Gidday to you too, my slippery eel!
You write:
>I hope we focus on the categories S&C make salient,
but fail to tell us just what these might be...
>rather than do that old "Lenin was Marx in practice!" "No he
>wasn't!" quote-mongering dance, again. We've an archive choc-full of
>that stuff already, I reckon.
Isn't (hem) practice quite a central category in this connection, O
wriggly one? Made salient by (hem) Marx, and (in respect of the
Absolute Spirit) dead dog Hegel himself?
>Your starter for five, Hugh!
You blinked when you tried to pre-empt the practice argument, Rob!
Obviously smelling a weak spot or two in S & C... So I'll double that!
Hugh
PS And please, Rob, don't make quoting as such an issue, there's a
good lad! Let's relate to the, how-shall-we-put-it, saliency of any
quotes given, rather than doing the old "All you can do is quote!" vs
"Where's your proof, then?" dance again.
--- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
