Reply to Melvin on dialectical logic

Jurriaan Bendien bendien at
Sun Jul 13 12:04:59 MDT 2003

Dear Melvin,

I realise you are very fond of Joe Stalin, but I am not. Your fondness for
Stalin leads you to accuse me of "faking, lying and petty-bourgeois
intellectual masturbation" without providing any good grounds for believing
that, beyond stale rhetoric, and you do not even bother to understand and
engage with what I said. Joe Stalin of course did not argue his case, he had
people who disagreed with his policy murdered, imprisoned or deported. Then
you say, you do not care about that, and indeed this is reflected in your
style of argumentation, which is along the lines of "I stick to my views
regardless of whether people are murdered, imprisoned or deported". But this
being the case, there is, precisely, no point in arguing with you, because
you just stick to repeating a few old dogmas regardless of any circumstances
anyway. Your aim is different from mine. You are a literal Marxist who
quotes Marx as being self-evident, i.e. on the basis that "the truth is
manifest" and Marx has a monopoly on the truth. What I am doing is explore
the meaning of what Marx says, and how this could be interpreted in
different ways in a modern context. I am interested in new insights, you
just keep recycling old news.

My post was for the benefit of Les Schaffer, with whom I have a friendly
contact about issues of mutual interest. Les is interested in particular in
the relevance of dialectic logic for logical formalisation processes and
mathematical theory, and that is what I responded to. For you, this is all
petty-bourgeois intellectual masturbation, but the issue that Les and myself
I concerned with is who is really doing the intellectual masturbation, and
in order to adress this correctly, we must among other things distinguish
between intellectual masturbation and other sorts of masturbation, including
Stalinist intellectual masturbation resulting from the pursuit of blind
dogma. I realise that for you, it is all one big pot of "faking and lying",
but we are genuinely interested in getting more logical and mathematical
people on our side, especially given the increasing irrationality of the
bourgeois discussions which dominate public discourse and the media, where
hoaxes and frauds are first denied and then trivialised as unimportant, even
although thousands of people have died or suffered physical injuries in the
meantime as a direct result of the hoaxes and frauds. You with your
dogmatically asserted convictions are part of the problem, not part of the
solution, you just want to attack other socialists, instead of your class

In brief, I am not going to respond to your dogmatic, blinkered jibe,
because I regard to a total waste of time.


More information about the Marxism mailing list