>
> i'm confused? is this a flame peter? are you telling me i'm
> wrong? huh? well FOAD. :) </teasing>
>
> anyway, i am confused as to your meaing. i said *used to be*. i recall
> that when the list first started it seemed like everyone was being
> denounced as "bourgeois liberal". i can't tell now because i'm too
> involved in the list to see it, if it is there at all.
My meaning was that is some of the change because the composition of the list has changed, with the kind of people who throw epithets like that around vanishing. (When I subscribed to LBO-talk, I set up a mail filter which puts it all into a particular folder, but deletes all messages from a particular set of people before filing it away) If the opponents of the "bourgeois liberals" are gone, does that mean we're left with "bourgeois liberals"?
<accusing stare>Are you actually a bourgeois liberal?</accusing stare>
Maybe the success of LBO-talk is due, in part, to the fact that no one knows what exactly Doug believes (probably including himself). From time to time he debunks the cherished beliefs of just about everyone on the list - so we're probably just a bunch of intellectual masochists.
Peter who also isn't quite sure what he believes (but adopts labels from time to time for convenience's sake) -- Peter van Heusden <pvh at egenetics.com> NOTE: I do not speak for my employer, Electric Genetics "Criticism has torn up the imaginary flowers from the chain not so that man shall wear the unadorned, bleak chain but so that he will shake off the chain and pluck the living flower." - Karl Marx, 1844