Re: moderation, list purpose

[g.maclennan@xxxxxxxxxx]

On Tue, 30 Jan 1996, Ralph Dumain wrote:

> This is really reprehensible.  In fact, there are tons of online forums
> for political discussion.  One or two combine both thery and practice,
> the rst are mostly issue-oriented.  p.news.discuss did both a few years
> ago.  All of Peacenet isdevoted to social issues.  Ths list presumably
> delas with theoretical, historical, and practical matters, hopefully
> from a standoint that involves more rationcination than day-to-day activism.
> Stop acting like_you_ own this list.  Perhaps you are the one who is in
> the wrong place.  Your behavior over the past couple of months has been
> reprehensible, especially now that you are a moderator.
>
>
I cannot believe the above.  Ralph, who knows I love him BTW, has called
me a jackass and vermin on this list for even daring to cheep up about
afro-american issues.  Straight up Ralph this is unworthy of you.

Louis and Ralph have alas fallen out.  But of course the bad feeling is
all on Ralph's part.

It does indeed seem at times that Louis is like a lightning rod on this
list for people's neuroses.

Somewhere in space there is
a post I sent out yesterday about Jerry and Louis so I will wait and see
if it turns up.  If not I will rewrite another piece about Jerry's
obsession with Louis.

Now about the list.  I am one of those who think things are going very
well.  there are of course spats and the spontaneity of the list can at
times work against it being a vehicle for serious political thought.


Now a word on Louis' method.  He is of course a classic stick bender in
the Leninist mode.  He over stresses (deliberately) one side of the
dialectic.  Now comrades is there any one out there who thinks that
contemporary Marxist writng is in danger of moving too much in the
direction of praxis?  Is there anyone who thinks that today's academics
are in danger of writing too simply?

Louis has insisted on people writing clearly.  Frankly I admire him for
that.  Jerry interprets this through the prism of his own views on the
lists.  He sees thought police and censorship at work.  For him the
seminar on Cuba will be a "disaster"  Wrong, very wrong. Like the fascism
seminar, it will give shape to the list and bring some focus and, yes,
discipline to a percentage  of the contributions.

I repeat the Cuban seminar will not interfere with other threads.  Nor will
any contribution be censored.  At the end of it we will all have learned
something provided of course we do not see our main task on the list as
keeping tabs on Louis or treat the contributions as term papers.


regards

gary



     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---

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