No subject

kelley kwalker2 at
Wed Oct 11 09:58:50 PDT 2000

you should apologize for calling both joanna and reese names and for expecting them to know something that it's taken you years to understand yourself. that is intolerant bullshit on your part and, as i said then, exactly why you will never get your wish of some sort of national or international party organization. if this is the way you treat people learning about a new topic, then they will never want to join arms with you in the struggle. this is something worth thinking about. it's an important question when it comes to issues of political practice: how to the enlightened "educate" the unenlightened.

you go on to talk about how the popular media gets it wrong. well, do you actually expect people do go out and follow up on everything they read to get the story straight? do you blame them, personally, for their ignorance? (if so, then you are certainly revealing your hypocrisy on that score)

were you, in fact, ever ignorant carrol and do you recall how it was that you learned more radical critiques. was it just an epiphany one day and VOILA! you became a member of the enlightenerati? or did it take years? did people, in effect, smack you upside the head with a newspaper when you said ignorant things? my guess is that they didn't and when they sternly critiqued you they surely didn't call you a malignant idiot.

At 10:29 AM 10/11/00 -0500, Carrol Cox wrote:

>Carl Remick wrote:
> > [Somebody ­ I forget who ­ was roundly denounced on this list a few weeks
> > ago for suggesting that exercise might be useful in treating depression.
> > Based on the following AP story, I think that person deserves an apology.
> > {
>No apology whatsoever. In my "denunciation" I *included* information to the
>effect that for *some* exercise really did control depression completely, for
>most it helped some, for some it made depression worse, and for some (like me)
>it "cures" depression *during the exerercise period. That's the reason I was
>able to read Smith's *Wealth of Nations* at a time when I was more or less
>paralyzed with depression. I read for an hour a day six days a week while
>peddling an exercycle.
>In addition -- *never* trust the AP to get a story on research in mental
>right. They *always* (not just usually or 999 out of a 1000 but ALWAYS) leave
>out all the qualifiers et cetera that the researchers put in.
>I subscribe to an on-line journal in neurology that Les Schaffer called my
>attention to. When something along this line comes out in it (it includes
>items" as well as serious research) then
>I'll read it. I don't give a fuck what the AP has to say on the subject.
>Repeat: No apology whatever for whatever I said about anyone who made any flat
>statement (without two or three pages of qualifications) on exercise and
>depression. My memory is vague -- but I think the person who made the
>did later qualify it: he was talking about "situational depression." But even
>for that experience varies. One can't keep walking for 24 hours a day. And I'm
>beginning to suspect on the basis of the experience of several friends,
>acquaintances, and relatives that those who are depressed *that* much by
>external circumstances to feel they have to label themselves as suffering from
>situational depression had better think about it a bit more. All too often
>situational depression translates at some point to Unipolar Affective
>period -- Anyone who has had more than two episodes of "Situational
>and is still calling it that is probably in denial.

More information about the lbo-talk mailing list