davidmci at coombs.anu.edu.au
Fri Feb 2 19:19:29 MST 1996
I hope that you realise that I was not directing any of this at you
personally. But I remain very puzzled as to why the number of "co-mods" on
a supposedly "undomerated" list kept increasing. It seems extremely
counterproductive, as none of the co-mods can stop from saying whatever I
like on l*st. It provides a pretext for crazies like Jerry to go on the
rampage over "l*st purpose".
The purpose of this list as I see it is -- (1) discussion of Marxist
theory; (2) Marxist analysis of certain concrete situations of
political-strategic importance; (3) discussion of appropriate strategies,
forms of political organisation etc in order to achieve the overthrow of
bourgeois hegemony and the smashing of the bourgeois state in order to
achieve communism. (in no particular order)
I have always taken this to be obvious. I consider these three aspects to
be closely intertwined -- therefore we do not need "splitism" (to use a
somewhat tired CPI(M) turn of phrase) on the l*st. Each thread should be
able to stand or fall as it may. I consider Marxism, as historical
materialism, to have an object, the class struggle, which can and must be
studied in all of its dimensions as a guide to revolutionary practice. I
consider the Marxist practice in philosophy as being the defence of a
consistent materialist position -- i.e. one that is compatible with
historical materialism. It is the class strugggle in theory -- obviously
it does not exhaust the class struggle, although some academics seem to act
as if it does.
I'm sorry to all the "MS posse" who think I am "old-fashioned", rejecting
analytical Marxism or whatever. I don't care. There is only one thing we
should care about here -- the *class struggle.* It seems to me that,
whatever other flaws Louis or any of the other anti-MS crew may have, at
least they remembered the class struggle (oh no, I'm sounding a bit Maoist
here). But I don't want to buy into such debates (thanks Justin). I am a
busy boy at the moment.
I apologise for screaming at everyone via the l*st with my upper-case type,
but I am sure that may subscribers have been thinking to themselves -- "if
I see one more post by Jerry, or in reply to Jerry, on some garbage about
the way discussion is conducted on the l*st, I'M GONNA SCREAM!"
AAAAARGH!!!! I've done it now, and I feel better.
I personally thought that the seminar on fascism was a good idea. If any
one (other than Jerry) REALLY thinks it sensored other threads, all I can
say is -- WAKE UP TO YOURSELVES! This l*st is unmoderated in reality.
Uncle Lou didn't force Adam or anyone else to shut their cyber-mouths. If
such a thing were possible, then I would personally have intervened to shut
Jerry's mouth every time he tried to pick a fight.
I know that Jerry is very capable. He could be contributing to this l*st
something very positive instead of just static. This list is unmoderated.
Co-mods, shut up. People complaining about l*st purpose, shut up.
Remember the class struggle, oppose splitism. The real enemy is there
I'm with you Lou -- lets return to Marxism. That is what this l*st is
about. It is not a workshop on how to run a l*st.
P.S. Apologies to anyone who is unable to follow Rahul's conversation with
me on Indian nationalism. Rahul has suggested that it should remain on the
l*st, so as to promote an interest in India on the l*st. I think this is a
good idea. Everyone else can just read the posts if they like. I have a
great deal of trouble following detailed posts on the Americas, Europe, and
basically most places outside of my region (Asia and Australasia). I read
them, but I don't often feel able to contribute. This is ok. We are
broadening our knowledge base. This is the reason why I didn't discuss
Italy and Germany in relation to the fascism discussions much. I am
largely ignorant of the details of these movements at anything more complex
that general knowledge. On the Comintern I know a bit about its operations
in Asia and that's it. So I'll stick to what I can talk about. There will
be many threads if everyone took the approach of just bringing up issues
that the think are important and seeing if anyone else joins in rather than
joining in on threads just to attack people that annoy them.
>I have just resigned as co-mod. I want to try to re-establish a little
>peace in this l*st. When I saw David McInerney's plaintive call for a little
>less discussion of moderation issues, so that he would be able to find a
>meaningful thread more easily, it just broke my heart.
>I am not the moderator of the Cuba seminar. I am not a co-moderator of
>the Marxism l*st. I am as Joan Osborne puts it in her fine song, "just
>another slob on the bus trying to find his way home."
>If this doesn't calm things down a little bit, then I may get pissed
>myself. I've been taking some medication lately for the hypomania with
>Finkelstein complications that has been bothering me for the last 17
>years. This stuff is called Flumoxxin and it seems to be working pretty
>good. But I don't want to be tested.
>So, let's see if we can return to the topic of Marxism.
>Date: Fri, 2 Feb 1996 10:00:57 +1100
>To: marxism at jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
>From: davidmci at coombs.anu.edu.au (David McInerney)
>Subject: Re: moderation, list purpose
>Cc: Rahul Mahajan <rahul at peaches.ph.utexas.edu>
>Sender: owner-marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu
>This discussion on different (practical vs. theoretical) aspects of the
>l*st is really shitting me off. One of the reasons that I subscribed to
>this this in the first place was that there was a *variety* of very
>different threads going on at once. At the moment there are two major
>threads which *dominate* the list, both of which I delete because the
>volume of material in them is just too great to keep up with. Thety are
>the "to be MS or not to be MS" thread and the "Jerry doesn't love Louis"
>thread (otherwise known as moderation, list purpose". All other threads
>seem to have disappeared due to lack of discussion. The very small thread
>on Indian nationalism and its historiography ("Spivak and the Subaltern")
>is still there, but the fascism thread has disappeared into the "Jerry
>doesn't love Louis" thread. I for one am sick of deleting 100 messages a
>day. Rahul, I will get back to you on the Indian nationalism thread. The
>question is, should we continue to pursue this discussion via the list, or
>should we conduct it personally? Should I have to sift through one message
>after another on "list purpose" to find some real content?
>THIS LIST WAS FORMERLY "UN-MODERATED" (WHEN JON WAS THE MAIN
>"NON-MODERATOR"). IT WORKED MUCH BETTER THAT WAY. "UN-MODERATION" HAS
>BECOME A VERY SAD JOKE. PULL YOUR HEADS IN EVERYONE.
>Mr. David McInerney,
>Political Science Program, Research School of Social Sciences,
>The Australian National University, Canberra, A.C.T., AUSTRALIA 0200.
>e-mail: davidmci at coombs.anu.edu.au; ph: (06) 249 2134; fax: (06) 249 3051
> --- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Mr. David McInerney,
Political Science Program, Research School of Social Sciences,
The Australian National University, Canberra, A.C.T., AUSTRALIA 0200.
e-mail: davidmci at coombs.anu.edu.au; ph: (06) 249 2134; fax: (06) 249 3051
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism