At 09:09 13/12/99 GMT, John Walker wrote:
>Chris actually wrote that:
>> One of the problems of a Gramscian concept of revolutionary change in a
>> developed capitalist society it what individual changes are significant,
>> however small.
>
>If Mohammad Ali was voted Sports personality of the century is really
>such a revolutionary change odd that the rest of you report of the
>event fails to mention he avoidance of fighting in Vietnam.
I wrote:
>Mohammed Ali won the century and received an introduction that
>specifically noted his political courage in going to prison rather than
>fight in the Vietnam war.
John wrote
> In his acceptance speach he made no mention of
>the new conflicts the USA is involved in, so it hardly has any
>contemporary relevance.
What do you expect? He did not speak about islam either. But in a wider
sense the votes he got were symbolic of more than boxing.
I do not think a Gramsian approach is necessarily desparate at all. Could
you spell out what are your criticisms of it?
Chris Burford
London
--- from list [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---
