1. There were no telephones during Confucious' time.
2. Several provinces of China are larger than all of Western Europe. Even a very high-priority message could take months to propagate.
3. "Control' of China 2500 years ago was almost nonexistent. It was a geographically, ethnically, and linguistically diverse set of quasi-nation-states. To even imagine them to be anything like a modern nation state indicates you are extrapolating your bizarre little philosophical universe well beyond the breaking point. (But then again, that wasn't too hard!)
4. Event the early Ryu-Jya (Legalists) were nothing like what you imagine modern laws to be. In fact, their activity probably centers on creating an established set of standardized weights (ie, for weighing food and whatnot). "Law" in early China was NOTHING like what you imagine it to be, and was a higly decentralized affair. Indeed, modern China is rapidly 'deteriorated' into the same.
As for...
Which is a commie nazi way of saying that the the Confucians were not a heck of a lot different from the legalists - and the legalists set up an early version of the standard highly centralized totalitarian terror state, which doubtless appears quite enlightened to the likes of Tyler Durden.
Again, you seem to visualize me as (-1) times yourself, or basically your old commie self.
The point I continue to harp on (and that you fail to understand) is that, despite how well one may argue that one sees reality 'objectively' (and others don't), completely alternate viewpoints are possible and very often held by others throughout the world. An action like the US in Iraq (irregardless of what you believe the objective reality to be) is futile precisely because it only re-inforces the world view of the locals (ie, that the US is a giant, bullying oppressive regime that has stuck it's big dick into the holy land and needs force to remove it).
In other words, perception is often reality, and until you (and others like you) accept that, then we'll continue to have bloodbath after bloodbath, initated by 'Christian' and 'Islamic' true believers alike.
-TD
From: "James A. Donald" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: China's wealthy bypass the banks Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 09:41:20 -0800
-- On 12 Nov 2004 at 9:51, Tyler Durden wrote: > As far as I'm concerned, what Kung Tze does ca 5 BCE is > really consdolidate and codify a large and diverse body of > practices and beliefs under a fairly unified set of ethical > ideas. In that sense, the Legalists were merely a refocusing > of the same general body of mores, etc...into a somewhat > different direction. One might call it a competing school to > Kung Tze de Jiao Xun, but I would argue only because, at that > time, Kung Tze "authority" as it's known today was by no > means completely established. But in a sense, the early > legalists weren't a HECK of a lot different from Confucious.
Which is a commie nazi way of saying that the the Confucians were not a heck of a lot different from the legalists - and the legalists set up an early version of the standard highly centralized totalitarian terror state, which doubtless appears quite enlightened to the likes of Tyler Durden.
--digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG k9Dumf7XMAhNCRDuxNd2aKQtrN2PqD2p2l3TDcjw 4SMVqw0LGnr3oZKU5v0WQpooJ4tKHdZvNiokzj2e9
