In response to:

For the Love of Marx

Zerubbabel Wrote: Apr 05, 2012 4:22 PM
When the "varying degrees" vary greatly it is worth noting. When people want to emphasize this variable because it buttresses their bias they recognize this. When people want to downplay the variable because it hurts their bias they suddenly become as Solomon, "There's nothing new under the sun." If I were to adopt your thinking I would deny that there was anything at all significant about the industrial revolution and its aftermath. The enlightenment was all done many times before. Christianity added nothing to humanity. Space travel, computers, organ transplants? Please that is all sooo "same old, same old."
Zerubbabel Wrote: Apr 07, 2012 10:33 AM
Why thank you very much! You have granted me the first of Schopenhauer's three phases of truth, ridicule. The next would be fierce opposition or actual refutation. generally speaking TH'ers just can't get past first base; as they head for second they realize that it requires effort.
calhoun211 Wrote: Apr 07, 2012 7:19 AM

There are more Marxists teaching in Sociology Departments in America than living in the former Soviet Union. These sociologists hold themselves out as scientists despite the fact that they fail consistently in their efforts to predict the future. In fact, most of them lack the competence to accurately predict the past. Among the least competent and most intellectually dishonest is Gary L. Faulkner, Professor Emeritus from the University of North Carolina.

Faulkner recently claimed that Marx predicted the events we are seeing in the Occupy Wall Street movement. He also claimed that events from the 20th Century bolster the credibility of...

Thursday, May 23 | 04:06 PM ET
Thursday, May 23 | 04:06 PM ET
Thursday, May 23 | 04:06 PM ET
Thursday, May 23 | 04:06 PM ET