To: Neocon who wrote (142928 ) 8/10/2004 4:14:28 PM From: Maurice Winn Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500 Neo, I used the wrong words. I agree that cultural imperialism is usually of a voluntary nature - nobody made me pay money to see Fahrenheit 911, visit McDonalds or Subway, read Donald Duck comics or buy a CDMA phone or invest in QUALCOMM and Globalstar. Hmmm, the CDMA and Globalstar are my cultural imperialism coming back to me as I invented them and found some Americans to do the work. No, hang on, the impetus for Globalstar came from the free Carnegie Library in Onehunga in 1957 and my father's attitude to science. But wait, Carnegie was an American philanthropist. On the other hand, he was actually a Scottish emigre who made a fortune in steel in the USA. Oh, cultural imperialism is a complex fun-house mirror hall with reflections all over the place. As you say, cultural adoption is an individual choice, though heavily influenced by community norms. The point I was making to C2 was that human ideas of what's a good thing are not necessarily related to what a cyberspace intelligence would consider a good time, just as we don't think that what chimps do is necessarily a good thing for us [though quite a lot of chimp culture is very much like human culture]. So a smart cyberspace wouldn't consider a cigar, and glass of whisky, while sitting in a chair of an evening, with a log fire, having a chat with me and C2 would be a fun time. People try to prove that a smart cyberspace can't exist by using cultural imperialism and anthropomorphism. Meaning "Hah, that dopey cyberspace won't enjoy sex and a cigar, and therefore can't be like us and therefore it can't be". Back on planet Earth where IEDs are part of the cultural debate, while cultural imperialism is for the most part voluntary, when soldiers start rampaging around, as with the occupation of Japan and Iraq, it is not voluntary. It's at the point of a gun. You have heard of Stockholm Syndrome. That's when people learn to enjoy something because the powerful tell them they do. It's like the education system in which children are instructed that they will enjoy particular things, and by and large they do. Occupation forces are doing the same process. That's the aim. To make cultural changes [or sometimes though not so much these days, to simply eliminate all the males and take the girls and land - or most of the females too]. Another point I was making was that Arpanet's development into cyberspace would ironically provide the means for the defeat of the USA as the world's main power. Or, maybe I've misunderstood the mechanism of internet protocol and it actually enables total USA control of everything because all cyberspace roads lead to Rome's domain name servers. End of History? Just because the Berlin Wall came down. Hah! We're just getting warmed up. Cultural Imperialism Rulz OK! Mqurice