.....Who thinks that besides Daria and Jane, Jodie is the coolest person on the show? I think they need to show more Jodie! Not only is she smart, witty, and mildly sarcastic, she's also somewhat outspoken, active in everything, and friendly to everyone. She's the girl in high school that you wanted to hate, but couldn't, because she gave you absolutely no reason to. To use a 'Jawbreaker' analogy, Jodie is Liz Purr. Any thoughts?
Josh
she does give me reason to hate her. i know lots of people like that, and i feel no guilt for hating them.
"endless, nameless" wrote:
Should I even ask WHY? IS it that she is nice to everyone? Reminds you of that girl that had perfect hair that you could never have?
Do you hate her because you know so many people like her?
And what is so wrong with being nice to everyone?
JENN
yes.
jodie's hair is crap. :-) but i know what you mean, she's the "perfect" one and stuff. well i'd be lying if i said i didn't hate "perfect" people out of jealousy, but there's more to it than that. they're wusses, and they put loads of effort into extra-curricular shite for no good reason (and there really is no good reason to put that much effort in).
no, i hate her because she's exactly like all the people i know, whom i hate.
it's dishonest. nobody likes everyone. i think you should be polite to people you don't like, but not *nice*.
Jenn of MindSpring Enterprises writes:
People like that are creepy.
-Shez.
Knowing this is Alli you're talking to, do you even need to ask those questions? ;-) (Just kidding, heh heh.) (also, I seem not to be getting Alli's posts, or those of a few other people for that matter. DAMN this earthlink news server. Ah well, not for much longer...)
My personal opinion on Jodie is... well, she's a nice girl and all, I just probably wouldn't have her as a close personal friend 'cause I tend not to get along with folks like her (the ultra involved super nice ASB officer people). There just aren't enough common interests. However, I would most likely associate with her to the level that Daria does, and I probably wouldn't harbor any active dislike for her at all (I don't now, to be sure).
--J.
Jessica L. of EarthLink Network, Inc. writes:
Which planet are you currently on that you require an earthlink?
I hear Mars is nice at this time of year, though few people get to visit as the natives keep shooting down our spacecraft.
Yeah, she represents the Establishment. One day she'll be our oppressor. Right now she sympathises with Daria, but she's been conditioned to Do The Right Thing, and unless someone like Daria manages to deprogram her she'll succumb to her destiny and end up hating "damn radicals" like Daria.
-Shez.
Yeah, she represents the Establishment. >>One day she'll be our oppressor. Right now she sympathises with Daria, but she's been conditioned to Do The Right Thing, and unless someone like Daria manages to deprogram her she'll succumb to her destiny and end up hating "damn radicals" like Daria.
-Shez.>>
Ooookay. I guess I got my answer, along with verbose diatripes on how being nice to everyone is a bad thing. Thanks.
Josh.
Swimr1996 wrote in message news:[email]... [...]
being
ISTM the anti-nice responses (if I can call them that) have in common a dislike of insincerity.
If people are interpreting "nice" as meaning "feigning unfelt affection" then I'd agree that that sort of "nice" is one I don't like.
But there are people who are nice to others, meaning behaving with courtesy, compassion, patience, and so on, not because they hope to get something from them, but because they recognise that other people are no less valuable then they are themselves. Because they recognise that treating others with courtesy, compassion, patience, etc. makes the world a better place. That sort of nice, I like.
Martin.
that sort of nice is good, yes. there are a lot of people who are only nice so that more people are on their side, but when faced with an opportunity to do something good, that wouldn't benefit them, for someone else (eg, *not* steal their friend's boyfriend), pass it up.. i've encountered a lot of people who act nice, so that people see them as friendly, and "charitable".
endless, nameless wrote in message news:[email]...
courtesy,
from
then
That
Sometimes I encounter people whose chilling depth of complacency is revealed by them saying, "... I've never deliberately done anyone any harm." It often follows, "Well, Reverend/Father/Vicar/Padre, you don't find me in church, but..."
I confess that a part of me wants to reply, "Oh, well, that's all right then. You obviously think *you're* a dead cert for heaven. You won't need the church, of course: it's for sinners like me. Mark well this question, you smug, self-righteous git: have you ever deliberately done anyone any good?"
I usually say the same thing, but in less confrontational language. ;-)
I hope the experience with acting-nice people doesn't prevent you recognising the genuinely nice people, when you come across them.
Martin.
"Martin Sylvester" wrote in message news:85hk56$aq6$[email]...
a
affection"
courtesy,
something from
valuable then
That
There are those of us who because of life experiences or whatever tend to be skeptical of nice people. We've often found that when someone was being nice to us it was for some ulterior motive. If they were giving a pat on the back it was only to probe for the best place to stick the knife. If they were being obsequeous it was only because they wanted something. It's sickening. You get to the point you just don't trust people who are "too nice." It just smells. There have been too many people who tried to use nice as a way to break through our armor. So if there really is someone acting nice out of genuine interest or concern (I assume such a thing is possible), it's easier, fits our life-experence model of the world, to just assume they're scheming. I suspect that Daria harbors such an attitude. That's the basis of her cynicism.
R. K. Henry wrote in message news:387cddf2$[email]...
I can see that this is the safest assumption; and the costs of being adventurous can be high.
I remember one school chaplain telling me that a young woman of 19 told him that it had taken her her whole school life to believe that he was for real: she'd been watching him like a hawk, waiting to see the nice guy act drop. Her life so far had not prepared her for the possibility that it wasn't an act. 8-(
You may have something there. I think Daria does recognise genuine goodness in some of the other people in Lawndale, but I'd agree that she's a character whose trust has to be earned before she puts her head out of her shell.
As you might remember, I've argued before that I don't agree that Daria is a dyed-in-the-wool cynic, since she does choose to take a stand over issues that mean something to her. And sometimes more than shouting at the TV!
I think one root of Daria's cynicism, to accept that term for now, is that she's bright enough to see the venality of the school system, and ethical enough to recognise and abhor its moral paucity. So far, school is the only organised, staffed structure she's encountered on a daily basis.
I think Daria might agree with what Tom Peters said the other day (on a Radio Four interview) about the American school system: that it's run on a "Fordist" basis, designed to serve industry by producing people who won't open their mouths from nine to five for forty years. In quoting this remark, btw, I'm not implying that I think British education is immeasurably superior; and I applaud the honourable exceptions.
Martin. Who enjoyed the beer as well as the pub grub on his post-Christmas break. 8-)
I think Daria will like college. college rules. They don't spend all their time and energy taking attendance, counting tardies, hiring security guards to make sure you're in class, hiring security guards to make sure you're not wearing hats, they don't make announcements about the dillemma of starburst wrappers in the cafeteria, and when the proffessor's done with the lecture you leave, as opposed to in HS where the teacher ends ten minutes early and you sit around a mill around by the door doing nothing.
In short, they treat you like relatively responsible HUMAN BEINGS. Daria would like that. (I sure as hell do).
That's true. There is virtually no emphasis on education in schools nowadays, it's security, socialization, conformity, conformity, conformity... in elementary school they spend time on socialization (meaning: abandoning all thoughts and accepting those of authority. Honestly, and they admit that as their definition!) when they could be spent teaching us... like maybe foreign languages at the time when the mind is most prepared for language acquisition (Damn! These European kids actually know other languages! It's freaky...) of course that would mean admitting life outside of the US.
she who can rant about education endlessly,
and enjoys the break from explaining Ayn Rand is not a fascist and "multiculturalism" really is scary (if we were really being multicultural we'd do what I said with foreign language, but no, our multicultural authors are American. How self centered is that?),
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
On 20 Jan 2000 00:03:12 GMT, [email] (Dagny Scott) wrote:
OTOH... My college experiences were filled with three types of people; oddly enough, all analogous to people who've been on the show... The hard-worker social-club types ("Jodies.") The pretentious snobs (the kids from "Gifted." Damn, can't remember the name of their school...) And numerous slackers (Like Trent. Only in college.)
Seeing as I never graduated, I'll let you guess which one I was... (Even had 3 offers to join bands. In spite of the fact that I can't play any instruments.)
(Snip)
Speaking of which, did we talk about "Mosaic" here once? (A profiling program being set up with the assistance of the FBI.)
It just got mentioned in another newsgroup I frequent; and I suspect Ms. Li would love it.
"Glenn Olson" wrote in message news:[email]...
their time
guards to make
wearing
wrappers in
leave, as
around a
There's another type: Daria's type and of most of us in this group. Some might call them geeks. They don't socialize, not much anyway, they're content to hit their books or otherwise attend to business, getting pretty good grades if not honor roll. And snobbery just isn't in the equation. Most of the really serious snobs didn't attend my alma mater anyway and I never once so much as visited frat row.
Daria's going to love college.
what's frat row?
college (US) = university (UK), yes?
my dad's stories of uni all involve putting chemicals in people's bags to make them pass out, and medical students doing stuff with human organs... errrr... :-)
In article , [email] wrote:
Remember "College Bored" from season one?
Quinn: What historic street are all the fraternities on?
Frat row is basically that, the area or street that all of that schools fraternities are on, with many of them using the Greek alphabet, alpha, beta, sigma, to name some, in some order, for their names. I believe this is how it works, since I didn't join a fraternity myself while in college.
Pretty much.
I wouldn't know anything about that......what?!.....Really, I have no idea at all! :-)
A.J.
yeah, where I'm going doesn't have any of the major obsessive studying people because they try to get into U of M or something, not GVSU, although I also like that GVSU is not a major jock school either. (although they actually do have teams now, whereas when my father was there all they had was rowing). but there's not really bad students there either, because they are SOMEWHAT selective so they all go to GRCC
And Mrs. Johnson is not there! I can wear hats!
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
So when did you start at this utopian establishment? I thought you were still at school.
Hey I actually saw Grandville on a map at Christmas! Someone showed me a map of the Great Lakes and there is was, near a place called Holland (is that where all the Dutch people live?).
-Shez.
Well it's dual enrollment when under a gzillion circumstances and if you miraculously get your counselor to ::gasp::: do something you can take college classes while in High School so I get out of high school halfway through the day and have college classes.
Pretty much. They have North America's only Delpht factory (don't sound too thrilled), a tulip festival, a wooden shoe factory... but the Dutch are really all around West Michigan. Holland also has Cuban immigrants that were sent there. and a beach.
ah, and the hats (which was another post I know): the rule isn't enforced for any reason, the reason is that it's a rule, and rules have to be enforced. mostly to give administrators something to do I guess, we have too many of those. they need something to do. it's that and tardies.
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
On 20 Jan 2000 17:49:39 GMT, [email] (Dagny Scott) wrote:
How wind ranging is that anti-hat rule, anyway? I know the rule is only implemented at the county, or maybe even the district level (mine was Fresno Unified), at least in California. If it goes beyond Fresno Unified, Los Angeles, and maybe a few other large cities, one has to wonder what the _real_ reasoning behind it is.
The theoretical reasoning, for the non-initiated readers, is that "gangs use hats for their identification, therefore we must ban all hats" (yeah, like they're not going to just find some other means of gang identification). At best, this is the sort of knee-jerk fear reaction that tends to happen when people are in a panic about some issue. It is completely ineffective, and even counter-productive on an outdoor campus (damnit, it's bright out there! I need my hat!).
At worst...
Tarvok said:
Typical Administration reaction.
Problem: Violent people with hats. Solution: Ban the hats.
Reminds me of the old "Cowboy X" skit on *Sesame Street*. Cowboy X is rampaging through the town stamping "X"'s on everyone, until a little boy asks him to stop. The Cowboy says:
"I'll stop being Cowboy X ... I'll be Cowboy O. O! Yee ha! O!" and he pulls out a stamper and starts stamping "O"'s on everyone.
The narration concludes:
"And the good people of Desert Gulch were happy ... because they really weren't very smart."
Appropriate to this situation, I wager.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
On Thu, 20 Jan 2000 11:19:10 -0500, "R. K. Henry" wrote:
Um, I'm type 3.
Kyle, he who means well The Shane Andrews of alt.sports.baseball.chicago-cubs
R. K. Henry wrote:
I'm lucky in that I attend an institution where the majority of the students DON'T belong to a sorority or fraternity and where those who do only have rivalries amongst themselves...in fact, you're better off relating to a sorority/fraternity member by not joining up at all. And...the large majority of students don't do much socializing aside from the occasional sports party (where sports enthusiast residents and commuters gather around the big screen TV in the caf and, powered by pizza and root beer, cheer on a specific team) or other social event. I mean, people do have fun on campus, but mostly it's a responsible fun. We're not Southwest Texas State or Florida State or any of those worthless party colleges.
If she gets into the right one, that is...and I see her getting into the right one easily. Her major is unlikely to be one that would cause her much grief over her gender. I still face many gender-based obstacles as a computer science major. So much so that it makes me want to give up and go back into engineering, where there are more females in the classes and the professors are more female-friendly. But I don't see Daria as a computer science major so she shouldn't worry about that.
LI, counting down till the new season starts
Not as many as German majors face. Those damn nouns with their masculine feminine or neuter... and then the adjective endings...
she seems more an English or Journalism major type... hard to say though. Possibly a science, though...
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
On 22 Jan 2000 13:21:33 GMT, [email] (Dagny Scott) wrote:
Daria's too cool to be anything BUT a journalism major.
Kyle News Editor Lake Land College Lighthouse
Kyle, he who means well The Shane Andrews of alt.sports.baseball.chicago-cubs
if journalism is so cool, why then is it that 90% of journalists are wankers? ;-)
i'm going to do physics at uni, me. lalala. considered doing A level english and then doing journalism, but i couldn't put up with two more years of my histrionic english teacher talking bollocks and throwing temper tantrums.
On Sat, 22 Jan 2000 20:40:13 +0000, "endless, nameless" wrote:
Good question.
Kyle, he who means well The Shane Andrews of alt.sports.baseball.chicago-cubs
Maybe 90% of journalists aren't exactly wankers... perhaps it's just the ones we see, the ones in the big corporate newspaper and television outlets, who are pushed to "get the story" at all costs, even if it requires that they be bastards. The majority of journalists are probably quite lovely and cool people, working in small press situations and on the internet for way too little cash for the amount of effort they put out. Of course it's just a theory. ;-)
--J.
On Sun, 23 Jan 2000 04:01:49 GMT, "Jessica L." wrote:
*bows down to his new queen*
Kyle, he who means well The Shane Andrews of alt.sports.baseball.chicago-cubs
Um... oh my. Heh. Thank you. I've never been a queen before, do I get a cool septer? *smile*
--J.
On Mon, 24 Jan 2000 00:45:08 GMT, "Jessica L." wrote:
If you are so inclined.
Kyle, he who means well The Shane Andrews of alt.sports.baseball.chicago-cubs
Kyle wrote:
Awesome, possum. *waves her new septer about* Aaah... *sighs in contentment*
--J.
yeah, but 90% of every group of people, are wankers. ;-p
90% of everything is shite. lalala.
Jessica L. wrote:
Which is one of the reasons I gave up the Journalism major back in 1978. At least at Point Park College, they were honest about it. From a lecture by the department chairman, February 1978:
"While every textbook you read will tell you that the goal of the journalist is fair, objective reporting, anyone who's ever kept a job, or lost a job at a major media outlet will tell you that's just not true. It's a nice phrase, and a comfort to the public, but woe to the novice journalist who takes it to heart. As a journalist you *WILL* take a stand. Your stand will be exactly what your employer tells you it will be, or you won't work. It's just that simple. So if you have any kind of strong moral principles, or any other kind of principles for that matter, you'd better start looking for another profession, or learn the art of Orwell's "doublethink".
So I listened to him. And 22 years later, I'm still supervising the ambulance service.
If not the majority, at least the true cream of the crop.
Peace Kevin
In article ,
journalist is
job at a
phrase, and
it to
exactly what
simple.
of
profession,
That kind of reminds me of the story of the statistician who, when he started his new job, asked of his new employer, "Ok, what do you want me to prove?"
In fact this is the way of the working world. If you're in business administration you'll do things the company way. If you're an engineer and the pointy-haired boss tells you to design widgets, then widgets are what you'll design. If you're a commercial artist then you draw what the client requires. If you're a photographer then you photograph what the client wants. If you're an advertising copywriter then you'll do your level best to convince people that chocolate-flavored phlem is the coolest soft-drink there is, no matter what your own tastebuds tell you. And a lawyer--well we needn't even start on lawyers. When someone else is paying you they get to make the rules. Even if you're self- employed there are a certain number of people called customers who will make the decisions. The only way out of such a moral dilemma is to be independently wealthy. Nice work if you can find it. Otherwise, check your ethics at the door as you come in.
"She's obviously overestimated my conscience--by assuming I have one at all."--Daria
and if the guy tells you to burn the works of Freud, Heine, and Einstein, you do. and if he tells you to close down the shops owned by Jews, you do. and if he tells you to shoot them and shove them in a ditch, you do. and Americans think we're so superior to them. not true.
(this was not an insult to anyone in particular, but a warning against disregarding ethics, as well as more getting mad at Americans who think they never would have supported the Nazis. You would have, no matter what the hindsight bias tells you)
"remember that conscience I don't have? it got me" -daria
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
Dagny said:
Well ... we never did any of those things. And under our system an employer doesn't have enough influence over your life to make you do these things.
I like to think that I have enough common sense and decency that I wouldn't have, even if I'd been a perfectly "Aryan" German. I would have tried to emigrate from Germany if I'd been in that situation. If not, I hope I would have had the courage to at least covertly resist the Nazis.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
On 24 Jan 2000 22:33:55 GMT, [email] (Jordan S. Bassior) wrote:
(Snip)
We all like to think that. Until we're there, we'll never really know.
You realize every single damn American says that? But they're simply mistaken, because saying that says we are superior to Germans, which Americans sure as hell are not. The Germans have accomplishments far outweighing any American accomplishment. They are, as a culture, more advanced. To say a barbaric culture cut into the wilderness a mere two hundred years ago, accomplished largely by the slaughter of its inhabitants, is in any way morally superior to the Germans is pathetic. You all would have been Nazis. Me too. Even you, Jordan; no, especially you, if it would keep friends. Remember, a cause isn't worth losing a friend for, you said. And it doesn't start out as a big cause. It starts out as a small cause, say, to allow the distribution of Freud and Heine. That's the point. And as it gets bigger, you're just used to it.
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
Oh God, there you go again. Whose web sites have you been reading, anyway?
With all due respect to the Germans, who have done some pretty nifty things when they weren't taking over the world, to hold them forth as the exemplars of western civilization is pretty bizarre. Even if you take America out of the picture, you'll still find that if you stack them up against England, France, and Russia over the last couple hundred years they come in near the bottom of the list.
Your assumption that older societies are naturally "superior" (whatever the hell THAT means) to newer ones is not bourne out by history. Younger societies often, one could probably say "usually," all else being equal, kick ass all over the older, more decadent establishments.
Further, your argument about Americans "cut into the wilderness a mere two hundred years ago" is absurd. First, Americans had been carving busily away at the wilderness for about three hundred years by the time we got around to the Revolution. Second, the people doing the carving were, in general, the most ambitious, clever and (if all else fails) mean and sneaky products of the "advanced" European culture, particularly England and Germany. Not Barbarians, but tough and smart (because the weak and dumb ones died out quick) products of the very culture you hold out as superior.
As to whether Americans are morally superior to Germans, no of course we're not. Our genocide of the American Indian is every bit as cruel as anything the Germans did to the jews, while our treatment of the African slaves makes the Nazi's treatment of France and Poland look positively enlightened.
20th Century America does, I really believe have some unique safeguards that would prevent anything like Nazi totalitarianism happening here, and we seem to be having some success sperading these memes to the rest of the world, but that doesn't mean we haven't been just as bad (not "worse," but just as bad) in the past, nor does it mean that as we continue to become a more decadant society we won't mutate into something unimaginably more evil.
Thanks, I'm glad I'm regarded as the resident psychopath for daring to have opinions that don't match everyone elses, and thinking they're a little more important than kissing everyone's ass?
No, I'm afraid these are my ideas, I don't just absorb other's ideas like some people do.
All of once did they attempt that in their existence. Of course you do at least realize they didn't start World War One, don't you?
First of all, I'm speaking about a bit more than the past century or so, a lot of the things I had to say went back to Renaissance time, i.e. protestant religion. Also I think Mendel is rather important. Within this time, Germany has produced a great deal of the world's philosophers and great literary writers (definitely more than America, who would be at the bottom in that respect), as well is pretty much creating the science of Psychology (Wundt, the originator of Psychology as a real science, and Freud), which is a major part of our culture and way we think of things
During this century, of course, Germany has been held back as a people by the Treaty of Versailles and its aftereffects as well as East Germany living under socialist rule....
But I like Germany, personally, and I think it's a crime that all we associate with their race is Hitler, disregarding their contribution to the world, regarding France primarily as the source of all "higher" culture, which is clearly extremely narrow-minded.
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
"Dagny Scott" wrote in message news:[email]...
have
more
Not at all. I simply regard you as bloody ignorant.
OK, that was unfair. You know some things. More than many people, particularly in the US. But when you're wrong ... and you're often wrong ... dammit, you're wrong loudly. This gets my goat.
some
We're not talking about ideas, we're talking about documented history.
things
least
I guess everybody is allowed one shot, huh?
the
lot
Fine, in that case make the list England, France, Russia, Italy and Spain. And they still come out near the bottom of the list. Except for Luther, the Germans were late bloomers, culterally ... they did almost everything worth talking about in the mid-to-late 19th century.
(Wundt, the
part
I'll spot you abstract philosophy and orchestral composition. I won't give you literature, which the US has pretty much dominated for the last 100 years (hello Hemmingway, Fitzgerald, Faulkner, O'Neill and Steinbeck) and England and France before that. No disrespect to Goethe, but he's no Shakespeare.
the
under
Life's a bitch.
associate
As I said in another post, we have no moral grounds for feeling superior to the Nazis in any except the most local and recent contexts. German history is nifty. Germans are smart. But the apex of european culture? Hardly.
On 25 Jan 2000 23:46:41 GMT, [email] (Dagny Scott) wrote:
Unless you were born omniscient (or put more semantic weight on 'just' than I'm reading into it,) that's patently false.
No offence; but your ideas were not crafted in a void.
During the Age of Imperialism *every* country in Europe with the means to do so was 'taking over the world.'
Ask the Irish, or the Pope, how wonderful an achievement that one was...
Hey, the USA has crafted The Church of Latter-Day Saints, Scientology and (I believe) the Jehovah's Witnesses. That's three to one on religions (and don't try to bring quality into this; religious debates are even bloodier than 'Nationalism' debates.)
Well of course. Germany has had more time to do so than America.
You forgot Jung.
I prefer China myself, and think it's a crime that we associate it so much with Mao.
I was not claiming that, as that's very hard to claim :) what I was claiming was that I believe I apply slightly more critical thinking/reconsideration to the ideas I come across than some people do... and I don't value having static ideas at all, whereas some people claim their opinion has basis because they've had it for so long, that could mean they don't think about it, too :)
well then it's silly to pin that on one nation :)
Well not even speaking of quality (which one could), Jehovah's Witnesses and the Church of Latter-Day Saints are both protestant sects of Christianity, therefore owing at least a bit to Luther. People in denominations other than Lutheranism still honor Luther and the Reformation.
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
On 26 Jan 2000 21:19:56 GMT, [email] (Dagny Scott) wrote:
Not unless you want me to take the traditional Catholic stance on protestantism...
I don't think the Witnesses can even be called 'christian.' IIRC, they're still waiting for the Christ to show up.
So, what makes them 'protestant'?
Glenn Olson wrote:
I was taught in school that Jehovah's Witnesses are considered by the Church to be a cult because they don't actually align themselves with any recognized religion (they don't consider themselves to be Protestants, which would align themselves with the Christian religion).
LI
In article , Lady Interference wrote:
Church to
Actually, the Jehovah's Witnesses are pretty much "Jews For Jesus." They accept Jesus as a prophet and a divinely-inspired person, but do not say he is both god and man at the same time and do not accept the notion that he died for man's sins. It's a current of Christianity that goes back to the first few centuries of the Common Era...the Arian church.
Like Jews, they do not eat pork, nor do they consume blood in any form, hence the transfusion prohibition. (Orthodox Jews will refuse transfusions as well.) Like Jews, they also expect a coming Golden Age when the Davidic dynasty is returned to Israel and a descendant of David will rule the entire world as Messiah and King. However, unlike Jews, they expect that person to be Jesus returned to Earth.
In a way, they are similar to the Seventh-Day Adventists, although the Seventh-Day Adventists consider Jesus a divine figure and encourage vegetarianism amongst their adherents as a way to better follow the dietary laws of the Torah. Unlike Seventh-Day Adventists, however, the Jehovah's Witnesses worship on Sundays.
The Jehovah's Witnesses were considered Jewish enough for Hitler, who massacred them right alongside Jews in the concentration camps.
--.\\<-H--
Michelle Klein-Hass wrote:
I had no idea they had accepted Jesus as such. I'd thought that they'd figured him as a prominent historical figure, much like some other people who figure in to the New Testament. Waitamin...I'm starting to see now...from what I've read in Jehovah's Witnesses literature they seem to accept the Old Testament as gospel and the New Testament as a historical (in the case of Revelation I believe they consider that predictatory) guide. I see...
I didn't know they didn't eat pork, but I did know about the blood transfusion thing. Orthodox Jews do the same thing? I didn't know that. I knew that Jehovah's Witnesses don't celebrate birthdays or holidays, though. My mom's former boss is a Jehovah's Witness and I remember they had a hard time celebrating her birthday, so on that day they just told her they were going to pay for her lunch as a little treat for her as a boss.
I know they expect the Second Coming, it's just that I didn't know they didn't regard it so much in that sort of way. And...as for Jews...what *do* they expect as far as saviorhood, then? I dunno, I spent so much time in the study of Catholicism in school and in World Religions class we spent so much of our time on Asian religions like Confucianism, Buddhism, and Shintoism, that we didn't get much of a chance to touch on the subject of Judiasm.
I knew that, I just didn't know why Hitler targeted them. Now I realize. Thanks.
(btw -- how do you know this? Research? Personal background? Or something else? Just curious, as always *g*.)
LI
In article , Lady Interference wrote:
something else? Just curious, as always *g*.)
Comparative Religions was one of my fave subjects in college.
--.\\<-H--
I'm not sure what the Irish have to do with it, they're just one of many Catholic countries, but anyway I thought Americans favoured freedom from authoritarian rule? Why should a religion be under the thumb of one man? I've always been deeply suspicious of the notion that I should have to accept the church and pope as the sole conduits between me and God. Personally I favour gnosis, but protestantism is a step in the right direction; Luther started a trend of diversification into own-brand churches.
-Shez.
On Thu, 27 Jan 2000 15:07:40 +0000, Shez wrote:
Just the first one I thought of that took Catholic vs Protestant arguments to violent levels.
I'm discordian-christian myself. Which basically means my 'gospel' is "Find your own damn way to god."
I'm not convinced that religion was the issue in Ireland, rather it was indigenous Irish who wanted home rule v. people of Scottish ancestry who wanted to remain in the UK. It just so happened that the Scottish are mainly Protestant and the Irish Catholic. I find it hard to imagine the terrorists being followers of either type of Christianity, I certainly wouldn't class them as Christians anyhow.
-Shez.
On Fri, 28 Jan 2000 19:44:03 +0000, Shez wrote:
Neither am I, actually - at least not at the decision-making level. At other levels, I think it was an important part of what maintained loyalty within the ranks.
Neither would I, actually. Though a few critics of christianity have used them as examples of hypocrisy...
Please, please note that the remarks I'm about to make about reformation history do not imply disprespect for people affiliated to protestant churches, or to those churches themselves; or to those of different faiths or of none. We've all come a long way since the reformation. But there were some things in Shez's posting that deserved the courtesy of a reply.
Shez wrote in message news:[email]...
a lot
protestant
For many people in Europe that's exactly what the reformation achieved: authoritarian control. Rulers find it easier to rule when *they* are the people who tell the ruled what's right and what's wrong, and they don't like the ruled to fall under the influence of people who invite them to explore right and wrong for themselves, especially when this leads the ruled to reject as immoral some of the methods their rulers use to gain and hold hold power. This isn't purely ancient history: look at the persecution of the Catholic church (and others) by 20th Century totalitarian regimes. In many countries, the reformation's immediate effect was to create state-controlled churches.
One of the reasons some of the princes in continental Europe were so pro-reformation was that Catholic inhibitions and criticisms were swept away, and they could put down the Peasants' Revolt with methods that previously had been judged immoral, and could silence that annoying criticism that what they were doing was unjust. They could browbeat or otherwise gain influence over the new, smaller, isolated protestant communities, no longer linked to a global church: "Divide and rule" was a part of the equation. In England, the reformation was experienced by many as a period of totalitarianism: see, for example, Duffy's _The Stripping of the Altars_.[1]
Barbarous things were done in the name of reform, and in the name of defending the faith: neither Protestants nor Catholics can escape criticism; but the basic dynamic, ISTM is that the reformation (and the reaction to it) was seized on by people with power as a means of controlling opinion, supressing criticism, and throwing a religious cloak over their political activities.
I'd be more than suspicious. That idea would be rejected by Catholics as a heresy. There's also, in the first place, Jesus Christ (though I would accept the rebuttal, "But he's the head of the church."); and prayer, conscience, scripture, natural law, love, the experience of beauty, etc. etc. For an idea of what Catholics really believe (as opposed to the myths), see _The Catechism of the Catholic Church_.[2]
That wasn't his intention (I'm not accusing Shez of believing it was). Certainly fragmentation of the Christian community and globalisation of business is an effective method of keeping profit, rather than the human person, at the heart of trade. I'm not (need I say?) seeking to imply that Christians are the only people who put human values before economic ones: but if the Christian people were united, that would be one very big force for change.
Martin.
[1] See URL: http://www.sylvesternet.freeserve.co.uk/catholic-books/0005.htm
[2] For the print version, see URL: http://www.sylvesternet.freeserve.co.uk/catholic-books/0003.htm A badly indexed online version is at URL: http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/ccc.html
Well obviously the Catholics aren't going to think protestantism is good, that's fairly obvious, any more than Bill Gates will think that other operating systems are good :) they (the Catholic church) were a monopoly, and now they're not. Luther set forth a rather major idea that religion was a thing between you and God, not you and your priest maybe eventually reaching to God. And to the extent America is a Christian nation, Luther's idea is its, which should be clear for a nation founded on democracy and individual rights. And I think Luther's ideas and the presence of the Protestant church prompted a few reforms in the Catholics, too, partly from realizing they were losing their monopoly :)
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
On 25 Jan 2000 23:46:41 GMT, [email] (Dagny Scott) wrote:
Do you know what it takes to be considered a psychopath on THIS group? I'm *damn* proud of you, Dagny! :)
Kyle, he who means well The Shane Andrews of alt.sports.baseball.chicago-cubs
Dagny Scott said:
Depends what you mean by "literary writers." America and Britain between them created most of the "genres" of fiction. Most of which are not seen as "literary", but are arguably just as valuable.
I agree with you as to the philosophical contribution.
Freud was Austrian. As was, of course, the man who did the most to bring Germany down. What's even more amusing is that there would have been a period when they were both in Vienna at the same time ...
Of course, both were the result of following unwise leadership.
I do too. But I don't think Germany's superior to America.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
that's a nice respectful way to start off a post. dagny is an impressionable young girl who can't form her own opinions, oh yes.
On Wed, 26 Jan 2000 00:25:22 +0000, "endless, nameless" wrote:
Dagny can certainly form her own opinions. We just aren't allowed to debate them with her or disagree with them, because if we do, we obviously "hate her." (According to her, I myself fall into that category. Should I be honored?)
But of course, if being an annoyance was grounds for not posting in a newsgroup, then Usenet would be a mighty empty place. <grin>
Martin (send all e-mail to "[email]") +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
Outpost Daria: Your Online Database for All Things Daria!
http://www.lawndale.net -OR- http://systech.simplenet.com/daria/No, you hate me because you said something to the effect that you hate me, or at least, attacked far more than my opinions, calling me paranoid and out for pity and all that... I don't just say anyone who disagrees with me hates me. Kyle, for example, I have disagreed with strongly in the past, and I think it's safe to say we do not hate each other.
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
On 25 Jan 2000 17:25:08 GMT, [email] (Dagny Scott) wrote:
The problem with this argument is that both of you are arguing entirely different things. Dagney, you are making generalizations about America. And most of your generalizations probably hold a little water. Jordan, on the other hand, is arguing about _individual_ persons, particularly himself. I think Jordan probably would resist. I also think, however, that America as a whole might not.
But, to lend weight to one side, I do think that, if there is any genetic basis to whether or not a person will resist (please remember this qualifier when weighing my argument), America probably does have a larger percentage of resistant persons. Consider the sorts of people who came to america. Most of the time, they're those who don't like the way things are done in their own country and need some place to go. Only America was suited to take them in times past, with it's young culture and untapped natural resources.
To use Germany as a specific example: when Hitler started doing what he did, there were basically three responses: local resistance (most of them got killed), emigration (most to America), or compliance. What this means is that Nazi Germany created a condition where Germany's "resistant population" was reduced and America's was increased (remember the qualifier, please).
But, of corse, this depends on whether or not there actually is a genetic basis to this quality.
There was an interesting experiment some years ago by an American teacher who managed to indoctrinate his high school class (and indeed half of the rest of the school) along fascist lines to teach them how easy it was to fall prey to an authoritarian regime which could offer them a sense of belonging and power. There was a long article about it in the Whole Earth Catalog.
-Shez.
On Wed, 26 Jan 2000 20:38:08 +0000, Shez wrote:
Interesting. Do you know if there's any info on the web or a magazine or some such?
Damon Orca on #Stars!
Damon Domjan of @Home Network writes:
I don't know, but the guy involved was called Ron Jones and it was done in Cubberly High School in Palo Alto in 1969. Maybe a web search would turn something up. The fascist-style movement he created in the school was called "The Third Wave" and gained the support of 200 students in just one week. I think it sheds light on how organisations like the Hitler Youth took Germany by storm.
-Shez.
On Wed, 26 Jan 2000 20:38:08 +0000, Shez wrote:
Did it have something to do with a Wave?
On 25 Jan 2000 17:25:08 GMT, [email] (Dagny Scott) wrote:
The conceit isn't that Americans are superior to Germans. The conceit is that the speaker is superior to the common man.
Most people who say that imagine they would have been like Schindler.
The history of Germany is no less 'barbaric.' The western art of conquest was created in Europe.
That would depend a lot on timing. There's good reason to suspect some of us would have been some of the early examples that fostered the fear of speaking out againt Der Fuehrer, if the timing had been right. (Apologies if spelling is out.)
You especially.
Glenn Olson wrote in message news:[email]...
30 June 1934. Among those killed were the Catholic leaders who'd been speaking out against Hitler. Their assassins got nice souvenir engraved "daggers of honour" from Himmler.
And that trend continued, of course: one concentration camp alone was the last place seen by a thousand Catholic priests.
Resistance to evil is (at least) twofold: the prophets who speak out, and die; and those who co-operate to some extent while secretly working against the oppressor (Schindler comes to mind).
Let's pray we never get a chance to find out which we'd be: collaborator, prophet, or covert resistor. My guess is that many of the atd habitu�s would be prophets, and most if not all of the rest would be covert resistors.
Where would you put the characters of _Daria_ in that menu? I can't decide whether Daria would be a prophet or covert resisitor; I think Jane would be a prophet, as would DeMartino. Ms Li and Upchuck would be collaborators.
Martin.
well, if we look at the characters in the best possible light, Daria would probably speak out, since she is rather outspoken to begin with, and Jane go along with her. Quinn might be one to resist covertly, she likes hiding her *good* acts already... I could see her hiding Jews and flirting with S.S. officers to protect them :)
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
Dagny said:
The Germans do tend to conform, though. And the immediately preceding German culture (the Second Reich) was militaristic, which made them ideologically vulnerable to a leader promising the restoration of German supremacy at the cost of conformity.
I'd dispute that. I'd say we were roughly equivalent around 1900 or so, but we started to pull ahead of them as a result of World War One and they never caught up.
How do you think Germany was established?
Depends on the cause, and the friend.
Heine.
That's a "big cause" to me.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
that depends on who your employer is. if it's bill clinton he probably does.
that's what the germans most likely thought.
how much room did the nazis leave for 'covert resistance'?
Alli said:
You can always quit government service.
have,
The evidence is that most Germans were happy to do what their Leader demanded.
A fair amount. But if you were caught, you were probably dead.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
On 26 Jan 2000 04:12:15 GMT, [email] (Jordan S. Bassior) wrote:
Only if you're in the low end of it...
Glenn Olson said:
No, you can pretty much quit the high end too. High government officials are always retiring ... some of them, under political pressure.
Do you know what *really* happens to people who retire from the CIA?
They get pensions. With medical benefits. And I believe a nice severance package.
It's civil service. *Firing* people is the hard part.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
I meant to say, "Hitler HAD ensared". Guy's been dead 55 years, after all ... :)
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
On 26 Jan 2000 19:48:34 GMT, [email] (Jordan S. Bassior) wrote:
There's a difference between retiring and quitting. Retiring means they no longer need you.
Quitting means you no longer need them.
Glenn Olson wrote:
So I guess my parents have both just quit their jobs, except with the benefit of receiving a retirement package.
I mean, my parents didn't need their employers anymore. Mom was fed up with her civil service job and the way they kept shifting around her department's responsibilities. Dad was fed up with being the only person there at the convention facilities who was properly trained as a plumber and who knew how to control the steam valves. Therefore they both handed in their retirement paperwork. It wasn't like they weren't needed...Mom had been there at the V.A. Hospital since before it was built and she was one of maybe five people in her entire department...and Dad was most certainly needed...it's just that both had been working well over 30 years and they felt like they didn't need that anymore.
*shrugs*
LI (remembering that monster.com commercial..."I want to be forced into early retirement.")
Glenn Olson said:
Do you honestly imagine that the CIA would be idiotic enough to try to *forcibly prevent* someone from quitting? Quite aside from the illegality involved, has it ever occurred to you how much *damage* an unwilling conscript could do to the Agency?
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
On 28 Jan 2000 06:27:50 GMT, [email] (Jordan S. Bassior) wrote:
I never said that they would continue actively working for them... nor did I ever mention the CIA caring about legalities...
(Fell off the wagon at conspiracy buffs anonymous...)
Glenn Olson said:
I really and truly do not think that the CIA murders people who merely decide to resign from the Agency. It would be impossible to do so without the people who were still working for them finding out about this policy, and if the people who were still working for them knew about this policy the results would be ... bad.
There are numerous ways one could provide insurance against such a murder. Most of these ways involve "dead-man's switches" ... setups that in the event of your death something bad would happen to the Agency (usually the release of classified and damaging information). Given the law of averages, some (or many) of these switches would trigger accidentally (when the agent died or was killed by someone else) and there would be horrible, continual, devastating leaks.
Another obvious likelihood is that agents angered by the CIA's enslavement of them (which is what it would amount to) would defect to hostile foreign governments. Or deliberately sabotage Agency operations.
Of course, you could simply not tell agents of this policy. The problem with this is that, believing that they could resign from the CIA like one can from most intelligence or law enforcement agencies, they would proceed to do so. You would have to have a gigantic assassination program devoted to murdering your own former agents. Needless to say, this would eventually get noticed.
These consequences are all rather predictable, and I find it very hard to believe that they would not occur to CIA higher ups. Hence I doubt that any such policy (of enslavement / assassination) exists at the CIA.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
is it? there is also evidence to suggest that 65% of people would be willing to administer potentially fatal electric shocks to another person, and that 21 of 22 nurses would be prepared to give patients dangerous overdoses if told to do so by someone claiming to be a doctor.
well what could you do? if you spoke of it, you could be caught. if you didn't, well what's the use?
endless, nameless of M.U.F.F.I.N.S. writes:
Hey, I see that Psychology A-Level is paying off!
-Shez.
milgram's experiments were the first we studied. :-) the one with the nurses was mentioned in the textbook along with that. we're currently doing stuff about maternal deprivation, and hodges & tizard or something. oh yes, and we have a mock exam on monday. on the same day as our physics one. oh fuck. better do some revision, perhaps. :-)
Alli said:
I've seen those experiments. The truly scary part is that the person telling the test subjects to administer the shocks has no real power to aid or harm them; people are willing to do this "just because".
Well, in that case at least the assumption is that the doctor knows what he's doing. Sometimes, in real medicine, a doctor has to balance the good and the harm a dose of pharmaceuticals can do. A doctor might *legitimately* give someone what would in normal circumstances be a "dangerous overdose" of a drug if the patient's condition was critical enough to make the risk of dying of an OD less than the risk of dying of the disease.
When all this is granted, the Germans (especially Eastern Germans) do have a distressing tradition, dating back to at least Frederick I of Prussia, of following orders blindly. This has been remarked upon many times in the last 300 years, by both friendly and hostile observers (the friendly ones see it as "orderliness").
You could sabotage the system. You could leak information to foreigners. You could speak out, carefully. You could encourage others to disaffection and dissension. You could aid the Resistance.
All were dangerous, and some people did each or all of those things. Many paid with their lives.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
yes. "normal" people. not just germans.
they didn't even know it was a doctor, some bloke just phoned up (prescriptions by phone were not allowed anyhow) and said he was a doctor, and that they had to give this patient this amount of this drug, which was considerably more than what it said on the bottle, and iirc the drug was unauthorised for use or something.
you'd have to be pretty fucking careful.
was it worth it?
Alli said:
I never claimed it was only Germans who would fall for this. As a matter of fact, the test was done in America.
Hoo boy. *That* is scary.
Yes. They were, mostly. Many of them got caught anyway, though.
I don't know. Admiral Wilhelm Canaris (head of German military intelligence) was one of those who paid with his life, and some historians believe that he materially contributed to the German defeat by leaking important secrets to the Allies and feeding misleading intelligence to Hitler. The various plots to depose Hitler all failed, though; Hitler has wisely ensnared most of those in a position to do so in a combination of loyalty oaths and Gestapo surveillance. The truly sad thing is that most of those who collaborated with Hitler were retained in their positions in the postwar German society.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
On 26 Jan 2000 19:54:41 GMT, [email] (Jordan S. Bassior) wrote:
(Snip)
That's probably why they got 95% on that one, compared to 65% on the other one...
'Official' authority carries more weight than blank authority.
It has it's uses. For example, 'orderliness.'
It's hard to get anything major done, if no one's following orders.
Eh. I think the guys who spoke out against monarchs had more guts. They were speaking out against Divinity...
Glenn Olson said:
The Nazis were far more brutal and intolerant than most monarchs.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
On 28 Jan 2000 06:31:09 GMT, [email] (Jordan S. Bassior) wrote:
Yes. But were they attributed supernatural patrons?
IE. Speak out against the Nazis, and you might get caught. Speak out against the King, and God himself sets you a place in hell.
On 24 Jan 2000 16:10:12 GMT, [email] (Dagny Scott) wrote:
Well said, Dagney! You're right, the scope might be different, but the intent is the same.
To the previous writer, and any who agree with him, I say, there is always a choice. If "The Man" commands you to things like that, you can say no. You might end up living worse off than you expected you might, but at least you're not contributing to that sort of thing. And there are jobs that don't require you to rescind your ethics.
In a perfect world, if everyone did this (stood for their ethics), nobody would be working for the schmucks that do these sort of things. Unfortunately, there is always someone who's highest ethic is "show me the money." So bad things will always be done, but that's never bothered me much. Advertising doesn't sway me, intimidation doesn't sway me, the promise of money, power, even *sex*, doesn't sway me. Hell, even the threat of an eternity in a lake of fire won't sway me (umm... is that a good thing?) I instinctively resist any time I sense someone trying to manipulate me. I resist first, and ask questions later (and occasionally realize that, though the method wasn't the best, the goal was good, and give in anyway, but as a result of *my* decisions).
Indeed, my only concern is to maintain the political stability of this place, to make sure that no one man or faction holds the reigns of government, uncontrolled. To make sure that nobody becomes powerful enough to attempt by coersion what failed by propaganda, sophism, threats, promise of reward, or other manipulation tactics. How *I* can do this, I don't know. I just do my duty at the ballot box, and when something bothers me, I write, to my congressman, my representative, my city councilman, or the editor of the local newspaper (which has a remarkably egalitarian opinion page, however liberally biased the rest of the thing might be).
On 23 Jan 2000 18:54:15 GMT, [email] (KTrick45) wrote:
So the moral of the story is: when it comes time to rise up and wreak havoc on the establishment, kill all the journalists first. Gawd, that's the worst I've heard! But I'm willing to bet it's not quite that bad. Sounds like you just had a _very_ bad professor.
On Sun, 23 Jan 2000 19:49:13 GMT, [email] (Tarvok) wrote:
Well, as a journalism major, I can tell you it is quite that bad.
Kyle, he who means well The Shane Andrews of alt.sports.baseball.chicago-cubs
Jessica L. of ASOP (Association of Strange
Jessica, that's so romantic. I think I feel an urge to rush out and become a journalist.
-Shez.
Currently we're trying to get rid of Detroit. Do you know anyone who wants it? Ontario doesn't and we sure as hell don't, unless they have a really good sports team this year, which they don't.
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
In article , [email] (Dagny Scott) wrote:
Woo...Martin Pollard isn't going to like THAT...
--.\\<-H--
Just clarifying the viewpoint of the non-Detroit parts of Michigan. (for those of you on the East Coast: yes, there are non-Detroit parts of Michigan. So if someone flies into Grand Rapids, don't say "how's Detroit?". And don't ask that question of people in the Upper Peninsula, at least if they have their hunting rifles around...)
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
Dagny Scott said:
Didn't OCP buy it? And isn't it protected by Officer Murphy, aka "Robocop"?
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
Dagny Scott opines:
We are? May as well give away everything between Clarkston and Monroe, and west to Wixom. Then I can move back to Toledo.
I'm glad the Wings didn't get a third Stanley Cup - one more year of that "Hockeytown" crap would have rendered me postal.
Kyle wrote in message news:86co1t$8bl$[email]...
I don't agree!
ISTM that Daria is quite capable of choosing non-vocational, academic subjects. She has the intellect, and she has the attitude.
Philosophy? Theology? Eng Lit? Classics?
No disrespect intended to people who have chosen a vocational subject, of course. 8-)
Martin.
On Thu, 20 Jan 2000 11:19:10 -0500, "R. K. Henry" wrote:
Hey, I was too busy hanging with the slackers, hiding from the socialites and laughing at the snobs to see *everything.*
Assuming she finds the geeks.
Glenn Olson wrote in message news:[email]...
I for one would vote for Daria as president of ApaSoc (The Apathy Society), in the confident hope that within a week the Societies board would bear this notice:
"The first and subsequent meetings of ApaSoc have been cancelled dued to lack of interest. Daria Morgendorffer, President."
Helen would be so pleased to learn that Daria is playing an active part in college life: president of a society, no less. It'll look so good on the resum�. "Which society is it, Daria?" "My phone card just ran out of credit. Bye!" <click> "But I called her!"
Martin.
Dagny said:
Hats?
Yeah. That's cause all the people in college *want* to be in college. They don't have to be babysat or guarded.
Yep. Horrified me too the first time I encountered this definition, and I was in my 20's at the time.
Very. What's even funnier is that our "multicultural" educators treat "Africa" as a unit, when the cultural difference between parts of even Black Africa (not to mention North Africa, Ethiopia, or South Africa) is at least as vast as between Spain and Poland.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
Hats. Stuff on your head. With the exception of Mr. Brower's toupee.
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
Dagny said:
No ... I mean why was your school assigning security guards to make sure that people weren't wearing hats? Were they going overboard on politeness ("take your hat off at the table") or were they afraid that people were smuggling in drugs or guns in the hats, or what?
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
Jordan wrote:
That's become pretty common around here. The wearing of hats in the school building is (in Ms. Li voice) "a punishable offense." Yes, you can get kicked out of school for wearing a hat. Supposedly, it has to do with the "gang associations" with certain hats. Absurd? Yes, and several steps beyond. But don't get me started.
Peace Kevin
we aren't allowed to wear hats in school (not that i meself wear hats outside school). the teachers have a bit of a dilemma with some members of the sixth form, because there's quite a few people with yellow/blue/purple hair, whose heads are, from the point of view of the teachers, probably best left covered.
Martin Sylvester said:
I think Jodie's half and half. I think she is genuinely nice, but I also think that she feels that she is obliged to pretend to like and approve of people that she really doesn't.
I think that she does really like Daria, though.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
He did it again! Perfectly summing everything up while staying on topic and not offending anyone. Geeze. Kudos man. BTW, Jordan do you know what happened to Marie?
cheryl
Cheryl said:
She was sick a while and didn't feel up to posting. She's currently visiting relatives.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
But there are people who are nice to others, meaning behaving with courtesy,
I think Jodie's half and half. I think she is genuinely nice, but I also think that she feels that she is obliged to pretend to like and approve of people that she really doesn't.
I think that she does really like Daria, though.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan>>
Agreed. I echo the sentiment that Jodie is genuinely nice. I do also agree that she does like Daria, and like many have suggested, even envies Daria for her 'devil may care' attitude and wishes she could be a little more like that, as opposed to feeling compelled to do something because of what's expected of you. I don't think she's nice to people though because she has to be, but because she wants to be. I think Daria and Jodie could both learn alot from each other, and I hope they develop more of a friendship in future episodes.
Josh
Personally,I'd like to see more of Jodie in the series.
Jeff Morris
Swimr1996 wrote in message news:[email]...
That's something that hadn't struck me until you mentioned it, but you're clearly right. If some of Daria's integrity rubs off on Jodie, and some of Jodie's open-ness rubs off on Daria, they'd each gain something.
Martin.
Martin Sylvester said:
I agree.
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
Jordan S. Bassior wrote in message news:[email]...
courtesy,
from
then
think
people
Well said. Politics -- even student politics -- can do that to a person.
Agreed.
Martin.
On 12 Jan 2000 07:05:14 GMT, [email] (Swimr1996) wrote:
No, no. Being nice to people is a good thing. Being nice to ALLI is a bad thing. :-)
Martin (send all e-mail to "[email]") +--------------------------------------------------------------------+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
Outpost Daria: Your Online Database for All Things Daria!
http://www.lawndale.net -OR- http://systech.simplenet.com/daria/;-)
"endless, nameless" wrote in message news:[email]...
person on the
witty, and
everything, and
to hate,
So what? You hate everyone.
When you come to realize that you have no interest in being like such people and thus no reason to envy them, you'll be able to dispense with the hate.
But they do get on your nerves sometimes, don't they? Overachieving, straight-A students, the kind of kids teachers and parents are always telling you, "Why can't you be more like so-and-so?"
not *everyone*. :�
they get on my nerves because they believe they can justify their existance by pretending to like people.
My parents and teachers never want me to be like them. The only person they've conspired to tell me to be like was in first grade when they decided I needed to be more like this girl who couldn't read at all (and therefore failed first grade) but had a neat desk and neat handwriting. I tried to write like her and then I realized I had to write my own name, so the whole copying stroke by stroke idea ceased to work. Since then they've realized it's beyond hope.
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
Dagny said:
Heh ... she must have been learning to write as a series of mechanical motions, with absolutely no idea what she was writing. Sort of a metaphor for blind conformity ...
Sincerely Yours, Jordan
"Man, as we know him, is a poor creature; but he is halfway between an ape and a god and he is travelling in the right direction." (Dean William R. Inge)
there are actually quite a few people i feel a certain amount of pride in hating.
i don't think she's saying she hates everyone. (anyway, i'll let her clear that up herself).
and 'hate' might be too strong a word, depending on how people interpret it, but personally, i pretty much hate everyone that invests a large amount of time and effort ensuring they get along with everyone, particularly when they have to be dishonest/fake/insincere/two-faced and generally in the words of Holden Caulfield "phoneys" in order to do so. that's not to say i hate (or even dislike) all popular, social people.
upon reflection, i guess it's the qualities of insincerity, etc, that i dislike so much. it has nothing to do with whether they're great at everything and universally liked.
i'm well aware i've no interest in being like such people, and i'm really not envious of many people at all. i just can't dispense with the hate (ok, severe dislike) though. they're just so freakin' annoying.
Will.
"Will" wrote in message news:AfTe4.673$[email]...
in
clear
I'm just teasing Alli.
I've known Alli long enough to appreciate that her misanthropic tendencies are just a charming part of her persona. More upsetting is the way she hates herself. It's quite paradoxical how someone so interesting and intelligent could have such low self-esteem. She's a lot like Daria in that respect. In fact there seems to be a lot of that in this group.
In article ,
person on the
witty, and
and
hate,
It's weird. Jodie and Daria seem to respect each other, but at the same time, there's some kind of an unspoken friction between them. I think Jodie feels torn between living up to a perfect "model student" standard and living to please herself. She's beginning to feel like one of Ms. Li's pawns doing the former, but feels the latter is selfish. Daria is an example of what her life as the latter might be like, something Jodie wants to be, yet doesn't want to be at the same time. Daria and Jodie are very much alike; ethical, smart, and living with two incredibly uptight parents. It's sort of like seeing two versions of how a person could turn out, depending on what choices they had made for themselves. The main difference between them is the ethics they adhere to, with Daria living to keep herself happy, and Jodie living to make others happy. So Jodie's a neat character. Now if only they use more of her this coming season...and Mack too!
Swimr1996 of AOL http://www.aol.com writes:
Who's Liz Purr?
I think Trent is coolest after Daria and Jane.
-Shez.
my thoughts are: why the hell am I just getting this when I got responses days ago?? Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
Dagny wrote:
Same here. An aol thing, perhaps? A Time (Warner) warp in the system?
Peace Kevin
or the (Time) Warner Brothers (and their sister Dot) getting their revenge on this newsgroup?
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
Dagny wrote:
I still subscribe to alt.tv.animaniacs. I think they've forgotten all about a.t.d. And everything else.
Peace Kevin
everything? sudden wave of amnesia on a.t.a? woah...
Dagny
http://firefly.cc.st
"This is the way the world ends Not with a bang but a whimper." -T.S. Eliot
Daria code: Ap D+ T5 W1 Q+ Fn^Fr O+ OH m c MV- C5X F:113,201,305 BB+ FCJ -DT+ q+ fT^fD
On 13 Jan 2000 20:52:45 GMT, [email] (Dagny Scott) wrote:
Because internet-lag is unpredictable at best.
It got delayed at one of the 'hops' to your ISP, but the route to the responder's ISPs had no such delays (either from his/hers or to your ISP)