Re: [Marxism] '...ists' or '...ites' (Was Conspiracy and History)

2010-01-14 Thread waistline2
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == In a message dated 1/13/2010 6:14:30 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,

Re: [Marxism] '...ists' or '...ites' (Was Conspiracy and History)

2010-01-13 Thread sobuadhaigh
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Paul wrote: The term 'Stalinite' was used occasionally in the 1930s in a hostile

Re: [Marxism] '...ists' or '...ites' (Was Conspiracy and History)

2010-01-13 Thread Mark Lause
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Of course, who's sure what Leninist means? Much less Marxist-Leninist. :-) As has

Re: [Marxism] '...ists' or '...ites' (Was Conspiracy and History)

2010-01-13 Thread Carrol Cox
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Lenin, of course, was not a Leninist and certainly not a Marxist-Leninist. Both

Re: [Marxism] '...ists' or '...ites' (Was Conspiracy and History)

2010-01-13 Thread Carrol Cox
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == But beyond the regamarole of the pseudo-theroies (Leninism, Stalinism, Trotskyism

Re: [Marxism] '...ists' or '...ites' (Was Conspiracy and History)

2010-01-13 Thread S. Artesian
== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. == Yes, let's get beyond the rigamarole and the simple-minded Are We Happy Yet?