File spoon-archives/marxism-international.archive/marxism-international_1997/marxism-international.9710, message 342

Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 06:24:23 -0400
Subject: Re: M-I: Constraints on Marxist discourse

>For some strange reason, that has nothing to do with the rules of M-I or
>the three-post-a-day limit, a post from a subscriber was stopped and its
>writer informed that his contributions would be dealt with on a
>post-to-post basis. This was done by a moderator who routinely and
>indiscriminately forwards posts from a non-subscriber with a content and a
>tone infinitely more destructive than this.
>Three posts a day it has been, and three posts a day it should be!!
>Stop the censorship!
>Subscribers can post as much as they like on what they like (except
>pro-Nazi stuff and unfounded cop smears etc, as we've established in the
>past). No one is forced to read stuff they don't want to.
>A few more exclusions like this and we'll have Malgosia-style M-fem
>moderation on M-I. M-fem is now dead.
>A few more exclusions like this and we'll have M-Unity-style moderation on
>M-I. M-Unity is now dead.
>A few more exclusions like this and we'll have Lenin-list-style moderation
>on M-I. Lenin-list was born a zombie and is now a lobotomized zombie.
>Louis G defends himself with the reflection that the post in question is
>not political but personal. Yup, and I'm Pamela Anderson.
>Cheers from the bright side,
>PS One last thing, the post I'm referring to is appended below for
>information. Same as a quote from Mein Kampf might be if I was digging into

Om me to! Since when is Jerry's letter a basis for Godena to put him on a 
special basis that reminds me of the thought police rather then any kind of 
Marxist criteria. In fact Aldolfo's post which write off the deformed 
workers states like China and Cuba far more repulsive then Jerry pointing 
out some of the historical qualities and actions of Proyect. All by the way 
which are true in light his political judgement.
And Godena willingly plays frontman for Aldolfo's wacko ideas and calling 
just about everybody on the M-I list far worse then anything Jerry has ever 
said. I think the other two moderaters should start moderatring the actions 
of Godena! And stop playing the fucking yes men to his "senority". It is 
Godena who is abusing the list rules by posting Aldolfo's garbage time and 
again when Aldolfo knows full well he can subscribe just like anybody else..

Warm Regards
Bob Malecki

P.S I am crossposting this to M-G so that Jerry who has been wrongly and 
bureaucratically dumped from the list can read it. I like Dave and Hugh 
oppose this shit and demand that the other two moderators do something about 
the real "rule breaker" Godena and his forwarding aldolfo's post. I demamd 
that you tell Godena that he inform Aldolfo if he wants to submit his 
garbage to the list that he subscribe and observe the rules of the three 
post a day limit..

Bob Malecki
>>Anyone who opposes censorship on m-int is free to forward the following to
>>that list./Jerry
>>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>>Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 16:20:55 -0400 (EDT)
>>From: Gerald Levy <>
>>To: marxism-international-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
>>Cc: marxism-international-digest-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
>>Subject: Siddharth the Comic
>>> From: Siddharth Chatterjee <>
>>> Louis Proyect, for all his faults and errors (accusing Bob Malecki of
>>> being an agent of the US govt. without any proof was a big mistake),
>>> is the one person on this list who contributes serious, well researched,
>>> and knowledgable posts. This is obvious to any one whether they agree
>>> with his argument or not. It is the redeeming side of his personality
>>> in comparison to which his faults and other quirks of character are
>>> minor and secondary.
>>Thank you, Siddharth -- I needed a good laugh.
>>What "serious, well researched, and knowledgeable posts"?
>>Are you referring to the endless reprints from _The New York Times_?
>> (which, btw, constitutes spam).
>>Or, are you referring to his oft-sent post on Cuba that has up-to-date
>>  statistics from the *1970's*?
>>Or, the 4th rate, poorly researched posts on the NEP and Zinoviev?
>>Or, his childish book reviews?
>>Or, his *daily* flames against countless listmembers? (that lead to newer
>>  subscribers discovering and then denouncing anew the scourge of
>>  Proyectism)
>>But, here's the real laugh! You say that calling Bob M a government agent
>>was a "big mistake." Well ... this "mistake" was made repeatedly (and
>>maliciously) on this and other lists. Was it a "mistake" when he recently
>>accused Hugh and Dave B of also being agents? Was it a "mistake" when he
>>threatened to contact Chris B's professional association to get him
>>expelled? Was it a "mistake" when he threatened to contact Hans E's
>>employer to get him fired? Was it a "mistake" when he *did* -- by his own
>>admission -- contact the supervisor (a member of mgt.) of a listmember
>>(and union member)?  Were all of his sexist comments (like "that time of
>>the month") also "mistakes"?  Have all of his patronizing attacks against
>>anyone under 50 also been "mistakes"?  Was it only a "mistake" when he
>>called all squatters "morons"? Are his national chauvinist comments (like
>>"Swedish meatballs") also "mistakes"?
>>What you call a "mistake" is part of a _p-a-t-t-e-r-n_. The pattern is of
>>a opportunist who *will say and do anything* in an attempt to discredit
>>anyone who dares to  challenge his almighty (Menshevik) authority. He is
>>simply the most unprincipled opportunist that calls himself a "Marxist"
>>that I have ever met (and that's saying a lot). He is also *THE* reason
>>why this list can not have serious conversations about *anything*.
>>I could go on (and on and on and on), but I won't. Since you have defended
>>him, you have given me more than enough reason to ignore you in the
>>future. Anyone that thinks so highly of his posts must think that Karl had
>>a brother named Groucho and Lenin was a "Beatle".
>>PS to Doug: the distinction between productive and unproductive labour is
>>important because of its relation to the calculation of the rate of
>>surplus value (s/v) and the rate of profit (s/c+v). Oh,  but I guess that
>>isn't important to you since the BLS doesn't calculate national income
>>using Marx's categories.
>>     --- from list ---
>     --- from list ---

     --- from list ---


Driftline Main Page


Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005