====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
I thought that the argument was 1. If the army is (generally, in all but the most revolutionary circumstances - i.e. the Red army under Trotsky) the enemy of the people. 2. How could anyone, of any gender or sexual preference, be defended if they choose to join? What happens AFTER they join is a totally different question. Not an unimportant one, no - but let's try to deal with first things first. - Bill Peggy Dobbins wrote: > ====================================================================== > Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. > ====================================================================== > > > On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 6:26 PM, Dan <d.koech...@wanadoo.fr> wrote: > >> The Army is the enemy of the people. >> >> For goodness sake, the armed forces are a pretty critical variable in any >> societal transformation, forward as well as backward, and stabilization >> whichever direction. "The People" have no hope if "The Army" is always and >> by definition "the enemy of the people. Does someone think 'the >> proletarian state' is sans army? How then could they be for the working >> class as the ruling class? This is why trusting peace and justice to a >> spirit above or the spirit within is always just smelling the incense >> whoever buys it for or from the guru. >> >> >> >> ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@lists.econ.utah.edu Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
