. Then again, long ago, I said I'd never live in 3 states: PA - smog laws are almost as bad as CA, and (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
(...) Er, I realize that I'm jumping into this 2 months later, but why does she refuse to go anywhere near Texas? james (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gasohol?
|
|
(...) It looks like Bush is going to have to "steal" to give you your $600 afterall! See here: (URL) A (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) You are the king of obfuscation, Larry. You turn people's comments in every direction and ignore the core of the argument. (...) Of course, I already said that in the post before this (which you've snipped). I'm not the wordmeister here, never (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I'd like to see how you prove happier from someone who lives in the projects, or in South Central LA, in comparison to someone who lives in Cuba. (...) Perhaps you are mistaking the political and economic systems? A Democratic Communist (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Show me a case where the baseline statement of communism has failed (or been followed either!) `From each according to Ability, To Each According to Need' The closest to what I view of communism is either kibitz's (if I can spell that (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Quick self-correction: Afghanistan. Can't forget Afghanistan! (But again, that territory was not intended to be appended to the USSR, so even that may not count.) best LFB (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I can't agree--it only makes the "moral call" that way if your personal values are based on individualism instead of the common good. Those values are nurtured in a capitalist system, so it's a self-replicating system, IMHO. (...) No more so (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Because, as wise spin doctors through the ages have said, the purpose of debate (and even .debate!) is *not* to persuade the other party--rather, it's to persuade the spectators, those who do not feel so strongly in X or Y direction and (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
Larry let me say that I'm proud of you for standing up for yourself, and believing in your own ideologies. To all the rest, why do you really care about Larry's opinions? Honestly, he's not going to change his mind, so why haven't all of you given (...) (23 years ago, 29-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I fail to see how calling you on the logical equivalent "It is the US's fault" vs. "It's not the US's fault" can be called nitpicking your exact wording. Rather it's pointing out glaring inconsistency at a basic level. Just admit you slipped (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Maybe you should have said that in the first place instead of Standard Anti US Diatribe # 8294, then. However it's not a statement that I agree with, except inasmuch as it's not possible to determine with certainty (from any real world (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Perfect! That's the main idea. Dan (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Well, you have ignored the basic point I tried to make in favor of complaining about and nitpicking my exact wording. So I conceed that I am not a good writer and I have not always been perfectly clear the first time I have said something (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
One topic I haven't seen mentioned here is that even with all the sanctions, Cuba still relies heavily upon the US for cash influx. Most of it is through Cuban-Americans sending money back to relatives in Cuba. If that process were denied, then the (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I'm not being bullheaded, I'm just pointing out your inconsistency. If you then take refuge in calling me names, so be it. Square "I never said in a general way that it's America's fault." with "By imposing sanctions, America is not ALLOWING (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I would revise that statement to say "The existence of US sanctions against Cuba prevents us from determining with certainty whether Cuban Communism would fail or succeed in the absence of those sanctions." Declaring that sanctions in (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Excellent point, Lindsay! Dan (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
Larry, I'm not back-pedaling on any of my statements or trying to water them down. The sanctions have a PROFOUND effect on Cuba's economy. By imposing sanctions, America is not ALLOWING Communism to work in the country. Example: Imagine if Hawaii (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) If you can't define success, you can't define failure either. You asked me how I define failure, I answered. Remove "seems" if it bugs you that much and replace it with <null>. Doesn't change the definition at all. Communism has failed each (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Wait, Sun Yat-Sen wasn't a communist! :) (...) Oops! The Potato Famine is a case of imperial exploitation, not a failure of capitalism. It's also 1840s to about 1852, not 1857. :) (...) The question is what the basis for redistribution must (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Just a small quibble about that--if the Libertarian powers that be had wanted simply to establish a thought-model of a society in which Libertarian ideals had been fully realized it, and if they also meant no implication of "utopian" status (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) But to have a fair comparison, one must compare quality of work as well as employment. I'd bet that the median (not mean, median) worker in Cuba has a much better lot than the median worker in the United States, even if they don't make as much (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Hmm as do most other EU countries. Perhaps well regulated state funded education systems do have benefits? Infant mortality rate is also higher in the US than the EU - Perhaps well regulated state funded health systems also have benefits? EU (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) The US is very slightly higher: (URL) the UK is higher still (99%) :-) Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) Indeed. I understand that only ~8% of the Cuban GDP is agriculture based. (...) One could say the same about many political ideals. However, the fact is that some of the communist concepts do have a rather simple attractiveness to a lot of (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) That's right. But it is partly due to the sanctions the US impose. If anyone is interested in the Cuban health care system, read here: (URL) A (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
Addendum to my previous post: After comparing other sources on unemployment rates in America and Cuba, I see my figures are way off. America's unemployment rate is about 4.5%, NOT 8.6%, but Cuba's is still about 6%. I apologize for my error. Cuba (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I think the keyword here is "seem." Your previous statements were concrete (Communism has failed), now are you saying Communism "seems" to have failed? If that is the case, then I can also say Democracy and capitalism "seems" to have failed in (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) No. It doesn't claim to be a utopia and it doesn't claim to need ideal conditions in order to succeed and it doesn't depend on everyone being good, or being idealistic, or even having the same goals. Hope that helps. (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
in order to have a favorable opinion of (...) I'll add in here, that Libertopia is just as much of a separation from reality as a true communist nation. (hmm...and me in my Sun, Sea and Socalism t-shirt) :) I think that you need to see where the (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I don't know--but if you take Cuba in comparison with the US pseudo-colonies in the Caribbean that masquerade as independent states, I'd much rather be Cuban. Compare Cuba with the Dominican Republic, Haiti, or even a place like Jamaica, (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: (snipped) (...) Wrong! Medicine is very good in Cuba. They invest heavily in Healthcare. Honest! A friend of my father went there for heart surgery and spoke wonders of the place! (...) It was the (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I'd go with the utilitarian argument that people don't seem to have much in the way of choices, material goods, freedom of expression, action, or movement, and some desperately want to leave to the extent of risking their lives to do so. Will (...) (23 years ago, 28-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) True. You'd be amazed by the amount of Portuguese people who have gone to Cuba for treatment, especially optic, cardiac, and neurosurgery (spelling?). (...) Dunno. But they do seem cult, public libraries have a lot of movement - then again, TV (...) (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
I reposted here since this is the best thread for this topic: (...) Perhaps it would help if you'd expalin what constitutes "failure" in your opinion? Cuba has several strong points: * National health care * Higher literacy rate than America * Lower (...) (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) Correct. US embargoes, while bogus on their very face, and not something I support in the general case, are not a sufficient excuse for Communism's failure in Cuba in and of themselves. (...) Thanks for the restatement. (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Cuba
|
|
(...) I don't really know the details of the situation, but I think you certainly could argue that fact-- you'd just have less evidence to present. It depends on how you define failure of a system-- both in quality and extremity. Hence, we can argue (...) (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Cuba
|
|
Okay, here's a new thread just for this topic... As I said before, I don't think it's valid to argue that Communism doesn't work in Cuba because of some inherent flaw in Communism itself. Cuba is under the yolk of heavy sanctions that have prevented (...) (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) Well maybe since it is DJ who he accused of making false statements, he should reply to him: (URL) A (...) (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) Not really. This section of the thread has changed course. I made a quick reference to it (communism) as an example and the topic blossomed. (...) I wouldn't say *that* :) Obviously there are several interested in the topic... (I'm not one of (...) (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) So to determine where the untruths lie, I am expected to read through the 12000+ messages in .debate to built up a profile of Larry’s views on communism/Cuba. That is preposterous. Truth/untruth may have nothing to do with Larry's past stated (...) (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) It would certainly depend on how you defined "working well." There are a large number of Cuban citizens who are quite content with their situation. Only the wealthy oppressors of the common man who have mostly come to the US were unhappy with (...) (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) Oh, brother. I think it's fairly clear (to anyone who's spent any time at all in OT.DEBATE) from Larry's established viewpoint re: communism, as well as from the context of the brief exchange between Larry and Dan, that Larry is identifying as (...) (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) Larry, If you are going to claim that posters are not telling the truth, I think you should do us all the courtesy at least being willing to justify your comments rather that claiming you do not wish to "pollute" the thread further. Scott A (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) I'm not going to pollute this thread more than I did already. The thread is about an unusual mechanism for seeing good works happen. I am not sure that there is general interest in revisiting the larger topic of communism. If there is and (...) (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) I don't get this. Why only help someone as part of a conditional agreement - why not just do good. What is the world coming to? Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) Larry, If you are going to claim that posters are not telling the truth, I think you should do us all the courtesy of indicating where you think the untruths lie. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) Obviously, your question was not to me therefore what's to answer? (...) Chris can answer your question since only he knows what he meant by "How about Cuba?". I was just responding to your comments regarding Cuba and Communism. What part is (...) (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) That's all well and good (and you're welcome to believe it although much of is false), but you didn't answer the question. Fortunately I was asking Chris, I guess, so there's still hope. (23 years ago, 27-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) You are correct that it isn't a good example, but because Communism has not been ALLOWED to work in Cuba due to the crippling sanctions (embargo, boycott, whatever you wish to call it) imposed by America. It's like denying someone food and (...) (23 years ago, 26-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) I'm not saying that the above excuse is a good one. Dan asked why would or wouldn't people do it-- and I answered. And I'm *very* sure that *some* people would give that reason. (...) Rather selfish, I'd say. Sure I consider my skills to be (...) (23 years ago, 26-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) What if person X *was* Adolf Hitler? Maybe your random act of charity might have forever changed him and prevented what he would have otherwise done. And, isn't the question "How do I know person X is deserving?" in itself "evil"? Are we (...) (23 years ago, 26-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) Are you saying that Cuba's systems are working well in practice? Are you saying Cuba is an example of Communism? Not clear what you're saying, exactly. I would say that it's not working well at all and isn't a very good example either. David (...) (23 years ago, 26-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) How about Cuba? (...) Agreed. If it is within your ability to help (and only you can define "ability") someone who needs the help (and, I think, only they can really define "needs"), then you "ought" to help. But not for more reward than the (...) (23 years ago, 26-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Pay It Forward
|
|
(...) Cynicism & selfishness. Actually, depending on the person, you could probably group cynicism under selfishness. (...) I think that's the general idea. But I think I'd say there are a few responses people would give to avoid "paying it (...) (23 years ago, 25-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Pay It Forward
|
|
Greetings! So I rented and watched the movie "Pay It Forward" a few nights ago. Pretty good movie. For those of you who haven't seen it, the story is about a troubled boy who, with a little inspiration from his teacher, puts into motion a plan to (...) (23 years ago, 25-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) Although I prefer B), I am OK with A) as long as we don't get "C) it will be a travesty of the original work the way most SF movies are". (...) I'd go with "nothing" except both involve apparent humans. I tried saying that twice, actually, (...) (23 years ago, 21-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) Larry wrote: (...) Something very like this interview took place in "Spin" magazine many, many years ago (circa the mid 80s) -- it was an interview with Pat Benatar conducted by Lydia Lunch. Throughout the text/interview, Lunch makes (...) (23 years ago, 21-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) Card is writing the screen play for Enders Game as a current project. IIRC, he has scrapped the project a couple of times because of movie-company constraints and is keeping insanely tight control. I suspect A) it will never be made or B) it (...) (23 years ago, 21-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) snip (...) Isn't it very easy to mislead adults too? Aren't adults the one who mislead children? What if an older child mislead a younger one? Who is *really* to blame? I'd personally say propaganda, issued either by the news (CNN comes to (...) (23 years ago, 21-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) Right. Plus I think that by coming to the conclusion that THIS is what the book is about, she exposes her inability to think outside the boundaries of what she herself is interested in. As I said in my reply to Dan, in my view, the book is (...) (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) Mark the above sentence as "exhibit A" (...) It's not "freaky". Really. Trust me. I won't go into why, except to say you would have to read it, and accept the premises. (...) That's unfortunate. I suspect that these novels would not translate (...) (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) Sounds kind of freaky. I've never been much of a novel reader so I'll probably never get to it. But I imagine the author's choice to use little tykes as protagonists serves his commentary on modern societal values (or lack of)? (...) "South (...) (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) Granted. It's listed as an "interview," but it's only an interview in the most basic sense. (...) That's a good point, too. Caveat Interviewee, I guess, though I expect Card is sharp enough to have picked up on her agenda during the course of (...) (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) OK... Wasn't billed that way though. (...) But did she let the *subject* in on this intent? I don't think so, it looks like to me that it was billed (to Card) as just a normal interview. Card, in a perfect world, would have read some of her (...) (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) _Ender's Game_ isn't intended as (nor does it come off as) comedy. You'd have to actually read the book(1) to see why the premise of child warriors, in context, isn't nutty at all. The author does a pretty good job of setting the stage for why (...) (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) I haven't previously read much of Salon, so I can't speak to complaints about its overall style, but I agree that--as a straightforward interview--this one is lacking. However, it *is* an interesting exploration of several forms of textual (...) (23 years ago, 20-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
Oh yeah, and those of you who don't know Card, read him! Especially the Ender books that are mentioned in this interview piece. They're really fantastic books. Chris (23 years ago, 19-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) As far as a quality interview, I guess that I think it's par for the course. As far as a piece of writing, I found it _really_ good! I thought her running internal dialog was fascinating. What per se did you think was wrong with it? I (...) (23 years ago, 19-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
Pretty sorry stuff as far the interviewer goes. She needs to get her head out of... As far as the author, Mr. Card, I have no clue who he is but judging from the explanations of some of his stories, the guy is either a complete nutcase or total (...) (23 years ago, 19-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
It's more of a debate than an interview. Two people who can't define their terms cover ground rapidly while discovering how much they dislike each other. I found the remarks by Card to be in character for him, a character I've paid attention to (...) (23 years ago, 19-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(...) Agree wholeheartedly! She tells how she attempts to get the answers she wants, and complains when she doesn't. Although it's interesting that she actually recognises this & documents it. The interview would probably look a lot better if all (...) (23 years ago, 19-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | How to conduct an interview and not actually listen
|
|
(URL) I think that is about the most self serving piece (and worst interview) I've ever seen in Salon...(1) IMHO this interviewer epitomizes much of what's wrong with american journalism in one nice neat package. Agree/disagree?(2) 1 - which is very (...) (23 years ago, 18-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun Control in the UK
|
|
(...) Very objective. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 17-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Free Speech versus Trademark?
|
|
I heard about this on the radio here in the UK. Parallels where drawn with this case which was settled out of court between Hirsts and Humbrol: (URL) was inferred that Humbrol’s case would have been thrown out of a US court. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 17-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun Control in the UK
|
|
(...) "almost an everyday occurrence" hmm I remember a few years ago I read that somebody is shot every 30 minutes in the USA. BTW : firearms are not banned in the UK. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 17-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Gun Control in the UK
|
|
(...) Another liberal myth shot down in flames. What's that you say? America has a higher per capita death rate in gun violence? That just means we're more proficient shots. Drat - there's that USMC brainwashing coming out again. }:~D Bill (23 years ago, 16-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Excellent article
|
|
(...) That's a fantastic question. But not specifically. The several books by Adele Faber and Elaine Mazlish are considered classics by those who believe that 'freedom without license' is the way to go, but they are actually somewhat more (...) (23 years ago, 15-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Free Speech versus Trademark?
|
|
While reading MSNBC today, I came across this interesting article: (URL) too much of a hurry now to develop my own thoughts further, I'd like to pose a question. Recalling issues like the Concentration Camp sets, Spite Your Face's 2001 LEGO parody, (...) (23 years ago, 14-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Gun Control in the UK
|
|
Just ran across this article: (URL) . What I thought most interesting in the article was this "Police fear that the increasing use of guns on the streets, now almost an everyday occurrence in boroughs such as Hackney or Lambeth, is spilling over (...) (23 years ago, 14-Aug-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
