translated I'll forward it to
this list.
Dave
> Date: Tue, 09 Nov 1999 00:13:41 +
> To:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> From: Chris Burford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: M-TH: Re: Whither the discussion
> Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 23:35 08/11/99 +, you wrote:
>There seems to be a lot of lost souls on this list who claim to be
>Marxists yet endorsed NATO's bombing of Yugoslavia, or who claim to
>be world socialists without having read a word of Marx.
>Do they think that this is the groucho marx thaxist theatre?
>T
>>> "THE WORLD SOCIALIST MOVEMENT(via THE SOCIALIST PARTY
Simon,
When I asked you on the other list about the role of the World Socialist Movement as
differentiated from the role of a party , you said WSM is an/the agent of the working
class. But what is your factual support for such a cla
Dave Bedggood wrote:
>They could save a lot of time and energy by reading the Communist
>Manifesto and then whipping themselves.
A curious prescription. I understand the reading suggestion, but why
the autoflagellation? Some crypto-religious guilt expiation thing? Or
some politicized masochist
G'day Thaxists,
Simon sez:
>> I think that the difference here is that I am not arguing for a
>> Marxist revolution, but a socialist one: i.e. that while Marx provided
>> one of the first expositions of socialist theory, you don't have to have
>> read a word of Marx to be a socialist.
Elic
nergy by reading the Communist
Manifesto and then whipping themselves.
> Date: Mon, 8 Nov 1999 05:14:54 -0500 (EST)
> From: Gerald Levy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: M-TH:
Simon wrote:
> I think that the difference here is that I am not arguing for a
> Marxist revolution, but a socialist one: i.e. that while Marx provided
> one of the first expositions of socialist theory, you don't have to have
> read a word of Marx to be a socialist.
Note the inference tha
