[Marxism] Walter has a point, Alarcon is dead right!

Mike Friedman mikedf at mail.amnh.org
Thu Aug 12 09:01:56 MDT 2004


Fred, your assertions cited below strike me as a bit disingenuous, and 
besides the point. The statement that "Kerry would have gone to war against 
Iraq" is factual: he did go to war against Iraq. As Congressman, as a 
member of government, he supported the war. And the statement that, as 
president, he will continue the war, promote repressive legislation, etc., 
is, of course, a hypothesis. As with any good hypothesis, it is based on 
evidence -- Kerry's statements, his platform, past experience, etc. You 
don't propose a hypothesis *unless* it possesses some evidentiary 
underpinning (an understatement, in this case...). Of course, only an 
actual Kerry presidency will corroborate or falsify this hypothesis, but 
that doesn't render it useless as a guide to action. Your argumentation is 
remarkably Popperian: "Kerry is the devil we cannot yet know as president"!

Mike


is This, Fred, is not strictly true. As with any hypothesis, it is a 
statement based on

At 09:46 AM 8/12/2004, you wrote:



>John. That is why the endless debate  over whether Kerry would have gone
>to war against Iraq is a waste of time.  Kerry says so, I can give many
>reasons for thinking so, but noone will ever be able to  prove it.
>Meanwhile, it remains Bush's war as president and commander in chief
>until he leaves office. Kerry is campaigning to make it his war in the
>full sense, but he cannot do that without winning the election.
>
>Similarly, noone can prove that Kerry won't be "better" in this or that
>respect.  You can scientifically show the fact that he will continue the
>core policies, but only experience will prove it.  Bush is the devil we
>know as president.  Kerry is the devil we cannot yet know as president.





More information about the Marxism mailing list