******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
Marx's statement is not a general position on the "spoiler" problem. It even specifies that that was a case which could result in the "presence of a few reactionaries", i.e. he could've said, "Don't let the 'spoiler' problem but the sole or ultimate determinate." Fine and good. Even more, this was during a revolution and he says: "If the forces of democracy take decisive, terroristic action against the reaction from the very beginning, the reactionary influence in the election will already have been destroyed", i.e. not our situation at all. Further, in terms of "spoiling," Nimtz and others record how the 'Marx party' in the US intervened in 1864 to convince Fremont to withdraw his candidacy to avoid spoiling the election leading to Lincoln's defeat. Perhaps Marx knew nothing of this and would've opposed this--but I'm doubtful on both counts and would disagree with him if he had. -Jason _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
