Suzanne Blom
9/24/2009 5:45:00 PM
"David Friedman" <ddfr@daviddfriedman.nopsam.com> wrote in message
news:ddfr-B6F44F.23472523092009@newsfarm.phx.highwinds-media.com...
> In article <u4cz7pm6s2k6$.40lyhxrmluak.dlg@40tude.net>,
> "Brian M. Scott" <b.scott@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 24 Sep 2009 14:34:33 +1000, "James A. Donald"
>> <jamesd@echeque.com> wrote in
>> <news:n0tlb5dhgps7lm96u99o6hmnqtksfutrnj@4ax.com> in
>> rec.arts.sf.composition:
>>
>> > "James A. Donald"
>> >>> The fans of "diversity" are not too familiar with
>> >>> what dead white males have been up to.
>>
>> > "Brian M. Scott"
>> >> Predictably following David into irrelevance to air a
>> >> tired prejudice.
>>
>> > In this thread I got attacked by a bunch of lefties,
>>
>> Rubbish. In this thread only Julian, David, and I have
>> responded to you.
>
> You left out Catja. I suspect that, from James' standpoint, she
> classifies as at least moderately lefty.
>
>> I doubt that David attacked you, and I
>> doubt that even you would call him a 'lefty'. Julian merely
>> raised an eyebrow at the notion of 'upper class Manchester';
>> that hardly constitutes an attack on *you*, though it can
>> certainly be regarded as a skeptical reaction to part of
>> what you wrote. (And while you might describe Julian as a
>> 'lefty', I find the idea more than a bit risible.) That
>> leaves me. My comment was indeed personally negative, and
>> you may if you wish call it an attack. It was also true:
>> you took an opportunity to vent your usual spleen on '[t]he
>> fans of "diversity"', it was predictable that you would do
>> so, and Manchesterism is an irrelevance, as it has damn-all
>> to do with 'upper class Manchester'.
>
> James wrote:
>
>> In the
>> course of absorbing the Manchester capitalism that
>> England has abandoned, the Chinese elite incorporated
>> the overseas chinese elite, which tends to have a lot
>> of upper class Manchester names.
>
> Julian and Catja responded with what looked like incredulity at the idea
> of "upper class Manchester." That made sense if he meant "the sort of
> upper class people who live(d) in the city of Manchester," assuming that
> Manchester is not a very upper class place; I assumed that was their
> point, although it's possible that I'm missing some entirely different
> implication.
>
> But their incredulity made no sense if he meant "the sort of upper class
> people associated with Manchester capitalism." And since what he had
> written was:
>
> " In the course of absorbing the Manchester capitalism that England has
> abandoned, the Chinese elite incorporated the overseas chinese elite,
> which tends to have a lot of upper class Manchester names."
>
> it was fairly obvious that that was what he did mean.
>
> Unless, of course, one had no idea what "Manchester" had to do with 19th
> century capitalism.
>
Well, gosh, golly, gee, I thought they were being humorous. I'd forgotten
that was forbidden.