--- Nathan Newman <nathan at newman.org> wrote: > ----- Original Message -----
>
> My argument was one of politically provocative analogy of China to those
> identified states historically known as fascist. I find any social science
> attempt to formulate some "objective" definition of fascism outside of the
> whole complex of rhetorical, economic and social meanings of the term to be
> a pretty fruitless goal.
Not wanting to be more of a dick than strictly necessary here, but does "I find" in this sentence have its natural meaning of "I have looked at them, and I found them to be so", or is it just a misleading euphemism for "I believe without having looked at them, but realise that it's going to look pretty weak to say so". Sorry and all that, but I've got one of Griffin's books on Fascism (the excellent Oxford Reader), and it kind of chafes me to see the amount of work he's put into the question dismissed lihe that.
"Marxism" has a whole complex of rhetorical, economic and social meanings, as do "health", "wealth" and "freedom". And, for that matter, pretty much any word worth arguing about. But that doesn't alter the fact that some of these uses are *wrong*.
dd
>
===== ... in countries which do not enjoy Mediterranean sunshine idleness is more difficult, and a great public propaganda will be required to inaugurate it. -- Bertrand Russell
____________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie