[Marxism] WWP Split -- Q. for Lou Paulsen --

Lou Paulsen Loupaulsen at sbcglobal.net
Fri Aug 20 06:57:30 MDT 2004


Dan writes:

"But anyway, Mr Paulsen, since it seems clear you've definitely come down on
the "east coast" or "IAC" side of the split in the WWP,  ...."

Why not say "the WWP side"?  You realize we have functioning branches on the
west coast.

"... do you suppose you
could enlighten the rest of us re the issues involved? How they arose, and
how they became so "antagonistic" they led to a formal Split?"

Dan, I realize that there is curiosity about this.  Particularly since the
"PSL"'s new website doesn't say anything very enlightening about it.  And I
agree that, in principle, when people in the communist movement take actions
of this kind, with potentially important consequences, they ought to explain
them.  But in this case they took the action, not us.  As you can
understand, we have work to do during this period.  Personally, I would much
rather work on the MWM, for example, than conduct some kind of public
slanging match during this period.  If the PSL were advancing points that
needed answering it would be a different matter, but they are just saying
that WWP "doesn't have it any more."  Well, that can only be settled in
practice.

Anyway why even ask me anything, since you go on to write that nobody can
trust anything that any "zombie" in WWP says at any time?

- - - - - - -

On "democratic centralism", Dan writes:

"Only a damn fool will follow people who make decisions in secret & won't
even tell you how they arrived at them.

"How can you respect somebody who belongs to one of these "democratic
centralist" sects, when you never know whether they're telling you their own
thoughts, acting according to their own lights -- or obeying some decision
arrived at by some Higher Echelon meeting in East Hempstead NY?

"If one of these zombies tells you they want to "have coffee & talk", you
can be sure it's not because they are interested in anything you have to say
themselves -- 99 times out of 99 it's because a Higher Echelon has assigned
them the job of "evaluating" you."

Well, the Higher Echelon instructs me to point out that they just don't have
the level of technology necessary to program all 24 hours of our day down to
the level of who every WWP member is going to have coffee with.  Of course
when we get the new cybernetic implants it will be easier.

Anyway, why do you think that it is worse dealing with someone who is acting
according to certain well-defined principles, under the discipline of an
organization with a national reputation (good or bad) to which he or she is
accountable and to which you can complain, than it is dealing with somebody
who is in one or more organizations, social networks, etc., with a murky
structure, unclear principles, etc., who will act "according to their own
lights" but you have no idea what those "lights" are?  You think that other
people's decision procedures are open and transparent?  The individuals you
deal with must be much more predictable than the ones I've dealt with over
the years.

Lou Paulsen
Member, WWP, Chicago







More information about the Marxism mailing list