or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › The Fall of Civilization
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Fall of Civilization - Page 6  

post #76 of 93
Quote:
Quote:
(jmswentworth @ April 26 2005,14:54) Leisure class are the lower classes, I think you have the term confused.
OMG - you really think the term "leisure class" refers to the lower classes?   I was honestly trying to give you a chance to work your way out of your earlier remarks, but I give up - I don't know if you are Kalra/Avnish/Styleman but you are truly an idiot.
bryce, I am not sure who the idiots are - we seem to have spent an awful ong time trying to figure out what he was babbling about.....
post #77 of 93
Quote:
ok, 1. immigrants will come to the UK 2. the poor people will hate the immigrants 3. the poor people will love the "gentry" because the "gentry" have been against immigration. I see. and this will be a totally new form of civilization, not related to wessex. I see.....
Exactlly. Please excuse my misinterpretation of lesiure class.
post #78 of 93
EDIT: never mind.
post #79 of 93
I think the fall of civilization is marked by the unintelligible comments posted by "˜jmswentworth'. Jon.
post #80 of 93
Quote:
I think the fall of civilization is marked by the unintelligible comments posted by "˜jmswentworth'. Jon.
All right, perhaps my comment on leisure class. Nevertheless, I remain; there is no civilisation without a distinct class system, which is individual to the society. Therefore, you can argue as much as you like, no gentry, no civilisation.
post #81 of 93
Quote:
Quote:
(imageWIS @ April 26 2005,15:06) I think the fall of civilization is marked by the unintelligible comments posted by "˜jmswentworth'. Jon.
All right, perhaps my comment on leisure class. Nevertheless, I remain; there is no civilisation without a distinct class system, which is individual to the society. Therefore, you can argue as much as you like, no gentry, no civilisation.
OK, now can you explain why the US does not have "gentry" but the Aztecs and Bedouin did?
post #82 of 93
Quote:
Quote:
(jmswentworth @ April 26 2005,15:09)
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS,April 26 2005,15:06
I think the fall of civilization is marked by the unintelligible comments posted by "˜jmswentworth'. Jon.
All right, perhaps my comment on leisure class. Nevertheless, I remain; there is no civilisation without a distinct class system, which is individual to the society. Therefore, you can argue as much as you like, no gentry, no civilisation.
OK, now can you explain why the US does not have "gentry" but the Aztecs and Bedouin did?
Al Saud. Montezuma.
post #83 of 93
Quote:
The Aztec Society The society traditionally was divided into two social classes; the macehualli (people) or peasantry and the pilli or nobility.
post #84 of 93
Next you will tell me that the American Civil Rights Movement did not destroy any hope of a gentry.
post #85 of 93
Quote:
Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal
Quote:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Basically saying that, as per the definition, we can never be a civilisation.
post #86 of 93
Quote:
Basically saying that, as per the definition, we can never be a civilisation.
"We"? Who is "we" in this statement? And while we're on the subject, what color is the sky in your world?
post #87 of 93
Quote:
Quote:
(imageWIS @ April 26 2005,15:06) I think the fall of civilization is marked by the unintelligible comments posted by "˜jmswentworth'. Jon.
All right, perhaps my comment on leisure class. Nevertheless, I remain; there is no civilisation without a distinct class system, which is individual to the society. Therefore, you can argue as much as you like, no gentry, no civilisation.
ok, JM, has anybody in the history of the study of civilization ever used that definition before? does anybody agree with you on that definition?
post #88 of 93
Quote:
Quote:
(jmswentworth @ April 26 2005,17:21) Basically saying that, as per the definition, we can never be a civilisation.
"We"? Who is "we" in this statement? And while we're on the subject, what color is the sky in your world?
We is obviously the people who made this statement; the Americans. The sky is currently black-midnight blue in 'my' world.
post #89 of 93
Quote:
Quote:
(jmswentworth @ April 26 2005,15:09)
Quote:
Originally Posted by imageWIS,April 26 2005,15:06
I think the fall of civilization is marked by the unintelligible comments posted by "˜jmswentworth'. Jon.
All right, perhaps my comment on leisure class. Nevertheless, I remain; there is no civilisation without a distinct class system, which is individual to the society. Therefore, you can argue as much as you like, no gentry, no civilisation.
ok, JM, has anybody in the history of the study of civilization ever used that definition before? does anybody agree with you on that definition?
The whole of the Conservative party, as well as the British gentry.
post #90 of 93
Quote:
Howard: "So Mr. Blair would have you believe that more immigrants are not a problem for the economy. He would have you believe that mortgages are low, because house prices are high, and he would have you believe that we would be a civilisation without a society"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Social Life, Food & Drink, Travel › The Fall of Civilization