Re: [Marxism] Is H-Net going under?

["Mark Lause" <MLause@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Certainly anyone should be free to sniff indignantly at whatever anyone else
says.  I've no real problem with who's subscribed, or the moderated nature
of the list or even who might be made to feel unwelcome on them.

Rather, the problem was that the H-Net lists never really discussed much of
anything.  H-SHEAR (the Early American Republic) initiated (at least from
what I encountered) an interesting experiment in "interactive book reviews."
The review was posted, the author responded, and the floor was opened for
discussion.  This failed to generate much discussion during the time I was
on that list, however.

I must plead guilty to having been in some of the bigger rows on H-LABOR and
H-CIVWAR . . . on issues like Haymarket or the nature of the Southern
secession.  The former list frustrated me a great deal because of its
unwillingness to address the nature of academic labor in higher education
and its liturgical deference to the gods and goddesses of the elite
institutions.

In other words, the structure of these lists mirrors the inexplicably
hierarchical nature of academe. If the norm is to defer to one's
"betters"--and you can't get the visual cues to tell who that is on
email--the default position is almost always dead silence.

As I've argued repeatedly, there is no way such a system reforms itself, and
it's a waste of time trying.  It's also a complete waste trying to follow
their lead as to which fads is or isn't relevant.

Solidarity!
Mark L.






________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism