Jump to content

Season 12 Chit Chat Thread


Tensor
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, djsurrey said:

Something like this:

 

Yes. But they didn’t design a theocracy- they didn’t have the “one nation under god” as an organising principle. They were largely well educated church going - as everyone was - intelligent men who weren’t fundamentalists.

Pence isn’t of that mold, and Trump is  like Tiberius Caesar or an older Caligula.

fun conversation btw. Thanks all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Nogravitasatall said:

They were largely well educated church going - as everyone was - intelligent men who weren’t fundamentalists.

The fundamentalist terminology did not develop until the early 20th century.

Quote

The term fundamentalism was coined by Baptist editor Curtis Lee Laws in 1920 to designate Protestants who were ready "to do battle royal for the fundamentals".[8] The term was quickly adopted by all sides. Laws borrowed it from the title of a series of essays published between 1910 and 1915 called The Fundamentals: A Testimony to the Truth. The term "fundamentalism" entered the English language in 1922, and is often capitalized when referring to the religious movement.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, joyceraye said:

Not really. They had to have been prosecuted and convicted for something like robbery or murder to be sentenced to transportation to America. 

They weren't transported away, they fled to avoid whatever it was they had to flee from.

12 hours ago, djsurrey said:

I would have thought son-goku5  would have meant persecution.

Yes, my bad.

9 hours ago, joyceraye said:

Yes, Nogravitasatall, convicts were sent from Britain to the antipodes after the American War of Independence.

Isn't it amazing that the British Empire had such a high crime rate that they were able to populate two continents with their prisoners? ^^

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, son-goku5 said:

They weren't transported away, they fled to avoid whatever it was they had to flee from.

 Transportation of convicts from Britain to America ended with the American War of Independence. British criminals fleeing to British colonies in America hoping not to get arrested would have been taking a big risk but no doubt some tried it. Are you thinking of the Jews who fled from Hitler's Europe in the 20th Century ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, joyceraye said:

Are you thinking of the Jews who fled from Hitler's Europe in the 20th Century ?

For example (even though America turned a lot of them back). Germans and Irish came in massive numbers between 1820-1870. Germans were leaving their home after the failed revolution in 1844, over a million Irish came to the US between 1815 and 1844 and in the year after 1844, another 250,000 came because of the potato famine. During the gold rush, a lot of Chinese came over.

My point is, everyone who migrates to another country has a reason to do so. The main reasons for migration are usually economic woes or persecution for political or religious reasons. People who escape war aren't migrants, they're refugees. Very few people simply go spontaneously

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, son-goku5 said:

People who escape war aren't migrants, they're refugees.

Not to split hairs but refugees are also migrants.

Quote

Refugee

Refugees are persons who are outside their country of origin for reasons of feared persecution, conflict, generalized violence, or other circumstances that have seriously disturbed public order and, as a result, require international protection.  The refugee definition can be found in the 1951 Convention and regional refugee instruments, as well as UNHCR’s Statute.  

--United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

More on key refugee definitions

Migrant

While there is no formal legal definition of an international migrant, most experts agree that an international migrant is someone who changes his or her country of usual residence, irrespective of the reason for migration or legal status. Generally, a distinction is made between short-term or temporary migration, covering movements with a duration between three and 12 months, and long-term or permanent migration, referring to a change of country of residence for a duration of one year or more.

- United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs

https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/definitions

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, djsurrey said:

Not to split hairs but refugees are also migrants.

Yes and no. A refugee usually returns to his/her country of origin after the crisis there is over. He/she becomes a migrant if they stay in the country they fled to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, son-goku5 said:

Yes and no. A refugee usually returns to his/her country of origin after the crisis there is over. He/she becomes a migrant if they stay in the country they fled to.

Oh I see. Well if someone is recognized as a refugee in Canada they are usually going to stay and efforts are made to integrate them into Canadian society. We generally did not have people just walk in before Trump came along. It is starting to get more complicated.

Quote

Since President Donald Trump was elected, over 27,000 people have crossed into Canada overland. (By comparison, only 2,000 people did this in 2016.) In 2017, the country granted refugee status to 53 percent of such border crossers, but that number was down to 40 percent in the first three months of this year, Reuters reported.  https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/05/theres-a-perception-that-canada-is-being-invaded/561032/

also https://globalnews.ca/news/4177786/migrants-nigeria-us-travel-visas/ 

In contrast the Syrian refugees that have come to Canada were processed in the middle east and then flown to Canada by the Canadian government.

Quote

Since Justin Trudeau and the Liberals came to power in October 2015, Canada has opened its doors to almost 50,000 Syrian refugees through sponsorships by the federal government and private community groups.

As of early December, the Immigration Department said it was still processing applications for 20,000 sponsored Syrian refugees, including 15,927 from private sponsorship groups, 4,006 under government assistance, and the rest through joint sponsorships between the two.

 

Edited by djsurrey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/11/2018 at 7:57 PM, son-goku5 said:

They weren't transported away, they fled to avoid whatever it was they had to flee from.

Yes, my bad.

Isn't it amazing that the British Empire had such a high crime rate that they were able to populate two continents with their prisoners? ^^

 

It’s how the crimes are defined and what the sentences that are imposed that makes the impact. Though it did create political will to populate colonies. See Heinlein and “The Moon is a Harsh Mistress” for the sci-fi take.

Appropo reasons for refugees: Beside politics it’s climate. Syria’s political problems are climate related. Farmer’s farms failed, they went to the cities, they couldn’t  get work, civil unrest ensued, oppression of unrest created resistance, things escalate. Because, to some degree, climate.

Edited by Nogravitasatall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nogravitasatall said:

Appropo reasons for refugees: Beside politics it’s climate. Syria’s political problems are climate related. Farmer’s farms failed, they went to the cities, they couldn’t  get work, civil unrest ensued, oppression of unrest created resistance, things escalate. Because, to some degree, climate.

And if anyone thinks that 4 million Syrians fleeing from their country, because of the results of climate change, was bad, they should wait until 500 million people in South- and Southeast Asia begin fleeing elsewhere because the Sea level rise floods their homes permanently.

Edited by son-goku5
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Nogravitasatall said:

Appropo reasons for refugees: Beside politics it’s climate. Syria’s political problems are climate related. Farmer’s farms failed, they went to the cities, they couldn’t  get work, civil unrest ensued, oppression of unrest created resistance, things escalate. Because, to some degree, climate.

There is a lot at work there other than climate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/13/2018 at 2:27 AM, djsurrey said:

There is a lot at work there other than climate.

Yup, but still... 

For example,  100% of NSW is in drought- and it’s winter.  That’s over the entire 800,000 square kilometres of the state, never mind QLD and Sa, the adjacent states, that are worse off. Sydney is looking at firing up the reverse-osmosis plant this summer to supplement the drinking water supply. 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-08/nsw-government-says-entire-state-is-now-in-drought/10088628?pfmredir=sm

So, I’m unsure how much water scarcity figures in the <Syrian> unrest but I’m prepared to be persuaded it’s part of the initial conditions. And none of any places I’ve seen images from in those conflicted areas look at all lush.

If/when predictions crystallise... gosh.

Edited by Nogravitasatall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since Mark Hamill was just in ep 11.24 I thought fans here might find this interesting.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/live-feed/mark-hamill-joining-knightfall-renewed-season-2-at-history-1134279?utm_source=Sailthru&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=THR Breaking News_2018-08-13 11:00:00_moconnell&amp;utm_term=hollywoodreporter_breakingnews 

Quote

History has renewed the medieval drama, while simultaneously bringing in some new blood. Mark Hamill joins in a recurring role, while Aaron Helbing comes on board as the new showrunner.

The renewal for Knightfall comes after a solid freshman run in the winter, one that saw live-plus-3 viewership average over 2 million episodic viewers. 

I have never watched it but might give it a look now.

Edited by djsurrey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, djsurrey said:

While these series have some value in entertainment, I don't like that they're shown on the History Channel. Some people might believe those things to be documentaries.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, son-goku5 said:

While these series have some value in entertainment, I don't like that they're shown on the History Channel. Some people might believe those things to be documentaries.

It could be misleading. Today with the internet it is not hard to find some details on truth and fiction.
 

Quote

Q. Why is this mythological part of the Templars’ history included in the series?

A. If we were to just disregard all of the myths and legends, the question would be: why are we making a show about the Templars at all? Why not the Knights Hospitaller? Why not the Teutonic Knights? Why not any of the other military orders? There is a reason that the Templars keep coming back to us and part of that is because they have been consistently linked with these legends and myths, which are just as much a part of their history. For TV, it’s natural to link those two elements together.
https://www.historyextra.com/period/medieval/dan-jones-templars-knightfall-tv-historian-myth-legend/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.