m-14970 at mailbox.swipnet.se
Sat Aug 10 13:16:33 MDT 1996
Louis G writes:
>What is needed on the list is not more smug idiosyncracies but a greater
>attention to detail in our data, in our evidence, and in our analytical
>efforts. A thread on the historiography of Stalinism, for example, with a
>comparative analysis of South Asian, Latin American, and European writers,
>juxtaposed with those from the United States, would, I think, serve the
>list better than another round of wearying and unpersuasive assertions from
>"Stalinists" like myself or from my counterparts on the opposite side.
>Marxism enjoys one of the richest veins of first class writers and
>historians since Guttenburg. Why it is not better mined on this list is a
>mystery to me. Are all of you as lazy as I am? Or merely insouciant?
I think one of the major reasons is that a lot of academic Marxists who are
trained in mining the literature, and who sometimes actually do what
they're trained for, were deliberately siphoned off on to marxism 2 when it
was so hastily and wrong-headedly created.
Another reason is the abysmal level of internal debate within most left
groups and on the left at large.
Bad habits are often burnt away by the pressing needs of a developing
movement, so I think we'll see an improvement in breadth and depth as the
mobilizations against imperialist attacks take off. At least from the
living among us.
--- from list marxism at lists.village.virginia.edu ---
More information about the Marxism