[lbo-talk] Progress and Cariucature (Was Re: Catholicism. . . )

andie nachgeborenen andie_nachgeborenen at yahoo.com
Mon Dec 15 09:38:45 PST 2008


That's one way of dismissing an argument. Shane, you're starting to lose it. That's style, man, style.

--- On Mon, 12/15/08, Shane Mage <shmage at pipeline.com> wrote:


> From: Shane Mage <shmage at pipeline.com>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Progress and Cariucature (Was Re: Catholicism. . . )
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Monday, December 15, 2008, 10:39 AM
> On Dec 15, 2008, at 11:21 AM, Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> >
> > On Dec 15, 2008, at 6:35 AM, Michael Smith wrote:
> >
> >> He certainly hated capitalism. But his
> justification
> >> for expropriating the expropriators isn't
> founded
> >> on the immorality of the latter, is it? That
> would
> >> presuppose some moral framework (founded on what?)
> >> existing over and above or outside of the
> historical
> >> dialectic.
> >
> > So what's behind an outburst like: "If money,
> According to Augier, 'comes into the world with a
> congenital blood-stain on one cheek,' capital comes
> dripping from head to foot, from every pore, with blood and
> dirt"? Detached scientific observation?
> >
> Style, man. Style.
>
>
> Shane Mage
>
> > This cosmos did none of gods or men make, but it
> > always was and is and shall be: an everlasting fire,
> > kindling in measures and going out in measures."
> >
> > Herakleitos of Ephesos
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list