Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site unmvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!houxm!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!cmcl2!lanl!unmvax!cliff
From: cliff@unmvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: No, but my favorite color is pink
Message-ID: <609@unmvax.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 26-Jan-85 05:28:51 EST
Article-I.D.: unmvax.609
Posted: Sat Jan 26 05:28:51 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 30-Jan-85 05:36:10 EST
References: <313@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP>
Organization: Univ. of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Lines: 67

RC informs us of the importance of his posting:

>Anyone who wishes to refer to socialism in net.politics and ignores the
>article below (and the *Communist Manifesto*) does so at his peril.  You
>have been warned.  

RC then tells us that socialism was was considered the intermediate step
between capitalism and communism.

>The modern socialist movement dates from the publication in 1848 of *The
>Communist Manifesto* by Marx and Engels.
			...
>To them
[Marx and Engels]
>it
[Socialism]
>was first and foremost a negation of capitalism which would develop its
>own positive identity (communism) through a long revolutionary process in
>which the proletariat would remake society and in so doing remake itself.
			...
>Society will then enter what Marx called "the higher stage of
>communist society", under which the state will wither away, a totally
>different attitude to work will prevail, and society will be able to
>inscribe on its banner the motto "from each according to his ability, to
>each according to his need."
			...
>"what is usually called socialism was termed by Marx the `first' or lower
>phase of communist society", and this usage was thereafter recognized or
>adopted by practically all who regard themselves as Marxists.

Then he explains that people can call themselves socialist or communist without
any inconsistency.  He is a self professed socialist.

>This explains
>why individuals or parties can without any inconsistency call themselves
>either socialist or communist, depending on whether they wish to emphasize
>the immediate or the ultimate goal of their revolutionary endeavors.
			...
>Richard Carnes, ihnp4!gargoyle!carnes

So I ask the question the obvious question:
	"So are you a communist or not?"

RC gets upset and stamps his feet:

>Subject: No, but my favorite color is pink
>Why do you want to know, Cliff?  Are you keeping a list?

>	He's got a little list
>	(They'll none of them be missed)...

>I am not now, nor have I ever been, a member of any communist party.  What I
>am is a communist DUPE, Cliff -- get the difference?  I advise everyone to
>get hold of a copy of *Masters of Deceit* by J. Edgar Hoover, the noted
>political philosopher.  Hoover exposes all of my fallacies, sophistries, and
>outright lies.  You can't be too careful with someone like me on the net.

OK.  I get it.  People can call themselves socialist or communist depending
on what they want to emphasize.  Of course if you ever ask the wrong person
who is a self professed socialist whether he is a communist you can expect a
petty piece of sarcasm.  Why should I read *Masters of Deceit* when your
original article was sufficiently enlightening?

	--Cliff [Matthews]
	{purdue, cmcl2, ihnp4}!lanl!unmvax!cliff
	{csu-cs, pur-ee, convex, gatech, ucbvax}!unmvax!cliff
	4744 Trumbull S.E. - Albuquerque  NM  87108 - (505) 265-9143