At 07:44 AM 6/22/01 -0000 Ritu Ko wrote:
>�Given that the context of the discussion clearly concerns nations, and not
>races, I don't know how any interpretation other than "political system" is
>possible.�
>
>Well, the answer lies in your original statement:
>
>�Well, considering that 25% of the World is Chinese, and we don't know how
>*they* really think.�
>
>I think if you had used the word �what� instead of �how�, the confusion
>wouldn�t have arisen.
Ummmmm........ o.k. In America, or at least the parts of America I am
from, we have a colloquialism that equates "how you think" with "what you
think" as sometimes being interchangeable phrases . At least among people
I am used to talking to, the context should have tipped off the meaning
that this was a political, and not a biological discussion.
So I guess that explains how you became confused, Ritu, but I am still
deeply disturbed as to how many other Brin-L'ers could seriously believe
that I considered an entire race of people as incapable of thinking.
At 01:06 AM 6/22/01 -0700 Christopher Gwyn wrote:
> i do note that since there are people who call themselves 'Chinese'
>(and who are referred to others as 'Chinese') living in Taiwan,
>Indonesia, Vietnam, Australia, Britain, France, the U.S., Canada, and
>elsewhere the term 'Chinese' does not clearly describes any political
>grouping. (certainly not any 'non-racial' grouping.)
Yes, the term Chinese can apply to a race or a citizenship. I would have
hoped that the citizenship context would have immediately appeared much
more logical coming from me than the racial context.
JDG - But apparently not.......
JDG
__________________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - ICQ #3527685
We are products of the same history, reaching from Jerusalem and
Athens to Warsaw and Washington. We share more than an alliance.
We share a civilization. - George W. Bush, Warsaw, 06/15/01
