[lbo-talk] Irrelevance to Marxism of defending Marxism and/or Marx was

[Mike Ballard]

CB in answering CC wrote: 

Discussion of the role of Marxism in the U.S. Civil War is not 
proving Marxism good in the abstract. It is proving it good in the concrete, a
concrete reality that might be important to the race of people 
liberated by the Civil War. It a very concrete , not abstract example.  It's
sort of using the historical practice of the Civil War to "open eyes" in the
present....

References to Marxism in actual historical practice are not abstract
references.

************
Yeah, what's wrong with a little historical materialism every once in awhile?

I found the bits about Marx, Engels and Weedie-baby pretty interesting, in
terms of the bearded ones actual political praxis.

Is history only relevent when we write about recent scheme/scams of that 
useless class (the landlords) in NYC or how the weak-as-water Democrats
are/have been/will be to organizing and raising the ante in the class struggle?

Best,
Mike B)

Read "The Perthian Brickburner":
http://profiles.yahoo.com/swillsqueal

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com