Years before I joined PEN-L and LBO, both Carrol and I used to post on another list. That was the first list I ever posted on. Prior to my joining the list, I made the decision to treat people on line -- as much as possible -- the same way I'd treat them off line. I decided I'd never insult *first*, but that I'd have -- as Don Quixote called it -- courage to offend if necessary. I decided I'd try to assume good intention on others, until proven wrong. I decided I'd try to focus on the logic and factual validity of the ideas debated. I made it a principle to not say things to people on line that I wouldn't be capable of saying to their faces. And after a bit of reflection, I decided to use my real name and take the consequences, not all of whom good -- it turned out. (No judgment here of people who wisely decide to use pseudonyms.)
I'm sure I've not been always consistent with my principles. I am as emotionally engaged, as passionate about these discussions as anybody else. I'm just a regular guy with strong opinions. But, I hope, the passion with which we debate here hasn't been a problem for me. I don't think I'm among the most trigger happy here. That's the nice part of me, I guess. But there's more. It must be the big chip on my shoulder, or whatever, but I react strongly against people who question not ideas, but intentions or personal character. If it's done to others, I let others decide how to react. But I do tend to react strongly. I can go tit for tat or even escalate it. It's not fair, I think, to expect people to take abuse abuse from others, even if it's the kind of mostly innocuous "verbal" abuse that listservs are famous for.
He may have forgotten about it, but I haven't: Carrol attacked me personally, questioned my intentions, even my sanity, not once, but several times. Carrol never apologized to me for all that. And, as a result, I didn't get to respect him much as a person. That's the source of my contempt for him, which obviously shows. That, aside from the fact that -- frankly -- I seldom agree with his views on a sheer rational level.
That said, as I type this, I can see how silly these grudge and animosity are in the big scheme of things. So I am hereby making a public pledge not let myself get too chippy with Carrol in the future.
After all, by sheer persistence, he's become an institution on LBO and PEN-L. Peace.
Carrol Cox wrote:
> I have never said anything about the DP "as an instrument of
> working-class liberation." I have assumed that no one onthis list is
> stupid enough to think that, and have felt no need to argue against it.
In other words, you admit that it is implicit in your views.
> What I have said is that it has been a constant barrier to _any_ kind of
> left growth, primarily because it sucks in 90% of the people (like
> Julio) who might otherwise be the cadre that could build the left. We
> lack leaders -- LOCAL leaders. So many of our potential leaders are
> doing stupid things like day-dreaming about what the Obama campaign
> might mean or whether on 'progressive' DP Senator is worth a damn to
> anyone. And those potential local leaders like Julio protect their cute
> little daydreams by making sure they don't understand the criticism made
> of them.
If Julio (or Carrol) daydreams, who cares. If a substantial mass of Black and young working people "daydream," then it's entirely different. The DP is the symptom, not the disease.