[Marxism] Re: Moderator's Note

Joaquin Bustelo jbustelo at bellsouth.net
Sun Nov 19 10:39:36 MST 2006


Louis writes, "On that list he tends to send things along as 
straight news items, while here they are prefixed with some kind of 
baiting provocation to the effect that unless you agree with what 
follows, you are some kind of Trotskyite heathen."

But don't I recall Walter being urged to NOT simply send stuff from the
bourgeois press, but to highlight its political significance in some sort of
intro? 

And wasn't someone here just a few hours ago pointing out that Walter was
perfectly capable of posting two dozen or more items to CubaNews in a few
hours, making following that list something of a project? 

Like I assume any number of others, I wish Walter were more selective in
what he posts here, and if I'd had my ruthers, the sort of volume he does
here (say 10-20 posts a week) is what I would have him do in CubaNews save
around specific, important punctual issues and controversies. But Walter
sees it differently.

I do believe there is a problem on the list now of generally too many
reposts/pointers, but the ones that I dislike the most, frankly, are the
inane cultural stuff like trashing Lord of the Rings (did you realize the
book originated in the dirty/filthy imperialist epoch, reflecting the
author's disgust with this state of affairs, and not in the bright communist
future of humanity?) and criticism of "important" films that are so
unattractive or unwatchable that no one bothers to publish them through
bittorrent (or, arguably, are so culture-bound in the last century that no
one that likes them knows how to seed a bit torrent file).

If you want to discuss movies, why not focus on ones like Harold and Maude
or even Billy Jack, which seem to be perpetually available and being
downloaded through file sharing, rather than stuff no one seems moved enough
to put some effort into watching?

Anyways, the whole drift over the past year or two has led to discussions
here being dominated by the non-involved and non-engaged, and they don't
necessarily intersect that closely with the concerns of those who are
active. 

For example Louis's analogy of the Leninist "internal discussion" schtick
with the mafia's code of silence was funny enough as a one liner, I guess,
but where do you go from there politically? 

The discussion I would have had --about whether the Leninist practice
implies/creates a *hierarchical* relationship between the "party" and others
engaged in the same issues/causes/movements/efforts, among other issues--
tends to be short circuited when the tone for a discussion is set in that
way.

Joaquín





More information about the Marxism mailing list