Nazism and Slavery

[Carl Remick]

Re Charles':  "I think some on this thread who are
questioing the historical necessity of
the Civil War do so in a pacifist 
and life saving spirit. However, the
argument between pacifism and
revolutionism is old. Marxist revolutionists
look at history and are skeptical about
the possibility of displacing an exploiting
ruling class without some use of force.
The aim is to minmize it, but the counter
revolution is a general phenomenon in
actual history. So, realists, pragmatists
prepare for the worst in strategy with a contingency 
plan for fighting AND an alternative
contingency (and hope !)
for peaceful revolutionary transition
for once, finally."

Hear, hear!  IMO, the greatest thing the left has going for it is
superior morality -- a strength that is immediately compromised, at the
very least, the minute violence enters the picture.  Certainly in the
sixties, the left  squandered whatever opportunity it had to recruit
mass support because of occasional loose talk in support of violent
tactics as well as actual isolated use of violence -- factors that were
all gifts to Nixon, Agnew, Mitchell & Associates.  Apart from morality,
there is also a very practical consideration -- the right will always
have more guns, and what's the use of suicidal gestures?   And even if
you're "successful" in using violence, the law of unintended
consequences can be expected to take a horrific toll; you just never
know how the effects of a war will play out, either in the immediate
aftermath or generations later.

Carl Remick