On Judging and not reading

NM nillo at SPAMtao.agoron.com
Sat Aug 28 01:38:45 MDT 1999




-----Original Message-----
From: Carrol Cox <cbcox at ilstu.edu>
To: marxism at lists.panix.com <marxism at lists.panix.com>
Date: Saturday, August 28, 1999 11:48 AM
Subject: Re: On Judging and not reading


>
>
>Xxxzx Xyyxyz wrote:
>
>> >rather than slapping their hands over their eyes and
>> >singing "LA LA LA I DON'T HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS I HAVE ALL THE ANSWERS
>> >ALREADY!!"
>
>Whoever wrote this should be condemned to an eternity of trying
>to read the collected Shakespearean criticism of the 20th century.


It  was me, and your consistent and obviously deliberate misrepresentation
of my position is digusting.  Stop it.

>Those who make statements such as that quoted above are
>either liars or braindead. They must know that they have
>failed to read an enormous amount of material that they
>nevertheless reject as false.


Lying about what?  it is hardly my fault that you are obviously too stupid
to tell the difference between my position, which is:

When Person A says "Hi I am interested in 1" Person B should *not* shriek,
"Wrecker! Splitter! Liar!  I know all about 8 and 1 must be just like 8,
even though I know nothing about 1!!!" and Persons C-E shouldn't respond to
Person A with "1 is irrelevant, 8 is all we need to know! Anyone who says
'read 1 must be ready to read 1-1000000000000000000!"

and what you insist is my opinion (apparently, "Everyone should read
1-1000000000000000"

[Carroll's worthless rant snipped]

Here is something for you to read.  Look up the definition of "straw man"
and report back on why you insist on using it, rather than dealing seriously
with the issue.  Also, explain why you like to kidnap children and train
them to be Nazis on an Argentinian grape farm.  I have no information about
you doing this, of course, but durnit, you just said I can have opinions
without information.










More information about the Marxism mailing list