Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[Andrew Pollack via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Forgot to include this:
https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/document/swp-us/education/
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

On 12/2/16 2:04 PM, Jeff via Marxism wrote:

Maybe Mark and other historians could comment further, but I'd be
surprised of any case in history in which radicalizing young people gave
much weight at all to advice from activists recounting their experiences
from 40 years earlier.


40 years? I learned my Marxism from Farrell Dobbs in 1967 who led a 
general strike in Minneapolis in 1934 so that is 30 years. I created 
this mailing list in 1998 in order to transmit the Marxism I learned 
from Dobbs but without the "Leninism" that went with it. As it happens, 
I learned about the mass movement by building the antiwar movement in 
the late 60s and early 70s so that means I am 50 years after the fact 
rather than 30.


In terms of Marxist theory, I don't think it makes much difference if it 
is 30 or 50 years. There's not much in the 20 year gap that would change 
one's assessment of the Democratic Party or the labor theory of value.


What does matter is the relevance of lessons you learn as organizers. 
There wasn't that much out of Dobbs's lecture on organizing teamsters 
that could be of much use in building antiwar demonstrations.


A few days ago a list member in his 20s wrote me:

> I wonder if you have any nuts and bolts mechanics insights from Camejo
> worth sharing.

I wrote him back:

Not exactly. I have tons of memories about working with Peter in the 
early 70s but they were hardwired to Boston politics and not really 
transferable.

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[Jeff via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I'll venture a partial answer to Mark's pointed question:

At 11:33 02-12-16 -0500, Mark Lause via Marxism wrote:
>.
>At some point, we really need to confront thefailure of the Boomers to pass
>on the essential lessons we got had coming out of the radicalization of the
>1960s and 1970s.  The real question is where the
>hell were the grey-haired activists who were supposed to help them learn to
>walk.

1) Well from what I have seen, those grey-haired activists have been in the
leadership of today's heroic anti-war demonstrations applying the
"essential lessons" they learned during the cold war. Namely that the enemy
wasn't capitalism (after all, most third-world countries allied with the
USSR were capitalist themselves) but "imperialism" meaning NATO and the
enemies of the USSR and China. And if asked what the term means they'll
happily cite Lenin whose conception of "imperialism" had a totally
different meaning. And then those grey-haired activists might include
another "essential lesson" from the cold war: the nuclear annihilation that
could result from actions that piss off Russia means avoiding war or
revolution in regions which are clearly in the Russian "sphere of
influence." Great lessons for 2016, don't you think?

2) Of course a much larger number of that generation's activists in the US
wound up back in the Democratic party and such institutions conducting
"practical politics" contrary to the "idealism" that was prominent in the
1960's radicalization which advanced revolutionary (aka "unrealistic")
demands, which of course were not to be realized because those revolutions
never succeeded. And then of course an even larger number left politics but
continued to embrace the values they learned through life-style, thus
individual, solutions that they could claim to have upheld for the last 50
years. Would you expect young people questioning capitalism to be impressed
by the evolution of these 1960's activists?

3) And in a more general sense, I'd be surprised if young people were to
follow the lessons learned by their (grand-) parents EVEN if they had been
lessons learnt through successes (which of course was usually not the
case). Maybe Mark and other historians could comment further, but I'd be
surprised of any case in history in which radicalizing young people gave
much weight at all to advice from activists recounting their experiences
from 40 years earlier. The collective memory of a population seems to be
limited to 10 or 15 years at best, with history proverbially repeating
itself on time scales longer than that. I know this point may contradict
the experiences of some on this list, but that is probably because you were
a member of a party led by grey-haired activists of that time to whom you
were expected to display reverence. But the other 99% of the young people
radicalized during the 1960's specifically rejected the older generation
("Don't trust anyone over 30") and set to figure things out from scratch.
Isn't it always that way?

I realize these observations are not what Mark wanted to hear, and doesn't
answer his question of how he is "supposed to help them learn to walk." But
they are not asking to be taught to walk, and will not give Mark the
hearing he (unlike categories 1 and 2) truly deserves. Lacking a complete
answer, I would say that older radicals can best apply the lessons they
have learnt through their own participation in today's activism, which can
set an example especially when (partially) successful. And write useful
articles which will be appreciated by younger radicals -- without them ever
noticing your grey hair! -- rather than lecturing them as if a parent.

- Jeff 

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[Mark Lause via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I'd be quite happy to discuss this further, but what I meant is mostly the
ongoing silly preoccupation with the well-being of this or that masonic
lodge versus that of its rivals.

With some exceptions of persons, times and places, I think this describes
the process on balance.Something that continued as everything began
collapsing.  People who became gurus in this process couldn't jettison what
made them gurus.

In the wake of the 2014 election, an ex-SWPer (of much more recent vintage
than most of us) insisting that 500 socialist votes in Ohio would be vastly
more important politically than  the 104,000 that went to the Greens.  (I
think he--and know that most who were agreeing with him--wound up
supporting Bernie Sanders who was, after all a "socialist.")  This was a
young man (not really so young, who was severely miseducated in a
quasi-religious kind of sectarianism.  (Certainly one that believes in
magic words.)

ML
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[Steven L. Robinson via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

In the early 1980s I recall that older, most former, Communist Party members 
played invaluable roles in the movements I  was, as a student,  involved with 
at the time - anti-Nuke, Central America solidarity etc. - While they carried 
with them dreadful political baggage, of which I was then only dimly aware, the 
fact is that on numerous matters of practical application their advice was 
invaluable - how to organize demonstrations, phone banking, obtaining legal 
observers, organizing coalitions etc. I know that former SWP members have 
played and continue to play similar roles, roles that  can best be termed as 
mentoring, in various movements throughout the country - although each year 
there are fewer of them. 

I think what Mark describes are the consequences of the destruction, decimation 
is too mild a word, of the organized left in the 1970s and 1980s.  As a result, 
there is little if any institutional memory left for the newly radicalized to 
draw upon.  SR

- Original Message -
.

At some point, we really need to confront thefailure of the Boomers to passon 
the essential lessons we got had coming out of the radicalization of the1960s 
and 1970s. Whenever I see young people stumbling for understandingor trying to 
figure out how to have a demonstration, I get very flusteredwith them, but 
hopefully show it rarely. The real question is where thehell were the 
grey-haired activists who were supposed to help them learn towalk.

Where were the Boomers when Occupy was being led off like lambs to 
theslaughter, eh? And don't get me started about BLM or the Greens. :-)

ML



_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[Mark Lause via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I have been so busy that I haven't weighed in on this until now, but I
think The North Star or anything like it is meaningless if we are not, at
least in part, a voice for those struggling to find their voice.

What the article discusses is what I hear regularly from students--often in
the same language.  I could despair at the clumsiness of expression or the
incomplete character of their thoughts.  But I am tickled to death that
capitalism is continuing to recruit and train its own gravediggers.  It
gives me more than a little hope that it will continue to do so after we
are all gone.

At some point, we really need to confront thefailure of the Boomers to pass
on the essential lessons we got had coming out of the radicalization of the
1960s and 1970s.  Whenever I see young people stumbling for understanding
or trying to figure out how to have a demonstration, I get very flustered
with them, but hopefully show it rarely.  The real question is where the
hell were the grey-haired activists who were supposed to help them learn to
walk.

Where were the Boomers when Occupy was being led off like lambs to the
slaughter, eh?  And don't get me started about BLM or the Greens.  :-)

ML





On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Gulf Mann via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
> *
>
> Very apt, T.
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 4:27 PM, Thomas <thomasfbar...@earthlink.net>
> wrote:
>
> > "Great minds have great faults."
> >
> > Lord Macaulay; History Of England from the Accession Of James II [1848]
> >
> > T
> >
> > -Original Message-
> > >From: Gulf Mann via Marxism <marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu>
> > >Sent: Dec 1, 2016 4:50 PM
> > >To: Thomas F Barton <thomasfbar...@earthlink.net>
> > >Subject: Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition
> > >
> > >It is true, Bill, that sometime Louis's 3-pointers fall out of bounds,
> > >carried a bit too far by his tendency for sarcasm. But, overall, he is a
> > >good trooper.
> > >
> > >On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:28 PM, William Quimby via Marxism <
> > >marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >> Louis, that was a pretty shitty comment.
> > >>
> > >> - Bill
> > >>
> >
> > >>
> > >_
> > >Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> > >Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/
> > options/marxism/thomasfbarton%40earthlink.net
> >
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/
> options/marxism/markalause%40gmail.com
>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[Manuel Barrera via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*


" I could have found other aging radicals like me to write for North Star who 
would have met with your approval but I have another agenda."
First, I, for one am glad to see Michael's post. It is one of the great aspects 
of the North Star that there are activists, whom we were once very much like, 
willing simply to say what they need to say and say it forcefully without 
decorum.
Second, I see Michael's points as more of a call to arms rather than a call to 
cuss. I believe he is dead on to call out the timidity of the liberals but ,as 
is patently clear from some the "claptrap" denouncing his post here, it is not 
only bourgeois liberals but "aging radicals" (sic in some cases) who seem think 
that we will win the struggle for liberation from capitalism with well-chosen 
verbiage and erudite logic, the "sophisticated" turn of phrase. Claptrap 
indeed. What Michael, in my view, is saying is that the gloves need to come 
off, both in our styles of debate, but also in the streets. What do you think? 
That we're going to "challenge" the "alt-right" with well-chosen demands and 
inspiring speeches? That the masses are just going to step in line once we stop 
"maligning" and "organize"? Organize what? Good informational picket lines and 
orderly marches? Organize whom? Nice liberals who want to "disagree but not be 
disagreeable" and "workers" in union jackets behind their lo
 cal banners? Do you really believe that is what a struggle for power is 
actually going to look like? More important, do you really believe that we did 
"back when" is going work now? With young people on the bring of lunacy in 
Black and Brown communities under jackboots of police occupations, with young 
women who now believe that they are threatened with sexual abuse and harassment 
without seeming impunity? With immigrant workers and their families feeling 
under threat of deportation; as the most desirable outcome in the face of right 
wing and police--and governmental--complicity? Or how about all us "aging 
radicals" along with our generations under the threat of poverty and misery as 
the social contract for the elderly and the infirm is shredded before our eyes?
Do you really believe that it will take all of us being "nice" and get along 
with each other to show that we are the "better people"?

I for one am with Michael and his generation. We Need To Fight and We Need To 
Fight Dirty and Mean and By Any Means Necessary.

But, please, by all means, continue with lovely turns of phrases and "strong 
economic analyses" demonstrating (sic) how much better educated you are than 
the monsters baring their teeth in front of us.
Perhaps you will create enough of a distraction so that the actual organized 
masses, led by the Michaels and Brandys, the Black Lives youth and the Dream 
Defenders can come behind or flank them. With swords drawn.

The "siempre" in La Victoria is about Amandla, not "speaking truth to power"

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

You people have to understand that the North Star operates on two 
levels, both as a journal like any other blog and as a networking tool 
to connect with young leftists. There are things about Michael Siebert 
that are not revealed in the brief description at the end of his piece 
that makes his participation essential as an activist involved with some 
of the most burning issues of the day. I could have found other aging 
radicals like me to write for North Star who would have met with your 
approval but I have another agenda.

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[Thomas via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

"Great minds have great faults."

Lord Macaulay; History Of England from the Accession Of James II [1848]

T

-Original Message-
>From: Gulf Mann via Marxism <marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu>
>Sent: Dec 1, 2016 4:50 PM
>To: Thomas F Barton <thomasfbar...@earthlink.net>
>Subject: Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition
>
>It is true, Bill, that sometime Louis's 3-pointers fall out of bounds,
>carried a bit too far by his tendency for sarcasm. But, overall, he is a
>good trooper.
>
>On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:28 PM, William Quimby via Marxism <
>marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Louis, that was a pretty shitty comment.
>>
>> - Bill
>>

>>
>_
>Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
>Set your options at: 
>http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/thomasfbarton%40earthlink.net
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[Gulf Mann via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

It is true, Bill, that sometime Louis's 3-pointers fall out of bounds,
carried a bit too far by his tendency for sarcasm. But, overall, he is a
good trooper.

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:28 PM, William Quimby via Marxism <
marxism@lists.csbs.utah.edu> wrote:

>   POSTING RULES & NOTES  
> #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
> #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
> #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
> *
>
> Louis, that was a pretty shitty comment.
>
> - Bill
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> _
> Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
> Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/opt
> ions/marxism/gulfmann%40gmail.com
>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition,

[DW via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

It's a crappy, immature article and Louis knows it. But he *adapted* to
some youth who wants to hurl insults at the ruling class as if this means
anything.  Reaching youth doesn't mean *adapting* to immature and the
childish insults of the Trump camp, which is what our 21 year old write on
northstar is advocating. In fact I'd say it's downright condescending to
*not* treat this young writer as an adult, which is what Louis is doing
here...and correct him. And that means calling him out.

I left my actual comments on the blog instead of posting them here.

David
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[William Quimby via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

Louis, that was a pretty shitty comment.

- Bill


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[wytheholt--- via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

The real problem is that this claptrap -- the use of over-the-top language, 
racist, sexist, homophobic, and maligning -- mirrors what is going on in the 
world of "journalism."  Insults and name-calling are getting built into regular 
"political" speech and commentary.  Anger and meanness suffuse all 
characterization.  This 21-year-old Montanan believes that, in the future, ONLY 
insulting name-calling prose will even be listened to.



 Louis Proyect via Marxism  wrote: 

More than any other buzzword, the term heard most throughout the 2016 
election cycle was “political correctness.” The American public was 
obsessed with the idea of words and their connotations — what was, and 
wasn’t okay to say. Republicans and the burgeoning far-right vehemently 
opposed the notion that any words were off-limits, and gleefully 
insulted their opposition with reckless abandon.

Curiously, liberals did not fight back. Instead, a smug sense of 
detachment came over the movement’s key voices, and a new set of rules 
for how to delegitimize conservative arguments arose. We could certainly 
call them racist, homophobic and xenophobic, but attacks on their 
appearance, for instance, were uncouth. Liberals were above the right’s 
vulgarity, and they would beat them based on the tenets of decency and 
our superior morality.

full: http://www.thenorthstar.info/?p=13012
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/wytheholt%40cox.net


_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

I wonder what you were writing 50 years ago that was so brilliant. North 
Star is trying to relate to young radicals not people like you who 
probably put their teeth in a jar before going to sleep at night.


On 12/1/16 2:25 PM, Dennis Brasky wrote:

What a stupid, immature, non-political article!

_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Re: [Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[Dennis Brasky via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

What a stupid, immature, non-political article!

>
> The left’s inability to meaningfully antagonize will allow those rising to
> power to continue to call them weak. The first steps toward truly combat
> the coming fascism must involve not just outspokenness and protest, but
> vulgarity and cruelty. It is not in our interest to humanize our enemies,
> because they are not human. Their near-cartoonish evil affects the entire
> world, and their concern for our feelings on the matter has proven to be
> nonexistent.
>


> Now is not the time to wonder if fat shaming Chris Christie is
> counterrevolutionary. When we discuss Steve Bannon, simply calling him a
> neo-Nazi will not do. He knows what he is — we must also call him a
> spineless, bloated, gas-filled corpse. Donald Trump is not merely orange,
> and calling him “Drumpf” will not phase him. He must instead be a
> repulsive, childish, damp, limp-dicked slimeball. We must ruthlessly mock
> their appearances, and disrespect them the way they disrespect us.
>
> full: http://www.thenorthstar.info/?p=13012
>
>
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

[Marxism] Fwd: No concern for the opposition

[Louis Proyect via Marxism]

  POSTING RULES & NOTES  
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*

More than any other buzzword, the term heard most throughout the 2016 
election cycle was “political correctness.” The American public was 
obsessed with the idea of words and their connotations — what was, and 
wasn’t okay to say. Republicans and the burgeoning far-right vehemently 
opposed the notion that any words were off-limits, and gleefully 
insulted their opposition with reckless abandon.


Curiously, liberals did not fight back. Instead, a smug sense of 
detachment came over the movement’s key voices, and a new set of rules 
for how to delegitimize conservative arguments arose. We could certainly 
call them racist, homophobic and xenophobic, but attacks on their 
appearance, for instance, were uncouth. Liberals were above the right’s 
vulgarity, and they would beat them based on the tenets of decency and 
our superior morality.


full: http://www.thenorthstar.info/?p=13012
_
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com