[PEN-L:8264] Wither Report

[sawicky@xxxxxxxxxx (Max Sawicky)]

What a gross epidemic of self-righteousness on
PEN-L and LBO these past few weeks!  This has
taken the form of denunciations of non-existent
racism on the list, unnamed neo-classical
economists, or the universe of "liberals."
We sure like ourselves, don't we?

Usually the racism attack has been clearly
attributable to political differences, since
with the exception of two or perhaps four people
of similar political leanings, nobody has seen
racist inferences in any posts.  Furthermore,
this same posture is taken as a license by some
to issue perfectly bigoted generalizations
about other groups.

It is not coincidental that most of those so
offended or concerned are not economists but are
more-or-less exclusively burdened with ideological
agendas.  These folks would be tolerable, and sometimes
interesting, but for the 'model of war' they are
packing.

This odious exploitation of an important issue
helps to make the charge of racism practically
worthless.  You cry wolf often enough, and nobody
pays attention to real wolves.  It also makes a
serious discussion of race impossible, since any
sincere expression of views is discouraged by the
threat of personal denunciation.  All this is not
as big a problem as racism itself, but it certainly
makes dealing with racism more difficult.  It's
the cyber-edition of the Tawana Brawley episode.

The generalizations about neo-classical economists and
liberals have not been applied to literal individuals
here, but they have been ascribed to the personal
character of such persons.  As such, their
implications are clear enough.  Not too long ago,
Patrick Bond provided a distressingly long list
of South African radicals who had sold out under
the new regime.  In the same vein, the shortcomings
of communists in power are plain.  This is not to
imply any relative impurity on the left, only to
say that generalizations can be empty things and
humility can be a good thing.

What's implicit ought to be made explicit:  the
attacks are an effort at inter-personal manipulation,
emotional blackmail, and intellectual intimidation.
Or else they are simply an expression of personal
frustration or rage over one's powerlessness
regarding other, greater demons.

Anybody with experience in radical politics can
recognize these hoary efforts to create some kind
of group discipline out of a disorderly contention
over ideas.  And anyone with experience in real
politics (radical and otherwise) can see how
pathetic the enterprise is.  It's campus & cult
stuff--you're in our group and you're cool, or
you're shit.  It's symptomatic of the marginalization
of the U.S. left in the real world, where hair-trigger
accusations of racism or moral condemnation never get
out of the starting gate, as far as the general public
is concerned.  This reflects well on the public.

Naturally a mailing list ought to be a hospitable
place for vigorous, even furious debate about ideas,
with a minimum of aspersions on the personal character
of others, directly or indirectly.  One of the wonders
of this, frankly, is Mike Perelman's tolerance of and
even light, occasional dalliance in the most bitter
language pertaining to those classified by some as
unradical, and his contrary posture regarding much
milder stuff coming from the other direction.
I appreciate his labors in running the list, but
I have to question his exercise of impartiality.
This was obvious in the past re: LP vs. GL, though
since then LP has more-or-less mellowed out.

"If you don't like it, why not leave?" some might
ask.  Well fuck you.  If you don't want a diverse
list, you can leave.  To me PEN-L is a bit like a
public utility; no narrow point of view has
exclusive rights to it.

I have lately avoided directly engaging others who
can't hold up a civil exchange and will continue to
do so, but I have to say the general climate on PEN-L
is deteriorating.  It's not enough to warn people
who directly address or refer to other individuals.
If this is not going to be a nasty, sectarian
M-L list, moderation has to be more moderating.


Max Sawicky