text:
The Chrysanthemum and the Sword

The Chrysanthemum and the Sword: Patterns of Japanese Culture is a 1946 study of Japan by American anthropologist Ruth Benedict compiled from her analyses of Japanese culture during World War II for the U.S. Office of War Information. Her analyses were requested in order to understand and predict the behavior of the Japanese during the war by reference to a series of contradictions in traditional culture. The book was influential in shaping American ideas about Japanese culture during the occupation of Japan, and popularized the distinction between guilt cultures and shame cultures.

Although it has received harsh criticism, the book has continued to be influential. Two anthropologists wrote in 1992 that there is "a sense in which all of us have been writing footnotes to [Chrysanthemum] since it appeared in 1946". The Japanese, Benedict wrote, are

"both aggressive and unaggressive, both militaristic and aesthetic, both insolent and polite, rigid and adaptable, submissive and resentful of being pushed around, loyal and treacherous, brave  and timid, conservative and hospitable to new ways..."

The book also affected Japanese conceptions of themselves. The book was translated into Japanese in 1948 and became a bestseller in the People's Republic of China when relations with Japan soured.

Research circumstances
This book which resulted from Benedict's wartime research, like several other United States Office of War Information wartime studies of Japan and Germany, is an instance of "culture at a distance", the study of a culture through its literature, newspaper clippings, films, and recordings, as well as extensive interviews with German-Americans or Japanese-Americans. The techniques were necessitated by anthropologists' inability to visit Nazi Germany or wartime Japan. One later ethnographer pointed out, however, that although "culture at a distance" had the "elaborate aura of a good academic fad, the method was not so different from what any good historian does: to make the most creative use possible of written documents." Anthropologists were attempting to understand the cultural patterns that might be driving the aggression of once-friendly nations, and they hoped to find possible weaknesses or means of persuasion that had been missed.

Americans found themselves unable to comprehend matters in Japanese culture. For instance, Americans considered it quite natural that American prisoners of war would want their families to know that they were alive and that they would keep quiet when they were asked for information about troop movements, etc. However, Japanese prisoners of war apparently gave information freely and did not try to contact their families.

Reception in the United States
Between 1946 and 1971, the book sold only 28,000 hardback copies, and a paperback edition was not issued until 1967. Benedict played a major role in grasping the place of the Emperor of Japan in Japanese popular culture, and formulating the recommendation to President Franklin D. Roosevelt that permitting continuation of the Emperor's reign had to be part of the eventual surrender offer.

As of 1999, 350,000 copies were sold in the US.

Reception in Japan
More than 2.3 million copies of the book have been sold in Japan since it first appeared in translation there.

John W. Bennett and Michio Nagai, two scholars on Japan, pointed out in 1953 that the translated book "has appeared in Japan during a period of intense national self-examination—a period during which Japanese intellectuals and writers have been studying the sources and meaning of Japanese history and character, in one of their perennial attempts to determine the most desirable course of Japanese development."

Japanese social critic and philosopher Tamotsu Aoki said that the translated book "helped invent a new tradition for postwar Japan." It helped to create a growing interest in "ethnic nationalism" in the country, shown in the publication of hundreds of ethnocentric nihonjinron (treatises on 'Japaneseness') published over the next four decades. Although Benedict was criticized for not discriminating among historical developments in the country in her study, "Japanese cultural critics were especially interested in her attempts to portray the whole or total structure ('zentai kōzō') of Japanese Culture," as Helen Hardacre put it. C. Douglas Lummis has said the entire "nihonjinron" genre stems ultimately from Benedict's book.

The book began a discussion among Japanese scholars about "shame culture" vs. "guilt culture", which spread beyond academia, and the two terms are now established as ordinary expressions in the country.

Soon after the translation was published, Japanese scholars, including Kazuko Tsurumi, Tetsuro Watsuji, and Kunio Yanagita criticized the book as inaccurate and having methodological errors. American scholar C. Douglas Lummis has written that criticisms of Benedict's book that are "now very well known in Japanese scholarly circles" include that it represented the ideology of a class for that of the entire culture, "a state of acute social dislocation for a normal condition, and an extraordinary moment in a nation's history as an unvarying norm of social behavior."

Japanese ambassador to Pakistan Sadaaki Numata said the book "has been a must reading for many students of Japanese studies."

According to Margaret Mead, the author's former student and a fellow anthropologist, other Japanese who have read it found it on the whole accurate but somewhat "moralistic". Sections of the book were mentioned favorably in Takeo Doi's book, The Anatomy of Dependence, but he is somewhat critical of her analysis of Japan and the West as respectively shame and guilt cultures, noting that while he is "disposed to side with her," she still "allows value judgements to creep into her ideas."

In a 2002 symposium at The Library of Congress in the United States, Shinji Yamashita, of the department of anthropology at the University of Tokyo, added that there has been so much change since World War II in Japan that Benedict would not recognize the nation she described in 1946.

Lummis wrote, "After some time I realized that I would never be able to live in a decent relationship with the people of that country unless I could drive this book, and its politely arrogant world view, out of my head." Lummis, who went to the Vassar College archives to review Benedict's notes, wrote that he found some of her more important points were developed from interviews with Robert Hashima, a Japanese-American native of the United States who was taken to Japan as a child, educated there, then returned to the US before World War II began. According to Lummis, who interviewed Hashima, the circumstances helped introduce a certain bias into Benedict's research: "For him, coming to Japan for the first time as a teenager smack in the middle of the militaristic period and having no memory of the country before then, what he was taught in school was not 'an ideology', it was Japan itself." Lummis thinks Benedict relied too much on Hashima and says that he was deeply alienated by his experiences in Japan and that "it seems that he became a kind of touchstone, the authority against which she would test information from other sources."

Reception in China
The first Chinese translation was made by Taiwanese anthropologist Huang Dao-Ling, and published in Taiwan in April 1974 by Taiwan Kui-Kuang Press. The book became a bestseller in China in 2005, when relations with the Japanese government were strained. In that year alone, 70,000 copies of the book were sold in China.

title: The Chrysanthemum and the Sword


text:
Denis Lamoureux

Denis O. Lamoureux is the Professor of Science and Religion at St. Joseph's College in the University of Alberta, in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada. He has doctoral degrees in dentistry, theology, and biology. The author of Evolutionary Creation and of I Love Jesus and I Accept Evolution, he has also written (along with Phillip E. Johnson) ''Darwinism Defeated? The Johnson-Lamoureux Debate on Biological Origins'', on the creation–evolution controversy (Regent College, 1999).

Lamoureux, an evangelical Christian and a former Young-Earth creationist, calls himself an evolutionary creationist, and lectures and writes widely on the topic. Lamoureux has been involved in several public debates with prominent creationists and atheists. He has also been involved in a televised debate moderated by Steve Paikin of TV Ontario.

In an important new contribution, Evolution: Scripture and Nature say Yes Lamoureux has argued for a return to what he calls the original meaning of Intelligent Design, which he defines as "the belief that beauty, complexity and functionality in nature point toward an Intelligent Designer." Lamoureux argues that Intelligent Design should properly be understood as a religious (metaphysical) belief, not a scientific one. Therefore, he denies the claim by proponents of "Intelligent Design Theory" such as Michael Behe that it is scientifically testable as a process distinct from evolution. Instead, Intelligent Design should be understood as fully consistent with the evolution of life by mutation and natural selection operating through natural processes, because these processes are ultimately controlled by God.

In his latest book, The Bible & Ancient Science: Principles of Interpretation (2020), Lamoureux presents evidence for an ancient scientific understanding in the Bible, which removes the need for what he calls scientific concordism, the attempt to match the Bible with modern science. Lamoureux teaches that since the ancient Jewish people believed - and revealed in their Scriptures - in ancient scientific concepts like the firmament, a three-tier universe, and a geocentric universe, to name a few, modern Christians should not try to align the Bible with science, thus freeing them to enjoy the splendors of modern science. Lamoureux argues that being freed from scientific concordism does not deny a devout reverence for Scripture. For example, he teaches that each time nature is used in Scripture, particularly in the Old Testament, it is simply the incidental circumstances used by the Holy Spirit to reveal inerrant spiritual truths. Lamoureux calls this the Message-Incident Principle. Similarly, Lamoureux teaches that the Holy Spirit accommodates by coming down to the level of the ancient writers and readers, for they would not understand modern scientific concepts. The spiritual message is what was important. He calls this Biblical Accommodation. Lamoureux displays his reverence for Scripture by using the term inerrancy over a hundred times and feels his principles of biblical interpretation are a more honest approach to the Bible.

Publications

 * (pdf)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Denis Lamoureux


text:
North Strathfield

North Strathfield is a suburb in the inner-west of Sydney, in the state of New South Wales, Australia. North Strathfield is located 15 kilometres west of the Sydney central business district, in the local government area of the City of Canada Bay. Strathfield and Strathfield South are separate suburbs, to the south.

History
The western part of this suburb was originally part of Homebush, while the eastern part was part of Concord.

The area became part of the Municipality of Concord when the latter was established in 1883. The name "North Strathfield" came from the station, built in 1918. Although the station was in the western part of Concord, there was already a station further north called "Concord West", so the station took its name from neighbouring Strathfield to the south. Strathfield was the name of one of the large homes in the present-day suburb of Strathfield, which in turn was originally named "Stratfield Saye", after the estate of the Duke of Wellington in England.

A major landmark in the area is Ardill House (or Our Children's Home) in Davidson Avenue, which was built by in 1861 John Bibb for Henry David Bray. It was enlarged circa 1880 and is now on the Register of the National Estate.

Because it was bisected by the Main North railway line, with easy access to the major arterial road Parramatta Road as well as to Parramatta River, the area became largely industrial in the early 20th century. Arnott's Biscuits moved its factory to Homebush in 1908. Centred on George Street with direct access to the railway, the factory expanded over time and eventually covered a large portion of the present-day suburb of North Strathfield. The railway bridge immediately south of the Arnott's Factory site is a well known landmark and has carried an advertisement for Arnott's since the 1930s, and is state heritage listed.

With industry moving out in the late 20th century, the area has been gentrified and became largely residential. The Arnott's factory moved out in 1997, with the former factory site redeveloped into the "Bakehouse Quarter" retail and restaurant complex, although its corporate headquarters remains on George Street in the suburb. More recently, many high density residential developments have replaced former industrial sites.

In 2000, the Municipality of Concord merged with Drummoyne Council to become the City of Canada Bay Council.

The suburb name of "North Strathfield" was gazetted in 1993, joining together the northeastern part of Homebush and the southwestern part of Concord and giving the area its own identity as a separate suburb. The suburb name remains seldom used, with many places in the suburb still identified as being in "Homebush" (western part) or "Concord" (eastern part) in common parlance and even in some official sources. Because North Strathfield is much better integrated with the northern part of Homebush than the two halves of Homebush are to each other, government planning documents refer to North Homebush and North Strathfield together, as the "Homebush Precinct", and Canada Bay Council in particular refers to a section of this precinct as the "Homebush North Precinct", even though no part of that section lies in the suburb of Homebush.

Population
In the 2016 Census, there were 4,767 people in North Strathfield. 41.9% of people were born in Australia. The next most common countries of birth were China 11.6%, South Korea 7.7% and India 6.2%. The most common ancestries reported were Chinese 18.3%, English 11.6%, Australian 10.3%, Korean 7.8% and Indian 6.5%. 40.9% of people spoke only English at home. Other languages spoken at home included Mandarin 11.7%, Korean 8.9%, Cantonese 5.7%, Italian 3.5% and Hindi 2.4%. The most common responses for religion were No Religion 28.9% and Catholic 26.7%.

Commercial area
North Strathfield has residential, commercial and industrial developments. A small group of restaurants and cafes is located opposite the North Strathfield railway station. More commercial developments can be found on nearby Concord Road in the "North Strathfield Shopping Village".

The site of the former Arnott's Biscuits factory in George Street has been redeveloped as the 'Bakehouse Quarter' and feature office space, restaurants, cafes, supermarkets and shops. Arnott's corporate headquarters remains at the Bakehouse Quarter on George Street. The head office and main call centre of NRMA Motoring and Services is also located in the former factory.

Transport
North Strathfield railway station is on the Northern Line of the Sydney Trains network.

Transit Systems operates two bus routes through the suburb of North Strathfield:

 * 410: Macquarie Park to Hurstville
 * 458: Ryde to Burwood

Schools
Strathfield North Public School is located on Concord Road. The McDonald College is a performing arts school. There is also a new Catholic School (opened 2015) - Our Lady of the Assumption Catholic Primary School.

title: North Strathfield


text:
Andes Chocolate Mints

Andes Chocolate Mints are small rectangular candies. The crème de menthe variety consists of one mint-green layer sandwiched in between two cocoa based chocolate flavored layers. The candies are usually wrapped in green foil and imprinted with the company's logo, the word Andes written amidst a drawing of snow-capped peaks. First launched in 1950, they are produced by Tootsie Roll Industries and made in Delavan, Wisconsin.

History
In 1921, Andrew Kanelos opened a small candy store in Chicago, Illinois. While he initially called his store "Andy's Candies" in reference to himself, Kanelos realised that his predominantly male customers did not like giving boxes of candy with another man's name to their wives and girlfriends. As such, he changed the spelling of the business to "Andes Candies." The mints were first launched in 1950. In 1980, Andes was purchased by the Swiss candy company Interfood (later Jacobs Suchard). When Jacobs Suchard bought Brach's in 1987, Andes became part of that division. When Jacobs Suchard was sold to Kraft General Foods in 1990, Brach's was kept separate by owner Klaus J. Jacobs. In need of cash, Brach's sold Andes to Tootsie Roll Industries in 2000. They are made in Delavan, Wisconsin.

In the United States, Andes mints are a popular after-dinner mint and are often distributed at restaurants, particularly Olive Garden. The mint used at Olive Garden is a special flavor manufactured exclusively for the restaurant chain, but it is tastewise similar to the Mint Parfait flavor, containing the same layers, but at different ratios.

Construction
Andes are a rectangular, thin chocolate bite. The crème de menthe variety consists of three layers: two cocoa-based layers with green mint in the middle. The candies are usually wrapped in green foil and imprinted with the company's logo, the word Andes written amidst a drawing of snow-capped peaks. The most common Andes mint is 1.5 × 0.75 × 0.25 inches, weighs 4.75 grams, and contains 25 Calories.

Other flavors

 * Amaretto (discontinued)
 * Cherry Jubilee
 * Mint Parfait
 * Toffee Crunch
 * Peppermint Crunch (offered seasonally)
 * Chocolatey Orange
 * Milk Chocolatey
 * Mint Cookie Crunch

In 2007, the Andes Limited Edition Dessert Indulgence array was introduced. It offered an assortment of three new flavors:
 * Raspberry Cream
 * Lemon Meringue
 * Key Lime

Spinoffs
Andes Mints have been used in several other products including baking chips, ice cream, cookies, and cake rolls. Several fast food and fast casual chains have offered Andes Mints in some of their offerings including: Jack in the Box milkshakes, Arby's milkshakes, as a Caribou Coffee cooler and as a featured topping in the topping bar at Yogurtland. The baking chips were introduced in the autumn of 2003 and include the mints' original design. They also have multiple special edition products.

title: Andes Chocolate Mints


text: Category:Australian kickboxers

title: Category:Australian kickboxers


text:
Hip Hop Caucus

The Hip Hop Caucus (HHC) is a national, non-profit organization in the United States, which aims to promote political activism for young U.S. voters using hip-hop music and culture.

The group's programs are intended to promote social and political equality in the areas of economics, education, health care, housing, the environment and social justice. The group is a member of the Black Leadership Forum and the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.

Rev. Lennox Yearwood Jr., President & CEO of the Hip Hop Caucus is a former co-creator of P. Diddy's "Vote or Die" campaign of 2004. In 2003 and 2004 he was the Political and Grassroots Director for Russell Simmons' Hip Hop Summit Action Network, as well as a Senior Consultant to Jay-Z's Citizen Change "Voice Your Choice" campaign.

Respect My Vote
Respect My Vote! is a voter mobilization campaign that aims to educate, register and mobilize young people of color between the ages of 18 and 39 who live in urban communities, do not attend college, people with felony records who are unaware of their voting rights, and students at historically black colleges and universities.

In 2008, the Hip Hop Caucus and the hip hop artist T.I. launched the "Respect My Vote" youth voting campaign. There was a higher number of young voters at the 2008 election, subsequent to higher turnout seen in 2004 and 2006. Analysis of the 2008 electorate showed that while overall numbers of voters did not increase as dramatically as expected, the composition of the electorate was notably different, with increased participation seen among minority youth voters, the Hip Hop Caucus' target demographic.

One Vote Day
The Hip Hop Caucus' Respect My Vote! Campaign, along with Radio One registered more than 30,000 voters during its national “One Vote Day” voter registration drive on September 30, 2008. Sixteen cities across the country participated in events aimed at mass voter registration. Radio One stations broadcast live from central locations in each of the participating cities urging unregistered voters to attend their local registration site to register onsite. Artists such as Nelly and Raheem DeVaughn helped draw large crowds to registration stations, allowing Hip Hop Caucus volunteers to register voters.

Respect My Vote! National Bus Tour
During the 2008 general elections The Respect My Vote! campaign traveled to 20 cities on the “Respect My Vote! Get Out The Vote Bus Tour” to encourage voting by distributing pledge cards and having celebrities discuss the value of voting. The tour included the largest ever Get Out the Vote Rally at Florida A&M University.

Green 2 Live
Green 2 Live aims to raise awareness within low-income communities of color about what they believe to be the impacts of climate change on their communities, and train leaders in sustainable energy activism, for which the Hip Hop Caucus created "Green the City" and "Green the Block" campaigns. Events have included the "Hip Hop Caucus Clean Energy Now Tour", with the Alliance for Climate Protection  and the "Historically Black College and University Tour" with the National Wildlife Federation

Green the Block
"Green the Block" is a national campaign and coalition created by the Hip Hop Caucus and Green For All. This campaign is aimed at promoting activism for sustainable energy in low-income communities of color.

The campaign, which was launched at the White House on President Barack Obama's birthday (August 4, 2009), aims to educate and encourage people to take better care of the environment.

Green the Block has helped organize over 100 community service projects in cities around the U.S. including Memphis, Tennessee, Oakland, California, Washington, D.C., and Miami.

The campaign hosted a 16-city "Campus Consciousness Tour" featuring hip-hop artist Drake to encourage college students to join sustainable energy efforts.

Green the City
Launched in 2010 as a joint campaign between the National Conference of Black Mayors and the Hip Hop Caucus Education Fund, Green the City works with African American mayors and city residents to promote activism for sustainable energy.

June 28–30, 2010 the Hip Hop Caucus Education Fund and the National Conference of Black Mayors hosted the "Green the City Advocacy Summit" that brought 25 mayors to Washington, DC, to attend a "Green the City" campaign and to meet with members of the United States Congress, Obama administration officials, and heads of the United States Environmental Protection Agency to advocate for sustainable energy in the U.S.

March on Gretna
On November 7, 2005, Rev. Yearwood led the first post-Hurricane Katrina march in Gretna, Louisiana to protest the alleged racial profiling of survivors. The march attracted 150 participants, including many displaced residents. As a result of this effort, police officers were convicted of denying human rights to African-American families displaced by Hurricane Katrina.

Gulf Coast Renewal
The Hip Hop Caucus implemented the Gulf Coast Renewal campaign after the disaster of Hurricane Katrina. The campaign focused on the affected areas of the Gulf Coast including Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama. Rev. Yearwood and the Hip Hop Caucus organized partnerships with national and grassroots organizations to advocate for the rights of Hurricane Katrina survivors.

After public mobilization, two marches in Washington, DC, testimony to Congress and other work by the group, the Federal Emergency Management Agency ceased preemptive temporary housing evictions of Katrina Survivors. To continue addressing the issue of displaced citizens in New Orleans and Iraq, due to the war the "We Care" concert was organized with Amnesty International.

In 2005 the Institute for Policy Studies awarded the Hip Hop Caucus their Letelier-Moffitt Human Rights Award for the Gulf Coast Renewal Campaign, an annual award given by the Institute for Policy Studies to those helping to advance human rights.

Stop the Violence in New Orleans
Fifteen months after Hurricane Katrina, the Hip Hop Caucus hosted the "Stop the Violence" town hall meeting at McDonogh No. 35 Senior High School in New Orleans, LA. Hip-Hop artists and community activists gathered with youth, parents and other citizens, aiming to address the issue of gun violence in the city. Panelists included rappers Doug E. Fresh, Slim Thug and many local rappers, along with President Kenneth Barnes Sr. of ROOT Inc. (Reaching Out to Others Together), community activist Ronald Coleman, and Councilmen James Carter. Audience members and panelists discussed possible steps to be taken to put an end to the violence in the streets of New Orleans.

Enough is Enough
In 2007, the Hip Hop Caucus began to address the issues of violence, alleged police brutality, and hate crimes. On November 17, 2007, the Hip Hop Caucus organized a rally called "Enough is Enough, Stop Police Brutality and Hate Crimes" on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. This rally aimed to bring attention to the cases of Sean Bell, Megan Williams, Martin Lee Anderson, Deonte Rawlings and other young African-American victims of alleged police brutality and hate crimes.

Make Hip-Hop Not War
The Hip Hop Caucus launched the "Make Hip-Hop Not War" campaign in 2007 aiming to promote activism in the anti-war movement for young people. The Hip Hop Caucus along with hip-hop artists and Iraq War veterans, campaigned in 16 cities through a national bus tour. The tour consisted of rallies and round table discussions, intended to inform young people about the war in Afghanistan and the Iraq War, and to encourage them to speak out against war. This campaign also worked to lobby Congress to stop funding the war in Iraq. The "Make Hip-Hop Not War" campaign received the Walter E. Fauntroy No FEAR Institute Award on May 14, 2008 for its efforts to speak out against the government and war-supporting institutions.

Shut it Down, Stop the Torture
Hip Hop Caucus and Amnesty International organized the "Shut It Down, Stop the Torture" event in Washington, D.C. to advocate the closure of the U.S. Guantánamo Bay detention camp in Cuba. The informational briefing and concert was intended to raise awareness on human rights and the events that took place at Guantanamo Bay. The event was held on Juneteenth (June 19, 2007), in order to symbolically link the emancipation of slaves in the U.S. and the current situation at Guantanamo Bay.

Hip-Hop Help Haiti
After the 2010 Haiti earthquake that claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of people, the Hip Hop Caucus created HipHopHelpHaiti.org, a network aimed at helping people to take action in response to the crisis. The 500 member online network is updated periodically and provides information on people can be involved and provide assistance to the Haitian population.

HOME
On 14 November 2014, the ensemble announced plans to release a full-length album entitled HOME. Scheduled for release via iTunes on 2 December 2014, the albums features songs from prominent artists such as Elle Varner, Ne-Yo and Crystal Waters. The first single from the album, "Mercy Mercy Me" by recording artist Antonique Smith has been released.

Discography

 * HOME (2014)

title: Hip Hop Caucus


text:
Inuyasha the Movie: Swords of an Honorable Ruler

Inuyasha the Movie: Swords of an Honorable Ruler is a 2003 Japanese animated fantasy adventure film based on Inuyasha manga series written and illustrated by Rumiko Takahashi. The film is directed by Toshiya Shinohara, written by Katsuyuki Sumisawa, and produced by Sunrise. It was released in Japan on December 20, 2003.

In the film, Inuyasha and Sesshomaru forcefully work together to seal So'unga, their father's third sword, when it is awakened from its sheath.

Swords of an Honorable Ruler is the third film of the Inuyasha series, following The Castle Beyond the Looking Glass and followed up by Fire on the Mystic Island.

Plot
Two centuries ago, the great dog-demon Tōga denies his elder son Sesshomaru's request for ownership of two of his swords, Tessaiga and So'unga. Afterwards, Tōga goes to a mansion guarded by an army of samurai where his human wife, Lady Izayoi, is giving birth. The army's leader, Takemaru of Setsuna, who is in love with Izayoi, attempts to kill her by stabbing her and setting the mansion ablaze. Tōga defeats the army, wounds Takemaru and enters the mansion, where he uses his third sword, Tenseiga, to revive Izayoi. Tōga allows her to flee the burning mansion with their newborn, whom he names Inuyasha, then fights Takemaru. At a safe distance, Izayoi witness the mansion collapses on both men and Toga's spirit wishes her to live a long life with Inuyasha.

In the present day, Inuyasha travels through the Bone-Eater's Well from the Feudal era to visit Kagome Higurashi in the modern era. Unbeknownst to them, Kagome's family uncover an ancient sword as part of their shrine's treasures, which turns out to be So'unga. The spirit of So'unga's sheath, Saya, emerges before the sword finds its way to Inuyasha and Kagome. Saya tells Inuyasha that he must master the sword before it can destroy the modern world, but once he holds it, it possesses his arm and reverts him to his demon form, forcing him to return to the Feudal era. Inuyasha's friends, monk Miroku, demon slayer Sango, fox demon Shippo, and Sango's nekomata companion Kirara attempt to stop him, only to escape once Inuyasha uses the sword's deadly Dragon Twister attack. Kagome takes Saya with her to the Feudal era and reunites with everyone including Inuyasha's mentor Myoga, who knows Saya. They are eventually accompanied by blacksmith Totosai, the creator of Tōga's swords.

The possessed Inuyasha runs into his older brother, Sesshomaru, who battles Inuyasha for having taken up So’unga. So’unga orders Inuyasha to attack Sesshomaru's company, Jaken and Rin, until Kagome intervenes and uses the Beads of Subjugation necklace command on Inuyasha to release him from So’unga's possession. After So’unga flies off to find a new host, Sesshomaru leaves Jaken and Rin behind, while Inuyasha leaves an unconscious Kagome with them, vowing to destroy So’unga himself. After being joined by her friends, Totosai reveals that So’unga is possessed by an ancient evil demon, following its sealing since there were no instructions given by Tōga as to what to do with it following his death. Meanwhile, So’unga retrieves Sesshomaru’s severed arm from the past and revives Takemaru, who, equipped with the sword and a new body, vows revenge on Tōga by killing his sons. Takemaru takes over a nearby castle and slays its army, resurrecting the approximately two-thousand soldiers as an army of the undead, as well as opening a portal to the netherworld.

Kagome and the rest of the group, including Jaken and Rin, join Inuyasha and Sesshomaru in a battle against Takemaru’s army. Despite inflicting heavy casualties on the soldiers, Miroku uses his Wind Tunnel to eliminate the rest. Kagome informs Inuyasha that, according to Totosai, the only way to defeat Takemaru and So’unga is to combine the forces of Tessaiga's Backlash Wave and the Dragon Strike of Sesshomaru's Tōkijin; Inuyasha initially refuses, noting that he and Sesshomaru could never fight side-by-side. Inuyasha kills Takemaru, forcing So’unga to form a physical body of its own. Inuyasha and Sesshomaru continuously fail to destroy Takemaru individually; the brothers eventually give in and use the powers of their swords to destroy So’unga's body and send the sword into the netherworld. Tōga’s spirit appears, remarking that he is proud of his sons, before the portal to the netherworld closes. Sesshomaru departs with Jaken and Rin, while Inuyasha and his allies look over the surrounding environment reverting normally.

Production
Like the second film, the third film is produced by the same staff members from the first film: Toshiya Shinohara directed the film at Sunrise, Katsuyuki Sumisawa wrote the screenplay, Hideyuki Motohashi designed the characters and acted as a chief animation director, and Kaoru Wada composed the music. Original creator and mangaka Rumiko Takahashi personally designed the human form of Inuyasha and Sesshomaru's father, Dog General, as his human form was never shown in the manga and the television series.

The theme song, "Four Seasons", is performed by Namie Amuro.

Release
The film was released in Japanese theaters on December 20, 2003.


text:
Soybean cyst nematode

The soybean cyst nematode (SCN), Heterodera glycines, is the most devastating pest to soybean crop yields in the U.S., targeting the roots of soybean and other legume plants. When infection is severe SCNs cause stunting, yellowing, impaired canopy development, and yield loss. The symptoms caused by SCNs can go easily unrecognized by farmers—in some cases there are no warning symptoms before a loss of 40% of the yield. Due to the slight stunting and yellowing, many farmers may mistake these symptoms as environmental problems when in fact they are SCNs. Another symptom of SCNs that may affect farmers' yields is stunted roots with fewer nitrogen-fixing nodules. Due to the fact that soybean cyst nematodes can only move a few centimeters in the soil by themselves, they mostly are spread via tillage or plant transplants. This area of infection will look patchy and nonuniform making diagnosis more difficult for farmers. They can be seen in the roots of summer soybean plants if the roots are taken out very carefully and gently washed with water. The egg masses should be seen as bright white or yellow "pearls" on the roots. The later the roots are pulled the harder it will be to diagnose due to the SCNs female dying and turning a much darker color, forming a "cyst". The best way to know if a field is infected by soybean cyst nematodes is to take a soil sample to a nematologist.

Biology
As the nematode feeds, it swells. The female swells so much that her posterior end bursts out of the root and she becomes visible to the naked eye. In contrast, the adult male regains a wormlike shape, and he leaves the root in order to find and fertilize the large females. The female continues to feed as she lays 200 to 400 eggs in a yellow gelatinous matrix, forming an egg sac which remains inside her. She then dies and her cuticle hardens forming a cyst. The eggs may hatch when conditions in the soil are favorable, the larvae developing inside the cyst and the biological cycle repeating itself. There are usually three generations in the year. In the autumn or in unfavorable conditions, the cysts containing dormant larvae may remain intact in the soil for several years. Although soybean is the primary host of SCN, other legumes can also serve as hosts.

Disease cycle
Soybean cyst nematodes are so devastating due to their life cycle being so efficient for multiplication. They have six life stages, which is the norm for all nematodes. These stages include: egg, juvenile (J1-J4), and adult and can complete multiple cycles within a single growing season. The SCNs makes its first molt while still inside the egg going from a juvenile 1 (J1) to a juvenile 2 (J2). When the soybean cyst nematode is a J2 it may then enter the root of the plant, usually just behind the root tip. Once the SCNs has gained entry into the root, it will then create a specialized feeding cell called a syncytium by penetrating the pericycle, endodermis, or cortex cell with its stylet in order to take in nutrients from the plant. These are cell masses with multiple nuclei that are formed due to cell wall dissolution and fusion. The J2 will then continue on in its development only when a syncytium cell is created. Female SCNs will remain there for the rest of their life, while males will leave the root after reaching adulthood. The males are attracted to a pheromone that is released by the female when her egg mass is ready for fertilization. When the eggs from the egg mass are fertilized, some of them will hatch within that same growing year to continue on with infection. Eggs will still remain inside the female, and when she dies and hardens into a "cyst", they will go into dormancy until the following growing season or until conditions are favorable. This cyst is very resilient against environmental conditions and can hold as many as 250 eggs.

Locations

 * Africa: Egypt
 * Asia: Iran (Golestan Province and Mazandaran Province), China (Hebei, Hubei, Heilongjiang, Henan, Jiangsu, Liaoning), Indonesia (Java), Korean peninsula, Japan, Taiwan (unconfirmed), Russia (Amur District in the Far East).
 * North America: Canada (Ontario), USA (Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Minnesota, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin).
 * South America: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador.

Management
Management of soybean cyst nematodes can be very difficult. Due to symptoms being hard to spot early on, they can infect a field rather quickly and persist indefinitely. SCNs can survive in the soil for long periods of time under adverse conditions, can work up on infecting previously resistant varieties of plants, and can never be completely eliminated (only suppressed). For these reasons SCNs is a very economically devastating pest. SCNs cause up to $1.3 billion in annual losses due to their resilience and persistence in the soil. In addition, SCNs can cause yield losses that exceed 30%. Soybean cyst nematodes can easily be prevented by thoroughly cleaning farm equipment to prevent introduction to the field. If a field is already infected on the other hand, that will not do much except help contain the infection from spreading to other fields. Right now, the most effective way of management is reducing tillage, planting resistant varieties, and crop rotation. Crop rotation is a very effective measure of control in heavily infested fields. Growing nonhost plants for two consecutive years is generally appropriate to allow for the growth of susceptible soybean cultivars. The more consecutive years of crop rotation used, the more effective this method will be in fields with high infestations. One full year may be sufficient in fields in which the nematode population is low or is heavily parasitized by fungi. Reducing tillage will help isolate the SCNs into just the infected area because they are small and do not travel very far. SCNs in the cyst form will have about 50% of their eggs hatch each year so numbers can be greatly reduced if they do not have a host to infect for several years. Planting resistant cultivars, rotating crops from soybean to corn, and planting cover crops are very effective management strategies to reduce the SCN population in a field. Studies have been done on using fungal root endophytes, such as Fusarium, in deterring against nematodes which could be the next step in SCN prevention.

Resistant soybean varieties
Resistant varieties are available.

PI 88788
The vast majority, however, rely on one breeding line (PI 88788) as their only source of resistance. (The resistance genes provided by PI 88788, Peking, and PI 90763 were characterized in 1997.) As a result, for example, in 2012 only 18 cultivars out of 807 recommended by the Iowa State University Extension had any ancestry outside of PI 88788. By 2020 the situation was still about the same: Of 849 there were 810 with some ancestry from PI 88788, 35 from Peking, and only 2 from PI 89772. (On the question of exclusively PI 88788 ancestry, that number was not available for 2020.) That was speculated to be in 2012 —and was clearly by 2020 —producing SCN populations that are virulent on PI 88788.

title: Soybean cyst nematode


text:
User:RYard

It's all a dream...go back to sleep.

title: User:RYard


text:
Self-hating Jew

The terms "self-hating Jew", "self-loathing Jew", and "auto-antisemite" (אוטואנטישמי, אוטואנטישמית) are pejorative terms used to describe a Jew whose viewpoints on a specific matter, especially towards the jewish religion, are perceived as antisemitic.

Recognition of the concept gained widespread currency after German-Jewish philosopher Theodor Lessing published his 1930 book Der jüdische Selbsthaß (lit. 'Jewish Self-Hatred'), which sought to explain a perceived inclination among Jewish intellectuals towards inciting antisemitism by stating their views about Judaism. More recently, this spotlight on antisemitism motivated by self-hatred within the Jewish diaspora is said to have become "something of a key term of opprobrium in and beyond Cold War–era debates about Zionism" in light of how some Jews may despise their entire identity due to their perception of the Arab–Israeli conflict.

Descriptions of the concept
The expression "self-hating Jew" is often used rhetorically, meaning towards Jews who differ in their lifestyles, interests or political positions from the speaker.
 * Usage of self-hatred can also designate dislike, or hatred, of a group to which one belongs. The term has a long history in debates over the role of Israel in Jewish identity, where it is used against Jewish critics of Israeli government policy.
 * Alvin H. Rosenfeld, an academic author who does not use the term "self-hatred", dismisses such arguments as disingenuous, referring to them as "the ubiquitous rubric 'criticism of Israel,'" stating that "vigorous discussion of Israeli policy and actions is not in question."
 * Alan Dershowitz limits the term "self-hatred" to specific Jewish anti-Zionists who "despise anything Jewish, ranging from their religion to the Jewish state", saying it does not apply to all "Israel-bashers."
 * The academic historian Jerold Auerbach uses the term Jewish self-loathing to characterize "Jews who perversely seek to bolster their Jewish credentials by defaming Israel."
 * The cultural historian Sander Gilman has written, "One of the most recent forms of Jewish self-hatred is the virulent opposition to the existence of the State of Israel." He uses the term not against those who oppose Israel's policy, but against Jews who are opposed to Israel's existence.
 * The concept of Jewish self-hatred has been described by Antony Lerman as "an entirely bogus concept", one that "serves no other purpose than to marginalise and demonise political opponents", who says that it is used increasingly as a personal attack in discussions about the "new antisemitism".
 * Ben Cohen criticizes Lerman, saying no "actual evidence is introduced to support any of this." Lerman himself recognizes the controversy over whether extreme vilification of Israel amounts to antisemitism, and says that antisemitism can be disguised as anti-Zionism, also a concern of Rosenfeld and Gilman as mentioned above.
 * The sociologist Irving Louis Horowitz reserves the term for Jews who pose a danger to the Jewish community, using "Jewish self-hater" to describe the so-called "court Jew", "who validates the slander (against Jews) as he attempts to curry the favor of masters and rulers."
 * The historian Bernard Wasserstein prefers the term "Jewish anti-Semitism," which he says was often termed "Jewish self-hatred". He asks, "Could a Jew be an anti-Semite?", and responds that many Jews have "internalized elements of anti-Semitic discourse, succumbed to what Theodore Hamerow has called psychological surrender." Wasserstein goes on to say that self-hating Jews, "afflicted by some form of anti-Semitism[,] were not so much haters of themselves as haters of 'other' Jews."
 * The historian Bernard Lewis described Jewish self-hatred as a neurotic reaction to the impact of anti-semitism by Jews accepting, expressing, and even exaggerating, the basic assumptions of the antisemite.

In Abrahamic religion
According to Ronald Hendel, the Israelites, who were progenitors of the Jews, frequently repudiated their Canaanite heritage by describing their ancestral traditions as "foreign" and "dangerous". Philippe Bohstrom believes Abraham, the ancestor of Israel, was an Amorite but this was later obfuscated by Biblical authors, who adopted Mesopotamian prejudices towards Amorites.

Gili Kluger argues that the biblical narratives about Amalek reflect self-hatred among Israelites, where they see Amalek as their "unwelcome brother", "rejected son" and a nation that possessed the inherent vices of Israel. Israelites believed that Amalek descended from Esau, who was the twin brother of Jacob/Israel.

In the New Testament, which is central to Christianity, the letters of Apostle Paul are described by some scholars as 'indiscriminate anti-Jewish polemic' that mirrors Graeco-Roman pagan attitudes to the Jews, despite Paul's Jewish background. Others argue that the letters resonate with Old Testament themes.

In German
The origins of terms such as "Jewish self-hatred" lie in the mid-19th century feuding between German Orthodox Jews of the Breslau seminary and Reform Jews. Each side accused the other of betraying Jewish identity, the Orthodox Jews accusing the Reform Jews of identifying more closely with German Protestantism and German nationalism than with Judaism.

According to Amos Elon, during 19th-century German-Jewish assimilation, conflicting pressures on sensitive and privileged or gifted young Jews produced "a reaction later known as 'Jewish self-hatred.' Its roots were not simply professional or political but emotional." Elon uses the term "Jewish self-hatred" synonymously with Jewish antisemitism when he points out, "One of the most prominent Austrian anti-Semites was Otto Weininger, a brilliant young Jew who published 'Sex and Character', attacking Jews and women." Elon attributes Jewish antisemitism as a cause in the overall growth of antisemitism when he says,"(Weininger's) book inspired the typical Viennese adage that anti-Semitism did not really get serious until it was taken up by Jews."

According to John P. Jackson Jr., the concept developed in the late 19th century in German Jewish discourse as "a response of German Jews to popular anti-Semitism that primarily was directed at Eastern European Jews." For German Jews, the Eastern European Jew became the "bad Jew". According to Sander Gilman, the concept of the "self-hating Jew" developed from a merger of the image of the "mad Jew" and the "self-critical Jew", and was developed to counter suggestions that an alleged Jewish stereotype of mental illness was due to inbreeding. "Within the logic of the concept, those who accuse others of being self-hating Jews may themselves be self-hating Jews." Gilman says "the ubiquitousness of self-hatred cannot be denied. And it has shaped the self-awareness of those treated as different perhaps more than they themselves have been aware."

The specific terms "self-hating Jew" and "Jewish self-hatred" only came into use later, developing from Theodor Herzl's polemical use of the term "anti-Semite of Jewish origin", in the context of his project of political Zionism. The underlying concept gained common currency in this context, "since Zionism was an important part of the vigorous debates that were occurring amongst Jews at the time about anti-Semitism, assimilation and Jewish identity." Herzl appears to have introduced the phrase "anti-Semite of Jewish origin" in his 1896 book, Der Judenstaat (The Jews' State), which launched political Zionism.

He was referring to "philanthropic Zionists", assimilated Jews who might wish to remain in their home countries while at the same time encouraging the Jewish proletariat (particularly the poorer Eastern Jews) to emigrate; yet did not support Herzl's political project for a Jewish state. Ironically, Herzl was soon complaining that his "polemical term" was often being applied to him, for example by Karl Kraus. "Assimilationists and anti-Zionists accused Zionists of being self-haters, for promoting the idea of the strong Jew using rhetoric close to that of the Anti-Semites; Zionists accused their opponents of being self-haters, for promoting the image of the Jew that would perpetuate his inferior position in the modern world."

The Austrian-Jewish journalist Anton Kuh argued in a 1921 book Juden und Deutsche (Jews and Germans) that the concept of "Jewish anti-semitism" was unhelpful, and should be replaced with the term "Jewish self-hatred", but it was not until the 1930 publication of the German-Jewish anti-Nazi philosopher Theodor Lessing's book Der Jüdische Selbsthass (Jewish Self-hatred) that the term gained widespread currency. Lessing's book "supposedly charts Lessing's journey from Jewish self-hater to Zionist." In it he analyses the writings of Jews such as Otto Weininger and Arthur Trebitsch who expressed hatred for their own Judaism. Lessing was assassinated by Nazi agents shortly after Hitler came to power.

In English
In English the first major discussion of the topic was in the 1940s by Kurt Lewin, who was Lessing's colleague at the University of Berlin in 1930. Lewin emigrated from Germany to the United States in 1933, and though focused on Jews also argued for a similar phenomenon among Polish, Italian and Greek immigrants to the United States. Lewin's was a theoretical account, declaring that the issue "is well known among Jews themselves" and supporting his argument with anecdotes. According to Lewin, a self-hating Jew "will dislike everything specifically Jewish, for he will see in it that which keeps him away from the majority for which he is longing. He will show dislike for those Jews who are outspokenly so, and will frequently indulge in self-hatred." Following Lewin's lead, the concept gained widespread currency. "The 1940s and 1950s were 'the age of self-hatred'. In effect, a bitter war broke out over questions of Jewish identity. It was a kind of 'Jewish Cold War'..." in which questions of Jewish identity were contentiously debated. The use of the concept in debates over Jewish identity – for example over resistance to the integration of African Americans into Jewish neighbourhoods – died down by the end of the 1970s, having been "steadily emptied of most of its earlier psychological, social, and theoretical content and became largely a slogan."

The term was used in a derogatory way during the 1940s by "'militant' Zionists", but the 1963 publication of Hannah Arendt's Eichmann in Jerusalem opened a new chapter. Her criticism of the trial as a "show trial" provoked heated public debate, including accusations of self-hatred, and over-shadowed her earlier work criticising German Jewish parvenu assimilationism. In the following years, after the 1967 Six-Day War and 1973 Yom Kippur War, "willingness to give moral and financial 'support' to Israel constituted what one historian called 'the existential definition of American Jewishness'." "This meant that the opposite was also true: criticism of Israel came to constitute the existential definition of 'Jewish self-hatred'." This is dismissed by Rosenfeld saying it "masquerades as victimization" and "can hardly be expected to be taken seriously" since criticism of Israel "proceeds across all the media in this country and within Israel itself."

Even Commentary, the Jewish journal which had once been "considered the venue of self-hating Jews with questionable commitments to the Zionist project", came under the editorship of Norman Podhoretz to staunchly support Israel. In his 2006 essay "Progressive Jewish Thought and the New Anti-Semitism", Alvin H. Rosenfeld takes "a hard look at Jewish authors" whose statements go well beyond "legitimate criticism of Israel," and considers rhetoric that calls into question Israel's "right to continued existence" to be antisemitic. The use of the concept of self-hatred in Jewish debates about Israel has grown more frequent and more intense in the US and the UK, with the issue particularly widely debated in 2007, leading to the creation of the British Independent Jewish Voices. The Forward reported that the group was formed by "about 130 generally leftist Jews." It was the Rosenfeld essay, which did not use the term Jewish self-hatred, that led to the 2007 debate. Critics claimed the charge of antisemitism implied Jewish self-hatred to those criticizing Israel. Rosenfeld responded that such claims were "disingenuous" and for some a "dialectical scam validating themselves as intellectual martyrs." The New York Times reported that the essay spotlighted the issue of when "legitimate criticism of Israel ends and antisemitic statements begin."

Social and psychological explanations
The issue has periodically been covered in the academic social psychology literature on social identity. Such studies "frequently cite Lewin as evidence that people may attempt to distance themselves from membership in devalued groups because they accept, to some degree, the negative evaluations of their group held by the majority and because these social identities are an obstacle to the pursuit of social status." Modern social psychology literature uses terms such as "self-stigmatization", "internalized oppression", and "false consciousness" to describe this type of phenomenon. Author Phyllis Chesler, a professor of psychology and women's studies, in referring to female Jewish self-hatred, points to progressive Jewish women who "seem obsessed with the Palestinian point of view." She believes their rage against oppression, frustration and patriarchy "is being unconsciously transferred onto Israel."

Kenneth Levin, a Harvard psychiatrist, says that Jewish self-hatred has two causes: Stockholm syndrome, where "population segments under chronic siege commonly embrace the indictments of their besiegers however bigoted and outrageous", as well as "the psychodynamics of abused children, who almost invariably blame themselves for their predicament, ascribe it to their being bad, and nurture fantasies that by becoming good they can mollify their abusers and end their torment." According to Howard W. Polsky, the social scientist, "feelings about Jewish marginality are often a step away from self-hatred." He then says, "Jewish self-hatred denotes that a person has adopted gentiles' definition of Jew as bad in one way or another and that being Jewish will hinder their success or identity."

Usage
It is argued by some academics that the concept of Jewish self-hatred is based on an essentialisation of Jewish identity. Accounts of Jewish self-hatred often suggest that criticizing other Jews, and integrating with Gentile society, reveals hatred of one's own Jewish origins. Yet both in the early twentieth century, where the concept developed, and today, there are groups of Jews who had "important differences in identity based on class, culture, religious outlook, and education", and hostility between these groups can only be considered self-hate "if one assumes that a superordinate Jewish identity should take precedence over other groupings of Jews."

Yet such hostility between groups has at times drawn on some of the rhetoric of antisemitism: "criticism of subgroups of Jews which drew on anti-Semitic rhetoric were common in 19th and 20th century arguments over Jewish identity". In practice, according to one academic, whilst there have been Jewish writers in the late 19th and early 20th centuries who consistently employed virulent antisemitic rhetoric without seeming to value any aspects of being a Jew, too often "those who accuse others of being self-haters search for examples of when they have criticized Jews or Judaism but ignore examples of when those they criticize have shown they value being a Jew." He argues that Jewish antisemitism does not necessarily amount to self-hatred, implying that "antisemitic Jew" may be a more accurate term to use. Other authors have also shown a preference for using "antisemitism" rather than "self-hatred."

The term is in use in Jewish publications such as The Jewish Week (New York) and The Jerusalem Post (Jerusalem) in a number of contexts, often synonymously with antisemitic Jew. It is used "to criticize a performer or artist who portrays Jews negatively; as a shorthand description of supposed psychological conflict in fictional characters; in articles about the erosion of tradition (e.g. marrying out and circumcision); and to discount Jews who criticize Israeli policies or particular Jewish practices." However the widest usage of the term is currently in relation to debates over Israel. "In these debates the accusation is used by right-wing Zionists to assert that Zionism and/or support for Israel is a core element of Jewish identity. Jewish criticism of Israeli policy is therefore considered a turning away from Jewish identity itself."

Thus some of those who have been accused of being a "self-hating Jew" have characterized the term as a replacement for "a charge of anti-Semitism [that] will not stick," or as "pathologizing" them. Some who use the term have equated it with "anti-Semitism", on the part of those thus addressed, or with "so called 'enlightened' Jews who refuse to associate themselves with people who practice a 'backward' religion." One novelist, Philip Roth, who — because of the nature of the Jewish characters in his novels, such as the 1969 Portnoy's Complaint — has often been accused of being a "self-hating Jew", argues that all novels deal with human dilemmas and weaknesses (which are present in all communities), and that to self-censor by only writing about positive Jewish characters would represent a submission to antisemitism.

The Israeli-born British Jazz saxophonist, writer and Hebrew speaking anti-Semite of Jewish descent Gilad Atzmon openly used the term to describe himself in a 2010 interview for the Cyprus Mail. In that interview, Atzmon calls himself a "proud self-hating Jew" and also described fellow Jewish anti-Semite, the Austrian Otto Weininger as one as well. At the same time, Atzmon stated that he considers a "self-hating Jew" as very different to a "proud self-hating Jew", considering "proud self-hating Jews" such as himself and Weininger as celebrating the hatred they feel for themselves, the Jewish people, Judaism, Israel and anything else they associate with Jewishness. Atzmon has taken several positions on history and politics associated with anti-Semitism including but not limited to, endorsing on his blog the conspiracy theory that "the Jewish people" are trying to take over the world  (though he later amended the original blog post to replace "the Jewish people" with "Zionists" ), blaming the entire Jewish people for killing Jesus (including those not even born at the time), accusing Gideon Falter (the chairman of the Campaign Against Antisemitism) of faking anti-Semitic incidents for profit (Falter then sued Atzmon for libel which Atzmon lost and was left with expensive legal costs ) and promoting the conspiracy theory of Holocaust denial, even publicly advising people to read Holocaust denying books by David Irving. The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)'s official blog Hatewatch written by David Neiwert noted that Atzmon was "a self-described 'self-hating ex-Jew' whose writings and pronouncements are rich in conspiracy theories, Holocaust trivialization and distortion, and open support of anti-Israeli terrorist groups."

Controversy and criticism of the term
The legitimacy of the term (in modern usage) remains controversial. According to the transdenominational Jewish platform My Jewish Learning: "Some scholars have claimed that by labeling another Jew self-hating, the accuser is claiming his or her own Judaism as normative–and implying that the Judaism of the accused is flawed or incorrect, based on a metric of the accuser's own stances, religious beliefs, or political opinions. By arguing with the label, then, the accused is rejecting what has been defined as normative Judaism. The term "self-hating" thus places the person or object labeled outside the boundaries of the discourse–and outside the boundaries of the community." Haaretz writes that the term is almost exclusively used today by the Jewish right against the Jewish left, and that within left-wing and liberal circles, is "usually considered a joke". Richard Forer, writing for The Huffington Post, rejects the legitimacy of the term as it is commonly used, calling them so divisive that they make tolerance and cooperation impossible, eradicating the possibility for genuine understanding. Forer writes: "The notion that any Jew who is dedicated to justice for all people harbors self-hatred defies common sense. Given the self-esteem it takes to stand for justice amidst fierce denunciation, a more accurate assessment is that these are self-loving Jews."

Jon Stewart, former host of The Daily Show, was repeatedly called a "self-hating Jew" by people whom he described as "fascistic". Considering the term to be like equating someone with the Jews who turned their backs on each other during the Holocaust, he said, "I have people that I lost in the Holocaust and I just … go fuck yourself. How dare you?" Stewart commented that the way his critics used the term—to define who is a Jew and who is not—was formerly always done by people who weren't Jewish. He saw this as "more than nationalism". Stewart also criticized right-wing Jews for implying that they are the only ones who can decide what it means to be Jewish: "And you can't observe Judaism in the way you want to observe. And I never thought that that would be coming from brethren. ... How dare they? That they only know the word of God and are the ones who are able to disseminate it. It's not right." To The Hollywood Reporter, he said, "Look, there's a lot of reasons why I hate myself—being Jewish isn't one of them."

In 2014, Noam Chomsky said that Zionists divided critics of Israeli policy into two groups: antisemitic non-Jews and neurotic self-hating Jews, stating: "Actually, the locus classicus, the best formulation of this, was by an ambassador to the United Nations, Abba Eban, Israel's ambassador to the United Nations.... He advised the American Jewish community that they had two tasks to perform. One task was to show that criticism of the policy, what he called anti-Zionism—that means actually criticisms of the policy of the state of Israel—were anti-Semitism. That's the first task. Second task, if the criticism was made by Jews, their task was to show that it's neurotic self-hatred, needs psychiatric treatment. Then he gave two examples of the latter category. One was I. F. Stone. The other was me. So, we have to be treated for our psychiatric disorders, and non-Jews have to be condemned for anti-Semitism, if they're critical of the state of Israel. That's understandable why Israeli propaganda would take this position. I don't particularly blame Abba Eban for doing what ambassadors are sometimes supposed to do. But we ought to understand that there is no sensible charge. No sensible charge. There's nothing to respond to. It's not a form of anti-Semitism. It's simply criticism of the criminal actions of a state, period."

Similar terms
"Self-loathing Jew" is synonymously used with "self-hating Jew." "Antisemitic Jew" can be used synonymously as well. "Self-hating Jew" has also been compared to the term "Uncle Tom" which is used in the African-American community. The term "auto-antisemitism" (אוטואנטישמיות, autoantishemiut) is also synonymously used in Hebrew. In a column in Haaretz, Uzi Zilber used the term "Jew Flu" as a synonym for Jewish self-hatred.

title: Self-hating Jew


text:
Diabrotica

Diabrotica is a large, widespread genus of beetles in the family Chrysomelidae. Members of this genus include several destructive agricultural pest species, sometimes referred to as cucumber beetles or corn rootworms.

Species

 * Diabrotica adelpha Harold, 1875
 * Diabrotica adornata Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica aegrota Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica alboplagiata Jacoby, 1882
 * Diabrotica alegrensis Bechyne & Bechyne, 1962
 * Diabrotica alexia Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica alfazema Bechyne, 1997
 * Diabrotica amecameca Krysan & Smith, 1987
 * Diabrotica amoena (Dalman, 1823)
 * Diabrotica amoenula Boheman, 1859
 * Diabrotica analis Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica antonietta Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica apicalis Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica apicicornis Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica apicipennis (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica aracatuba Bechyne & Bechyne, 1964
 * Diabrotica arcuata Baly, 1859
 * Diabrotica asignata Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica atomaria Jacoby, 1889
 * Diabrotica atriceps Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica atriineata Baly, 1889
 * Diabrotica atriscutata (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica atromaculata Baly, 1889
 * Diabrotica atrosignata (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica bakeri (Bowditch, 1911)
 * Diabrotica barberi R. Smith & Lawrence, 1967 - northern corn rootworm
 * Diabrotica barclayi Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica balteata LeConte, 1865 - banded cucumber beetle
 * Diabrotica bartleti Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica beniensis Krysan & Smith, 1987
 * Diabrotica biannularis Harold, 1875
 * Diabrotica bilineata Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica bioculata Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica bipartita Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica bipustulata Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica bisecta Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica boggianii Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica boliviana Harold, 1877
 * Diabrotica bordoni Bechyne & Bechyne, 1969
 * Diabrotica brevicornis Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica brevilineata Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica brevittitata Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica brunneosignata Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica buckleyi Baly, 1879
 * Diabrotica buqueti Baly, 1889
 * Diabrotica caiuba (Bechyne & Bechyne, 1969)
 * Diabrotica calchaqui Cabrera & Cabrera Walsh, 2004
 * Diabrotica callangaensis Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica carolae Krysan & Smith, 1987
 * Diabrotica caveyi Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica cavicollis Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica centralis Jacoby, 1882
 * Diabrotica championi Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica chapuisi Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica chimborensis Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica chloris Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica chloropus Harold, 1875
 * Diabrotica chlororhoidalis Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica chontalensis Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica circulata Harold, 1875
 * Diabrotica clarkellita Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica clarki Weise, 1916
 * Diabrotica clio Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica columbiensis Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica confluenta Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica confraterna Baly, 1889
 * Diabrotica confusa Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica consentanea Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica contigua Baly, 1889
 * Diabrotica costaricensis Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica crenulata Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica cristata (Harris, 1837)
 * Diabrotica cryptochlora Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica cryptomorpha Bechyne, 1997
 * Diabrotica curvilineata Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica curvipustulata Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica cyaneomaculata Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica decaspila Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica decempunctata Latreille, 1813
 * Diabrotica deliqua Weise, 1921
 * Diabrotica delrio Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica discoidalis Baly, 1865
 * Diabrotica dissimilis Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica distincta Jacoby, 1882
 * Diabrotica diversicornis Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica dmitryogloblini Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica duckworthorum Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica duplicata Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica duvivieri Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica dysoni Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica egleri (Bechyne & Bechyne, 1961)
 * Diabrotica elata Fabricius, 1801
 * Diabrotica elegantula Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica emorsitans Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica enae Marques, 1941
 * Diabrotica ephemera Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica eustolia Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica evanescens Baly, 1889
 * Diabrotica exclamationis Baly, 1859
 * Diabrotica extensa (Baly, 1889)
 * Diabrotica facialis Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica fallaciosa Weise, 1921
 * Diabrotica fallenia Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica fauveli (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica febronia Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica fenestralis Jacoby, 1879
 * Diabrotica fidelia Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica firmiona Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica flava (Olivier, 1791)
 * Diabrotica flaviventris Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica flavofulva Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica formosa Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica fowleri Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica freudei Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica fucata (Fabricius, 1787)
 * Diabrotica fulveola (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica fulvicornis Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica fulvofasciata Jacoby, 1889
 * Diabrotica funerea Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica fuscula Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica gahani Jacoby, 1893
 * Diabrotica generosa Baly, 1879
 * Diabrotica germari Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica glaucina (Baly, 1889)
 * Diabrotica godmani Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica gorhami Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica gracilenta Erichson, 1847
 * Diabrotica gracilis Jacoby, 1878
 * Diabrotica graminea (Baly, 1886)
 * Diabrotica gratiosa Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica grayella Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica guaira Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica guaratiba (Marques, 1941)
 * Diabrotica gudula Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica guttifera Baly, 1889
 * Diabrotica haroldi Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica hartjei Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica hathawayi Marques, 1941
 * Diabrotica helga Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica hilli Krysan & Smith, 1987
 * Diabrotica hogei Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica ianthe Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica illigeri Baly, 1889
 * Diabrotica impressipennis Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica inaequalis Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica inornata Weise, 1921
 * Diabrotica interrupta (Baly, 1886)
 * Diabrotica iridicollis Bechyne & Bechyne, 1965
 * Diabrotica isohaeta Bechyne & Bechyne, 1969
 * Diabrotica jacobiana Duvivier, 1885
 * Diabrotica jacobyi Baly, 1879
 * Diabrotica jamaicensis Bryant, 1924
 * Diabrotica jariensis Bechyne & Bechyne, 1965
 * Diabrotica javeti Baly, 1889
 * Diabrotica josephbalyi Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica kirbyi Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica klugii Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica kraatzi Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica labiata Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica lacordairei (Kirsch, 1883)
 * Diabrotica lamiina (Bechyne & Bechyne, 1969)
 * Diabrotica latevittata (Baly, 1886)
 * Diabrotica lawrencei Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica lebasii Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica lemniscata LeConte, 1868
 * Diabrotica liberata Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica liciens (Fabricius, 1801)
 * Diabrotica limitata (Sahlberg, 1823)
 * Diabrotica linensis Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica linsleyi Krysan & Smith, 1987
 * Diabrotica longicornis (Say, 1824)
 * Diabrotica luciana (Blake, 1965)
 * Diabrotica lucifera Erichson, 1847
 * Diabrotica luederwaldti (Bowditch, 1911)
 * Diabrotica lundi Smith & Lawrence, 1967
 * Diabrotica luteopustulata Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica lutescens Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica macrina Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica manaensis (Weise, 1921)
 * Diabrotica mantillerii Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica mapiriensis Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica marsila Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica martinjacobyi Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica matina Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica mauliki Barber, 1947
 * Diabrotica mediofasciata Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica melanopa Erichson, 1847
 * Diabrotica melanopyga Baly, 1889
 * Diabrotica meyeri Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica milleri Krysan & Smith, 1987
 * Diabrotica minuta Jacoby, 1879
 * Diabrotica mitteri Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica modesta (Fabricius, 1801)
 * Diabrotica morosa Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica moseri Weise, 1921
 * Diabrotica munda (Weise, 1921)
 * Diabrotica mutabilis Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica myrna Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica neolineata Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica nigritarsis (Baly, 1889)
 * Diabrotica nigrocincta Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica nigrolimbata Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica nigromaculata Jacoby, 1878
 * Diabrotica nigroscutata Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica nigrostriata Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica nitidicollis Baly, 1889
 * Diabrotica novemguttata (Weise, 1921)
 * Diabrotica novemmaculata Jacoby, 1878
 * Diabrotica nummularis Harold, 1877
 * Diabrotica obscura Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica occlusa Champion, 1920
 * Diabrotica ochreata (Fabricius, 1792)
 * Diabrotica octoplagiata Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica oculata (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica olivacea Jacoby, 1882
 * Diabrotica olivieri Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica orthocosta (Bechyne & Bechyne, 1969)
 * Diabrotica pachitensis Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica palpalis Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica panamensis Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica panchroma Bechyne, 1955
 * Diabrotica paradoxa Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica paranaensis Marques, 1941
 * Diabrotica parintinsensis (Bechyne & Bechyne, 1969)
 * Diabrotica pascoei Baly, 1879
 * Diabrotica paula (Bechyne & Bechyne, 1962)
 * Diabrotica pauperata (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica peckii Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica periscopica Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica perkinsi Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica piceicornis Baly, 1889
 * Diabrotica piceolimbata (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica piceomarginata (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica piceonotata Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica piceopicta (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica piceopunctata Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica piceosignata Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica platysoma Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica plaumanni Bechyne, 1954
 * Diabrotica plebeja Weise, 1921
 * Diabrotica poeclienta Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica porracea Harold, 1875
 * Diabrotica praeusta (Weise, 1921)
 * Diabrotica propylaea (Bechyne & Bechyne, 1969)
 * Diabrotica prostigma Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica proximans (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica pulchella (Jacquelin-Val, 1856)
 * Diabrotica pulchra (Sahlberg, 1823)
 * Diabrotica purpurascens Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica pygidialis Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica quadricollis (Jacoby, 1887)
 * Diabrotica ramona Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica recki Marques, 1941
 * Diabrotica redfordae Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica reedi (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica regalis (Baly, 1859)
 * Diabrotica regularis Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica relicta Suffrian, 1867
 * Diabrotica rendalli Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica reysmithi Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica rogersi Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica rosenbergi Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica rufolimbata Baly, 1879
 * Diabrotica rufomaculata Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica rufopustulata Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica salvadorensis Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica samouella Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica sancatarina Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica sanguinicollis Jacoby, 1879
 * Diabrotica schaufussi Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica scripta Olivier, 1808
 * Diabrotica scutellata Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica sebaldia Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica sedata Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica sel Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica selecta Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica semicirculata Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica semiflava Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica semisulcata Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica septemliturata Erichson, 1847
 * Diabrotica septemplagiata Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica serrozulensis (Bechyne & Bechyne, 1962)
 * Diabrotica sesquilineata Erichson, 1847
 * Diabrotica sexmaculata Baly, 1879
 * Diabrotica sharpii Kirsch, 1883
 * Diabrotica sheba Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica signaticornis Chevrolat, 1844
 * Diabrotica signifera Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica silvai Marques, 1941
 * Diabrotica simulata (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica sinuata Olivier, 1789
 * Diabrotica songoensis Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica spangleri Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica speciosa (Germar, 1824) - cucurbit beetle
 * Diabrotica speciosissima Baly, 1879
 * Diabrotica spilota Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica sublimbata (Baly, 1865)
 * Diabrotica submarginata (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica subrugosa (Gahan, 1891)
 * Diabrotica subsulcata Baly, 1865
 * Diabrotica surinamensis Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica synoptica Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica tarsalis Harold, 1875
 * Diabrotica teresa Bechyne, 1956
 * Diabrotica terminalis Jacoby, 1879
 * Diabrotica tessellata Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica testaceicollis (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica tibialis Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica tijuquensis Marques, 1941
 * Diabrotica tortuosa Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica transversa Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica travassosi Marques, 1941
 * Diabrotica tricolor Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica trifasciata Fabricius, 1801
 * Diabrotica trifoveolata (Baly, 1890)
 * Diabrotica trifurcata Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica triphonia Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica tropica (Weise, 1921)
 * Diabrotica tumidicornis Erichson, 1847
 * Diabrotica undecimpunctata Mannerheim, 1843 - spotted cucumber beetle, southern corn rootworm, western cucumber beetle, western spotted cucumber beetle
 * Diabrotica underwoodi Bowditch, 1911
 * Diabrotica unipunctata Jacoby, 1882
 * Diabrotica univittata Jacoby, 1899
 * Diabrotica utingae Marques, 1941
 * Diabrotica vagrans Baly, 1889
 * Diabrotica varicornis Jacoby, 1889
 * Diabrotica variegata (Jacoby, 1887)
 * Diabrotica venancia Bechyne, 1958
 * Diabrotica venezuelensis Jacoby, 1882
 * Diabrotica vilaolivae Bechyne & Bechyne, 1969
 * Diabrotica virescens Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica virgifera LeConte, 1858 - Mexican corn rootworm, western corn rootworm
 * Diabrotica viridana Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica viridans (Baly, 1889)
 * Diabrotica viridicollis Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica viridifasciata Jacoby, 1887
 * Diabrotica viridilimbata Baly, 1879
 * Diabrotica viridimaculata Jacoby, 1878
 * Diabrotica viridipustulata Baly, 1886
 * Diabrotica viridula Fabricius, 1801
 * Diabrotica waltersi Derunkov, Rocha Prado, Tishechkin & Konstantinov, 2015
 * Diabrotica weisei Baly, 1890
 * Diabrotica westwoodi (Baly, 1889)
 * Diabrotica zikani Bechyne, 1968
 * Diabrotica zischkai Bechyne, 1956

title: Diabrotica


text:
Rationalizable strategy

Rationalizability is a solution concept in game theory. It is the most permissive possible solution concept that still requires both players to be at least somewhat rational and know the other players are also rational, i.e. that they do not play dominated strategies. A strategy is rationalizable if there exists some possible set of beliefs both players could have about each other's actions, that would still result in the strategy being played.

Rationalizability is a broader concept than a Nash equilibrium. Both require players to respond optimally to some belief about their opponents' actions, but Nash equilibrium requires these beliefs to be correct, while rationalizability does not. Rationalizability was first defined, independently, by Bernheim (1984) and Pearce (1984).

Definition
Starting with a normal-form game, the rationalizable set of actions can be computed as follows:

 * 1) Start with the full action set for each player.
 * 2) Remove all dominated strategies, i.e. strategies that "never make sense" (are never a best reply to any belief about the opponents' actions). The motivation for this step is no rational player would ever choose such actions.
 * 3) Remove all actions which are never a best reply to any belief about the opponents' remaining actions—this second step is justified because each player knows that the other players are rational.
 * 4) Continue the process until no further actions can be eliminated.

In a game with finitely many actions, this process always terminates and leaves a non-empty set of actions for each player. These are the rationalizable actions.

Iterated elimination of strictly dominated strategies (IESDS)
The iterated elimination (or deletion, or removal) of dominated strategies (also denominated as IESDS, or IDSDS, or IRSDS) is one common technique for solving games that involves iteratively removing dominated strategies. In the first step, at most one dominated strategy is removed from the strategy space of each of the players since no rational player would ever play these strategies. This results in a new, smaller game. Some strategies—that were not dominated before—may be dominated in the smaller game. The first step is repeated, creating a new even smaller game, and so on. The process stops when no dominated strategy is found for any player. This process is valid since it is assumed that rationality among players is common knowledge, that is, each player knows that the rest of the players are rational, and each player knows that the rest of the players know that he knows that the rest of the players are rational, and so on ad infinitum (see Aumann, 1976).

There are two versions of this process. One version involves only eliminating strictly dominated strategies. If, after completing this process, there is only one strategy for each player remaining, that strategy set is the unique Nash equilibrium. Moreover, iterated elimination of strictly dominated strategies is path independent. That is, if at any point in the process there are multiple strictly dominated strategies, then it doesn't matter for the end result which strategies we remove first.

Strict Dominance Deletion Step-by-Step Example:

 * 1) C is strictly dominated by A for Player 1. Therefore, Player 1 will never play strategy C. Player 2 knows this. (see IESDS Figure 1)
 * 2) Of the remaining strategies (see IESDS Figure 2), Z is strictly dominated by Y and X for Player 2. Therefore, Player 2 will never play strategy Z. Player 1 knows this.
 * 3) Of the remaining strategies (see IESDS Figure 3), B is strictly dominated by A for Player 1. Therefore, Player 1 will never play B. Player 2 knows this.
 * 4) Of the remaining strategies (see IESDS Figure 4), Y is strictly dominated by X for Player 2. Therefore, Player 2 will never play Y. Player 1 knows this.
 * 5) Only one rationalizable strategy is left {A,X} which results in a payoff of (10,4). This is the single Nash Equilibrium for this game.

Another version involves eliminating both strictly and weakly dominated strategies. If, at the end of the process, there is a single strategy for each player, this strategy set is also a Nash equilibrium. However, unlike the first process, elimination of weakly dominated strategies may eliminate some Nash equilibria. As a result, the Nash equilibrium found by eliminating weakly dominated strategies may not be the only Nash equilibrium. (In some games, if we remove weakly dominated strategies in a different order, we may end up with a different Nash equilibrium.)

Weak Dominance Deletion Step-by-Step Example:

 * 1) O is strictly dominated by N for Player 1. Therefore, Player 1 will never play strategy O. Player 2 knows this. (see IESDS Figure 5)
 * 2) U is weakly dominated by T for Player 2. If Player 2 chooses T, then the final equilibrium is (N,T)

 * 1) O is strictly dominated by N for Player 1. Therefore, Player 1 will never play strategy O. Player 2 knows this. (see IESDS Figure 6)
 * 2) T is weakly dominated by U for Player 2. If Player 2 chooses U, then the final equilibrium is (N,U)

In any case, if by iterated elimination of dominated strategies there is only one strategy left for each player, the game is called a dominance-solvable game.

Iterated elimination by mixed strategy
There are instances when there is no pure strategy that dominates another pure strategy, but a mixture of two or more pure strategies can dominate another strategy. This is called Strictly Dominant Mixed Strategies. Some authors allow for elimination of strategies dominated by a mixed strategy in this way.

Example 1:

In this scenario, for player 1, there is no pure strategy that dominates another pure strategy. Let's define the probability of player 1 playing up as p, and let p = $1⁄2$. We can set a mixed strategy where player 1 plays up and down with probabilities ($1⁄2$,$1⁄2$). When player 2 plays left, then the payoff for player 1 playing the mixed strategy of up and down is 1, when player 2 plays right, the payoff for player 1 playing the mixed strategy is 0.5. Thus regardless of whether player 2 chooses left or right, player 1 gets more from playing this mixed strategy between up and down than if the player were to play the middle strategy. In this case, we should eliminate the middle strategy for player 1 since it's been dominated by the mixed strategy of playing up and down with probability ($1⁄2$,$1⁄2$).

Example 2:

We can demonstrate the same methods on a more complex game and solve for the rational strategies. In this scenario, the blue coloring represents the dominating numbers in the particular strategy.

Step-by-step solving:

For Player 2, X is dominated by the mixed strategy $1⁄2$Y and $1⁄2$Z.

The expected payoff for playing strategy $1⁄2$Y + $1⁄2$Z must be greater than the expected payoff for playing pure strategy X, assigning $1⁄2$ and $1⁄2$ as tester values. The argument for mixed strategy dominance can be made if there is at least one mixed strategy that allows for dominance.

Testing with $1⁄2$ and $1⁄2$ gets the following:

Expected average payoff of $1⁄2$ Strategy Y: $1⁄2$(4+0+4) = 4

Expected average payoff of $1⁄2$ Strategy Z: $1⁄2$(0+5+5) = 5

Expected average payoff of pure strategy X: (1+1+3) = 5

Set up the inequality to determine whether the mixed strategy will dominate the pure strategy based on expected payoffs.

u$1⁄2$Y + u$1⁄2$Z ⩼ uX

4 + 5 > 5

Mixed strategy $1⁄2$Y and $1⁄2$Z will dominate pure strategy X for Player 2, and thus X can be eliminated from the rationalizable strategies for P2.

For Player 1, U is dominated by the pure strategy D.

For player 2, Y is dominated by the pure strategy Z.

This leaves M dominating D for Player 1.

The only rationalizable strategy for Players 1 and 2 is then (M,Z) or (3,5).

Constraints on beliefs
Consider a simple coordination game (the payoff matrix is to the right). The row player can play a if he can reasonably believe that the column player could play A, since a is a best response to A. He can reasonably believe that the column player can play A if it is reasonable for the column player to believe that the row player could play a. She can believe that he will play a if it is reasonable for her to believe that he could play a, etc.

This provides an infinite chain of consistent beliefs that result in the players playing (a, A). This makes (a, A) a rationalizable pair of actions. A similar process can be repeated for (b, B).

As an example where not all strategies are rationalizable, consider a prisoner's dilemma pictured to the left. Row player would never play c, since c is not a best response to any strategy by the column player. For this reason, c is not rationalizable.

Conversely, for two-player games, the set of all rationalizable strategies can be found by iterated elimination of strictly dominated strategies. For this method to hold however, one also needs to consider strict domination by mixed strategies. Consider the game on the right with payoffs of the column player omitted for simplicity. Notice that "b" is not strictly dominated by either "t" or "m" in the pure strategy sense, but it is still dominated by a strategy that would mix "t" and "m" with probability of each equal to 1/2. This is due to the fact that given any belief about the action of the column player, the mixed strategy will always yield higher expected payoff. This implies that "b" is not rationalizable.

Moreover, "b" is not a best response to either "L" or "R" or any mix of the two. This is because an action that is not rationalizable can never be a best response to any opponent's strategy (pure or mixed). This would imply another version of the previous method of finding rationalizable strategies as those that survive the iterated elimination of strategies that are never a best response (in pure or mixed sense).

In games with more than two players, however, there may be strategies that are not strictly dominated, but which can never be the best response. By the iterated elimination of all such strategies one can find the rationalizable strategies for a multiplayer game.

Rationalizability and Nash equilibria
It can be easily proved that a Nash equilibrium is a rationalizable equilibrium; however, the converse is not true. Some rationalizable equilibria are not Nash equilibria. This makes the rationalizability concept a generalization of Nash equilibrium concept.

As an example, consider the game matching pennies pictured to the right. In this game the only Nash equilibrium is row playing h and t with equal probability and column playing H and T with equal probability. However, all pure strategies in this game are rationalizable.

Consider the following reasoning: row can play h if it is reasonable for her to believe that column will play H. Column can play H if its reasonable for him to believe that row will play t. Row can play t if it is reasonable for her to believe that column will play T. Column can play T if it is reasonable for him to believe that row will play h (beginning the cycle again). This provides an infinite set of consistent beliefs that results in row playing h. A similar argument can be given for row playing t, and for column playing either H or T.

title: Rationalizable strategy


text:
Talk:Rationalizable strategy

The article showed only two rationalizable pure strategies for the matching pennies game. I changed it to state that all the pure strategies are rationalizable, which I believe to be correct.

I also added a note about the iterated elimination of strategies that are never the best response yielding the set of rationalizable strategies. I found this fact in a set of lecture notes on the web, which I added to the References section. (I felt it needed at least one online reference.)

The articles on dominance and best response should probably have links to each other and to this article. I haven't added these yet.

—Ilmari Karonen 19:24:46, 2005-09-01 (UTC)

 * Yeah, reading over the page again, I should have been more careful to distinguish between rationalizable strategies and rationalizable equilibria. I'm going to add the formal mathematical definition in the next few days, and when I do that I'll try to be sure that distinction is mentioned and consistently employed.  Thanks for the addition!  --best, kevin  · · · Kzollman | Talk · · · 19:28, September 1, 2005 (UTC)

There is not really a definition in the article. I don't know where to find and include one. --Janlo (talk) 15:16, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Added a definition. Will try to add more detail soon. I work in game theory. J-weinstein77 (talk) 22:13, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Weak Dominance Deletion Step-by-Step Example
In the example of Weak Dominance Deletion Step-by-Step Example, the strategy U (resp. T) does not weakly dominates T (resp. U) (after the deletion of player one's strategy). To show that the order of deletion has an impact, more strategies should be added (for instance player one could have 1 more strategy). Comment added by QBramas

"Dominanza (teoria dei giochi)" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Dominanza (teoria dei giochi) and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 12 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 02:09, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

Mixed Strategy Dominance Deletion Step-by-Step Example with Detailed Explanation
As part of a University of Michigan Game Theory course, we are helping improve this Game Theory wikipage by adding an example of Mixed Strategy Dominance. In particular, we added an explanation of how to assign tester q values for Player 2's strategy and test them to see if that mixed strategy will dominate the pure strategy. The existing example of Mixed did not offer calculations on how to prove mixed dominance, nor did it end by solving the game. My teammate made the step-by-step IDSDS graph, based off a game out of our textbook, Strategy: An Introduction to Game Theory by Joel Watson. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MeltedKeyboard (talk • contribs) 17:45, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

 * The calculation in this section appears to me to be incorrect (even after I fixed an apparent repeated error where it said ½X+½Z when it should have said ½Y+½Z). To dominate, the mixed strategy has to be better *no matter what the opponent does*. It is impossible to capture that condition in a single inequality (unless it contains variables representing what the opponent's strategy is). The approach you've used would never incorrectly reject a strategy that was actually dominant, but would incorrectly accept strategies that are not dominant. In particular, by not weighting the opponent's strategies, the calculation implicitly assumes that the opponent plays a mixed strategy of 1/3 U, 1/3 M, and 1/3 D. 50.197.48.113 (talk) 13:00, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rationalizable strategy


text:
North Parramatta

North Parramatta is a suburb of Sydney in Western Sydney, in the state of New South Wales, Australia. North Parramatta is 24 kilometres north-west of the Sydney central business district in the local government area of the City of Parramatta.

History
The Darug people had lived in the area for many generations, and regarded the area as a food bowl, rich in food from the river and forests. They called the area Baramada or Burramatta ('Parramatta') which means "the place where the eels lie down".

Heritage listings
North Parramatta has a number of heritage-listed sites, including:
 * 28a Bourke Street: Lake Parramatta
 * Corner of O'Connell Street and Dunlop Street: Parramatta Correctional Centre
 * Pennant Hills Road: St Patrick's Cemetery

The UrbanGrowth NSW Development Corporation is working on creating an aspirational place identity for the publicly owned and nationally listed Heritage Core. It will not have any residential developments, and the heritage buildings will be preserved with the help of repair and restoration work that will make them weatherproof and safe. The significant landmarks on the site which will be conserved include the Cumberland Hospital and the Norma Parker Centre.

Schools and recreation
North Parramatta is dominated by Lake Parramatta and The King's School, which together comprise almost 50% of the land area. Lake Parramatta is a 10-hectare reserve, based around a former reservoir. The catchment area for the lake is bounded by North Rocks Road, Pennant Hills Road and Hunts Creek. The entrance is from Lackey Street, North Parramatta. Lake Parramatta served as a recreational spot for locals who enjoyed swimming. It had been closed due to pollution, but was reopened in January 2015.

Schools in the suburb include:
 * Burnside Public School
 * Parramatta North Public School
 * Redeemer Baptist School – situated on a heritage-listed area – former site of Burnside Orphanage
 * RIDBC Garfield Barwick School
 * Tara Anglican School for Girls
 * The King's School, Parramatta, the oldest independent school in Australia
 * St. Monica's Primary School

Transport
The nearest train station to North Parramatta is Parramatta railway station. The 609 bus route, run by Hillsbus, is the local access to bus transport. It circles around from Prince Street, to Gloucester Avenue, past Lake Parramatta, onto Iron Street and then to the Parramatta Bus Interchange.

At the 2011 census, 21.9% of employed people travelled to work on public transport and 57.3% by car (either as driver or as passenger).

Demographics
At the 2016 census, North Parramatta recorded a population of 13,248. Of these:
 * Age distribution : North Parramatta has a slight over-representation of young adults when compared to the country as a whole. This is most apparent in the range 25–34 years of age, who make up 20.4% of the suburb's population, significantly larger than the national average of 14.4%. North Parramatta residents' median age was 35 years, compared to the national median of 38. Children aged 0–14 years made up 17.7% of the population (national average is 18.7%) and people aged 65 years and over made up 11.0% of the population (national average is 15.8%).
 * Ethnic diversity : About half (45.4%) of North Parramatta residents were born in Australia; the next most common countries of birth were India 7.8%, China 5.5%, Iran 3.5%, Philippines 2.5% and Lebanon 2.2%. However, only 13.2% identify their ancestry as Australian, which is the largest group; the next most common self-identified ancestries were English 12.9%, Chinese 9.0%, Indian 7.9% and Irish 5.3%. Just under half (44.1%) of people only spoke English at home; other languages spoken at home included Mandarin 5.7%, Arabic 5.5%, Persian 3.4%, Cantonese 3.2% and Hindi 3.2%.
 * Religion : The most common responses for religion were Catholic 23.7% and No Religion 21.4%.
 * Income : The average weekly household income was $1,524, compared to the national average of $1,438.
 * Housing : Most private dwellings (59.1%) were flats, units or apartments. Another 23.7% were separate houses, while 16.6% were semi-detached (mainly townhouses). The average household size was 2.5 people.

title: North Parramatta