Re: [OPE-L] you don't call this a flame?

From: Fred Moseley (fmoseley@MTHOLYOKE.EDU)
Date: Mon Dec 04 2006 - 22:21:45 EST

Jerry, I am sorry, but no, I don't see this as a flame.
This is one of the posts that I focused on.  It seems to me that R.
calls your argument
that forms of primitive communism can be found in non-humans
to be racist.  He claims that there is scholarly backing
for this call.  I don't agree with R's argument, but it
is not totally crazy.  I think it can be answered.
Why not answer it with additional argument, rather than
calling it a flame?

Please explain what in this post is a flame.

What do others think?


P.S.  jerry, I am sure that you have exercised tremendous
restraint in not responding to all of R's provocations,
and I appreciate that very much.  I just have a hard time defending
this as a flame.

Quoting Jerry Levy <>:


This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Dec 31 2006 - 00:00:04 EST