HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: A bushel of raspberries for Kolodney
Date: 26 Jan 1993 14:15:53 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

In article <C1DKH0.99y@panix.com>,
sieh@panix.com (Nutella) writes to mine:
>>>Look at the Chinese.  Im not saying that they werent casting
>>>covetous glances at the Vietnamese and the Cambodians.  There was
>>>the Mongol Empire, too.  But when it came time to check out the
>>>great unknown of the Pacific, or even to consider stretching out to
>>>the Levant and Eastern Europe, they probably just said, wait a
>>>minute.  Whats the limit?  Are we stepping into something we hadnt
>>>oughta?  Do we have everything we need?  Maybe we need to look into
>>>ourselves and develop our inner selves.  Maybe controlling others
>>>doesnt get the same result in the long run as controlling ourselves
>>>and depending on our own initiative.
>>
>
>Gabrielle Daniels fundamentally misunderstands Chinese Dynastic history.
>To begin with, China is a country carved into existence through wars and
>conquest of other ethnic people, of which Tibetans were one such group.
>Furthermore, the reasons for China not pursuing their sea technology
>lies in their philosophical outlook of the world rather than wondering
>whether or not pursuing imperialistic was "moral".  They certainly had
>no qualms about it before, so it's not reasonable to think that they had
>this sudden change of heart.  For the "Chinese", calling China the "Middle
>Kingdom" was no accident.  It was a form of cultural chauvinism on their
>part in which they believed that only they were the only "civilized" ones
>and all other people were "barbarians".  This lasted even until the
>Qing Dynasty in which the rise of Western Civilization (ie. Europe)
>surpassed even Chinese Civilizaton in many aspects.  Also, increasingly,
>their outlook became more parochial, inward looking.
.
.
I did not misrepresent Chinese history.  I merely stated that China
did look "covetously" at other Asian peoples.  Furthermore, you
confirmed my point that the Chinese did look inwardly before
thinking of crossing the Pacific.
.
In no way do I see China as being innocent of warring against other
Asian peoples.  I thought my post said this.
.
Give me some credit for even knowing something about your history.
.
However, I still don't buy Kolodney's thesis.  It is still
reductionist in my view. Africans and Indians were not capable,
technologically speaking, in the era of exploration, of defending
themselves or offensively acting against Westerners.  This was how
China was defeated and quartered up by Western powers.
.
Nonetheless, thank you for your comments.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.african.american:14413 talk.politics.misc:70144
From: kautaj@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (The Wise Man from the East)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Racists oppose Afro-Cuban appointee to State Dept.
Keywords: Mario Baeza, Assistant Secretary of State for Latin-American Affairs
Date: 27 Jan 93 10:07:47 GMT
Organization: Indiana University, Department of Mathematics.


In article <1993Jan26.190925.515@midway.uchicago.edu> thf2@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <C1Guqq.2J6@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> kautaj@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (The Wise Man from the East) writes:

>>I doubt if this statement is true. I believe the speaker of the house
>>(or an equivalent position) is blak. 
>
>Except the speaker of the house has no power.

Speakers of the house don't have any powers even here in the US. Heck, you
need 2/3 of the house and 2/3 of the senate to override the whims of a single
president! Wrong?

>>And the status of blaks there is in no
>>doubt the highest in the Americas in terms of self-esteem, health-care, level
>>of education etc... 
>
>Unless they have AIDS, and then they're locked up in prison camps.

Here blaks are locked-up anyway -- with or without AIDS. There are more blak
males in prison (between the age of 20-29) than in college (all ages!).

>>Unfortunately, due to the 30 year embargo (or otherwise),
>>Cuba is not a rich country. 
>
>Cuba's only survived because 25% of their income was in Soviet subsidies.
>Now that Russia isn't trying to embarass the US anymore, Cuba's economy
>will go the way of other communist countries, and collapse.

She wouldn't need that 25% if she were allowed to trade freely. Simple logic.

>>This explains the constant immigration to Miami, 
>>with promises of $25,000 in gold per defector (remember the Pan-Am games in
>>Indy?
>
>Yeah, every single Cuban defector gets $25K in gold.  You believe that.
>I'm sure none of them want to escape totalitarianism, they just want
>this non-existent gold.

The recent celebrated case got more than $25K for heavens sake! He was 
literally residing inside my TV talking shit!!

>>The amount of anti-Castro propaganda in the US media is amazing. A legacy of
>>folx here being brought up fighting the cold war. To judge Cuba, one has 
>>only to compare her with the rest of Latin America. Her standard of living is
>>much better! 
>
>False.

No. It's true.

>>Think about that for a moment...So she has to get her
>>oil (at market price) from Russia instead of Venezuela, a US puppet..
>
>Are you saying that Venezuela wouldn't charge market price?

That's probably your only valid argument here. I used the term "market price"
in anticipation of ill-informed theories that somehow Russia is subsidizing 
oil imports for her. Get it now??

kauta.


>-- 
>ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
>standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
>the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
From: thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank)
Subject: Re: Justice Thurgood Marshall
Reply-To: thf2@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 03:13:37 GMT

In article <r!q38p-@rpi.edu> buckmr@rs6421.ecs.rpi.edu (Ron Buckmire) writes:
>Does anyone have any excerpts of cases or comments from Justice Marshall which
>would reveal his position on Gay rights?

He was in the dissent in Hardwick.
-- 
ted frank                     | thf2@ellis.uchicago.edu 
standard disclaimers          | void where prohibited
the university of chicago law school, chicago, illinois 60637
From: johnson@whitewater.chem.wisc.edu (Art Johnson)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: A raspberry to Kolodney
Date: 24 Jan 93 01:20:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: pslu1.1993Jan24.012059.6820
Organization: Physical Sciences Lab, UW-Madison

In article <1jl2ijINN1j6@morrow.stanford.edu> HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu  
(Gabrielle Daniels) writes:
> One more thing, Kolodney.  My beef about the so-called glories of
> Western Civ is not about progress, but price exacted for so-called
> progress.  If pain must be exacted for progress, it is an empty kind
> of progress. No technology is worth lives being dusted off the map.
> ..
> I think of little children who lost fingers in loom factories, and
> boys who died in coal mines for 'progress.'  I dunno.
> ..
     Gabrielle, simply because the price of technological advancement is  
pain, does not mean that that advancement is therefore empty. The question  
is what sort of pain for what sort of advancement. My beef with American  
Civ is not that it has advanced technology, but that the benefits and more  
importantly, the liabilities, of that technology have never been equitably  
distributed. If everyone was willing to share the social pain of a major  
change in technology, this country wouldn't be as screwed up as it is.  
Somebody on s.c.a.a. just wrote about how Eli Whitney's invention of the  
cotton gin ended up making lives much more harder for black folk who were  
slaves. That's absolutely true. But it's not the cotton gin that's evil.  
It's a social system that allocates all the benefits of the cotton gin to  
plantation owners, and all of the pain of the cotton gin to black slaves  
and poor farmers, that is evil and corrupt. Same goes for the children in  
the loom factories, and the boys in the coal mines. It's not the power  
loom, or the mining of coal, that's evil. It's a moral system that  
callously disregards the health and safety of people who work under  
conditions which are by nature dangerous.  Focusing on *technology* as the  
root of all evil is, I think,  missing the point, Gabrielle. The focus  
should be on the *context* in which a particular type of technology is  
being used.      
 
> Is this what you celebrate in progress?  You Westerners, you givers
                                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> of light...hah!
> ..
     Careful here, Gabrielle. Like it or not, everyone here in America,  
recent immigrants excepted, are Westerners, in some fashion.

     [...stuff deleted...]

Arthur Johnson
johnson@whitewater.chem.wisc.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
From: mdouglas@netcom.com (Hokh'Ton)
Subject: Re: Racists oppose Afro-Cuban appointee to State Dept.
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 06:47:04 GMT

In <C1Gu0s.KHr@NCoast.ORG> cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton) writes:

>As quoted from <1993Jan26.070809.28661@netcom.com> by mdouglas@netcom.com (Hokh'Ton):

>> >The only problem is that if I'm not mistaken, a LARGE proportion of the 
>> >Marielitos were BLACK.  Obviously they didn't see much of a future for 
>> >themselves in Cuba.  I wouldn't call that being willing to die for Castro.
>> > . . .
>> 
>> 
>> >Christopher Morton
>> --------------------------------------------
>> 	Yes, a large portion of the Marielitos was Black. Many of them,
>> however, were releases from prisons, given the choice of joining the boat
>> brigade or being further imprisoned or executed. I don't think that they
>> represent a very good sampling of the Afro-Cuban population.

>That may be, but it depends upon your perspective.  Many people criticize
>the percentage of Blacks in the US prison population and point to that as a
>symptom of serious problems with the way the society treats Black people.
>If you're willing to lend credence to that assessment, wouldn't it also apply
>to CUBAN society?  Is this indicative of the way in which Blacks are treated
>in Cuba?


>-- 
>------------------------------------------------------------------  
>"Read my lips, no new Haitians.  Ack!" - Bill the Prez
>------------------------------------------------------------------ 
>Christopher Morton
==============================================================
	That I wouldn't know. I have no true idea of how Blacks are treated
in Cuba. Nor do I profess to have any idea of same. As far as my being
willing to "lend credence to that assessment . . .", I have not mentioned my
thoughts on African Americans in US prisons and the reasons they are there.
In any case, assuming the "assessment" is valid, it does not necessarily
follow that societal elements in Cuba and the US are analogous in any way.
	I merely pointed out that I do not believe the Marielitos Blacks to
represent, as I said, a "very good sampling of the Afro-Cuban population."
-- 




	Hokh'Ton	:	The Crystal Wind is the Storm,
  mdouglas@netcom.com	:	 and the Storm is Data,
Michael Douglas-Llyr	:	  and the Data is Life.
			:		---Player's Litany (The Long Run)
From: pmmst8+@pitt.edu (Makala P Mweene)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: Gabrielle's empty basket (of raspberries!)
Date: 28 Jan 93 04:49:33 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh


 (Gabrielle Daniels) writes:
>someone privately E-mailed me a couple of days ago as to whether I
>believed in what I call _biological determinism_ when
>I refer to whites.  In other words, there is something in white
>folks genes which makes them racist, etc.  The answer is no.  I do
>not believe that whites are inherently racist in their genes.


[..an excellent article....]

My Dear Gabrielle,
                 The powere of your logic shines still. In this regard 
you continue to outreason all your detractors and your arguments are as
impeccable as  they are unmatched in more ways than one.

Please forgive and mind them not for they know not what they are saying...


     makala
 


Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
From: johnson@whitewater.chem.wisc.edu (Art Johnson)
Subject: Re: Masons
Organization: Physical Sciences Lab, UW-Madison
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 93 22:14:30 GMT

In article <C14yM6.9p4@ddsw1.mcs.com> barnhart@ddsw1.mcs.com (Mr. Aaron  
Barnhart) writes:
> 
> One of my housemates, a Korean, is a Mason.  Bob Dole and Jerry Ford
> are both 33d-degree Masons.  Hm!
> 
> Aaron

     So what degree Mason is Bill Clinton? Al Gore? George Bush? And if  
both Republican and Democratic high government officials all belong to the  
secret society of Masons, does that mean that both parties are nothing  
more than elaborate front organizations used (founded?) by the Masons to  
hide their secret machinations? But wait! If we know about it, how can it  
be secret anymore? But what if that's exactly what the Masons _want_ us to  
think?........ :-)

Arthur
From: glovercj@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: MALCOLM X: From An African-American
Date: 27 Jan 93 15:40:17 GMT
Organization: Drexel University

In article <1k45d2INN8rm@rave.larc.nasa.gov> taylor@hojo.larc.nasa.gov (Barney
Taylor) writes:
>There is no need to feel that there are no leaders today with the charisma
(sp) of the 
>previous mentioned leaders of the sixties, because there are. Some of which
are
>Dr. Leonard Jeffries, Dr John H. Clarke, Ivan Van Sertima, Dr. Yosef
ben-Jochannan,
>Asa Hilliard, and many more. The statement that everyone is afraid to take the
>initiative is not founded. It should be noted though, the media is a
movement's worst
>enemy. So it is only wise on our part, and smart on the part of those who are
against Pan-Africanist, black nationalist, etc., not to nationally support our
leaders via media.
>Barney

I can agree these men are leaders in a sense, but these are not the public
figure leaders and heroes we once knew in Dr. King, and Brother Malcolm. Tyhe
media has played a major part in covering up what little leaders we have, but
in the same sense they have displayed the leaders that we don't neccessary want
to be our leaders(like Jesse Jackson, Michael Jackson, Michael Jordan, Coloniel
Powell, etc.) We need leaders that are speaking out for the liberation of
Africans everywhere, not just writing it in books, or excelling in sports.

Peace, :-)
Chad J Glover
glovercj@duvm.ocs.drexel.edu   or   glovercj@dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu 
Drexel University Software Testing Lab
"Give a Man a Fish, you Feed him for a Day,
Teach a man to Fish, you Feed him for a Lifetime."
From: patm@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Pat Murphy)
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 17:09:08 GMT
Subject: Re: Inside the Numbers
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american

Chad writes:

> Pat Murphy writes:
> >the most disturbing item to me is that most of the africans who were
> >sold off into the slave trade were done so by other africans...  
> 
> You know this is the second time I've let this one slide by, but now I'll bite
> Africans were MOSTLY sold into slavery by Africans? Where, how, did you get
> this statistic? I think this is just another example and case of statistics
> fitting the model the statistics taker has chosen. As I said before anyone can

	from my original post, it was from a September 1992 National
	Geographic article who have had a history of taking care with
	numbers...  the article makes clear that it is ESTIMATED that
	80% of the africans sold into the trade were sold by africans
	such an estimate certainly points to *greater than 50%* at a
	minimum.

> make statistics that say anything. For instance, suppose I have a survey that
> asks if racism exists and I give it to the most racists people in the world
> only. What would be the result? No take the same survey and give it to the
> people running the House of Representatives? There would be a difference.

	very true... we must guard against statistic-mongers who do
	doctor the numbers to support their message.  the message of
	this article was simply a historical accounting of the cruelest
	trade--  i don't think the author had a hidden agenda.

> Furthermore, this is an ewxample of the Europeans desire to want to take the
> burden off of the European's shoulder and put it on someone elses. I guess
	
	i don't know, the author is jamaican-born and i believe,
	black (any UNC students out there who can verify?).  he
	didn't list his sources so we don't know that it is
	european-driven.  presently, we must take the numbers from
	the author's mouth

> Africans piloted the boats that brought the slaves to America, while the
> European accepted slaves as gifts as they waited on the shores of our beloved
> America?

	the article does not state this, nor does the original
	posting...

happy trails,
pjm.

	TEMPLE OWLS ARE EVERYWHERE!!
	(sorry, chad, couldn't resist the implicit dig
	  at your dragons!)
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: How white America perceives African-Americans??!??
Date: 24 Jan 93 20:38:00 GMT
Organization: Oracle Corporation
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <2B6224CC.2180@news.service.uci.edu> cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese) writes:
>>In article <1993Jan21.180129.13733@oracle.us.oracle.com> mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:
>>>In article <1993Jan20.223413.10464@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> dem2@pyuxd.uucp (Me) writes:
>>>>In various articles mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman) writes:

>>>>>A permanent policy of shoot to kill against rioters
>>>>>might be a pretty effective permanent solution to riots.

>>>>Not in a society that pretends to be democratic. 

>>>Sorry, dude, but democracy refers to majority rule.  If the majority
>>>is happy killing rioters then there is no problem.

>In a very well-publicized survey, either 68 or 72% of college men
>surveyed said that they would "force a woman into having sex" if they
>knew they would not get caught.  Guess since the majority of men think
>it's okay we should do it.  Check out Naomi Wolf' latest book for refs,
>please. 

Lovely use of the straw man debating tactic, Janis.

Please note the fallacy in your argument.  I did not suggest that the
majority of people being willing to shoot rioters means that shooting
rioters is right - I have other reasons for that belief.  I merely
pointed out that if the majority of the poeple votes for politicians
who enact shoot-to-kill policies for riots then nothing undemocratic
has occurred.

To extend your analogy, if the democratically elected legislatures of
a state vote to decriminalize rape then nothing undemocratic has
occurred.

>The majority of people in the south 100 years ago (and probably far
>recently) also thought that slavery was an acceptable evil.  The
>majority of people in the country 100 years ago thought women shouldn't
>vote.  

These arguments have the same fallacy as your first.

>There is no rule that says "vox populus, vox Dei" here, pal.  The
>majority can be way fucking wrong, and if you're looking down the wrong
>end of a gun, the majority can appear even more wrong.

Of course.  So what?  I never said it couldn't be wrong.

>What an asshole.

Actually, Janis, give the complete lack of reading comprehension you
emenstrate above you are either an idiot (assuming it was inadvertant)
or a liar (assuming it was deliberate.)

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
From: HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: Anyone know James Earl Jones' politics?
Date: 21 Jan 1993 17:39:13 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

In article <C15J06.2p9@NCoast.ORG>,
cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher Morton) writes:
>As quoted from <1jkv46INNsnd@morrow.stanford.edu> by HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels):
>> .
>> You'd be surprised how many people take him very seriously, like
>> William F. Buckley, George Will and the rest of that clack.  I
>> remember the "60 Minutes" piece on him, too.  He's whipping up a lot
>> of homegrown animosity since Reagan came in. These fans are not
>> into show business, and they are much like the cats who supported
>> Perot.
>
>My impression is that liberals and leftists take Limbaugh far more seriously
>than a lot of conservatives do.  Considering their non-stop attacks on him,
>they'd HAVE to.  As far as I'm concerned this is nothing more than the mirror
>image of the far rightists who attack every media phenomenon that doesn't
>promote "family values".  The difference is of course that they practically
>only have Limbaugh to complain about.
.
.
I complain about Limbaugh at the far right and the guy that does
"The Rest of the Story" or something.  Those news talk shows on the
radio are pretty bad as well: KGO here in SF is really drumbeating.
 Depressing.  OKay with you if you wanna think he's light.  I don't
and his fans, 99% all white, are with him all the way.

>Have you ever listened to the show?  On a good day, it's pretty funny.  On a
>bad day, it's just pompous whining.  Of course you could say the same thing of
>any liberally oriented show as well.  I certainly think there's some validity
>to Limbaugh's claim that you can't get a feel for the show without listening
>to it for a couple of months or so.
.
.
Sorry.  It's too painful to listen to for more than 1 minute.  And
what liberal-oriented shows are you speaking of?  There aren't any!
McNeil-Lehrer?  The Laughlin Report?  Don't make laugh.

>I find that he makes some very good points while also sometimes doing the very
>things that he criticizes liberals for.  In general, I just find him better
>entertainment than I'm likely to find on the radio during the day.  No doubt
>there are people who take him too seriously, but then there are people who
>take "The Spotlight" and "The Daily World" seriously too.
.
Sorry, but this so-called fellow traveller doesn't read that shit.
Limbaugh's dangerous.  I've made my point.
From: sieh@panix.com (Suma Yi)
Subject: Re: Justice Thurgood Marshall
Organization: Panix Public Access Internet & Unix, NYC
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 14:48:06 GMT

In article <1993Jan27.031337.19023@midway.uchicago.edu> 
thf2@midway.uchicago.edu (Ted Frank) writes:
>In article <r!q38p-@rpi.edu> buckmr@rs6421.ecs.rpi.edu (Ron Buckmire) writes:
>>Does anyone have any excerpts of cases or comments from Justice Marshall which
>>would reveal his position on Gay rights?
>
>He was in the dissent in Hardwick.

Sorry, but can you provide a bit more information on the Hardwick decision?
Some of us don't know.  Thanks.
-- 
//Lui Sieh		|How seldom we weigh our neighbor in the same
Mail: sieh@panix.com 	|balance with ourselves.  -- Thomas A. Kempis
_____________________________________________________________________
Disclaimer: These are my opinions...but others may share them as well