elijahcraig
13th June 2004, 23:36
As I have been restricted, once again, I suppose I"ll post my replies here:
Elijah, you're a bright kid who reads philosophy...are you telling us now that you can't tell the difference between the abstract definition of a term that could be found in any dictionary and its real political meaning in revolutionary politics? And that you actually think the dictionary definition is "superior"?
I am saying I do not accept your definition, but Stalin’s.
What flaws? If someone is an "ultra-leftist", does that mean they "must" have "flaws" that they are "concealing"?
Yes. Marx, Lenin, and Stalin (and Mao) all showed these. Lenin didn’t call ultraleftism an infantile disorder for nothing.
As to "boosting" their "power", how so? Ultra-leftists usually advocate more power be shared with ordinary workers, not less -- both within the party and in future society.
I mean their ideology, what they do in favor of themselves and at the cost of the workers usually occurs with no knowledge of.
By the way, while quite a few folks have commented on Elijah's propensity for the insult direct -- "billy buttcrack" for example -- has anyone besides me noticed that he only does this when his views have been clearly refuted in a discussion?
You haven’t refuted anything—you made up a definition to seat good with your purposes and arguments. It’s merely the construction of a false term in order to argue against me. I am using the definition used by most communists. You also don’t support dialectics, so you aren’t exactly in line with Marxism.
And how am I being defeated? You have stated arguments, dense and ridiculous as always, and I have stated my replies. I have high doubts as to whether you actually read the essay, though it probably wouldn’t matter.
Elijah, you're a bright kid who reads philosophy...are you telling us now that you can't tell the difference between the abstract definition of a term that could be found in any dictionary and its real political meaning in revolutionary politics? And that you actually think the dictionary definition is "superior"?
I am saying I do not accept your definition, but Stalin’s.
What flaws? If someone is an "ultra-leftist", does that mean they "must" have "flaws" that they are "concealing"?
Yes. Marx, Lenin, and Stalin (and Mao) all showed these. Lenin didn’t call ultraleftism an infantile disorder for nothing.
As to "boosting" their "power", how so? Ultra-leftists usually advocate more power be shared with ordinary workers, not less -- both within the party and in future society.
I mean their ideology, what they do in favor of themselves and at the cost of the workers usually occurs with no knowledge of.
By the way, while quite a few folks have commented on Elijah's propensity for the insult direct -- "billy buttcrack" for example -- has anyone besides me noticed that he only does this when his views have been clearly refuted in a discussion?
You haven’t refuted anything—you made up a definition to seat good with your purposes and arguments. It’s merely the construction of a false term in order to argue against me. I am using the definition used by most communists. You also don’t support dialectics, so you aren’t exactly in line with Marxism.
And how am I being defeated? You have stated arguments, dense and ridiculous as always, and I have stated my replies. I have high doubts as to whether you actually read the essay, though it probably wouldn’t matter.