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!


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] ---

Reply via email to