exclusion (Re: la revolution)

[Michael Eisenscher]

I agree with Frances.  Have we on the left learned nothing from our history
of purges?  If someone's comments are beneath your willingness to address
them seriously, then don't respond.  If you believe a poster has committed
an offense against another's dignity, shown insensitivity, or been
irresponsible, you can point it out without resorting to vitriole,
invective, or accusations about their unstated motivations.  If their
message could be read a number of ways, before leaping to the worst possible
interpretation, ask them what they meant.  Let's not turn this list into a
religious sect admissable only to "true believers."  If you want to be Pope,
go to Rome and apply.  I believe the job will come open in the not too
distant future.

In solidarity,
Michael

At 06:44 PM 8/23/1998 -0400, Frances Bolton (PHI) wrote:
>
>On Sun, 23 Aug 1998, Carroll and Louis attack James from philly:
>
>> >I suggest everyone simply ignore
>> >him. (Remember, his was the case I suggested could stand as a metaphor
>> >for a potential practical problem in a party not exercising the power to
>> >expel members.)
>> >
>> I think he should be expelled. Doug has no problems with right-wing thought
>> as long as it is intelligently expressed. Withrow clearly does not get to
>> first base.
>
>Louis and Carroll:
>
>I respect both of you, and I've learned alot from both of you. I read most
>of your stuff with great interest (except the Tobin tax--I'm skipping
>that).
>
>Your reactions (as well as those of others) towards James bother me. No,
>we might not agree with his stance on Mumia or Cuba. We might think that
>his comments about people living in ghettos put forth before they were
>fully thought out. But I don't think those comments make it appropriate to
>call him a racist and a reactionary. They are enough to ask him if he
>realizes the implications of his claims.
>
>The only way I could condone expelling someone from a list is if they were
>consistently rude, or if they deliberately and consistently made
>inflammatory remarks. If someone has not joined a list in good faith,
>i.e., if we had a republican or a member of the US Taxpayers Party, in our
>midst, I would endorse an explusion. I don't know that we could accuse
>James of any of these things. 
>
>I'm not trying to offend you, but these posts reminded me of children
>ganging up on and beating up the kid who was weakest and least popular.
>Reading them made me cringe a bit. If I were at the recieving end of them,
>I'd be hurt. And, it makes me a bit nervous about posting anything at all,
>wondering when you are going to turn and attack me. Sorry if I sound
>sanctimonious, but I've seen some real viciousness here and on PEN-L, and
>I hope we can avoid more. 
>
>Yours, 
>Frances
>
>