Con lang

 

A genuine language nerd discusses the three most insane proposals for new language families. At least in his estimation! Number three on the list is a proposed "Sardo-Babylonian" family, claiming that Sardinian (a Romance language) is related to Babylonian and Sumerian. Number two claims that Basque and Hittite are related, while number one claims that the Minoan language of ancient Crete (which isn´t even deciphered yet) must have a relation to Hungarian?!

Unsurprisingly, the Sardinian proposal was made by a Sardinian, and the Hungarian one by a Hungarian. Strangely enough, the authors of the second proposal (linking Basque with Hittite) are neither Basque nor Hittite (I think), but I suppose you can´t get everything in an imperfect world.

I suppose these national romantic drafts can at least win the Nobel literature prize, LOL.

 

Identity crisis

 

"No, Navarre is not Basque sensu stricto,
seriously now!"

I recently found out that two of the last names in my family are Basque in origin. Which doesn´t mean anything at all, since the names have become common among non-Basque, as well. So my Basque forebears might as well have lived 1,000 years ago. Or maybe they weren´t Basque, but simply adopted such names? 

One of the "Basque" names running in my family was used by Spanish Christian knights claiming descent from Theoderik the Great. And the Goths claimed descent from Scandza. As in...Sweden.

Not sure what to make of this. Am I Basque, Spanish, Swedish, or what?

At least I know that everything, everything I say, is Brahman! 

Revelation on the road to Montreal: How the Spartacist League discovered the right of nations to self-determination

”Spartacist” is the publication of the so-called International Communist League (Fourth Internationalist), a network of small revolutionary groups centered on the U.S. Spartacist League (SL). The Spartacists are notorious on the far left for their pro-Stalinism (despite being Trotskyists), sectarianism, and general kookery. They have also been frequently accused of First World chauvinism, anti-immigration racism and pro-imperialism. In issue no 65 of ”Spartacist”, dated Summer 2017, the group reprints a conference resolution titled ”The Struggle Against the Chauvinist Hydra”. The issue itself has the title ”The Fight for Leninism on the National Question”. The resolution supposedly reverses the erstwhile chauvinist course of the organization.

Or does it *really*? The traditional Spartacist position on the national question is that ”interpenetrated peoples” can´t demand self-determination under capitalism. The examples usually given were Israel-Palestine and Northern Ireland. In practice, the Spartacists defended the national rights of the Jews in Palestine and the Protestants in Ireland beneath a cover of ra-ra-revolutionary verbiage. It´s *not* clear from ”Spartacist no 65” whether they have revised their understanding of these conflicts. Nor is it clear whether the SL has repudiated its opposition to open borders or its de facto pro-British stance during the Falkland-Malvinas War.

What is clear is that the SL has changed its understanding of many other national conflicts, but these don´t involve ”interpenetrated peoples” as usually defined. Still, it does represent a break with the traditional line of this particular tendency. Thus, the SL now supports independence for Quebec and a privileged position for the French language in that province. Their previous position is condemned as Anglo-chauvinist. (Strictly speaking, the Spartacists began calling for Quebecois independence already in 1995, but mostly to get rid of the national question from the Canadian agenda altogether, in effect a position of kicking Quebec out so Anglo workers could go on with more important ”class struggle” issues.) The Spartacist League now also calls for the independence of Catalonia, the Basque countries and Corsica. Further, they propose the partition of Belgium into three or four new republics.

Only a few Third World issues are commented upon. Apparently, the Spartacist tendency used to oppose the independence of Guadaloupe, a French colony in the Caribbean with nominal status as a French departement. This position was reversed by the conference. Curiously, the Spartacist take on Puerto Rico used to be the exact opposite: this U.S. dependency should be *forced* to become independent regardless of whether the inhabitants like it or not! Here, the international conference took the eminently sensible position that the Puerto Ricans themselves should decide on their exact relation to the United States – many Puerto Ricans, in fact, demand statehood (i.e. they want the island to become the 51st U.S. state).As for Syria, the SL upholds the (bizarre) position of military support to the Islamic State terrorists against the Kurds – the Kurds, it seems, are still Turds. If the Albanians are still goat-fuckers is, alas, never explained…

Why did the ”International Communist League” suddenly change some of its long-standing positions in this manner? I suspect the reason is a power struggle within the tendency between a certain Comrade Coelho and an old guard of entrenched petty apparatchiks at the Spartacist HQ in New York City. Spartacist founder-leader James Robertson has apparently left his semi-retirement and joined forces with Coelho, who thus carried the day. The new ICL executive committee is said to be 70% non-American and the goal is to make the entire organization 70% ethnic minority. In their fight against the old-timers, Jim & Coelho had the support of non-Anglophone sections in Quebec, Greece, Mexico and elsewhere. Since the Spartacist League and their co-thinkers don´t really *do* much, I strongly suspect that the entire change of line is really the reflection of a change of guard within an increasingly irrelevant sect. Those who liked the old line better can join two old splits from the SL, the Bolshevik Tendency and the Internationalist Group, which both uphold the right of English-speakers to carry out their business in Anglais even in Montreal, Acadia and (perhaps) Paris.

The Great White Hope

The Great Pyrenees doesn't look like any dog I know. Sometimes they remind me of jumbo-sized Golden Retrievers, but they also have traits of Spitz and Chow-Chow. Great Pyrenees (Pyrs for short) are huge, one of the largest dog breeds in fact, but they also look nice, cuddly and fluffy. Information materials on Pyrs are filled with photos of kids hugging their sweet-natured "polar bears".

Well, think again, partner!

While Pyrs aren't out-rightly dangerous (in contrast to Giant Schnauzers), they weren't bred to be your child's favourite playmate. In fact, the Great Pyrenees is an old breed of guard dog, originally used by medieval Basque shepherds in southern France to guard their flocks against wolfs and bears. Later, the Pyr became a popular dog among French aristocrats, who used it to watch over their chateaux and palaces. Against the local peasants, perhaps?

The breed has "dominance issues" and need a firm hand and early training, which can be difficult for inexperienced owners. A tight leash and a very sturdy fence are other requirements, since these dogs love to roam and *hate* other large dogs, especially other Pyrs. However, they tolerate children and even cats provided these are introduced to the Pyr at an early stage of its socialization. Everyone else better beware of this suspicious, 100-pound working dog. It's not innately aggressive, but it does what it takes to defend its sheep (or owners). It's also quite notorious for its constant barking. Somehow, I feel that the Pyrenean Mountain Dog (another name for this breed) is better off in its native Pyrenees guarding livestock than in an American suburban home!

"Great Pyrenees" is a short, elementary introduction to this fascinating breed. As other books in this series, much of the information isn't breed-specific and could be applied to any large dog, or to dogs in general. Thus, we are told to avoid puppy mills, buy high-quality dog food and use anti-flea shampoo on a regular basis. Still, the booklet is well written and contains enough specific information on Pyrs to satisfy the causal reader. This book could be good for a public library or perhaps a veterinarian's waiting room. The author recommends Paul Strang's "The New Complete Great Pyrenees" for those who want more detailed information.

Finally, a plus for the photos, which are all in colour and usually excellent. In fact, the humans are frequently more ugly than the dogs!