Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
UNITE! Info #131en-rep: The merry Murray "M-L" melee
[Posted: 31.03-01.04.2008]
Note: The "UNITE! (etc) Info" posting series (1995-) advocates the
political
line of Marx, Lenin and Mao Zedong. For all items, see
www.rolf-martens.com.
INTRO NOTE, 2008 (FOR VARIOUS REASONS, RATHER LONG):
Here's a repeat, in more easily readable html form, of my Info #131en,
which
was sent to some newsgroups, mailing lists and individual e-mail addresses
on
21.08.2000 in text document form and in 8 parts, part 1/8 etc.
A main reason why I'm bringing this repeat now is the fact that there
recently
was - or, it can perhaps be said, still is going on - a precisely similar,
likewise quite instructive and and likewise also rather funny, "melee" at
one
of those mailing lists which exist today and which, at least officially,
have
as their theme the questions of Marxism, or of Marxism-Leninism, namely,
the
list MLL, which has the web address
http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxist-leninist-list.
(As
shown by
its archive, that mailing list has existed since March 2000. Today, it has
been
said rather recently, it has some 200 subscribers.)
What can be done with a mailing list for Marxism, if it's approximately
soundly
constructed and handled?
On principle, I think, nothing less than a gathering on it of all forces
on
earth who really are in favour of the international proletarian revolution
(exceptions, unfortunately, and im****tant such, necessarily being those
who
live in such countries or otherwise under such conditions that they by a
very
use, on their part, of the Internet immediately would risk imprisonment or
execution), of all forces who want to combine with each other for exchange
of
information and for serious discussion about that burning question:
How are the vast majority of people on this planet to take it over from
those
ridiculously small, but of course organizationally and militarily at
present
very powerful, cliques of reactionary bourgeois/imperialist scum who today
still are controlling it? - A problem which, more or less, for each day
that
passes, only more and more loudly is shrieking out for a solution.
At least a certain contribution to the solving of this problem, in my
opinion,
can be made by/at such a mailing list, which of course cannot start out as
ant
hying else than a very small thing, only, its potentialities should be
enormous.
The ruling imperialists, it's to be expected, will not be very friendly
towards
there occurring any serious international discussions which such a mailing
list, on principle, makes possible. They are likely to try to counteract
the
development of such discussions, by various means and at various levels of
counteraction, depending on how small or how big a threat they are
considering
such a thing to be, at various possible stages of development that it may
get
to reach.
A problem for those imperialists in this respect, and an advantage for any
combining forces really of the proletariat and of the oppressed peoples,
of
course is and will continue be: Those ruling cliques will not be able to
close
the entire Internet down. It's here to stay, and with this some enormous
possibilities also for proletarian forces to combine and to unite
internationally. If one channel of such should come to be closed or
otherwise
made useless, certainly, such forces as may already have begun to combine
no
doubt will be able to find another.
Since the early1990s (at least), there have existed some such mailing
lists on
which actual international discussion about the big problem mentioned has
been
possible, at least during a certain time. (Experience seems to show that
Usenet
newsgroups, despite their advantage of being almost impossible to censor,
are
less favourable for such.) The big drawback with practically all of those
mailing lists which have existed so far has been that they have been -
either
from the beginning on or else from some later stage on - under the control
of
(more or less "well-camouflaged") bourgeois forces, who have closed them
down
or have imposed such conditions on them as to make all serious discussions
at
the list in question, in the interests of the proletariat, more or less
impossible in practice.
Those camouflaged bourgeois forces who have been controlling such mailing
lists
often have been arguing, towards their subscribers, in order to prevent
actual
discussions, that "harm can be done" to those subscribers, or to some of
them,
or to the mailing list in question, in basically two ways:
1) "Reactionary, pro-bourgeois statements", and/or "statements of
defamation of
some subscribers", or "of the mailing list itself", or "of generally
respected
earlier proletarian leaders" may appear, and "this must be prevented".
This
"argument", for the suppression of actual debate, of course is very wrong.
It's
very much to be expected, of course, that people will say some wrong
things,
sometimes even some rather reactionary ones, with meaning to. Then those
statements can and should be criticized, and if possible refuted, by
others.
"Harm" even the smallest fly, so to speak, certainly no such statement can
do.
Marx adherents appearing in public (oven the Internet, above all) who are
not
used to being subjected to defamations and verbal hate attacks at least
some100
times per day must be doing something seriously wrong.
Openly racist and Nazi statements should indeed be counteracted also
organizationally, I hold, since they advocate what practically everybody,
rightly, considers to be crimes against humanity. But the dissemination of
larger amounts of such, at mailing lists said to be for discussion of
Marxism,
can be prevented very easily, and if a little of this commodity should
slip by,
surely, no big harm can have been caused to anybody by this, and in
particular,
hardly any to that vital interest of continued discussion of the im****tant
matters.
In the course of actual and open discussion - as long as such is possible
-
differences of opinion, even quite sharp ones, also among people who all
sincerely favour the proletarian revolution, of course will appear. As
Mao
Zedong, for instance, has pointed out: "Marxism is a wrangling ism." In
many
cases, long experience has shown, it's only after some serious and
sometimes
protracted wrangling among a number of people that the im****tant truth, or
truths, comes out. Marx adherents therefore should never fear such
wrangling
and certainly should not consider it "an insult to their personality" or
"a
defeat", if they - "purely as an exception", say - in due course should
turn
out to have been wrong, on a point or other. They would in such cases
instead
have won a certain victory, for themselves and for the proletariat, of
their
having gained a bit of new knowledge.
2) "Camouflaged reactionaries and dyed-in-the-wool anti-Marxists", and
even
"paid agents and operatives of the imperialists' intelligence services"
may
appear on such mailing lists, and "this must be prevented", and/or "such
people
must be kicked off the list whenever found out" - thus runs a second
"argument"
for suppressing open discussion. This of course is utter nonsense too.
Very
obviously, bourgeois-reactionaries and also direct agents and spies always
will
appear on such mailing lists. But what harm can they possibly do, on a
mailing
list, to the interests of the Marx adherents, or to those of other honest
sup****ters of the common interests of the vast, as long as open debate
still
continues? Absolutely none, even if there should be droves and droves of
them.
(Something which it also is very difficult, almost impossible, for the
ruling
reactionaries, to bring about, since they precisely are so enormously
outnumbered in the world and practically everybody just hates their guts -
harder and harder, therefore, does it get too, today, for the imperialists
to
recruit even "a minimum of" "reasonably effective" agents of theirs, even
in
those relatively "rich" countries where there still is considerable
corruption
of some groups of people on account of those enormous superprofits which
they're squeezing out of the people in the poorer,
internationally-oppressed
countries.)
Some dyed-in-the-wool reactionaries and intelligence service agents it, on
the
contrary, is *quite good* to have on a Marxism-oriented list, namely, as
instructive negative examples, as "skeletons-in-the-classroom-corner", so
to
say. By no means should those who organize such mailing lists, in case
they do
want to serve the interests of the proletariat, strive to kick such
subscribers
out of them.
It's in an attempt at applying, as well as possible, the above-stated
principles that I on my part have created (as I did on 01.07.2007), and am
"running", a mailing list called "Modern Marxism". Its web address is
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/modern_marxism/,
and there's a standing
Invitation to it at my homepage. When I'm writing this, it has 47 members,
from
5 continents. It probably was a little "recruitment drive" of mine, with
the
abovementioned Invitation sent per e-mail to a number of addresses which I
had
"dug up", that resulted in 9 more people's finding their way to it in the
last
7 days, something which of course has pleased me very much.
I wrote about the members of this mailing list in one posting to it on
13.03,
directed to one other of them and reproduced in a section of (the quite
long -
as is this one too) Info #311en, of 14.03.2008:
"Politics that really, consistently and with sufficient knowledge for it
actually to make a difference, is in favour of the international
proletariat
and the vast majority of people today, that's something which comes down
to a
matter of no more than some individuals here and there, I believe. Each of
you
others, thus, who have gathered on this mailing list, for instance, I'm
viewing
as, potentially at least, an internationally not unim****tant political
'potentate' or force."
I've earlier been subscribing to some other mailing lists whose names and
descriptions have had to do with Marxism - with member****p numbers varying
between a few dozen and some 200-300 - and today I'm subscribing to a
couple of
other such too. It was on a few such mailing lists, in particular on one
of
them, that, back in the year 2000, there took place something which, in
the
title of this Info, I'm calling a "melee".
A language note:
Perhaps not everybody is familiar with the somewhat unusual word "melee",
which
I had found in some books dealing with military history and which I've
checked
out now again, in a couple of dictionaries which I have and at the
Internet's
Wikipedia, in order to see if the manner in which I used it, back in
2000,
covers that which I intended it to cover. This in fact it does, rather
precisely. My respective sources on "melee" say:
Wyld (UK, 1952) (spelling it "mêlée"): "Confused fight, skirmish,
conflict,
affray". Webster (USA, 1993): "1: a fight or contest between individuals
mingled in a confused mass: a confused struggle; 2: a cavalry exercise in
which
two groups of riders try to cut paper plumes off the heads of their
opponents;
3: a confused mingling together of often incongruous elements". Wikipedia
(Internet, present time): "Melee (from the French mêlée IPA: [m?le])
generally
refers to disorganized close combat involving a group of fighters. A melee
ensues when groups become locked together in combat with no regard to
group
tactics or fighting as an organized unit; each participant fights as an
individual.". Yes, that's what I meant and mean. These explanations cover
those
aspects of that word which I wanted it to have too.
Now is it natural or not to have some melees occurring on mailing lists
having
to do with Marxism, and are they in general good or bad things?
It's rather natural that such occur, I think, on such mailing lists which
in
reality are controlled by, basically, bourgeois forces. This is because,
when
things "hotten up" in certain debates on really im****tant political
matters,
the bourgeois forces will "run out of arguments" against the proletarian
ones
completely. They then can and will do nothing else than try in various
ways to
*suppress* the discussion, using such "arguments" for "justifying" this as
those mentioned above - in case they don't find it "necessary" to close
down
the entire mailing list, something which would expose those responsible
for
this very clearly as utter reactionaries, of course.
"Melees" are liable to occur on mailing lists of that type, as a result of
such suppression attempts, which will then be opposed more or less
consistently
by various more or less pro-proletariat forces on that list, and sup****ted
more
or less consistently by the various more or less pro-bourgeoisie ones.
Typical
of them is that there in the *antagonistic* contradiction
bourgeoisie-proletariat, the bourgeoisie is relatively strongly
represented on
the list in question, so that the outcome of the melee, or struggle - will
there in fact be suppression of the discussion, or will there not? - will
remain uncertain, perhaps for a rather long time. Anyway, such melees in
themselves, such sharpening of the struggle, under such conditions,
absolutely
are good things. They always make it much clearer, *who* (among the list
members, above all) is really *on the side of which class*.
On such mailing lists as the one managed by me, which - this I'm
maintaining,
myself, now, as something for readers of this to judge on themselves,
whether
they find it true or false - *is* controlled by a pro-proletariat force
(me!),
there will hardly occur any melees, of that kind which I mean, anyway.
Because *I* certainly *don't* want any suppression of the discussion at
that
list, and I don't intend to listen to any suggestions of or "arguments
for" or
such suppression, by any other list member(s). As "list dictator", I'm
decreeing: No suppression. (Unless there's spam in such big amounts that
these
create a problem, or Nazi propaganda, which will rather soon be put an end
to
too.)
There was, rather recently, at the MM list managed by me, a somewhat sharp
debate, of an antagonistic character too, occasioned by my (finally)
having
ascertained and pointing out, as I did on 02.03.2008, that a certain list
member (since December 2007), "marxist front" <marxistfront@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
was
not at all any existing person or group "in India", or anywhere else, but
was
one of quite many "cyber ghosts" invented, for swindle and disturbance
purposes, by a certain small-time reactionary in the USA by the name of
Thomas
P. Murray. He was not pleased with this and in retaliation wrote to the
list,
i.a. "COMRADES BEWARE OF THIS CIA AGENT ROLF" (me), which I didn't find it
necessary to counter with anything else than writing to the list, in
reply,
"Nice try, Murr-Murr-Ghostie!"
And then another list member, David Walters <dave.walters@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -
whom I
had invited personally to MM already in August 2007 for, hopefully, making
that
list more lively, since he then (and several months onward too, as MM list
member), despite being a Trotskyite, did not fear debate, - got it into
his
head that he should try to "rescue" that poor scumbag Murray from having
had
his "Indian" "cyber ghost" exposed. David did this by his, among other
things,
"telling" me, in a rather sharp tone too, what I in the future "should
write"
respectively "not write". To this I replied by pointing out that it showed
how
very closely David "Dino" Walters, unfortunately, was connected with the
reactionary bourgeoisie in the world.
Certainly, I didn't dream of perhaps kicking out, or of applying any other
list
organization pressure on, any of those those two, whose respective
characters
presumably had become clearer by this little "open and frank exchange of
views"
(as the diplomats call it) which we had had. With "Dino" I'm continuing
too
that earlier co-operation concerning the Marxists Internet Archive (MIA)
which
I had begun even earlier - he's one of the main editors of MIA. Under the
conditions of *this* list, the bourgeois reactionaries, whose more or less
*only* "political weapon", against a consistently Marxist political line
(which
I think I've been representing and upholding, so far), consists of
attempts at
*suppressing the discussion*, don't stand much of a chance, politically.
[MIA: http://www.marxists.org/]
The story about this rather recent altercation, at the MM list, is told by
my
(quite long) Info #311en, "A debate on 'cyber ghosts', Mao Zedong's line
and
how to unite", of 14.03.2008.
A perhaps sharp, complicated debate, conducted in a friendly manner - thus
involving only *non-antagonistic* contradictions, such which Mao Zedong
called
"contradictions among the people" - this would not be, or occasion,
something
which I'd call a "melee".
But, as mentioned in the beginning of this intro note, both back in August
2000
and also quite recently, in late March 2008, there have been a couple of
such
"melees" which have been both instructive and (I think, at least) funny.
The
story about the first mentioned I'm telling in the below here, of course.
Concerning the story about the recent (or perhaps not yet at finished)
one, it
may be be of interest to the readers, I think - to those who don't shy
away, I
mean, from reading this stuff because it is pretty long (and thus,
hopefully,
all the more instructive) - to get to know: The more or less "main
character"
in the August 2000 melee, a "cyber ghost" of the abovementioned Murray's
"whom"/which I then called "Question Mark" (surname "Scott"), then
actually no
more than 2 days old (but "cyber ghosts" of course can dispense with such
"tedious business" as childhoods etc), was/is "the main character" in that
equally farcical "melee" of late March 2008. He was/is being kowtowed to
now,
or recently, by a number of (nominally) grown-up people over at that
mailing
list, MLL, as its "strongman" and "chief Marxist-Leninist ideologue" (yes,
it's
true!), and already several times has threatened to "resign", as he has
called
it, from that list. (This "big boss" of MLL doesn't just "join" mailing
lists,
you see, as might you or I, but "gets appointed to" them, as some sort of
an
"official".) This of course would leave the poor flesh-and-blood
bourgeoisie-friendly members there with (almost) no "cyber ghost" sup****t,
more
or less "at the mercy of" "those horrible" proletariat-friendly ones.
But still it's too early to predict the outcome of that - likewise very
merry -
melee now at the list MLL.
Here follows the story about the one (mainly at a list called "ISML",
apparently still in existence) which took place in August 2000.
[End of intro note]
Citizen ex-"SiberiaSwamp Kommandant" Jim Hillier, UK
<Jim.Hillier@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
[Added in 2008:
Why I back in 2000 bestowed that title - of perhaps not the most
complimentary
kind - on Jim Hillier, despite his having recently asked me some questions
in a
quite friendly way, in an e-mail sent privately to me - readers will
understand, I hope, after reading Appendix B in this Info, which comes at
the
very end of it.
It so happens too that Jim Hillier today is one of the 5 members of the
Moderators Panel of that mailing list, MLL, where the repeat "melee" of
this
year has taken place (or is taking place). The other 4, listed at the
MLL's
website, are Alan Dover (New Zealand), Charles F. Moreira (Malaysia),
George
Gruenthal (USA) and Sven Buttler (Germany).]
You wrote to me on Fri, 18 Aug 2000 23:37:11 +0100, smack in the middle of
the
most hilarious part (so far!) of what I shall call 'the merry Murray
mock-up-"Marxist-Leninist" melee' on the so-called
"International-Struggle-M-L
list" which you're subscribed to too, asking me privately some questions.
I don't mind replying to them, this of course publicly. It's suitable
anyway, I
think, to go into these questions at this point with a (8-part) posting in
the
present Info series. This above all in order to provide some information
on
them to those who really are striving to organize for worldwide
proletarian
revolution. I have to say at once that past experience indicates that you
are
not among them. But this, in my opinion, need not mean that you and I
couldn't
both benefit from reciprocal exchange of information on various matters
and
from co-operation, on a united-front basis, on such points where we might
have
some interests in common.
Would it be possible for me, you're asking, to explain to you why I think
the
two Internet writers you mentioned - precisely two of the most panicky
high-to-heaven-howlers, comical "karate"kickers and agitated arm waverers
in
that little "deflection"-dogfight which some ultra forces are trying now
in
order to protect their big masters in the world - are the same person?Yes,
I
shall gladly show you, and others, the rather simple reasoning behind
this.
Or, to be more exact, I actually *don't* think they're the same *person*.
We
have to do here with some real cases of what in "Orwellian" language are
called
"unpersons" - just some stage props which get dissolved into puffs of
smoke as
soon as you give them some sound punches in their ugly grimacing faces.
But
they're doing their best anyway, together with their few actually human
puppeteers too, to appear as a whole big flock of shrieking hyenas,
howling
wolves, monsters coming at you from everywhere and vampires enough to
darken
the sky - "BOOOH!" Some quotes I shall bring below will show all what I
mean.
1. ON HOW THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN REVOLUTION AND REACTION OFTEN APPEARS, AS
IT HAS
TURNED OUT IN THE PRESENT SMALL FIGHT TOO
Those actually striving to represent revolution, represent Marxism in the
world, must always be prepared to encounter this phenomenon, a seemingly
"overwhelming" array of the most awful monsters, who're making propaganda
for
sometimes this, sometimes that long-since refuted phony"Marxist", in
reality
arch-bourgeois, line and are maintaining that they are the ones who're
representing the overthrow of that bourgeoisie whose interests they on the
contrary precisely represent, and that *they* "of course are the big
majority".
It in fact is the case that such forces (those which you encounter
directly, at
least) are always much more numerous than the actual sincere
revolutionaries.
This is because it's the bourgeoisie in the world who are organized,
nationally
and internationally, and are secretly sup****ting and even "pre-emptively"
launching *phony* organizations supposedly "opposing" them, while the
workers
and the oppressed peoples have practically no organizations which are
really
their own.
But what proletarian revolution is all about is representing the common
interests of the vast majority of people on earth. And those who by their
political line are doing this will have, visibly only more or less
indirectly
perhaps, the sup****t of the people too. They therefore, as long as they're
pursuing such a correct line, will represent a strength much bigger than
any
"majority of organized political forces" which opposes that line, and
therefore
should not care one tiny bit however loudly the conscious phonies and/or
those
who're wrong are yelling "we are thousands, while you are only five or
ten; you
must bow to us!"
2.HOW DID IT SOON BECOME CLEAR THAT THE WRITERS YOU ASKED ABOUT WERE
*PHONY*"MARXISTS" AND NOT EVEN REAL PERSONS?
Because of that insincerity which they soon demonstrated in practice, in
the
first place, and by the quite extraordinary inconsistency of their actions
too,
in the second. Their oneness there was reason to suspect on account of
some
very typical similarities in their respective approaches. I shall soon
give you
some details.
The thing in this case has been, that the reactionary "cyber ghosts" have
been,
and still are, sup****ted by some actual persons whose op****tunism - or
worse -
they have suited just perfectly, which is why those people have not even
wanted
to see that they're ghosts either, although this hasn't been all that
difficult. (Well, those who haven't encountered the phenomenon of phony
"persons" on the Net before perhaps may be excused a little if they don't
hit
on that idea by themselves at once.)
You mentioned one "Dawn", full name "Meia Dawn" - and to any
"Net-connected"
person who's a little interested in Marxism and thus has looked up, or at
least
seen the name of, that im****tant Marx-Engels Internet Archive (MEIA) at
http://www.ex.ac.uk/
Projects/meia/index1.htm, such a first name as "Meia"
at
once must hint, at least, at the possibility of there being some
tongue-in-cheek bourgeois prankster behind it, mustn't it? And how genuine
does
the name of that (to me unknown) organization which she said she was in,
the
"Red Comrades Documentation Project"(!), sound to actual Leftists?
"Midway Meia" <meia_dawn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (who hasn't wanted to say whether
"she/he" is a man or a woman; I've been calling "her" a "her" for
simplicity)
is "an adherent of Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin", she's said. Yes, but
you
cannot be this today without also being an adherent of Mao Zedong, who as
all
know was the main exposer of the treason of the Soviet revisionists and
social-imperialists since the early 1960s on, and for decades the main
continuer of Marxism. So "Meia's" line was suspect from the start,
although she
has added too that she does hold Mao Zedong's and others' criticism of the
so-called "modern" revisionism swindle to be correct.
The other writer you mentioned, "Sue T Simonson"
<progressivesociety@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
who likewise made her public Net appearance this year, a little before
"Meia"
who has said she knows "Sue" too, at first seemed to be someone who was,
politically, quite well-informed and advanced. She advocated the line of
Marx,
Lenin and Mao Zedong, she said, and had also clearly seen through the
"RCP"-USA
and that big international swindle connected with it, the pur****ted
"preparatory International" the "RIM", as utter phonies. Very much did she
appreciate, she wrote, to have gotten informed of that mailing list
managed by
Per Rasmussen, Denmark, the Power to the People list (reached by
<pttp-subscribe@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>) to which I was also subscribing. (As you may
recall, Jim, it was I who first - during a long time, alone in this -
publicly
exposed and denounced the "RIM" as a complete fraud [in fact controlled by
the
CIA, as I've demonstrated too], from 1994 on and via the Net from early
1996
on.)
Since there are, internationally, so extremely few actual Marxists (whom
it's
possible to contact via the Net anyway), "Sue" at first looked like she
might
be a not unim****tant small force.
Now she had not seen through that pur****ted "critic" (from 1996 on), but
real
behind-the-scene sup****ter, of the "RIM" leaders, the phony "MPP"-USA led
by
the agent of US imperialism "Quispe". Fair enough; it so happened that I
could
inform her in detail on that question. (Those "reserve" swindlers btw have
left
their own publication "The New Flag" and their earlier website and joined
a
parallel crook-led group, the "Mao"_Quacks, whose quite good Mao Zedong
archive
at www.maoism.org people absolutely should read, while not falling for
their
political tricks - nor for those of that other "RIM tail" the "CSRP"-USA.)
But when I posted document after document, to the pttp list and to
newsgroups,
from the big international Internet "Quispe" fight in mid-1996, in the
course
of which those agent forces were completely exposed and that big "aircraft
carrier" of anti-Marxist subversion the "RIMitz" left even lower in the
water,
very "curiously", "Sue" was suddenly not one bit interested any more. Only
after repeated prodding on my part and a full month later did "Sue" reply
at
all concerning this, and then, even more "strangely", refused to see those
facts which the documents from 1996 very simply and clearly showed.
"Sue" didn't even want to discuss these things - nor any others, for that
matter - with me any more. On her own part, she had shown us other readers
one
part of a "critique" of the "RIM" written by her which I could see at once
was
not sincerely meant but could only be a pretense at a such by a person of
out-and-out (openly-)bourgeois persuasion who was trying laboriously to
copy
how a Marx adherent might think and write. ("Comrades", for instance, the
actually bourgeois writer, out of touch with any actual Leftists, clearly
had
thought must be one suitable and impressive term to use, in every second
sentence or so.)
Further, "Sweet Sue" had a curiously close connection to and co-operation
with
one other writer who had appeared shortly before her and who apparently
believed not only in "God" but also in "non-violence" and thus was just
about
as far from a Marxist or even a genuinely Leftist standpoint as was
imaginable,
"Mature Martha". The latter, a "young grandmother" whose repeated
nonsensical
postings to pttp eventually drew a surprised question from Per too, after
which
she "went off to Wisconsin for 14 days", later posted a quite flattering
comment concerning the quality of my writings ("Christian forgiveness"
perhaps;
I had sharply attacked her reactionary views and pointed out to all that
she,
like "Sue", was a "cyber ghost"), and not only this:
In an - absolutely welcome, but rather baffling - turn-around from her
earlier
"no guns!" position, "Martha" now recently co-signed an international
joint
statement, for which Per and I had taken the initiative, in sup****t of the
just
defence struggle of the DR Congo against the massive imperialist
aggression
which that country is being subjected to. She even included a street
address
and a phone number of hers when signing. (See below; I wager you, or
anyone,
1,000 Congolese Francs against 10 that you'll not be able to contact
"Martha"
anyway.)
3. SOME VITAL POLITICAL MATTERS RECENTLY DISCUSSED ON THE ISML AND PTTP
LISTS,
AGAINST WHICH BACKGROUND THE MELEE IN PARTICULAR MUST ALSO BE SEEN -
FIRST, THE QUESTION OF SUP****T FOR THE DR CONGO
One im****tant thing which was recently not so much directly debated on
these
lists as organized via them, and via some others (the Activist Mailing
list
[http://get.to/activist],
the mlmtt list managed by Per and likewise
subscribed
to by me <subscribe-mlmtt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> and some others which Per is on),
precisely was that joint international statement in sup****t of the DR
Congo. It
was a "small" but very "broad" thing, with 13 signatures to it, by
individual
writers and some organizations in Denmark, Sweden, France, the USA,
Greece, New
Zealand, India and Malaysia, when it was sent publicly on 17 August, one
more
(USA) being added to it immediately afterwards.
Many are those organizations around the world which are designating
themselves
"Marxist-Leninist" or "Leftist"; "strangely" few of them however have had
much
or even anything to contribute towards sup****ting the Congolese people in
their
enormous struggle against this most massive imperialist aggression which
has
been going on since August 1998, stagemanaged by US imperialism above all
and
vilely sup****ted by as good as all the imperialist, so-called rich states,
which has so far cost the lives of over 1.7 million people and which
entails
that half of the DR Congo is under foreign occupation, ravaging, plunder
and
fascist terror, with massacre after massacre perpetrated by the aggressor
imperialist-proxy forces.
Therefore, even this "small" joint action was of some im****tance, it may
be
hoped, possibly helping develop such a big and broad international
movement of
sup****t of the Congolese people which is absolutely necessary but which so
far
exists in organisatorically only far too weak forms. (The really
non-Marxist
PTB, Belgium, from the beginning has been one force leading the way
forward on
this, and some small efforts have been undertaken by for instance the
miniscule
DR Congo Committee here in Sweden, founded precisely in August 1998 and
led by
Bony Ndjov-a-Shamalo; I'm one of its founding members too.)
In an Appendix A, in the last part of this posting, I shall reproduce that
international joint statement with its signatures.
4. THE GIANT DECADES-LONG INTERNATIONAL "AIDS" TERROR PROPAGANDA HOAX
Another question of the most vital international im****tance, which has
been
debated recently on these lists, is a matter likewise of life or death to
millions of people and a struggle whose outcome depends very much on
whether
the scientific truth will become known and understood by hundreds of
millions
or whether a most perverted and directly genocidal ENORMOUS PROPAGANDA LIE
disseminated jointly by ALL the imperialists since close to TWO DECADES
BACK
now. This big lie is considered so vital, by the US imperialists, to make
people continue to believe in, worldwidely, that earlier this year the
further
dissemination of it, and the further suppression, as far as at all
possible, of
the (already long-since discovered) truth on the matter was entrusted
directly
to that organ of theirs for international counter-revolution, the CIA.
It's the propaganda hoax, started in the early/mid-80s, that there is a
new
"disease syndrome" called "AIDS", that "it" is "infectious" and in
particular,
"possible" or even "likely" to be transferred ***ually, that it "is being
caused by" a pur****ted "virus", called "HIV", which nobody in all those
years
has even seen and which in all probability, according to the actual
experts,
doesn't even exist.
Since some time back now, there exists an Internet website,
www.virusmyth.com,
which already completely refutes this big lie in such clear terms that
people
with practically no scientific knowledge of their own on this matter too
can
see that that's the truth on it - they only need to realize that you must
NOT
TRUST the imperialist exploiting and oppressing scumbags and their totally
perverted mass media AT ALL, NOT on ANY question of general im****tance -
and
which is being hosted by South Africa's president Mbeki, who by this and
by an
international "AIDS" conference in Durban last June, where the truth was
*allowed* to be argued for, got into considerable conflict with those
international forces which South Africa in other respects has been and
still is
largely obeying, above all the US imperialists.
It so happened that I got to know about this website, informed about it a
couple of weeks ago by a co-sup****ter (in Canada) of that abovementioned
national liberation struggle of the Congolese people, and since then have
started to contribute towards this truth's becoming known and understood
internationally, beginning with a few "immediate-reflection" postings and
with
my 'UNITE! Info #129en: The "AIDS virus" terror hoax' (in 2 parts) of 13
August, which I hope helped explain the main facts on this to as many as
possible.
5. LIKELY CONNECTIONS WITH THE PRESENT (ALREADY A LITTLE "COOLED-DOWN")
"MERRY
MELEE"
My postings on this subject were welcomed quite warmly by some other Net
writers and (of course) hatefully rejected (with no actual arguments
advanced
against what I had stated) by certain others. They caused a brief debate
on the
ISML list with Hari Kumar, who manages that list and who on his part, as
to
issues of Marxism, is still applauding the very wrong and really
ridiculous
total about-turn by the formerly rather im****tant Marxist-Leninist Enver
Hoxha,
who from 1978 on tragically started vilifying Marxism in general and his
own
former long-time associates the Chinese communists as led by Mao Zedong in
particular, bringing also of course, on such a political "basis", the
country
he led, Albania, economically on to a course which would soon prove to be
disastrous.
Citizen Hari's wrong views (which it was not at all unnatural of course
that he
had been misled into holding, to start with) were soundly refuted by me in
this
brief "AIDS" debate, but he (as did some others too) continued to cling on
to
them, seemingly not even being very interested in trying to find out the
actual
main facts on them and ending that discussion on his part rather quickly.
Whether or not to sup****t the struggle of the Congolese people against
what the
US imperialist and other media are constantly mendaciously calling "a
rebellion" - pretending then that foreign invading troops are "not" since
long
the ones controlling half of the DR Congo - Hari's organization, the
"Alliance
Marxist-Leninist - North America" would now (finally!) look into, he
promised
on the list on 12 August. So far, no result of its deliberations on this
has
been seen publicly.
I hold it's likely that the very nastily counter-revolutionary, though
laughably stupid, behaviour which citizen Hari was to demonstrate in the
'merry
Murray "M-L" melee' soon after these things, in particular around that
time
when, as it happened, you wrote to me privately, Jim, late last Friday
(GMT),
had something to do with a reluctance of his to turn around, respectively
to
take a clear stand, on these two abovementioned political questions and
*oppose* that which, above all, the US imperialists are so *fanatically*
interested in perpetrating concerning them.
Now Hari soon, even the day before yesterday, on Saturday, began, as far
as
appearances went, to "cool it" in that "melee". But it would be quite
wrong, on
the part of actual Marxists and revolutionary people, if they were to
"forget
all about" those things he did write late on Friday - and so far has not
himself repudiated either - when endeavouring to assess where citizen Hari
really stands, in the struggle between proletariat and bourgeoisie in the
world.
6. CAN THIS PRESENT MELEE OR "AFFAIR" TAKING PLACE ON THE ISML LIST, IN
PART ON
THE (MORE IM****TANT) PTTP ONE TOO, BE COMPARED TO THE INTERNATIONAL
"QUISPE"
FIGHT IN 1996?
Yes and no. You wrote: "I understand you considered STS ['Sue'] to be a
net
phantom when she appeared on PTTP. As soon as you raised this, she
disappeared.
- The whole affair reminds me of the Quispe problem a few years back now."
Actually, the present melee is quite similar, in principle, to the one in
1996,
and is bringing in part at least some similarly valuable experience. But
it's
incomparably smaller, both as to the number of forces directly involved in
it
and also as to its direct political im****tance - that's how I judge it at
least. Also, it seems to me that there are no intelligence service forces
of
the ("big-time") reactionaries' quite directly involved this time.
Speaking of this, I should mention here at once to you, for instance, Jim,
who
also asked me about how to find earlier "UNITE! (etc) Infos" of mine, that
not
so few of them have dealt in detail with those im****tant questions
concerning
the "RIM" (and in part, concerning other utterly phony "preparatory
Internationals") on which some main truths became clear to many people in
many
different countries from 1996 on precisely in connection with the big
"Quispe"
fight in that year.
For instance, in the rather recent Info #121en, I made a summing-up (in 8
parts, with documents) precisely of that "Quispe" fight, directly
addressing,
btw, that abovementioned cyber ghost "Sweet Sue", although I by then (late
May)
was already pretty certain "she" was precisely a "ghost".
And no, sorry, I must admit I have so far failed to construct that which I
do
think I ought to have put together long ago, a website with all these
Infos
(etc) on it. I shall gladly compensate for this, as far as you and others
who
may expressly want this are concerned, Jim, by mailing you as many earlier
such
Infos as you may require. (And to you I shall now also mail a list of them
so
far - the series started in late 1995.)
In one of these Infos, there also is some brief mention of you, citizen
Jim, on
account of a certain conflict in 1997, your role in which I learned of
only
indirectly then (and would be willing to reassess today, of course, if
some
facts perhaps would show me to have been in part or totally wrong on it) -
you
may have wondered why I above referred to you as 'ex-"SiberiaSwamp
Kommandant"'.
"SiberiaSwamp" was the designation which I on my part held, and still
hold, to
a be more suitable one for a certain mailing list whose main organizer
and/or
moderator, I've understood, were you, the so-called "LeninList". All
information available to me then (and now) has shown pretty clearly, I
think,
that it in reality was a forum which had not a **** to do with actual
Marxism
and/or Leninism or anything like that but could in justice only be
compared to
some labour camp of the (former) Soviet social-imperialists' and
social-fascists'. Concerning this, see one passage from my 6-parts 'Info
#37en:
To Jay M. on RIM & "LeninList"' of 29.06.1997 which I shall bring in an
Appendix B in the last part of this posting.
While I've been writing this, I've also received a mail from Per,
including a
Cc of one from you to him, where you wrote i.a. "maybe he [referring to
me]
doesn't trust me" - since you hadn't yet got that reply to your queries
which
you're getting now; perhaps you were anxious to get such a reply quickly?
Well, as I already have indicated, I do hold it to be quite im****tant, for
all
Marxists, basically ABSOLUTELY TO DISTRUST people like you, who on the one
hand
are quite particular about maintaining, publicly, that you "are"
Marxist-Leninists (too), but whose stated line and actions so far have
systematically been IN PRECISELY THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION and have favoured
arch-reaction - in your case, Jim, above all quite directly the Russian
new
tsarists (and former social-imperialists) and the present-day ruling
Chinese
revisionists, at the international level, and all sorts of vile scum at
the
national or European level too, if I'm not completely mistaken.
I would like to add that in my judgment, which I can explain my reasons
for in
detail, those who want to represent Marxism should not trust Per either,
as
long has he continues to think and act as he does think and act. (That
same
last qualification I want to add concerning you too, Jim.) Citizen Per,
true
enough, does say, quite rightly, that the political line of Marx, Lenin
and Mao
Zedong is the correct one, as seen from the standpoint of the vast
majority of
people. But his actions, as a whole, so far (and in so far as I know about
them) have been very opposite to those required by Marxism, and some views
which he clings to and advocates openly are clearly quite wrong, in some
cases,
ridiculously so.
Now Per has done some things which I on my part think are or have been
quite
good; it IMO was brave of him, for instance, to invite me back (on 20
July) to
his PTTP list, after he had one month earlier kicked me out of it, which
was a
quite unjustified action "motivated" by what others too could clearly see
was a
pretext and which some others (2!) expressly protested against too. And
his
contribution to the sup****t of the Congolese people, after he got to know
some
more about this struggle in Africa, has been wholehearted and, in my
judgment,
an im****tant one. But there are some things he continues to do which are
ABSOLUTELY IMPERMISSIBLE, in particular for a Marxist, and, it must be
said,
for any genuine Leftist too.
This precisely showed up in this present "merry melee", in which he,
together
with me, became "the target of" much of that swinish - but totally weak
and
ridiculous - arch-reactionary howling in it, for instance on the part of
citizen Hari, but in which he, firstly, by no means STRUCK BACK against
and
CLUBBED DOWN that howling with the firmness absolutely necessary in such
cases
- since such reactionary vilifications, in the final instance, precisely
are
DIRECTED AGAINST THE MASSES OF PEOPLE in that, to all, so infamous snotty
"BIG
BROTHER" manner tried on by such people on such occasions.
He was "not at all" defending me, Per on the contrary wrote, when
confronted by
the "terrible" accusation by an array of a few "ghosts" plus "real" people
that
he, on certain points, was doing just that. He even thought it might be
suitable to "co-howl" a little, by ridiculously unjustifiedly saying I was
"paranoid", on some questions at least - remember that same most vile and
most
infamous dung-throwing attempt by the Khrushchovite scumbags against
Stalin
(just to take one instance) by means of "just lightly" hinting at
"insanity"?
(Stalin of course made some real, and serious, errors too. And I'm not
saying
that I'm not making, or may risk making, any.)
And early in the "melee", Per did what I hold was the worst among these
things:
He called on me to "stop" pointing out, on his PTTP list, the fact that
"Martha", "Sue", "Meia" and some other equally silly (some of them now
"high-howling") cyber ghosts precisely were that, clearly invented and
puppeteered by one and the same "old-time"-bourgeois idiot.
Such things cannot be excused by ignorance. One thing which I hold to be
the
most im****tant and necessary condition for co-operation, on the part of
Marxists, with people like you, Jim, and Per and also Hari, is that you DO
NOT
ATTEMPT TO SUPPRESS THE DISCUSSION, but ALLOW THE ADVOCACY OF MARXISM and
the
DISSEMINATION OF FACTS (or what are judged/argued by others to be facts)
CONCERNING THE WORLD (natural-scientific such, for instance.)
What all of you people mentioned above have so far shown, to some extent
or
other, are SOME "BIG-BROTHER"-ISH TENDENCIES, tendencies towards
suppressing
the masses and fearing debate. This is very bad. The masses of people will
not
stand for it, and will VERY JUSTLY CLUB DOWN those who're trying such
things
on, as soon as that vast majority gets organized. Those who really want to
act
as Marxists must get rid of such tendencies completely.
Suppose that I or some others, by mistake or intentionally, say some wrong
things? Suppose some others feel hurt by them, or by things in themselves
correct but stated a little less diplomatically? What "danger" to the
revolutionaries can such things be? None, of course. People who actually
have
in mind somehow to lead or contribute to the overthrow of the entire
present
world order, how can they possibly think they could or should try to avoid
getting their feelings hurt by some "nasty" statements or other? Wrong
things
you instead must REFUTE, as well as possible, thus making them REBOUND
ONTO
their originators as BOOMERANGS (or teaching them the truth, if it was a
sincere mistake). - On this theme, I could bring lots and lots of quotes
from
the well-known developers of scientific proletarian revolutionary theory
too.
Anyway - to return to Per - I was quite happy to see him as "co-target"
beside
me! I think it indicated he has at least done some things right! Being
somewhat
familiar with the writings of Mao, Per will know that nice and
widely-quoted
thing which the Chairman used to say too about "being attacked by the
enemy is
good and by no means bad".
7. THE RECENT ATTACKS ON YOU AND ME, ON THE ISML LIST ABOVE ALL, WERE
REALLY
QUITE HILARIOUS, WEREN'T THEY, PER?
BY NO MEANS SHOULD THEY NOW BE "FORGOTTEN" AND/OR THOUGHT TO BE "JUST"
SOME
"PASSING ABERRATIONS"!
SUCH THINGS ARE AN IM****TANT AND ALWAYS CONTUNUING PART OF THE CLASS
STRUGGLE
IN THE WORLD.
IT'S IN FIGHTS SUCH AS THIS ONE, EVEN IF THIS HAS BEEN JUST ONE SMALL
MELEE AND
PERHAPS WILL NOT EVEN GO ON VERY LONG, THAT OFTEN SOME QUITE VITAL TRUTHS
COME
OUT AND SOME IM****TANT LESSONS ARE LEARNED.
HERE I SHALL TELL YOU (PER, JIM, HARI AND OTHERS) A LITTLE ABOUT THE
THOMAS P.
MURRAY "MULTIPLE POISONALITIES", HOPING TO GIVE ALSO "NORMALLY DEAD
SERIOUS"
PEOPLE SOME GOOD LAUGHS
That "awful monster/vampire multitude" which has recently descended on
both of
us, so to speak, Per, has consisted, quite in the main, of various
"spooks" all
"blown into life" by one and the same bourgeois person, one Thomas P.
Murray.
It would carry too far to recount here every one of those (sometimes
"small")
things which I on my part have taken as indications of this, and which
together
are making me reasonably certain about what is what here. I can tell you
at any
rate that I happen to have a rather long experience in encountering this
particular phenomenon, the "Murray Funny Family", which goes back in time
to
(at least) late 1997 and which has not seldom appeared in connection with
various "Left-wing" political struggles.
As many probably know, "multiple poisonalities" are a not uncommon
affliction
in some parts of the USA, where there in some human bodies may co-exist
perhaps
half-a-dozen, or even a full dozen, different poisonalities, with perhaps
different ***es too, one appearing after the other, and the one sometimes
being
in conflict with the other too. The emergence of the Internet of course
has
made it possible for those who wish to do so to develop such internal
division
and strife within themselves into a (more or less) fine art. Thomas P.
Murray
is one case in point.
Who is this Murray, then? Actually, it's not all that im****tant to know
this
more precisely. Those who're interested in this of course could do some
further
investigation into the matter, based for instance on what I'm contributing
below. This wouldn't be bad. But it would be unjustified, I hold, for
anyone to
engage in some personal "hounding" or other, of this person, Murray, on
account
of these "ghosts" of his. He rather clearly is *not* connected (directly)
with
intelligence services and is doing his reactionary stuff on a "voluntary",
"private-enterprise" basis, with that bourgeois-reactionary aim of feeling
some, if not "Big Bad Brother", then at least "Little Bad Brother"
suppressing
and/or deflecting power over other people, sometimes even, "with half or
one-third of his mind", wanting to do some positive things for others.
Murray, as far as I've gathered, is between 40 and 50 years of age. He's
teaching (or he was, in 1997-98 at least) at a certain institute of
learning in
a certain city in the USA. One of his subjects must be biology, to judge
from
some quite well-informed (and to me at least valuable) things which he
recently
let "Meia Dawn" say concerning the Lysenko controversy.Over the years,
he's
collected together a not so small treasure of knowledge on matters
concerning
Marxism too. He does "understand the world", on the whole, rather better
than
do Per or Hari, for instance. (You, Jim, I don't know well enough to try a
comparison.) But he precisely is *not* in favour of the proletarian
revolution.
Continued dictator****p of the bourgeoisie, though making him also just a
little
bit uncomfortable and discontent, is what he absolutely wants.
Therefore, Murray cannot really understand Marxism at all either, which
should
be apparent to all who approximately do so and who have noted some of the
things he has let his supposedly "Marxist" "cyber ghost" characters do and
say.
Here is a list of cyber ghosts invented by Thomas P. Murray so far, with
their
respective e-mail addresses and including his own (as it was back in
1997), and
briefly some other facts about them. That is, as far as I know about, or
think
I know about, this:
8. THE MERRY MURRAY FUNNY NET GHOST FAMILY (SO FAR, AND AS FAR AS I KNOW
OR
THINK I KNOW TODAY) - IN REVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER AS TO ITS MEMBERS'
RESPECTIVE FIRST PUBLIC APPEARANCES, THE LATEST ONES THUS FIRST:
Name, e-mail address,
"organization" if any
First appeared
publicly (date)
Publicly posts/
posted to
Status,
Aug. 2000
"Mark Scott" <Hantayo000@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
16.08.2000
ISML list
active
"Meia Dawn" <meia_dawn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
("Red Comrades Documentation Project")
18.07.2000
PTTP, ISML lists, newsgroups
active
"Jay Brown" <jay_brown@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
July 2000
newsgroups
silent
"After The Fall" <subgenie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
June 2000
Activist list
silent
"Sue T Simonson" <progressivesociety@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
18.05.2000
PTTP, MLMTT, ISML lists
active
"Martha" <MarCrow@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
("Martha Rose Crow, 1210-34th Avenue North
Saint Cloud, MN 56303-1531, USA;
320-252-4190")
11.05.2000
PTTP list
active
"Mr. Joady Guthrie" <jguthrie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
("Eagle Alliance", <jguthrie@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
www.tmn.com/~eaglea/ HTML/eagle.html
<eaglea@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>)
01.01.2000
---
silent
"diatribe" <tkmeyer@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
(later replaced by "After The Fall")
late 1999
Activist list
silent
"Comrade mart" <mart@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
1999
PTTP list
active
"Caleb Hill" <CHill@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Sep. 1998
newsgroups
silent
"Ian Sampson" <isampson@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
02.08.1998
newsgroups
silent
"Andrew Allen Walton" <revcom@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
("Mao Zedong adherent, New Zealand")
May 1998
M-G list
silent
"Ms Li V. Trahn" <lvtrahn@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
("Vietnam/USA/ Friend****p/Coalitiom" [sic])
29.03.1998
M-G list
silent
"M. Simco" <msimco@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
(first(?) "woman")
Jan. 1998
M-I list
silent
"C. Masterson" <oriontec@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
("ORIONTEC")
Jan.1998
M-G list
silent
"J.K. Marks" <jkmarks@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Dec. 1997
M-G, M-I lists
silent
"L.R.F." <trinity@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
16.12.1997
M-G, M-I lists
silent
"Andrew Allen Walton" <reed@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
("Trotsky adherent")
Nov. 1997
M-G list
silent
"Roger C Phelan" <rphelan1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Oct. 1997
M-G, M-I lists
silent
Thomas P. Murray <tmurpat@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Oct. 1997 (or earlier)
M-I list
silent
"Liam R. Flynn" <liam@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
July 1997
M-G, M-I lists
silent
"Noor Khan" <?>
?
?
silent
Possibly, many others exist or have existed, unknown to me. (I've
participated
in public Net debates since late 1995.)
Note 1)
Today existing mailing lists can be reached by:
http://get.to/activist
<subscribe-pttp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (appr. 94 members)
<subscribe-mlmtt@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (appr. 19 members)
<subscribe-internationalstrugglemarxistleninist @[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> (appr. 35
members)
Note 2)
The M-G list was an unmoderated list which existed from October 1996 on
and was
closed on 24.05.1998. (Added in 2008: See Infos #065en, "The panicky
closing of
M-G", of 23.05.1998, part 1/9 etc, and #066en, "Detecting some Net cops,
I.",
likewise of 23.05.1988, part 1/9 etc.)
The M-I list was a moderated list which existed from October 1996 on and
was
closed on 24.05.1998.
Those two lists mentioned above replaced an earlier unmoderated Marxism
list
("M1") at Jefferson Village, Virginia, USA, which had some 2-300 members.
The
big so-called "Quispe" fight took place, mainly in April-June 1996, mainly
via
that mailing list. (Added in 2008: See Info #121en, "The 'Quispe' fight in
1996", of 29.05.2000, part 1/8 etc.)
[End of Note 2]
The "system" or "principles" employed by Murray in the development of the
above
can be seen in part by readers; various informations on some details or
other,
for instance what political standpoints the various ghosts have pretended
to
represent, I shall gladly provide by mail, as far as I know them.
I on my part am posting to those existing mailing lists above and
sometimes to
congokin_opinions, and to various newsgroups, from the e-mail address seen
in
this posting.
9. A BRIEF GLIMPSE FROM A MUCH EARLIER DEBATE IN WHICH MURRAY TOOK PART
AND
THEN WAS DIRECTLY REFERRED TO, IN LATE 1997 / EARLY 1998
How I can tell, with some certainty, that it's Murray who's cropping up
here
again, once more, is a long story, as I said above. Here just some brief
parts
of it:
In late 1997, Murray's predilection for multiple Net poisonalities was
pointed
to, by several writers to the then M-G list. There were also various
accusations leveled at him, which I on my part to begin with found
completely
unfounded and repeatedly defended him (respectively his aliases) against.
Most
of them were *unfounded* too, such as the one precisely against his
appearing
under pseudonyms or in disguise (why object to this in itself?), or one
about
"harassing" others by sending "unsolicited" mails to them (those people
never
got advertisements or other junk mail, or what?).
Murray was being attacked, not least, by some writers whom I (already)
*knew*
were either nasty reactionaries or else, even, *agents* of reactionary
intelligence services. They wanted to kick him off the list(s). I most
strenuously combated ANY kicking out of ANYBODY, *including* the agents,
from
such lists - what better teachers, or
"skeletons-in-the-classroom-corners", as
I called them, could you have on a list than such people?
But it turned out that apparently, I wasn't completely right in this
defence of
mine of this (multiple) writer either. It seems he had in fact done such a
thing, for instance, as sending mails in the names of other (actual)
persons,
in which third parties were being abused, to the embarrassment of the
presumed
senders too then. One quote from Siddharth Chatterjee on this:
[QUOTE:]
Comments:
Authenticated sender is <siddhart@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
From:
"Siddharth Chatterjee" <siddhart@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
To:
marxism-general@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date:
Sat, 24 Jan 1998 01:11:38 +0000
Subject:
M-G: The Provocateur's Gender Change
The provocateur and proven forgerer in M-G now assumes the voice of a
woman,
"M.Simco" <msimco@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> who says...
...........
The forgerer recognizes and implicitly admits his criminal handiwork. Yes,
"J.K. Mark's" forgery (which will be treated as a crime in a bourgeois
court of
|
