File spoon-archives/marxism-thaxis.archive/marxism-thaxis_1997/marxism-thaxis.9710, message 369


Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 10:00:32 +0200
From: Hugh Rodwell <m-14970-AT-mailbox.swipnet.se>
Subject: M-TH: When is a moronic slug not a moronic slug?


More on the Humpty-Dumpty character of "Marxist" discourse in the hands of
Stalinists.

Under the heading of "The list revitalized?", I posted the following to
M-International, where the discourse, officially along roughly the same
lines as here, is in the hands of Stalinists:

>Since it's way over a week since I was suspended, perhaps it's time to
>speak out again.
>
>Considering that  the rumpus all started with what were considered
>non-political vituperations of a purely personal kind by one subscriber
>against another, perhaps the moderators could let us know in what sense the
>following post is NOT non-political vituperation of a purely personal kind:
>
>
>>>You should have gotten struck by lightning, you moron. Who gives a rat's
>>>ass? I didn't expect you to be as
>>>superficial in your reply as this.Did you see your reflection in a
>>>mirror, you
>>>vampire creep. You are Rush Limbaugh. Heartfield thinks that the crap that
>>>comes out of his brain is "controversial".This LM is about as unsavory a
>>>bunch as you are going to find.
>>
>>>If Heartfield had a brain instead of a big mouth,his outfit is made up of
>>>slugs Louis Proyect
>
>This is not the first post of this character by Louis Proyect.
>
>Now, if the moderators mean business with their statements of the past week
>or two, and want to run a railroad that keeps on the tracks, they would be
>well advised to apply their new strict interpretation of the rules
>even-handedly.
>
>Given that a subscriber has raised the question of the character of the
>above posting in relation to rules that were invoked to justify expulsions
>and suspensions, I expect an official answer on the point by the moderators.
>
>Gay in particular justified the actions of the moderators on the grounds
>that they would encourage a higher and cleaner level of political
>discussion. Perhaps we need to be enlightened as to the political
>implications of "vampire creep", "moron", "slugs" and "a rat's ass".
>
>Jerry provided a political explanation of his language, but it wasn't
>considered to come up to scratch.
>
>Let's see how the present case compares.


I received the following answer from Stalinist moderator Louis Godena:

>While Louis Proyect has been asked to avoid this type of language in the
>future, his post differs substantially from those that resulted in the
>departure of Jerry Levy, *et al*.  For one thing, Mr Levy repeatedly flamed
>his nemises on marxism-international.  In fact, an examination of his posts
>reveal that he seldom wrote about anything else.  For another, Louis
>Proyect's rhetoric, while inflammatory, is centered around a political
>point; namely, the misquoting by James Heartfield of "statistics" "proving"
>a fact that he must have known is absurd.  And, as long as we are on the
>subject of misnomers, "rat's ass" in this case is a figure of speech and not
>directed at anyone in particular.  "Vampire creep", "slug", etc., do not
>differ substantially from the type of animism used by Lenin to scourge his
>enemies.
>
>But, of course, Hugh is splitting hairs here to make a point.  There is a
>world of difference between the occasional use of the word "moron", "slug",
>"vampire creep" in a post attacking the political position of an opponent,
>and the repeated, daily barrage of invective (and nothing else) that
>regularly emitted from the pens of the departed Messrs. Malecki and Levy.
>Hugh of course knows this, and all his jailhouse lawyering, slyly presented
>as a legal brief, cannot disguise this salient fact.
>
>Further, the moderators have no intention of being dragged into this type of
>political sophmorism, which always aims, not at serious argument, but toward
>Appeals to the Liberal Conscience, always on the part of those who routinely
>wear their Militancy and Higher Knowledge of Revolutionary Marxism on their
>sleeves.

1 In Stalinist eyes, Proyect's malevolent and baseless slurs are not
repeated occurrences!

2 In Stalinist eyes, Proyect's malevolent and baseless slurs are "centered
around a political point", ie the misquoting of statistics thereby
rendering a fact absurd.

3 In Stalinist eyes, Proyect's language and purpose "do not>differ
substantially from the type of animism used by Lenin to scourge his
enemies".

4 In Stalinist eyes, the posts of Bob M and Jerry L to M-I consisted of
nothing but invective.

5 In Stalinist eyes, I am splitting sophomorical hairs, while Proyect and
Godena (and Adolfo of course) are engaged in "serious argument".


In a word, for Stalinists anything is permitted if it "scourges ...
political enemies".

This is a combination of turf warfare and pragmatism that has nothing to do
with Marxism or Leninism.

Cheers,

Hugh







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

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005