Is there a formal term for this?
James Nicoll
Historical references: almost all from between about 1848
and 2000 and none from between 2000 and perhaps 3950?
The Miss Marple Effect, where everything ends up being just
like St. Mary Mead?
James Nicoll
--
"About this time, I started getting depressed. Probably the late
hour and the silence. I decided to put on some music.
Boy, that Billie Holiday can sing."
_Why I Hate Saturn_, Kyle Baker
Mike Schilling
"James Nicoll" <jdni...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:bbnr4c$95e$1...@panix1.panix.com...
> Setting: AD 4000
>
> Historical references: almost all from between about 1848
> and 2000 and none from between 2000 and perhaps 3950?
>
> The Miss Marple Effect, where everything ends up being just
> like St. Mary Mead?
Similar effect: AHs where the characters discuss one and only one AH: our
timeline:
"Imagine, for instance, what the world be like if George Washington hadn't
died of plague in the 1779 epidemic. He might have rallied the rebels to a
victory, leading to independence for the colonies and revolution on the
continent of Europe."
Ross TenEyck
> Setting: AD 4000
> Historical references: almost all from between about 1848
>and 2000 and none from between 2000 and perhaps 3950?
> The Miss Marple Effect, where everything ends up being just
>like St. Mary Mead?
I've seen a variant termed the Star Trek Effect... any list
of historical figures or references will contain three items;
two 20th-century or before, and one later.
--
================== http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~teneyck ==================
Ross TenEyck Seattle, WA \ Light, kindled in the furnace of hydrogen;
ten...@alumni.caltech.edu \ like smoke, sunlight carries the hot-metal
Are wa yume? Soretomo maboroshi? \ tang of Creation's forge.
Terry Lago
James Nicoll wrote:
> Setting: AD 4000
>
> Historical references: almost all from between about 1848
> and 2000 and none from between 2000 and perhaps 3950?
>
> The Miss Marple Effect, where everything ends up being just
> like St. Mary Mead?
>
> James Nicoll
>
Sloppy writing? :)
T.
Mark Hanson
news:AdLDa.1435$MQ2...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
> Similar effect: AHs where the characters discuss one and only one AH: our
> timeline:
>
> "Imagine, for instance, what the world be like if George Washington hadn't
> died of plague in the 1779 epidemic. He might have rallied the rebels to
a
> victory, leading to independence for the colonies and revolution on the
> continent of Europe."
Isn't that the "Herry Turtledove" effect?
Mark
Dan Goodman
news:2KLDa.1123355$F1.134593@sccrnsc04:
On soc.history.what-if, it's called "double blind".
--
Dan Goodman dsg...@visi.com
Journal: http://dsgood.blogspot.com
Dorothy J Heydt
You can call it that, but it didn't originate with Turtledove.
See e.g. "If Lee Had Lost at Gettysburg," by Winston Churchill.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
Mike Schilling
more about previous events in the series than makes sense. The best (worst)
example that comes to mind is from _Time Enough for Love_:
Lazarus: Once I went to see a man who claimed to be able to measure how
long you'd live.
Ishtar (or Hamadryad, or one of the others. Doesn't matter): Pinero the
charlatan?
Yup, Pinero would still be famous thousands of years later. Of course.
James Nicoll
Spanish colonies are still fairly likely to split away and still
pretty likely to end up as dictatorships or rolling civil war zones
so why would anyone from a British Empire Forever timeline expect the
colonies of British North America to do any better at self-rule,
particularly as republics, a notoriously unstable form of government?
Double particularly if the slavocracies of the south are tied to the
industrious colonies of the North. That's just building a flash point
in.
A BEF AH writer might write about a republican North America
but it would probably look more like Jeremy Bentham's version of the
Draka than our world.
lal_truckee
Depends: c.f. ponzi, quisling, boycott
Errol Cavit
news:Xns939187F7BC2...@209.98.13.60...
No. Some DBWIs include this kind of discussion, but characters talking about
OTL as an AH isn't what defines a DBWI.
--
Errol Cavit
to email, my middle initial is G | "...one of the reasons that New Zealand
Settlers did not treat the Maoris as their Australian counterparts did the
Aborigines was that, when they did, they got killed. James Belich, Historian
Dan Goodman
news:bbo3cq$bd9fn$1...@ID-90251.news.dfncis.de:
Their names live on -- but how many people know anything about _them_?
Dan Goodman
@panix2.panix.com:
> In article <Xns939187F7BC2...@209.98.13.60>,
> Dan Goodman <dsg...@visi.com> wrote:
>>"Mark Hanson" <mark.h...@attbi.com> wrote in
>>news:2KLDa.1123355$F1.134593@sccrnsc04:
>>
>>> "Mike Schilling" <mscotts...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:AdLDa.1435$MQ2...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com...
>>>> Similar effect: AHs where the characters discuss one and only one
AH:
>>>> our timeline:
>>>>
>>>> "Imagine, for instance, what the world be like if George Washington
>>>> hadn't died of plague in the 1779 epidemic. He might have rallied
>>>> the rebels to
>>> a
>>>> victory, leading to independence for the colonies and revolution on
>>>> the continent of Europe."
>>>
>>> Isn't that the "Herry Turtledove" effect?
>>
>>On soc.history.what-if, it's called "double blind".
>
> They pick an unlikely AH if they talk about our world.
And usually, they don't say it's a likely one.
> The
> Spanish colonies are still fairly likely to split away and still
> pretty likely to end up as dictatorships or rolling civil war zones
> so why would anyone from a British Empire Forever timeline expect the
> colonies of British North America to do any better at self-rule,
> particularly as republics, a notoriously unstable form of government?
> Double particularly if the slavocracies of the south are tied to the
> industrious colonies of the North. That's just building a flash point
> in.
>
> A BEF AH writer might write about a republican North America
> but it would probably look more like Jeremy Bentham's version of the
> Draka than our world.
>
> James Nicoll
--
Mike Schilling
More about Quisling than the others, both because he was the most recent and
because he affected an entire country. Given how little Pinero changed and
how many thousands of years had elapsed, I'm quite dubious his name would
live on.
Sean O'Hara
> Setting: AD 4000
>
> Historical references: almost all from between about 1848
> and 2000 and none from between 2000 and perhaps 3950?
>
> The Miss Marple Effect, where everything ends up being just
> like St. Mary Mead?
>
after 1900 has survived to the future?
--
Sean O'Hara
Alex: A dwarf is someone who has disproportionately short
arms and legs. ... A midget is still a dwarf but their
arms and legs are in proportion.
Gareth: So... what’s an elf? --The Office
Robert Carnegie
>, Mike Schilling <mscotts...@hotmail.com> writes
>
>"James Nicoll" <jdni...@panix.com> wrote in message
>news:bbnr4c$95e$1...@panix1.panix.com...
>> Setting: AD 4000
>>
>> Historical references: almost all from between about 1848
>> and 2000 and none from between 2000 and perhaps 3950?
>>
>> The Miss Marple Effect, where everything ends up being just
>> like St. Mary Mead?
>
>discuss one and only one AH: our timeline:
>
>"Imagine, for instance, what the world be like if George
>Washington hadn't died of plague in the 1779 epidemic.
>He might have rallied the rebels to a victory, leading to
>independence for the colonies and revolution on the
>continent of Europe."
Deliberately bad example? ;-)
One wonders why anyone in an AH story should have a
particularly keen interest in AH, more so than ordinary folks in
OTL. Do you suppose that AHers are subconsciously aware
that they're living in AH?
At any rate, if we were privy to their speculation about AH in the
/opposite/ direction to us-wards ("I believe that if mighty Alexander
had not conquered Carthage, the Carthaginians would instead
have built an empire across all Europe"), it'd be hopelessly
confusing.
Robert Carnegie at home, rja.ca...@excite.com at large
--
"AUTO SPARES (ROYSTON) would like to give our hearty
congratulation to Geoffrey Reid, on cocking up fifty years
with the company." - Royston Crow
Mike Van Pelt
Sean O'Hara <darkerthenightth...@myrealbox.com> wrote:
>Perhaps it's related to the Star Trek Effect where no art created
>after 1900 has survived to the future?
Except for that one poem written by some poet in the Alpha
Centauri colony around 2130something that James Tomcat Kirk
quoted to Edith Keeler...
--
The only meaningful memorial, the only one that will really count, will be when there are streets, tunnels, living and working quarters named after each of those astronauts--and those who will yet die in this effort--in permanently occupied stations on the moon, on Mars, in the asteroid belt, and beyond.
-- Bruce F. Webster
Craig Richardson
IRL Ishtar would say something more along the lines of "Yeah, we still
get pineros like that showing up. Usually we beat them with sticks."
--Craig
--
Managing the Devil Rays is something like competing on "Iron Chef",
and having Chairman Kaga reveal a huge ziggurat of lint.
Gary Huckabay, Baseball Prospectus Online, August 21, 2002
Mike Schilling
"Robert Carnegie" <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote in message
news:yS2XoGAR...@redjac.demon.co.uk...
> In article <AdLDa.1435$MQ2...@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com
> One wonders why anyone in an AH story should have a
> particularly keen interest in AH, more so than ordinary folks in
> OTL. Do you suppose that AHers are subconsciously aware
> that they're living in AH?
Not only that, but they seem to be aware *exactly* where they diverged from
the "real" world.
Mark Atwood
> In article <MPG.19496a55f...@news.cis.dfn.de>,
> Sean O'Hara <darkerthenightth...@myrealbox.com> wrote:
> >Perhaps it's related to the Star Trek Effect where no art created
> >after 1900 has survived to the future?
>
> Except for that one poem written by some poet in the Alpha
> Centauri colony around 2130something that James Tomcat Kirk
> quoted to Edith Keeler...
There was a whole bunch of "future cultural knowledge" in Spock's IQ
test at the beginning of "Star Trek III: The Voyage Home".
The only one I remember off the top of my head was
Test: What was the axiom of the philosophical treatise by $MUMBLE?
Spock: Nothing unreal exists.
Test: Correct.
Which actually does sound like it really could be used as a
philosophical axiom, actually...
--
Mark Atwood | When you do things right,
m...@pobox.com | people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
http://www.pobox.com/~mra
Michael Grosberg
@panix1.panix.com:
> Setting: AD 4000
>
> Historical references: almost all from between about 1848
> and 2000 and none from between 2000 and perhaps 3950?
>
make it the year 20,000 and you could call it "the Belarus Effect".
--
--------------------------------------------------
Michael Grosberg
Mail: preacher_public "at" hotmail.
--------------------------------------------------
"I know I believe in nothing but it is my nothing"
- The Manic Street Preachers
Peter Meilinger
>The only one I remember off the top of my head was
> Test: What was the axiom of the philosophical treatise by $MUMBLE?
> Spock: Nothing unreal exists.
> Test: Correct.
>Which actually does sound like it really could be used as a
>philosophical axiom, actually...
Way too concrete, although it might work for Vulcan philosophy.
I would've expected "Nothing real exists."
Pete
Mike Schilling
"Peter Meilinger" <mell...@bu.edu> wrote in message
news:bbolfm$58i$1...@news3.bu.edu...
Is knowledge unknowable and, if so, how do we know this?
how...@brazee.net
Trek and us, their references to our times are way excessive.
Johnny1A
>
> Yup, Pinero would still be famous thousands of years later. Of course.
Bad example of a legitimate problem, actually. The line you're
talking about is in _Methuselah's Children_, and it's only been maybe
150-200 years since Pinero lived, if that long. LL is talking to
Elder Mary Sperling, who's quite a bit younger than he is, but still
one of the older Howard People. LL actually _met_ Pinero, and in fact
given what Pinero was able to do (and he advertised!) it's quite
reasonable that a young LL would seek him out.
As for Sperling, she might have been born after Pinero, or she might
have been a child at the time, but it's quite reasonable that she
would recall the fuss over him (he was world-famous for a little
while), either first-hand or hearing her parents and other adults
discussing him.
For a better example of this problem, in _The Gripping Hand_, N&P
sloppily have a character make a reference to Ronald Reagan and a bit
later to 'FDA-era' medicine. But this is 1000+ years in the future,
and it just doesn't make sense that they'd be speaking colloquially
that way. People in that time might or might not have _heard_ of
Reagan, the way someone in 2003 might have heard of Edward the
Confessor or Canute, but only a professional historian specializing in
CoDominium times or a geekish amateur student of history is likely to
even know what the 'FDA' was.
Of course, that's double-sloppy, since in MIGE timeline, there should
not even have _been_ a President Reagan. Maybe a Governer Reagan, but
not a President Reagan. None of our OTL presidents should have been
there, past maybe Gerald Ford, the CoDominium would have changed
politics too thoroughly.
(They tried to retcon it, to accomodate actual OTL events, but it just
makes a mess of the timeline. A peril of setting SF stories in the
too-near future.)
Shermanlee
Dave Goldman
<m...@pobox.com> wrote:
> There was a whole bunch of "future cultural knowledge" in Spock's IQ
> test at the beginning of "Star Trek III: The Voyage Home".
>
> The only one I remember off the top of my head was
>
> Test: What was the axiom of the philosophical treatise by $MUMBLE?
> Spock: Nothing unreal exists.
> Test: Correct.
Ah, but $MUMBLE was a Vulcan philospher who lived during Earth's 19th Century...
- Dave Goldman
Portland, OR
Mike Schilling
"Johnny1A" <sherm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b3030854.03060...@posting.google.com...
> "Mike Schilling" <mscotts...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<%0MDa.1443$E63....@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com>...
>
> >
> > Yup, Pinero would still be famous thousands of years later. Of course.
>
> Bad example of a legitimate problem, actually. The line you're
> talking about is in _Methuselah's Children_, and it's only been maybe
> 150-200 years since Pinero lived, if that long.
Are you sure? If so, never mind. A much shorter period of time, and Pinero
would have been of particular interest to Howards.
lal_truckee
> there should
> not even have _been_ a President Reagan. Maybe a Governer Reagan, but
> not a President Reagan.
I STILL don't believe it ...
Scott Robinson
If knowledge can be defined to include simple facts, yes.
Godel proved it. Of course, this requires a definition of "knowing"
that requires a level of certainty impossible for any science, so even
Vulcans wouldn't use it.
Facts have a remarkable ability to destroy large sections of
philosophy (take a gander at what neurological studies have done).
Pity philosophers rarely rebuild philosophy stronger the way
scientists do with science.
Scott
Michael Stemper
>Mike Schilling wrote:
>> Yup, Pinero would still be famous thousands of years later. Of course.
>
>Depends: c.f. ponzi, quisling, boycott
"Quisling" goes back to WWII, or about 60 years. "Ponzi", unless I miss
my guess, goes back to the Roaring Twenties, or about 80 years. Merriam-
Webster says that "boycott" goes back to 1880, or about 120 years. None
of these are particularly supportive of a person being remembered for
millenia. I'd bet that most English-speakers today aren't aware that
these words refer to real people. In fact, I didn't know that about
"boycott".
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
Time flies like an arrow.
Fruit flies like a banana.
lal_truckee
> I'd bet that most English-speakers today aren't aware that
> these words refer to real people. In fact, I didn't know that about
> "boycott".
Just to demonstrate, this English-speaker forgot that I should have
included "lynch."
I think such words last longer if there's a real need uncovered by other
words; contrast "lynch" and "boycott" with "ponzi" and "quisling."
Although I think "ponzi" might have legs, if people finally realized the
Stock Markets are nothing but classic ponzi schemes. Hint: Tulips makes
the leap easier.
Dan Goodman
90251.news.dfncis.de:
> Just to demonstrate, this English-speaker forgot that I should have
> included "lynch."
Not so. The derivation from the name of a person is dubious.
Judge/Mr. Lynch may be in the same category as Senator Placebo and Dr.
Lyme.
Mark Atwood
> lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:bbqjb7$cb2rt$1@ID-
> 90251.news.dfncis.de:
>
> > Just to demonstrate, this English-speaker forgot that I should have
> > included "lynch."
>
> Not so. The derivation from the name of a person is dubious.
>
> Judge/Mr. Lynch may be in the same category as Senator Placebo and Dr.
> Lyme.
John Crapper?
lal_truckee
> lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:bbqjb7$cb2rt$1@ID-
> 90251.news.dfncis.de:
>
>
>>Just to demonstrate, this English-speaker forgot that I should have
>>included "lynch."
>
>
> Not so. The derivation from the name of a person is dubious.
>
> Judge/Mr. Lynch may be in the same category as Senator Placebo and Dr.
> Lyme.
Merriam-Webster: "lynch law":
Etymology: William Lynch died 1820 American vigilante
later shortened to the verb form "lynch"
David Bilek
>lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:bbqjb7$cb2rt$1@ID-
>90251.news.dfncis.de:
>
>> Just to demonstrate, this English-speaker forgot that I should have
>> included "lynch."
>
>Not so. The derivation from the name of a person is dubious.
>
>Judge/Mr. Lynch may be in the same category as Senator Placebo and Dr.
>Lyme.
Dr. Lyme?
It's well known that Lyme Disease is named for Lyme, Connecticut. Is
this in dispute somewhere?
-David
Dorothy J Heydt
Dan Goodman <dsg...@visi.com> wrote:
>>
>> Depends: c.f. ponzi, quisling, boycott
>
>Their names live on -- but how many people know anything about _them_?
Well, I know who Quisling was. The others probably date from
further back.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
Dorothy J Heydt
lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Michael Stemper wrote:
>> I'd bet that most English-speakers today aren't aware that
>> these words refer to real people. In fact, I didn't know that about
>> "boycott".
>
>Just to demonstrate, this English-speaker forgot that I should have
>included "lynch."
ObSF: Gully Foyle: "Are you going to turn my name into a
household word, like 'lynch' and 'boycott'?"
Mike Schilling
> >lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:bbqjb7$cb2rt$1@ID-
> >90251.news.dfncis.de:
> >
> >> Just to demonstrate, this English-speaker forgot that I should have
> >> included "lynch."
> >
> >Not so. The derivation from the name of a person is dubious.
> >
> >Judge/Mr. Lynch may be in the same category as Senator Placebo and Dr.
> >Lyme.
You're just being silly. Placebo is an Olympic skiier, not a Senator.
Chris Byler
wrote:
>In article <bbqjb7$cb2rt$1...@ID-90251.news.dfncis.de>,
>lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>Michael Stemper wrote:
>>> I'd bet that most English-speakers today aren't aware that
>>> these words refer to real people. In fact, I didn't know that about
>>> "boycott".
>>
>>Just to demonstrate, this English-speaker forgot that I should have
>>included "lynch."
>
>ObSF: Gully Foyle: "Are you going to turn my name into a
>household word, like 'lynch' and 'boycott'?"
Curses! Foyled again!
--
Chris Byler cby...@vt.edu
"Between justice and genocide there is, in the long run, no middle
ground." -- Lois McMaster Bujold (Aral Vorkosigan)
Chris Byler
wrote:
>In article <Xns93918E4268D...@209.98.13.60>,
>Dan Goodman <dsg...@visi.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Depends: c.f. ponzi, quisling, boycott
Also lynch, bowdlerize, maverick.
Does anyone use "ponzi" as a word? "Ponzi scheme", maybe, but "ponzi"
alone?
>>Their names live on -- but how many people know anything about _them_?
>
>Well, I know who Quisling was. The others probably date from
>further back.
But you probably do know something about the original people behind
caesarean sections, christianity, and maybe even platonic solids (or
platonic love affairs). All of which are much older than the above
examples.
Mark Atwood
> On Fri, 6 Jun 2003 19:02:36 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
> wrote:
>
> >In article <Xns93918E4268D...@209.98.13.60>,
> >Dan Goodman <dsg...@visi.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Depends: c.f. ponzi, quisling, boycott
>
> Also lynch, bowdlerize, maverick.
"German Chocolate Cake" was originally "German's Chocolate Cake",
named after a Mr. German.
Dorothy J Heydt
Mark Atwood <m...@pobox.com> wrote:
>"German Chocolate Cake" was originally "German's Chocolate Cake",
>named after a Mr. German.
Really? Well, hooray for him. (Even though I can't eat it any
more.)
Do you know anything about the derivation of Black Forest Cake?
Dorothy J. Heydt
(which I can't eat any more either....)
lal_truckee
> In article <m38ysfd...@khem.blackfedora.com>,
> Mark Atwood <m...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>
>>"German Chocolate Cake" was originally "German's Chocolate Cake",
>>named after a Mr. German.
>
>
> Really? Well, hooray for him. (Even though I can't eat it any
> more.)
>
> Do you know anything about the derivation of Black Forest Cake?
Ms. Helen Forest and Mr. Archibald Black came from the future to help
their ancestors live better; for in the future the FDA was willing to
admit that chocolate was 1) non-fattening, 2) the secret of eternal life.
Somehow they misjudged both time and place, and ended up in one of the
least desirable epochs. Their concoction was co-opted by the Hitler
Youth Cooking School located in the eponyomous forest and, while they
were soon forgotten, their cocoction lives on in finer health food
stores everywhere.
r.a.sf.w
Lawrence Watt-Evans
>Dan Goodman <dsg...@visi.com> writes:
>> lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:bbqjb7$cb2rt$1@ID-
>> 90251.news.dfncis.de:
>>
>> > Just to demonstrate, this English-speaker forgot that I should have
>> > included "lynch."
>>
>> Not so. The derivation from the name of a person is dubious.
>>
>> Judge/Mr. Lynch may be in the same category as Senator Placebo and Dr.
>> Lyme.
>
>John Crapper?
Thomas Crapper was a real person, a 19th-century British plumbing
contractor. He did not invent the flush toilet, though. The word
"crap" is much, much older; it's cognate to "scrap" and really just
means any kind of waste material.
Never heard of John Crapper.
Senator Placebo is definitely fictional.
Who's Dr. Lyme supposed to be?
David Bilek
Lyme Disease. Except that it was named for Lyme, Connecticut and I've
never heard anyone attribute it to a "Dr. Lyme".
How about "Otto Titzlinger"?
-David
Karl M Syring
> In article <m38ysfd...@khem.blackfedora.com>,
> Mark Atwood <m...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>>"German Chocolate Cake" was originally "German's Chocolate Cake",
>>named after a Mr. German.
>
> Really? Well, hooray for him. (Even though I can't eat it any
> more.)
>
> Do you know anything about the derivation of Black Forest Cake?
Well, it was invented by one Mr. Forest Black.
Karl M. Syring
Craig Richardson
wrote:
>In article <m38ysfd...@khem.blackfedora.com>,
>Mark Atwood <m...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>>"German Chocolate Cake" was originally "German's Chocolate Cake",
>>named after a Mr. German.
>
>Really? Well, hooray for him. (Even though I can't eat it any
>more.)
>
>Do you know anything about the derivation of Black Forest Cake?
AFAICT, the obvious origin is, unfortunately, correct in this case.
Of course, by last month's ECJ ruling, it must now be known as "Black
Forest Style" cake, unless it is actually baked and packaged in the
Schwarzwald...
--Craig
--
Managing the Devil Rays is something like competing on "Iron Chef",
and having Chairman Kaga reveal a huge ziggurat of lint.
Gary Huckabay, Baseball Prospectus Online, August 21, 2002
Sean O'Hara
declared...
> In article <bbo3cq$bd9fn$1...@ID-90251.news.dfncis.de>, lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> writes:
> >Mike Schilling wrote:
>
> >> Yup, Pinero would still be famous thousands of years later. Of course.
> >
> >Depends: c.f. ponzi, quisling, boycott
>
> "Quisling" goes back to WWII, or about 60 years. "Ponzi", unless I miss
> my guess, goes back to the Roaring Twenties, or about 80 years. Merriam-
> Webster says that "boycott" goes back to 1880, or about 120 years. None
> of these are particularly supportive of a person being remembered for
> millenia. I'd bet that most English-speakers today aren't aware that
> these words refer to real people. In fact, I didn't know that about
> "boycott".
>
of a defunct kingdom who happened to become a character in a
popular work of historical fiction.
--
Sean O'Hara
Alex: A dwarf is someone who has disproportionately short arms
and legs.... A midget is still a dwarf but their arms and legs
are in proportion.
Gareth: So... what’s an elf? --The Office
Mike Schilling
"Sean O'Hara" <darkerthenightth...@myrealbox.com> wrote in
message news:MPG.194adb3cd...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> Well then, how about Jezebel -- rather minor figure in the history
> of a defunct kingdom who happened to become a character in a
> popular work of historical fiction.
As Asimov points out in _The Caves of Steel_, people misremember her as
being a loose woman rather than an idolater.
John M. Gamble
lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Mike Schilling wrote:
>> Another one: what do you call it where the characters in a series know far
>> more about previous events in the series than makes sense. The best (worst)
>> example that comes to mind is from _Time Enough for Love_:
>>
>> Lazarus: Once I went to see a man who claimed to be able to measure how
>> long you'd live.
>> Ishtar (or Hamadryad, or one of the others. Doesn't matter): Pinero the
>> charlatan?
>>
>> Yup, Pinero would still be famous thousands of years later. Of course.
>
>Depends: c.f. ponzi, quisling, boycott
>
Or if someone wrote a very good play about him (come to think, it
would make a good tragedy in the right hands). Would anyone know
about an obscure dust-up in Scotland were it not for the play
Macbeth?
--
-john
February 28 1997: Last day libraries could order catalogue cards
from the Library of Congress.
John Schilling
Hint: more people own stock in companies that make automobiles than in
companies that sell tulips.
The fundamental difference between the stock market and the ponzi scheme
is that the stock market is founded on enterprises which create real
wealth and can distribute the proceeds to their stockholders in the form
of dividends. It is quite possible for an individual stock or for the
market as a whole to grow beyond what that foundation can support, which
of course periodically happens, but the foundation is there and is
substantial.
--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
*schi...@spock.usc.edu * for success" *
*661-951-9107 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *
Mike Schilling
"Dorothy J Heydt" <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote in message
news:HG2v5...@kithrup.com...
> In article <m38ysfd...@khem.blackfedora.com>,
> Mark Atwood <m...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> >"German Chocolate Cake" was originally "German's Chocolate Cake",
> >named after a Mr. German.
>
> Really? Well, hooray for him. (Even though I can't eat it any
> more.)
>
> Do you know anything about the derivation of Black Forest Cake?
>
I got here too late, unfortunately, and the only jokes remaining involve
Werner Erhard.
Christopher Adams
>> test at the beginning of "Star Trek III: The Voyage Home".
>>
>> The only one I remember off the top of my head was
>>
>> Test: What was the axiom of the philosophical treatise by $MUMBLE?
>> Spock: Nothing unreal exists.
>> Test: Correct.
>
> Century...
For $MUMBLE read Kiri-kin-tha, by the way; it is his First Law of Metaphysics.
--
Christopher Adams -*- SUTEKH Dysfunctions Officer 2003
Great are the powers of the seventy-two transformations;
Greatest of all is the art of improvisation.
- JOURNEY TO THE WEST, Wu Cheng'en
Dan Goodman
$Io.32...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net:
The discoverer of Lyme's Disease, of course.
Mark Atwood
> > Do you know anything about the derivation of Black Forest Cake?
> Well, it was invented by one Mr. Forest Black.
ObSF: ISTR in one of Asimov's novels, the Horsehead Nebula was still
called the Horsehead Nebula, but nobody knew why. (It only
looks like a horse's head from one narrow and specific angle of
view.) One character had an off the cuff theory that it was
named after a "Mr. Horace Head".
Lawrence Watt-Evans
>Lawrence Watt-Evans <lawr...@earthlink.net> wrote in news:FH7Ea.37413
>$Io.32...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net:
>
>> Who's Dr. Lyme supposed to be?
>>
>The discoverer of Lyme's Disease, of course.
I've never heard of that; I thought everyone knew it was Lyme Disease,
not "Lyme's Disease," and that it's named for Old Lyme, Connecticut.
Huh.
Dan Goodman
$rO.31...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net:
There are people who don't know it's "Lyme Disease" and probably more who
don't know it was named after Old Lyme.
Konrad Gaertner
And there's those of us who wonder why its named after a fruit.
--KG
Dorothy J Heydt
Lawrence Watt-Evans <lawr...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>On 06 Jun 2003 23:56:03 GMT, Dan Goodman <dsg...@visi.com> wrote:
>
>>Lawrence Watt-Evans <lawr...@earthlink.net> wrote in news:FH7Ea.37413
>>$Io.32...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net:
I knew it was a placename. I didn't realize it was "Old Lyme"
rather than just "Lyme".
Dorothy J. Heydt
how...@brazee.net
On 6-Jun-2003, Michael Stemper <mste...@siemens-emis.com> wrote:
> "Quisling" goes back to WWII, or about 60 years. "Ponzi", unless I miss
> my guess, goes back to the Roaring Twenties, or about 80 years. Merriam-
> Webster says that "boycott" goes back to 1880, or about 120 years. None
> of these are particularly supportive of a person being remembered for
> millenia. I'd bet that most English-speakers today aren't aware that
> these words refer to real people. In fact, I didn't know that about
> "boycott".
How about Crapper?
Johnny1A
> Johnny1A wrote:
> > there should
> > not even have _been_ a President Reagan. Maybe a Governer Reagan, but
> > not a President Reagan.
>
> I STILL don't believe it ...
Neither did the writers of the old "Laugh-In" TV show. They had a
skit called "News From 20 Years In The Future", in which they'd play
the least probable possible future news stories for laughs. The idea
that someday Ronald Reagan might become President of the United States
was a favorite improbability.
Shermanlee
how...@brazee.net
On 6-Jun-2003, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
> ObSF: Gully Foyle: "Are you going to turn my name into a
> household word, like 'lynch' and 'boycott'?"
No, like "jaunte". (This is a book I reread).
Mike Schilling
"Johnny1A" <sherm...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:b3030854.03060...@posting.google.com...
Ah, our young and innocent days.
Dorothy J Heydt
IIRC he was a real person too, who invented either the earth or
the water closet, and published his story in a book called _The
Tale of Ajax_, pronounced "a jacks" (a latrine).
Now someone who's actually got the information will correct me.
Ann Sharp
>
> IIRC he was a real person too, who invented either the earth or
> the water closet, and published his story in a book called _The
> Tale of Ajax_, pronounced "a jacks" (a latrine).
>
> Now someone who's actually got the information will correct me.
Sir John Harrington? 16th century?
http://www.plumbingworld.com/historytoilet.html
http://www.plumbingworld.com/historythomas.html
Ann
Ann Sharp
> Do you know anything about the derivation of Black Forest Cake?
Ann:
http://www.sacklerinstitute.org/~eigsti/sartre.html
It's the English version of "Schwarzwälderkirschtort," Black Forest
Cherry Torte. The official description is "a chocolate layer cake with
Kirsch, whipped cream, sour cherries and chocolate curls" The Black Forest
region produces Morello cherries, Kirsch and other distilled cherry brandy
made from the Morellos. I've seen one account that says "historians believe
Black Forest Cake originated in the late 16th century" there, but if so, I
am sure it was a pre-chocolate version.
I think the torte -- at least the chocolate version we have today -- was
probably a nineteenth-century Viennese confection, if only because of the
alcohol and the hefty amount of whipped cream. It's also logical enough
that any gourmet-quality confection using Morello cherries from the region
would be named after this rather Romantic region (when I was small, I had
toys "made by elves from the Black Forest" which did indeed come from
there).
L.P.H.,
Ann
Mike Dworetsky
"Lawrence Watt-Evans" <lawr...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:FH7Ea.37413$Io.32...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> On 06 Jun 2003 11:33:49 -0700, Mark Atwood <m...@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> >Dan Goodman <dsg...@visi.com> writes:
> >> lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote in news:bbqjb7$cb2rt$1@ID-
> >> 90251.news.dfncis.de:
> >>
> >> > Just to demonstrate, this English-speaker forgot that I should have
> >> > included "lynch."
> >>
> >> Not so. The derivation from the name of a person is dubious.
> >>
> >> Judge/Mr. Lynch may be in the same category as Senator Placebo and Dr.
> >> Lyme.
> >
> >John Crapper?
>
> Thomas Crapper was a real person, a 19th-century British plumbing
> contractor. He did not invent the flush toilet, though. The word
> "crap" is much, much older; it's cognate to "scrap" and really just
> means any kind of waste material.
>
Didn't he invent the siphon flush tank, however? The thing that puts the
"oomph" in British flushing?
--
Mike Dworetsky
(Remove "pants" spamblock to send e-mail)
Mike Dworetsky
"Dorothy J Heydt" <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote in message
news:HG3EM...@kithrup.com...
> In article <3NcEa.34460$rO.31...@newsread1.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> <how...@brazee.net> wrote:
> >
> >On 6-Jun-2003, Michael Stemper <mste...@siemens-emis.com> wrote:
> >
> >> "Quisling" goes back to WWII, or about 60 years. "Ponzi", unless I miss
> >> my guess, goes back to the Roaring Twenties, or about 80 years.
Merriam-
> >> Webster says that "boycott" goes back to 1880, or about 120 years. None
> >> of these are particularly supportive of a person being remembered for
> >> millenia. I'd bet that most English-speakers today aren't aware that
> >> these words refer to real people. In fact, I didn't know that about
> >> "boycott".
> >
> >How about Crapper?
>
> IIRC he was a real person too, who invented either the earth or
> the water closet, and published his story in a book called _The
> Tale of Ajax_, pronounced "a jacks" (a latrine).
>
In the UK, the best-known book about Crapper is entitled "Flushed with
Pride".
Lawrence Watt-Evans
Yes, he did -- or possibly one of his employees did. I was blanking
on the word "siphon," though, so I didn't mention it.
jtingle
>$Io.32...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net:
>>
>The discoverer of Lyme's Disease, of course.
It's Lyme Disease, named after the town of Old Lyme, CT. I never
heard of it being attributed to a Dr. Lyme.
Regards,
Jack Tingle
Robert Carnegie
>> these words refer to real people. In fact, I didn't know that about
>> "boycott".
>
>included "lynch."
>
>words; contrast "lynch" and "boycott" with "ponzi" and "quisling."
>
>Although I think "ponzi" might have legs, if people finally realized the
>Stock Markets are nothing but classic ponzi schemes. Hint: Tulips makes
>the leap easier.
Of course, when the word and the meaning survive, the
association with the more-or-less historical person may not.
On the career of Quisling I'm mentally filling in a lot of blanks,
and of Ponzi I have no mental picture at all, although I more or
less understand the idea - although the /differences/ of various
money-circulation schemes don't very much interest me.
A stock market /can/ be no more than one of those, particularly
when investors pay attention to the stock market itself and not to
the real-world enterprises which stock shares represent. And for
the nervous small investor, the effort of fully understanding the
businesses that are being invested in may not be worth the
payback.
The price of stock ought, of course, to represent to a good
approximation the reasonable expectation, /ignoring/ the market,
of reward deriving from owning the stock for the indefinite long
term - more or less, and with the particular difficulty of determining
what /is/ the reasonable expectation of the reward. I am frankly
not sure how dividends paid to share-holders, for instance,
actually work when stock changes hands.
I'm increasingly dissatisfied, morally, with my own participation in
Capital - not that my situation is poor; rather the reverse (but not
/so/ much the reverse as my surname could imply). The fact is,
I don't feel that I've earned it. Indeed, quite a lot of it, I didn't. But I
expect I'll feel better in the morning, so don't rush with
suggestions as to its disposal ;-)
Robert Carnegie at home, rja.ca...@excite.com at large
--
"AUTO SPARES (ROYSTON) would like to give our hearty
congratulation to Geoffrey Reid, on cocking up fifty years
with the company." - Royston Crow
William December Starr
lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> said:
>> Yup, Pinero would still be famous thousands of years later. Of
>> course.
>
> Depends: c.f. ponzi, quisling, boycott
Those names are all associated with oft-repeated phenomena though --
people are still running pyramid schemes, some governmental officials
are still serving as puppets for foreign powers, people are still
organizing mass refusals to buy from particular providers, and all
will probably continue to happen for quite a while. Running an "I
have a machine that accurately predicts your deathdate" apparent
scam, on the other hand, is a bit less likely to recur over and over
again down the human timeline.
-- William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>
Lee DeRaud
<rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>In article <bbqjb7$cb2rt$1...@ID-90251.news.dfncis.de>,
>lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> writes
>>
>>Although I think "ponzi" might have legs, if people finally realized the
>>Stock Markets are nothing but classic ponzi schemes. Hint: Tulips makes
>>the leap easier.
>
>A stock market /can/ be no more than one of those, particularly
>when investors pay attention to the stock market itself and not to
>the real-world enterprises which stock shares represent. And for
>the nervous small investor, the effort of fully understanding the
>businesses that are being invested in may not be worth the
>payback.
The real defining characteristic of a Ponzi scheme is that the payback
to the earlier investors is financed by the input from the later
investors. The Social Security system makes a much better example than
most stock markets.
Lee
Robert Sneddon
<jti...@email.com> writes
>
>It's Lyme Disease, named after the town of Old Lyme, CT. I never
>heard of it being attributed to a Dr. Lyme.
Don't forget Dr. Gall, inventor of the Gall Bladder.
--
Robert Sneddon nojay (at) nojay (dot) fsnet (dot) co (dot) uk
Aaron J. Dinkin
> ObSF: ISTR in one of Asimov's novels, the Horsehead Nebula was still
> called the Horsehead Nebula, but nobody knew why. (It only
> looks like a horse's head from one narrow and specific angle of
> view.) One character had an off the cuff theory that it was
> named after a "Mr. Horace Head".
This was _The Stars, Like Dust_, I think. Nobody knew what a horse was,
either. (They only had them on Earth.)
-Aaron J. Dinkin
Dr. Whom
Robert Carnegie
December Starr <wds...@panix.com> writes
I think there's one or more Web sites that do this, based on
lifestyle data, but they usually don't claim to be perfectly accurate,
e. g., they usually don't attempt to predict you getting hit by a truck
crossing the street. (Although if you can tell them whether you live
in an urban area, or elsewhere...) In fact, they may link to advice
on lifestyle changes that could change the outcome.
OTOH, I won't be at all surprised if there's one or more
commercial Web sites which offer to read the length of your life
line, etc., if you hold the palm of your hand to the screen.
So this wouldn't be the same PInero who wrote plays?
Dan Clore
>
> Setting: AD 4000
>
> Historical references: almost all from between about 1848
> and 2000 and none from between 2000 and perhaps 3950?
>
> The Miss Marple Effect, where everything ends up being just
> like St. Mary Mead?
I don't know, but did you ever notice on the original _Star
Trek_ how they'd give lists of three, with the first two
real historical figures and the third a fictional future
figure? ("The greatest physicists in history, Newton,
Einstein, and Blipfargluglandladnlansf of Aaaalphzzzand
3--")
--
Dan Clore
Now available: _The Unspeakable and Others_
http://www.wildsidepress.com/index2.htm
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1587154838/thedanclorenecro
Lord Weÿrdgliffe & Necronomicon Page:
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/9879/
News for Anarchists & Activists:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/smygo
"It's a political statement -- or, rather, an
*anti*-political statement. The symbol for *anarchy*!"
-- Batman, explaining the circle-A graffiti, in
_Detective Comics_ #608
anxious triffid
news:rTQDa.1516$9e4....@newssvr17.news.prodigy.com:
>
> Is knowledge unknowable and, if so, how do we know this?
>
Ahem ... "Is knowledge knowable? If not, how do we know this?"
anxious triffid
wrote in news:3ee11c07$0$1147$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au:
>>> The only one I remember off the top of my head was
>>>
>>> Test: What was the axiom of the philosophical treatise by $MUMBLE?
>>> Spock: Nothing unreal exists.
>>> Test: Correct.
>>
>> Ah, but $MUMBLE was a Vulcan philospher who lived during Earth's 19th
>> Century...
>
> For $MUMBLE read Kiri-kin-tha, by the way; it is his First Law of
> Metaphysics.
>
> --
Or for $MUMBLE read Parmenides, except for the fact he makes it his second
axiom:
#1. The one: that it is and it is impossible for it not to be.
#2. The other: that it is not and it necessarily must not be.
Richard R. Hershberger
> They pick an unlikely AH if they talk about our world. The
> Spanish colonies are still fairly likely to split away and still
> pretty likely to end up as dictatorships or rolling civil war zones
> so why would anyone from a British Empire Forever timeline expect the
> colonies of British North America to do any better at self-rule,
> particularly as republics, a notoriously unstable form of government?
> Double particularly if the slavocracies of the south are tied to the
> industrious colonies of the North. That's just building a flash point
> in.
>
> A BEF AH writer might write about a republican North America
> but it would probably look more like Jeremy Bentham's version of the
> Draka than our world.
Taking this a step further back, the success of the American
Revolution was improbable. It has acquired an air of inevitability,
but the whole enterprise came very close to collapsing. I am not
generally a fan of the Great Man theory of history, but a good case
can be made that George Washington was irreplaceable. He also had a
habit of riding between the opposing lines in battles. The possiblity
is obvious.
On the other hand, it is difficult to see the pre-Revolution status
quo maintained indefinitely, even had the Revolution failed. We would
have almost certainly ended up with some form of self-rule as a
more-or-less liberal democracy, and would probably have ended up with
most of the territory which is now the U.S. North American political
divisions would be somewhat different, and we might have been blessed
with a Governor-General, but in broad terms things wouldn't have been
all that different.
Richard R. Hershberger
Konrad Gaertner
>
> Taking this a step further back, the success of the American
> Revolution was improbable. It has acquired an air of inevitability,
> but the whole enterprise came very close to collapsing. I am not
> generally a fan of the Great Man theory of history, but a good case
> can be made that George Washington was irreplaceable. He also had a
> habit of riding between the opposing lines in battles. The possiblity
> is obvious.
>
> On the other hand, it is difficult to see the pre-Revolution status
> quo maintained indefinitely, even had the Revolution failed. We would
> have almost certainly ended up with some form of self-rule as a
> more-or-less liberal democracy, and would probably have ended up with
> most of the territory which is now the U.S.
Really? Who would make the Louisiana Purchase? Whatever the
colonies become, I don't think they'd end up with a single
government capable of spending that kind of money in that way.
--KG
David Johnston
>
> >
> > On the other hand, it is difficult to see the pre-Revolution status
> > quo maintained indefinitely, even had the Revolution failed. We would
> > have almost certainly ended up with some form of self-rule as a
> > more-or-less liberal democracy, and would probably have ended up with
> > most of the territory which is now the U.S.
>
> Really? Who would make the Louisiana Purchase?
Who needs to? The British would probably take it in one of their wars
with France.
John Andrew Fairhurst
> Running an "I
> have a machine that accurately predicts your deathdate" apparent
> scam, on the other hand, is a bit less likely to recur over and over
> again down the human timeline.
>
Dress it up in a more technological way and you could be in on a good
little earner :-)
--
John Fairhurst
In Association with Amazon worldwide:
http://www.johnsbooks.co.uk/
Your One-Stop Site for Classic SF!
Updated for 2003 Publications
Niall McAuley
> Running an "I
> have a machine that accurately predicts your deathdate" apparent
> scam, on the other hand, is a bit less likely to recur over and over
> again down the human timeline.
http://www.deathclock.com/
--
Niall [real address ends in se, not es.invalid]
Daniel Silevitch
<kgae...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
Instead of being purchased, it would have ended up as war booty from
the next British/French war. Probably not called the Napoleonic War,
however. Without the strain of supporting the US Revolution, the French
Revolution happens differently and is probably delayed by a few years
to boot.
-dms
wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu
One of the first US political stories I recall was a
Time cover in 1967 which reported that a Rockefeller/
Reagan combination beat LBJ/Humphrey and every other
conceivable democratic ticket by a wide margin.
Rocky and anybody else did not do nearly as well.
Reagan gave Ford a good run for the nomination in
1976. As little as I agreed with him on most
issues, I think he was a credible presidential
candidate from the day he won California.
OBSF: Spinrad had a president Reagan in "Bug Jack
Barron" (1969). And not as a joke.
William Hyde
EOS Department
Duke University
Christopher J. Henrich
R. Hershberger <rrh...@acme.com> wrote:
>
> On the other hand, it is difficult to see the pre-Revolution status
> quo maintained indefinitely, even had the Revolution failed. We would
> have almost certainly ended up with some form of self-rule as a
> more-or-less liberal democracy, and would probably have ended up with
> most of the territory which is now the U.S. North American political
> divisions would be somewhat different, and we might have been blessed
> with a Governor-General, but in broad terms things wouldn't have been
> all that different.
I wonder what would have happened to the Peculiar Institution. (An
ante-Civil-War euphemism for slavery.) In OTL slavery was abolished in
the British Empire in the early 1800s. But if the South were part of
the Empire, it would have lobbied fiercely on behalf of its interests.
The crisis might have infected politics in the Mother Country. In a
way, the American Civil War was a replay of the English one of the
1640's. The southern colonies were founded, roughly speaking, by
Cavaliers, whereas New England was founded, very definitely, by
Roundheads. (Obligatory reference to _1066 And All That_: "wrong but
romantic" vs. "right but repulsive.")
So, the southern Dominions would have been eager to secede, and the
Dominion of New-England would have been fierce for Abolition; and both
would have support from factions in Great Britain. Also, I think the
crisis would have boiled up earlier, when the northern Dominions were
less industrialized than they were in OTL 1860's.
And Mexico is a potential player. Damned if I know on which side,
though. Presumably whichever gave it the best chance of holding on to
New Mexico and California, while maybe recovering Texas.
--
(random signature)
David Cowie
>
> Is knowledge unknowable and, if so, how do we know this?
From the film _8mm_:
"You're going to see some things that you can't un-see."
--
David Cowie david_cowie at lineone dot net
David Cowie
> Cavaliers, whereas New England was founded, very definitely, by
> Roundheads. (Obligatory reference to _1066 And All That_: "wrong but
> romantic" vs. "right but repulsive.")
>
ObNitpick: "wrong but wromantic."
Leif Magnar Kj|nn|y
Mike Schilling <mscotts...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>Similar effect: AHs where the characters discuss one and only one AH: our
>timeline:
With a glorious counter-example in _The Man in the High Castle_,
where after the Axis wins WWII there are references to a novel
which describes an AH springing from an Allied victory and its
"obvious" consequences... which is *nothing* like our own history.
--
Leif Kjønnøy, Geek of a Few Trades. http://www.pvv.org/~leifmk
Disclaimer: Do not try this at home.
Void where prohibited by law.
Batteries not included.
Mark Atwood
>
> The crisis [slavery in the South in a timeline without the US] might
> have infected politics in the Mother Country.
It looks like it *did* infect politics in the Mother Country, and it's
rather disquieting to see who was on the Wrong Side of the argument.
(Charles Dickens, ferex)
http://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/LevyPeartdismal.html
--
Mark Atwood | When you do things right,
m...@pobox.com | people won't be sure you've done anything at all.
http://www.pobox.com/~mra
David Kennedy
> In article <bbun88$soq$1...@panix1.panix.com>, wds...@panix.com says...
>> Running an "I
>> have a machine that accurately predicts your deathdate" apparent
>> scam, on the other hand, is a bit less likely to recur over and over
>> again down the human timeline.
>>
>
> Oh, I don't know - horoscopes never seem to quite go out of fashion.
> Dress it up in a more technological way and you could be in on a good
> little earner :-)
Biorhythms - the killer app of the early 80s!
Go on, ObSF that!
--
David Kennedy
www.dkennedy.org
JoatSimeon
>It looks like it *did* infect politics in the Mother Country, and it's rather
disquieting to see who was on the Wrong Side of the argument.
-- antislavery sentiment (and relatively favorable attitudes towards blacks)
peaked in Britain in the 1820's and 1830's.
After that, it was all downhill until about WWI.
One of the main reasons was that the abolitionists had oversold their case.
They'd argued for two generations that abolishing slavery wouldn't destroy the
export economy of the West Indies, and that the freed slaves would work on the
plantations as before, only for wages -- and that wage labor would be cheaper
and more productive.
But abolishing slavery _did_ wreck the West Indian plantation economy.
Only on small densely populated islands like Barbados did the freed slaves go
on cutting cane on the plantations, and they did so only because the planters
controlled every square inch of the island and the alternative was starvation.
Even there, labor-force participation nosedived after emancipation and profits
fell off sharply.
It turned out that, in strictly _economic_ terms, the planters and their
defenders had been right, and the abolitionists wrong.
On bigger islands like Jamaica, the freed slaves refused to work consistently,
forced wages up to levels that banktrupted the estates, and squatted on public
land as semi-subsistence farmers.
Only where indentured Indian labor was brought in -- quasi-slaves -- did the
plantations do well.
This turned opinion in Britain sharply against the blacks and their defenders.
So did the failure of attempts to spread "Christianity and civilization" in
Africa, where the missionary/humanitarian/abolitionist lobby had likewise
predicted swift and immense progress once the export trade in slaves was
supressed. It turned out that when denied an export market, Africans simply
put the slaves to work domestically, so the "legitimate trade" the
abolitionists predicted was not only disappointing in scale, but was composed
almost exclusively of slave-grown produce!
The British public remained anti-slavery, but it also came to be deeply
convinced that blacks were irresponsible perpetual "children" at best, and
incorrigible savages at worst, who had to be kept in line with bullet and whip.
(The real cause of the plantation economy's collapse was simply that cutting
sugar-cane in gangs under supervision is about the most unpleasant form of
labor known to human kind, and nobody would do it at a wage which left the
planter any profit, unless driven by starvation or the lash.)
Larry M Headlund
David Kennedy <da...@dkennedy.org> wrote:
>John Andrew Fairhurst <jo...@johnsbooks.co.uk> wrote:
>> In article <bbun88$soq$1...@panix1.panix.com>, wds...@panix.com says...
>>
>> Dress it up in a more technological way and you could be in on a good
>> little earner :-)
>
>Biorhythms - the killer app of the early 80s!
>Go on, ObSF that!
RAH: The Year of the Jackpot, though he mostly deals with longer term and
more mass cycles.
We could have a contest to name faddish beliefs or new non-religious
popular enthusiasms with which the SF author is NOT in sympathy
or does not believe himself.
For example, the popularity of the I Ching in Man in a High Castle
alternate USA would be an example. It would be even better if it
was a really new instead of new to general population practice.
--
--
Larry Headlund l...@world.std.com Mathematical Engineering, Inc.
(617) 242 7741
Unix, X and Motif Consulting Speaking for myself at most.
Stewart Robert Hinsley
<m...@pobox.com> writes
>It looks like it *did* infect politics in the Mother Country, and it's
>rather disquieting to see who was on the Wrong Side of the argument.
>(Charles Dickens, ferex)
Some years back I read "Oliver Twist". I was quite shocked at the
hereditarian views embedded in that book.
--
Stewart Robert Hinsley
Mark Atwood
>
> One of the main reasons was that the abolitionists had oversold their case.
>
> They'd argued for two generations that abolishing slavery wouldn't
> destroy the export economy of the West Indies, and that the freed
> slaves would work on the plantations as before, only for wages --
> and that wage labor would be cheaper and more productive.
The link I posted had mentioned that, in the form of someone
complaining about the loss to "civilization" of cheap spices from the
West Indies, and the economists' retort that it was none of the
complainers business that the former slaves might want to rebalance
towards subsistance farming instead of export farming.
In broad terms, the complaint, the fallacy behind it, and the retort
have not changed in a century.
Mark Atwood
>
> (The real cause of the plantation economy's collapse was simply that cutting
> sugar-cane in gangs under supervision is about the most unpleasant form of
> labor known to human kind, and nobody would do it at a wage which left the
> planter any profit, unless driven by starvation or the lash.)
Question. How is sugar-cane cultivating profitable today?
Dorothy J Heydt
Mark Atwood <m...@pobox.com> wrote:
>joats...@aol.com (JoatSimeon) writes:
>>
>> (The real cause of the plantation economy's collapse was simply that cutting
>> sugar-cane in gangs under supervision is about the most unpleasant form of
>> labor known to human kind, and nobody would do it at a wage which left the
>> planter any profit, unless driven by starvation or the lash.)
>
>Question. How is sugar-cane cultivating profitable today?
Machinery, I should think.
Dorothy J. Heydt
Albany, California
djh...@kithrup.com
http://www.kithrup.com/~djheydt
Mike Schilling
"Mark Atwood" <m...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:m37k7vg...@khem.blackfedora.com...
> joats...@aol.com (JoatSimeon) writes:
> >
> > One of the main reasons was that the abolitionists had oversold their
case.
> >
> > They'd argued for two generations that abolishing slavery wouldn't
> > destroy the export economy of the West Indies, and that the freed
> > slaves would work on the plantations as before, only for wages --
> > and that wage labor would be cheaper and more productive.
>
> The link I posted had mentioned that, in the form of someone
> complaining about the loss to "civilization" of cheap spices from the
> West Indies, and the economists' retort that it was none of the
> complainers business that the former slaves might want to rebalance
> towards subsistance farming instead of export farming.
>
> In broad terms, the complaint, the fallacy behind it, and the retort
> have not changed in a century.
>
Nowadays there's an common ant-anti-colonalist argument that there was no
exploitation in the Third World; if wages were minimal and conditions harsh
there, it was a result of the impartial laws of economics. Here's a
counterexample.
Mark Atwood
> In article <m33cijg...@khem.blackfedora.com>,
> Mark Atwood <m...@pobox.com> wrote:
> >joats...@aol.com (JoatSimeon) writes:
> >>
> >> (The real cause of the plantation economy's collapse was simply that cutting
> >> sugar-cane in gangs under supervision is about the most unpleasant form of
> >> labor known to human kind, and nobody would do it at a wage which left the
> >> planter any profit, unless driven by starvation or the lash.)
> >
> >Question. How is sugar-cane cultivating profitable today?
>
> Machinery, I should think.
I would think so too, but I've continued to come across blurbs
to the effect that it is still cut with machetes.