====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
Dear Mr Mage: > For my part, I would rather be termed a "Trotskyite" (accepting > Trotsky as a primary historical/political/intellectual source) but not > a "Trotskyist" (identifying with any of the organizational > manifestations stemming from the abortive "Fourth International"). > You must be the author of _The Hungarian Revolution. Documents by Shane Mage_. Young Socialist Forum, Berkeley, CA 1959! I have this work! I obtained it in the context of an H-HOAC list discussion on October 1956 of the Hungarian Revolt of 1956 and Herbert Aptheker's book on it. Here's my post. It recommends your dissection of Aptheker: http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=H-HOAC&month=0610&week=e&msg=lIqH1FIFc3zC3h4cYF79EA&user=&pw= I found it useful, and said so. (Would a "Stalinist" say that? Only if by "Stalinist" you mean: "Intrepid searcher after the truth." ) Louis won't read it. He is watching paint dry. Seriously, I found it pretty good! I also got a lot out of Aptheker's book. Of course there's a lot of other stuff today, including this: http://www.plp.org/pl-magazine/selections/hungary56.html PLP is "Stalinist", of course, by some accounts. But not by mine. As I said, there are no "Stalinists", meaning: people with a "cult" of Stalin, people who _call themselves_ "Stalinist". It's only a term of abuse, as when Louis called me a "Stalinist" yesterday. An insult; no other content. I forgive him, of course. If I were a "Stalinist", though, I'd say: "Louis: Off to the GULAG with you!" But I'm not, so I don't. You embrace the term "Trotskyite"? Some years back a TrotskyIST told me NEVER to use the term "TrotskyITE", since that's what the "Stalinists" called them, so it was an insult. Anyway, I enjoyed your pamphlet, and have a digital copy (not the print version). Let me ask you a question. You say that you "accept Trotsky as a primary historical/political/intellectual source." What does that mean? What does it mean to "accept Trotsky as a primary historical source", for example? Sincerely, Grover Furr ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: [email protected] Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
