Should we allow philosophy to destroy our faith in the revolution?

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

BTB:

Well I don't call it my core theory.

Then, this is just one more area where you differ from Engels, Plekhanov, Lenin, Trotsky, Cliff, Harman, Callinicos...

Anyway, there's nowt wrong with being 'in development' - in fact its a core facet of the dialectic.

1) When I try this excuse, you object.

2) How do you know that "it's a core facet of the dialectic" if you haven't 'developed' yet?

3) It's a core facet of prevarication, too.

Now you're just being cruel and if I didn't have a serious drug habit, I'd take exception to that.

We already know you have a serious drug habit: the opiate of 'dialectics'.

[Hit The North]

R:

2) How do you know that "it's a core facet of the dialectic" if you haven't 'developed' yet?

I don't expect to be 'developed', only 'developing'. it's an open dialectic.

We already know you have a serious drug habit: the opiate of 'dialectics'.

It's not as good as heroin. But, then, what is?

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

BTB:

it's an open dialectic.

Once more, how do you know if you haven't 'developed' enough yet?

It's not as good as heroin. But, then, what is?

Doesn't need to be; all that is required is that it provides you with the consolation you need for the fact that Dialectical Marxism is such an abject and long-term failure.

[Hit The North]

R:

Once more, how do you know if you haven't 'developed' enough yet?

Good point.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

BTB:

Good point.

Once more, how do you know this is 'good point' if you are still in the developmental stage?

[Hit The North]

Another good point.

[Rosa Lichtenstein]

BTB:

Another good point.

For a non-'developed' mystic, you seem to know a lot.