Hurtful words

Robert Malecki malecki at
Mon Jun 10 06:00:04 MDT 1996

Karl writes;
>Cyberspace is concerned with images, symbols and signifiers. A person
>cannot be given a fist in the face, a country cannot be nuked and a
>building cannot be occupied within the framework of this spac e. It is the
>validity of one's argument that is decisive in cyberspace, in the context
>of email as the Marxism List uses it, not the need to establish one's
>credentials: what an unfortunate choice of signifiers Louis chooses. This
>is why word are so important in cyberspace. They are the primary means of
>self-expression in cyberspace. Therefore they must be used with great
>care. It is this featur e of cyberspace that makes it all the more
>valuable. By its very essence cyberspace makes language decisive. In many
>ways cyberspace, in this context, is language's natural medium.
>Consequently the g reater skill, creativity and imagination in the use of
>language the greater is self-expression. This is why any  demeaning of
>language in cyberspace constitutes the demeaning of the corresponding rel
>ationship between human beings. If the only link in the relationship
>between two humans is language then clearly the character of the language
>existing between these humans is an expression of the ch aracter of the
>relationship between them. Barbarise the language that establishes the
>link between them and the relationship is barbarised. In short, language
>is of primary importance within mailspac e and must never be vulgarized or
>trivialized. By the sustained trivialization of language a nihilistic
>statement is being made: that language is meaningless and human relations
>consequently meaningl ess. The upshot then is that humanity  are
>meaningless entities: a bundle of meaningless molecules.
>The respect with which human language is treated, the way it is cared for
>loved and nurtured is an expression of corresponding respect, care and
>love for humanity. Those who abuse language abuse peop le.


I think you go off the deep end here on the language question. Communication
is also a class question. Thus our "marxist" intellectuals including  the
above which gives some sort of value to the written word in what i think is
a very idealistic and moral manner.

The reason for a vanguard party is to bridge the gap between a relative
intellectual theory and the proletariat. In other words you need the
proletarian vanguard to get the theory to the broad masses. Without  a
militant class concious vanguard you "marxist" intellectualls are up "shit
creek" without a paddle!

This does not mean that Karl is wrong when he talks about the behavior and
language in regards to the people here who lack an answer to political
ideology turn to cursing and threats of jackboots etc.

But he does go off the deep end thinking that the proletariat is going to in
first incorporate language rules of a victorian society to class
struggle..However revolutionaries should be concious of the tendency to
"proletarian culture" which the Stalinists used against the left opposition
in order to crush them.

Warm regards
malecki in exile...

     --- from list marxism at ---

More information about the Marxism mailing list