>>> Louis Proyect <lnp3 at panix.com> 11/27 3:37 PM >>>
Charles Brown:
> Why don't you
>draw that anti-Chris Burford thread to a close
>Louis ? We get your point.
Charles, I am the moderator of the Marxism mailing-list, as Doug is the moderator of the lbo-talk mailing-list. If Doug told me to stop bickering with Chris, I'd honor his request. On another moderated list, PEN-L, Michael Perelman occasionally advises me privately or the list publicly that it is time to move on. His timely interventions have made PEN-L a top-quality list. ___________
Charles: So what, moderators as posters should be subject to the same standards as others. Your harassment of Chris Burford, which you seem to think is so edifying for everybody, is just as tiring as things that tire you. I don't have to be a moderator to make that judgement publically.
And I will be commenting on your other list conduct as the occasion arises.
Anyway, I did move on. Racism is different than hate crimes.
__________
I thought the "hate crime" discussion had degenerated. It was turning into the sort of empty breast-beating that typified the 1960s. _____________
Charles: As one of the major breast-beaters on these lists, your judgement of what is breastbeating is rather suspect. Your breastbeating about the French Revolution as not a revolution
is about as stale as rightwing historiography from the last 50 years. If breastbeating is prohibited, you will have to stop repeating constantly about "stagism" and the like.
The 60's were ahead of the 90's in the struggle against racism. You have backslid from the 60's.
One of the main forms of left racism is censorship of "breastbeating" against racism. Amazing how quickly white people get uncomfortable with too much talk about racism and hate crimes. Statements like "analyzing peoples' email posts for their racial sensitivity is just a waste of bandwidth" is a typical statement of this left racism. Analyzing Chris Burford' liberal "errors" ad nauseum is a much less important use of bandwidth then analyzing posts for racism ( not "racial sensitivity", a typical avoidance of the word "racism")
Analyzing peoples email posts for their racial sensitivity is just a waste of bandwidth. Furthermore, people were repeating arguments that they made already. I have seen this sort of failure to come to finality on other Marxism or left-wing mailing lists and it is a source of deep frustration for people who are looking for solid information in the form of well-researched posts. __________
Charles: Your conclusion that the posts didn't have"solid information" is a poor political judgement in itself. Your moderation decisions are not immune from political critique.
The deep frustration that people might have been feeling was because white people are uncomfortable discussing racism sharply for long periods of time because it causes them to start doing some self-criticism; it makes them feel they might have to make some significant changes in their own thinking and action.
How many Black people are on your list ? How many of them were frustrated ?
____________
I pay $70 a month for the privilege of hosting a Marxism mailing list. I find it deeply satisfying because the seriousness of the participants and the high quality of the posts competes favorably with print journals. I have a bias toward contributions that represent people's own thinking on a subject rather than attempts to refute what other people are saying. That being said, I don't particularly mind when such an exchange breaks out. I do, however, reserve for myself the right to state that the discussion has hit a brick wall. People were discussing "hate crimes" over a five day period and nobody showed signs of budging an inch from their original positions. This becomes a sterile exercise that discredits Marxism. _______________
Charles: The discussion shifted to racism from hate crimes. Anyway, I wasn't in the discussion in the first day or so. I only joined in the second day. Those who had been arguing my side, went away for a while so I was responding to three people.
What discredits Marxism is socalled Marxists evincing the ideas as they were on your list. That you think polemics against positions that will truly discredit Marxism are sterile means you don't have good political judgement.
I think that both you and Henry are brilliant thinkers. I do think, however, that you both seem to have trouble following the initiatives of cyberchairs like Doug and me.The other day you posted 11 times to LBO-Talk. I know for a fact that you would have kept getting warnings that you had exceeded the 3-post limit. _________
Charles: What are you a little cyberspace police agent counting posts ? You seem to be quite talkative on these lists to me. Not only that you post long ass e-mails that take up lots of bandwidth.
I have no warnings from Doug of any type for days. So what you know as a fact is false. I have not one warning from Doug for weeks. Now we will see whether there is any difference between you two.
Anyway, you like to brag about how there are no limits on your list. So which is it Lou ? Having no limits is good or is it only good sometimes when you are being challenged on substantive issues.
For these forums to be effective, there has to be some direction from a moderator. I have seen one Marxism list after another trashed over the past four years because participants thought that the rules didn't apply to them. That will not happen in marxism at panix.com.
__________
Charles: A lot of these lists have been recked by moderators , from what I can tell. You and others love to post to this list about how you are still fighting rear guard actions against evil moderators on other lists. That's not real interesting to those of us who were not on those lists with you. Oh but I'm sure that's not a waste of bandwidth.
Charles Brown
Detroit