>>> kelley <oudies at flash.net> 10/08/99 11:58AM >>>
ooops...
then spare me. and yourselves!
(((((((((((
Charles: I think you are trying to be a censor.
((((((((((((
but really, i can't believe it's just about who has a better marxist analysis. doesn't strike me as one of ange's usual obsessions. chaz, yes.
ange no. speaking of obsessions, chaz you know you complain because others [ange and ted] condescend to you, well i'm afraid that i think you have a tendency to condescend to women. you don't seem to do it to me, though you once did. i suppose that this is because you 'n' i share some similarities with regard to philosophy of social science, so maybe you respect me or something. or mebbe you just like my slutty humor. dunno. don't care.
((((((((((((
Charles: Slutty ? I thought you were a nun (Mother Superior) obsessed with controlling people's posts based on religious dogma and Catholic ethnocentrism.
I wouldn't say Angela condescends. She misrepresents.
(((((((((((((
but again,i'd really like to know why this matters. what difference does it make. serious quesiton and i'd like serious answer. oh and while i'm thinking of it: no duh! ange, theory doesn't dictate practice. but it must shape it, have an impact, affect it... somehowerother or you wouldn't be bumming over differences like this. so.
(((((((((((((
Charles: There is no requirement that e-mail posts matter a lot or make a big difference. What seems to be forbidden is flaming.
However, this particular exchange started with Angela calling for analysis of the relationship between nation-states and surplus value. I commented that I think that there is more of a link between Marx's analysis of surplus-value and today's nation-states than she allowed, and it is in in part Lenin's analysis of imperialism and other subsequent analyses. So, if you think these issues are important, then these would be how these posts matter.
Then the posts got into whether I had discussed surplus value and labor power in analyzing the war on Yugoslavia.
CB