My remarks aside, why it may not come.

Post #133,245 by mmoffitt 1/2/04 12:01:03 PM Reply	My remarks aside, why it may not come. Marx himself once observed that "revolution may not be necessary in England because of the Anglo-Saxon sense of fair play." While I agree that our famous "send of fair play" has been greatly diminished over (especially) the last 25 years, I also have the nagging feeling that revolution never comes unless enough of the People are hungry. We, due to our geographic position, have an abundance of food. I doubt that enough of us will ever be hungry enough to mount a revolution. bcnu, Mikem I don't do third world languages. So no, I don't do Java.
Post #133,246 by drewk 1/2/04 12:04:47 PM Reply	Not quite The way I heard it is that revolution comes from the middle class. The poor are too busy trying to find their next meal. The rich like things how they are. Revolution comes when the middle class realize that the rich are trying to turn them into the poor. === Implicitly condoning stupidity since 2001.
Post #133,250 by mmoffitt 1/2/04 12:09:43 PM Reply	Proletariat != middle class. An argument heard often is that Marxism failed because in the West because it failed to predict the rise of the middle class. But, in the new millenium, perhaps equality will hold and you'll be right about the revolution. When I think of the "worker's class" I think of what is called "the working poor". We may well be on the rapid path to turning the middle class into the working poor - and that, I grant you, would cause a revolution. bcnu, Mikem I don't do third world languages. So no, I don't do Java.

Welcome to IWETHEY!