Date: Thu, 5 Jun 1997 18:42:48 +0200
From: Hugh Rodwell <m-14970-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se>
Subject: M-I: Louis P barges in to poison an interesting discussion


As if butter wouldn't melt in his mouth, and as if discussing value theory
on Thaxis had nothing in the world to do with discussing value theory on
International or General, or could be considered relevant to Marxism as it
exists without the mediation of Poof! Gone Spoonism, Louis P writes:

 >I have been following a rather interesting thread on thaxis between Jerry
>Levy and Doug Henwood on the relevance of value theory to understanding
>the class struggle. Hugh jumped into the thread in midstream and took the
>opportunity to crosspost his potentially interesting thoughts to this
>thread all over the Spoons map.

Snitch talk.

We'd never guess anything on value theory was of any interest to Louis P,
as he never gives us his opinion. Also the thread was by no means limited
to Doug and Jerry.

Louis P is pretending that a thread is some kind of sacred ritual performed
in the Spoon sanctuary, and that I have been guilty of some kind of breach
of etiquette. This tells us more about his attitude to the discussion of
Marxism than anything else. Perhaps he will propose a list rule for a
period of entry to a thread? Anyone *late* will be sent to detention!

I love the "potentially interesting" comment. It would have been
interesting, but unfortunately the wrapping was wrong ...

"All over the Spoons map" is crazy. Since the question is central to
Marxism I posted to another two lists besides Thaxis, where I knew there
would be interested readers (not everybody, but enough).

Louis goes on:

>The problem is that nobody can really appreciate the background of the
>discussion unless they are on thaxis. We simply don't know what Doug's
>prior thoughts on the matter are and all we know is that he serves as a
>straw man for a set of ideas that Hugh can flail away at. From the quote
>taken out of context, we might assume that Doug is some kind of
>neo-Ricardian, while Hugh is the authentic Marxist.

For a Marxist interested in the value question, the material I posted
contained quite enough context. Others are welcome to expand the thread by
asking questions.

Louis of course personalizes the discussion as if I was lashing into Doug.
I discuss general ideas -- vulgar vs Marxist economics -- and if anybody
chooses to identify with either set of ideas, they'll know where they fit
into my appreciation of the different theories. Any reasonable reader can
see that I don't choose to identify Doug with the anti-value, vulgar
economists, although others have. I choose to see Doug as posing a question
on its merits. It would in fact surprise me very much if he put forward a
positive standpoint on this question. His agnostic eclecticism lends itself
very well to putting questions, and very badly to answering them (or
sometimes, to even seeing they've been answered).

To assume Doug is a neo-Ricardian from the exchange is nonsense, as
Ricardianism is an attempt to bring value theory back into economics. The
assumption given an identification of Doug with the anti-value crowd would
be that he is a vulgar, psychologizing economist trapped in the conceptual
fetishism of the capitalist mode of production. I don't make this
assumption. Louis should learn something about the fundamentals of Marxism.

As for authentic, the subscribers can decide who's closest to Marx's ideas,
but this requires some idea of what they are and how history has treated
them, so Louis isn't in a strong position to say anything sensible on this.


>Now I would say that if this latest violation goes by without action from
>the moderators, then let's simply drop the statute against crossposting.
>The moderators remind me all too much of the kind of 5th grade teacher I
>was back in 1968. "If you misbehave once more," I'd say in the sternest
>tones I could muster, "I'm going to call in your parents." After 2 or 3
>warnings and no summons to the parents, the kids would figure out that I
>was not serious.

This is the real business-in-hand for Louis of course. Call the cops. Throw
out an opponent.

Fortunately, Louis himself isn't the cop here. Neither is Poof! Gone.

And fortunately there are still subscribers who can recognize important
discussions when they see them and resist the temptation to poison the
exchanges by howling for repressive organizational attacks on people they
disagree with.

Christ I'm glad I never had Louis as a teacher.

Cheers,

Hugh

I'm all for his proposal for dropping the statute against cross-posting, of
course, but then what would he be able to fall back on to call for the
expulsion of the Trots? Perhaps we need a formalistic, organizational thing
like this to remind us from time to time of the bigoted sectarian formalism
of Louis's approach and of the underlying class forces that make the Louis
Ps of this world tick.








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