determinism

[R]

sorry to have let you down, tahir.   did the best i could, as i've never 
claimed to be as knowledgeable about marxism as carrol or yoshie, et al, 
for example.   there's been so much conversation on this board addressing 
your question that i think the subject's pretty well covered.  don't you?

i do appreciate your asking, though.

R

At 11:42 AM 7/1/2002 +0200, you wrote:


>  also, R wants to point out that a considerate member of
>this message board asked him to expand on his original "laconic" statement
>about determinism, which willingly (or willfully, to use your term) R did.
>
>
>Actually R, although I appreciate the "considerate" tag (you are too 
>kind), I didn't detect a response to my question about "determinism" in 
>Karl Marx. You raised a lot of stuff about dogmatism and adherence to the 
>holy texts of dead guys, which are entirely valid issues, but I didn't see 
>a response about the determinism issue. Is it still forthcoming? I'm 
>genuinely interested.
>Tahir