[lbo-talk] China

[Michael Dawson]

See, Doug:  The real radical just doesn't bother explaining "individuals,"
political parties, or actual cases of social change.  Such things are
inscrutable at best, see?  And none of them are even mentioned in the Theses
on Feuerbach!  After all, doesn't that guy condemn merely "describing" the
world?  And if Mao can't have a crystal ball, why should we mere peons
expect to make one?

-----Original Message-----
From: lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org [mailto:lbo-talk-bounces at lbo-talk.org]
On Behalf Of Doug Henwood
Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2004 3:02 PM
To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
Subject: [lbo-talk] China

Carrol Cox wrote:


>Why do you want one? The Chinese people struggled, but, for the present,
>they have lost. Simple enough. What good is an explanation, except
>perhaps for antiquarians of the future? It seems a commonplace enough
>matter that most revolutions lose. Why should one expect otherwise?
>Human history is not a Dick & Jane reader.

Wow, an early approximation of an answer. So the failure is just one 
of those things? It had nothing to do with China's level of 
development or the structure of the Chinese CP? Nothing to be learned 
for the future? Is this just another way of saying shit happens?

Doug
___________________________________
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk