From xod@thestonecutters.net Mon Sep 30 18:39:03 2002 Return-Path: X-Sender: lojban-out@lojban.org X-Apparently-To: lojban@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-8_1_1_4); 1 Oct 2002 01:39:03 -0000 Received: (qmail 95106 invoked from network); 1 Oct 2002 01:39:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (66.218.66.216) by m13.grp.scd.yahoo.com with QMQP; 1 Oct 2002 01:39:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO digitalkingdom.org) (204.152.186.175) by mta1.grp.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; 1 Oct 2002 01:39:03 -0000 Received: from lojban-out by digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.05) id 17wC32-0003kZ-00 for lojban@yahoogroups.com; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 18:42:04 -0700 Received: from digitalkingdom.org ([204.152.186.175] helo=chain) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17wC2M-0003kB-00; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 18:41:22 -0700 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-list); Mon, 30 Sep 2002 18:41:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [66.111.194.10] (helo=granite.thestonecutters.net) by digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.05) id 17wC2J-0003k1-00 for lojban-list@lojban.org; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 18:41:19 -0700 Received: from localhost (xod@localhost) by granite.thestonecutters.net (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g911cG083615 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2002 21:38:16 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from xod@thestonecutters.net) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2002 21:38:16 -0400 (EDT) To: lojban-list@lojban.org Subject: [lojban] guntrusi'o (was: LOI PRENU GO PA MEI GI KA'E NAI TE JINGA?) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20020930204807.E83411-100000@granite.thestonecutters.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-archive-position: 1781 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org Errors-to: lojban-list-bounce@lojban.org X-original-sender: xod@thestonecutters.net Precedence: bulk X-list: lojban-list From: Invent Yourself Reply-To: xod@thestonecutters.net X-Yahoo-Group-Post: member; u=110189215 X-Yahoo-Profile: throwing_back_the_apple On Mon, 30 Sep 2002, Craig wrote: > >> > I don't know about {cecmu}. In Spanish, "el pueblo" has very strong > >> > connotations. (I guess "the people" in English does too, but not > >> > necessarily the same ones.) There probably can't be one best > >> > translation, each will get better a different aspect. > >> > >> Of course. "The people" in English is exclusively a political term, > >> for one thing. > > >It's a code work for the peasants + working class. The bourgeoisie are > >never part of "the people", though their college age students are > >eligible. na'ebo lei vlipa prenu > > There are three cases where the bourgeoisie or other non-peasants might be > part of The People. > > Those bourgeoisie who put their resources to helping The People rather than > to acting bourgeoisish may identify themselves with The People without being > contradicted. They're probably worng, but nobody will argue with them. .ie > Those bourgeoisie who are living under feudalism and are as oppressed as > the proletariat are certainly part of The People, until the revolution, when > they become enemies of The People, which comes to mean only the proletariat. > When the bourgeois revolution comes, the proletariat benefits in the short > term. .ie .i ti'e 1 le 4 barna be le ca gugrjunguo lanci be'o po'e le'e tarci cu sinxa lei terprapo'e > The soldiers are part of the lower class, and thus of The People, but are > certainly not peasants and do not work. In many cases, the peasants and the > soldiers have not gotten along - hence the need for the line, "Proletariat > of the world, unite!" as a communist rallying point. .ienai .i fendi lei minjygu'a fo na'ebo le kamsonci .i mu'a natmi .i da'ina'i piso'eroi lei jenmi pu bandu lei terprapo'e .ija'o J ta'enu'o cmima lai prenu -- Before Sept. 11 there was not the present excited talk about a strike on Iraq. There is no evidence of any connection between Iraq and that act of terrorism. Why would that event change the situation? -- Howard Zinn