NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/alt/activism/21115

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-21 | 6.8 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!sgiblab!sgigate!sgi!cdp!NFMail!poly.math.cor!math.cornell.edu!harelb
From: [e-mail]
Newsgroups: alt.activism
Date: 20 Jan 93 16:42 PST
Subject: Re: MIM
Sender: Notesfile to Usenet Gateway <[e-mail]>
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
Nf-ID: #R:[e-mail]:-1744373509:[e-mail]:376352177:000:6404
Nf-From: math.cornell.edu!harelb    Jan 20 16:42:00 1993
Lines: 135


From: [e-mail] (Harel Barzilai)
Subject: Re: Re: MIM

Dear Gary,

See the post I made today reiterating the reasoning for the
inappropriateness of MIM posts on misc.activism.progressive which
cited Amnesty International in the body and gave a restatement of the
reasoning in teh beginning paragraphs.


** Date:         Tue, 19 Jan 93 01:44:44 EDT
** From: FLANAGAN@morekypr
** Subject:      Re: MIM
** To: [e-mail] (Harel Barzilai)
**
** Dear Harel,
**
** Concerning MIM, I think that MIM or the RCP cannot be compared to
** Lyndon LaRouche and the KKK. Whereas, they stand for the extreme
** right and racism, both the RCP and MIM have taken strong stands against
** racism, the exploitation of women, and (in the case of MIM) on gay
** rights, as well as numerous other issues. I think that it would be
** difficult to demonstrate that LaRouche or the KKK had taken progressive
** stands on any issues.

Re: "cannot be compared" -- that depends. On racism, you are certainly
correct. But as far as a pro-Stalin, pro-former-Rumanian-leader, etc,
organization, which was also writing articles "against the
exploitation of women, racism, etc" -- then the reasoning I gave in
that article and repeatedly before applies. I don't think MIM has sent
us a pro-Stalin, not sure if MIM or WW sent us a pro-Rumanian dictator
article, but this is irrelevant, although I have my own suspicions on
where they stand, or fail to stand, on those issues; rather, again,
the reasoning given with reguard to "cheer-leader the systematicly
murderous SL" suffices.

**
** While I find many of MIM's and the RCP's views
** extremes (I once was physically attacked by RCP members when I was
** a member of the US-China People's Friendship Association) and may
** disagree with them on numerous issues, I think that it is a tremendous
** distortion and injustice to try to lump them with the KKK, neo-Nazis, and
** Lydon LaRouche. A more appropriate analogy might be with the Socialist
** Workers Party and the Spartacist League. The Spartacist League has
** historically opposed the struggle for self-determination in Ireland
** and the SWP has taken stands in past years that I, personally, opposed
** and found deplorable.
**
** The latter, for example, supported the Soviet occupation of
** Afghanistan, when my own view was "a pox on both their heads" and was

Analogous to pro-SL cheerleading.

** one of condemning many Soviet actions there. Many other views
** represented on ACTIV-L represent extremes of one type or another and
** they're not always compatible. If MIM and RCP are barred from ACTIV-L,
** then it seems to me that ACTIV-L is ideologically biased ... I can't
** really draw any other conclusion.

Right -- ideologically-"biased" against cheerleading for
the systamatically murderous. Note that even in the case of Castro who
is Mother Theresa next to Sendero, misc.activism.progressive is home
for anti-US-blockade, aggression, etc, not for articles singing praise
in cheer-leading excercises to "our glorious Fidel", despite that that
would have been quantitatively, at least, far less objectionable.

**
** I've taken part in many activities over the years, from working
** towards improved relations with China in the 1970s, marching against
** the KKK in Greensboro following the shooting of members of the
** Communist Workers Party, to working more generally in progressive
** circles in recent years, and I've had my share of disagreements with
** groups over the years. However, I would never bar a group that had

Re "bar" -- see orignal posts' comments on why this is not "censorship"
This is "to work with" or not, to "walk arm in arm with" or not, not
to "censor" or not -- as if MAP undertook a campaign to take away
MIM's UseNet, PeaceNet, FreeNet, etc, access. MAP answers "no" to the
first two questions, just as we would for...

** taken progressive stands on many issues and which defines itself in
** those terms from expressing it's views - that includes the SWP and
** Spartacist League (which I have virtually no agreement with) and many

...pro-Stalinist articles purveyors, "taken many protressvie
positions" or not.

Again "freedom to express views" is not in question here.



Harel Barzilai
Co-founder, Co-moderator, misc.activism.progressive (MAP)
(re-sending "I have one question" re "censorship"), Next.



** other groups. I would note that Workers World Party (which I like in
** most respects) supported the crackdown in Tiananmen Square ... will
** they now be barred from ACTIV-L because of their position on that.
** Perhaps if they would have been if they posted such a position now.
** But I wouldn't support that either. I've always tried to look at as
** many progressive/left perspectives as I could and form my own
** opinions. From my perspective ACTIV-L has ceased to be an unbiased
** source.
**
** I considered encouraging others to signoff ACTIV-L in protest as
** well, but I didn't think that would be especially productive. My decision
** is based on my own feelings on this issue. When I began seeing so many
** postings from ideologically divergent left/ progressive groups on
** ACTIV-L, I thought this is great - a place where these views can be
** disseminated and discussed. Clearly, though, if one takes a stance that
** is unpopular with many people (and I think that the verdict is still
** out in Peru) then the freedom to express their views is illusory. I
** just don't buy the attempt to lump MIM and the RCP with the right and
** non-progressive movements. It's that sort of factionalist that most
** disgusted me about the left/progressive movements in the seventie and
** eighties. Clearly it isn't dead. It isn't with pleasure that I signed
** off of ACTIV-L - I valued it as a source of information, which I often
** agreed with and sometimes didn't, but this is what I can do as one
** person to express my disapproval.
**
** Thanks for taking the time to respond to my message, but nothing has
** changed in my view on the matter. I think that the decision to bar
** MIM was wrong and the attempt to lump them with fascism flimsy. I can't
** support it and oppose it in my own way. I wish that the progressive
** forces would stop dividing itself - that is what will help the right
** to win. I'm soory, but this is how I feel.
**
** Thanks again,
** Gary Flanagan
** [e-mail]