[Ichneumon]

[And what "connection" would that be, specifically? Come on, out with it. Tell us how Marx's statement actually holds water, and isn't just cheap rhetorical rationalization. We'll wait. If NOW's founder had claimed that the Bible "contains the BASIS of natural history for our views" on abortion, would you beat Christians over the head with it until the end of time, or would you examine the claim to see whether it was cheap posturing which was full of crap first?]

Easy to answer. Marx called Darwin's theory the basis for his idea. There's a connection right there.

What a *pathetically* lame dodge... I asked you to *explain* this alleged "connection", and you just repeated "Marx says so!" again without explaining or examining it in the least.

Look, if you're unable to support the implication you've been making all day, just be honorable enough to retract it. Don't keep dodging when people call you on it.

[Siena Dreaming]

I asked you to *explain* this alleged "connection",

Look...perhaps you and I have different definitions of "connections"...I don't know.

All I'm saying to those who claim there is no connection...MARX SAID THERE WAS. Get it? There is a connection in his statement...admittedly not a scientific point-by-point description. But a connection nonetheless.

I find it fascinating that Marx called Darwin's theory a "basis" for his views presumably on capital. That's the connection I see and I only say it when people say there is NO connection...Marx himself said there was.