Thread

strathspey@strathspey.org:44639

Previous Message Next Message

  • GOSS9@telefonica.net

    GOSS9@telefonica.net March 12, 2006, 1 a.m. (Message 44639)

    Re: OT - singular or plural

    Sorry to disagree on two points. Organizations are singular, as in the 
    RSCDS is, though its branches and dancers are.
    
    Second point, possibly political, for which I appologize. It is 
    correct to say that the United States are because, when referring to 
    the states, but it is also OK to say that the United States is when 
    referring to it as a whole.
    
    Part of this problem is political propaganda, in that by the common 
    political science definition of a state, the U.S. is one, and its 
    states, as those of Brazil, and Mexico, are really provinces no matter 
    what they call themselves. This is because they all fail step three of 
    a three step test.
    1. Territory-yes, 2. population-yes. 3. sovereignty-no. Therefore the 
    U.S. having all three is a state, and its states are not
    In the UK, the UK is a state, which now has both provinces and nations 
    within it. For a short time the UK was one state with nations that 
    happened to be two kingdoms.  Not sure what the present status is but 
    in the 70´s, Northern Ireland is not a nation, but is a province of the 
    United Kingdom, but Wales has never been a state, but was a nation that 
    became a province of England. 
    
    Nations neither require territory nor sovereignty, just people. So 
    there was a Jewish state, and a Jewish province, in the historical 
    past, and there is one now, but between a.d. 67 and 1947, there was 
    only a Jewish nation. Yugoslavia was a state that included several 
    nations, now these nations sort of correspond to the borders of several 
    states. The Soviet Union, like the U.S. pretended it was a union of 
    states, but it was actually one state, containing many nations, some of 
    which have become states in recent history. 
    
    This confusion has created problems in U.S. History, and it took a 
    civil war to decide it. It is still a problem when one party says they 
    belive in states rights, unless of course gays want to marry or 
    citizens want to smoke a joint. Sorry Republicans, I know you like to 
    say things at your conventions such as "the soveriegn state of x casts 
    its votes for y" but the very fact that you have to put both sovereign 
    and state in the same sentence indicates that you are confused.
          

Previous Message Next Message