File spoon-archives/marxism-general.archive/marxism-general_1997/marxism-general.9708, message 9


From: "Karl Carlile" <joseph-AT-indigo.ie>
Subject: Re: M-G: Re: The Swamp
Date: Fri, 1 Aug 1997 11:53:19 -0700


Karl: I shall send a copy of Vladimir's message to
marxism-international and perhaps thaxis.

Incidentally are ther e any limits on posting to genral and thaxis.

----------
From: Rolf Martens <rolf.martens-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se>
To: marxism-general-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
Subject: Re: M-G: Re: The Swamp
Date: 31 July 1997 21:38

Vladimir Bilenkin wrote the below (included in full here) on 31.07

An IMO good posting, Vlad.

You and I (for instance) disagree on vital poiltical matters.
But this charcterization of yours of what you're calling "the
swamp" is not so bad. My only objection would be to say that
there are other (political) "swamps" too, so perhaps one might
call this one our "host swamp" or something in that direction.

And, proceeding from our different standpoints, you, Karl, also
Bob for instance and - at least earlier, around New Year - Ang
or Angie, who hasn't been heard from in a while (and there were
one-two other people too) have constituted a kind of "anti-host-
swamp" alliance, haven't we. I hope that this will continue.

Of course our "hosts" the Spoons are based on some kind of
Western (phony)"Marxist" or phony"left" establishment - I'd
put quotation marks here where you're not doing this, Vlad.

But at least so far, we're all still allowed to sit in their inn
and discuss matters, even including our saying various quite
unpleasant things now and then. That's guite good, I think.
They know of course that we could all (or many of us) go some-
where else if they just were to chuck us (respectively, some of
us) out. A technical problem, true, but not unsurmountable.

But I'd like to stress that, IMO: The M-G charter in itself is
quite good. And that, so far, it has been upheld by the Spoons 
too. So, basically, *I* at the moment am *not* complaining on 
such an account. I'm a "satisfied customer". I'm recommending 
the place to others.

Considerably worse IMO is that other "inn" the SiberiaSwamp
("LeninList"). I don't know, Vlad, whether you like my nick-
name for it or not, but I think it's fitting. I don't mean
to say that people should *not* go there too, only that it's
no good as a "replacement for" M-G.

And yes, there *were*( IMO too) some bad actions on the part 
of the Spoons last year, that killing of "M1" and the division
into M-G and M-I etc. But now (as I said) M-G has functioned
quite OK for several months, and if it's not such a great forum
for discussion of ideas etc as it might be, which I've earlier
read that you think, that matter was and is up to us subscribers,
then, isn't it? The New Year discussion between you, Justin S.
and me, for instance, on certain matters of culture ("queer
debate") IMO was actually somewhat productive, for instance,
despite (or because of) our different views and relatively
heated feelings on the subjects. *Russia*, respectively, *the
SU*, I'd like to discuss more with you (for instance), only,
as you know, there have been all those other things so far.

Rolf M. 



>Karl Carlile wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Vladimir!
>> 
>> I read with interest your very recent post concerning Rolf's
postings. 
Forgive my
>> ignorance but I did not know that you and Rolf refused to join the
other 
marxism lists.
>> Would you please explain to me what you mean by the "swamp".
>
>
>
>
>Hi Karl,
>
>	Sorry I couldn't answer you sooner.  What do I mean
>by the "swamp"?  The easy way would be to say that they are
>a group of people who from the very beginning of the Spoons
>marxism list held an informal power over its turf.  They did 
>this by "hegemonic" means, by constructing a "public opinion"
>and using psychological, intellectual, and, increasingly,
>administrative pressures to intimidate and to silence those
>participants whom they saw in any way capable of threatening
>their control of the list, which they considred their birth right,
> and the established discursive parameters the swamp found 
>acceptable. 
>
>In short, the swamp is inherently opportunistic or, to use
>Lenin's term, "disloyal" to the cause they profess to support,
>because they put their power interests above all political
>principles. The worst defeat for them is a "literary" one.
>For it is the literary, the rhetorical, the affective -and not 
>the power of ideas -  that is their conventional power tool
>in the Net.  
>
>But this is an easy answer.  It lies on the surface of things
>by considering this group of people in isolation from a broader
>framework of their social existence of which their virtual one 
>is just a symptom.  To answer your question, then, is to 
>investigate not the "literary" but the real, material sources
>of their power that they've been always able to hold despite 
>occasional crushing defeats and self-exposures.  The process of
>such investigation is like peeling off an onion or seeing what's
>inside of a Russian "matr'oshka" doll. It would establish first 
>that the strength of this group is rooted in their being 
>representatives of the Western marxist left establishment. Which
>would immediately posit a question: Where there lies the latter's
>source of power?  My hypothesis is that it lies not in their non-
>existent link with the working class but in them being an integral,
>even if very special, part of the late bourgeois superstructure.
>This is where their "political unconscious" is located.
>
>The next step in our hypothetical investigation would be to see
>if the history of this group in the Spoons "marxism space" would
>indeed provide some evidence that the above hypothesis is not
>entirely out of question;  that whatever understanding of themselves
>this group of people has --and I never doubted that they were
>entirely sincere in this respect -- they, nevertheless, (or more 
>exactly, precisely because of this)-- effectively serve as a 
>mediating link between this "space" and the "spaces" of
>the entirely opposite political nature.
>
>I believe that the history of m1 contains irrefutable
>evidence of this sort.  It shows how step by step the swamp
>strengthened the ability of the outside forces to control
>and manipulate the activities of those few participants who
>indeed presented a degree of danger for the ruling class.
>I repeat, this should not be understood in a vulgar, mechanistic
>way.  It is only if we take into account this history as a whole
>and in conjuncture with the paralel social-political developments 
>in the real world, the social nature of and the role played by
>the "technical personel" (the Spoons), the misty links of the
>latter with the institutions that made possible this "technical"
>assistance and who's own very existence in turn  depends entirely
>on their not so misty links to real sources of power-- only then
>we can hope to understand the social nature and the role of the
>"swamp", as well as to appreciate those of the marxist left
>establishment in general.
>
>Regards,
>
>Vladimir
>
>
>     --- from list marxism-general-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
>
>



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


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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005