I have already outlined the nature of the "Sozialismus affair" briefly.
Here I consider its implications for the Left by comparing it to the
"Social Text affair":
(a) The _Social Text_ affair concerns a hoax played by Alan Sokal on
the anonymous reviewers and editors of that magazine. The
"Sozialismus" affair concerns a hoax played by at least one of the
editors of that magazine on the _readers_ of that magazine. I.e.
he (or they) _knowingly_ selected a biased reviewer and, thereby,
violated the implied compact that they have with their
subscribers. This, by itself, makes the "Sozialismus" _worse_ than
the "Social Text" affair.
(b) The writer of the review of the RM conference (along with the
person who recommended that this person write the article for
_Sozialismus_) were outspoken critics of the "Social Text affair"
who described themselves as "classical Marxists" in contrast to
the "post-modernism" of _Social Text_. Now the "classical
Marxists" have engaged in a journalistic fraud that is _worse_
than the innocent (although serious) error in judgment by _Social
Text_.
(c) The _Social Text_ affair was primarily a scandal in the US Left.
The _Sozialismus_ scandal is an _international_ scandal that has
the potential of adversely affecting the relationship among
Marxists in Germany and the US.
(d) The _Social Text_ affair received wide publicity, including in
the bourgeois press. There were also public meetings and articles.
None of this publicity or notoriety has _yet_ happened regarding
_Sozialismus_. The "classical Marxists" who were loud critics of
"Social Text" have suddenly become silent about this newest
scandal.
Jerry
