Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 09:55:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: Louis N Proyect <lnp3-AT-columbia.edu>
Subject: A reply to Hans


Hans Ehrbar:
-----------
Then the Maoists came. It started with MIM. At 
that time, we did not really have an answer to 
MIM other than Chris's "I like your clear and 
assertive tone" stuff. Chris did play an 
important role because he taught us to take 
those people seriously. Most others on this list 
would just have brushed them off. We could not 
really criticize them because they were doing 
things and we were only talking. Compare this 
with the recent debates with MIM. Now we have 
people on the list who have been observing the 
work of MIM for years and can give them serious 
feedback regarding their flaws. Doug is still 
trying to brush off their theoretical analysis 
as pure nonsense, but in my mind they have their 
finger on a gap in our own analysis: an analysis 
of the class consciousness or lack thereof of 
the proletariat in the Imperialist centers.

Louis Proyect:
-------------
This gets to the very heart of our problem. MIM 
is an object of ridicule in a Nation magazine 
humor column for its bizarre position on sex 
(much more bizarre than the positions I've 
attempted in my own bedroom). Meanwhile Hans and 
Chris Burford regard MIM the way the Magi 
regarded the infant Jesus.

Martens, MIM, Neil, Malecki and others too 
numerous to mention are basically parasites. 
They feed off our list. In the same way that 
Monthly Review would not publish a letter from 
the MIM freaks challenging Harry Magdoff, a 
genuine Marxism list wouldn't let them through 
the front door.

Hans, your perceptions are so out of whack with 
what's important for Marxists to discuss that I 
sometimes have to laugh out loud.



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