[OPE-L:7227] RE: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: fundamentalism

From: Nicola Taylor (n.taylor@student.murdoch.edu.au)
Date: Mon May 20 2002 - 04:25:45 EDT

Hi Riccardo,
Thank you for the following comment on the nature of 'flames', which I
interpreted in the exactly the same manner as you did:

> (ii) may be it is a problem of language and culture, but translated 
>in Italian, a parenthetical like "even Nicky who seems to be Jerry's 
>good friend etc.", implying that an argument by Nicky in favour of 
>Jerry should be due to the fact that she must be "a good friend" of 
>him, would be judged as a flame.

Since my name keeps coming up (why?), I'd like to use this opportunity
to clarify 4 things further:

1) My support for Jerry was limited to the specific instance where he
commented on the hermeneutic character of Kliman's work.  What I
supported (in 2 sentences) was Jerry's right to state an opinion.
Moreover, I deliberately bracketed my support for Jerry's right to have
an opinion with a clear refusal to make any comment on whether that
opinion is 'right' or 'wrong'.  

2) I have nowhere, at any time on this list, supported Jerry's decision
to make Alan's private email available to others.  In the one comment
that I did make online (at the time of the incident) I said the exact
opposite.  I have never requested Alan's email.  I have never seen it.
I do not want to see it.  I do not wish to comment on it.  I do not want
it imposed on me.  I am dismayed by the whole business.  End of story.

3) I have no problem whatsoever with Rakesh expressing his own
(legitimate) concerns on the above.  I do have a problem with the manner
in which he expresses them (personalised references to Jerry's ethics
and heart problem etc).  Imo, this is not a 'legitimate' way to express
a legitimate concern and tends, moreover, to alienate people (note Mike
W's departing comment).

4) I also have a problem with the way in which Rakesh attributes to me
and others - see the example below - opinions and/or positions that I do
not hold, and have never held or expressed.  I have no intention of
*ever* responding to *any* challenge framed in this arbitrary fashion,
for the same reason as in 3).  


At 12:35 -0700 18-05-2002, Rakesh Bhandari wrote:
>>Dear Rakesh,
>>	thanks for your further elaboration. I accept that on this 
>>thing we have different opinion. That's it.
>>	The problem here is not to agree 100% with Jerry. I think his 
>>parallel with gardening was a slip (in fact, he admitted it). I 
>>think he over-emphasised the point about hermeneutics, opposing it 
>>to understanding real capitalism. Though, I thin k he raised an 
>>interesting point to be elaborated, how different are the ways of 
>>doing Marxian hermeneutics today, and how this hermeneutics is 
>>linked to a process of understanding and changing the word.
>Dear Riccardo,
>all these questions can be raised without saying that real Marxists 
>who are primarily interested in understanding and struggling against 
>real world capitalism have great difficulty communicating with 
>Kliman because Kliman has a primary research interest with the same 
>relevance to Marxism as personal gardening.
>First, this is a flame. You want to call it a slip, but this is a 
>euphemism. Jerry needs to re-read the list rules. And I don't think 
>we should have a moderator who breaks his own rules.
>Second, it puts all the blame on Kliman for these communicational 
>difficulties. Why does this list need a hypothesis of why Kliman has 
>communicational difficulties? Especially a hypothesis which puts 
>Kliman in a very unfavorable comparison with his old interlocutors?! 
>Kliman is not even on the list. Levy's comments on Kliman were 
>neither polite nor productive.
>  The list does not need a moderator like this.  Sinha, Skillman and 
>others (perhaps you and me as well) have blame to share in the 
>breakdown of conversation with the TSS school; I of course make no 
>excuses for Kliman's obnoxious demands for retraction--one must 
>realize that I have had as much unpleasant email exchange with 
>Kliman as almost anyone on this list.  But I don't think Levy's 
>making available of Freeman's private email (even if Freeman allowed 
>this) did anyone any good--even Nicky who seems  to be Jerry's good 
>friend could find no reason for Jerry to circulate Freeman's private 
>email with the absurd cries that he was exposing a THREAT to the 
>list. What a TSS person could think is that the moderator of this 
>list is willing to do anything to bring them down--circulate private 
>email and make ad hominem criticisms. Again we don't need this kind 
>of moderation.
>Levy has moderated for--what?--seven years now. Do Marxists have 
>moderators for life? It's time for a change.

Riccardo Bellofiore
Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche
Via dei Caniana 2
I-24127 Bergamo, Italy
e-mail:   bellofio@unibg.it, bellofio@cisi.unito.it
direct	  +39-035-277545
secretary +39-035 277501
fax:	  +39 035 277549
homepage: http://www.unibg.it/dse/homebellofiore.htm

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Jun 02 2002 - 00:00:07 EDT