Maoist polemic on line or persons?

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

This l'st is created by conflict, and the delicate balance
which allows something creative to come out of it.

C addresses fellow Maoists:

"Let's all try and be Maoists, raise our struggle to the level of line."

Chance would be a fine thing. The Maoist influx into this l'st has turned into
a bit of a bloodbath. Slippery stuff, blood.

It prompts the
question what is it in the Maoist ideological approach that is
vulnerable to this degeneration, when in words all the right
things can be said about curing the sickness to save the patient etc.

Is it a combination of rapid fire internet effects and the
late Maoist emphasis on finding any clues in the writing of
someone you don't agree with, to prove they are a representative
of the bourgeoisie "smuggled in", "nestling beside" etc.

All this confusion just shows how Fujimori is continuing to reap
benefits from the capture of Guzman and the handling of the
press statements. There is something extraordinarly blinkered
in the approach to issues of credibility by the Maoists on this
l'st that they can't see that, when a bit more mutual understanding,
a bit more flexibility and tolerance, would allow the spotlight
to fall on Fujimori's weaknesses not on theirs.

It is welcome that people have drawn back from the accusations of
financial wrongdoing levelled against both Quispe and Olaechea.
I suggest again that such an accusation is  unprovable
on an internet forum like this that it should be seen
as out totally of order and therefore reflects the ill judgement of
those that make it.

But it seems the accusation of police agent, is still being made
against one of the posters. It is a fact that state representatives
will be gleaning and sifting correspondence on this l'st. The
sheer volume gives them a rather high dross to jewel ratio.
But they do not need to be remarkable at all to subscribe.
The only other thing of benefit to them is stirring up utterly
divisive conflict.We are quite good at that anyway of course,
but they may always give it a helping hand. Another reason to avoid
making personal attacks that cannot be justified.

I do not understand how it is proper that Quispe should be
arbitrarily called a police agent. Marcelina, I recall unwisely
IMHO calling Borja a traitor. And it most unlikely to be true
that Tony's hair reaches the ground literally. But surely the
proper thing is to present the evidence of being a police agent
if there is any evidence
of substance discretely to sources in the PCP so that they can
quietly decide how much confidence to continue to place in this
channel. And let that estimate quietly get about. I cannot see how it is
proper to throw round such
remarks in a flame war on a public internet forum like this.
Unless it can be overwhelmingly proved, anyone repeating it
to a lesser degree, however convinced they might be, just damages
their own standing.

If Maoists want to spend time contributing to a forum that
they must presumably see as composed mainly of labour aristocrats
>from the imperialist countries, could they out of respect to
themselves, if not out of respect to the rest of us, decide how
to be more efficient at looking after their own credibility.

Chris Burford
(not a moderator for many months)



     --- from list marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---