Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 11:37:16 +0100 Subject: M-G: Our discussions -- who, how, what? *Adolf-O an orthodox Marxist!* Doug quotes Adolf-O on women's rights: >>Isn't this bourgeois feminism in a nutshell? Asking special privileges. > >Special privileges not to be beaten with fists and words? That use of >"special privileges" is indistinguishable from the U.S. Christian right's >campaign against gay and lesbian rights: the demand for basic civil rights >is demeaned as a campaign for "special rights." > >I used to think that feminists were too harsh in their critique of the >sexism of orthodox Marxists. Maybe I was wrong. The interesting thing is, he appears to be labelling Adolf-O as an orthodox Marxist. So, it would be nice to have clarification on this. 1) Does Doug in fact regard Adolf-O as an orthodox Marxist? 2) If so, why? *Condemn, censor and expel!* Gary M is getting desperate that his pet issues are not the pet issues of others on the list, and calls for expulsions for raising questions of Stalinism and its historical role. He also calls for the immediate expulsion of Jerry L. Too bad he's not a moderator himself, and that the rules weren't made with this kind of locks and bars charade in mind, but with a view to encouraging *open* dialogue on issues subscribers wish to discuss. The rest is up to us and our ability to focus on important issues and tolerate or at least ignore subscribers we feel to be irrelevant. If we engage with subscribers we disagree with, this is dialogue, and the question becomes one of how we conduct such a discussion. Apart from the very few very simple rules of M-I, this is up to us, and readers can draw their own conclusions from the way we act. He's "depressed" because he knows in advance what a fiasco any bowdlerized list of the kind Louis P is conducting his fake agitation for will be. *List fatigue* Jon F puts his finger on the lack of a working class sounding board on the list. This is quite true. The problem is that overcoming this lack is a task for off-list political organizational work, in unions and party-building. Meanwhile, the issues of principle and orientation insist on being thrashed out, and you can't get away from it. Every notable event that crops up raises the same deep questions of strategy. The longing so many on the list express for pithy, incisive, constructive and authoritative contributions from all on only the relevant issues is actually completely *utopian* given the current situation in the class struggle and the utterly unresolved question of the revolutionary international leadership of the working class. It's as utopian as Erica Jong's fantasies about the "zipless fuck" in Fear of Flying. Real relationships are hard and messy, with lots of flaming and misunderstandings -- and that's with people you get on with (at least got on with once) and share some fundamental values with. It's the same in real politics, only there you're messing with people (in public debate, hopefully not within your own party, but there are no guarantees) who you don't get on with and whose fundamental values conflict with your own. Let's all get real and accept that discussions within the non-party, all-inclusive Marxist framework of the Spoon lists (everyone who considers themselves a Marxist or is interested in or at least engages with Marxism in some way) will be imperfect, unsatisfactory, full of loose ends and emotional eruptions, and tiring. Judging from the record they'll also be instructive, exciting and entertaining at the same time as they put us in touch with people whose existence we would never have expected before the Net. A final word of hope to Jon. Remember how recent and undeveloped all this Net discussion is. There are ways of reaching ordinary workers with these discussions that we haven't even thought of yet, let alone tried to put into practice. Bob M's Cockroach is one way that gets the ideas spread afar. Other subscribers forward urgent stuff to the list. There is constant private interchange between subscribers. In other words, there's plenty of potential, what's needed is an authoritative leadership in the class to make it jell. Direction and focus will come of themselves when we succeed in giving our political strategy concrete momentum in the struggle around us. (Dave B's post ("With friends like these" 16 March), which I only just read, gives further useful perspectives on our discussions and the class struggle.) Cheers, Hugh PS Jon bounced back with a fine posting on real political debate: >Well guess what? The current moderators did not sign up to run a closed list. >Aside from prohibiting the obvious, cop-baiting, provocations from obvious >fascists etc., and the three post limit, a Hyde Park free for all was >expected. >No votes were to be taken on who had the correct line. If you want to do that, >organize a party, if you don't belong to one. > > In the course of my time banging around in the working class, I have been >physically threatened, had my stuff vandalized, been hit by flying object, had >bosses try to fire me and have been fairly regularly redbaited. I now face the >prospect of seeing my job sold out from under me at the age of 50. > >The crapola a few people dish out here can be annoying. That should be all it >is, however. The real world beyond the blinking cursor has far worse things >than cyber-flames in store for us. Good on you, Jon! --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005