Gabberattack used the present tense, I am from Czechoslovakia, not I was born in Czechoslovakia.
It made me wonder because, as you've pointed out, despite Czechoslovakia not existing for the past 21 years, there are people who still think it exists.
It just seemed odd relating your current position to what was past.
It's like a Kazakh stating I am from the Soviet Union.
You can take that statement one stage further by declaring Gabberattack is from the Austro-Hungarian empire, which will be as odd.
Nevertheless, given the context, we can give the benefit of the doubt that Gabberattack was underlining their experience of communism in Czechoslovakia.
Going on another tangent, I met somebody who's family lived in one area for generations.
His grandfather was in the Austro-Hungarian army, his father was in the Italian army, he was in the Yugoslav army and his son currently serves in the Croatian army. It underlines just how the political map in that region changed so much so quickly.
Man, everyone knows Czechoslovakia was a communist country, when the country split the commies were 3 years gone. How is it important to the topic of the discussion which part of the country I am from if the communist regime was in Czechoslovakia and not in Czech republic or Slovakia?
Man, everyone knows Czechoslovakia was a communist country, when the country split the commies were 3 years gone. How is it important to the topic of the discussion which part of the country I am from if the communist regime was in Czechoslovakia and not in Czech republic or Slovakia?
I wasn't debating whether Czechoslovakia was a communist country, please read my posts carefully again.
Another point to consider is that adults who are now in their late thirties would have only experienced as adults the final days of the communist regime.
It is only those in their late forties or older who can narrate what their direct experience, as adults, of several years of the communist system.
As for your second question, it is very relevant when you look back to the events of 1948 and how people view how the communists to power in the first place.
I'm sure SpamSandwich is too thick to see the ridiculous irony of proclaiming over and over how violence is never acceptable, with the desperate purpose of tearing down Mandela and trashing him as a person of any worth, while proudly having the web-site of a "no-compomise gun lobby" in his signature. It's the standard, extreme and despicable hispocricy of right-wing nut-jobs like him. People like him will claim everyone and their dog has a right to own a gun, no matter the consequences (you know, everyone shooting each other up) so that they can protect themselves from the government. This same person condemns Mandela for using violence (after peaceful efforts failed) to try to stop a muderous, brutal, apartheid regime that committed atrocities against it's people through blatant racism. And so, Mandela is a bad man, even though 99% of his life was spent through unification, forgiving those people who persecuted him, and inevitably ending the apartheid. I wonder, in the twisted mind of SpamSandwich, if he would think Americans would have the right to use force (you know, being a lobbyist and all) if the US government became an apartheid government, and all that it entails. Whether the people that fought against that would be "muderers" or "heroes". I'm sure he would support an armed uprising for ALOT less. This hypocrisy also fits perfectly with his obsessive insistence that Mandella should also be defined as a communist, the worst kind of "bogeyman", another mental delusion of right-wing nutjobs who see "communism" everywhere they look, including defining a capitalist President like Obama as one.
I'm pretty sure there's an extremely simple explanation for all this- actually, the only possble exlanation. In short, SpamSandwich has xenophobic and racist tendencies himself. Mandela should be condemned for his actions (even though they brought so much good) because he was black, and because he does not fit SpamSandwich's preferred ideology. ie, he was't a right-wing, conservative, white guy, and therefore SpamSandwich will make all the effort possible to demonize Mandela, trash his legacy, and define him as a murder and a communist, 2 words that do not come to the mind of sane, rational, objective, decent people who look at the entirety of Mandela's life, and how he moved things forward in a massive way fighting against brutal injustice. There's a reason he's praised effusely by every single leader, and by pretty much everyone else- maybe if you tried to get past your toxic, hypocritical biases, and looked at things in an objective context, you would see what everyone else sees. Instead, you, and people like you will never do that. Nor will you ever have the decency, or class, to let someone like Mandela who served as an incredible role model for so many, be exempted from your mud-dragging tactics. No, that would be beyond you. You will continue to have racism and xenophobia define your opinions and outlook on everything, while vehemently denying that you're a racist, and pretending to be offended at the suggestion.
I'm done with this thread- there's a reason people like SpamSandwich don't voice their opinions in real-life, and resort to the internet because they know, deep down, how revolted people would be by what comes out of their mouths. On the internet, you can tear someone down all you want, using specious argumentation and deception, it's the easiest thing for cowards to do. I won't be coming back to this thread, but I just had to voice my disgust. I suggest the threads lock it.
I couldn't agree more, spamsandwhich has underlying racist connotations should one carefully read what he was saying. Which makes me wonder which side he would he choose had he been a German who followed hitler without questioning this wrongs. Right wings fascist tend to defend baseless things like not wanting to ban guns, He will never admit it but deep down he knows it. He will never be half the the man Mandela.
I couldn't agree more, spamsandwhich has underlying racist connotations should one carefully read what he was saying. Which makes me wonder which side he would he choose had he been a German who followed hitler without questioning this wrongs. Right wings fascist tend to defend baseless things like not wanting to ban guns, He will never admit it but deep down he knows it. He will never be half the the man Mandela.
Since I don't know you and you obviously don't know me, I ask you the following:
- Is it "right wing" or "fascist" to want as little government as possible in every facet of American life, more individual responsibility and no more wars? Fascism is radical authoritarian nationalism. How am I a fascist? In fact, a good argument could be made that the current US administration is partly fascist, partly corporatist, and certainly promotes elements of Marxism.
- I used to think things could be solved with violence when I was young (because of government propaganda), but I've never murdered anyone. Have you? Do you think a gun should ever be used to prevent violence? If not, then you'd have a hard time defending any kind of military or police force. If you think guns only cause violence, then why allow our politicians, police or military access to them?
- Mandela promoted violence to end violence. What did Martin Luther King promote and was he arguably more successful, even though he died promoting his beliefs?
I c
I couldn't agree more, spamsandwhich has underlying racist connotations should one carefully read what he was saying. Which makes me wonder which side he would he choose had he been a German who followed hitler without questioning this wrongs. Right wings fascist tend to defend baseless things like not wanting to ban guns, He will never admit it but deep down he knows it. He will never be half the the man Mandela.
He actually sounds like someone who doesn't take the national media's word for it.
I couldn't agree more, spamsandwhich has underlying racist connotations should one carefully read what he was saying. Which makes me wonder which side he would he choose had he been a German who followed hitler without questioning this wrongs. Right wings fascist tend to defend baseless things like not wanting to ban guns, He will never admit it but deep down he knows it. He will never be half the the man Mandela.
Godwin’s law in full force here. Don’t agree with me, I’ll hang Hitler or the Nazis around your neck. I WIN!
Both are true. Mandela was a violent revolutionary and a Communist. Bin Laden was trained by the CIA to repel the Russians.
The upshot from the US viewpoint should be that whenever we allow our military and politicians to interfere and involve us in the affairs of other nations, no good ever comes of it.
It is not true that Mandela was a communist. In fact he was against the ANC allying with te communists. But when the party did vote for it he was in favor because as he said (paraphrasing) that when you fight oppression you don't have the luxury of choosing your allies.
If you look at the fight against apartheid, it was the communist governments which assisted the people fighting it, while the western leaders (but to their credit, not the people) branded the apartheid revolutionaries terrorists and refused to help them.
Mandela's greatness derives as much from his fight against apartheid which involved morally questionable tactics which he himself was unhappy about, his great ability to drive a process of mercy after the fight was won as opposed to retribution, and his action of giving up power keeping the long term success of SA in mind over short term personal benefits.
It is not true that Mandela was a communist. In fact he was against the ANC allying with te communists. But when the party did vote for it he was in favor because as he said (paraphrasing) that when you fight oppression you don't have the luxury of choosing your allies.
If you look at the fight against apartheid, it was the communist governments which assisted the people fighting it, while the western leaders (but to their credit, not the people) branded the apartheid revolutionaries terrorists and refused to help them.
Mandela's greatness derives as much from his fight against apartheid which involved morally questionable tactics which he himself was unhappy about, his great ability to drive a process of mercy after the fight was won as opposed to retribution, and his action of giving up power keeping the long term success of SA in mind over short term personal benefits.
So, the message is... Collectivism and violence are acceptable? I'm struggling to see a positive message.
If there is a question about my disgust regarding apartheid, let there be no doubt. It's reprehensible and it should be noted that it is still practiced in other parts of the world and our government takes a hands-off approach there also. I don't believe the US need be the police for the world either, so I'll be clear about that while I'm at it.
Mandela is revered for one reason only, his (and Desmond Tutu’s) compromise and reconciliation with the Apartheid regime. He had the intellect to realize that South Africa would descend into possibly decades of bloody civil war without it. Had he chosen to do what Robert Mugabe did in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), that is kick the Colonial Europeans out and confiscate their property for redistribution, South Africa would be mired in the same economic cesspool today that infects other African nations. And just like the civil rights struggle in the U.S. the blacks of South Africa have a long way to go to achieve parity with the remnants of the former regime who still control much of the wealth in the country. It ain’t over by a long shot. Mandela’s successors can still screw it up.
Mandela is revered for one reason only, his (and Desmond Tutu’s) compromise and reconciliation with the Apartheid regime. He had the intellect to realize that South Africa would descend into possibly decades of bloody civil war without it. Had he chosen to do what Robert Mugabe did in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), that is kick the Colonial Europeans out and confiscate their property for redistribution, South Africa would be mired in the same economic cesspool today that infects other African nations. And just like the civil rights struggle in the U.S. the blacks of South Africa have a long way to go to achieve parity with the remnants of the former regime who still control much of the wealth in the country. It ain’t over by a long shot. Mandela’s successors can still screw it up.
This past week I was pleasantly surprised to find that BBC radio coverage of the passing of Mandela was quite evenhanded. They openly discussed his early revolutionary violence phase as well as the statesman he eventually became. Both parts of the man's history need to be acknowledged... something our media seem unwilling to do.
So anyone born in Moscow between 1917 and 1989 isn't from the Soviet Union?
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say "that's a real dickish comment" i.e., you're showing so much ignorance your membership on AI should be revoked.
At least I can block you here. Isn't science grand?
My point was that they're not from the Soviet Union NOW! There isn't a Soviet Union as of 2013 that anybody can currently be a citizen of now.
Oh, and for the record, the Soviet Union didn't officially come into being till Dec 1922, so somebody born between 1917 and Dec 1922 wasn't born in the Soviet Union at the time.
So anyone born in Moscow between 1917 and 1989 isn't from the Soviet Union?
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say "that's a real dickish comment" i.e., you're showing so much ignorance your membership on AI should be revoked.
At least I can block you here. Isn't science grand?
From can mean both a point in space. ChiA certainly could have been more clear but you also could have not assumed it meant a time, instead of a place. Anecdotally I'd say it's likely the most common ambiguous preposition used where both the reader and writer tend to consider only one meaning so perhaps we should all be more vigilant from this point forward.
edit: Maybe it was gabberattack that could have been less ambiguous. Screw it, I'm not going to back to read where this all started.
You know Apple did something right when someone like you, with a history of bigotry, racism, xenophobia, and class warfare, has a problem with it. Oh, and this isn't "politics". The legacy of a transformative figure like Nelson Mandela transcends politics, countries, and boundaries- but that's not something someone like you would ever understand, acknowledge, or appreciate. Stick to discussing Apple, because with any other topic that has anything to do with humanity you show an unflattering image of your character.
Good on Apple for confidently proclaiming and asserting it's values, and what it believes, even while it exposes itself to misguided and baseless criticism from the minority. The fact that it does so, so prominently, says alot about the company.
I'm not going to back to read where this all started.
My point was, when someone says "I'm from 'x'", it's fairly dickish to say 'no you aren't' when you've never even left moms basement or grad school.
It's so pointless ignorant and trolling and only reflects the ignorance of the person saying "he can't be from there it doesn't exist anymore" - and they then proceed to tell me how things were there, when they never were there and the other person was there.
Comments
Carrying on with our tangential pedantry,
Gabberattack used the present tense, I am from Czechoslovakia, not I was born in Czechoslovakia.
It made me wonder because, as you've pointed out, despite Czechoslovakia not existing for the past 21 years, there are people who still think it exists.
It just seemed odd relating your current position to what was past.
It's like a Kazakh stating I am from the Soviet Union.
You can take that statement one stage further by declaring Gabberattack is from the Austro-Hungarian empire, which will be as odd.
Nevertheless, given the context, we can give the benefit of the doubt that Gabberattack was underlining their experience of communism in Czechoslovakia.
Going on another tangent, I met somebody who's family lived in one area for generations.
His grandfather was in the Austro-Hungarian army, his father was in the Italian army, he was in the Yugoslav army and his son currently serves in the Croatian army. It underlines just how the political map in that region changed so much so quickly.
Man, everyone knows Czechoslovakia was a communist country, when the country split the commies were 3 years gone. How is it important to the topic of the discussion which part of the country I am from if the communist regime was in Czechoslovakia and not in Czech republic or Slovakia?
The worst part is now Nelson Mandela won't be in a Fast & Furious sequel.
We'll always have Paul Walker... oh, wait...
I wasn't debating whether Czechoslovakia was a communist country, please read my posts carefully again.
Another point to consider is that adults who are now in their late thirties would have only experienced as adults the final days of the communist regime.
It is only those in their late forties or older who can narrate what their direct experience, as adults, of several years of the communist system.
As for your second question, it is very relevant when you look back to the events of 1948 and how people view how the communists to power in the first place.
In any case, it's not relevant to the main topic.
I c
I couldn't agree more, spamsandwhich has underlying racist connotations should one carefully read what he was saying. Which makes me wonder which side he would he choose had he been a German who followed hitler without questioning this wrongs. Right wings fascist tend to defend baseless things like not wanting to ban guns, He will never admit it but deep down he knows it. He will never be half the the man Mandela.
Since I don't know you and you obviously don't know me, I ask you the following:
- Is it "right wing" or "fascist" to want as little government as possible in every facet of American life, more individual responsibility and no more wars? Fascism is radical authoritarian nationalism. How am I a fascist? In fact, a good argument could be made that the current US administration is partly fascist, partly corporatist, and certainly promotes elements of Marxism.
- I used to think things could be solved with violence when I was young (because of government propaganda), but I've never murdered anyone. Have you? Do you think a gun should ever be used to prevent violence? If not, then you'd have a hard time defending any kind of military or police force. If you think guns only cause violence, then why allow our politicians, police or military access to them?
- Mandela promoted violence to end violence. What did Martin Luther King promote and was he arguably more successful, even though he died promoting his beliefs?
He actually sounds like someone who doesn't take the national media's word for it.
I c
I couldn't agree more, spamsandwhich has underlying racist connotations should one carefully read what he was saying. Which makes me wonder which side he would he choose had he been a German who followed hitler without questioning this wrongs. Right wings fascist tend to defend baseless things like not wanting to ban guns, He will never admit it but deep down he knows it. He will never be half the the man Mandela.
Godwin’s law in full force here. Don’t agree with me, I’ll hang Hitler or the Nazis around your neck. I WIN!
Dumbass.
It is not true that Mandela was a communist. In fact he was against the ANC allying with te communists. But when the party did vote for it he was in favor because as he said (paraphrasing) that when you fight oppression you don't have the luxury of choosing your allies.
If you look at the fight against apartheid, it was the communist governments which assisted the people fighting it, while the western leaders (but to their credit, not the people) branded the apartheid revolutionaries terrorists and refused to help them.
Mandela's greatness derives as much from his fight against apartheid which involved morally questionable tactics which he himself was unhappy about, his great ability to drive a process of mercy after the fight was won as opposed to retribution, and his action of giving up power keeping the long term success of SA in mind over short term personal benefits.
After reading these last few comments I'm glad I didn't read the thread. Yikes!
LMAO!
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
It is not true that Mandela was a communist. In fact he was against the ANC allying with te communists. But when the party did vote for it he was in favor because as he said (paraphrasing) that when you fight oppression you don't have the luxury of choosing your allies.
If you look at the fight against apartheid, it was the communist governments which assisted the people fighting it, while the western leaders (but to their credit, not the people) branded the apartheid revolutionaries terrorists and refused to help them.
Mandela's greatness derives as much from his fight against apartheid which involved morally questionable tactics which he himself was unhappy about, his great ability to drive a process of mercy after the fight was won as opposed to retribution, and his action of giving up power keeping the long term success of SA in mind over short term personal benefits.
So, the message is... Collectivism and violence are acceptable? I'm struggling to see a positive message.
If there is a question about my disgust regarding apartheid, let there be no doubt. It's reprehensible and it should be noted that it is still practiced in other parts of the world and our government takes a hands-off approach there also. I don't believe the US need be the police for the world either, so I'll be clear about that while I'm at it.
Mandela is revered for one reason only, his (and Desmond Tutu’s) compromise and reconciliation with the Apartheid regime. He had the intellect to realize that South Africa would descend into possibly decades of bloody civil war without it. Had he chosen to do what Robert Mugabe did in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), that is kick the Colonial Europeans out and confiscate their property for redistribution, South Africa would be mired in the same economic cesspool today that infects other African nations. And just like the civil rights struggle in the U.S. the blacks of South Africa have a long way to go to achieve parity with the remnants of the former regime who still control much of the wealth in the country. It ain’t over by a long shot. Mandela’s successors can still screw it up.
Mandela is revered for one reason only, his (and Desmond Tutu’s) compromise and reconciliation with the Apartheid regime. He had the intellect to realize that South Africa would descend into possibly decades of bloody civil war without it. Had he chosen to do what Robert Mugabe did in Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe), that is kick the Colonial Europeans out and confiscate their property for redistribution, South Africa would be mired in the same economic cesspool today that infects other African nations. And just like the civil rights struggle in the U.S. the blacks of South Africa have a long way to go to achieve parity with the remnants of the former regime who still control much of the wealth in the country. It ain’t over by a long shot. Mandela’s successors can still screw it up.
This past week I was pleasantly surprised to find that BBC radio coverage of the passing of Mandela was quite evenhanded. They openly discussed his early revolutionary violence phase as well as the statesman he eventually became. Both parts of the man's history need to be acknowledged... something our media seem unwilling to do.
So anyone born in Moscow between 1917 and 1989 isn't from the Soviet Union?
My point was that they're not from the Soviet Union NOW! There isn't a Soviet Union as of 2013 that anybody can currently be a citizen of now.
Oh, and for the record, the Soviet Union didn't officially come into being till Dec 1922, so somebody born between 1917 and Dec 1922 wasn't born in the Soviet Union at the time.
From can mean both a point in space. ChiA certainly could have been more clear but you also could have not assumed it meant a time, instead of a place. Anecdotally I'd say it's likely the most common ambiguous preposition used where both the reader and writer tend to consider only one meaning so perhaps we should all be more vigilant from this point forward.
edit: Maybe it was gabberattack that could have been less ambiguous. Screw it, I'm not going to back to read where this all started.
This is yet another bad decision taken by Apple.
Apple should stay out of politics.
You know Apple did something right when someone like you, with a history of bigotry, racism, xenophobia, and class warfare, has a problem with it. Oh, and this isn't "politics". The legacy of a transformative figure like Nelson Mandela transcends politics, countries, and boundaries- but that's not something someone like you would ever understand, acknowledge, or appreciate. Stick to discussing Apple, because with any other topic that has anything to do with humanity you show an unflattering image of your character.
Good on Apple for confidently proclaiming and asserting it's values, and what it believes, even while it exposes itself to misguided and baseless criticism from the minority. The fact that it does so, so prominently, says alot about the company.
where was:
google
microsoft
walmart
facebook
samsung
amazon (no surprises here).
Steve would be proud of Apple for doing this.
My point was, when someone says "I'm from 'x'", it's fairly dickish to say 'no you aren't' when you've never even left moms basement or grad school.
It's so pointless ignorant and trolling and only reflects the ignorance of the person saying "he can't be from there it doesn't exist anymore" - and they then proceed to tell me how things were there, when they never were there and the other person was there.