Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 14:29:20 -0400
From: Louis Proyect <lnp3-AT-panix.com>
Subject: Re: M-I: A new home for m-i (Was: Tumbrils away!)


>Again, what I do is my business.  I am not taking the Spoons imprimatur, nor
>do I  have any desire to do so.  I am simply insuring the survival of both
>M-I and M-and-S, albeit in somewhat different forms.  Jones can say whatever
>he wants.
>
>I will say whatever I want. 
>
>Louis G

This exchange is symptomatic of the sort of difficulty we must put behind
us in order for the new M-I to have viability. Stop and think about it.
Godena says he hates Jones and has refused to answer his private mail in
the recent past. Meanwhile, Jim Hillier will have nothing to do with either
of them. And all 3 of these good comrades believe--to one extent or
another--in the revolutionary continuity of Stalin with Lenin and Marx. If
these sorts of animosities can not be healed at the outset between people
who are largely in agreement on historical questions, then a new M-I is a
doomed project.

Last night I had a long talk with Louis G. and I told him (and Mark
privately) that what we should be shooting for is the quality of discussion
that marked M-I in the first few months. If you turn the clock back and
examine the archives, you will find tip-top analysis of the East Asian
economy by Godena, thoughtful contributions from Adolfo on the situation in
Peru and a truly inspired reflection on Soviet history by Mark. And then
everything started to come apart at the seams. The unspeakably evil Jerry
Levy decided to use Mark's post as an excuse to open up a big campaign
against "Stalinists" and all hell broke loose. My position at the time was
that Levy was trying to destroy M-I, as he openly claimed on thaxis. That
he was able to accomplish so much destruction in a short time shows that he
is highly skilled at this one thing.

At around the same time, I was doing what I like to do which is research
some topic and write longish posts. Frankly, I am not particularly
interested in "debating" anybody because nobody is willing to do their
homework. That is why people like Rodwell and Bedggood were such a waste of
time. They lived for debate, but could be less interested in information.
Argument without information is not only a waste of bandwidth, it is an
insult to the memory of people like Marx and Lenin, who spent countless
hours in libraries collecting facts to buttress their arguments.

The recent discussion of the "wharfie" strike is a sign of how good M-I can
be when we are all travelling down the same road. If the new M-I can serve
to facilitate this kind of exchange, then it is absolutely worth fighting for.

I have to admit that I am still a little unsure about what Louis G. has in
mind. He obviously has his own notion about what "real" Marxism consists of
and has made no secret that he regards much of what I say as reformist
poison. On the other hand, Louis G. is somebody who needs a foil like me to
operate off of, so there's a bit of a symbiosis implied in the
relationship. Of course, when he is paying the bills for the new list,
there is an added leverage he has in enforcing any disciplinary decisions
against someone like myself, who not only has rotten, Mensheviki,
opportunist, social-fascist politics, but is quite obstreperous in
defending them. Grrrr!

In any case, if we can decide that the model of M-I in its early days is
what we want, then I think we are in good shape. If not, then it is
important for Louis G. to spell out what he has in mind so that we can
provide input into the decision-making process or make alternative choices.

Louis Proyect



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