I am just in the second chapter of Thomas Friedman's book, which takes its title from a saying about the playing field being leveled (in terms of acquiring knowledge and/or money) so that individuals all over the earth can now "play" on a more even basis with big businesses.
Have any of you-all read it? Did anyone notice irony in how many times he uses the word globalization (globe...) in a book with this title?
My hope is that "globalization" will eventually make war obsolete as every country will be so dependent on every other. Can you imagine, for instance, China provoking a conflict with US, while using their un-balance of trade they heavily invest in our economy
Where would we get our shovels, our trousers, our lead-coated toys
Yeah right. As if. We wish.
Even if the whole world becomes corporatised, we will just replace nation-state warfare with corporate warfare. Played out as much as possible in countries other than where the corporate HQs are of course.
"Corporate warfare" sounds relatively harmless
Unless GM,Chrysler, and Ford get involved.
Speaking of which, why not send these big three automakers to
Exxon Mobil, or PhillipsConoco. They seem to go together like
cheese and crackers.
Tut tut Luke that borders almost on politics
Tut tut Luke that borders almost on politics
Is that not allowed?????
I mean $25 million (billion?) in profits last quarter. Corporate
oil and autos are almost strangebedfellows' or at least odd fellows.
Let them help each other: each is dependent on the other.
Just a thought I've not heard bandied about anywhere else, but in this
forum it seems everything is tossed around. TA
Tut tut Luke that borders almost on politics
Is that not allowed?????
Politics and religion tend to get people yelling and biting. We stay away from that here. We get mad enough with language foibles.
Drifting a bit here: you know that there are actually people who truly think the earth is flat? As I understand it, they are not altogether stupid, just susceptible to belief in conspiracies. Prolly a neurosis of some sort.
I believe that is an urban myth. The oft-mentioned so-called 'Flat Earth Society' consisted pretty much of one man (in England I think from memory, but can't be bothered looking it up).
The oft-mentioned so-called 'Flat Earth Society' consisted pretty much of one man (in England I think from memory, but can't be bothered looking it up).The man in the UK was probably the founder of the Universal Zetetic Society (
link) Samuel Shenton. Until his death in 2001, Charles K Johnson lead the group from Lancaster, CA. There are some members worldwide. The BBC had this to say about the flat-earthers recently (
link). There's an online presence via a forum (
link). Enjoy. ("Now, where did I bookmark that Luddite group's URL?") I've found that you can find people who believe in almost anything, but then I've lived in California most of my life, and it's a well-known kook-magnet. Must be the clement weather.
Yes, I know, it gets people's bristles up,and I've been told that
before, yet there are some really good discussions about politics
and religion on back threads which are no longer being commented
on. Sorry, I'll try to remember your advice.
Yes, I know some very good people who believe the world is flat.
What interests me is that there are some people who ascribe the
fact that the universe is only 6000 years old, denying the
existence of "cave men", Neanderthal, CroMagnon, and even
dynosaurs. Amazing: but to each his/her own.
The world is a pancake and too many people are obsessed just to pick out the blueberries before someone else does.
I've found that you can find people who believe in almost anything, but then I've lived in California most of my life, and it's a well-known kook-magnet. Must be the clement weather.
Hahahahaha. There are a lot of similarities between California and Australia, but you prolly have even more kooks than we do! I suppose people have travelled there from all over the world to be kooky since at least 1849!
...and any state that can elect the Governator has to have at least a little bit of kookiness endemic to it!
There are a lot of similarities between California and Australia
Except we're right-ways up, the water goes down the plughole counter-withershins, and most of our immigrants became criminals after being transported.
There are a lot of similarities between California and Australia
Except we're right-ways up, the water goes down the plughole counter-withershins, and most of our immigrants became criminals after being transported.
Hmm. Perhaps I should send you a copy of MacArthy's Universal Corrective Map of the World (it has Tasmania and Tierra del Fuego at the top).
Between 1718 and 1776 50,000 convicts were transported to the USA, but I don't suppose California had been invented then? It's your fault we started out the way we did, because after 1776 the Brits had to find somewhere else to export their troublesome underclass - if you hadn't dumped that damn tea in the harbour you'd still be importing England's most notorious! All in all 165,000 convicts came to Australia, but by the second half of the 19th century transportation was rapidly outstripped by immigration. Today most Australians are not descended from convicts (though I have two in the tree), and their surname is just as likely to be Iemma, Popov, Nguyen, Chen, Al Mazri, or Kirkyasharian as Smith or Jones.
I should send you a copy of MacArthy's Universal Corrective Map of the World
I was introduced to this wonderful topsy-turvy map in the late '70s or early '80s by a geography professor. It was a joke, son. We being on a globe and there being gravity, all of us are pointing upwards.
Between 1718 and 1776 50,000 convicts were transported to the USA, but I don't suppose California had been invented then?
Well, the US state didn't exist until 1850, but the Presidio de San Francisco was founded in 1776 and that of San Diego in 1769. The word California, referring to an island inhabited by black Amazons, is first recorded in 1510 in Las Sergas de Esplandián by García Ordóñez Rodríguez de Montalvo. Sir Francis Drake landed near San Diego in 1579 and claimed California for the English Crown. He called it Nova Albion, which is Cod-Latin for New Britain.
It's your fault we started out the way we did
Another big influence on the early make-up of the 13 colonies was the number of white indentured servents from the UK and black slaves from Africa.
to say nothing of Native American slaves.
to say nothing of Native American slaves
The English and the USans tended towards policies of assimilation, isolation, and extermination of Native Americans. The Spanish tended towards conversion and enslavement in their sphere of influence.
to say nothing of Native American slaves
The English and the USans tended towards policies of assimilation, isolation, and extermination of Native Americans. The Spanish tended towards conversion and enslavement in their sphere of influence.
And the said presidio mentioned above in said pre-l850 state, among others
enslaved many in their 'missions', called 'assimilation'.
And the said presidio mentioned above in said pre-l850 state, among others enslaved many in their 'missions', called 'assimilation'.
The Presidio was run by the Spanish and then the Mexican State, being staffed with military. The Missions were run by the Church and staffed Franciscans. Both used slave labor. Mariano Vallejo, the Mexican military commandant of Northern California, and later a California senator, ran a huge hacienda near Petaluma that used many Native Americans as slave labor. I believe he got them after they had been rounded up in the missions in San Rafael and Sonoma, baptized, and then farmed out. I'm not sure that they used the term assimilation, but perhaps conversation.
Basically whoever wins enslaves the losers, well the surviving losers, and calls it assimilating/civilizing/converting. It ain't new; Romans did it, Native American tribes did it, Brits did it, MacDonald's does it.
[quote]
And the said presidio mentioned above in said pre-l850 state, among others enslaved many in their 'missions', called 'assimilation'.
The Presidio was run by the Spanish and then the Mexican State, being staffed with military. The Missions were run by the Church and staffed Franciscans. Both used slave labor. Mariano Vallejo, the Mexican military commandant of Northern California, and later a California senator, ran a huge hacienda near Petaluma that used many Native Americans as slave labor. I believe he got them after they had been rounded up in the missions in San Rafael and Sonoma, baptized, and then farmed out. I'm not sure that they used the term assimilation, but perhaps conversation. [/quote
]
And the assembly line notwithstanding. Sweat shops. And the things
Zed mentions. And some Native American enslaved others. All nations are guilty somehow,
it seems.
All nations are guilty someho
Yes, man is a miscreant at best. A misanthropist at worst.