From: morphy@cco.caltech.edu (Jones Maxime Murphy)
Subject: Re: Social perquisites of non-slaveholding whites
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 1992 19:22:05 GMT

casper@vxcrna.cern.ch (CASPER,DAVI./PPE) writes:


>Jones, you are sounding pretty arrogant these days, and arrogance is not very
>conducive to an exchange of views.  Believe it or not, I too have a college
>education, and have read a few books (light reading and otherwise) in my years.
>In the future, I will thank you not to address me in this condescending tone,
>as if speaking to an errant child.  Were I to speak to you so, you would no
>doubt come back sarcastically calling me "massa", as if I had committed an
>unspeakable racial slur.

Nah, I'd think of some other astute putdown. I already used that one.

>Your attitude, as evidenced "crystal clear" above is that you have a monopoly
>on the truth and the rest of us are idiotic dupes of a centuries old conspiracy.
>Given that that is the case, and that you refuse to concede even a shred of
>validity to opinions which differ from yours, why do you waste your time on us?

I'm not sure. I guess it's the pure sadistic pleasure of doing intellectual
battle with unarmed opponents.

>>My "purpose", like yours, is to express my views.

>No, as your statement above says, your purpose is to impose your views on us.

I'm fluent in English, thanks. I don't need you to put words in my mouth.

>>If you perceive an agenda on my part, speak up and identify it, as well as
>>where it's undermining the veracity of my assertions.

>OK, how's this (from your previous post):

>>Colonialism and slavery in fact are the fundamental catalyst for everything
>>Western Europe achieved subsequent to their commencement.
>>Jones

>This statement:

>1) Is a complete trivialization of the history and culture of about 1/5 of the
>world's population.

Well, they're just a minority. They just have to learn to live with that.
"Western civilization? I think it would be a very good idea."--Mahatma Gandhi

>2) Is a gross and utter simplification which shows contempt for the intellect of
>those you are having a discussion with and makes you look silly.

I would not so much as mention your intellect, much less question it.

>3) Seems like it could only be made by someone pedalling an ethnocentric world
>view and/or a certain political ideology.

As opposed to disinterested observers like yourself, completely free of 
ethnicity and political orientation.

>4) Is not true.  Or rather it is such a sweeping generalization, it probably
>cannot be falsified or proven since the terms are so poorly defined.

I'll be happy to help you with any terms you're having trouble with. You just
have to ask nicely instead of foaming at the mouth.

>I really doubt that you care, but I think unless you get down off your pedestal
>and start granting others some of the same respect they show to you, people
>(like me for instance) are going to start tuning you out.  Why can't you
>disagree without being disagreeable?

'Cause it's no fun.
Jones
-- 
Jones M Murphy Jr                                        (212) 602-4375
NatWest Investment Bancorp, National Westminster Bank PLC
100 Wall Street, New York, NY10005                   FAX (212) 269-0113
Newsgroups: alt.war.civil.usa