From: owner-ammf-digest@smoe.org (alt.music.moxy-fruvous digest) To: ammf-digest@smoe.org Subject: alt.music.moxy-fruvous digest V14 #3710 Reply-To: ammf@fruvous.com Sender: owner-ammf-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-ammf-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk alt.music.moxy-fruvous digest Wednesday, March 4 2020 Volume 14 : Number 3710 Today's Subjects: ----------------- These 2 Items Would Make Our Founding Fathers Proud ["Trump 2020 Stiletto] Copper fusion technology and 15 mmHg of compression ["copper fusion techn] America's most trusted and largest resource for Government & Police ["Imm] Enjoy Dating on your terms ["SeekingArrangement" ] Learn the secrets before they find a way to hide them forever. ["Casino D] Congratulations, Youāve been nominated for inclusion ["*Joan Riley*" <*Jo] Irritability and fatigue due to sleep disorders ["NeckRelax" ] We are here to help you and want to see you make it! ["Casino Destroyer" ] This Could End Trumpās Presidency ["Trumps Presidency" Subject: These 2 Items Would Make Our Founding Fathers Proud These 2 Items Would Make Our Founding Fathers Proud http://resqribble.us/AxyH8hvP_4s9KhPqdastj3-dRdEaePEJqBWx5xqxq5NPvV_M http://resqribble.us/GEde5S8dDQyVM9WlVeHqUwTwQrdSRoo_suPdC9f-mVVXdl5v In the Enlightenment period (1700s to 1800s), literary criticism became more popular. During this time period literacy rates started to rise in the public; no longer was reading exclusive for the wealthy or scholarly. With the rise of the literate public and swiftness of printing, criticism arose too. Reading was no longer viewed solely as educational or as a sacred source of religion; it was a form of entertainment. Literary criticism was influenced by the values and stylistic writing, including clear, bold, precise writing and the more controversial criteria of the author's religious beliefs. These critical reviews were published in many magazines, newspapers, and journals. Many works of Jonathan Swift were criticized including his book Gulliver's Travels, which one critic described as "the detestable story of the Yahoos". 19th-century Romantic criticism The British Romantic movement of the early nineteenth century introduced new aesthetic ideas to literary studies, including the idea that the object of literature need not always be beautiful, noble, or perfect, but that literature itself could elevate a common subject to the level of the sublime. German Romanticism, which followed closely after the late development of German classicism, emphasized an aesthetic of fragmentation that can appear startlingly modern to the reader of English literature, and valued Witz b that is, "wit" or "humor" of a certain sort b more highly than the serious Anglophone Romanticism. The late nineteenth century brought renown to authors known more for their literary criticism than for their own literary work, such as Matthew Arnold. The New Criticism However important all of these aesthetic movements were as antecedents, current ideas about literary criticism derive almost entirely from the new direction taken in the early twentieth century. Early in the century the school of criticism known as Russian Formalism, and slightly later the New Criticism in Britain and in the United States, came to dominate the study and discussion of literature, in the English-speaking world. Both schools emphasized the close reading of texts, elevating it far above generalizing discussion and speculation about either authorial intention (to say nothing of the author's psychology or biography, which became almost taboo subjects) or reader response. This emphasis on form and precise attention to "the words themselves" has persisted, after the decline of these critical doctrines themselves. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 08:25:16 -0500 From: "copper fusion technology" Subject: Copper fusion technology and 15 mmHg of compression Copper fusion technology and 15 mmHg of compression http://copperwind.buzz/_W9Oe1nl8w0xsqXdbw5y2V_H0OrlH-1ILJhrQKxDGcO32Q http://copperwind.buzz/sUvvM2CpW-MnXMOt49Oa9mNa1VkRlAA-R-hG3uTN_ZK_vQ In 1930, while residing in Budapest, LukC!cs was summoned to Moscow. This coincided with the signing of a Viennese police order for his expulsion. Leaving their children to attend their studies, LukC!cs and his wife ventured to Moscow in March 1930. Soon after his arrival, LukC!cs was "prevented" from leaving and assigned to work alongside David Riazanov ("in the basement") at the MarxbEngels Institute. LukC!cs returned to Berlin in 1931 and in 1933 he once again left Berlin for Moscow to attend the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences. During this time, LukC!cs first came into contact with the works of the young Marx. LukC!cs and his wife were not permitted to leave the Soviet Union until after the Second World War. During Stalin's Great Purge, Lukacs was sent to internal exile in Tashkent for a time, where he and Johannes Becher became friends. LukC!cs survived the purges of the Great Terror, which claimed the lives of an estimated 80% of the Hungarian C)migrC)s in the Soviet Union[citation needed]. There is much debate among historians concerning the extent to which LukC!cs accepted Stalinism. In 1945, LukC!cs and his wife returned to Hungary. As a member of the Hungarian Communist Party, he took part in establishing the new Hungarian government. From 1945 LukC!cs was a member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Between 1945 and 1946 he strongly criticised non-communist philosophers and writers. LukC!cs has been accused of playing an "administrative" (legal-bureaucratic) role in the removal of independent and non-communist intellectuals such as BC)la Hamvas, IstvC!n BibC3, Lajos ProhC!szka, and KC!roly KerC)nyi from Hungarian academic life. Between 1946 and 1953, many non-communist intellectuals, including BibC3, were imprisoned or forced into menial work or manual labour. LukC!cs's personal aesthetic and political position on culture was always that socialist culture would eventually triumph in terms of quality. He thought it should play out in terms of competing cultures, not by "administrative" measures. In 1948b49 LukC!cs's position for cultural tolerance was smashed in a "LukC!cs purge," when MC!tyC!s RC!kosi turned his famous salami tactics on the Hungarian Communist Party. In the mid-1950s, LukC!cs was reintegrated into party life. The party used him to help purge the Hungarian Writers' Union in 1955b1956. TamC!s AczC)l and Tibor MC)ray (former Secretaries of the Hungarian Writer ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 09:07:12 -0500 From: "Immediate Access" Subject: America's most trusted and largest resource for Government & Police America's most trusted and largest resource for Government & Police http://boostfit.buzz/AGdzz41ZKE1sMOTXcoyQSqIFR_XZOd1yEgVa34Utnp3pYTtB http://boostfit.buzz/dQHiOxGp7yybOLoM1RNplgaYubjPXfhsE_YSV2bjMW7erq-- Original guitarist Slovak's style was strongly based on blues and funk. Slovak was primarily influenced by hard rock artists such as Hendrix, Kiss and Led Zeppelin. His playing method was highly based on improvisation, a style commonly used in funk music. He also was noted for his aggressive playing style; he would often play with such force, that his fingers would "come apart". Kiedis observed that his playing evolved during his time away from the group in What Is This?, with Slovak adopting a more fluid style featuring "sultry" elements as opposed to his original hard rock techniques. On The Uplift Mofo Party Plan (1987), Slovak experimented with genres outside of traditional funk music including reggae and speed metal. His guitar riffs would often serve as the basis of the group's songs, with the other members writing their parts to complement his guitar work. His melodic riff featured in the song "Behind the Sun" inspired the group to create "pretty" songs with an emphasis on melody. Kiedis describes the song as "pure Hillel inspiration". Slovak also used a talk box on songs such as "Green Heaven" and "Funky Crime", in which he would sing into a tube while playing to create psychedelic effects. Navarro brought his own sound to the band during his tenure, with his style based on heavy metal, progressive rock and psychedelia. Klinghoffer's style employed a wide range of his own unconventional guitar effects and vocal treatments. In his debut Chili Peppers album, I'm with You (2011), he focused heavily on producing a textured, emotional sound to complement the vocals and atmosphere of each song. He has stated that he is a huge fan of jazz and funk, which does express itself in many of the album's tracks ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 04:11:55 -0500 From: "SeekingArrangement" Subject: Enjoy Dating on your terms Enjoy Dating on your terms http://highshoval.biz/8chdfmVJlHtRtS7-VVWwYCKvyD5vfGDex3hJh0DoUHryhqTK http://highshoval.biz/e3Icz_SY-tU4ypld4LgBqd_f2ZPNxNia72kvDvEGBNI4OxHo In 1957 Northrop Frye published the influential Anatomy of Criticism. In his works Frye noted that some critics tend to embrace an ideology, and to judge literary pieces on the basis of their adherence to such ideology. This has been a highly influential viewpoint among modern conservative thinkers. E. Michael Jones, for example, argues in his Degenerate Moderns that Stanley Fish was influenced by his own adulterous affairs to reject classic literature that condemned adultery. JC Subject: Are you still drinking Apple Cider Vinegar? Are you still drinking Apple Cider Vinegar? http://copperwind.buzz/tuqrrSjbxQ0DwzhX-6Glc3R9HDhyFuMl7EiZWmGCvQRI40eX http://copperwind.buzz/3dOEO4K1TMsPIUG7-xwi_bdTMNGgsw9Q5boJ6N6WwqttYJLf er the Hungarian Soviet Republic was defeated, LukC!cs was ordered by Kun to remain behind with OttC3 Korvin, when the rest of the leadership evacuated. LukC!cs and Korvin's mission was to clandestinely reorganize the communist movement, but this proved to be impossible. LukC!cs went into hiding, with the help of photographer Olga MC!tC). After Korvin's capture in 1919, LukC!cs fled from Hungary to Vienna. He was arrested but was saved from extradition due to a group of writers including Thomas and Heinrich Mann. Thomas Mann later based the character Naphta on LukC!cs in his novel The Magic Mountain. He married his second wife, GertrC:d Bortstieber in 1919 in Vienna, a fellow member of the Hungarian Communist Party. During his time in Vienna in the 1920s, LukC!cs befriended other Left Communists who were working or in exile there, including Victor Serge, Adolf Joffe and Antonio Gramsci. Around that time, LukC!cs began to develop Leninist ideas in the field of philosophy. His major works in this period were the essays collected in his magnum opus History and Class Consciousness (Geschichte und KlassenbewuCtsein, Berlin, 1923). Although these essays display signs of what Vladimir Lenin referred to as "ultra-leftism", they provided Leninism with a substantive philosophical basis. In July 1924, Grigory Zinoviev attacked this book along with the work of Karl Korsch at the Fifth Comintern Congress. In 1924, shortly after Lenin's death, LukC!cs published in Vienna the short study Lenin: A Study in the Unity of His Thought (Lenin: Studie C Subject: Open. Quote. Switch. Open. Quote. Switch. http://boostfit.buzz/SHObv-KK3PvK-xD7Qv2YTyjWBZi2eE5WZQrIDEQANet30xs3 http://boostfit.buzz/ExdJnFAjebzDdNjF4WXDgwomivzl0Oj4DN_gXfvm_scpSLHr Literary criticism is thought to have existed as long as literature. In the 4th century BC Aristotle wrote the Poetics, a typology and description of literary forms with many specific criticisms of contemporary works of art. Poetics developed for the first time the concepts of mimesis and catharsis, which are still crucial in literary studies. Plato's attacks on poetry as imitative, secondary, and false were formative as well. The Sanskrit Natya Shastra includes literary criticism on ancient Indian literature and Sanskrit drama. Later classical and medieval criticism often focused on religious texts, and the several long religious traditions of hermeneutics and textual exegesis have had a profound influence on the study of secular texts. This was particularly the case for the literary traditions of the three Abrahamic religions: Jewish literature, Christian literature and Islamic literature. Literary criticism was also employed in other forms of medieval Arabic literature and Arabic poetry from the 9th century, notably by Al-Jahiz in his al-Bayan wa-'l-tabyin and al-Hayawan, and by Abdullah ibn al-Mu'tazz in his Kitab al-Badi. Renaissance criticism The literary criticism of the Renaissance developed classical ideas of unity of form and content into literary neoclassicism, proclaiming literature as central to culture, entrusting the poet and the author with preservation of a long literary tradition. The birth of Renaissance criticism was in 1498, with the recovery of classic texts, most notably, Giorgio Valla's Latin translation of Aristotle's Poetics. The work of Aristotle, especially Poetics, was the most important influence upon literary criticism until the late eighteenth century. Lodovico Castelvetro was one of the most influential Renaissance critics who wrote commentaries on Aristotle's Poetics in 1570. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 10:39:43 -0500 From: "Casino Destroyer" Subject: Learn the secrets before they find a way to hide them forever. http://afterfall.buzz/EWvHVhGdLAs5eDpKaNMhM_ROV6HqUuaiSTTPDI2KpWyKzwXt http://afterfall.buzz/geB_1T73Y425uyBMcCad-DK7icX6a36GYHqCf2JKNHMvQS1W In 1956, LukC!cs became a minister of the brief communist revolutionary government led by Imre Nagy, which opposed the Soviet Union. At this time LukC!cs's daughter led a short-lived party of communist revolutionary youth. LukC!cs's position on the 1956 revolution was that the Hungarian Communist Party would need to retreat into a coalition government of socialists, and slowly rebuild its credibility with the Hungarian people. While a minister in Nagy's revolutionary government, LukC!cs also participated in trying to reform the Hungarian Communist Party on a new basis. This party, the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party, was rapidly co-opted by JC!nos KC!dC!r after 4 November 1956. During the 1956 Hungarian Revolution, LukC!cs was present at debates of the anti-party and revolutionary communist Pet?fi Society while remaining part of the party apparatus. During the revolution, as mentioned in Budapest Diary, LukC!cs argued for a new Soviet-aligned communist party. In LukC!cs's view, the new party could win social leadership only by persuasion instead of force. LukC!cs envisioned an alliance between the dissident communist Hungarian Revolutionary Youth Party, the revolutionary Hungarian Social Democratic Party and his own Soviet-aligned party as a very junior partner. Following the defeat of the Revolution, LukC!cs was deported to the Socialist Republic of Romania with the rest of Nagy's government. Unlike Nagy, he avoided execution, albeit narrowly. Due to his role in Nagy's government, he was no longer trusted by the party apparatus. LukC!cs's followers were indicted for political crimes throughout the 1960s and '70s, and a number fled to the West. LukC!cs's books The Young Hegel (Der junge Hegel, Zurich, 1948) and The Destruction of Reason (Die ZerstC6rung der Vernunft, Berlin, 1954) have been used to argue that LukC!cs was covertly critical of Stalinism as an irrational distortion of Hegelian-Marxism. He returned to Budapest in 1957. LukC!cs publicly abandoned his positions of 1956 and engaged in self-criticism. Having abandoned his earlier positions, LukC!cs remained loyal to the Communist Party until his death in 1971. In his last years, following the uprisings in France and Czechoslovakia in 1968, LukC!cs became more publicly critical of the Soviet Union and Hungarian Communist Party. In an interview just before his death, LukC!cs remarked: ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 03:07:05 -0500 From: "*Joan Riley*" <*JoanRiley*@highshoval.biz> Subject: Congratulations, Youāve been nominated for inclusion Congratulations, Youbve been nominated for inclusion http://highshoval.biz/16AybIf8WvtMv-TOPSNBKbuemb5uecVFWBtgqTBrDzjndw http://highshoval.biz/ld1bOt6KsmaieRNyT8lSMzZof7MM19mhvlKm0gliCvWReefu Literary criticism (or literary studies) is the study, evaluation, and interpretation of literature. Modern literary criticism is often influenced by literary theory, which is the philosophical discussion of literature's goals and methods. Though the two activities are closely related, literary critics are not always, and have not always been, theorists. Whether or not literary criticism should be considered a separate field of inquiry from literary theory, or conversely from book reviewing, is a matter of some controversy. For example, the Johns Hopkins Guide to Literary Theory and Criticism draws no distinction between literary theory and literary criticism, and almost always uses the terms together to describe the same concept. Some critics consider literary criticism a practical application of literary theory, because criticism always deals directly with particular literary works, while theory may be more general or abstract. Literary criticism is often published in essay or book form. Academic literary critics teach in literature departments and publish in academic journals, and more popular critics publish their reviews in broadly circulating periodicals such as The Times Literary Supplement, The New York Times Book Review, The New York Review of Books, the London Review of Books, the Dublin Review of Books, The Nation, Bookforum, and The New Yorker. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 08:02:20 -0500 From: "NeckRelax" Subject: Irritability and fatigue due to sleep disorders Irritability and fatigue due to sleep disorders http://powertrack.buzz/T2Q7he42o-YbLxuDPFeyc51NyvoMXcB5LS2quUevaLPXO47o http://powertrack.buzz/pI4adIDa_vlUoxMDlV9PH2k9D8Jthsdz2BvI4xz7YdqxzMA On 22 June 1340, Edward and his fleet sailed from England and arrived off the Zwin estuary the next day. The French fleet assumed a defensive formation off the port of Sluis. The English fleet deceived the French into believing they were withdrawing. When the wind turned in the late afternoon, the English attacked with the wind and sun behind them. The French fleet was almost completely destroyed in what became known as the Battle of Sluys. England dominated the English Channel for the rest of the war, preventing French invasions. At this point, Edward's funds ran out and the war probably would have ended were it not for the death of the Duke of Brittany precipitating a succession dispute between the duke's half-brother John of Montfort and Charles of Blois, nephew of Philip VI. In 1341, conflict over the succession to the Duchy of Brittany began the War of the Breton Succession, in which Edward backed John of Montfort and Philip backed Charles of Blois. Action for the next few years focused around a back-and-forth struggle in Brittany. The city of Vannes in Brittany changed hands several times, while further campaigns in Gascony met with mixed success for both sides. The English-backed Montfort finally succeeded in taking the duchy but not until 1364. Battle of CrC)cy and the taking of Calais Battle of CrC)cy, 1346, from the Grandes Chroniques de France. British Library, London. Edward III counting the dead on the battlefield of CrC)cy In July 1346, Edward mounted a major invasion across the channel, landing in Normandy's Cotentin, at St. Vaast. The English army captured the completely unguarded Caen in just one day, surprising the French. Philip mustered a large army to oppose Edward, who chose to march northward toward the Low Countries, pillaging as he went. He reached the river Seine to find most of the crossings destroyed. He moved further and further south, worryingly close to Paris, until he found the crossing at Poissy. This had only been partially destroyed, so the carpenters within his army were able to fix it. He then continued on his way to Flanders until he reached the river Somme. The army crossed at a tidal ford at Blanchetaque, leaving Philip's army stranded. Edward, assisted by this head start, continued on his way to Flanders once more, until, finding himself unable to outmanoeuvre Philip, Edward positioned his forces for battle and Philip's army attacked. ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 09:45:53 -0500 From: "copper fusion technology" Subject: LifeSocks - # Medical copper compression EN2 LifeSocks - # Medical copper compression EN2 http://copperwind.buzz/Z0VDet_mztFAO8VK7VkcKEOiGzzoZbCMsKr08kPGjct1q8Oq http://copperwind.buzz/t16TjH2j81DiQxi5SkhrRvLYQ9uq82JGgA4SRgb4-f6Q9Ln0 In 1930, while residing in Budapest, LukC!cs was summoned to Moscow. This coincided with the signing of a Viennese police order for his expulsion. Leaving their children to attend their studies, LukC!cs and his wife ventured to Moscow in March 1930. Soon after his arrival, LukC!cs was "prevented" from leaving and assigned to work alongside David Riazanov ("in the basement") at the MarxbEngels Institute. LukC!cs returned to Berlin in 1931 and in 1933 he once again left Berlin for Moscow to attend the Institute of Philosophy of the Russian Academy of Sciences. During this time, LukC!cs first came into contact with the works of the young Marx. LukC!cs and his wife were not permitted to leave the Soviet Union until after the Second World War. During Stalin's Great Purge, Lukacs was sent to internal exile in Tashkent for a time, where he and Johannes Becher became friends. LukC!cs survived the purges of the Great Terror, which claimed the lives of an estimated 80% of the Hungarian C)migrC)s in the Soviet Union[citation needed]. There is much debate among historians concerning the extent to which LukC!cs accepted Stalinism. In 1945, LukC!cs and his wife returned to Hungary. As a member of the Hungarian Communist Party, he took part in establishing the new Hungarian government. From 1945 LukC!cs was a member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Between 1945 and 1946 he strongly criticised non-communist philosophers and writers. LukC!cs has been accused of playing an "administrative" (legal-bureaucratic) role in the removal of independent and non-communist intellectuals such as BC)la Hamvas, IstvC!n BibC3, Lajos ProhC!szka, and KC!roly KerC)nyi from Hungarian academic life. Between 1946 and 1953, many non-communist intellectuals, including BibC3, were imprisoned or forced into menial work or manual labour. LukC!cs's personal aesthetic and political position on culture was always that socialist culture would eventually triumph in terms of quality. He thought it should play out in terms of competing cultures, not by "administrative" measures. In 1948b49 LukC!cs's position for cultural tolerance was smashed in a "LukC!cs purge," when MC!tyC!s RC!kosi turned his famous salami tactics on the Hungarian Communist Party. In the mid-1950s, LukC!cs was reintegrated into party life. The party used him to help purge the Hungarian Writers' Union in 1955b1956. TamC!s AczC)l and Tibor MC)ray (former Secretaries of the Hungarian Writer ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 06:12:42 -0500 From: "Local Window Specials" Subject: Local Window-replacement specials from The Home Depot and Others Local Window-replacement specials from The Home Depot and Others http://pandemicblood.buzz/x-JamgB4tsa7Uf2l3lrQhhgF6u0jWEqOaYszAzabtPNxVlXd http://pandemicblood.buzz/c2x_wTbORcKmJ60QNa8SMo6KlOF-1xfs_7WZ5DQS4pSLNPCw LukC!cs was born LC6winger GyC6rgy BernC!t in Budapest, Austria-Hungary to the investment banker JC3zsef LC6winger (later Szegedi LukC!cs JC3zsef; 1855b1928) and his wife Adele Wertheimer (Wertheimer AdC)l; 1860b1917), who were a wealthy Jewish family. He had a brother and sister. His father was knighted by the empire and received a baronial title, making LukC!cs a baron as well through inheritance. As an Austro-Hungarian subject, the full names of LukC!cs were the German Baron Georg Bernhard LukC!cs von Szegedin and the Hungarian szegedi LukC!cs GyC6rgy BernC!t. As a writer, he published under the names Georg LukC!cs and GyC6rgy LukC!cs. LukC!cs participated in intellectual circles in Budapest, Berlin, Florence and Heidelberg. He received his doctorate in economic and political sciences (Dr. rer. oec.) in 1906 from the Royal Hungarian University of KolozsvC!r. In 1909, he completed his doctorate in philosophy at the University of Budapest under the direction of Zsolt BeC6thy. Pre-Marxist period Whilst at university in Budapest, LukC!cs was part of socialist intellectual circles through which he met Ervin SzabC3, an anarcho-syndicalist who introduced him to the works of Georges Sorel (1847b1922), the French proponent of revolutionary syndicalism. In that period, LukC!cs's intellectual perspectives were modernist and anti-positivist. From 1904 to 1908, he was part of a theatre troupe that produced modernist, psychologically realistic plays by Henrik Ibsen, August Strindberg, and Gerhart Hauptmann. LukC!cs spent much time in Germany, and studied at the University of Berlin from 1906 to 1907, during which time he made the acquaintance of the philosopher Georg Simmel. Later in 1913 whilst in Heidelberg, he befriended Max Weber, Emil Lask, Ernst Bloch, and Stefan George. The idealist system to which LukC!cs subscribed at this time was intellectually indebted to neo-Kantianism (then the dominant philosophy in German universities) and to Plato, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, SC8ren Kierkegaard, Wilhelm Dilthey, and Fyodor Dostoyevsky. In that period, he published S ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 03:04:30 -0500 From: "LatinSwipe" <**LatinSwipe**@resqribble.us> Subject: Meet Sexy Latin Women Meet Sexy Latin Women http://resqribble.us/Dbc0r_mbpQrljFOkopBpp7WH3ZVBx3zSJsfB8G0Ah-TJ2w http://resqribble.us/j2iS12sVWj-hbMxTJExZMO6eHMhF-muAahkI5XtofIq6zA President Woodrow Wilson did not oppose segregation practices by autonomous department heads of the federal Civil Service, according to Brian J. Cook in his work, Democracy And Administration: Woodrow Wilson's Ideas And The Challenges Of Public Management. White and black people would sometimes be required to eat separately, go to separate schools, use separate public toilets, park benches, train, buses, and water fountains, etc. In some locales, in addition to segregated seating, it could be forbidden for stores or restaurants to serve different races under the same roof. Public segregation was challenged by individual citizens on rare occasions but had minimal impact on civil rights issues, until December, 1955, in Montgomery, Alabama, Rosa Parks refused to be moved to the back of a bus for a white passenger. Parks' civil disobedience had the effect of sparking the Montgomery Bus Boycott. Parks' act of defiance became an important symbol of the modern Civil Rights Movement and Parks became an international icon of resistance to racial segregation. Sign for "colored" waiting room at a Greyhound bus terminal in Rome, Georgia, 1943. Segregation was also pervasive in housing. State constitutions (for example, that of California) had clauses giving local jurisdictions the right to regulate where members of certain races could live. In 1917, the Supreme Court in the case of Buchanan v. Warley declared municipal resident segregation ordinances unconstitutional. In response, whites resorted to the restrictive covenant, a formal deed restriction binding white property owners in a given neighborhood not to sell to blacks. Whites who broke these agreements could be sued by "damaged" neighbors. In the 1948 case of Shelley v. Kraemer, the U.S. Supreme Court finally ruled that such covenants were unenforceable in a court of law. However, residential segregation patterns had already become established in most American cities, and have often persisted up to the present (see white flight and Redlining). In most cities, the only way blacks could relieve the pressure of crowding that resulted from increasing migration was to expand residential borders into surrounding previously white neighborhoods, a process that often resulted in harassment and attacks by white residents whose intolerant attitudes were intensified by fears that black neighbors would cause property values to decline. Moreover, the increased presence of African Americans in cities, North and South, as well as their competition with whites for housing, jobs, and political influence sparked a series of race riots. In 1898 white citizens of Wilmington, North Carolina, resenting African Americans' involvement in local government and incensed by an editorial in an African-American newspaper accusing white women ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 10:19:36 -0500 From: "Casino Destroyer" Subject: We are here to help you and want to see you make it! http://afterfall.buzz/-nRIoGMLrvi8D1TNPcTC2Pr7aGmQjiOs3Po361h8z6VHTHwk http://afterfall.buzz/V_vkrjdVpvAw2RjMQ_jsdIEJHxI8KF4iUp3V_bbLNcv25M5J In 1956, LukC!cs became a minister of the brief communist revolutionary government led by Imre Nagy, which opposed the Soviet Union. At this time LukC!cs's daughter led a short-lived party of communist revolutionary youth. LukC!cs's position on the 1956 revolution was that the Hungarian Communist Party would need to retreat into a coalition government of socialists, and slowly rebuild its credibility with the Hungarian people. While a minister in Nagy's revolutionary government, LukC!cs also participated in trying to reform the Hungarian Communist Party on a new basis. This party, the Hungarian Socialist Workers' Party, was rapidly co-opted by JC!nos KC!dC!r after 4 November 1956. During the 1956 Hungarian Revolution, LukC!cs was present at debates of the anti-party and revolutionary communist Pet?fi Society while remaining part of the party apparatus. During the revolution, as mentioned in Budapest Diary, LukC!cs argued for a new Soviet-aligned communist party. In LukC!cs's view, the new party could win social leadership only by persuasion instead of force. LukC!cs envisioned an alliance between the dissident communist Hungarian Revolutionary Youth Party, the revolutionary Hungarian Social Democratic Party and his own Soviet-aligned party as a very junior partner. Following the defeat of the Revolution, LukC!cs was deported to the Socialist Republic of Romania with the rest of Nagy's government. Unlike Nagy, he avoided execution, albeit narrowly. Due to his role in Nagy's government, he was no longer trusted by the party apparatus. LukC!cs's followers were indicted for political crimes throughout the 1960s and '70s, and a number fled to the West. LukC!cs's books The Young Hegel (Der junge Hegel, Zurich, 1948) and The Destruction of Reason (Die ZerstC6rung der Vernunft, Berlin, 1954) have been used to argue that LukC!cs was covertly critical of Stalinism as an irrational distortion of Hegelian-Marxism. He returned to Budapest in 1957. LukC!cs publicly abandoned his positions of 1956 and engaged in self-criticism. Having abandoned his earlier positions, LukC!cs remained loyal to the Communist Party until his death in 1971. In his last years, following the uprisings in France and Czechoslovakia in 1968, LukC!cs became more publicly critical of the Soviet Union and Hungarian Communist Party. In an interview just before his death, LukC!cs remarked: ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2020 11:59:36 -0500 From: "Trumps Presidency" Subject: This Could End Trumpās Presidency This Could End Trumpbs Presidency http://afterfall.buzz/MhUBxqIoDQfRkNOrku6g1TxCq51IQsGzql8_zQuO_ayIuf2Q http://afterfall.buzz/jJlSFfhy09GP0w2tIsrhN0cksq-IzNFCAUawelg4KNkehcix According to him, "The premise of dialectical materialism is, we recall: 'It is not men's consciousness that determines their existence, but on the contrary, their social existence that determines their consciousness.' ...Only when the core of existence stands revealed as a social process can existence be seen as the product, albeit the hitherto unconscious product, of human activity." (B'5). In line with Marx's thought, he criticises the individualist bourgeois philosophy of the subject, which founds itself on the voluntary and conscious subject. Against this ideology, he asserts the primacy of social relations. Existence b and thus the world b is the product of human activity; but this can be seen only if the primacy of social process on individual consciousness is accepted. LukC!cs does not restrain human liberty for sociological determinism: to the contrary, this production of existence is the possibility of praxis. He conceives the problem in the relationship between theory and practice. LukC!cs quotes Marx's words: "It is not enough that thought should seek to realise itself; reality must also strive towards thought." How does the thought of intellectuals relate to class struggle, if theory is not simply to lag behind history, as it is in Hegel's philosophy of history ("Minerva always comes at the dusk of night...")? LukC!cs criticises Friedrich Engels's Anti-DC