Tony Blair's Comment - CNN

[BrerAnansi]

There might be a certain level of regionalization, but that is relatively slight.  Even in countries where regionalization is more defined, a general melting of those regional cultures exists within that particular country (again, there are exceptions)

Exception in cases such as countries in Africa (for which I already conceded that no national culture exists).

Uhh... did I ever state that there was a national culture in America?  I don't think so.  I conceded that some countries do not have a national culture.  Furthermore, extremes on the spectrum don't mean a whole lot... statistically, they're generally not even considered.

When the exceptions start to outnumber the data points...maybe it's time for a new hypothesis...

[parsley]

Dude -- I lived in France for a year and in England for three years.

But I'm glad we're making progress. Caliphate and Qutb. See? Your knickers are showing. You're scared of "da muslim" aren't ya? Kilts are fun, saris are cute, tutus are exotic, and headscarves are scary.

(I wonder if skinned heads are scary too?)


Anyway. Yes. Sign of the times and all that. You people watch too much cable TV and know too few different kinds of people. Crack open a book; you'll be glad of it.

Oh, wow, gee.  That added a lot to the discussion.  Why use facts when you can just claim omniscience and employ misdirection and ad hominems?

Arguments become a lot easier when you act like you're on FoxNews.

[FossilJ]

There might be a certain level of regionalization, but that is relatively slight.  Even in countries where regionalization is more defined, a general melting of those regional cultures exists within that particular country (again, there are exceptions)

Exception in cases such as countries in Africa (for which I already conceded that no national culture exists).

Uhh... did I ever state that there was a national culture in America?  I don't think so.  I conceded that some countries do not have a national culture.  Furthermore, extremes on the spectrum don't mean a whole lot... statistically, they're generally not even considered.

When the exceptions start to outnumber the data points...maybe it's time for a new hypothesis...

Well, this made my point before I had a chance to state it.

[redemption]

Oh, wow, gee.  That added a lot to the discussion.  Why use facts when you can just claim omniscience and employ misdirection and ad hominems?

Arguments become a lot easier when you act like you're on FoxNews.

I'm saying to you that a LOT of muslim women wear veils. A LOT. In Malaysia as well as in Lyons; in Jakarta as well as in Luton. Know what I mean? Wearing veils has NOTHING to do with Qutb, salafism or the caliphate. It is a mark profound ignorance and a sign of deep-throating political propaganda (I wonder that you don't gag; do you swallow?) to think otherwise.

I posed straight-up questions, and you gave me non sequiturs in response. I expect nothing from Baccaraga, but I did and do expect you at least to show some honesty and sophistication in this and other discussions.

These are mostly young people -- 3rd generation Brits & Frenchies. They wear headscarves, for goodness sakes. That's it. Much in the same way that little old Italian-origin ladies in Clapham do; like little old Irish ladies do in Liverpool. It is a mark of their faith and of their tradition.

A few posts back, I suggested a starting point. Why veils and not pork. I suggest you think on that, at least a little bit.

[President_Baccaga]

There might be a certain level of regionalization, but that is relatively slight.  Even in countries where regionalization is more defined, a general melting of those regional cultures exists within that particular country (again, there are exceptions)

Exception in cases such as countries in Africa (for which I already conceded that no national culture exists).

Uhh... did I ever state that there was a national culture in America?  I don't think so.  I conceded that some countries do not have a national culture.  Furthermore, extremes on the spectrum don't mean a whole lot... statistically, they're generally not even considered.

When the exceptions start to outnumber the data points...maybe it's time for a new hypothesis...

Someone said that a national culture did not exist.  I don't have to prove that all countries have a national country to demonstrate my disagreement; one country would suffice.

[FossilJ]

You seem to be obstinately avoiding the point of the argument.

And what about Lega Nord and Due Sicilie today?

What about Lega Nord?  Lega Nord exists primarily because of wealth distribution fostered in Rome from the relatively rich north to the poor south.  It has basically nothing to do with culture.  Sure, there are slight differences between la Padania and Palermo but those differences are slight and are the exception.

This point actually strengthens my argument.

They want to secede and arbitrarily draw up new boundaries.  Clearly Italian culture can't keep the country together by itself.  That's because the two are separate ideals.  The former is a sociological entity.  The latter is a political entity.  They are related, but not necessarily so, and there are no specific causal ties between them.  

Have you ever lived in Sicily?  Do you know anything about Sicilian culture?  I have lived there for two years and my girlfriend is Sicilian, so if you really know something about why Due Sicilie exists, let me know.

Oh man.  You know, many of my friends are black -- I lived with blacks for thirteen years!  Anything you say about blacks is going to be absolutely useless as a result.  I don't even need to address your point.

Also, your comment regarding African states is a tad ignorant.  

Why ignorant?  If there's any place where your statement that countries only have "farcical, arbitrary political boundaries" holds true, it's in Africa,

No, it's everywhere.  I'm not giving you a narrative in the history of empires.  That's relevant, but a separate string of thought.

I'll continue, anyway.

where during the period of African conquest and colonization, European powers divided lands (and hence ethnic groups) without any regard whatsoever to historical tribal boundaries, alliances, etc.  There are many places in Africa where individuals care much more about their ethnic identity than any affiliation to a particular country.  

[/quote]

I'm not going to argue too much about this, because it's irrelevant to my point, and I honestly don't think there are many examples of political states made up of single, unified nations.  

I suggest you re-read your African history, starting in the mid-1950s.  Not every state turns out to be Algeria or Angola.  Your point is generally true regarding ethnic groups, but then, that point is generally true across the entire globe.  Which is something you refuse to acknowledge.  Why, I don't understand.

[President_Baccaga]

Well, this made my point before I had a chance to state it.

Not really.  Italy has a strong underlying Italian culture; just because there are slight regional variations doesn't mean that a national culture fails to exist.

[FossilJ]

Someone said that a national culture did not exist.  I don't have to prove that all countries have a national country to demonstrate my disagreement; one country would suffice.

Whoa, whoa, whoa, Doctor Putwordinmouth!  This is not at all what I said.

I said that countries do not have cultures.  Nation and state are two separate things entirely.  

[President_Baccaga]

I expect nothing from Baccaraga

As I expect less than nothing from you, red.  Nice try on the spelling though; rather ignorant, given that I'm sure you didn't take the time to actually understand what "baccaga" means.

[FossilJ]

Well, this made my point before I had a chance to state it.

Not really.  Italy has a strong underlying Italian culture; just because there are slight regional variations doesn't mean that a national culture fails to exist.

So then you're clearly not understanding my argument, nor are you understanding BrerAnansi's.



(By the way, I also made provisions that stated there are exceptions to the rule that countries don't have cultures.  I'm being nice by doing so -- in a strict semantic sense, I don't need to, but I understand the tendency to conflate "nation" and "country".  So you proving an exception to the rule is somewhat puzzling -- it's redundant.)