Re: [OPE-L] Suspension

From: Michael Schauerte (mikeschauerte@GMAIL.COM)
Date: Fri Nov 16 2007 - 23:07:49 EST

I wasn't planning to post anything to the list until I finished the
(interminable) translation I am working on, but I want to simply register my
protest to the way Rakesh has been treated.

I do not know the long history of the feud, but if this post gets the
response "he started it" I would pay it about as much mind as when my 5 year
old daughter me "she started it" when she retaliates in a childish way
(which is natural enough in her case) to something her younger sister did.
So excuse me for not reading all of the relevant posts over the past few
years, but I am just basing this comment on the "crystal clear" resignation
letter of Ajit and his accusation that Rakesh "has been st[al]king" him "for

This is a serious accusation, however figuratively it may be intended. For
anyone "googling" Rakesh to find out more about him might come across this
accusation and would naturally have doubts about his character. And this
could also have repercussions for his career prospects, so Ajit should be
more careful (to say the least) before throwing around such accusations.

But when I read his resignation letter looking for evidence to back up these
charges, I found nothing at all. The only "crystal clear" thing to me was
that Ajit was overreacting. In fact, Ajit comes across very badly in that
letter. To say that Rakesh was "pretending to be sometime[s] writing
independently" or "taking the cover of somebody else's response to me" to
"write nasty things aobut what I had written" just sounds silly. And then to
say that "Straffa" is a codename for Ajit (and use that opportunity to say
that Rakesh doesn't no anything about Straffa) only makes him look sillier.
Are you telling me that in addition to all of the other restrictions placed
on Rakesh, he should not have been allowed to discuss the ideas of Straffa
either?! (And what is so bad about having your ideas or Straffa's ideas
criticized in the first place?) And speaking of restrictions, Rakesh was
given no opportunity to reply to these, frankly, hysterical accusations.

The part of that letter that really made me question Ajit's judgment was
that he also brings in Louis Proyect for abuse as a "failed scholar" along
with Rakesh (not that Proyect ever claimed to be a "scholar"--successful or
otherwise--in the first place), and informing us that he left pan-L because
of Proyect. I would be curious to know what the exact reason was. If it was
just that Proyect criticized his ideas, then I think he was overreacting
then just as he seems to be doing know. Or was Proyect "stalking" him?
(whatever that word means in Ajit's mind)

If Ajit was treated badly by Rakesh in the past I am sorry for him but I do
not see how such past treatment can justify the abuse he has leveled at
Rakesh in that letter and elsewhere which I know has caused Rakesh a good
deal of distress, which is only made worse by not having a chance to
properly defend himself.

I'm sorry that my first post in months is regarding this argument rather
than something more edifying. I have basically finished the translation (and
nearly finished my introduction) of the Samezo Kuruma book (actually 2 books
in one) tentatively entitled *Marx's Theory of the Genesis of Money. *I'm
not sure when (or even if) it will be published but if anyone would like to
have a look at it contact me off-list and I can send you the Word file.

Yours for Comradely Discussion (and I mean that sincerely!),

Michael Schauerte

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 30 2007 - 00:00:03 EST