On Monday, 7 November 2022 at 16:42:19 UTC, hvt...@xs4all.nl wrote:
> Op maandag 7 november 2022 om 15:37:08 UTC+1 schreef Frank Berger:
> > The Amnesty International document starts from the assumption that a rightful native Palestinian population was expelled and the land occupied by newcomer Jews. This is one view. There are others. IF you start from the position that Israel is an occupying power then a lot follows that wouldn't otherwise.
> Unless the books of Moses are a guide in one's life, occupation is the only narrative that does justice to the facts. But after some time, it was internationally agreed that the occupied territories could become a Jewish state. Israel has since occupied more territory. There is no international agreement on that yet.
>
> Amnesty is about human rights, not borders. It examines how nations/states treat their citizens and the inhabitants of occupied territories. The 21st century has started badly in this regard. Israel is no exception.
>
> Henk

What the man said. I would just add that people should be very careful about how they use the word "antisemitic". This is an important term with a serious and meaningful history. It does NOT apply to discussion or criticism of the current political actions of the state of Israel. Any attempt to use the word in that context renders it meaningless. It is not a meaningless word and if the Jews themselves render it meaningless by casual use of it for anyone who criticises the state of Israel then they are doing a grave disservice to their own culture and history.

hvt...@xs4all.nl schrieb am Montag, 7. November 2022 um 17:42:19 UTC+1:
> Op maandag 7 november 2022 om 15:37:08 UTC+1 schreef Frank Berger:
> > The Amnesty Internatnational document starts from the assumption that a rightful native Palestinian population was expelled and the land occupied by newcomer Jews. This is one view. There are others. IF you start from the position that Israel is an occupying power then a lot follows that wouldn't otherwise.
> Unless the books of Moses are a guide in one's life, occupation is the only narrative that does justice to the facts. But after some time, it was internationally agreed that the occupied territories could become a Jewish state. Israel has since occupied more territory. There is no international agreement on that yet.
>
> Amnesty is about human rights, not borders. It examines how nations/states treat their citizens and the inhabitants of occupied territories.

Amnesty pretty much sucks at protecting human rights, but I guess for you it's honestly too late to change your mind about that, and that sucks. Just keep your mouth shut about things you know nothing about.

Frank is quite wise, and you are just fucking blind.

> The 21st century has started badly in this regard. Israel is no exception..
>
> Henk

Says Henk who knows nada about the history behind these conflicts, yet thinks he has a say about israeli politics. What a joke.

I bet you know nada about the history behind the conflicts, yet you indirectly accuse israel of treating people wrong and talk about "occupied territories" (of which you probably know nothing about either).

Henk, please shut up.

hvt...@xs4all.nl schrieb am Montag, 7. November 2022 um 17:42:19 UTC+1:
> Op maandag 7 november 2022 om 15:37:08 UTC+1 schreef Frank Berger:
> > The Amnesty Internatnational document starts from the assumption that a rightful native Palestinian population was expelled and the land occupied by newcomer Jews. This is one view. There are others. IF you start from the position that Israel is an occupying power then a lot follows that wouldn't otherwise.
> Unless the books of Moses are a guide in one's life, occupation is the only narrative that does justice to the facts. But after some time, it was internationally agreed that the occupied territories could become a Jewish state. Israel has since occupied more territory. There is no international agreement on that yet.
>
> Amnesty is about human rights, not borders. It examines how nations/states treat their citizens and the inhabitants of occupied territories.

Amnesty pretty much sucks at protecting human rights, but I guess for you it's honestly too late to change your mind about that, and that sucks. Just keep your mouth shut about things you know nothing about.

Frank is quite wise, and you are just fucking blind.

> The 21st century has started badly in this regard. Israel is no exception..
>
> Henk

Says Henk who knows nada about the history behind these conflicts, yet thinks he has a say about israeli politics. What a joke.

Yet you accuse israel of treating people wrong (while completely neglecting how Palestinians treat their own people - HAHA), I bet you know nothing about the "occupied territories" either.

Henk, please shut up.

hvt...@xs4all.nl schrieb am Montag, 7. November 2022 um 17:42:19 UTC+1:
> Op maandag 7 november 2022 om 15:37:08 UTC+1 schreef Frank Berger:
> > The Amnesty Internatnational document starts from the assumption that a rightful native Palestinian population was expelled and the land occupied by newcomer Jews. This is one view. There are others. IF you start from the position that Israel is an occupying power then a lot follows that wouldn't otherwise.
> Unless the books of Moses are a guide in one's life, occupation is the only narrative that does justice to the facts. But after some time, it was internationally agreed that the occupied territories could become a Jewish state. Israel has since occupied more territory. There is no international agreement on that yet.
>
> Amnesty is about human rights, not borders. It examines how nations/states treat their citizens and the inhabitants of occupied territories.

Amnesty pretty much sucks at protecting human rights, but I guess for you it's honestly too late to change your mind about that, and that sucks. Just keep your mouth shut about things you know nothing about.

Frank is quite wise, while you are just fucking blind.

> The 21st century has started badly in this regard. Israel is no exception..
>
> Henk

Says Henk who knows nada about the history behind these conflicts, yet thinks he hs a say about israeli politics. What a joke.

Then you accuse Israel of treating people wrong (as if, besides some minor cases), while completely neglecting the atrocities committed by the Palestinas to their own people, such as killing homosexuals, and dissidents etc.; or how the PA pays martyr rents to palestinians who kill israeli civilians etc., I bet you know nothing about the occupied territories either.

Henk, please shut up.

Let Golda Meir come to word:

"When peace comes we will perhaps in time be able to forgive the Arabs for killing our sons, but it will be harder for us to forgive them for having forced us to kill their sons. Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us."

> I have trouble countenancing references to generalized accusations of human rights violations by Israel or anybody else unless such accusations are specific enough to lead to rational consideration and discussion. Otherwise, such accusations amount to nothing more than name calling. The strategy, of course, in the case of Israel bashers, is that if you accuse them of generalized human rights violations enough people might come to believe it.

Amnesty's generalizations are usually based on specific cases. Those interested could ask for specifications. I don't believe that Amnesty can be called an Israel basher, or an organization facilitating them. Its findings are never and nowhere welcome - and shouldn't be.

Henk

hvt...@xs4all.nl schrieb am Montag, 7. November 2022 um 18:38:14 UTC+1:
> > I have trouble countenancing references to generalized accusations of human rights violations by Israel or anybody else unless such accusations are specific enough to lead to rational consideration and discussion. Otherwise, such accusations amount to nothing more than name calling. The strategy, of course, in the case of Israel bashers, is that if you accuse them of generalized human rights violations enough people might come to believe it.
>
> Amnesty's generalizations are usually based on specific cases. Those interested could ask for specifications. I don't believe that Amnesty can be called an Israel basher, or an organization facilitating them. Its findings are never and nowhere welcome - and shouldn't be.
>
> Henk

If you can't see that Amnesty is an israel basher, you are blind. And it's too late for you to change your mind anyway.

How about showing us a specific case? Then we can talk about it and see how Amnesty is an israel basher.

Henk is just like Amnesty and Herman: A lot of talk, no substance.

On 11/7/2022 12:18 PM, Andy Evans wrote:
> On Monday, 7 November 2022 at 16:42:19 UTC, hvt...@xs4all.nl wrote:
>> Op maandag 7 november 2022 om 15:37:08 UTC+1 schreef Frank Berger:
>>> The Amnesty International document starts from the assumption that a rightful native Palestinian population was expelled and the land occupied by newcomer Jews. This is one view. There are others. IF you start from the position that Israel is an occupying power then a lot follows that wouldn't otherwise.
>> Unless the books of Moses are a guide in one's life, occupation is the only narrative that does justice to the facts. But after some time, it was internationally agreed that the occupied territories could become a Jewish state. Israel has since occupied more territory. There is no international agreement on that yet.
>>
>> Amnesty is about human rights, not borders. It examines how nations/states treat their citizens and the inhabitants of occupied territories. The 21st century has started badly in this regard. Israel is no exception.
>>
>> Henk
>
> What the man said. I would just add that people should be very careful about how they use the word "antisemitic". This is an important term with a serious and meaningful history. It does NOT apply to discussion or criticism of the current political actions of the state of Israel. Any attempt to use the word in that context renders it meaningless. It is not a meaningless word and if the Jews themselves render it meaningless by casual use of it for anyone who criticises the state of Israel then they are doing a grave disservice to their own culture and history.
"The Jews" do not do so. Some Jews do so. Some Jews poop in their pants. The question is not that any criticism of Israel is labeled antisemitic. That is a trope used by actual antisemites and actual anti-zionists. The question is to what extent is general criticism of Israel driven by 1) antisemitism or 2) anti-Zionism. Anti-zionism means opposition to the existence of state of Israel. Most activist anti-zionists are either a) Palestinians (who have a dog in the hunt) or b) anti-semites. Are there anti-zionists who don't think they are antisemites. Sure. But they don't really get to define what antisemitism is, do they? It is not limited the most virulent form, hatred of Jews. It includes opposition to what Jews hold dear, namely attachment to the Holy Land from time immemorial. The Jewish prayer book dating from not long after the Roman destruction of the Jewish Commonwealth in 70 AD has always called for Jewish return to Israel. It is part of our heritage. If you tell me I can be Jewish as long as I renounce the holy land, that is a non-starter, and you are an antisemite who thinks you are "just" and anti-zionist.

On 11/7/2022 12:38 PM, HT wrote:
>> I have trouble countenancing references to generalized accusations of human rights violations by Israel or anybody else unless such accusations are specific enough to lead to rational consideration and discussion. Otherwise, such accusations amount to nothing more than name calling. The strategy, of course, in the case of Israel bashers, is that if you accuse them of generalized human rights violations enough people might come to believe it.
>
> Amnesty's generalizations are usually based on specific cases. Those interested could ask for specifications. I don't believe that Amnesty can be called an Israel basher, or an organization facilitating them. Its findings are never and nowhere welcome - and shouldn't be.
>
> Henk
>

Among Zionists, Amnesty is indeed considered an Israel basher. The proof is what I said before. The Amnesty document cited, ASSUMES Israel is an occupying force. Many believe, that under International Law, it is not. Rather the land is in dispute. Since there never was a Palestinian State or anything remotely like it, Israel cannot be considered an occupying force under International Law. If you pre-decide that Palestine is a state, then you Israel is an occupying force and every military action against terorists (er, freedom fighters) amounts to a human rights violation.

> Among Zionists, Amnesty is indeed considered an Israel basher. The proof is what I said before. The Amnesty document cited, ASSUMES Israel is an occupying force. Many believe, that under International Law, it is not. Rather the land is in dispute. Since there never was a Palestinian State or anything remotely like it, Israel cannot be considered an occupying force under International Law. If you pre-decide that Palestine is a state, then you Israel is an occupying force and every military action against terorists (er, freedom fighters) amounts to a human rights violation.

Amnesty usually distinguishes between Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. It recognises Israel as a state, as it should. Whether a state can occupy territory beyond its borders without occupying it in a legal sense, I do not want to know. One would expect it to at least respect human rights, all the more so if it is a signatory to the convention.

Henk

On 11/7/2022 3:44 PM, HT wrote:
>
>> Among Zionists, Amnesty is indeed considered an Israel basher. The proof is what I said before. The Amnesty document cited, ASSUMES Israel is an occupying force. Many believe, that under International Law, it is not. Rather the land is in dispute. Since there never was a Palestinian State or anything remotely like it, Israel cannot be considered an occupying force under International Law. If you pre-decide that Palestine is a state, then you Israel is an occupying force and every military action against terorists (er, freedom fighters) amounts to a human rights violation.
>
> Amnesty usually distinguishes between Israel and the occupied Palestinian territories. It recognises Israel as a state, as it should. Whether a state can occupy territory beyond its borders without occupying it in a legal sense, I do not want to know. One would expect it to at least respect human rights, all the more so if it is a signatory to the convention.
>
> Henk
>
>
>
We've been through this so many times. Israel has to defend its citizens from terror. The Palestinans have rejected a negotiated state several times. They want all of Israel, not the West Bank and Gaza. I am not making this up. It is their policy. If Israel simply withdrew from the West Bank there would be chaos. It's simply not possible. So unless and until a negotiated solution is reached, this is and will be the status quo. Yes. there are "Greater Israel" folks who want to annex the West Bank. An overwhelming majority of Israelis would be willing to exist next to a Palestinian safe if it was safe for Israel. That's why the proposals for a state include demilitarization which was rejected out of hand.
Truly, I can not really come to grips with the fact that people "equate" murderers like Arafat and Abbas on the one hand and democratically elected leaders of a liberal democracy. It is mind boggling.
Are you familiar with the peace proposal offered be Saudia Arabia, I think a couple of years ago? Isreal would annex the major settlement blocks (a fact on the ground is a fact on the ground), the rest of the West Bank and Gaza would be folded into Jordan and renamed something like the Hashemite / Palestinian Kingdom. The Palestinians would give claims to repatriation in Israel proper. West Bank Palestinians would become citizens of the new state, and expatriates would be welcome as well. Almost nobody has even addressed this proposal publicly, but I imagine it is being discussed privately. Up front, the Palestinians will reject this (I think they have already), I think Jordan rejects this (King Abdullah, who is Hashemite, not Palestinan, doesn't want sever hundred thousand (millions potentially) of Palestinians suddenly in his hair. However, I think that something like this is more likely to come about than the PLO getting their own state or of Israel annexing the West Bank. Everybody always says the status quo can't persist. But that is silly. The reason there is a status quo is because, temporarily at least, it is more feasible than any other condition. How long before the current status quo is replaced by an alternative is anybody's guess. I would say not until Palestinian leadership moderates and provides evidence that it is willing to live in peace with Israel.

On 11/6/22 5:59 AM, Frank Berger wrote:
> On 11/6/2022 1:56 AM, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Sunday, 6 November 2022 at 15:32:52 UTC+11, Frank Berger wrote:
>>> On 11/5/2022 5:32 PM, raymond....gmail.com wrote:
>>>> On Sunday, 6 November 2022 at 01:30:13 UTC+11, Marc S wrote:
>>>>> Marc S schrieb am Samstag, 5. November 2022 um 14:56:51 UTC+1:
>>>>>> I love Meloni: https://twitter.com/KidRock/status/1575198062389399552
>>>>> It should be noted: Meloni is not a fascist. She supports Ukraine
>>>>> and Taiwan, and Putin cut off gas deliveries to Italy right after
>>>>> she was elected.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://twitter.com/KenWeinstein/status/1576591033672032257
>>>>>
>>>>> Netanyahu (mazel tov!) is not a fascist, Trump is not a fascist and
>>>>> DeSantis is not a fascist - hopefully people in this sub will one
>>>>> day be able to get this simple truth in their heads.
>>>>
>>>> The truth is simple,
>>> If the truth were simple, everyone would agree.
>>> and all three of the above, are appalling examples of right wing
>>> extremism.
>>>>
>>> Which policies of these guys are extreme? Examples please. And
>>> explain why you think they are extreme.
>>>>> One might not agree with everything they say and do,
>>
>> I am not here to answer your questions which are ad nauseum the same
>> every time you post. You are the one who has yet, against all the
>> norms of decency, to propose why, with a full explanation, as to why
>> you believe these three examples of disgusting humanity, and criminal
>> to boot,  are not extremists with full-on authoritarian leanings. And
>> no, I won't read your reply, but you owe it to the group, and to
>> yourself.
>>
>> Ray Hall, Taree
>>
>
> No you are here to fling out accusations of fascism without defining it
> and without saying what those you accuse of it have done or believe that
> is fascist.  It is exactly like McCarthy flinging out accusations of
> communism wherever he thought it would stir up trouble.

Orwell made perhaps the best comments of all:

“The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies
"something not desirable"".

and

“It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely
meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly
than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social
Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922
Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek,
homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women,
dogs and I do not know what else.”

Bob Harper

On 11/6/22 7:29 PM, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, 7 November 2022 at 00:59:57 UTC+11, Frank Berger wrote:
>
>>>>>> One might not agree with everything they say and do,
>>>
>>> I am not here to answer your questions which are ad nauseum the same every time you post. You are the one who has yet, against all the norms of decency, to propose why, with a full explanation, as to why you believe these three examples of disgusting humanity, and criminal to boot, are not extremists with full-on authoritarian leanings. And no, I won't read your reply, but you owe it to the group, and to yourself.
>>>
>>> Ray Hall, Taree
>>>
>> No you are here to fling out accusations of fascism without defining it and without saying what those you accuse of it have done or believe that is fascist. It is exactly like McCarthy flinging out accusations of communism wherever he thought it would stir up trouble.
>
> Wherever fascism is so obviously evident, it is not necessary to define it, even to those who obviously appear to embrace it fully, and at the same time then try to deny it. As you also do with Israeli war crimes.
>
> Ray Hall, Taree

To repeat, unless you missed an earlier post:

Orwell made perhaps the best comments of all:

“The word Fascism has now no meaning except in so far as it signifies
"something not desirable"".

and

“It will be seen that, as used, the word ‘Fascism’ is almost entirely
meaningless. In conversation, of course, it is used even more wildly
than in print. I have heard it applied to farmers, shopkeepers, Social
Credit, corporal punishment, fox-hunting, bull-fighting, the 1922
Committee, the 1941 Committee, Kipling, Gandhi, Chiang Kai-Shek,
homosexuality, Priestley's broadcasts, Youth Hostels, astrology, women,
dogs and I do not know what else.”

Bob Harper

On 11/7/2022 3:50 AM, Andy Evans wrote:
> On Monday, 7 November 2022 at 04:05:10 UTC, Frank Berger wrote:
>> On 11/6/2022 10:29 PM, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> Fortunately, what is "obviously evident" to you (Ray) is not so to most people.
>
> How do you know? It's obvious to me too.
>
>> I am interested in defending Israel from you poisoned mind and poison pen in the minds of others who might read what you have to say. Go ahead, maybe you can bring others to your way of thinking.
>
> You don't need to "bring others to a way of thinking" if they're there already.
>
>> To quote Obama, you are SO on the wrong side of history....
>
> The actions of the state of Israel are highly contentious at the highest political level including the UN, as you well know. But I am NOT going to discuss that on this newsgroup.
>

You need to distinguish, of course between non-binding resolutions of the Arab-dominated General Assembly, and actions and resolutions of the Security Council. The bottom line from the Security Council has always been Resolution 242, which calls for each part to recognize the other's rights, and Israeli withdrawal (not complete withdrawal) from the "occupied" West Bank PENDING a negotiated solution. Nowhere was there required a unilateral withdrawal by Israel which everyone know would result in disaster for all parties. Israel bashers love to cite Resolution 242 as if it was a call for complete and immediate Israeli withdrawal. They lie, of course. All you have to do is read the Resolution.

Frank Berger schrieb am Montag, 7. November 2022 um 22:58:34 UTC+1:
> On 11/7/2022 3:50 AM, Andy Evans wrote:
> > On Monday, 7 November 2022 at 04:05:10 UTC, Frank Berger wrote:
> >> On 11/6/2022 10:29 PM, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> >> Fortunately, what is "obviously evident" to you (Ray) is not so to most people.
> >
> > How do you know? It's obvious to me too.
> >
> >> I am interested in defending Israel from you poisoned mind and poison pen in the minds of others who might read what you have to say. Go ahead, maybe you can bring others to your way of thinking.
> >
> > You don't need to "bring others to a way of thinking" if they're there already.
> >
> >> To quote Obama, you are SO on the wrong side of history....
> >
> > The actions of the state of Israel are highly contentious at the highest political level including the UN, as you well know. But I am NOT going to discuss that on this newsgroup.

Andy doesn't discuss this important issue on a ng because he has no clue ;D completely brainwashed.

Andy loves to throw soup at paintings in order to fight climate change! But: No words about the homosexuals and dissidents and israelis killed by the palestinians, no words about the human rights under palestinian rulership.

> >
>
> You need to distinguish, of course between non-binding resolutions of the Arab-dominated General Assembly, and actions and resolutions of the Security Council. The bottom line from the Security Council has always been Resolution 242, which calls for each part to recognize the other's rights, and Israeli withdrawal (not complete withdrawal) from the "occupied" West Bank PENDING a negotiated solution. Nowhere was there required a unilateral withdrawal by Israel which everyone know would result in disaster for all parties. Israel bashers love to cite Resolution 242 as if it was a call for complete and immediate Israeli withdrawal. They lie, of course. All you have to do is read the Resolution.

I will pray for you Frank. May you have it easy and may you have a long life! Can't believe you are 80+... how is your mind still working so well. Respect.

On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 1:27:59 AM UTC-8, Herman wrote:
> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 10:04:33 AM UTC+1, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 9:41:15 PM UTC-8, Herman wrote:
> > >
> > I wasn't referring to their repertoire. I was referring
> > to their screechy (Faust) woobly (Mutter) sounds.
> > ?!? Making things up again ?!?
> >
> Right, I remember, at the time I said you really have no
> idea what you're talking about. I don't like ASM a lot, I
> don't have a single cd of hers, but technically she can
> do anything she wants on a violin,

Except music ?!?

> and the same goes for Faust, who has the advantage of
> relative youth over ASM. This prompted you to say that
> Faust was my violin goddess, which somehow made
> me an anti-semite. So... talking about making things
> up...

OK, you are not anti-semite for liking Faust. You are a
cultural anti-semite based on eyeball statistics about
musicians you like and musicians you don't like. Does
this sound more accurate and fair?

dk

On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 11:54:33 PM UTC+1, dan....@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> OK, you are not anti-semite for liking Faust. You are a
> cultural anti-semite based on eyeball statistics about
> musicians you like and musicians you don't like. Does
> this sound more accurate and fair?
>
> dk

You're an evil nasty person, mentally sick.
All you're interested in here is controlling people and smearing them with your evil.
You have not a single clue what I am listening to and which performers I "like".
Don't ever 'talk' to me again. You're evil.

On 11/6/22 12:56 PM, Néstor Castiglione wrote:
> On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 2:13:18 PM UTC-7, Notsure01 wrote:
>> On 11/5/22 4:32 PM, HT wrote:
>>> Op zaterdag 5 november 2022 om 20:48:30 UTC+1 schreef Todd M. McComb:
>>>> In article <2b953454-303f-4422...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>> JohnGavin <dag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Of course - but the comedy lies in the implication that a society
>>>>> is not civilized unless it prefers one piano player over another.
>>>> Reductive & hyperbolic statements do appear to be the norm around
>>>> here....
>>>
>>> The norm? I think it is custom. The Arrau/Lim controversy illustrates that we have no alternative.
>>>
>>> Henk
>> I have a suggestion. What might be more enlightening would be to go over
>> specific YT performances by artists and to point out what they do
>> well... or badly.
>>
>> Ideally one of the piano experts here would do it, but I'd be glad to
>> start a separate thread.
>>
>> I don't get a lot of feedback about my posts here, so it would be great
>> if folks let me know if this suggestion is valuable. I'd definitely be
>> interested in understanding better what makes particular artists great.
>>
>> And if this is a stupid idea, let me know.. I wouldn't want to be the
>> only one here who hasn't been insulted!
>
>
> Considering that every one in this free-for-all of a thread is likely older than me by at least 25 years or so, allow me to offer my perspective as a generational outsider:
>
> I think everyone on RMCR is at least a little loopy or warped. Except me, of course. And besides having objectively correct opinions on music and various other subjects, I also enjoy great mental health. :)

Which only means that you and I are kindred spirits. :-)

Bob Harper

On 11/6/22 1:16 PM, JohnGavin wrote:
> On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 3:56:27 PM UTC-5, Néstor Castiglione wrote:
>> On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 2:13:18 PM UTC-7, Notsure01 wrote:
>>> On 11/5/22 4:32 PM, HT wrote:
>>>> Op zaterdag 5 november 2022 om 20:48:30 UTC+1 schreef Todd M. McComb:
>>>>> In article <2b953454-303f-4422...@googlegroups.com>,
>>>>> JohnGavin <dag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Of course - but the comedy lies in the implication that a society
>>>>>> is not civilized unless it prefers one piano player over another.
>>>>> Reductive & hyperbolic statements do appear to be the norm around
>>>>> here....
>>>>
>>>> The norm? I think it is custom. The Arrau/Lim controversy illustrates that we have no alternative.
>>>>
>>>> Henk
>>> I have a suggestion. What might be more enlightening would be to go over
>>> specific YT performances by artists and to point out what they do
>>> well... or badly.
>>>
>>> Ideally one of the piano experts here would do it, but I'd be glad to
>>> start a separate thread.
>>>
>>> I don't get a lot of feedback about my posts here, so it would be great
>>> if folks let me know if this suggestion is valuable. I'd definitely be
>>> interested in understanding better what makes particular artists great.
>>>
>>> And if this is a stupid idea, let me know.. I wouldn't want to be the
>>> only one here who hasn't been insulted!
>>
>>
>> Considering that every one in this free-for-all of a thread is likely older than me by at least 25 years or so, allow me to offer my perspective as a generational outsider:
>>
>> I think everyone on RMCR is at least a little loopy or warped. Except me, of course. And besides having objectively correct opinions on music and various other subjects, I also enjoy great mental health. :)
>
>
> Why all the complex analysis?
>
> How about a reasonable standard of courtesy - respect for others’ opinions, even if they don’t agree with one’s own. Enough humility to express a point of view, and then to clear the way for others to do likewise.
>
> But the past has shown that those who most need to hear this won’t, and things will proceed as usual.
>
> Those contributors who commanded my respect in the past and left the group did so quietly without fanfare.

A sad but accurate assessment.

Bob Harper

JohnGavin schrieb am Sonntag, 6. November 2022 um 22:16:50 UTC+1:
> On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 3:56:27 PM UTC-5, Néstor Castiglione wrote:
> > On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 2:13:18 PM UTC-7, Notsure01 wrote:
> > > On 11/5/22 4:32 PM, HT wrote:
> > > > Op zaterdag 5 november 2022 om 20:48:30 UTC+1 schreef Todd M. McComb:
> > > >> In article <2b953454-303f-4422...@googlegroups.com>,
> > > >> JohnGavin <dag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>> Of course - but the comedy lies in the implication that a society
> > > >>> is not civilized unless it prefers one piano player over another.
> > > >> Reductive & hyperbolic statements do appear to be the norm around
> > > >> here....
> > > >
> > > > The norm? I think it is custom. The Arrau/Lim controversy illustrates that we have no alternative.
> > > >
> > > > Henk
> > > I have a suggestion. What might be more enlightening would be to go over
> > > specific YT performances by artists and to point out what they do
> > > well... or badly.
> > >
> > > Ideally one of the piano experts here would do it, but I'd be glad to
> > > start a separate thread.
> > >
> > > I don't get a lot of feedback about my posts here, so it would be great
> > > if folks let me know if this suggestion is valuable. I'd definitely be
> > > interested in understanding better what makes particular artists great.
> > >
> > > And if this is a stupid idea, let me know.. I wouldn't want to be the
> > > only one here who hasn't been insulted!
> >
> >
> > Considering that every one in this free-for-all of a thread is likely older than me by at least 25 years or so, allow me to offer my perspective as a generational outsider:
> >
> > I think everyone on RMCR is at least a little loopy or warped. Except me, of course. And besides having objectively correct opinions on music and various other subjects, I also enjoy great mental health. :)
> Why all the complex analysis?
>
> How about a reasonable standard of courtesy - respect for others’ opinions, even if they don’t agree with one’s own. Enough humility to express a point of view, and then to clear the way for others to do likewise.
>
> But the past has shown that those who most need to hear this won’t, and things will proceed as usual.
>
> Those contributors who commanded my respect in the past and left the group did so quietly without fanfare.

I don't understand the witchhunt for people who don't abide by your rules. You are all grown up, it should be fairly easy to just ignore remarks one does not like. That you guys are making drama about this, while neglecting really important stuff one could make drama about (as in Andy's position on Israel, Herman's attitude with Dan) speaks for itself.

A bunch of idiots honestly.

Bob Harper schrieb am Dienstag, 8. November 2022 um 16:18:51 UTC+1:
> On 11/6/22 1:16 PM, JohnGavin wrote:
> > On Sunday, November 6, 2022 at 3:56:27 PM UTC-5, Néstor Castiglione wrote:
> >> On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 2:13:18 PM UTC-7, Notsure01 wrote:
> >>> On 11/5/22 4:32 PM, HT wrote:
> >>>> Op zaterdag 5 november 2022 om 20:48:30 UTC+1 schreef Todd M. McComb:
> >>>>> In article <2b953454-303f-4422...@googlegroups.com>,
> >>>>> JohnGavin <dag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> Of course - but the comedy lies in the implication that a society
> >>>>>> is not civilized unless it prefers one piano player over another.
> >>>>> Reductive & hyperbolic statements do appear to be the norm around
> >>>>> here....
> >>>>
> >>>> The norm? I think it is custom. The Arrau/Lim controversy illustrates that we have no alternative.
> >>>>
> >>>> Henk
> >>> I have a suggestion. What might be more enlightening would be to go over
> >>> specific YT performances by artists and to point out what they do
> >>> well... or badly.
> >>>
> >>> Ideally one of the piano experts here would do it, but I'd be glad to
> >>> start a separate thread.
> >>>
> >>> I don't get a lot of feedback about my posts here, so it would be great
> >>> if folks let me know if this suggestion is valuable. I'd definitely be
> >>> interested in understanding better what makes particular artists great.
> >>>
> >>> And if this is a stupid idea, let me know.. I wouldn't want to be the
> >>> only one here who hasn't been insulted!
> >>
> >>
> >> Considering that every one in this free-for-all of a thread is likely older than me by at least 25 years or so, allow me to offer my perspective as a generational outsider:
> >>
> >> I think everyone on RMCR is at least a little loopy or warped. Except me, of course. And besides having objectively correct opinions on music and various other subjects, I also enjoy great mental health. :)
> >
> >
> > Why all the complex analysis?
> >
> > How about a reasonable standard of courtesy - respect for others’ opinions, even if they don’t agree with one’s own. Enough humility to express a point of view, and then to clear the way for others to do likewise.
> >
> > But the past has shown that those who most need to hear this won’t, and things will proceed as usual.
> >
> > Those contributors who commanded my respect in the past and left the group did so quietly without fanfare.
>
> A sad but accurate assessment.
>
> Bob Harper

An absolutely nonsensical assessment. This is an open forum. Everybody is allowed to talk like they like - as long as no physical threats are made or racist or antisemitic statements are made it should go without saying that everything is alright. I understand why some people wouldn't like this, but that you guys just can't seem to carry on, that is the true sad aspect about all of this. Dan does not spew hatred, and if you don't like the way he talks it's your god damn choice to mind your own businesses than trying to lecture people to abide by your corrupted morals.

On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 7:36:12 AM UTC-8, Marc S wrote:
>
> Dan does not spew hatred, and if you don't like the way he
> talks it's your god damn choice to mind your own businesses
> than trying to lecture people to abide by your corrupted morals.

The bigger problem is that H & Co. never state explicitly what
their "morals" are, or which behaviors are OK and which ones
are not. They always errupt in indignation after the fact. How
is one even expected to know and comply ?!?

dk

On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 10:31:08 AM UTC-7, Herman wrote:
> On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 12:45:26 AM UTC+1, Bob Harper wrote:
> >
> > This explains great deal about you, none of it very
> > edifying to contemplate, and greatly to be regretted.
> >
> Indeed. And look how this topic degenerates into a
> litany of obscenities.

Isn't this the very essence of counterpoint? ;-)

dk

On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 11:57:00 AM UTC-7, JohnGavin wrote:
> On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 2:36:47 PM UTC-4, Todd M. McComb wrote:
> > In article <fbf2712b-743d-4d23...@googlegroups.com>,
> > JohnGavin <dag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >In the scheme of things, preferring Arrau to Lim is not important
> > >in the least.
> > I have nothing against people who prefer older performances, but I
> > do get the sense that there are people who disdain all new
> > interpretations (& all new music, of course), and I don't think
> > that's healthy for the culture overall....
>
> Of course - but the comedy lies in the implication that a society is
> not civilized unless it prefers one piano player over another. There
> have been wars motivated by differences among denominations of
> the same faith. That’s folly enough.

Civilization becomes pointless and useless when it is stuck in the past
and refuses to adapt to fresh new ideas and new ways of doing things.
In large swaths of the Western world "civilization" stands for nothing
more than "leave us alone to live as we did two centuries ago". Why
should anyone put up with this?

dk

On Wednesday, 9 November 2022 at 06:56:26 UTC+11, dan....gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 11:57:00 AM UTC-7, JohnGavin wrote:
> > On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 2:36:47 PM UTC-4, Todd M. McComb wrote:
> > > In article <fbf2712b-743d-4d23...googlegroups.com>,
> > > JohnGavin <dag...gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >In the scheme of things, preferring Arrau to Lim is not important
> > > >in the least.
> > > I have nothing against people who prefer older performances, but I
> > > do get the sense that there are people who disdain all new
> > > interpretations (& all new music, of course), and I don't think
> > > that's healthy for the culture overall....
> >
> > Of course - but the comedy lies in the implication that a society is
> > not civilized unless it prefers one piano player over another. There
> > have been wars motivated by differences among denominations of
> > the same faith. That’s folly enough.
>
> Civilization becomes pointless and useless when it is stuck in the past
> and refuses to adapt to fresh new ideas and new ways of doing things.
> In large swaths of the Western world "civilization" stands for nothing
> more than "leave us alone to live as we did two centuries ago". Why
> should anyone put up with this?

Because nobody sensible collectively want to go back to being the abject serfs they once were, under the yoke of the privileged very few. Simple really. And yet this is what the followers of the right wing loonies desire. It doesn't make sense, unless they are utterly stupid.

The fact is we are not progressive enough. The Amish beat everyone to it a century ago.

Ray Hall, Taree

On 11/8/2022 5:01 PM, raymond....@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, 9 November 2022 at 06:56:26 UTC+11, dan....gmail.com wrote:
>> On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 11:57:00 AM UTC-7, JohnGavin wrote:
>>> On Saturday, November 5, 2022 at 2:36:47 PM UTC-4, Todd M. McComb wrote:
>>>> In article <fbf2712b-743d-4d23...googlegroups.com>,
>>>> JohnGavin <dag...gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> In the scheme of things, preferring Arrau to Lim is not important
>>>>> in the least.
>>>> I have nothing against people who prefer older performances, but I
>>>> do get the sense that there are people who disdain all new
>>>> interpretations (& all new music, of course), and I don't think
>>>> that's healthy for the culture overall....
>>>
>>> Of course - but the comedy lies in the implication that a society is
>>> not civilized unless it prefers one piano player over another. There
>>> have been wars motivated by differences among denominations of
>>> the same faith. That’s folly enough.
>>
>> Civilization becomes pointless and useless when it is stuck in the past
>> and refuses to adapt to fresh new ideas and new ways of doing things.
>> In large swaths of the Western world "civilization" stands for nothing
>> more than "leave us alone to live as we did two centuries ago". Why
>> should anyone put up with this?
>
> Because nobody sensible collectively want to go back to being the abject serfs they once were, under the yoke of the privileged very few. Simple really. And yet this is what the followers of the right wing loonies desire.

Rubbish, It's quite the opposite. Drastically reducing the use of fossil fuels too quickly will exactly restore the age of serfdom, with the leftist politcal elite the privileged class. Simply really.

It doesn't make sense, unless they are utterly stupid.
>

Characterizing people who don't want change as fast as you do or don't want the exact change as loonies and wanting to restore serfdom is ridiculous.

> The fact is we are not progressive enough.

Opinio, not fact. There is a difference

The Amish beat everyone to it a century ago.
>
> Ray Hall, Taree
>