Date: Sun, 23 Feb 1997 02:26:31 +0000
Subject: Re: M-G: Re: M-TH: Poor Quality on Spoon


A KARL CARLILE MESSAGE


GERY:This is the ultimate in metaphysical constructs. I.e. if we all get 
together and wish it so, then it will happen. This prescription, without 
regard for history and political and class composition (not to mention a 
critical discussion of the problems inherent in open lists), reminds me 
of the plot line behind some old Judy Garland-Mickey Rooney movies.

KARL: Yes. If in general people choose to conduct themsleves in a 
rational fashion on lists then the quality of the lists willl 
improve. In the same way individuals from different class bacgrounds 
have chosen to be socialist. There is nothing metaphysical about 
this. In general individuals do have freedom to choose. If this were 
not the case then the working class would be unable to choose 
socialism. 

GERY: Poor levels of discussion (btw, how do we define and gauge that 
expression?) are the result of a complex cluster of factors. To begin 
with, one should place the quality of discussion in the context of 
political and personal enmities that have existed in the past since that 
helps shape how listmembers talk to each other and who remains on any 
given list. More specifically, one should critically evaluate the history 
of the rise, decline, and death of what used to be called the marxism 
list (yet "survived", in undead form, as m1).

KARL: Even if what you say is true this  still does not prevent
individuals from choosing to conduct themselves in a rational
manner. 

GERY: The quality of discussion is also sensitive to both the quality of 
discussion by the most frequent posters to a list and the quality of 
"moderation."  In the new scheme of things, there are also questions 
concerning lines of demarcation among lists, e.g. should "newbies"
ask basic questions on m-intro or bring those discussions to other lists? 
Should the discussion of Nietzche be on m-int given its statement of 
purpose or on another list?  Etc., etc., etc.

KARL: The above comments are merely a feeble alibi designed to 
support the irresponsibility of many people on these lists. The 
point is that despite the limitations that may exist it is still 
possible for people to choose to be rational. If we dont have 
rationality then the quality of lists sinks and words loose their 
meaning. This internal subversion of the lists is, in effect, a 
strategy to destroy them and in this way development of thought and 
politics is seriously obstructed. Capitalism could not devise a 
better strategy. Indeed I often wonder whether there are  plants 
on the lists whose task it is to internalyl subvert them in this 
very effective way.

My view is that it is a prime task of genuine socialists on these 
lists to struggle to heighten the quality of the lists. In so far as 
they succeed in achieving this they are making a significant 
contribution to the development of both thought and politics in the 
struggle for socialism.

One must remember that capitalism has presented socialism with the 
information technology to discuss issues on an relatively instanteous 
basis across the planet. This is a technology that must be exploited 
to the full rather than abused. I am sure the business people make 
better use of it than many of the individuals purpoting to be 
socialists on the Spoon lists. 

GERY: Let's say we wanted to cook a "revolutionary net pie" and used
the following recipe:

1) Add 5 parts Maoists and other Stalinists;
   Add 5 parts Trotskyist sectarians;
   Add 2 parts social democratic;
   Add 3 parts "independent" flamers;
   Add 2 parts sharp, critical, should-know-better;
   Add 10 jars of tobasco sauce, worchester sauce, and jet fuel;
   Sprinkle with salt, pepper, and plutonium.

2) Place above in pie tray and place in oven. Set temperature for 800 
degrees F. Leave apartment, cook for 3 days, and then eat.

Bon appetit!

KARL: This kind of stuff above, although it may appear funny to some, 
contributes nothing to debate. Indeed its hidden agenda may be to 
trivialise issues such as the serious one that I raised and thereby 
trivialise the list.

I am serious about socialism. However I question the sincerity and 
motives of some people on these lists.

                                      




                                Yours etc.,
                                           Karl   


     --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---