On Thu, 27 Mar 2003 andienachgeborenen wrote:
> Actually, I disagree with your transation. "Verkehrs" I read as
> "intercourse" not "discourse."
You're quite right, that was a trans-o. I meant to write intercourse. That paragraph should have read:
Secondly, the apercu itself has nothing with war having a purpose. This idea rests on a slightly inaccurate translation. The original actually says that war is the continuation "of political intercourse" (des politischen Verkehrs) "mixed in with other means" (mit Einmischung anderer Mittel.) If the aims of political intercourse revolve around the concept of face, then so too will the aims of war.
Michael