Maoist Internationalist Movement
mim3 at nyxfer.blythe.org
Wed Oct 25 17:09:25 MDT 1995
On Wed, 25 Oct 1995, Louis N Proyect wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Oct 1995, Maoist Internationalist Movement wrote:
> > This is convenient for allowing a wide variety of people
> > with unanchored imaginations into an organization. Yet
> > such is ultimately an attempt to return the communist
> > movement to pre-scientific times.
> Louis: I apologize, Pat number 3. You should definitely stay out of the
Pat for MIM replies: I have to comment on the ongoing fascination with
MIM's practice of being semi-underground by petty-bourgeois individualists
on this list. For those who do not follow Proyect's hang-up, I never
called myself "Pat number 3," but my account number is mim3, so Proyect is
making a joke about our anonymity and the fact that we don't care if we
are referred to by number, since we are all representing the same line to
the best of our ability anyway. People will see that these kinds of jokes
have been going on for weeks now on the list.
The truth is the truth no matter who says it. One
Trotskyist is so frustrated with MIM that he said
he's convinced there are no people in it, just
a supercomputer miles underground in Ann Arbor.
To which we say: so what if we are just a supercomputer?
Did we claim to be more than a numerically
small organization anymore than Mao's party or
Lenin's party was when it started? No, we never did.
Likewise some of the people on this list are
so engulfed in post-modernist rot that they can't
discuss matters of science without knowing the
shoe size of the participants. This is something
we have to fight. Proyect calls us "sectarian,"
but which of us is training people to reason
independently of WHO the speaker is? How can
we put the interests of the class above our own
individual and organizational interests if we
are not trained to think regardless of WHO
the speaker is that we are evaluating?
Proyect, I'm warning you: we play very nasty tricks on
post-modernist petty-bourgeois like you. We've been
known to quote our opponents' line against them
unknownst to them. Then we get criticized simply
because we are the MIM and hated by the imperialists. Then we
reveal whose line we were spouting. If they think we are
men, we are women and we quote women. If they
think we are Black, we are Martian Green and we quote
whites. We love the people like Proyect who criticize
us for saying something, but only if we are one alleged
identity or another.
Proyect trains people to criticize people for WHO they are. We
on the other hand teach people to support the
correct line WHOEVER speaks it, including
space aliens, supercomputers and Trotskyists.
We also train people to criticize people
regardless of WHO they are. Such is necessary
to attack the bourgeoisie in the party after
the socialist revolution for instance.
In place of promoting scientific approaches,
Proyect prefers to initiate personal attacks of
no political value like the pat3 comment.
To make up for such individualist corrosion,
he then proposes swampy organization. In his
vision we will have a mass movement of
people attacking each other for who they are,
but all moving together to each person's
own goal of not-actually-existing-socialism--i.e. no where.
of the petty-bourgeoisie and bourgeoisie, the point is to be a GREAT
individual. Hence Proyect goes on grading people, making
references to snobs and standing for the class of economists,
programmers and statisticians against the proletariat.
In the short time I've been here though, one person has
joked that Proyect has his vote for Central Committee.
Others have wondered when this will become a political
Moderators of INTERNET groups should think about this too.
Which does more to promote the truth? A dynamic where
people grandstand for personal popularity, including
possible jobs and party posts or a dynamic in which
one does not personally benefit (or suffer
security consequences from right-wing kooks constantly issuing
death threats via INTERNET, both privately and publicly).
Now if I were to be running for INTERNET president and
I issued anonymous facts about my opponents, that
would mean the buyer would have to beware. But here
we are talking about history, and things accessible
in books and newspapers. Scientific discussion is actually
advanced by anonymity.
The petty-bourgeoisie and bourgeoisie does not feel any
of the reality to that, because it has never been put
in prison for politics. Once in a country-club
prison for white collar crime, the bourgeois
prisoner never gets put in isolation
for reading the wrong lit. We at MIM have. It's not
just that MIM is censored on the INTERNET. MIM
Notes is probably the single most censored newspaper
in prisons today. Hence prisoners know why MIM
does what it is doing.
Workers also know what MIM is talking about. One is
more likely to speak the truth if one thinks one's boss
is not going to punish one for it. We aren't interested
in playing class conformity games for our advancement
on the INTERNET.
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism