Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 06:55:54 GMT
From: Chris Burford <cburford-AT-gn.apc.org>
Subject: M-TH: How to/not to amplify panic


Amplification and inhibition of signal are of course
the basic methods of controlling the developing 
culture of cyberspace. Present developments on 
thaxis illustrate this.


Brain Ganter first contributed, in the form of 
the declaration called "Performative Left", on 2nd April.

By April 3rd he raised the allegation of panic, in 
a post commenting on a typically brief and relaxed post 
by Doug 

(Doug's post:

>>Yeah, but not in prose like yours, comrade. Your style is ponderous, wordy,
and obsolete. Marx wasn't like that. No one outside your charmed inner
circle would want to read past the first sentence. Your theory may be just
fine, but style is praxis, and yours sucks.
<<


>From the commentary by Brian Ganter from RMC Buffalo:

>>The publication of
RMC/Buffalo's text has been treated by this left as an earthquake, and as
in all earthquakes, what has followed is panic and running for cover...the
cover of "your typography is wrong ...therefore I am deleting you and
freeing myself from having to understand you" ...the cover of "style",
"vocabulary", "prose"..  The problem is however, that none of these covers
covers.  The time has come to stake out a space for revolutionary Marxist
theory and the Red Critique of RMC-Buffalo is an attempt to exactly that.
<<



On 4th April Brian Ganter contributed his first article
entitled PANIC LEFT, Pt 1. 
Thread titles have now reached PANIC LEFT 11.

>From then to the end of thaxis-digest 141, 17th April,
the word PANIC in capitals, which of course is experienced
in cyberspace as a shout, has been repeated on this list
147 times.

This does not count the effects of the diligent cross-posting 
of material to marxism-international. Nor the elaboration of
panic in lower case.

The amplification is of course helped by the 
word being in the title, with automatic reproduction 
by mailing software, even though some critics have
deliberately tried to change the thread title.


It is clearly also part of the conscious style of the 
originating posters. We now have reached "PANIC LEFT 11".

Like Barkley, I was reminded of 
Shawgi Tell who presented a series of posts with the 
thread title in capitals attacking a "YOUNG LIBERAL
FASCIST", numbered I recall up to 13 (?). What 
was striking was how this approach overwhelmed 
the possibility of genuine dialogue and argument,
by volume and repetition. To give Shawgi his due,
he did stop the thread eventually after an appeal.

I would not wish to impugn the theoretical integrity
of Shawgi Tell, or Brian Ganter or Stephen Tumino
by suggesting they hold identical theoretical
viewpoints, but clearly there has been some transfer
of genes between the different cultures, 
whether through geographical or cyberspace proximity..

Serious theoretical discussions should be engaged and 
not musty, but for this same reason I do not see how 
they can take place on a list subjected to an 
atmosphere of heightened PANIC.

The RMC wants to "stake out a place" for revolutionary
marxist theory. Could they be offered this, in return
for an amnesty on discussion of panic? And could we
trust them?

Meanwhile..
our moderators are very committed to the open contest of 
serious ideas, and IMO, there are some very complex 
issues underlying the present confrontation, so any moderation
on a theoretical list must be scrupulously impartial about
the value of the ideas expressed (except for racist etc
sentiments). But I would expect a list concentrating on
theory could accept impartial rules against for example
thread titles in capitals, and indiscriminate cross posting
which confuses which list is the main forum for 
engaging the conflict of ideas. I also think that a low volume
theoretical list must have a mechanism to guard against
rapid fire email exchanges by having a volume limit of the
number of posts per day, which on a theoretical list could
be lower than on a general list, as a discipline
to promote serious contributions. I am floating these ideas
here, because I am sure the moderators would not want to 
act in a way that the majority of constructive members of the
list would oppose.

Regards

Chris Burford



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