Re: [Marxism] Red-tail hawk sighting

[Alan Bradley <alanb1000@xxxxxxxxx>]

From: Haines Brown
> (1) Everyone is concerned with their "material
> conditions". We depend on materials that are
> available in our environment and on environmental
> stability. This only amounts to the simple statement
> that we depend on our environment. It has absolutely
> nothing to do with Marxism. It is just a very
> simplistic example of functionalism.

I'm a little puzzled about what you consider Marxism
to be.

> (3) I find your comment (3) hard to fathom. ...
> This may be true in religious terms, but hardly
> seems Marxist and hardly seems scientific. 

I will happily admit to having no interest in
bloodless and inhuman forms of "Marxism". Ultimately,
it's about people.

My comment was intended to lay stress on this.

> Marx and the classic Marxists said virtually 
> nothing about the natural environment for
> obvious reasons. 

Incorrect. Louis has addressed this.

> Contemporary Marxists say little if anything
> about it, although hopefully I'm wrong here. 

Thankfully, you are wrong.

> Whenever I've feebly attempted such an integration
> of environment and Marxism, people don't understand
> why I bother or think it only an irrelevant
> diversion.

Once again, I'm not quite sure what you consider
Marxism to be.


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate 
in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367

________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism