Re: moderation, list purpose

["Chris, London" <100423.2040@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I'd really like to come in on the thoughtful contributions from Lisa,
and Louis.

I think what we are arguing over is an emerging process of differentiation.
Not perfectly clear, turbulent at times, certainly contradictory,
often argumentative. How is Cuba going to get discussed? Just by a stream
of consciousness? Why not, threads build their own momentum and coherence.

By someone risking taking a lead with some proposals, which others go
along with, still others criticise, and yet others skip, - why not?

Or by someone setting up a separate list - why not?

I predict that as this marxism list gets clearer about its different positions,
and major themes, it will stimulate and throw off associated discussion groups,
which hopefully will remain in contact, cross fertilize etc.

Louis has usefully conceptualised in a sense two lists on this list:

<<Needless to say, you can belong to both lists. I expect that someone like
Chris Burford would definitely be interested in both. Myself, I wouldn't
go near anything connected with theory. It makes me break out in hives.
But let's stop kidding ourselves. We have two clashing political cultures
and the sooner we face this, the better off we'll be.>>

Yes lets face it, and then the cacophony might actually seem less. We could
hear different themes and contrasting points of view more clearly with
less confusion. There might even be some harmonies.

We can look at the impressive range of discussions in the
Brecht forum and welcome that they are all taking place even if we
cannot include ourselves (I liked Lisa's point on this) in all of them.

We can turn to the arts page of our favourite newspaper, and skip the
sports page, or vice versa. We can dwell on the letters page, or only
go to a substantive article once a week. We can always read any contribution
by one of two authors, or we can dip in browse over half of everything, go away,
and come back again in a month's time. In many ways this list is a 
self-organising
publication. Crazy and chaotic, it is starting to form recognisable
although not rigid patterns. One of the basic issues is how to combine
both theory and practice and do justice to both. What a contradiction.

And Louis, after such a good, brief, and thoroughly pertinent
post on "Shining Path, Dmitrov, and Fascism", don't say "I wouldn't
go near anything connected with theory".


Regards to all,

Chris B
London.



     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

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