From: "Joseph Green" <comvox-AT-flash.net>
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 1997 14:48:33 +0000
Subject: Re: M-G: Two kinds of dictatorships in LeninList


     I should like to reply to some statements of comrade Adolfo 
Olachea, but first I should point out that nothing I say should be 
taken as supporting the action of Jim Hillier in banning articles 
from the Lenin List that asserted, as Adolfo does, that "Cuba is 
fascist". That action by comrade Hillier split the Lenin List, 
stopped the debate on Cuba in its tracts, and was undertaken on 
the most frivolous grounds. Hillier substituted emotionalism for 
concern for serious discussion on the issue of whether Cuba is 
state-capitalist. This showed that Hillier didn't grasp the depth 
of the crisis of left theory.

     But it still seems to me that comrade Olachea doesn't the 
understand the depth of this crisis either. After a passage about 
how it is necessary to work "openly and consciously and FROM THE 
STANDPOINT of the proletariat and the oppressed masses of the 
world, fighting for their liberation", he continues as follows:

> That is why--Joe Green for example--could not be allowed to post his
> "Stalin is a revisionist" point of view in a genuine LeninList.

     Actually, I was requested by a moderator, Jim Hillier, to 
post this material. But now Adolfo informs us that this material 
would not have been allowed on the list, or that he thinks it 
should not have been allowed. So the Lenin List had one policy in 
public, and another in private. This apparently confirms what 
Hillier eventually wrote to me, that "Adolfo & co." had used his 
invitation to me to post material on Stalinism against him, and 
that they were responsible for the harassment of my postings.

     My postings to the Lenin List were subject to a special 
review by the moderators, which other postings did not have to go 
through. Not a single one of my postings was found to be 
inappropriate. But by subjecting them to this review, they were 
delayed, and it became hard to reply to Proyect's pro-Castroist 
nonsense in a timely fashion. This harassment harmed the debate 
over Castroism and let Proyect get away with some absurd 
statements.

     But moreover, I wasn't informed that there was such a special 
harassment of my postings, nor was the Lenin List so informed. 
This was carried on as a matter of internal maneuvering among the 
moderators (or some of them). This was not right; this was not 
principled; this did not show respect for the mass of participants 
in the Lenin List, or for me as a communist activist.

     Comrade Olachea says that

> "we, the revolutionaries, shall not allow any kind of attacks upon the
> proletarian leaders in our list. That we shall enforce every one of
> the conditions and rules of LeninList."

     To me, comrade Olachea, this sounds just like what comrade 
Hillier said about the "Cuba is fascist" articles.

     But you go on:

> To complain about this fact of life while aware of these conditions to
> subscribe to the LeninList, is not a principled action in a communist, in
> any case.

     On the contrary, comrade Olachea, to impose conditions in 
private, while saying another thing in public, was not a proper 
way for the panel of moderators to act. You never replied publicly 
to Hillier's public invitation to me to post materials on 
Stalinism. Let me review some facts:

     1) I started to participate on the LeninList because of what 
were essentially invitations by two members of the List, one of 
whom was a moderator, and both of whom were aware of my views.

     2) I believed that the Lenin List was based on a commitment 
to what its comrades saw as anti-revisionism and Leninism, which 
are things I have devoted my all efforts towards for years and 
years. I was not informed that I had to subscribe to any 
additional conditions in order to participate (conditions which in 
my eyes go against the condition that one should be an anti- 
revisionist).

     3) I was invited by a moderator to post materials on 
Stalinism, and no one--not you, not anyone else--posted any 
message on the Lenin List retracting this invitation.

     4) The materials I posted on the Lenin List were of high 
quality, so much so that even the arch-apologist for Castroism, 
Louis Proyect, had to admit that the facts were correct. He had to 
quietly abandon the assertions he had made in his own lengthy 
posting of Sept. 6 "The Theory of the Cuban Revolution" and sing a 
different tune. In fact, the articles from CV didn't just state 
opinions, but provided an economic analysis of the Cuban 
revisionist economy and how it had been built up over the decades. 
They provided a factual basis of use to anyone who wanted to 
seriously examine revisionist economy, something Proyect wants to 
prevent, and would be of use even to serious comrades who disagree 
with our conclusions. Moreover, they provided a factual basis that 
went beyond anything else posted on the Lenin List about the Cuban 
economy. It seems to me that a serious consideration of what the 
Cuban economy looked like and how it had evolved would have been 
far more useful than simply debating whether Cuba is fascist.

     5) You have thus every reason to believe that the CV 
materials on Stalinism will be of high quality, even though you 
will most likely disagree with them. Yet you are still sure, even 
before reading them, that they won't be of any use to the 
activists on the Lenin List pondering the major issues of 
revolutionary theory. Incredible.

     It was not right for various moderators of the old Lenin List 
to maintain a secret policy of harassment which I was not notified 
of and which conflicted with what one of them, Hillier, had posted 
on the list. But beyond this, it shows a lack of understanding of 
the seriousness of the crisis of revolutionary theory that Adolfo 
still wants a list which bans discussion of serious work that he 
regards as an insult to Stalinism just as Hillier banned things 
that he regarded as an insult to Castroism. As far as I can see, 
Adolfo's and Hillier's reasoning for this are pretty much the 
same.

     On the Internet, it is the custom for every group to develop 
a list on whatever basis it wishes.  That of course is the whole 
point of Internet lists. But the public policy of a group should 
be the same as its real policy. And groups that want to insulate 
themselves from the crisis of revolutionary theory may end up by 
stunting their own political development.

      With respect to the new Lenin List, I have received a notice 
from the moderators. In response to it, I have submitted a request 
to subscribe to it, but I have explained that I maintain my views. 
I have asked if they wish to collaborate with someone with my 
views. I think such a collaboration could be useful for both 
sides. But if this new list really requires that one both be a 
Maoist and accept Stalinism, then it should reject me. If the list 
wants to maintain a broader discussion among the anti- 
revisionists, then it will accept me. We shall see.

     --Joseph Green, Communist Voice

comvoice-AT-flash.net
Communist Voice web page:
http://www.flash.net/~comvoice
Joseph Green
comvox-AT-flash.net


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