[Marxism] My Final Rebuttal to Carlos Rivera

sranz at iwon.com sranz at iwon.com
Wed Mar 2 04:38:06 MST 2005

Note:  I apologize for what appeared to my my previous post.  Only the first sentences appeared.  Serves me right for getting fancy by using Power Editor. 

----- Original Message ----- 

>From <cerejota at optonline.net >: 

>>  Send her a copy of the script, and if it's any good, she'll bring it up 

>> to her contacts at the Adam & Eve company that produce her videos.

> How are you so sure?

If you read the Free Forum section of her website, you’d know that she works primarily for Adam & Eve, which produces her “Nina Hartley How To...” series.

>> Of course, if you're bluffing, you'll be exposed, and anything you ever 

>> write here will be regarded with suspicion, even when it appears to make 

>> sense.

>This is the left, everything anybody says is regarded with suspicion, 

>even when it appear to make sense. I think I know this since I was like 5 

>years old.

I am referring to the suspicion with which I and others regard folks who address Nina disrespectfully and at the same time claim to be progressive.  Sorry if that wasn’t clear.

>> According to the writer, Mark Weiss, the film was originally supposed to 

>> be an XXX-rated Norma Rae, but it went much further than just forming a 

>> union.

>> The creative freedom to do that exists in porn, not in the mainstream film 

>> industry.  Pardon me for being cynical, but I'm not holding my breath 

>> waiting for you, Carlos, to lobby Susan Sarandon to make a big-budget 

>> pro-socialist film.

>Actually, there are bazillions of pro-socialist Hollywood films.

   In your dreams, dude.  If that were the case, this would be a different country. Hollywood movies are made by capitalists whose collective interest is in promoting capitalism.

>There is even one by Keanu Reeves, "Johnny Mnemonic", based on the short 

>story by William Gibson. It features Henry Rollins as a resistance >doctor 

>and Ice T as a latter day Che Guevara. The movie is not that great, but >not 

>bad either.

   Showing Che as a decent person does not qualify as ‘pro-socialist’. Progressive, liberal, maybe, but not pro-socialist. Heck, there are lots of porn films that are progressive and liberal.  I even compiled a list of nearly 100 such films and videos called “Progressive Pornography on Video:  A List of Lust for the Politically Correct”, which I distributed at the Socialist Scholars Conference when Nina was there. 

   However, a film is pro-socialist if it editorializes on behalf of a socialist society, a worker’s collective, etc.

   Hollywood gave us Martin Ritt’s “Norma Rae”, which sympathetically depicted ... a unionization drive. That’s it.

>BTW, did Nina Hartley sign any of the anti-war petitions? UP&J? ANSWER? 

>NION? I mean, Susan Sarandon was a big wig in pushing NION up to the 

>front, and her career has suffered as a result.


     If you were to be so kind as to respectfully post your query on her website, she’ll tell you her position on the war.

     If Susan Sarandon had been a porn star [hey, Susan, it’s not too late!], her career would not have suffered one bit for taking an anti-war stand.  The #1 porn star today, Jenna Jameson, came out against the war. And guess what?  She’s still #1!  Nina Hartley’s career in porn has never suffered from her being an open socialist, despite the fact that several porn executives lean Republican.

     That’s one nice thing about the porn industry:  unlike Hollywood, it doesn’t give a damn about the Bible Belt.  It only fears the chastity belt.

>Yes, and Nina's whole work is trying to say that porn is a happy >institution 

>tainted by a few bad apples, such as unsafe sex producers and Traci >Lords. 

>You continue to deny this, but the record is there.

    There is no record of her having said or even implied this.  I see you’re backing away somewhat from the Mankiewicz quote and now claiming that it is her “work” that is ‘trying’ to say it.  What does that mean?  Could you ever be more vague? 

    Accusing her of being dishonest is not respectful, by the way.

>I believe that under capitalism, everything is unhappy. That is why I >am a 

>communist and not a liberal.

    Well, bully for you. 


    Pockets of happiness exist in this society despite our capitalist, puritanical patriarchy, particularly among those who resist it with some success.  Then, of course, there’s the ruling class who benefit from capitalism directly and are therefore quite happy.


More information about the Marxism mailing list