Did you know you can buy land on the moon?

Chris Jones wrote:

So, they practiced communism and suffered (of course, they were also
newcomers with strange ideas, which could also account for some
failure). As they grew, they went to a private property system. Both
seem eminently reasonable choices to me. But that's not what we
celebrate at Thanksgiving, it's a harvest feast,

And that harvest feast was brought to them - and you - thanks to the
realization that collective farming (and virtually all other
collectivized endeavors) sucks and privatization pays.

What a holiday has become does not change what it originally was. Just
as Christmas in actual fact has little to nothing to do with
Christianity, but is a rip-off of pre-Christian Mithra-worship.

--
Scott Lowther, Engineer
Remove the obvious (capitalized) anti-spam
gibberish from the reply-to e-mail address

Scott Lowther writes:

What a holiday has become does not change what it originally was. Just
as Christmas in actual fact has little to nothing to do with
Christianity, but is a rip-off of pre-Christian Mithra-worship.

Yes, when we stick to facts, we find we agree on almost everything,
maybe even everything. It's our political beliefs that differ. I'm
sure you've noticed.

"Brian Thorn" wrote in message
...
And when the US began the effort to eliminate slavery, Britain very
nearly came down in support of the side that was trying to continue
it.

Although Britain had eliminated it decades before.
--
If you have had problems with Illinois Student Assistance Commission (ISAC),
please contact shredder at bellsouth dot net. There may be a class-action
lawsuit
in the works.

"Scott Lowther" wrote in message
...
Stuf4 wrote:
How many of these Natives have even survived?

More of 'em today than back then.

Scott, this is just one more example of Stuffie's complete inability to do
any research whatsoever before posting. The only difference between stuffie
and hallerb is that stuffie at least makes the attempt to spell.

Having spent several years surrounded by reservations and working
side-by-side with *Indians*- the preferred name, by the way, as I was
informed by an Indian that, if I was born an American, I'm also a *native
American*- Stuffie's rant was nothing more than complete and absolute
horse**** promoted by Indian-wannabes and those who have decided to feel
guilty about something their ancestors did. Spend some time with real
Indians and listen to what they *really* say before posting, Stuffie. But
then, you won't be able to because you'd **** them off long before you'd
have the opportunity to learn anything.
--
If you have had problems with Illinois Student Assistance Commission (ISAC),
please contact shredder at bellsouth dot net. There may be a class-action
lawsuit
in the works.

In article ,
Brian Thorn wrote:
It's not like slavery was something only the US thought of. They were
just a bit slower to get rid of it than most of the rest of the world.

And when the US began the effort to eliminate slavery, Britain very
nearly came down in support of the side that was trying to continue it.

Indeed so, out of economic interests, assorted grievances with the USA,
and the (erroneous) belief that the social system of the CSA was closer to
that of Europe. But slavery was the big reason why they hesitated,
delayed a decision, and eventually decided not to get involved. They'd
have sided with the South instantly if there hadn't been that one big sore
point.
--
MOST launched 30 June; first light, 29 July; 5arcsec | Henry Spencer
pointing, 10 Sept; first science, early Oct; all well. |

In article ,
Scott Lowther wrote:
It's not like slavery was something only the US thought of. They were
just a bit slower to get rid of it than most of the rest of the world.

Wow... way to be HORRIBLY wrong there, Henry. Slavery remained a common
enoguh state of things until quite recently, and still goes on in many
places.

Name three countries where it's *legal*. Of course it goes on illegally,
including (a little bit) in the US. But if (somewhat dim) memory serves,
at the time the issue was decided in the US, the only other substantial
country where slavery remained legal was Brazil, and it finally joined the
civilized world in the 1880s.

Unless, of course, you think that "the rest of the world" really only
means European civilization... and even then you're wrong. I'm no math
wiz, but I'm pretty sure 1865 came *before* 1945...

You're going to have to explain why 1945 was so magic. If you're
including servitude to governments as "slavery", bear in mind that most of
the Allied troops who liberated Europe were conscripts. (Canada was the
only substantial participant which made an effort to use only volunteers
as combat troops, and that was motivated by touchy domestic political
issues, not moral considerations.) I'm afraid I don't see any great
turning point there... especially given some of the things that happened
in Eastern Europe thereafter.
--
MOST launched 30 June; first light, 29 July; 5arcsec | Henry Spencer
pointing, 10 Sept; first science, early Oct; all well. |

From Scott Lowther:
Stuf4 wrote:

I'd say that the bright student sees through the propaganda to realize
that during such transfer of "title", there was no consent by the vast
majority of those who were using the land at the time of "purchase".

And nor was there need to. Just ask 'em... the Native Americans "had no
concept of land ownership," as we're so often told. Consequently, they
were not the owners of the land.

I was very deliberate in choosing the phrase "using the land" (as
opposed to "owning the land").

Curious that you see no need for consent in US takeover of the land.
So why not just take over *all* the land? What's the point of the
"reservations"? They could be loaded up on boats and shipped off to
some place like Guantanamo.

"Problem" "solved".


~ CT

From Chris Jones:
Scott Lowther writes:

Stuf4 wrote:
There's a strange irony in the US tradition of "Thanksgiving".
Schoolkids are taught that this is a feast to commemorate how European
settlers celebrated with the Natives.

When in actual fact, it's a celebration of privatization over the
geno-suicidal disaster that is communism.

Where DO you get your actual facts? I think they must come to you out
of thin air.

I also question the statement: "More of 'em today than back then."

It would be interesting to see how the percentage has changed over time.

(Remember, the Native population started at 100%.)


~ CT

In article ,
Chris Jones writes:
Scott Lowther writes:

Chris Jones wrote:

Scott Lowther writes:

Stuf4 wrote:
There's a strange irony in the US tradition of "Thanksgiving".
Schoolkids are taught that this is a feast to commemorate how European
settlers celebrated with the Natives.

When in actual fact, it's a celebration of privatization over the
geno-suicidal disaster that is communism.

Where DO you get your actual facts?

Here's a good preliminary source:
http://www.mises.org/fullstory.asp?c...sgivin g+Hoax

If you don't believe it, read Bradford's "Of Plimouth Plantation," and
see what he has to say about how they increased crop production. Here's
a hint: they ahda communal system, and were starving... then swtiched
to privatization, and had plenty.

Scott, Scott, Scott! I need no convincing that the Puritanical
colonists of Plimouth Plantation were loons. Despite living so close to
their disembarkation point, I, and almost all the current inhabitants of
Massachusetts, have almost nothing in common with them besides whichever
laws we choose to share (an ever decreasing, though I will admit not
vanishing, amount).

Whoa there, Hoss! The Plymouth Pilgrims may have been Loons, but they
were most certainly _not_ Puritans!

The Plymouth Pilgrims were fairly normal, fun loving English Folk, who
had comitted teh Capital Crime (And it was a Capital Crime back then,
you'd have your head cut off or be hung for it) of Not Belonging to
the Church of England.
(As an example of Fun-Loving, they spent the first couple of years
living 100 to a room. And a lot of kids were born during that
time. (No Cable TV, I'd say) One of the most important people in the
colony was the Brewer and Cooper, John Alden.

THey enjoyed all manner of frivolity, didn't mind owning nice stuff,
and got along with everybody, (Including the Indians - Massasoit's
tribe wasn't in the greatest position, locally - they'd lost a lot of
population to disease, and their neighbors, the Peace (Peace is what
we want and do have, and a piece of all that you have!) loving Pequods
and Mohegans (Mohicans) were eyeing his terretory like a German gazing
at Poland. Massasoit found that having a bunch of Large Guys With
Guns as your friends was a very nice thing.) except the interloping,
humorless, greedy filthy Puritans up to Massachusetts Bay (Boston
Harbor). The Puritans were the Rats in the Wainscotting of teh Church
of England. Their goal was to subvert the CoE, taking it over for
their own foul gain. They viewed the Pilgrims with an equal level of
loathing.

The Family Journals make mention of the time that the Puritans decided
to imprison John Alden on no charges whatsoever, other than the Heresy
of Breathing. Miles Standish was tasked with going up to Boston and
springing him. This was indeed done, although the Journals allude to
the concern that Miles was possible losing his grip, as Boston wasn't
razed to the ground, and the Puritans of Military Age weren't either
captured or crippled. It turns out he'd been studying this thing
called Diplomacy...

So, they practiced communism and suffered (of course, they were also
newcomers with strange ideas, which could also account for some
failure). As they grew, they went to a private property system. Both
seem eminently reasonable choices to me. But that's not what we
celebrate at Thanksgiving, it's a harvest feast, and we give thanks we
have enough to make it through the winter, and we also give thanks for
all the other things that bless our lives. I put them in that order
intentionally.

Well, the 100 to a Room thing was a little strange, but not too much
different than your average College Dormitory in the 1970s. One of
the stranger ideas for that time was Representative Democracy. (As
opposed to the way that the Brit Parliament was run at the time -
M.P.s weeren't supposed to be representing their Boroughs, but the
Empire as a whole. The average Englishman had no representation
whatsoever. (Which leads us to that whole 1776 thing. I'm sure that
will come up later.) That of course, never caught on.

FOr those who are noodling about Space Colonies, adn the Dynamics
thereof, the early days of the North American colonization would make
a good study.

--
Pete Stickney
Descendant of the Carvers, Bradfords, Mullens, Aldens, and Dotys of
Plymouth.

In article , Henry Spencer wrote:
In article ,
Scott Lowther wrote:
It's not like slavery was something only the US thought of. They were
just a bit slower to get rid of it than most of the rest of the world.

Wow... way to be HORRIBLY wrong there, Henry. Slavery remained a common
enoguh state of things until quite recently, and still goes on in many
places.

Name three countries where it's *legal*. Of course it goes on illegally,
including (a little bit) in the US. But if (somewhat dim) memory serves,
at the time the issue was decided in the US, the only other substantial
country where slavery remained legal was Brazil, and it finally joined the
civilized world in the 1880s.

Of course, there was all the even stranger legislation in the ealry half
of the c19th, when people were banning the trade, but not slavery, or
vice versa.

You're going to have to explain why 1945 was so magic. If you're
including servitude to governments as "slavery", bear in mind that most of
the Allied troops who liberated Europe were conscripts. (Canada was the
only substantial participant which made an effort to use only volunteers
as combat troops, and that was motivated by touchy domestic political
issues, not moral considerations.) I'm afraid I don't see any great
turning point there... especially given some of the things that happened
in Eastern Europe thereafter.

I believe he would be referring to the significant amounts of slave
labour used in Germany. This was, mind, a reintroduction not a
continuation...

--
-Andrew Gray