[SpamCop-List] Re: The chinese own spam

[Miss Betsy]

"Marjolein Katsma" <nobody at spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:Xns94DD7CA3BBCEFhomesitehelp at 216.154.195.61...
> Miss Betsy (nobody at spamcop.net) wrote in news:c715pn$rr7$1
> @news.spamcop.net:
>
> > race:  any of the different varieties of mankind, distinguished
by
> > form of hair color of skin and eyes, stature, bodily
proportions,
> > etc.; many anthropologists now consider that there are only
three
> > primary major groups, the Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid,
each
> > with various subdivisions.  The term has acquire so many
> > unscientifict connotations that in this sense it is often
replaced
> > in scientific usgage by ethnic stock or group.
>
> Those "many anthropologists" surely are a minority, and don't
agree with
> current scientific thinking, certainly not current scientific
thinking
> in biology and genetics (or linguists, for that matter).
>
> > So I was using the 'scientific' definition of race in layman's
> > terms.
>
> No, you're using an entirely unscientific definition.

No, I am using a scientific definition, perhaps an old one since
genetics is  used by the anthropologists now to determine ethnic
stock.

> > It is a nation.  It has one seat in the United Nations.  It has
one
> > government.
>
> No, it's a *country*. Just having a government or having a seat
in the
> United Nations doesn't *make* it a nation. They, themselves,
recognize
> different nationalities (though fewer than they should).

There is no particular difference in the usage of nation and
country in American English.  However, I do understand your
distinction.  In the US, we do have the various Indian Nations
which is what you are describing (they do have territory and to
some extent their own law).
However, they are all US citizens.  If they travel, they get US
passports.  There are some immigrants to the US who live together
with other people from the same ethnic group in communities where
the language and the customs are from that ethnic group (Chinatown
is a good example).  Some of them may not be US citizens; some are
born here and so are US citizens.  However, they are not "nations"
within the US.

>
> > Racism is prejudice of one race for another.
>
> Exactly. That's why it is the same thing as your PC "ethnic
prejudice".
> You confuse ethnicity with nationailty.

It is not the same.  Some people are prejudiced against Hispanics,
no matter where they come from - Mexico, Chile, Argentina, Peru.
Others may have nothing against South Americans, but perceive that
*all* Mexicans are the same and include people who have emigrated
to Mexico (and who are not from the same ethnic background) in that
definition.

And prejudice against 'Hispanics' is not racial since they are
mostly Caucasiod just as most of the people who are prejudiced
against them are (in the US).  In fact, some of the prejudiced
people could have similar national roots as the ones they are
prejudiced against; however, now both have been assimilated into
different cultures.

In the US, there is enmity in some areas between black teenage
gangs and Mexican teenage gangs and neither one trusts 'white'
authority (which includes both black and Hispanic people).  There
is no 'racial' prejudice here, but ethnic (as in coming from
different cultures).

> That would mean seeing all citizens of China as the same - well,
that's
> racist, too. Because they aren't. Call it "reverse racism" but
it's
> still racism.

All citizens of China share something in common, no matter what
their ethnic (or racial) origins.  Presumably, Chinese ISP's can be
of different backgrounds, but they are lumped together as Chinese
because they operate within the territory of China.

> China is *not* "a stable, historically developed community of
people
> with a territory". It's a large number of very different
communities,
> with very *different* cultures, certainly not a language in
common, and
> inseveral areas not all that stable either. NOTE: many people in
China
> do not even speak Chinese, let alone being able to read or write
it.

You are quibbling.  Many people within US borders do not speak
English.  They are unlikely to be running an internet network.
Perhaps some of the parts of China that do not speak Chinese are
developed enough to have network admins (just as there are some
Indian Nations in the US who could have their own networks).

You are quibbling about being stable also.  Are there not parts of
Europe that have been over the years parts of different
governments?  Like Alsace-Lorraine?  Is that area a different
'nation' because of its history? Are the citizens of that area a
different 'race' from their neighbors?

Genetically, I believe there are different 'races' among some of
the peoples in China you mentioned - which I have already pointed
out.

If you are going to debate with people, then you need to use
commonly defined definitions - not your personal definitions.

Miss Betsy