h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

A525278

F47997?thread=302220

You have a point.

But I'm scared of Mugwumps!

You really should be

I can't promise it will help, but I'll defend your point

thank you very much.

Don't confuse yourself. I'm getting out of there if Blatherskith comes

Uch... can't spell...

Anhaga.

This is what the response to my posted suggestion: F47997?thread=302220

Since, as I mentioned, I don't intend to write it for them, I went to Update Headquarters. I hope you don't mind, but I added the text of your posting to my "Suggestion for Update" remarks at: F60915?thread=303316

I think it strengthens my argument that something is missing to have this backed up by your comments (which were, admittedly, made before mine). I also didn't think you wanted to be the iceberg.

Mudhooks:

I think you might be labouring under a misapprehension about how the editing process works around here. Blatherskite wrote an original entry on the Constitution. It went through Peer Review, was recommended by a Scout, and was edited by a Sub-editor. All of these people are ordinary researchers like you and I. Then the entry, long since out of Blatherskite's hands, went to the editorial staff at the BBC. Jimster is one of these. The conversation we've been having at Editorial Feedback has been with the BBC -- Blatherskite, the original researcher, probably doesn't know anything about the conversation. All Jimster (who likely had nothing to do with the original entry and is sitting in London anyway) can do is make small changes of a few words or maybe a sentence, unless a researcher such as you or I provides a passage which can be inserted in a specific place as either an addition or a replacement for a specific passage. Most of this was in Jimster's post, anyway. This is going to take a while, but I'm pretty sure that the corrections we're suggesting will be taken care of (one already has been taken care of). Now, I don't know as much about the Six Nations contribution as you do, so it would probably make sense for you to write a quick passage about the Six Nations contribution and post it back to Jimster with a suggested position for placement. I suspect that going through Update Central will just take longer.

I see...

Being relatively new, I wasn't really aware of what Blatherskite wasn't doing the actual editing.... or this part of it.

I guess I will have to do a little work on it. Thanks for 'splaining it to me.

Ps... what is with this page???? I'm not sure if you see it spread all over the screen, but I do.

Fricking computers.... I just spent an hour writing and was just going to do my spell check before posting and blink.... My computer froze and I lost it. ARGGGGGGhhhhh

Would it help if I asked Blatherskite to amend his entry? Me and him are on excellent terms except he likes to yike me and then lie about it, but other than that I trusting we could come to some sort of accommodation, maybe even get the whole wretched piece of crap stricken from the record until such time as he gets a clue.

As an edited entry, it's out of Blatherskite's hands and in the hands of the BBC. I doubt that it would help to talk to Blatherskite about it. Unless he actually was on our side. . .

On a different subject, one that I just brought up on the "It's Saddam, It's Bush" thread, what do you think of Mr. Bremer's idea of bringing democracy to Iraq by siezing all public assets and selling them to private interests without bothering to consult with the owners of those assets, the Iraqi people? Does it remind you of any other colonial asset-grabs?

Of course it does, Anhaga. It's THE colonial asset grab. That's what colonialism is after all. It's also what I've been trying to get through to people for months.

You want to know what's going to happen? Just look at the "Winning of the West". They're doing it all over again except they ran out of frontier in 1916, so it's global now. And as long as people think they should want those assets, they're going to get them no matter who it hurts.

But everyone should know we've been put on this earth to serve Americans. It should be obvious. That's what Blatherskite thinks I reckon and it shows.

And it also should be obvious the American government doesn't even bother to try to disguise it anymore since they're probably convinced that the American people don't care or will go along with virtually anything. They went along with Bush's legitimization as president did they not?

That was probably the first clue about what was possible. Now we're going to see Vietnamization all over the place, no holds barred. Who's going to stop them?

Sadly, I can't imagine the American people stopping them. I do draw some hope from the careers of both Napoleon and Hitler: Empires do over-extend themselves sometimes, and Mr. Bush seems an exceptionally hasty emperor. I'm saddened, however, that the Spanish and the Poles have begun to move into southern Iraq to give the Americans and British a rest. It's also sad that the Canadians are moving into Kabul to give the Germans a rest from giving the Americans a rest, expecially since the Taliban are still in power in large parts of Afghanistan (and a good deal of Kabul) and the "government" doesn't have any power anywhere. Thank goodness for that intervention.

I think it is up to the rest of the world to stop them. If the rest of the world doesn't clean up the messes, then the U. S. will become vastly overextended and collapse, or it will simply turn into a bunch of robber-hooligans with no pretense of honour and they will become pariahs.

blah blah blah to the converted.

The problem is the elite in the rest of the world believe the lies and will sellout their own people to get a piece of the action.

Somehow the paradigm needs to change from favoring the selfish greed of the few to doing what's best for whole communities. If it only works for a few, even if the few constitute a majority or plurality, that's good enough. And it probably needs to start at the family level too which have been most injured by this "enterprise of enterprises".

Maybe the youth can be convinced that their rebellions shouldn't be against their families but against the enterprises that keep their families in turmoil. To rebel against corporate authority wherever they encounter it. To use the American phrase, "Hold their feet to the fire", denounce the hypocrisy, dispute the lies, keep them in court trying the issues, and maybe even fighting the thugs in the streets.

Those with the most power to resist will be the least likely to risk things. They're going to be the ones toughest to convince. It doesn't look promising but the alternative looks even less promising. Maybe that insight can triumph over self-deception finally.

It's interesting to see what you find when you enter your name into a search window.

I am a fairly good history student, but I'm not omniscient. I had no idea about either the Six Nations thing or about Iceland. If I'd been notified about them, I would have looked into them. Offhand I'd say the Six Nations would have merited inclusion in the development, alongside Rousseau. But they would not have had a written constitution, and I tied together the two: a written social contract that guaranteed a democratic system.

But if the only problem was that I said the US was the first "true democracy" since Athens, fear not. I've already come to regret that sentence, since it was pointed out to me that the US is not a true democracy... and I concur.

But thanks for all the kind words in my absence.

RAF: If you ever asked me if I'd yikesed you, and I had, I'd tell you. But thanks for the kind words anyway.