Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: $Revision: 1.6.2.16 $; site inmet.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!bbnccv!inmet!janw
From: janw@inmet.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics.theory
Subject: Re: Re: The myth of Allied invasion of
Message-ID: <28200260@inmet.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 2-Nov-85 20:03:00 EST
Article-I.D.: inmet.28200260
Posted: Sat Nov  2 20:03:00 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 5-Nov-85 21:30:45 EST
References: <28200256@inmet.UUCP>
Lines: 24
Nf-ID: #R:inmet:28200256:inmet:28200260:000:994
Nf-From: inmet!janw    Nov  2 20:03:00 1985


/* Written 12:44 pm  Nov  2, 1985 by janw@inmet.UUCP in inmet:net.politics */
> [Gabor Fencsik {ihnp4,dual,hplabs,intelca}!qantel!gabor ]
> [answering <50400001@hpcnof.UUCP> Larry Bruns]

I believe Gabor's points to be both true  and profound.
(I don't know Gabor, but I've never seen an article of his that
was not worth re-reading).

Let me add this. 
Though hypotheses in "alternative history" are unverifiable,
it is quite likely that, without Communism, the Russian empire
would have fallen apart. All the others did (count:
Austro-Hungary, Britain, France, Holland, Belgium, Portugal,
Spain...). This one survived, and spread, and keeps spreading.

Communism provided it (1) with an incomparable machinery 
of power and (2) with a supranational, internationalist
ideology, acceptable to the ruling class of subject lands.
It also (3) made economic gain secondary to power gain, so
the empire needn't be cost effective to exist.

		Jan Wasilewsky
/* End of text from inmet:net.politics */