>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/28/00 02:06PM >>>
Carrol Cox wrote:
>You have a really fine political mind -- but you are almost
>deliberately trashing it. Anyone who takes you and Mark
>really seriously can only conclude that further political
>theorizing or organizing is pointless. The world is over
Doug wrote:
>What
> I'm not clear on is what exactly this socialist revolution would mean
> for industrial and agricultural practice, energy sources, the
> transformation of the built environment, living arrangements, etc.
>
This is exactly the issue. The point is not to be original, the point i
Tolerated disagreement would have to be within narrow bounds. I went outside them in
academia, and was cast out. I am now a lawyer. My experience is that intellectuals do
not enjoy disagreement on fundamentals. Chomsky is right that they are herd animals.
--jks
Short of mass working-class mo
Carrol Cox wrote:
>You have a really fine political mind -- but you are almost
>deliberately trashing it. Anyone who takes you and Mark
>really seriously can only conclude that further political
>theorizing or organizing is pointless. The world is over.
>Forget it. Let's go to the movies.
That's
Carrol Cox wrote:
> you and Mark, so far as I can tell, have actually persuaded
> just one person -- Me! You haven't had the tiniest effect on anyone else
> as far as I can see. So what are you going to do with your one single
> solitary convert -- you are going to swear at him for saying, let's s
- Original Message -
From: "Carrol Cox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 2:09 AM
Subject: [PEN-L:20795] Re: Reply to Carrol Cox
> Yes I agree the house is on fire. So what do we do?
stop discussing rock music, waterfalls and brand imagery.
Mar
Louis Proyect wrote:
>
> THIS IS WRONG, CARROL. IT IS NOT "PRACTICAL". IT IS "THEORETICAL". LET ME
> REPEAT IT WITH EMPHASIS: IT IS A THEORETICAL QUESTION. IT HAS TO DO WITH
Lou, I followed with great interest the debate you and Mark had with
Jim Heartfield some years ago and you convinced me
Carrol:
>This is the part of your post which provoked the "Pish" in my pen-l post. The
>problem posed by the four alleged "schools of thought" is not theoretical but
>practical, and your belief that any such theoretical work can be or needs to
>be carried out is as silly as Doug's frequent demand
