In message <000501bee916$56595540$68ac10cb at rcollins>, rc-am
<rcollins at netlink.com.au> writes
>on the citations of greens:
>
>these would be 'associated tendencies' would they not? the fransiscans
>were both a response otoh to the gluttony of the church and, otoh, to
>the rampaging mobs who killed fat priests and looted the churches. the
>fransiscans got to stay around, with the sponsorship of some king whose
>name eludes me, to preach the virtues of poverty to the masses whilst
>decrying the latter as a sin. looks pretty much the same to me. but
>are there any socialist tendencies which operate the same? even
>socialism, to which i don't in any case s/bscribe to, argues for the
>(re)distribution of wealth, even if it doesn't include murdering paunchy
>bishops.
>
>Angela
>_________
>
>
>
-- Jim heartfield