From: zeleny@husc10.harvard.edu (Michael Zeleny)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.soviet
Subject: Re: Luna Park
Date: 15 Oct 92 22:09:11 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Oct15.180913.16426
Organization: The Phallogocentric Cabal

In article <1bkc30INNf5s@agate.berkeley.edu> 
muh@physics20 (Yury M. Mukharsky) writes:

>In article <1992Oct15.111721.16412@husc3.harvard.edu>
>zeleny@husc10.harvard.edu (Michael Zeleny) writes:

MZ:
>>>>now, you tell me, from whom do you propose to
>>>>save Russia?  As a necessary condition, I suppose your enemies must be not

YMM:
>From whom you would save a sick child? That's exactly the point, you just
>can not imagine that after "from" not necesserely follows "whom". From 
>ourselfs, if you want. You seems to see no possibility of improvment, save
>oppression. it's you problem, don't put it on others.

When you save a sick child, you kill pathogenic bacteria.  What kind
of bacteria are responsible for Russia's sickness?  What *is* Russia's
sickness?  (Not that my past experience allows me to expect a straight
answer from any of my esteemed interlocutors.)

MZ:
>>If there ever should appear an anti-earthquake party, you can rest assured
>>that the responsibility for the shifting of the tectonic plates will be
>>vested into the CIA, the KGB, the mafia, or some shiftless individuals,
>>depending.

YMM:
>Who started talking about politics? Does it follows from your idea that it is
>immoral to fight eathquake by prediction/profilcatics? Seems that you think
>so.

It is futile to fight natural calamities by political means.  The last
thing Russia needs is another round of witch-hunts.  More generally,
all talk of salvation presupposes higher purpose.  Exactly what is
Russia's higher purpose, and how is it supposed to relate to the
purpose of the New World Order, or the Islamic Fundamentalism?  Would
it not be more reasonable, and more humane, to try to help Russians
instead of trying to "save" their country, a task which is likely to
demand the sacrifice of many among them?

MZ:
>>religious ritual, my definition of Jewishness is certainly dependent on
>>exclusion.  Again, so what?  I am certainly not trying to grant the Jews
>>any sort of license to oppress non-Jews by means of political promotion of
>>"Jewishness", just as I would never do likewise for the Russians.  

YMM:
>But you claims that Russians will oppress non-Russians, and Jews will not.

MZ:
>>no difference in value between the two cases.

YMM:
>That's the difference.

Where did I ever claim that?  I say that nationalism of any sort or
provenance oppresses national minorities.  Kindly cite the article
where I stated anything to the contrary.

MZ:
>>Ah, but the mythical "Russian culture" is your very own private
>>hobby-horse, so it is incumbent upon you to tell me just who does, and who
>>does not belong.  As for me, I simply don't give a diddly fuck about etnic
>>culture of any sort, especially when called upon to define its boundaries

YMM:
>Damn, why do you care to start the discussion of who belongs and who not.
>(Or whom Russian nationalists will accept or not, with mildly said strange
>example of Shevchenko).
>Ask question, and after few replys say that opponent is stupid to talk
>on such a strange theme. 

If you don't want to answer my question, there is no need to reply at
all.  If you don't see its relevance, think of the Nuremberg Laws.

MZ:
>>by gerrymandering, as political exigencies will often demand.  What about
>>Kazan?
>>
>>Conversely, I never felt myself a Russian, but rather a Russian Jew. 

YMM:
>Anti-Russian Jew?

Hardly so, though I suppose to your mind this might be a tautology.

>Yury

cordially,
mikhail zeleny@husc.harvard.edu
"Un de mes plus grands plaisirs est de jurer Dieu quand je bande."
Newsgroups: soc.culture.soviet