Date: Sun, 25 Jun 1995 21:53:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Jim Jaszewski <ab975-AT-main.freenet.hamilton.on.ca>
Subject: Re: Lumpen intelligentsia?



On Sun, 25 Jun 1995, Chris Burford wrote:

> I realise I probably present myself to someone like Jim as a 
> delicate soul and maybe I don't have quite the same sense of humour
> (I did enjoy his reference to the elephant however) but I 
> find the following exchange from Friday very disturbing.
> 
> >>>>
> 
> > What I'd like to get from them, and
> > sometimes do from Louis, is interesting substantive discussion.
> 
> 	Don't worry; I'll have your back against the wall yet (or maybe
> I'll just have you put against the wall, hnyuck, nyuck...  :)

	What are you, a boy scout??  You'll find THAT kind of black humor 
in any 'Ruskie' jokebook! Ever read one -- or are they too depressingly 
REAL for you?? Sheesh!...

	I expect this kind of censorious pettiness (not to mention lack of
funnybone) from 'our' bourgeois opponents -- who will attack ANYTHING
possible. No holds barred -- but in a genteel manner, of course... 

	This only confirms further my suspicions that this list is full of 
earnest non-marxists...


> What on earth does "hnyuck, nyuck" mean?

	It's something the Three Stooges would say, fool. (why fool? Read
further...)


 The whole image sounds most 
> unappealing and really an allusion to a sort of male rape, certainly 
> when you consider that it is a physical and psychological violation of the
> person of an extreme and dramatic form. After all most rapes by men of 
> women are motivated more by themes of violence and power than by sexual
> gratification. But in this vernacular the image is that the male 
> victim's back is against the wall so of course it is not sexual, and 
> does not compromise the aggressor's image of his own masculinity. I don't
> think that makes it OK at all. The act may not be erotic. It is highly
> physical and violent.

	Boy, you ARE full of it...

	And I'm only being so rude because of this rather bizarre attack,
TOTALLY unjustified. Like I said, I expect it of the humorless bourgeois
(stalinist?) types. Trust them to want to tie me down on questions of
FORM, not substance... 

	(For those who may be wondering why I feel justified in slinging
around the term 'bourgeois', the above is not a bad example of why.)


> Justin may well have a thick skin and can look after himself but other
> valuable contributors to this list may not. Even if I am annoyed by 
> how I experience Justin at times as a self-appointed member of the 
> logic police, I find the prospect of watching an e-mail male rape 
> unartistic. If the two of you have to act this out, I would appreciate 
> it if you could do it off stage.

	I think it's YOU who has the sick mind here, fella. Not to mention
being a bit thick... I was referring to a FIRING squad -- not a rape (tho'
I suppose it could be taken the way you saw it -- if one were looking to
color it that way...)


> Bluntly Jim, although I want a development and application of 
> marxist ideas as much as you, I myself feel violated by how you appear to 
> have burst into this room, said "Hi here I am!" and "I enjoy putting 
> anyone I consider is not a marxist up against a wall and working them 
> over".

	And, bluntly, you are one of the pecking-est of the pecking order
I've found here yet...

	Now, instead of just letting my 'bad taste' slide by, YOU are
gonna make a federal case of it, not least for the reason, I suspect,
BECAUSE I am new here and you don't like what I am saying, but it's easier
to try to set me up for the other censorious types here, rather than face,
head-on, a new opponent... 

	This is the kind of tactic I would expect of a class enemy...

	I mean, this is truly bizarre that I have to respond to this
swill... 


> Did you spend even a few days let alone a week to watch and read the 
> house style that has developed on this list before jumping in? 

	What crap. You mean, did I try to fit myself into your idea of 
the pecking order? *MAY* I point out that this whole post revolves around 
YOUR totally mis-understanding a bad joke and taking EXTREME offence to 
it. As if it were really any of your business. It was not even a personal 
attack!!

	YOU are the one who's out of line here -- but again, I know you 
are counting on your buddies to gang-up on me (as if fairness had 
anything to do with that strategy...)

	These LONG and tedious posts attacking ME are not generated by ME.
They are generated by YOU and others LIKE YOU. Yet I have the feeling that
an attempt is being made to heap ALL this wasted verbiage on MY head.

	As I said -- such an attack strategy is a favorite of those in
positions of power, which they intend to keep. You are probably right to
see me as a threat to your position though... However, I really don't
remember your politics, but I am pretty sure now that YOU are not where
the intellectual action is here... 


> because you seem to have imported some habits from some other
> e-mail culture that seem alien and destuctive, rather than creative.

	Pompous twit.


> I don't blame you for being unemployed, but how long have you been
> unemployed, and how are you occupying your time? because frankly in 
> Marxist terms I think you are displaying some lumpen characteristics.

	You are a true idiot...


> If there is a lumpen proletariat, perhaps nowadays there is such a 
> thing as a lumpen intelligentsia. Is your social being determining your
> consciousness, Jim?

	&*$^ you, swellhead..


> I am sure you will concede that is a very Marxist question.

	If you are a marxist, the capitalists can rest easy...


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
   Jim Jaszewski   <jazz-AT-freenet.hamilton.on.ca>

   WWW homepage:   <http://www.freenet.hamilton.on.ca/~ab975/Profile.html>

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-



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

     ------------------