AnimeSuki Forums

Register Forum Rules FAQ Members List Social Groups Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   AnimeSuki Forum > General > General Chat

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2012-09-16, 08:06   Link #23701
Urzu 7
Juanita/Kiteless
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New England
Age: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by bladeofdarkness View Post
but the Haredi are still Jews in the end.
mind you, annoying as hell Jews, but still Jews.
it doesn't change Demographics in the traditional sort of way.

Jews are a race of people and also a type of people based on religious affiliation. This text from wikipedia supports what I just said:

Quote:
Generally, in modern secular usage, Jews include three groups: people who were born to a Jewish family regardless of whether or not they follow the religion; those who have some Jewish ancestral background or lineage (sometimes including those who do not have strictly matrilineal descent); and people without any Jewish ancestral background or lineage who have formally converted to Judaism and therefore are followers of the religion.[29]
Of course, most people who follow the religion of Judaism are also ethically Jewish. Haredi Jews are a type of Jewish people defined by ideology (and perhaps more, I haven't looked them up online), and thus, they are a sector in the Jewish faith. The nation of Israel and the city of Jerusalem recognize them as a distinct group in their populations.
__________________
http://forums.animesuki.com/images/as.icon/signaturepics/sigpic38963_5.gif
Urzu 7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 08:25   Link #23702
bladeofdarkness
Um-Shmum
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at GNR, bringing you the truth, no matter how bad it hurts
Age: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urzu 7 View Post
Jews are a race of people and also a type of people based on religious affiliation. This text from wikipedia supports what I just said:



Of course, most people who follow the religion of Judaism are also ethically Jewish. Haredi Jews are a type of Jewish people defined by ideology (and perhaps more, I haven't looked them up online), and thus, they are a sector in the Jewish faith. The nation of Israel and the city of Jerusalem recognize them as a distinct group in their populations.
to be honest, the Haredi mostly get treated in Israel as "those embarrassing relatives who's existence you kinda have to just accept" more then anything.
__________________
bladeofdarkness is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 09:15   Link #23703
DonQuigleone
Knight Errant
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 26
If anything, Haredi Jews are crazier then muslims. They're certainly a lot more sexist.

Anyway, I think it's wrong to single out Islam as a particularly violent religion, there are many muslim countries that are not particularly violent at all (Malaysia and Indonesia come to mind, though there are a few incidents).

Islam is not the only violent religion in existence. Even Buddhism has been behind a lot of religious violence. Almost every major insurrection in China has been driven by Buddhist cults like the White Lotus, and in Japan there was also the Ikko-Ikki. And while people seem to have warm fuzzy feelings towards the Dalai Lama and Tibetan Buddhism, before the communist takeover that country was positively feudal.

Also, if we describe a religion as being a particular type of worldview, then I think you'll find that most Christians and Jews are no longer really Christian or Jewish anymore, most of them would ascribe to world views like "liberalism" "conservatism" and "socialism". And of course, these secular world views have had their fair share of killing. Liberalism had Robespierre and the French revolutionary wars. Socialism (or more particularly Communism, it's extreme cousin) has a rich history of oppression and mass murder, and as for conservatism, almost every dictator in existence has been ostensibly been a conservative.

The only people left whose world views are dominated by Christianity and Judaism (people like the Haredi, or Westboro baptist church), are just as bad as radical Islam in terms of violence and prickliness.

And of course we're ignoring the elephant in room here, Nationalism, which has been responsible for more deaths and genocides in the last 200 years then any other political ideology.

So perhaps you think it's a degenerate sign that Muslims will kill and riot over insults to the prophet, but how about the fact that many people in the USA think flag burning should be an arrestable offence? I don't really see much difference here, in either case people are being arrested over insults to symbols.

And of course, look at what's going on in China right now with rioters destroying Japanese businesses? I don't see how this is any different from what's going on in the Middle East. In this case, the Chinese are being motivated by the most violent religion of all, Nationalism, which the CCP has gone to great lengths to encourage in their citizenry.
DonQuigleone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 09:54   Link #23704
Terrestrial Dream
勇者
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tesla Leicht Institute
Age: 24
I am not going to say anything about this topic after this
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
They can feel insulted all they like. That is there right. But denying people the right to honor their own dead because of a minority is wrong. It be like forcing the President of the United States from going to a National Cemetery because there are a few Native Americans buried their that were drafted into the army and fought and died for a country that was oppressing their peoples. (oddly I can see that having happened even without looking at the rosters). Or the African soldiers that fought for the Confederacy. Their service is honored regardless of the fact their people were slaves. Or any number of peoples that have been drafted in times of war.
When politicians do it, no. If they were to visit individually as a citizen of Japan instead of politicians I would have no problem. But when politicians group up or a prime minister go, then that is a different story.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
I don't know how it works presently in Asia, but the old rules here were, "Majority rules, Minority rights". The minority of the dead and their families have the right to protest, but since they are not the majority of interned souls, they do not have the right to stop the majority from honoring their dead. This isn't a "get over it" sort of thing. This is a "tough, this is our country" sort of thing. That will seem nationalistic, but well, tough, it is. And frankly when it comes to the dead, I see no problem with it. They did serve the Emperor and died for the Emperor by Japanese tradition, and should be honored as such. Their own families can honor or dishonor them individually in their own ways.
The problem is not individual's honoring their dead, the problem is politicians going to there. Lets be honest, these politicians are not going there just to honor the dead, there is problematic message behind their visit. And like I said before ,not all of the enshrined are Japanese and I am pretty sure non-Japanese weren't exactly fond of the emperor as well. To many of these politicians, like the idiot Ishihara, the shrine still has tie to their "glorious" past.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
If you want symbolism, note that the Emperor himself would not go there after the A-listers souls were added. But he knew those men. He knew what they did. Of anyone in Japan, he, as Emperor, would have the say if they will be honored for service to him. The priests dishonor the Emperor, and they have to live with their shame. But that does not shame the rest of the souls their.
Whether or not the emperor went does not matter. The point is the meaning behind the pm's visit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ithekro View Post
If the A-Listers were alive and being honored...then there would be a problem. But if they were alive, they could be honored alone, and not just mixed in randomly with tens of thousands of other dead people.
They shouldn't be honored at all.
__________________
Terrestrial Dream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 09:58   Link #23705
kyp275
ZA ZOMBIE!!!
 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Somewhere in the EVE cluster...
Quote:
Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan View Post
In the following 5-6 centuries after that, China could have tried another attack if they wanted, but stll didn't. There has to be a reason for that, don't you think?
Because it's not really worth the effort? Force projection through naval power in large numbers has never really been practical until the advent of modern ships, nevermind the 1300s, especially when you consider the Mongols aren't much of a seafaring nation to begin with.

The only reason Japan did not succumb to the Mongols was purely through the grace of geography, or do you honestly believe that the Mongols would not have been able to steamroll Japan if it wasn't separated by the sea?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan View Post
Portugal was a real connection, but then the Dutch had very frequent trades with Japan even in the Edo Era (1641 to 1853 if I'm right). The domain of rangaku proved to be useful in a longer run while the Chinese gave even less attention to Western science.
It's not so much that the Chinese gave less attention to Western science, but rather that they were too busy being decimated by western colonial powers, being the far bigger pie than Japan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan View Post
I didn't say Japan had the advantage in all domains
Oh? then what was this?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan View Post
I see it as a major inferiority complex they can't solve on their own especially when Japan owned China in almost any domain for so many centuries.
I think the implication here is rather obvious, or are you gonna argue that there's any meaningful difference between your "all" and "almost any" here?

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan View Post
Let's put it that way: the Chinese chose to reject elements which could have helped them modernize their country despite having been in contact with Europeans for some time; meanwhile, the Japanese spent enough time looking at a number of things from Europe to finally accept embracing those same elements for their country's sake (hence my analogy of red pill vs. blue pill).
You seems to have mistaken western colonial powers to benevolent visitors from afar there. Were Japan force-fed opium down their throat? Like I said earlier, Japan benefited from being too small of a pie that lacks any valuable natural resources while the colonials were busy dismantling China.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan View Post
By the way, it wasn't the first time I'm at odds with kyp275 and I was fed up with his comments. I'm guessed I'm tired, but I'm still in the mood of shouting out loud that the PRC doesn't deserve anything, not even respect from anyone by the path they are taking.
Why, because I'm not blindly anti-China while simultaneously brown-nosing Japan? I respect the other side in a debate when it's backed up by logic and facts, especially in a topic as complex as geopolitics in Asia. Right now though you're coming across more like a Terry Jones for Japan, and the stuff you're saying isn't much different than those by Japanese ultra-nationalists.

Last edited by kyp275; 2012-09-17 at 02:00.
kyp275 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 11:39   Link #23706
Urzu 7
Juanita/Kiteless
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New England
Age: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
If anything, Haredi Jews are crazier then muslims. They're certainly a lot more sexist.

Anyway, I think it's wrong to single out Islam as a particularly violent religion, there are many muslim countries that are not particularly violent at all (Malaysia and Indonesia come to mind, though there are a few incidents).

Islam is not the only violent religion in existence. Even Buddhism has been behind a lot of religious violence. Almost every major insurrection in China has been driven by Buddhist cults like the White Lotus, and in Japan there was also the Ikko-Ikki. And while people seem to have warm fuzzy feelings towards the Dalai Lama and Tibetan Buddhism, before the communist takeover that country was positively feudal.

Also, if we describe a religion as being a particular type of worldview, then I think you'll find that most Christians and Jews are no longer really Christian or Jewish anymore, most of them would ascribe to world views like "liberalism" "conservatism" and "socialism". And of course, these secular world views have had their fair share of killing. Liberalism had Robespierre and the French revolutionary wars. Socialism (or more particularly Communism, it's extreme cousin) has a rich history of oppression and mass murder, and as for conservatism, almost every dictator in existence has been ostensibly been a conservative.

The only people left whose world views are dominated by Christianity and Judaism (people like the Haredi, or Westboro baptist church), are just as bad as radical Islam in terms of violence and prickliness.

And of course we're ignoring the elephant in room here, Nationalism, which has been responsible for more deaths and genocides in the last 200 years then any other political ideology.

So perhaps you think it's a degenerate sign that Muslims will kill and riot over insults to the prophet, but how about the fact that many people in the USA think flag burning should be an arrestable offence? I don't really see much difference here, in either case people are being arrested over insults to symbols.

And of course, look at what's going on in China right now with rioters destroying Japanese businesses? I don't see how this is any different from what's going on in the Middle East. In this case, the Chinese are being motivated by the most violent religion of all, Nationalism, which the CCP has gone to great lengths to encourage in their citizenry.

Unfortunately, yes, the world has all types of people who tend to be violent. There are extremists of all sorts. Certainly, there are many who were violent extremists who weren't religious (btw, I'm not anti-religious, I stick up for religion in anti-religion debates and I'm very spiritual).

We discussed Islam and violence, but all three Abrahamic religions have this problem. It is just that Judaism and Christianity have, for the most part, overcome some big hurdles in regards to these things. They haven't removed the problem of some of their members fighting and killing in the name of God, but things sure got better with all that.

Also, please don't say those westboro baptist church losers are following Christianity more closely than all other Christians. Please, don't. Those people are, in fact, going about it worse than all other types of Christians. It is very simple. Those people just do not align with Jesus Christ. Not even close. They align with the lord of evil instead.

And about the Dalai Lama, Tibet, and the feudal setup: The Tibetan people want every bit of that setup back if it meant the Chinese ceasing to oppress them. They want their land back. They want their homes back. They want their rights back. They want the lives of those who were murdered to be back. They want the thousands of monasteries, many of which which were historically important or held importance within their religion, to be back (the number of destroyed monasteries is well over 6,000). They want their way of life and culture to once again take place in their homeland and no longer be in jeopardy of ceasing to be in a matter decades.
__________________
http://forums.animesuki.com/images/as.icon/signaturepics/sigpic38963_5.gif

Last edited by Urzu 7; 2012-09-16 at 11:57.
Urzu 7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 11:53   Link #23707
Haak
Watching Ookami Shoujo...
 
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: UK
Age: 23
Well Islam can't really do anything about that. It's a set of beliefs passed down by a book. It can't force anyone to interpret it the correct way so it's mostly the people's problem.

I think that's mostly because most muslim/arab countries still happen to be deeply socially conservative, parochial and (regardless of the history) toxically anti-American rather than anything else (as well as a culture desensitised to violence through simple history rather than religion)
__________________
Haak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 12:15   Link #23708
Irenicus
Le fou, c'est moi
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
(Malaysia and Indonesia come to mind, though there are a few incidents).
Malaysia shares with a large number of Muslim countries a set of very reactionary Sharia-based social laws. Indonesia is always fighting some minority insurgency somewhere, though that's not Islam but rather just the fact of ruling a giant, diverse and densely populated archipelago.



As for the "Islam" problem, consider it a modernity problem. Even the Holy Qur'an in all its infallibility is only as good or bad as the people that read it.

If anything the religion as a whole took a few step backwards over the centuries with first the relative decline of the vibrant Sufi mysticism of the "Golden Age" and the early Ottomans, the fossilization of an increasingly conservative ulama scholarly class who saw the arrival of the modern world as a threat, and then, to make things worse, the 19th, 20th and 21st century phenomenon of a challenge to this already conservative traditional religious authority from the reactionary side, even the now "moderate" Muslim Brotherhood was once one such radical group. Al-Azhar scholars view Wahhabism and Salafism with probably more contempt than you and I (and being Sunni scholars they lol @ Iranian imams' fatwa), but the new generation of religious fanatics and televangelists on Arab TV stations pay them no heed, and it's pushing the traditional ulama increasingly reactionary to "keep up."

Of course, all of this is fundamentally an expression of rage at the dislocation that rapidly changing societies produce. Idiots, you can say, shooting all the wrong targets, and I have little sympathy for murderers and fanatics, but their rage itself isn't very hard to comprehend. Until very, very recently there was not even a "democracy" or "public sphere" safety gauge to vent.
Irenicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 12:58   Link #23709
DonQuigleone
Knight Errant
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urzu 7 View Post
We discussed Islam and violence, but all three Abrahamic religions have this problem. It is just that Judaism and Christianity have, for the most part, overcome some big hurdles in regards to these things. They haven't removed the problem of some of their members fighting and killing in the name of God, but things sure got better with all that.

Also, please don't say those westboro baptist church losers are following Christianity more closely than all other Christians. Please, don't. Those people are, in fact, going about it worse than all other types of Christians. It is very simple. Those people just do not align with Jesus Christ. Not even close. They align with the lord of evil instead.
In the middle ages the way europeans viewed the world was through the lens of christianity. Our ideas of laws, ethics and behaviour were entirely Christian. Today, most modern christians do not have their world view predominantly shaped by christianity, but by more modern ideologies like Liberalism or Socialism.

When I meet a modern Irishman, he may or may not believe in god, but when he views the world, he is not viewing it in the way catholicism says to view it. He freely uses contraception, laughs at jesus parodies and generally doesn't think about religion all that much. The issues that enflame his interest are not related to Christian teachings, but secular ones. Now go back 40 years, and everyone viewed things in the Catholic way, and our country was bigoted and repressive. We had an active censor constantly on the prowl for Blasphemy, and the arch-bishop of Dublin was more influential then any other public figure. Our schools were Catholic schools, taught by priests and nuns, and they taught all manner of backwards things.

Christianity never "mellowed out", more people are just less Christian, it's very rare these days to meet people whose entire lives and views are shaped by their faiths in a western country, and when you do find such people, they are little different from the Muslims that so many criticize, be they Jewish, Christian, Communist or Fascist(I think to be a Communist requires a level of faith equal to being a Christian).

People who form their beliefs on dogma (of any kind) tend to end out taking an intolerant attitude to others, ultimately resulting in violence on a massive scale. This is not a problem unique to Islam, but common to all dogmas. Doesn't matter if your prophet is Jesus, Mohammed, Moses or Marx.

That said, there's good elements to many of these things, taken in moderation. It's only when your thoughts are consumed by these ideas, that you begin to see the people who don't adhere to them as being first unfortunate, then dysfunctional, then evil, then out to kill you. That is the end result of extreme chauvinistic faith. If you truly believe your beliefs are the path to all that is good and righteous, then logically, those who do not practice them, or worse openly reject them, are evil.
Quote:
And about the Dalai Lama, Tibet, and the feudal setup: The Tibetan people want every bit of that setup back if it meant the Chinese ceasing to oppress them. They want their land back. They want their homes back. They want their rights back. They want the lives of those who were murdered to be back. They want the thousands of monasteries, many of which which were historically important or held importance within their religion, to be back (the number of destroyed monasteries is well over 6,000). They want their way of life and culture to once again take place in their homeland and no longer be in jeopardy of ceasing to be in a matter decades.
I'm not arguing about what the tibetans want (obviously they want independence, and there is nothing wrong with this). I'm just saying that a lot of westerners seem to have a very flowery view of what Tibet was like under the lamas. They seem to think it was some peaceful wise Shangri-La it, which is utter nonsense. No matter which way you cut it, it was a theocracy, where most of the population were serfs working the estates of rich Monasteries and other wealthy landowners. Not only that, but the monks would frequently hand out punishments like floggings, hands or feet being cut off, and the gouging out of eyes, for such relatively minor crimes as stealing from the monasteries.
DonQuigleone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 15:25   Link #23710
RRW
Unspecified
*Scanlator
 
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Unspecified
Armada of British naval power massing in the Gulf as Israel prepares an Iran strike

Quote:
Battleships, aircraft carriers, minesweepers and submarines from 25 nations are converging on the strategically important Strait of Hormuz in an unprecedented show of force as Israel and Iran move towards the brink of war.
Western leaders are convinced that Iran will retaliate to any attack by attempting to mine or blockade the shipping lane through which passes around 18 million barrels of oil every day, approximately 35 per cent of the world’s petroleum traded by sea.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...an-strike.html

i think is better to make new threads for current conflict. one for middle east and other for China-Japan
__________________
RRW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 16:01   Link #23711
Irenicus
Le fou, c'est moi
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Age: 25
This article is...sensationalized.

The exercise was planned long in coming, before Netanyahu went off the deep end. It's done to show Iran that the Western powers have the capability to reopen the Straits, yes, but not because the West is rallying to war. If that's the case, putting all those naval assets in the restricted Gulf region before starting one is war criminal level idiocy.

And of course, nobody wants war. Obama rebuffed Netanyahu; Britain signals the same thing. Not even Israel, which is by now full of people increasingly hysterical over their prime minister going hysterical, want a war.

And...battleships? What battleships? Nobody in the world operates battleships. Even the Iowas are already decommissioned once and for all. Only Russia operates a battlecruiser (well, 3 rusting somewhere and 1 active), and it's just a very big missile cruiser.

I don't like the way news articles like this are going. War fever can shove it. The Muslim world is already spooked enough.
Irenicus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 18:24   Link #23712
SeijiSensei
AS Oji-kun
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Plimoth
Age: 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irenicus View Post
This article is...sensationalized.
It's the Telegraph, the voice of Tory Britain for decades. The Telegraph is the "high-Tory" paper, while the tabloid Daily Mail targets a more "middle-brow" conservative audience. Murdoch's The Sun is a mass-appeal paper much like his US property the New York Post.

I noticed that the New York Times has no story that I can find on these maneuvers.

An article in yesterday's International Herald Tribune about the Senkaku conflict observes that Tuesday is the anniversary of the 1931 Mukden incident* which began the Japanese conquest of Manchuria. This event is depicted in episode seven of Senkou no Night Raid and was considered so controversial that it was only shown on the web. Sounds like we should be seeing another round of anti-Japanese demonstrations in a couple of days.

The IHT reports a disturbing comment late last week from "the state-run Beijing Evening News [that] China should use nuclear weapons in the dispute, claiming it would be 'simpler.'"
__________

*Having read the description of this event, I thought I recalled a scene in a videogame where a railroad station was bombed. Sure enough, it's in the first installment of the JRPG Shadow Hearts. The time period is all wrong, as the game takes place before World War I, but the first time you meet Marguerite (the personification of the famous spy "Mata Hari") she is bombing a railway station in Manchuria.
__________________

Last edited by SeijiSensei; 2012-09-16 at 18:54.
SeijiSensei is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 18:30   Link #23713
KiraYamatoFan
No end to my talents
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada
Age: 31
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...ran-middleeast

If Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's administration asked for more trouble after the war threats and the entire media coverage about what happens in Syria, I think they just did on both fronts. What are they thinking by going public with that, I really don't know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SeijiSensei View Post
It's the Telegraph, the voice of Tory Britain for decades.
UK's paper version of the Fox News, eh? I guess I know now what to read or not should I get my feet in England someday.

I add my voice to RRW's in order to create a separate thread for the current crises.
__________________
"Let 'Blood, Blood, BLOOD!' be your motto! Slit their gizzards!" - King Richard from Blackadder.
KiraYamatoFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 18:33   Link #23714
Vexx
Obey the Darkly Cute ...
*Author
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: On the whole, I'd rather be in Kyoto ...
Age: 57
George Will slaps the Romney campaign with a reality trout about the Islamic protests and hits the nail on the head:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/0...usaolp00000009

Quote:
Will said. "If the video hadn't been the pretext, another one would have been found." He added: “There are sectarian tribal civil wars raging across the region that we neither understand nor can measurably mitigate."
Vexx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 18:39   Link #23715
RRW
Unspecified
*Scanlator
 
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Unspecified
well actually my friend post it on FB so i think i found it intersting

Quote:
Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan View Post
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...ran-middleeast

If Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's administration asked for more trouble after the war threats and the entire media coverage about what happens in Syria, I think they just did on both fronts. What are they thinking by going public with that, I really don't know.



UK's paper version of the Fox News, eh? I guess I know now what to read or not should I get my feet in England someday.

I add my voice to RRW's in order to create a separate thread for the current crises.
well i can make china-japan one since it more interesting. Middle east one probably calm down for month or so (except for Iran Israel which took forever)
__________________
RRW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 18:46   Link #23716
DonQuigleone
Knight Errant
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan View Post
UK's paper version of the Fox News, eh? I guess I know now what to read or not should I get my feet in England someday.
I wouldn't go quite that far. I've read The Daily Telegraph on many occasions, and it has quality writing and coverage, even if it is somewhat conservatively slanted(though mostly in the Opinion section).

The closer equivalent to Fox news in the UK is actually The Times, and Sky News, which are owned by Rupert Murdoch (as is Fox).

Any bias in any of these is pretty small beans compared to Fox though.

As for that article, it is a bit sensationalistic, in my experience the Telegraph is not usually that sensationalist.
DonQuigleone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 18:51   Link #23717
KiraYamatoFan
No end to my talents
 
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Montreal, QC, Canada
Age: 31
Quote:
Originally Posted by DonQuigleone View Post
I wouldn't go quite that far. I've read The Daily Telegraph on many occasions, and it has quality writing and coverage, even if it is somewhat conservatively slanted(though mostly in the Opinion section).

The closer equivalent to Fox news in the UK is actually The Times, and Sky News, which are owned by Rupert Murdoch (as is Fox).

Any bias in any of these is pretty small beans compared to Fox though.

As for that article, it is a bit sensationalistic, in my experience the Telegraph is not usually that sensationalist.
Thanks for the clarification. When the words "Voice of the Tory Britain" came up, I guess the first thing which came to mind was Fox News.

About the article itself, I guess we should ask the editor-in-chief why they added sensationalism here and now.
__________________
"Let 'Blood, Blood, BLOOD!' be your motto! Slit their gizzards!" - King Richard from Blackadder.
KiraYamatoFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 19:07   Link #23718
DonQuigleone
Knight Errant
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Age: 26
Indeed, but Tory doesn't mean mad insane the way "conservative" might mean in the US. It's more old style, sane, conservatism.
DonQuigleone is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 19:08   Link #23719
RRW
Unspecified
*Scanlator
 
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Unspecified
i made china-japan island dispute thread

http://forums.animesuki.com/showthread.php?t=114790
__________________
RRW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2012-09-16, 19:20   Link #23720
SeijiSensei
AS Oji-kun
 
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Plimoth
Age: 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by KiraYamatoFan View Post
Thanks for the clarification. When the words "Voice of the Tory Britain" came up, I guess the first thing which came to mind was Fox News.
Don Q is quite correct about the Telegraph. By "Tory Britain" I meant the more upper-class component of British Conservatism. As he says, the paper is generally well-written and intended for a educated, "blue-blooded" audience. The Mail and the Sun target "working-class conservatives".

Market researchers in Britain still apparently use the same alphabetical class categories that they did when I was studying British politics back in the 1970s. Groups "A" and "B" are the top of the class distribution; they have traditionally been the target audience of the Telegraph. The Guardian, formerly the Manchester Guardian, was the voice of traditional British liberalism and appeals to the more left-wing members of AB, and the managerial middle-class in C1. In historical terms these forces are best represented by their leaders in the 1880s, the Conservative Disraeli and the Liberal Gladstone.

The Labour paper in Britain has traditionally been the Daily Mirror which competes against the Mail and Sun. Labour recruits from the various working-class categories, C2, D and E, though the C2 group often gave a substantial share of its support to the Conservatives and were the focus of many scholarly discussions about the roots of "working-class conservatism" in the 1960's and 1970's. The American equivalent of this conundrum is working-class support for the Republicans as discussed in books like Thomas Frank's What's the Matter with Kansas?.

Kansas, by the way, is considering whether to bar President Obama's name from the November ballot on the grounds he had a Kenyan father. (Despite the claims of Donald Trump and others, there is no question that Obama is constitutionally eligible to be the President.) "Birthers" conveniently overlook the fact that Mitt Romney's father George was born in Mexico after Mitt's grandfather moved there to avoid prosecution for polygamy. Being white Mitt need not provide any additional documentation whatsoever.
__________________

Last edited by SeijiSensei; 2012-09-16 at 19:40.
SeijiSensei is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
current affairs, discussion, international, news

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 20:25.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
We use Silk.