Thank you for your letter. I regret that I am not clear as to what you intend by arisch. I am not of Aryan extraction: that is Indo-Iranian; as far as I am aware none of my ancestors spoke Hindustani, Persian, Gypsy, or any related dialects. But if I am to understand that you are enquiring whether I am of Jewish origin, I can only reply that I regret that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people. My great-great-grandfather came to England in the eighteenth century from Germany: the main part of my descent is therefore purely English, and I am an English subject—which should be sufficient. I have been accustomed, nonetheless, to regard my German name with pride, and continued to do so throughout the period of the late regrettable war, in which I served in the English army. I cannot, however, forbear to comment that if impertinent and irrelevant inquiries of this sort are to become the rule in matters of literature, then the time is not far distant when a German name will no longer be a source of pride.
Your enquiry is doubtless made in order to comply with the laws of your own country, but that this should be held to apply to the subjects of another state would be improper, even if it had (as it has not) any bearing whatsoever on the merits of my work or its sustainability for publication, of which you appear to have satisfied yourselves without reference to my Abstammung.
Don't fuck with posh and emotionally repressed Oxbridge motherfuckers when they realize they are finally on the right side of history. 🤣
I loved it when I first read it and this is my favorite part:
But if I am to understand that you are enquiring whether I am of Jewish origin, I can only reply that I regret that I appear to have no ancestors of that gifted people.
In the link it has his letter to his British publisher, where he was even more blunt. Maybe the first time that "I have _______ friends" has actually rung true.
Personally, I should be inclined to refuse to give any Bestätigung (although it happens that I can), and let a German translation go hang. In any case I should object strongly to any such declaration appearing in print. I do not regard the (probable) absence of all Jewish blood as necessarily honourable; and I have many Jewish friends, and should regret giving any colour to the notion that I subscribed to the wholly pernicious and unscientific race-doctrine.
Telling something or someone to go hang was a very strong insult in those days. Even worse than saying go fuck yourself. Because hanging was how people were executed, meaning they are the most unwanted people in society...
If you want to understand how to crush your foes with English, read Russell.
It’s dated, and ancient compared to the shit we spew, but it soo pure and clear (when you get the ear for it).
I am not a scholar, I can’t analyse prose or poetry, but his writing is cleansing and lights up the brain - especially if you have a fetish for reasonableness.
It’s dated, and ancient compared to the shit we spew, but it soo pure and clear (when you get the ear for it).
I am not a scholar, I can’t analyse prose or poetry, but his writing is cleansing and lights up the brain - especially if you have a fetish for reasonableness.
I know exactly what you mean and I've never quite had the words to describe this type of writing. It's definitely old fashioned to our eyes, but it's so dense with meaning. I felt the same reading some of the landmark SCOTUS decisions of the Warren court during the civil rights era.
I have a Bachelor's degree in Philosophy and I found myself loving Russell and Mill because there's no pompousness to their writing. A lot of philosophers use very flowery language that's hard to parse, but Russell just gets straight to the point, clear as day.
In my opinion, philosophy should be written clearly so anyone can understand it (looking at you, Heidegger)
In the early 1900's, he discovered a logical paradox that shattered mathematics for years, and drove brilliant people literally insane (one of them died in an asylum later on).
He then tried to redefine mathematics based solely on logic; but he failed after a 1000-page manuscript... and that was only the first half of what he intended to publish.
There are countless valuable quotes by him and anecdotes, he's a very inspirational man.
I think it's use is popularized by the tv show 'Peaky Blinders' with the Birmingham pronunciation of the word.
Some have accustomed themselves of writing a bit more cautious, as multiple platforms have active swear detection (not the reason to use it on Lemmy, but there were are).
People often write how they talk, and I find the best authors will incorporate dialect and intonation into their writing. One of my favorite examples is of Blood Meridian. It's so amazing that one can literally tell who is talking purely from word choice and grammar with no quotation marks and often no indicators of who is speaking.
I think usually it's just for fun. "Fook" is supposed to be evocative of Northern England in the same way "feck" is of Ireland, but in my experience no one in Northern England pronounces it that way for real. Not in the North West, at least.
I fucking think it's because they're fucking worried that fucking people on fucking Lemmy might be fucking offended by the fucking word fuck and its fucking derivatives. Let's fucking hope they fucking bookmark this fucking post and fucking come back to it in a few fucking weeks to see if anything's fucking happened to it. Fuck fuckity fuck fuck - fuck fuck.
thanks! I'm no mathematician and won't pretend to understand what's going on there, but I've stumbled across some "This knowledge is too much for a human brain to hold and therefore I have gone mad" tropes (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GoMadFromTheRevelation) that I was always wondering if there are actual IRL examples of this
Hell, just getting 50% of high school students to understand Russell's Teapot and the Burden of Proof would have a huge impact on political discourse in the US.
Thank you for your letter and for your enclosed pizza menu suggestions. I have given some thought to our recent correspondence about topping choices. It is always difficult to decide on how to respond to people whose culinary ethos is so alien and, in fact, repellent to one's own. It is not that I take exception to the general points made by you about pizza toppings, but that every ounce of my energy has been devoted to an active opposition to cruel fruit placement, compulsive sweetness, and the sadistic persecution of traditional savory flavors which has characterised the philosophy and practice of pineapple-on-pizza advocacy.
I feel obliged to say that the gastronomic universes we inhabit are so distinct, and in deepest ways opposed, that nothing fruitful or sincere could ever emerge from a shared pizza between us.
I should like you to understand the intensity of this conviction on my part. It is not out of any attempt to be rude that I say this but because of all that I value in Italian culinary experience and pizza-making achievement.
Yours sincerely,
What are the chances I had just sent something similar to someone advocating for pineapple on pizza?
Bertrand Arthur William Russell, 3rd Earl Russell, OM, FRS (18 May 1872 – 2 February 1970) was a British philosopher, logician, mathematician, and public intellectual. He had influence on mathematics, logic, set theory, and various areas of analytic philosophy.
I mean, not everybody gets knighted for stealing from brown people or killing the French. Paul McCartney got knighted just for writing some nice tunes.
It doesn't skirt around the issue or go for subtlety either, just straight up states that fascism is violent oppression. I wouldn't even call it gentlemanly, just formal and direct.
I'm of two minds when it comes to chewing out someone. On one hand, I have literally torn strips off dozer operators, and can cuss with the best of them. I love well put together strings of expletives, and think the more creative you are with them, funnier they are and the more they show intellect rather than just 'huh huh fucking cunt'.
On the other side, I see the value of being overly polite but cutting. There's something personal about it. You're beautifully insulted and it feels like you disappointed your parents.
I generally tend to opt for the first option and call people slack-jawed pigeon fuckers.
Nah, it is drectly pointing out the worst parts of fascism and saying that there would be no reason to meet since Bertrand is opposed to those things. Adding in profanity, which I am a huge fan of, would not drive the point home if the direct statements are not clear already.
Now if the fascist sent a follow up asking to reconsider I would hope the reply would be "I told you to fuck off already"
Bertrand Russel had his own style, and it's complete, formal, heartfelt and true. If he tried to add a bunch of cursing to it, it would become inauthentic, just as it would if someone whose natural mode is to start cursing and punching decided to try to talk like Bertrand Russel. Everyone's got their voice.
For an equally complete, formal, heartfelt and true example which does include cursing, see:
It's a good question if you're unfamiliar with this quote.
Once you get to a certain depth of vocabulary, and basic level of skill in writing, it's easy to write a lot of text.
You can sort of "talk around" your central point, adding reams and reams of text, sketching out your point in a crude outline, eventually arriving at a complete picture or just stupefying your audience into submission.
This kind of communication is evidence of "thinking out loud," where you know the vibe of what you're trying to say, but figure out your logic at the same time as you're saying/writing it.
Especially in writing, this would be considered a first draft. If you take the time to think about what you're trying to say then you can often refine/reduce your message to a more respectful length (a shorter one).
I guess you get some thoughtfulness and economy of words kind of for free them. Reminds me of how (I think it was him) Edgar Allan Poe would write with slow-to-dry ink, so he would have to take his time when writing.
I'm guessing the point wasn't to express mere disinterest, but active resentment of the opposing viewpoint: "Not only have I no desire to converse with you, which may be taken as a hesitation to engage with your views, but I believe such a conversation to be utterly worthless because I despise your entire world view" with a dash of "You're a bigot and I want nothing to do with your kind."
That doesn't preclude taking a moment to write such a letter.
If anything, it serves to challenge the pretense of dignified and harmless "opinions" that fascists like to leverage. I'd argue that is much more productive than the way discourse has occasionally evaded calling out the cruel, sadistic, violent, bigoted assholes and enemies of human progress and dignity as just that.
As Russel notes, there is no reasonable discussion to be had with someone so openly endorsing violence beyond reason, whose entire worldview is so diametrically opposed that there is no common ground to found a discussion on in the first place.
Giving fascists the "Eh, just opinions" benefit normalises their hateful views as permissible. For anyone valuing freedom, tolerance, progress and justice, opposing these rhetorics is not just sensible, but even crucial to combat the spread of this ideological cancer.
There can be no peaceful disagreement with an ideology that, given the chance, will suppress all disagreement violently.
This one is even better than Tolkien's response to a German publisher in 1938, asking for proof of his ancestry, which may or may not have been sent, but tellingly there was no official translation of The Hobbit into German until 1957.
Don't fuck with posh and emotionally repressed Oxbridge motherfuckers when they realize they are finally on the right side of history. 🤣
I loved it when I first read it and this is my favorite part:
In the link it has his letter to his British publisher, where he was even more blunt. Maybe the first time that "I have _______ friends" has actually rung true.
Telling something or someone to go hang was a very strong insult in those days. Even worse than saying go fuck yourself. Because hanging was how people were executed, meaning they are the most unwanted people in society...
Russell is one of the greats. But if you're looking for a terse knockdown there's always this classic from author Max Reger:
That was impressively descriptive, but I'm afraid most fascists are too stupid to understand the burn.
Pure poetry
Wouah... Juste... Wouah oO
"No offense, but ew"
"After careful consideration, fuck the fuck off.
Yours sincerely,
Fuck you."
How to turn down lunch with a fascist by Flying Squid:
I am wearing this shirt right now. Really.
Is that the same way you turn down bananas?
No, I'm polite about bananas. I say, "no thank you."
It is not the fault of the banana that it tastes horrible. It's just minding its own business being a fruit.
If you want to understand how to crush your foes with English, read Russell.
It’s dated, and ancient compared to the shit we spew, but it soo pure and clear (when you get the ear for it).
I am not a scholar, I can’t analyse prose or poetry, but his writing is cleansing and lights up the brain - especially if you have a fetish for reasonableness.
I know exactly what you mean and I've never quite had the words to describe this type of writing. It's definitely old fashioned to our eyes, but it's so dense with meaning. I felt the same reading some of the landmark SCOTUS decisions of the Warren court during the civil rights era.
I have a Bachelor's degree in Philosophy and I found myself loving Russell and Mill because there's no pompousness to their writing. A lot of philosophers use very flowery language that's hard to parse, but Russell just gets straight to the point, clear as day.
In my opinion, philosophy should be written clearly so anyone can understand it (looking at you, Heidegger)
Dude's a fookin legend !
In the early 1900's, he discovered a logical paradox that shattered mathematics for years, and drove brilliant people literally insane (one of them died in an asylum later on).
He then tried to redefine mathematics based solely on logic; but he failed after a 1000-page manuscript... and that was only the first half of what he intended to publish.
There are countless valuable quotes by him and anecdotes, he's a very inspirational man.
Unrelated, genuine question: Why do some people write "fookin"?
Is it just for fun?
Do you pronounce it that way?
I personally write "fucking" and rarely "fuckin".
Just curious.
I think it's use is popularized by the tv show 'Peaky Blinders' with the Birmingham pronunciation of the word.
Some have accustomed themselves of writing a bit more cautious, as multiple platforms have active swear detection (not the reason to use it on Lemmy, but there were are).
People often write how they talk, and I find the best authors will incorporate dialect and intonation into their writing. One of my favorite examples is of Blood Meridian. It's so amazing that one can literally tell who is talking purely from word choice and grammar with no quotation marks and often no indicators of who is speaking.
I thought it was to emphasize that they are Australian, but that's just because of a character in a book that I read.
Popular slang word they like, i guess? Not american here.
I think usually it's just for fun. "Fook" is supposed to be evocative of Northern England in the same way "feck" is of Ireland, but in my experience no one in Northern England pronounces it that way for real. Not in the North West, at least.
I fucking think it's because they're fucking worried that fucking people on fucking Lemmy might be fucking offended by the fucking word fuck and its fucking derivatives. Let's fucking hope they fucking bookmark this fucking post and fucking come back to it in a few fucking weeks to see if anything's fucking happened to it. Fuck fuckity fuck fuck - fuck fuck.
I think that's unlikely.
Or it's just the way they pronounce it, and want to give their cursing a bit of flavour.
where could I read more about this paradox?
glad you asked, here you go :
Russel's paradox
but brace yourself, it's quite technical.
thanks! I'm no mathematician and won't pretend to understand what's going on there, but I've stumbled across some "This knowledge is too much for a human brain to hold and therefore I have gone mad" tropes (https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GoMadFromTheRevelation) that I was always wondering if there are actual IRL examples of this
Russell is the GOAT. If he was taught in schools, we would be living in paradise.
Hell, just getting 50% of high school students to understand Russell's Teapot and the Burden of Proof would have a huge impact on political discourse in the US.
That's his teapot I've been worshiping all these years without proof, only faith? Well that's good to know!
With all due respect, you are the antithesis of all that I consider human. With all due respect.
By the way, if anyone else was curious, dude was a “Sir” due to an inherited title, not knighted for individual actions.
What are the chances I had just sent something similar to someone advocating for pineapple on pizza?
Jokes aside - dude was pretty badass:
👑
Of course nothing fruitful could ever emerge from your pizza, you reject those flavours!
A half-brick to the face is an equally elegant way of turning down a nazi.
The recipient better be fireproof to avoid getting burned by such vehemence.
Mosley was not impervious to fire.
Regrettably, the British people made the unforgivable mistake of not proving it BEFORE he died peacefully in his sleep aged 84.
It at the time most researched was focused on how resistant to bricks he was. Not very was the ultimate conclusion.
His other grandpa
"Nah" - B
Honestly, same.
Alternatively, you can accept the lunch date and then punch them when they get there.
Wait a second, sir? Fascist? One moment while I check wikipedia...
Nevermind, it turns out he just inherited the title, not as bad as being knighted
I mean, not everybody gets knighted for stealing from brown people or killing the French. Paul McCartney got knighted just for writing some nice tunes.
And Lewis Hamilton for driving cars
All that and the Oxford Comma. Love it
Needs more expletives.
No it doesn't, and that's coming from me. You can check my comment history lol.
It's beautiful to also see how well it holds together in the most gentlemanly and old-fashioned prose.
It doesn't skirt around the issue or go for subtlety either, just straight up states that fascism is violent oppression. I wouldn't even call it gentlemanly, just formal and direct.
I'm of two minds when it comes to chewing out someone. On one hand, I have literally torn strips off dozer operators, and can cuss with the best of them. I love well put together strings of expletives, and think the more creative you are with them, funnier they are and the more they show intellect rather than just 'huh huh fucking cunt'.
On the other side, I see the value of being overly polite but cutting. There's something personal about it. You're beautifully insulted and it feels like you disappointed your parents.
I generally tend to opt for the first option and call people slack-jawed pigeon fuckers.
Nah, it is drectly pointing out the worst parts of fascism and saying that there would be no reason to meet since Bertrand is opposed to those things. Adding in profanity, which I am a huge fan of, would not drive the point home if the direct statements are not clear already.
Now if the fascist sent a follow up asking to reconsider I would hope the reply would be "I told you to fuck off already"
Nah. You have to follow your own style.
Bertrand Russel had his own style, and it's complete, formal, heartfelt and true. If he tried to add a bunch of cursing to it, it would become inauthentic, just as it would if someone whose natural mode is to start cursing and punching decided to try to talk like Bertrand Russel. Everyone's got their voice.
For an equally complete, formal, heartfelt and true example which does include cursing, see:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cleveland-browns-letters/
I read that as explosives and was wondering who the hell was downvoting you.
Always with the walls of text these people... Just decline and be done with it! Nobody trying to grade your thesis over here ffs.
"No thank you"
Would be better here. All relevant information in the letter would be implied.
If you're going to show off writing skills, actually say something useful
"I have made this longer than usual because I have not had time to make it shorter." - Blaise Pascal (Probably)
He had time to write a whole Paige, but not to... not do that?
It's a good question if you're unfamiliar with this quote.
Once you get to a certain depth of vocabulary, and basic level of skill in writing, it's easy to write a lot of text.
You can sort of "talk around" your central point, adding reams and reams of text, sketching out your point in a crude outline, eventually arriving at a complete picture or just stupefying your audience into submission.
This kind of communication is evidence of "thinking out loud," where you know the vibe of what you're trying to say, but figure out your logic at the same time as you're saying/writing it.
Especially in writing, this would be considered a first draft. If you take the time to think about what you're trying to say then you can often refine/reduce your message to a more respectful length (a shorter one).
tl;dr easy say lot meh, hard say little good
Ahh, yes I've been to uni too. It's not gotten me much faster at writing large amounts of text. But I do have to agree it's become very easy.
Isn't this more of a lack of energy rather than time? Or perhaps just lazyness?
I suppose that depends on one's writing process.
For my part, I usually end up deleting needless words or clichés on a second pass.
My fine motor control just isn't there for super fast writing
I guess you get some thoughtfulness and economy of words kind of for free them. Reminds me of how (I think it was him) Edgar Allan Poe would write with slow-to-dry ink, so he would have to take his time when writing.
It is a paradox, but the implication is that bottling up your feelings consumes more of your time then taking the time to properly vent them.
That's quite a bit of emotion for a simple difference in ideology
I'm guessing the point wasn't to express mere disinterest, but active resentment of the opposing viewpoint: "Not only have I no desire to converse with you, which may be taken as a hesitation to engage with your views, but I believe such a conversation to be utterly worthless because I despise your entire world view" with a dash of "You're a bigot and I want nothing to do with your kind."
"No thank you" just doesn't drive that home.
Where does the motivation to drive that home come from, isn't this just a difference in opinion?
"I hate bigotry" is quite a strong opinion
Yea, I'd expect they'd do something more productive against it then
That doesn't preclude taking a moment to write such a letter.
If anything, it serves to challenge the pretense of dignified and harmless "opinions" that fascists like to leverage. I'd argue that is much more productive than the way discourse has occasionally evaded calling out the cruel, sadistic, violent, bigoted assholes and enemies of human progress and dignity as just that.
As Russel notes, there is no reasonable discussion to be had with someone so openly endorsing violence beyond reason, whose entire worldview is so diametrically opposed that there is no common ground to found a discussion on in the first place.
Giving fascists the "Eh, just opinions" benefit normalises their hateful views as permissible. For anyone valuing freedom, tolerance, progress and justice, opposing these rhetorics is not just sensible, but even crucial to combat the spread of this ideological cancer.
There can be no peaceful disagreement with an ideology that, given the chance, will suppress all disagreement violently.
This isn't challenging or achieving anything though, it's just a long form "no"