I responded to Gerald Levy's - perhaps offhanded? - comment that Marx repeatedly stated that he wasn't a Marxist because I remembered M's quip differently - that M made it as a commentary on French Marxists and that M's remark is known indirectly through Engels (and I noted the 4 specific times that E mentioned it)...I cited Draper as my source...now maybe M said he wasn't a Marxist a whole bunch of times in reference to the French Marxists...maybe he said it in other contexts and there are other sources relating such incidents...in any event, Gerald L replies by suggesting that I check Rubel...fine, but there was no indication why he was making this suggestion...in return, I asked if this source would indicate that Draper is wrong - Draper's point being that M didn't repeatedly state he wasn't a Marxist...so Gerald L replies to my second post on the subject with: > Read Rubel yourself and find out. > .. to not burden everyone with extra and unnecceary bytes (a common Net > courtesy). So as not to further offend, I have included the whole of > your recent post. > Hint: you might learn something. > With all due respect, get off of your high-horse. It is entirely > appropriate for listmembers to suggest readings and/or to write short > posts. in other words, Gerald L ignores the point of my posts again...BTW, I wasn't offended that you deleted my post when you suggested that I check out Rubel...that would have been silly of me because I snip all the time and agree that to do otherwise is burdensome...and I think it highly appropriate that listers recommend readings...but it seems common courtesy to provide a cue as to why you offer a suggestion.. ..that is why I followed up by asking a couple of questions...and rather than address my questions, you post the above (which, in this instance, is included in its entirety)...Michael
