At 31/05/01 21:28 -0400, you wrote:
> >as central as LP. If LP does not realise that is a constraint upon him, and
> >does not understand that freedom is recognition of necessity, he will
> >inevitably pay the consequences.
> >
> >Chris Burford
>
>Can you recommend maybe somebody who is wholesale?
>
>Louis Proyect
>Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org/
This weak joke, just possibly based on some inside reference that is funny
to him, again retreats into self referential indulgence.
I am in some difficulty replying since Michael politely sent me a note
asking me to try not to make individuals the issue.
This is rather hard since LP himself makes his individualism the issue
by evading the substantive point (entirely his prerogative since Michael
asks for no challenges on this list)
and writing narcissistic things like
>I also invite Michael Perelman to get into the act. I am too much for one
>person to deal with. I require a regiment to control.
and
>You can come over to NYC any time you'd like. I sort of enjoy being tied
>up. Especially if Sarah Vaughn is being played on the stereo.
It is Louis Proyect who has failed to reply to the issue of substance:
>This evasively flippant reply notably fails to refute my assertion that
>his position on the international united front against fascism attempts to
>be that of the tiny US Trotskyist organisation which campaigned for the
>defeat of the USA during its alliance with the Soviet Union.
>
>And furthermore that it in indeed a principal aim of his polemics to make
>no distinctions between imperialism, and to imply that to do so is opportunist.
It is clear that at his best he is trying to apply to marxist polemics,
Lenin's, or more probably Trotsky's, method of attacking opportunism.
(See his personal remarks on the "class composition" of Brenner and Woods
which he has failed to clarify to justify the arbitrary nature of his
attacks.)
His method of attacking opportunism is not balanced by Lenin's readiness
to criticise left opportunism as well as right opportunism. Nor is it
moderated by Lenin's criticism of the elusiveness of opportunism and the
individualism of the intelligentsia.
If Louis Proyect is not part of the solution he is part of the problem. The
choice is largely his.
As for any additional issue of substance that can be got out of his weak
joke about somebody who is wholesale, it is perhaps about the internet as a
gift economy.
While some internet enterprises have turned themselves into capital and
market commodities for a fee, the internet is still largely a gift economy.
Competition very much occurs still for the limited attention of the
voluntary customer. and in a crowded market the competition tends to be
over quality.
In many ways it is Louis Proyect who himself is selling wholesale and sees
no reason to moderate himself to sell fewer but better.
He could try to sell his line that the tiny US Trotskyist party was correct
to call for the defeat of its ruling class when its ruling class was in
alliance with the Soviet Union between 1941 and 1945 in what was in
practice an international united front against fascism - by selling his
articles in even greater volume, wholesale.
Or he could try to write fewer but better. And build a more reliable
reputation than that of a moderator of a marxism list who is prepared to
fabricate a letter by Marx. The choice is his.
Chris Burford
London
Chris, try not to make individuals the issue.
On Fri, Jun 01, 2001 at 01:26:48AM +0100, Chris Burford wrote:
> At 31/05/01 04:04 -0400, LP wrote:
> > >In due course the internet may control him as it gets to know his
strengths
> > >and weaknesses more and more.
> > >
> > >Chris Burford
> > >
> > >London
> >
> >You can come over to NYC any time you'd like. I sort of enjoy being tied
> >up. Especially if Sarah Vaughn is being played on the stereo.
>
>
> But LP claims he is too much for one person to deal with....
>
> This evasively flippant reply notably fails to refute my assertion that his
> position on the international united front against fascism attempts to be
> that of the tiny US Trotskyist organisation which campaigned for the defeat
> of the USA during its alliance with the Soviet Union.
>
> And furthermore that it in indeed a principal aim of his polemics to make
> no distinctions between imperialism, and to imply that to do so is
opportunist.
