I was under the impression that Bulgaria was created after WWI when Austria-Hungary and the Ottoman Empire fell apart (like so many other countries). At that time a whole bunch of ethnolinguistic states were created.

84% v. 90%. Either way you have to admit that the borders were drawn and changed with the intention of putting Bulgarians in and keeping non Bulgarians out.


Yes. It is another thinig to say that. But I believe the evidence is overwhelming. The most recent border changes all made the ethnolinguistic lines closer to politcal lines. Yugoslavia, Kosovo, Czechoslovakia. Has there been a border change in the last twenty years that wasn't about making the political borders closer to ethnolinguistic borders? And any border changes that are possible in the future are all about making ethnolinquistic borders closer to poliltical borders. Belgium, Catalan, Scotland, Ireland recombining, the Basques. Is there a possible border change in Europe you can see coming in the future that won't be about making political boundaries reflect ethnolinguistic lines?


All the border changes and movements of people after WWII were about making ethnolinguistic borders reflect politial lines. The German explusion of Pomerania, Silesia, Konigsburg, Danzig and the Sudentenland. The movement of polish nationals from Easter Poland (now Western Ukrain) to the ethnically cleansed parts of Pomrania and Silesia (now western Poland). Etc. ETc. After WWII the only border movement has also been for ethnolinguistic lines. Can you name a border change since WWII that wasn't about that?

The Soviet tried to fight this ethnolinguistic trend but they lost. The Soviet Union, Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia were both attempts to ignore nationalism, and they all failed.


The European ethnic map is in a few historical atlases I have. I have seen the same map in about five pubications. But my scanner is down. The ethnolinguistic map of the Middle East I have (that is the best) I got from the internet but the link isn't valid anymore. I will look for them both this weekend.

Like I said the biggest problem with my theory is not that Europe has been moving towards ethnolinguistic uniformaty or that it continues to do so (the belive the facts overwhelming support that conclusion), it is whether the middle east and central asia will follow Europes model.

GGG acknowledged the European trend but then made some very good points of why the Middle East and Central Asia are different from Europe. Cletus also acknowledged the European trend but also made some good point on why Europe was different from Middle East and Central Asia. For some reason you focused on what I thought was the undisputable part of my thesis (Europe) and did not focus on the weak part (what happend and is happening in Europe will also happen in the Middle East and Central Asia).

But the big issue is what forces caused Europe to do what it did (and continues to do) and are these same forces present in the Middle East and Central Asia?

I was kidding. The whole point of my post was the irony where Ty was usinng the Basque example to counter my theory. Don't you think the whole Basque situation supports my theory that there still is strong pressure in Europe for borders to move closer in line with ethnoglinquistic boundaries? The Basques (although incredibly small) are one of the few ethnolinguistic groups to not have a country in Europe (like the Kurds in the Middle east although the Kurds are the fourth largest ethnic group in the ME where the Basques are like the75th biggest ethnic group in Europe) And now they are moving to have a country of just Basque speakers.

The Basque independence movement and the sympathy for it totally backs my theory and Ty used the example of them to dispute my theory.

Inequality.
 

Alan Greenspan was not happy with the deficits. To put the deficits on him (which were beyond his control) is not valid. There is a classic economic theory that holds that the minimum wage laws cost jobs and do not really increase wages and most economists agree with that theory. I however, do not. In my graduate economic classes I also argued for a minimum wage but was pretty much laughed at by everyone in the program. I am sure most of the conservatives on this board agree the minimum wage is bad. I also believe in the progressive income tax which most economics deride.

However, I think to imply that there has been conspiracy to supress wages by the conservatives is not valid. I don't think that is true. I just think it has been caused in part by people making the wrong economic assumptions.

Does that bitter spinster ever post on this board on another subject besides me- or a post made by me?

Only when she's talking about your buddies.

http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...8072#post38072

More Hot Air
 

So what do you thing of GGG's options?

More Hot Air
 

So I believe the the options are:

1) Give up (Pull out)
2) Stay the course
3) Increase troop strength.

GGG thinks there are more options

Does anything else think there are other options? If so what are they?

Does anyone think it is constructive to talk about any thing other than what our options are?

Nuts!?!

Wow. It is hard for me to imagine a prior post that would reinforce my current image of her more than that one (That would be the image of her being a bitter and oversensitive spinster that thinks she has been wronged by many men in relationships).

Exactly. Which is why I focused on the Europe part -- where we are talking about things that have already happened. I was hoping to get a better understanding of the force to get at why it might be seen elsewhere. Borders moved a lot in Europe between 1800-1925. Since then, much less. Understanding why would help understand whether it's likely to happen elsewhere.

In Europe, borders often changed when the winning side in a war demanded territory. In an age of nationalism, this happens less, since (a) there is this principle of self-determination floating out there, and (b) it may cause more trouble than it's worth. Also, the UN and superpower rivalries put a damper on this. So in the last fifty years in Africa, you don't see the borders moving much at all, even though the countries there are artificially and poorly aligned with ethnic realities. As Africa continues to develop, perhaps this will change. Or, perhaps not.

One would expect finance lawyers to be able to do basic math, too, but you would be frequently wrong. As someone once told me about lawyers--"if they knew how to do math, they would have gone to business school". Personally, I blame misguided educational concepts about estimation for my poor career choices.

So is the consensus that I am a bad person if I post here (for the time being at least) solely trying to elicit another paranoid delusional paigowesque rant from Spanky? I would have thought that Slave or Less would have filled him in on how those sorts or posts are perceived, but they probably find them amusing too. My lucky day!

It is mean probably. But as my fellow mods and admins can attest, I do have a mean streak.



ETFS.

I am a finance lawyer and I know enough to know that .15% is not 1/5 of one percent! My clients are very lucky to have a math genius available to advise them.

What about a post in which she bitterly lamented her spinsterhood and the fact that she had been wronged by many men in relationships? If I squeeze my eyes really tight and hum music from the Caberet soundtrack to myself, I can kinda imagine ncs posting that, though I have to work real hard to dispel the overpowering flavor of irony.

I have an MBA with an emphasis in International Finance and Economics. As Less is my witness, I have suffered through many Calc and Stat courses.