HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cash@convex.com (Peter Cash)
Subject: Re: Serbian co-operation with Nazis
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 15:09:17 GMT
Organization: The Instrumentality
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In article <85926@netnews.upenn.edu> kkniaz@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Krzysztof W. Kniaz) writes:
>In article <1992Aug11.214407.10900@news.eng.convex.com> cash@convex.com (Peter Cash) writes:

||In either case, it's hardly surprising. Remember, Eastern Europe and the
||Balkans have a long tradition of complex inter-ethnic hate and
||warfare--including virulent anti-semitism. 

|This statement is partially true i.e whole Europe has a long tradition
|of violent anti-semitism. Actually Jews-hartred started in West-European
|countries such as Spain, France and The Holly Roman Empire of the German Nation
|in medieval period. Ascribing racial and ethnic tensions ONLY to Eastern
|Europe is simply a manipulation or misrepresentation.

Where in my article did you detect an assertion that anti-semitism is found
only in Eastern Europe? In any case, if we are talking about the period
1918-1939, I would say that anti-semitism was _particularly_ virulent in
Eastern Europe. Jews may have been discriminated against in France or Spain
during this time--but they weren't slaughtered, as they were, say, in the
Ukraine. Even in Germany, large-scale pogroms didn't start until close to
the end of this period.
-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
             |      Die Welt ist alles, was Zerfall ist.     |
Peter Cash   |       (apologies to Ludwig Wittgenstein)      |cash@convex.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Xref: sparky soc.history:7361 soc.culture.yugoslavia:7977
From: miklg@acuson.com (Michael Goldman )
Newsgroups: soc.history
Subject: Re: Chinese Meet Romans?
Date: 21 Aug 92 17:22:29 GMT
Organization: Acuson; Mountain View, California

It seems to me that one thing the Romans were truly superb in
was finding a way to divide and conquer.  They were almost
always able to find allies within the potential enemy through
bribery, or promises of power, or simply finding who hated whom.
I don't know that the Chinese were better or worse at that game
but IMHO, that can account for as much of Roman success as the
sheer force of arms.  They had Germanic allies in their German
wars, and their seizure of more civilized states was aided by
internal spies and collaborators.  The ruling families
inevitably had created a _lot_ of enemies in their rise to, and
maintenance of power.

Might China have become as fragmented by contending groups in the
2nd century as they were in the early 20th?  Could the Romans
have found some puppets able to raise armies on their behalf?

- Michael Goldman

-- 
"History teaches us that men and nations behave wisely once they have
exhausted all other alternatives." - Abba Eban
	Disclaimer:  All views are solely my own & not the views of Acuson.
	<sun!sono!miklg>  or  [miklg@acuson.com]
Xref: sparky soc.history:7509 soc.culture.japan:6925
From: hyde@cs.dal.ca (Bill Hyde)
Newsgroups: soc.history
Subject: Re: England since 1688
Date: 18 Aug 92 16:38:27 GMT
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada

In article <1992Aug18.115850.10272@neptune.inf.ethz.ch>, cohen@cumuli.vmsmail.ethz.ch (Mark Cohen) writes:
|> In article <1992Aug18.075152.5135@uniwa.uwa.edu.au> diarmuid@uniwa.uwa.edu.au
|> Diarmuid Pigott writes:
|> 
|> >The Glorious Revolution - the overthrow of James II by the Parliament by
|> >peaceful means (as opposed to what happened to Charles I (execution),
|> >and the invitation of the Elector of Hanover to the throne (because of
|> >his wife Mary), and hence the establishment of a truly parliamentaary
|> >system of govt. in England.
|> 
|> The Glorious Revolution was the beginning of the establishment of the
|> parliamentary system that is used in Britain today. The monarch invited over
|> was William of Orange, who was indeed husband of James' daughter Mary. He
|> also happened to be the son of a daughter of Charles I and so had a very good
|> claim on the throne in his own right. The Glorious Revolution was peaceful in
|> England consisting of William landing in Devon with some troops and marching
|> mostly unopposed to London. James recognizing the inevitable ran away to
|> France, but not before throwing the seal of England into the Thames, perhaps
|> believing that the country could not be run without the ornaments of power.
|> In Scotland things were not so peaceful. Opposition amongst some of the
|> catholic clans resulted in the massacre of Glen Coe some time later.
|> William and Mary had no children and were succeeded by Mary's sister Anne.
|> Anne did not marry.


	Anne married prince George of Denmark and had many children
	(I believe 18) of whom only one (a son) lived much past birth.  He died
	in an epidemic while still fairly young.

	Even for ruling monarchs, life could be terrible then.


 The Elector of Hanover (George I of England) became king
|> of England in 1714 after the death of Anne. He was the great-grandson of
|> James I (and VI of Scotland).

	Originally the hope was that his mother, the electress Sophie,
	would become queen.  She was the daughter of Elizabeth of
	Bohemia (herself daughter of James I(VI)).  Sophie spoke english
	and understood the english system of government, so the transition
	to the new dynasty would have been smoother.  Unfortunately, she
	did not live long enough.


						Bill Hyde
Department of Oceanography
Dalhousie University,
Halifax, Nova Scotia
hyde@Ice.ATM.Dal.Ca or hyde@dalac
From: jessica@pres.jsc.nasa.gov (Jessica Dickerson)
Newsgroups: soc.history
Subject: What happened in 1419?
Date: 19 Aug 1992 21:01:17 GMT
Distribution: soc.history
Organization: KRUG Life Sciences - NASA


  A while ago, someone mentioned that he/she remembered numbers by 
interpretting them as dates.  Well, I friend of mine has just received
a phone number which can be used as a (past) date. So...
 
What happened in 1419?

Jessica
dickerson@medics.jsc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.yugoslavia
From: josip@src.umd.edu (Josip Loncaric)
Subject: Re: Croatian President on WWII victims
Organization: Systems Research Center, Maryversity of Uniland, College Park
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 14:30:38 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.093329.14687@husc3.harvard.edu> stojanov@husc10.harvard.edu (Milan Stojanovic) writes:
>My posting was a complete and it was taken from Tudjman's book.
>I challenge you to find where it is incomplete.  Or to admit that 
>your Pres., whom 56% of Croats voted for, ( aware or not aware of his 
>statements), is just a little bit more educated anti-semite ( Serbs aside,
>this time). 
>
>Milan N. Stojanovic

Did you post the entire book?  You selected an excerpt you consider
damaging, that's all.

Technical details aside (I'm an American, so my President happens to
be Mr. Bush), it is for Jews to judge if a person is against their people
or not.  Certainly Serbs are not to be trusted in this matter -- they
have a clear interest in smearing Mr. Tudjman.

And the facts are that Croatian Jews do not consider Mr. Tudjman to
be an anti-semite.  In fact, they have been very supportive of Croatia
and some have high positions in the Croatian government.  

Mr. Stojanovic, your role in this is completely unreasonable.  We all
know that terrible things were done in Croatia in WWII, and why;
but essentially Croats are not motivated by anti-semitism but by their
opposition to Serbian domination.  Your attempts to confuse
the issue are very ugly.  And, if I might say, not very successful:
after careful consideration, Israel has recognized the independence
of Croatia.

It appears more likely that this renewed attack on Tudjman is caused
by your need to defuse world outrage created by Serbian concentration
camps.

Josip



Newsgroups: soc.history
From: pdunn@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Patrick L Dunn)
Subject: Re: Civil War:  Battle Hymn of the Republic
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 06:33:06 GMT

I have heard several stories about the tune for the hymn.  It supposedly is a
variant on an old negro spiritual from the Carolina low country, with words
"Say, brother, will you meet us on Canaan's happy shore?"

The University of Georgia alma mater also predates both JB's Body and the Hymn,
(so I have been told) and the tune is identical.

PDunn
Newsgroups: soc.history
From: c34657b@saha.hut.fi (Tuomas Viljanen)
Subject: Re: What happened in 1419?
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Distribution: soc.history
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 15:28:44 GMT

In article <57297@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> jewell@mace.cc.purdue.edu (Larry Jewell) writes:
>In article <jessica.20@pres.jsc.nasa.gov> jessica@pres.jsc.nasa.gov (Jessica Dickerson) writes:
>
>>  A while ago, someone mentioned that he/she remembered numbers by 
>>interpretting them as dates.  Well, I friend of mine has just received
>>a phone number which can be used as a (past) date. So...
> 
>>What happened in 1419?
>
>  Good King Wenceslas died.

The battle of Nemker during the Hussite Wars: 300 Hussites under Jan Zizka were
attacked by 2,000 Imperialists. The Hussites employed their wagenburg formation
and artillery, making good their escape and causing the Imperialists severe
casualties in the process.
>>Jessica
>>dickerson@medics.jsc.nasa.gov
>
>
>Larry J


  ++ Tuomas Viljanen                     ++ For a battle like Crecy, you do  ++
  ++ Lahderanta 20 A 19                  ++ not need a military genius like  ++
  ++ SF-02720 Espoo 72 FINLAND           ++ Edward III. All you need is an   ++
  ++ 358-0-592175 or c34657b@saha.hut.fi ++ idiot like the Duke of Alencon.  ++
Xref: sparky soc.history:7218 soc.culture.yugoslavia:7855
From: stojanov@husc10.harvard.edu (Milan Stojanovic)
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.yugoslavia
Subject: Re: Irony continues in our history
Date: 12 Aug 92 19:40:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Aug12.154054.14665
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

In article <1992Aug12.170142.9743@src.umd.edu> josip@src.umd.edu (Josip Loncaric) writes:

>(2) The ethnic composition of Partizans would be discussed in a more
>    extensive presentation of WWII in former Yugoslavia.  I'd suggest
>    you look up relevant entries in "Enciklopedija Jugoslavije".
>


Here it goes again. Last time you have posted it, and it was for 1944,
not for before.  Why Mr. Loncaric?


>(3) If you have a point to make, make it: you are completely free to
>    claim whatever you wish.  But note that others may remain unconvinced,
>    depending on what you say.

Excellent.   I have to say that the extent of Croatian participation 
was negligible in any resistance movement during first two years of 
WWII in Yugoslavia, except in the commanding structures of communist 
resistance.  There is a reason for that.  Croats felt NDH is their country,
and they were ready to live with "minor" incidents such as extermination
of Serbs and Jews.  

>    
>>Regards,
>>
>>Milan N. Stojanovic
>>
>
>Josip
>
Milan
Newsgroups: soc.history
From: cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster)
Subject: Victorian age
In-reply-to: gapickrell@happy.colorado.edu's message of 21 Aug 92 02:04:06 GMT
Organization: pubs
Date: 21 Aug 92 13:43:27 CDT

Gary Pickrell writes:

   A couple days ago someone posted something about the Victorian
   age and it got me thinking about how the strict, rigid
   rules got started.  Does anyone know?

From what I know of the 19th century, the middle and upper classes in
all the advanced European countries adopted quite strict codes of
behavior in this period (not necessarily always followed in private, of
course).  I can only speculate that it was a short fall from comfort to
squalor in those times, and any slip could ruin a person.  (See the
movie Howards End, or any other fiction from that period.)

Chris Brewster
Xref: sparky soc.history:7494 rec.arts.books:14870
From: reiher@ficus.cs.ucla.edu (Peter Reiher)
Newsgroups: soc.history,rec.arts.books
Subject: Re: "The Black Death", by Philip Ziegler
Date: 19 Aug 92 16:32:04 GMT
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department

In article <1992Aug17.151016.10561@acuson.com> miklg@acuson.com (Michael Goldman ) writes:
>cash@convex.com (Peter Cash) writes:
>
>>the Black Death that Ziegler brought out, and of which I was not aware:
>>that the plague actually had some beneficial effects. For some of the
>>survivors, at any rate, life was better after the plague than before.
>>Before the plague, resources were scarce; after the depopulation of Europe,
>>there was more than enough to go around. Thus, the plague indirectly caused
>>a rise in the European standard of living--which may, in turn, have
>>contributed to the period of technological advance and expansion that
>>followed. 
>
>	I have read that the depopulation affected the working classes
>	more than the upper classes resulting in a shortage of manual
>	laborers which thus drove up wages.  This resulted in a greater
>	economic viability of mechanization of labor-intesive work, thus
>	starting the seeds of the industrial revolution.

Ziegler presents a fair amount of evidence (from scholarship of the 50's
and 60's, not his own scholarship) that the social and economic effects
of the Black Death had probably been overstated in earlier work.  The
evidence suggests that, rather than starting any radically new
phenomena, the Black Death speeded along changes that were already
taking place.  Some of those changes included better working conditions
for the lower classes and a greater tendency for serfs to become freed
from their bondage.  The same thing would likely have happened without
the Black Death, in this view, only somewhat more slowly.

Of course, Ziegler was writing a survey after what was apparently
a period of major historical revisionism (the good kind, not the neo-Nazi
sort), and that was over twenty years ago.  There may have been a
"counter reformation" in the understanding of this period in history
since then, that restored more prominence to the Black Death as a
fundamental cause of major social and economic phenomena.

--
		Peter Reiher
		reiher@wells.cs.ucla.edu
Newsgroups: soc.history
From: packer@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Packer)
Subject: What is it with the Balkans?
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-b1  
Organization: Dept. of Independence
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 11:59:00 GMT

In article <1992Aug11.214407.10900@news.eng.convex.com>, cash@convex.com (Peter Cash) writes...
>In either case, it's hardly surprising. Remember, Eastern Europe and the
>Balkans have a long tradition of complex inter-ethnic hate and
>warfare--including virulent anti-semitism. Add to that the grievances


Has this area contributed anything to civilization except trouble?




Newsgroups: soc.history
From: k044477@hobbes.kzoo.edu (Jamie R. McCarthy)
Subject: Re: It's useless!
Keywords: mutlu
Organization: Kalamazoo College
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 16:43:04 GMT

kkniaz@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Krzysztof W. Kniaz) writes:
>
>what if readers of soc.history...
>start flooding
>Multu's address with huge ... messages?

Mail-bombing is not to be condoned, under any circumstances.  Please do
not do this.

>It is relatively easy to write a shell program in UNIX , sending mail
>to Mutlu, say every 10 minutes.

It is even easier to set up a kill file properly.
-- 
 Jamie McCarthy      Internet: k044477@kzoo.edu      AppleLink: j.mccarthy
 Sure, I subscribe to alt.sex, but I only read it for the articles...
Xref: sparky soc.history:7573 soc.culture.japan:7138
From: blamb@rodan.hri.com (Bill Lambert)
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.japan
Subject: Re: The Russo-Japanese War (part 2)
Date: 21 Aug 92 21:48:36 GMT
Reply-To: blamb@rodan.hri.com (Bill Lambert)
Followup-To: soc.history
Organization: Horizon Research

In article <1992Aug21.180605.6076@island.COM>,
fester@island.COM (Mike Fester) writes:

=> Why? It's difficult to see the Pacific War as a "race war". After all, the
=> Japanese attacked, subjugated, and attempted to eradicate the culture of
=> Korea, and last I checked, they are of the same race (in fact, the Japanese
=> Royal family is most likely descended from Korean nobility). 

"Race War" is probably not the right definition by scientific
classifications of race, but by those definitions Hitler's actions
against Slavic peoples or even Jews might not be termed racist either.
Things deserve the classification of racist when people differentiate
themselves from others by reason of lineage or place of birth, even
if those differentiated have similar physical characteristics.

=> (some omitted) .......... but bear in mind that governments and 
=> individuals USUALLY go with their economic, rather than racial,
=> interests.

I agree with Mike, but it's much easier to propagandize and justify
their economic interests when those interests are aimed at people's
who can be delineated as inferior. In other words, your own people
won't buy screwing equals, therefore, make them unequal. It's not
so seperate from the economic interest to persue those economic
interests aided by racist propaganda. At too many times in history,
those two (economic interests and racism) have married too many
times to be totally distinct issues.

- Bill Lambert 
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.yugoslavia,soc.culture.jewish
From: jmc@SAIL.Stanford.EDU (John McCarthy)
Subject: Re: Civil War:  Battle Hymn of the Republic
Reply-To: jmc@cs.Stanford.EDU
Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University
	<22828@hacgate.SCG.HAC.COM> <11756@optilink.UUCP>
Date: 13 Aug 92 20:41:59

The verse you mention was sung when I was in school in the 1930s.
--
John McCarthy, Computer Science Department, Stanford, CA 94305
*
He who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense.
From: morna@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Morna J Findlay)
Newsgroups: soc.history
Subject: Re: England since 1688
Date: 18 Aug 92 16:25:39 GMT
Reply-To: morna@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Morna J Findlay)
Organization: Laboratory for the Foundations of Computer Science, Edinburgh U

In article <1992Aug18.115850.10272@neptune.inf.ethz.ch> cohen@cumuli.vmsmail.ethz.ch (Mark Cohen) writes:
	

>William and Mary had no children and were succeeded by Mary's sister Anne.
>Anne did not marry. 

Anne did marry and had about 11 children, none of whom survived to
adulthood.

M

--
Morna Findlay 					JANET:morna@uk.ac.ed.dcs 
	Thanksgiving For a National Victory (Robert Burns)
Ye hypocrites! are these your pranks? To murder men and give God thanks?
Desist, for shame! Proceed no further: God won't accept your thanks for murther.
Newsgroups: soc.history,soc.culture.yugoslavia
From: josip@src.umd.edu (Josip Loncaric)
Subject: Re: Irony continues in our history
Organization: Systems Research Center, Maryversity of Uniland, College Park
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 05:55:04 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.190346.14672@husc3.harvard.edu> stojanov@husc10.harvard.edu (Milan Stojanovic) writes:

 [ Responding to a reference which shows how Serbian propagandists
   manipulate history trying to stay in control of the Croatian people ]
>
>Probably you meant "as a people with occasional tendencies toward
>exterminating Serbs who should not be allowed to rule over them."
>That is what war in Croatia was all about.
>

People who believe that they can get away with exterminating other people
are nuts.  Do you believe extermination is a smart policy?  I'd hope
you do not.  So, why should Croatia think differently?

Croatia has not suggested "ruling over" its Serbian minority.  Croatian
constitution and other laws guarantee its Serbian minority full equality, 
cultural autonomy, etc.  Croatia is not interested in "ruling over" anyone -- 
"ruling over" simply does not pay.

However, Croatia is interested in not being carved up by a hostile
Greater Serbia.  And before you start raving about historical
vs. "administrative" vs. ethnic borders, please remember that we've
all seen a megabyte or so on that topic already.

Josip
From: kja@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (krista.j.anderson)
Newsgroups: soc.history
Subject: Re: BOOK REVIEW: Collier's _The Rise of Selfishness..._
Date: 14 Aug 92 17:32:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbfsb.1992Aug14.173235.12096
Organization: AT&T

Although I found the book review interesting and though-provoking,
I find myself questioning the ad hoc hypothesis that Americans have
been getting more and more selfish.  I realize there are many
definitions of the word, but to me, the earliest immigrants to
America were very selfish, too.  Was there ever a time in history
when people were not basically out for themselves and their
families or their tribes or their countries?

Did the author of the book consider other changes over the
centuries?  For example, there was an extreme trend from rural
populations to urban populations as the industrial methods of
agriculture became more common.  Urban life and industrialization
has given people more choices.  Who's to say what choices farmers'
children would have made if they'd had more choices?  Another
change was an increase in population.  When I go through my life
today, I'm living with double the population that was here in my
parents' day during WWII.

So, lifestyles certainly changed from the 18th century to the 19th
and from the 19th to the 20th.  But did human nature change?  I'm
not so sure.  If people did change, I wouldn't say they are more
selfish, but I might say they have less integrity, less pride in
their personal sense of morality, fewer principles.  I don't really
see selfishness as the opposite of integrity nor as the major
problem today.

For that matter, maybe it's better to have a nation of people more
interested in partying than to risk fanaticism or oppression on the
part of the highly-principled types.  (I don't really think so, but
it might be worth considering; the trouble with people with
principles is they so often think *everyone* should have the *same*
principles; hedonists don't usually give a hoot what others are
doing.)  What criteria did the author use to judge a better time or
a worse time?   

I read a magazine article on how women's roles changed during the
1800s.  It said that as farming gave way to industrialization,
women had less to do and were therefore free to do charity work and
otherwise assume the role of moral backbone, while the men's work
had perhaps become more competitive, with less of a spirit of
cooperation than there'd been in the barn-raising days.  But is
this a change in selfishness or simply a change in scope of what is
considered worth protecting?  That is to say, maybe men's scope
went from farm community to family whereas women's scope went from
family farm to urban community?
Newsgroups: soc.history
From: rlp@cactus.org (Robert Platt)
Subject: Re: Chinese Meet Romans?
Organization: Capital Area Central Texas UNIX Society, Austin, Tx
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 02:44:45 GMT

A few years ago I attended an exhibit of artifacts of the 1st emperor
of China, including a very small part of the Terra Cotta army with
which he was buried.  The first emperor believed he ruled the whole
universe because he had conquored all of the inhabited areas that
were known to Chinese civilization.  He fielded armies of up to a
million men that included both infantry and cavalry.  The Chinese
possessed crossbows capable of penetrating metal armor.  Notes
from the exhibit stated that had the Chinese and Roman empires met,
the Romans would have been easily defeated.   I find this very credible,
the Chinese were superior in weapons, tactics, logistics, and engineering.

Bob Platt
-- 
	Robert L. Platt
CACTUS:	rlp@cactus.org			"Software is easy,
WORK:	rlp@mpd.tandem.com	         comedy is hard!"
HOME:	rlp@ceres.uucp                   -----------------
Organization: Washington University, St. Louis
Date:         Mon, 17 Aug 92 07:34:48 CST
From:         C05705DA@WUVMD
To:           NETNEWS@WUVMD
Subject:      aaron burr?
Newsgroups:   soc.history

since i've been gone fir a while, has aaron burr lecture 3 been posted?
if so, could someone please send me a copy of it? it would be most
appreciated.  thanks.
Xref: sparky soc.history:7248 soc.culture.yugoslavia:7894