One solution is to treat a degree of conflict and competition between lists as normal, and to be restrained about handling it, but not to overlook it. It is really a symptom of loss of direction.
The Stockholm syndrome applies perhaps only to a minority. The majority know they need to remain silent and certainly cannot afford to protest. That is made clear to all by the robustness and arbitrariness by which the list owner proclaims that he "throws" people off the list.
Only a minority join in the bullying but it takes only 3 or 4 other posters to give the impression that an individual is quite isolated. These are the dishonourable contributors.
A lie is usually a bit of laziness on behalf of the perpetrator. He or she thinks they have found a knock-out argument and do not bother to check their sources. A suitable sanction is that on other lists, the list in question should build up a reputation for inaccuracy and arbitrariness. It should end up looking stupid. Although elusiveness is a common feature of opportunism, the internet is a rather remorseless medium for recording opinions.
If material is copied to another list which reflects on the judgement of the moderator it should be possible to anonymise the names of the contributors.
Louis Proyect established the basis for his own list, and contnues to build up its reputation, by knocking other lists, and playing on people's impatience with the necessary range of democratic debate. The passage quoted by Michael Pugliese is typical
>...[H]enwood's list, where approximately 10 people spend 50
>percent of their time in really vile attacks on "Leninists". Ugh.
The fact that Doug would permit serious replies from Leninists is overlooked, indeed that there is an issue of what exactly Leninism is and how it is to be carried out.
It is helpful to read Liza Featherstone's actual statements and to see she was merely commenting on the probable sectarian style of the ISO in broad front work. There is always a contradiction here for any organisation, and Nathan's more detailed comments are pertinent.
In the years just before their unbanning, the South African Communist Party had a policy that its members would not necessarily even support one another in wider ANC meetings. Certainly they addressed the question of how their members could be seen to be both loyal to their own organisation and loyal to the broader movement.
All struggle, and all unity, are both wrong polices: there must be some candour, and this will build trust, rather than weaken it.
As for those who shout 'red-baiter', when what is being criticised is ultra-leftism, it is they that are the baiters. They intend to create a mass of confusion and irritation to set the grounds for an expulsion. It is a mater of individual tactics whether to ignore it or not.
Ultimately the punishment for such sectarianism is that the individual and the list exclude themselves from serious practical debate. Which is rather serious if they claim to be marxist, since marxism is about the integration of theory and practice. It should not be a variant of identity politics, a friendship circle, with an endless discussion of who one likes and who one dislikes in abstract political terms, and regardless of historical stage.
So Doug, I suggest that each of these lists is seen in a larger context of a left-leaning pluralist civil society, running into five figures. No list on its own can expand with sufficient exponential speed to be decisive in bringing forward the revolution within the next 10 years. The culture as a whole, however, could accelerate developments. LBO-talk has contributed to that culture and will contribute more. With restraint so as not to open oneself open to further arbitrary attack, but without overlooking the question, it will from time to time be appropriate to comment about some lists on other lists.
For a start it might be in everybody's interest to promote the things certain other lists are good at. That then sets a context against which other lists are judged.
Could you update the links you yourself recommend, copy them to this list and invite others to comment?
Chris Burford