Ireland

George Pennefather poseidon at SPAMtinet.ie
Tue Aug 10 02:51:21 MDT 1999






>>>From the standpoint of unity,
>>>either way presents problems, and so the only solution is to find the
>>>truth of the matter and to accomplish that.
>>>
>>I will repeat this again: You have a page that purports to be
>>"inforamtion" to be judged from. Yet, you already judge the
>>information.
>
>  Macdonald, you are being very stubborn. You have not answered my
>reply to this question: how can information on a subject be gathered
>without discrimination of whether or not that information fits into
>that subject?
>
My point is that, as a Marxism archive, one should not spend time
speculating on whether or not the information fits within our own schema,
but rather whether or not it used a variant of Marx's writings et al, to
come to its conclusions. Face it Brian, those in your list who blanked out
Mao and Stalin did so under the duress of popular opinion. Why do I say
that? Because there is not a continuity of conformity between all the
writers on your list of "Marxists", but these are the ones who surpass your
first checklist. You are right, Stalin's works are listed unedited. So,
then, he was not a Marxist? What is he, Brian? Don't say "stalinist", that
would be his own category, and lord knows I doubt you wish to confer such
compliments. Where did Stalins ideas come from? How about that? To put it
another way, any list that purports to not exclude anything within the
bounds of Marxist thought should include Bernstein through to Pol Pot. If
not, let the reader know of your biases up front. I will never say a page
can have no biases, I sure as hell don't want a Djlias on the list/page.
But, if I chronicled things from a "non-sectarian" all marxist list, I would
be forced to slam a six pack and transcribe the "New Class".


>  On the 'you'. It is not my page, nor my judgement. I am a part of
>marxists.org, and was a part of the judging body.
>
Fair enough.

>>I constantly work in coalitions involving Stalinists, Trotskyists,
>>etc. They get things done, have the same goals as set out in the
>>coalition and we don't talk about land reform in the twenties when
>>we try to stop the bombing of Iraq. There is no lack of thought
>>here, these are excellent comrades who simply don't think themselves
>>into a tizzy.
>
>  Some perspective eh? Does marxists.org wage campagains to stop
>bombing in Iraq? No, it does not. It is an information archive. See
>my question above, on the discrimination of information.
>
My point is not that- it is that I knowingly transcend the debate for the
sake of *trying* to surpass it. Many party members on both sides refuse such
coalitions on the basis they do not want to work with "Class Traitors",
"social democrats" etc.
This is all BS. All the Stalinists I know read Marx. Can you say that of
Bakuninists?
>>By deleting Stalin
>>, your site promotes the idea that the discussion should be closed, for
>>"we" already have the answer-
>>Stalin really BAD!
>
>
>  We have moved them, yes. We did so because we do not consider
>Stalinism Marxist, yes.
>
>"Deleting Stalin", we have not done in anyway whatever, not a single
>tag has ever been altered for harm in his archive.
>
Semantics Brian? You know what I meant, we have been arguing over where
Stalin was, so obviously we both know.

>"Discussion should be closed" you say when on the only page we make
>any judgement of Stalinists we end that same paragraph: "We provide
>their writings here for reference and to enable readers to judge for
>themselves."
On a link to the Non-Marxist section, with an Anarchist.
>  Two distortions exposed, one to go.
Not really, count them later.
>
>  "Stalin is really bad"
>
>  Where on any page of the site is this so-called answer existing in
>any form? Where on any page has any moral judgement been made of
>Stalin? Can you find one?
>
Not on the page, but the page owners.
>  I don't think so. You are manipulating the truth Macdonald. If you
>can deal with the first question, we can get back on track.
>
It was never my intention to do such, you are defensive (which I understand;
you helped build the bloody thing, commendations and critiques all through,
however.

>Brian


Macdonald


***************************
***************************
To criticize the people's shortcomings is neccessary, as we have already
said, but in so doing we must truly take the stand of the people and speak
out of whole hearted eagerness to protect and educate them. To treat
comrades like enemies is to go over to the stand of the enemy.

Mao Tse-tung, "Talks at the Yenan forum on literature and art".


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com









More information about the Marxism mailing list