19 Mar
2018
19 Mar
'18
3:11 p.m.
Russell Coker wrote:
On Saturday, 17 March 2018 4:08:46 PM AEDT Trent W.
Buck via luv-talk wrote:
Even though there's a huge Spanish-speaking minority in USA? :-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_language_in_the_United_States
"United States [is] the third-largest Hispanophone country in the world, after Mexico
and Colombia."
I think it's easier for a Mexican to follow the politics of USA than the politics of
Spain.
My point was to poke holes in your (apparent) implication that because
Australia is an English-majority country, we can only understand and
hang out with other English-majority countries, and (therefore) that
Mexico and USA can't understand one another because USA is
English-majority and Mexico is Spanish-majority.
Russell Coker wrote:
Mexicans who don't speak English will find it difficult to follow US politics.
So 72.7% of Australians can't follow politics
in non-English countries
easily.
That's like saying most Mexicans can't follow US politics because
USA
is an English-speaking country, and they only speak Spanish. Of course there will be significant interest in US
politics given how much US
politics matters to them, compared to Spain for example where they can easily
follow the news but it won't matter much to them.
Why do you think it's at all controversial that the US has a major
influence on Australia?
That was not my intention.
You initially started talking about the US, and
when I asked why, you said (paraphrasing) they're a shit anglophone country, and
when I asked why you focused on anglos, you said (paraphrasing) they're the only ones
we have a relationship with.
So I was like: "hang on, yes, we interact with the US, but not ONLY them.
China drives our economic policies and Indonesia drives our military policies".
Having a PM elected by parliament instead of an
elected president
makes a significant difference to politics.
Er, if you mean here in Australia, AFAIK the way it works is this:
1. party X elects a leader Y (i.e. only party X members vote)
2. party X gets a majority of seats
3. party X goes to the Queen (via GG) and says
Dear Queenie,
We'd like to form a government, with Y as your PM, is that OK?
4. The Queen (via GG) rubber-stamps it (unless she's REALLY REALLY REALLY angry).
In this system, if the ALP has a majority, other elected MPs
(e.g. from the Greens or Nationals) have no say in who the PM is.
19 Mar
19 Mar
4:16 p.m.
New subject: Reading the Bible
On Monday, 19 March 2018 3:11:02 PM AEDT Trent W. Buck wrote:
People who don't speak English will find it difficult to follow American
politics.
Name the last 3 occasions that we went to war to support Indonesia.
The TPP was not foisted upon us by China. While the US has stopped pushing
it, that's where it appears to have originated.
Unless of course you have a coalition government in which case whoever forms
the coalition gets a say. Usually they won't want to make an issue out of who
is PM as they have other things they want to push. But they could.
--
My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
Mexicans who
don't speak English will find it difficult to follow US
politics.
Even though there's a huge Spanish-speaking minority in USA? :-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_language_in_the_United_States
"United States [is] the third-largest Hispanophone country in the world,
after Mexico and Colombia."
I think it's easier for a Mexican to follow the politics of USA than the
politics of Spain. My point was to poke holes in your (apparent)
implication that because
Australia is an English-majority country, we can only understand and
hang out with other English-majority countries, and (therefore) that
Mexico and USA can't understand one another because USA is
English-majority and Mexico is Spanish-majority.
I never said that we could only associate with English speaking countries.
Merely that it's a lot easier for the majority of Australians who only speak
English.
Try reading articles about Spanish politics through Google Translate some
time. I've tried it and it's difficult, unpleasant, and gives the impression
of being inaccurate.
Of course
there will be significant interest in US politics given how much
US politics matters to them, compared to Spain for example where they can
easily follow the news but it won't matter much to them.
Why do you think it's at all controversial that the US has a major
influence on Australia?
That was not my intention.
You initially started talking about the US, and
when I asked why, you said (paraphrasing) they're a shit anglophone country,
and when I asked why you focused on anglos, you said (paraphrasing) they're
the only ones we have a relationship with.
So I was like: "hang on, yes, we interact with the US, but not ONLY them.
China drives our economic policies and Indonesia drives our military
policies". Having a PM
elected by parliament instead of an elected president
makes a significant difference to politics.
Er, if you mean here in Australia, AFAIK the way it works is this:
1. party X elects a leader Y (i.e. only party X members vote)
2. party X gets a majority of seats
3. party X goes to the Queen (via GG) and says
Dear Queenie,
We'd like to form a government, with Y as your PM, is that OK?
4. The Queen (via GG) rubber-stamps it (unless she's REALLY REALLY REALLY
angry).
In this system, if the ALP has a majority, other elected MPs
(e.g. from the Greens or Nationals) have no say in who the PM is. 
4:29 p.m.
New subject: Reading the Bible
Quoting Russell Coker (russell(a)coker.com.au):
People who don't speak English will find it
difficult to follow American
politics.
There is still truth to this (especially for immigrants who speak
less-spoken languages), but there are perhaps more complexities
than you are aware of. Notably, there are two major Spanish-language
television networks, Telemundo and Univision, that have presences both
over the air and on television cable services.
In theory, all of the services of government at all levels are
accessible in any of a dozen-ish of the more-common languages. E.g.,
common government paperwork can be had in Spanish, Vietnamese, Mandarin,
etc. In any court appearance, translators can be summoned at no charge
to the citizen. Printed or electronic ballots are available in all of
that large group of languages.
Someone requesting a ballot in Swedish or Romansch would doubtless be
out of luck, and I'm sure that coverage of the greater-spoken languages
is better, but the point is the United States makes a creditable effort
to respect there being no official language, though I'm sure there
remains English-language biases invisible to yr. present correspondent.
(I've never studied Spanish formally, but found when I was in Spain with
British friends that I naturally absorbed a great deal of Spanish
passively as a Californian while the Brits stood around puzzled by even
words like 'calle' (street). It was an amusing realisation.)
It is also doubtless that Spanish/English bilateral outreach is
decidedly better here in California than in, say, Oklahoma or Arkansas.
20 Mar
20 Mar
10:20 a.m.
New subject: Reading the Bible
Russell Coker wrote:
To *support* them? Oh, I was thinking of... something else.
I never said that we could only associate with English
speaking
countries. Merely that it's a lot easier for the majority of
Australians who only speak English.
Try reading articles about Spanish politics through Google Translate
some time. I've tried it and it's difficult, unpleasant, and gives
the impression of being inaccurate.
Well I can read Spanish (badly), and I block google, but I know what you mean.
Did you have trouble following, say, the invasion of Afhganistan because you didn't
speak Dari *or* Farsi?
You don't HAVE TO rely on google when there are still multilingual human beings.
Of course they have their own agenda, but then so does Google.
So I was like:
"hang on, yes, we interact with the US, but not ONLY them.
China drives our economic policies and Indonesia drives our military
policies".
Name the last 3 occasions that we went to war to support Indonesia. The TPP was not foisted upon us by China. While the
US has stopped
pushing it, that's where it appears to have originated.
Erm, I don't think so.
The TPP began as an expansion of the TPSEP signed by Brunei,
Chile, New Zealand and Singapore in 2005.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership
10:49 a.m.
New subject: Reading the Bible
On Tuesday, 20 March 2018 10:20:36 AM AEDT Trent W. Buck wrote:
Russell Coker wrote:
Yes I do have trouble following what's happening in Afghanistan, I have to
rely on reports in English.
I never said that we could only associate with
English speaking
countries. Merely that it's a lot easier for the majority of
Australians who only speak English.
Try reading articles about Spanish politics through Google Translate
some time. I've tried it and it's difficult, unpleasant, and gives
the impression of being inaccurate.
Well I can read Spanish (badly), and I block google, but I know what you
mean.
Did you have trouble following, say, the invasion of Afhganistan because you
didn't speak Dari *or* Farsi? You don't HAVE TO rely on google when there are
still multilingual human
beings. Of course they have their own agenda, but then so does Google.
I don't know anyone who speaks Dari or Farsi. The people I know who speak
Spanish don't seem inclined to write an English version of their content.
The TPP was
not foisted upon us by China. While the US has stopped
pushing it, that's where it appears to have originated.
Erm, I don't think so.
The TPP began as an expansion of the TPSEP signed by Brunei,
Chile, New Zealand and Singapore in 2005.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Pacific_Partnership From the first paragraph of that page:
After the
United States withdrew its signature,[6] the agreement could not
enter into force
I don't think you are making a good case for Chinese influence.
--
My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/
My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/
3:50 p.m.
New subject: Reading the Bible
Quoting russell(a)coker.com.au (russell(a)coker.com.au):
Yes I do have trouble following what's happening
in Afghanistan, I have to
rely on reports in English.
For the Middle East but, alas, not Afghanistan, https://www.memri.org/
is useful even though the project has USA and Israeli origins and
occasional bias. ISTR that Middle East Media Research Institute got its
start after people kept pointing out that local coverage and official
pronouncements in Arabic and Farsi often differed greatly from the
versions of the same news items released to the West in European
languages.
I've checked a bit using my paltry knowledge of Arabic and (more
usefully) asked native speakers, and the latter vouched for the accuracy
of MEMRI's translations.
Also of note, though no longer available in dead-tree form as it once
was: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Press_Review
1837
days inactive
1838
days old
5 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Rick Moen -
Russell Coker -
Trent W. Buck