Re: [OPE-L] you don't call this a flame?

From: Riccardo Bellofiore (riccardo.bellofiore@UNIBG.IT)
Date: Tue Dec 05 2006 - 04:26:38 EST

Hi Fred. You know, different persons have 
different sensibilities. So, when I call you a 
"fundamentalist", you take it as an offense, when 
for me is an accurate description, in my meaning 
of the word. And it does not become wrong because 
you do not accept my argument.

In fact, you, as all the Marxists, always ask for 
further arguments, because you would never be a 
censor against others. Then, if I try for 
arguments, you never find them as appropriate. At 
a certain point, I quit. So, for example, about 
our discussion of your paper on money, which 
should have ended in your web page, you wanted to 
engage in a long discussion for me to refine it, 
when I find it quite definitive.

So, I find your request for arguments some time a 
bit excessive. This happens between us as 
friends, with no insults. Imagine in a list when 
somebody calls others racist, and the like. 
Difficult to see this as not a flame, though I 
understand each individual pojt may be defended 
as an argument (and I am strongly against Wilson 
and sociobiology and the like, even Singer etc.). 
The long chain of deductions and arguments, 
however, becomes very long, and orthodox marxist 
have the habit of having long arguments.

To me is just boring, I fully understand when 
others take these as flames. And I do not need 
further arguments, thanks. The situation is quite 

Especially when, relative to the same persons (in 
the mail, there is Jerry, there is Nicky, since a 
long time), the aggression is constant. So that 
after some time, as you may know, quantity 
becomes (bad) quality.

And probably, you have missed in that mail the 
usual attack against Jerry as Moderator. I take 
it as a flame.

Now, after having read OPE-L by a long time, and 
after having seen how the discussion goes on, and 
even the patience of Jerry for a long time 
against attacks , I declare in public that I 
would like to have Jerry as a Dictator for life 
for this list.

I think he deserves respect.

And I think that Rakesh is a precious guy in the 
list. But he is submerged by the details, and by 
the need to fight always, with a strong 
aggressive tone.

Now, I ask you if I also, as many others, have to 
quit the list to avoid being trapped in following 
these discussions.

The solution is very clear. In a list, rakesh 
should respect minimal rules. If he wants to 
write a paper, he can call everybody as he 
wishes. If there is a refereeing process, there 
will be readers who will ask for arguments, if 



At 22:21 -0500 4-12-2006, Fred Moseley wrote:
>Jerry, I am sorry, but no, I don't see this as a flame.
>This is one of the posts that I focused on.  It seems to me that R.
>calls your argument
>that forms of primitive communism can be found in non-humans
>to be racist.  He claims that there is scholarly backing
>for this call.  I don't agree with R's argument, but it
>is not totally crazy.  I think it can be answered.
>Why not answer it with additional argument, rather than
>calling it a flame?
>Please explain what in this post is a flame.
>What do others think?
>P.S.  jerry, I am sure that you have exercised tremendous
>restraint in not responding to all of R's provocations,
>and I appreciate that very much.  I just have a hard time defending
>this as a flame.
>Quoting Jerry Levy <>:
>This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

Riccardo Bellofiore
Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche
"Hyman P. Minsky"
UniversitÓ di Bergamo
Via dei Caniana 2
I-24127 Bergamo, Italy
direct    +39-035-2052545
secretary    +39-035 2052501
fax:      +39 035 2052549

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Dec 31 2006 - 00:00:04 EST