Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 14:50:43 -0800
From: iwp.ilo-AT-ix.netcom.com (CEP )
Subject: Re: Censorship and evasions


You(Chris) wrote: 
>
>Jerry did not like my specific endorsement in a post signed
>as a comoderator, that Kevin had the right to warn
>that if Elsequin persisted in obscene attacks he would
>go to Elsequin's postmaster.
>
>That's tough for Jerry, but unless I see a lot of posts
>suddenly condemning Kevin for his statement, I conclude
>that people feel he does indeed have the right to do
>that. Perhaps in fact one of our 350 subscribers has
>done so already.

    Carlos:

    Dear Chris:  Your attempts to always meddle in the middle of a      
    melee reminds me of an old friend I had.  He will always stay
    in the middle of kids who wanted to puch each other.  The problem
    was that he always ended up being a little bit as everyone he
    tried to separate.

    In other words, when you assume the "intellectual-in the-middle"
    about Shiny S.... (I promised to Louis I won't say the S word
    anymore), you started to sound a little bit as justificating their
    actions.  Then you tried with Maoism in China, a little, almost
    shy defense, always trying to use some legalistic recourse of
    "not convicing evidence" and so forth ...  I got bored of your
    demands for a kind of process that will satify your lack of         
    commitment to any explicit working class primncipples, such as
    "Thou Shall Not Kill Another Leftist Without Conclusive proof of
    His/Her abominable crimes and niot before you gave him/her ample
    opportunity to defend himself-herself"

    It is equally boring when you try to discuss whether Stalin killed
    six, three or two and half million people in his pursue of the
    bureaucratic strangling of the revolution.

    And just in case you're interested.  I think your threats or        
    anybody's threats of going to court, dennounce anyu member of this 
    list to the "postmaster" or "taking care" of the opponent are
    wrong.  Some more than others, no matter who did it and when.  I
    would suggfest that all of you drop it and address the political
    questions. not as a numerologist or an alchimist or an accountant
    but as a Marxist.

    Moreover, Chris, try to address more of the substance (you do
    quite well when you try) and less about the "process", particularly
    the process in this list (and this goes to all who are worry about 
    the process more than they are about discussing real issues).

    I, for one, already agreed not to use the S... word anymore, not
    because I cahnged my mind about the PCP but because I don;t like
    the idea of the centrists to use as a way to avoid taking a         
    position on the issue at hand: Do you agree, or not, with the
    established practice of Maoists in Peru, of killing leftists they
    accusse of being "collaborators" without proof, without due process
    of any sort?

    Comradely.
    Carlos




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

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