andie nachgeborenen wrote:
>
> Apparantly you are not familiar with how the word
> "liberalism" is used in Anglo-American philosophical,
> political theory, and legal theiry circles, e.g., by
> Rawls. No matter. But this battle is getting boring.
I understand the usage, and I don't want to argue about words, but I will say that there is something a bit odd about insisting to use a word in a context where it is certain to be misunderstood to begin with, and to generate boring (as you say) conversation.
Charles, you often insist (correctly) that for marxists theory and practice are united; but I don't think your application is always correct. That unity implies that we always _start_ with the practice. In the present thread you are beginning with Justin's _words_ and ignoring his practice.
Justin's practice (overlooking the digression in to ABB, which he shares with the CPUSA*) has been rather consistently in harmony with the practice one would expect, _under present conditions_, of a committed socialist.
Carrol
*Hence, any condemnation of Justin's practice is doubly a condemnation of the CP.