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 */