Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 08:34:29 -0500 (EST)
From: Louis N Proyect <lnp3-AT-columbia.edu>
Subject: M-I: Fawlty Towers


On 5 Jan 1997, Chris Burford wrote:

> 
> 
> [I am not prepared to post under the thread-line "vile bodies",
> since the whole principle I am insisting on so earnestly but 
> without apology is that
> personal attacks, even against enemies, are counterproductive,
> reveal nothing, divide us, and play into the hands of the activities of 
> the real enemy, as revealed in the Cointel business.]
> 
> 

Louis: How in the world does the tongue-in-cheek use of the title of an
Evelyn Waugh novel play in the hands of the cops? Why would you even
suggest something as stupid as this? You do have to admit that the Jerry
Lewis/Quispe photos did not lead to repression against New Flag, don't
you? By the way, did I ever tell you the joke about the rabbi who went to
a saloon and ordered a glass of milk and a Slim-Jim? Oh, never mind...

> 
> On Fri, 27 Sep 1996, Hans Ehrbar wrote:
> >
> > I want to add something else. When I was working at
> > the assembly line in Detroit, I never asked a worker
> > about his or her past unless they volunteered.  I
> > don't know how Louis wants to organize workers if they
> > must be afraid that he goes after them the way he
> > threatened to do with Robert.
> >

> Louis: Hans, you are the biggest fucking moron in the world. I plan to
> write the President of the University of Utah to tell him how stupid you
> act in public. All Malecki did the first month on the list WAS BRAG ABOUT
> HIS PAST. His beef now is that people expect some proof and he can't give
> it.
> 
> 
> There is however no apology for having made the threat. 
> 

Louis: Chris, old thing, I don't know how to tell you this, but the above
bit of business is so obviously "over the top" that I am amazed that you
would try to make me ashamed of saying it. Can you imagine the President
of a major American university getting a letter from a computer programmer
that starts off, "Did you know that one of your professors has been acting
stupid in public?" He would probably fire his secretary for letting a
crank letter find its way into his incoming mail. 

Now, how about this, Dr. Burford. Hans, I apologize for the ill-considered
comic riff I made on September 27 of last year. Now it is your turn, Dr.
Burford, to tell the list if you still stand by your statement that I
engage in psychopathic behavior.


> 
> New York humour is different from English humour and is 
> different from German humour. It seems to me rather 
> debatable to privilege one sense of humour and 
> to judge someone else as lacking in humour. If the above
> 

Louis: The issue is not humor, it is politics. You and Hans fell in love
with the Maoists (all the wrong ones unfortunately) when they marched
into m-1 and began patronizing them in the most disgusting manner. You
went out on a limb to make people like Quispe feel right at home. This was
the very same Quispe who *jew-baited* me. I don't recall any moral
indignation on your part over this at the time, by the way.
That is why I call you a Pecksniff. Pecksniff was a character in a Dickens
novel called "The Pickwick Papers" whose moral outrage had certain blind
spots, most notably his own. 


> The threat was made. So contrary to what Doug alleges, something
> did happen. LP gave notice that he wished his opponents to 
> debate with him under a potential threat that if he infuriated them
> he is so erratic that he might just conceivably compromise them 
> with their boss. And he prides himself on his ability to keep people
> guessing about whether he is joking or not.
> The reality is that Barkley believed the threat was real.
> 

Louis: This is really stupid. Barkley never once referred to this business
about "snitching" in the past, as you didn't either. The reason that it is
coming up now is that you are frustrated with your political isolation on
this list. M-I is a lot less "eclectic" than m-1 and you two reformists
stick out like a sore thumb. When you have strong political beliefs that
go against the grain of the majority opinion on a mailing list, there are
several ways to deal with this. If you are like Hugh Rodwell and are not
really interested in persuading people of the validity of your ideas, but
instead only in "making the point", you fire away "cheerfully" no matter
how many people you piss off.

This is not your style, however. You like to think of yourself as the
great conciliator or "triangulator", if you will. The problem is that your
ideas are so whacked-out that the left-wing consensus that exists on this
list presents something of a brick wall. Once upon a time there were other
outspoken reformists on the list who would be willing to take a position,
for example, in favor of NATO bombing of the Serbs, as you did. They have
either left us or prefer to lurk nowadays.

I myself knew in advance that if I got back on PEN-L, I would generally
keep my mouth shut because I was in the enemy's camp. Over there, Jerry
Levy and Barcley Rosser "rule". What happened is that a PEN-L'er, almost
the minute I arrived, tried to get me into a debate about market
socialism. 

I said to myself, "Who needs this shit" and got off the list. I would
prefer to have debate or discussion with people I am close to at this
point in my life. I am looking forward to challenging Louis Godena, who I
consider to be a real friend and comrade, on the role of the working-class
during the antiwar movement. Why should I waste my time trying to convince
a bunch of tenured "pwogwessive" professors about the validity of the
Soviet experiment.

> 
> 
> >>>
> I do not want to hear from Louis that Per is only 19 years old, unless
> Per tells me so himself. I can only say I have found his comments usually as
> sensible as most people from 19-69 and I do not want to have to spend time
> guessing whether Louis is playing the political psychopath again.
> <<<
> 

Louis: I'll tell you what, Dr. Burford. The next time you use the word
psychopath when you refer to me, I will take the following action: I will
commandeer a nuclear submarine in the Hudson River and install Doug
Henwood as my first mate, Louis Godena as my munitions officer and Scott
McLemee as my mess officer. We will next sail up the Thames and train our
sights on your clinic. Then we will direct a Tomahawk nuclear guided
missile with your name written on it directly at you. This time I am *not*
joking.


> It is in everyone's interests
(clip)
 
> IMO it is quite permissible
(clip)

> It would be better 
(clip)

Louis: Look at the Pecksniff in action handing down judgements. Chris, you
need a little bit of moral authority to indulge in this sort of thing. Pay
a little attention to the way you are being received on this list lately.
Carrol Cox read you the riot act. An Israeli newcomer told you to shut up
about this stuff. Doug Henwood stood up for me. (By the way, Doug is not 
above chastising me in public. He disassociated himself from my "ugly"
attack on Andrew Ross.)

You are in the same position as Jerry Levy was. Jerry used to demand
that I "behave" myself, but most people--including yourself--thought that
Jerry himself was out of line. Now you have stepped into Jerry's shoes.
The Ward 6 story has played itself out. You have exchanged uniforms with
the mental patient and now walk up and down the parapets of M-I talking to
yourself.

> if it could be said that Barkely and Hans accept Louis Proyect's statement
> that he has not and would not compromise an opponent to his/her boss.
> For my part if I were to add my name to any statement I would want
> a genuine and voluntary statement that LP understands that personal 
> attacks rather than political criciticisms do not have a place in 
> building a principled marxist unity, even on a marxist mailing list, 
> because the fact is repeatedly he is willing to use intimidation,
> threats and contempt to deal with people with whom he  happens
> as a matter of material accident to have differences.
> 

Louis: "Contempt"? Now we are getting somewhere. I am absolutely
filled with contempt for you.

> The full post by Hans E to which Louis responded with his threatening
> joke is relevant, and has been proved to be quite serious,
> contrary to what LP made out.
> 
> 
> ________________________
> 
> From: Hans Ehrbar <ehrbar-AT-marx.econ.utah.edu>
> Date: Fri, 27 Sep 1996 14:01:58 -0600
> Subject: The stinking book...
> 
> Yes, Robert is one of the moderators of marxism-intro.
> He is a compassionate revolutionary with a keen sense
> of justice.  He empathizes with his fellow people and
> he is very courageous.  While Louis Proyect first
> brought forward his unfounded charges that Robert is a
> police agent and now reneged on it without as much as
> a hint of an apology, I will try to prove that Robert
> is not destroying every email list he is on, and I
> will not renege on it.  All you will have to do is
> sign on to the list once it has started, and you will
> be able to convince yourself.  It is not Robert, it is
> Louis Proyect who is destroying lists.
> 

Louis: Yes, there is a real "epistemic" problem here. Hans is a member of
the Spoons Collective, a group of 5 or 6 people, that has *absolute power*
over us. The Spoons Collective, minus Hans, met in NY last summer. I was
invited, as was Doug Henwood. The consensus was that Robert Malecki was
destroying the Marxism list, not me. (Odd that I would even be invited, if
I was such a great destroyer.) Everybody wanted to get rid of the
unmoderated list, period, but decided to keep it going under a new name
just to placate Hans. This new unmoderated list, which I am not a member
of, has been *unsuccessful* according to you, Chris Burford. Meanwhile,
marxism-international, which I have devoted every ounce of my intellect
and energy to, is *successful* in your words.

These facts do not matter to our Dr. Pecksniff, however. He is deep in his
obsession with me, as was Jerry Levy and as is Barkley Rosser. When
obsession takes over, all is lost.




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