Posted by Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. from pcp676434pcs.olathe01.ks.comcast.net (68.46.240.100) on Wednesday, August 21, 2002 at 6:04PM :

In Reply to: Re: Mexico posted by Jake from ? (206.212.89.240) on Wednesday, August 21, 2002 at 5:08AM :

>>Mexico has a different culture, political philosophy and level of economic development. This is not a "land grab" proposal.

>>Canada and the US share a common ancestor, history and culture. Mexico does not.<<

I am not sure if I agree with that. The U.S. is, in many respects, becoming a Latin American country. Because of its proximity to Mexico, Spanish has long been a secondary language (though frequently denied) in the U.S.

In addition, within thirty years, Latinos will be the numerical majority in the U.S. Reactionary pundits, such as Pat Buchanan, recognize that eventuality and are trying to reverse it by declaring a temporary moratorium on immigration.

Cheers, Mark A. Foster, Ph.D.

posted at 05:05:05 PM by Dr. Mark A. Foster

>>colour is english and color is american.<<

Most differences between American and British spellings come from Noah Webster, the compiler of the first Webster's Dictionary.

Webster wanted English to look more like it sounded. For instance, he changed the British realisation to realization. Unfortunately, he did not live long enough to finish his worthy project.

posted at 08:20:46 PM by Dr. Mark A. Foster

If the objective is a purely economic union, I can see excluding, at least for the time being, Mexico from a "United North America." However, if the goal is the establishment of a political union of North America, something which does not fully exist in Europe, then I do not see how Mexico can be excluded - even in the first stages.

If Canada, Mexico, and the United States are to share a common federal government, the addition of political power can allow that government to be more "liberal" in terms of who is included. In other words, in a purely economic union (such as the EU, with its somewhat restrictive policies), its members can be more easily threatened by economic disparities than in a confederation which is both political and economic.

posted at 12:18:53 PM by Dr. Mark A. Foster

>>I have always wondered how the American term "gas" instead of "petrol" came about?<<

As Meggie said, gas is short for gasoline.

Gasoline is the technical name for the petroleum by-product which is used to power automobiles.

Actually, petrol is not really an abbreviation for petroleum (even though the word "petrol" is derived from "petroleum"). Petrol is the British, Canadian, Australian, etc. nickname for gasoline (or "gas," the American nickname).

---

Overall, I like the idea of an "NAU" (North American Union), like the EU in Europe (re: the site: http://www.unitednorthamerica.org).

However, why is Mexico excluded? Because it is a "Third World" country? Because English is not one of its major languages?

In addition, in any "NAU," measures must be taken to assure that the United States would not achieve an even greater degree of cultural hegemony over its neighbors to the south and north.

Cheers, Mark A. Foster

A native New Yorker living in Kansas

posted at 09:59:30 AM by Dr. Mark A. Foster

to hannity@foxnews.com

cc

subject Tricks of the Devil????

memo I just wanted to offer my two cents on Shawn Hannity's reference to the devil on his show last night.

While I respect Mr. Hannity's right to credit any religious dogmas likes, to promote them on a new commentary show is, in my view, highly inappropriate.

Mr. Hannity, in an interview with Franklin Graham, said that the biggest trick of the devil is to convince people that he does not exist.

I am fairly certain that, given Mr. Hannity's apparently fundamentalist Christian religious beliefs, he will regard me as someone who is tricked by the devil, too. However, I did not see how I could let this one pass by without comment.

Cheers, Mark A. Foster, Ph.D.

posted at 03:07:27 AM by Dr. Mark A. Foster

>>although in the ST community I think DS9 is not regarded as the best<<

Yes, which is one reason I have never wished to get involved with the ST community.

One of the reasons I like both B5 and DS9 is because of the "mysticism" which is built into both shows (especially B5). With respect to DS9, none of that would have happened while Roddenbury was still alive.

In terms of which came first: Yeah, it was DS9. However, I agree with the critics who have suggested that, after B5 became popular, DS9, struggling with less-than-noteworthy Nielson ratings, decided to adopt some of the themes found on B5. I actually remember when those changes were first implemented.

posted at 08:57:54 PM by Dr. Mark A. Foster

Richard Perl says that we should seize the oil fields from Iraq - then go into Saudi Arabia and seize their oil fields.

I say, lets hope that some country with a bit of sense comes into the United States and seizes control over Washington.

posted at 01:24:30 PM by Dr. Mark A. Foster

>>If there WAS a Marxist running where I live the last federal election, I would have chosen them too. However, only the big metro centres have candidates <<

Cool. I have observed the growing popularity of anarchism, especially on the Internet. Like many Marxists, I find anarchism highly objectionable.

However, I have noticed that most people I run into who call themselves anarchists do not really know what the term means. For instance, some people appear to believe that labelling oneself an anarchist is little more than a license to do whatever one wants. That view may approximate some extreme forms of libertarianism (though I doubt most libertarians would even go that far) but has nothing to do with anarchism.

Marxists are generally radical collectivists. Anarchists tend to be radical individualists (but not as most people understand that concept). Although anarchism originated in Marxism (the First International), the two systems parted ways a long time ago.

>>Interesting note: the majority of the young (18-23) voters polled at the universities in BC, were Marxist. The Marxist Party of Canada actually has it's majority (83%) in that age range too.<<

I wish that were true here in the U.S. Most of my students come closer to being fascists than Marxists. Of course, the U.S. itself (sadly) has many fascistic elements.

>>The working class shall be heard!<<

I agree. What bothers me is that Marxists tend to come from the intelligentsia (the class of intellectuals), including we college professors, not the proletariat or working class. In the U.S., the working class is afflicted with chronic false consciousness.

Are you a Marxist, too?

posted at 01:16:18 AM by Dr. Mark A. Foster

Copyright © 2002 Mark A. Foster, Ph.D. All rights reserved.