Date: Sat, 19 Oct 1996 13:27:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Carl Davidson <cdavidson-AT-igc.apc.org> Subject: Re: Demise of CrossRoads and a New Paper At 08:59 AM 10/17/96 -0400, Louis N Proyect wrote: .. Part of >the problem is that the Guardian and Daily World were basically party >publications and subject to the kind of amateurishness that plagues >Pacifica radio. If the Guardian was a party publication, then why didn't any of the US Maoist parties ever give it any financial or distribution support? We wanted them to see us in this way, but they never did. >My concept is quite distinct and really quite radical. >That is, the staff of the newspaper should be composed of people who are >*writers* and *leftists*. I tend to think of people like Doug Henwood, >Jeff St. Clair, Ken Silverstein, Alex Cockburn and not all the earnest but >dull people who wrote for party presses. Fine, but these people don't work for free. How do you propose to pay them? >Louis: Bean-counting mentality will never inspire revolutions. No, but neither revolutions not anything else can be financed without beancounters. And the reason why many decent left projects fail financially is because most leftists consider themselves "anti-beancounters." If fact, when you use this term, it just means to me that your're not serious about financial matters. >25,000 copies? If somebody like Michael Moore was the editor, I would expect >subscription rates to number in the hundreds of thousands. Only if he had a serious advertising and promotion budget to work with. >Louis: There are thousands of wealthy individuals who would like to see >something like this. These are the same people who buy mutual funds from >Camejo or give money to the progressive foundations. I used to raise tens >of thousands of dollars *on my own* to support Nicaragua from this >milieu. They have to be inspired. The Guardian, the Daily World and >CrossRoads were not inspiring. One, people who buy mutual funds from Camejo get a return on their money. Two, there may be "thousands" of rich leftists giving their money to foundations like Crossroads or the Funding Exchange (I doubt it, most of them are liberal rather than left), but the reason they do it is because these foundations do their "beancounting" for them in regard to the viability of various progressive causes. And most of these foundations, unfortunately, stipulate that they do not fund publications. Three, if you have these contacts, try inspiring the first, say, $100,000 just as pledges if a total of $500,000 can be reached. I don't think it can be done for a newspaper today, but, as I said before, I would love to be proven wrong >Louis: A "traditional left paper"? Orthodox Marxism-Leninism? The >"organized left"? That is our problem, isn't it. The existing left is an >impediment to the growth of revolutionary forces in the United States. It >is unimaginative, boring, trapped in the past and irrelevant. Not only is >the Soviet Union finished as a project, so are the "Marxist-Leninist" >parties that it spawned. Comrades, the future lies before us!!! (Or some >such silly slogan.) > By "traditional" I meant newsprint as opposed to a Web site, not dogmatic, dull or uninspiring content. I still think setting up a Web paper would be one good test as to whether a hard copy version might be possible later on. At least it would give us something to show prospective funders about what we have in mind, our ability to recruit interesting writers, etc. Carl Davidson, Chicago Keep On Keepin' On
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005