Tuis » Algemeen » Koeitjies & kalfies » Leendert the Eristic
| Leendert the Eristic [boodskap #27413] |
Mon, 18 October 1999 00:00  |
Adam
Boodskappe: 6
Geregistreer: October 1999
Karma: 0
|
Junior Lid |
|
|
Leendert:
If there is anything worse than a liar, it's a clever liar. You are
certainly clever, though I doubt you're intelligent.
Look up the word "eristic", it's your trademark. You are always far more
interested in appearing to win an argument, than in getting any closer to
reality through debate. You're a pedant, but let's give credit where it is
due... you're a persistent terrier pedant, obviously with a lot of time on
your hands to yap and snap at the heels of your so-called opponents.
In the past, certain Afrikaners (especially bureaucrats and pedantic
academics) could impose their idea of the truth from on high, backed by the
power of the State. Now such people can only yap and whine and post
portentous judgments. Some things have improved in SA!
I personally think it's a massive tragedy that the Afrikaans language and
Afrikaner culture as a whole has such a tenuous future. People like you,
far from contributing to Afrikanerdom's strength and endurance, are
ultimately responsible for its demise. You have nothing to do with the
independent boere of the 19th century who were prepared to fight the largest
power in the world. You have everything to do with the little people
(especially but not only Afrikaners) who hid behind the power of the state
in the 20th century and exploited the masses, all the time claiming you were
bringing civilization to them.
This is goodbye, Leendert. I leave it to you to have the last word. You're
good at that.
David
___________________________________________________
Leendert van Oostrum wrote in message ...
>
> Adam wrote in message ...
>>
>>
>> Yes, that is correct. But let's not be naive here. It was not just
>> rhetoric. It was also real, bonecrushing discrimination.
>
> Correct.
>
>> Jan Smuts may (or
>> may not) have approved of screwing the blacks in SA, but he didn't just
>> pretend at election time. Between elections he acted as though he meant
>> every word. Even people like Hofmeyr, who despised the idea of
>> discrimination, sacrificed their principles in fact.
>
>
> Please don't tell those starry-eyed weepers who tell us "If only the Nats
> did not come to power"!
>
>>
>> Where Verwoerd was different from anyone before him (or any politician
>> before him) was that he changed the rhetoric by emphasising another
> rhetoric
>> altogether i.e. eiesoortige ontwikkeling. Like JJ Rousseau he was quite
>> prepared to "force them to be free" if blacks didn't have the good sense to
>> accept what he claimed to be in their best interests.
>
> That, actually, was in the spirit of the times. It was at the hight of
> modernety (Toffler's 2nd wave). It was commonly assumed that "experts" knew
> best.
>
> Doctors knew best what was good for your health (e.g. advising women not to
> breastfeed) Teachers knew best what was good for children. Colonial powers
> new best what was good for colonies. Brahmin knew what was best for Pariah
> (still do, in fact!)
>
>> Verwoerd found a way
>> for the white to have his cake and eat it... to pretend to help the black,
>
> Are you saying there was nothing other than pretense?
>
>> but to make sure he could not achieve his own aspirations...
>
>
> Please be specific about black aspirations that were thwarted (not your
> assumptions about such aspirations) and the ways in which Verwoerd "made
> sure" that they could not be achieved.
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>> I see. You are asserting that Verwoerd did not need to pay attention to
>>> voter perceptions?
>>
>>
>> SA was unique in that the govt really only had to pay attention to one
> voter
>> perception, "is this govt the best for the interests of the white man"?
>> Aside from that Verwoerd was very free to do what he wanted
>
>
> Precisely! In other words, Verwoerd was _not_ free to ignore what you choose
> to term "the best interests of the white man".
>
>>>> Nothing you can say, Leenhart, will ever change the fact that blacks
>>>> experienced one of the most repressive and exploitative regimes in
> history
>>>> under the National Party.
>>>
>>> I lose interest in discussions when the phrase "Nothing you say... will
>> ever
>>> change..." is brought in.
>>
>>
>> Sorry to lose your interest. In fact my statement doesn't interest me
>> either... it is so obvious that I was bored just making it. Apologies, I
>> thought you might contest the fact. I underestimated you
>
>
> Very well, then. Please support, with some evidence, the statement that you
> find so boring.
>
> And yes. You underestimate your readers.
>
>>
>>
>> Yes, I totally agree with this. If you think I'm conducting a campaign to
>> spank and berate the old Nat govts, you're mistaken.
>
>
> What, precisely, is your campaign about then?
>
>>
>>
>> Well, if I misunderstood, I apologize. Did you not mean to say, then, that
>> Verwoerd wanted money for humanitarian and moral reasons to plough into
>> Bantu education, but that he was frustrated by the opposition?
>
> I did not mean to, nor did I say so.
>
>> Did you not
>> mean to say that the opposition (apparently thinking ahead of its time to
>> the neo-conservative in the UK and US in the 1980s) made it difficult for
>> Verwoerd to achieve his idealistic and unselfish goals by arguing for
>> keeping taxes down and letting the free market rule? If I got it wrong,
> I'm
>> sorry.
>
> I did not mean to say so, and neither did I.
>
>> Would appreciate your clarification.
>
>
> Start by reading what I wrote in the first place. And refrain from reading
> into my words what you would like me to say. That is very bad
> historiography.
>
>
>>> More to the point, though: If we insist on applying our own moral
>> judgements
>>> to our ancestors, neglecting the context of their own times, we must
> assume
>>> that our own descendants will do that to us - that, after all, is the
>>> example we set. It is, furthermore, wise to assume that their ideas of
>>> morality will differ substantially from our own, and that they will have
>>> much to reproach us for.
>>>
>>> Consider that - and cringe.
>>
>>
>> No, that does not make me cringe. I totally agree. Let us be very clear
>> that they were people like us (we came from them). Let us be clear that
>> many of us are as "guilty" as them of taking advantage of discrimination or
>> at least living comfortably with it)... this includes me and probably you
>> too Leendert, if you're over 30). Let us be clear that they were acting as
>> the majority of whites at that time throughout the world would have acted
> in
>> their situation.
>>
>> BUT let us not extrapolate from that that the way they acted was anything
> to
>> be proud of. If we try to do that, our descendants will simply laugh at
> us.
>
> Unless the alternative to their actions was worse than what they did. The
> alternative to what was done was _not_ a 1980's free market system. The
> alternative was African Socialism and Ujamaa.
>
>> I detect in many of your posts, Leendert, that transition from trying to
>> understand without judging with extraneous criteria, to justifying the
> past.
>
>
> What I detect in your writings, David, is no sign at all of trying to
> understand without judging with extraneous criteria. Your use of 1980's
> ideas of free market economies being a case in point.
>
> Furthermore: There is no such thing as "justifying" "the past". It cannot be
> done. All we can do is to attempt to understand why people did particular
> things, and not others.
>
> In your case, you choose to ascribe to people some motives while excluding
> others. This, of course, is correct. The problem is that you give no reasons
> for ascribing some motives while excluding others.
>
> I have, therefore, no reason to accept your judgement.
>
>> If I'm wrong, I apologize once again, but part of the blame lies with you
>> and the thin-skinned prickly way you express your opinions.
>
>
> I get thin skinned and prickly when people ascribe to me statements I did
> not make. You did that, and did so again in this post.
>
>>
>> Gloudina has already intimated that my criticisms of her are not acceptable
>> here if expressed in English. She has the right to do so. If you feel the
>> same way, I promise not to trouble (or bore, or amuse) you! Let me know!
>
>
> I do not feel se same way Gloudina does. However, I would also prefer not to
> be bored any longer. Neither am I interested in having any further words put
> in my mouth.
>
> Kind regards, LeeLeendert:
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Leendert the Eristic [boodskap #27438 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #27413] |
Tue, 19 October 1999 00:00  |
Leendert van Oostrum
Boodskappe: 1880
Geregistreer: July 2000
Karma: 0
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
Adam wrote in message ...
> Leendert:
>
> If there is anything worse than a liar, it's a clever liar. You are
> certainly clever, though I doubt you're intelligent.
There _is_ something even worse: A stupid liar - such as you.
>
> Look up the word "eristic", it's your trademark.
What makes you think that I need to look it up? Because, perhaps, _you_ had
to mine it from a thesaurus?
And yes, I think the description fits.
You are always far more
> interested in appearing to win an argument, than in getting any closer to
> reality through debate.
How would you know? You refuse debate the moment you are pressured to follow
the conventions of civilised debate.
"Truth", on the other hand, you would not recognise if you tripped over it.
> You're a pedant,
Yes. I get pedantic. Particularly when a silly little know-it-all swoops
down on the news group and starts lecturing everyone, left, right and
centre - from Gloudina up!
> but let's give credit where it is
> due... you're a persistent terrier pedant, obviously with a lot of time >on
> your hands to yap and snap at the heels of your so-called >opponents.
You flatter yourself. To respond to your infantile blustering takes almost
no time at all.
And yes "so-called opponent" describes your own status accurately.
>
> In the past, certain Afrikaners (especially bureaucrats and pedantic
> academics) could impose their idea of the truth from on high, backed by the
> power of the State. Now such people can only yap and whine and post
> portentous judgments. Some things have improved in SA!
You are wrong. As always in the past, the great bulk of the yapping and
whining still comes from outside the country. The Empire is out there,
still.
>
> I personally think it's a massive tragedy that the Afrikaans language and
> Afrikaner culture as a whole has such a tenuous future. People like you,
> far from contributing to Afrikanerdom's strength and endurance, are
> ultimately responsible for its demise. You have nothing to do with the
> independent boere of the 19th century who were prepared to fight the largest
> power in the world. You have everything to do with the little people
> (especially but not only Afrikaners) who hid behind the power of the state
> in the 20th century and exploited the masses, all the time claiming you were
> bringing civilization to them.
Your own behaviour in this newsgroup closely matches the behaviour of the
"little people" whom you describe above.
Indeed, your demeanour reminds me of the worst kind of colonialist
know-it-all coming to "civilise" the Boers. Condescendingly colonising also
this news group with your imperialist language and ideas
You arrant fool! (To say it in the politest way.)
Did you really believe that you could come and overwhelm the "dirty Boers"
with your half baked theories, lifted from the self serving imperialist
cogitations that comprise your so-called "standard histories"?
And make us grateful for being forced to converse with you in your own
language to get a truth or two through your thick hide and into your thicker
skull?
I do not suppose you have the faintest idea how savagely barbaric your
behaviour is!
And, being the yellow dog that you are, you slink away yelping and hollering
when you get kicked in the butt as you deserve!
> This is goodbye, Leendert. I leave it to you to have the last word. You're
> good at that.
Thanks! And no, I doubt your contributions will be greatly missed.
Thanks, also, for demonstrating why I should give your book a miss if it
ever finds a publisher.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Leendert the Eristic [boodskap #27439 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #27413] |
Tue, 19 October 1999 00:00 |
Jimmie
Boodskappe: 21
Geregistreer: October 1999
Karma: 0
|
Junior Lid |
|
|
Sulke antwoorde laat mens dink jy het nooit verby standerd vyf gekom met die
ontwikkeling van jou mentaliteiet nie. Soos die ou sê: jy's dalk "clever", maar
defnitief nie intelegent nie.
Leendert van Oostrum wrote:
> Adam wrote in message ...
>> Leendert:
>>
>> If there is anything worse than a liar, it's a clever liar. You are
>> certainly clever, though I doubt you're intelligent.
>
> There _is_ something even worse: A stupid liar - such as you.
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Leendert the Eristic [boodskap #27512 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #27413] |
Wed, 20 October 1999 00:00 |
Simon van der Schans
Boodskappe: 263
Geregistreer: January 1999
Karma: 0
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
Leendert van Oostrum wrote in message
...
>
> Adam wrote in message ...
>> Leendert:
>>
>> If there is anything worse than a liar, it's a clever liar. You are
>> certainly clever, though I doubt you're intelligent.
>
>
> There _is_ something even worse: A stupid liar - such as you.
>
>>
>> Look up the word "eristic", it's your trademark.
>
> What makes you think that I need to look it up? Because, perhaps, _you_ had
> to mine it from a thesaurus?
>
> And yes, I think the description fits.
>
> You are always far more
>> interested in appearing to win an argument, than in getting any closer to
>> reality through debate.
>
> How would you know? You refuse debate the moment you are pressured to follow
> the conventions of civilised debate.
>
> "Truth", on the other hand, you would not recognise if you tripped over it.
>
>> You're a pedant,
>
> Yes. I get pedantic. Particularly when a silly little know-it-all swoops
> down on the news group and starts lecturing everyone, left, right and
> centre - from Gloudina up!
>
>
>> but let's give credit where it is
>> due... you're a persistent terrier pedant, obviously with a lot of time >on
>> your hands to yap and snap at the heels of your so-called
> opponents.
>
> You flatter yourself. To respond to your infantile blustering takes almost
> no time at all.
>
> And yes "so-called opponent" describes your own status accurately.
>
>>
>> In the past, certain Afrikaners (especially bureaucrats and pedantic
>> academics) could impose their idea of the truth from on high, backed by the
>> power of the State. Now such people can only yap and whine and post
>> portentous judgments. Some things have improved in SA!
>
>
> You are wrong. As always in the past, the great bulk of the yapping and
> whining still comes from outside the country. The Empire is out there,
> still.
>
>>
>> I personally think it's a massive tragedy that the Afrikaans language and
>> Afrikaner culture as a whole has such a tenuous future. People like you,
>> far from contributing to Afrikanerdom's strength and endurance, are
>> ultimately responsible for its demise. You have nothing to do with the
>> independent boere of the 19th century who were prepared to
fight the
> largest
>> power in the world. You have everything to do with the little people
>> (especially but not only Afrikaners) who hid behind the power of the state
>> in the 20th century and exploited the masses, all the time
claiming you
> were
>> bringing civilization to them.
>
>
> Your own behaviour in this newsgroup closely matches the behaviour of the
> "little people" whom you describe above.
>
> Indeed, your demeanour reminds me of the worst kind of colonialist
> know-it-all coming to "civilise" the Boers. Condescendingly colonising also
> this news group with your imperialist language and ideas
>
> You arrant fool! (To say it in the politest way.)
>
> Did you really believe that you could come and overwhelm the "dirty Boers"
> with your half baked theories, lifted from the self serving imperialist
> cogitations that comprise your so-called "standard histories"?
>
> And make us grateful for being forced to converse with you in your own
> language to get a truth or two through your thick hide and into your thicker
> skull?
>
> I do not suppose you have the faintest idea how savagely barbaric your
> behaviour is!
>
> And, being the yellow dog that you are, you slink away yelping and hollering
> when you get kicked in the butt as you deserve!
>
>> This is goodbye, Leendert. I leave it to you to have the last
word.
> You're
>> good at that.
>
>
> Thanks! And no, I doubt your contributions will be greatly missed.
>
> Thanks, also, for demonstrating why I should give your book a miss if it
> ever finds a publisher.
Aan Bees: Het jy telling gehou hier?
Swart Simon
|
|
|
|
| Re: Leendert the Eristic [boodskap #27513 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #27413] |
Wed, 20 October 1999 00:00 |
Bees
Boodskappe: 186
Geregistreer: October 1998
Karma: 0
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
Simon van der Schans wrote in message
news:7ulbu8$r1
>
> Aan Bees: Het jy telling gehou hier?
So min of meer. Geen uitklophoue. Min of meer gelyk op punte,
miskien het David 'n effense voorsprong. Tot nou toe was hy (sy
idees) varser. Albei kom nou egter bietjie vuisvoos voor.... wie
sal die deursettingsvermoë hê?
So effens ernstiger - ek geniet Adam / David se bydraes nogal. En
die interaksie nog meer.
Groete
Bees
|
|
|
|
| Re: Leendert the Eristic [boodskap #27514 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #27413] |
Wed, 20 October 1999 00:00 |
Leendert van Oostrum
Boodskappe: 1880
Geregistreer: July 2000
Karma: 0
|
Senior Lid |
|
|
Beste Jimmie,
Ek maak nie aanspraak op "intellegensie" nie.
Dit is vir my genoeg om te onderskei tussen feite en beweringe.
Maar, aangesien jy blykbaar beswaar het teen die feit dat ek die man 'n
leuenaar noem, is jy seker bereid om te bewys dat ek die stellings gemaak
het wat hy aan my toegeskryf het?
Vriendelike groete, Leendert
Jimmie wrote in message ...
> Sulke antwoorde laat mens dink jy het nooit verby standerd vyf gekom met die
> ontwikkeling van jou mentaliteiet nie. Soos die ou sê: jy's dalk "clever", maar
> defnitief nie intelegent nie.
>
> Leendert van Oostrum wrote:
>
>> Adam wrote in message ...
>>> Leendert:
>>>
>>> If there is anything worse than a liar, it's a clever liar. You are
>>> certainly clever, though I doubt you're intelligent.
>>
>> There _is_ something even worse: A stupid liar - such as you.
>>
>
|
|
|
|
| Re: Leendert the Eristic [boodskap #27516 is 'n antwoord op boodskap #27413] |
Wed, 20 October 1999 00:00 |
Byter
Boodskappe: 7
Geregistreer: September 1999
Karma: 0
|
Junior Lid |
|
|
Ja Swaer, miskien is Suid-Afrika beter af sonder party mense, en ook sonder
party skrywers!
In article , "Leendert says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Adam wrote in message ...
>> Leendert:
>>
>> If there is anything worse than a liar, it's a clever liar. You are
>> certainly clever, though I doubt you're intelligent.
>
>
> There _is_ something even worse: A stupid liar - such as you.
>
>>
>> Look up the word "eristic", it's your trademark.
>
> What makes you think that I need to look it up? Because, perhaps, _you_ had
> to mine it from a thesaurus?
>
> And yes, I think the description fits.
>
> You are always far more
>> interested in appearing to win an argument, than in getting any closer to
>> reality through debate.
>
> How would you know? You refuse debate the moment you are pressured to follow
> the conventions of civilised debate.
>
> "Truth", on the other hand, you would not recognise if you tripped over it.
>
>> You're a pedant,
>
> Yes. I get pedantic. Particularly when a silly little know-it-all swoops
> down on the news group and starts lecturing everyone, left, right and
> centre - from Gloudina up!
>
>
>> but let's give credit where it is
>> due... you're a persistent terrier pedant, obviously with a lot of time >on
>> your hands to yap and snap at the heels of your so-called >opponents.
>
> You flatter yourself. To respond to your infantile blustering takes almost
> no time at all.
>
> And yes "so-called opponent" describes your own status accurately.
>
>>
>> In the past, certain Afrikaners (especially bureaucrats and pedantic
>> academics) could impose their idea of the truth from on high, backed by the
>> power of the State. Now such people can only yap and whine and post
>> portentous judgments. Some things have improved in SA!
>
>
> You are wrong. As always in the past, the great bulk of the yapping and
> whining still comes from outside the country. The Empire is out there,
> still.
>
>>
>> I personally think it's a massive tragedy that the Afrikaans language and
>> Afrikaner culture as a whole has such a tenuous future. People like you,
>> far from contributing to Afrikanerdom's strength and endurance, are
>> ultimately responsible for its demise. You have nothing to do with the
>> independent boere of the 19th century who were prepared to fight the
> largest
>> power in the world. You have everything to do with the little people
>> (especially but not only Afrikaners) who hid behind the power of the state
>> in the 20th century and exploited the masses, all the time claiming you
> were
>> bringing civilization to them.
>
>
> Your own behaviour in this newsgroup closely matches the behaviour of the
> "little people" whom you describe above.
>
> Indeed, your demeanour reminds me of the worst kind of colonialist
> know-it-all coming to "civilise" the Boers. Condescendingly colonising also
> this news group with your imperialist language and ideas
>
> You arrant fool! (To say it in the politest way.)
>
> Did you really believe that you could come and overwhelm the "dirty Boers"
> with your half baked theories, lifted from the self serving imperialist
> cogitations that comprise your so-called "standard histories"?
>
> And make us grateful for being forced to converse with you in your own
> language to get a truth or two through your thick hide and into your thicker
> skull?
>
> I do not suppose you have the faintest idea how savagely barbaric your
> behaviour is!
>
> And, being the yellow dog that you are, you slink away yelping and hollering
> when you get kicked in the butt as you deserve!
>
>> This is goodbye, Leendert. I leave it to you to have the last word.
> You're
>> good at that.
>
>
> Thanks! And no, I doubt your contributions will be greatly missed.
>
> Thanks, also, for demonstrating why I should give your book a miss if it
> ever finds a publisher.
>
|
|
|
|
| |
  |
Gaan na forum:
[ XML-voer ] [  ]
Tyd nou: Wed Dec 25 01:47:09 UTC 2024
|
Supertaal
Blog
Soek
Hulp
Lede
Registreer
Teken aan
Tuis
