M-TH: RED-NET (fwd)

[Brian M Ganter]

Comrades, Revolutionary Marxist Collective:


     From what I have read of your posting, critiquing the forthcoming
conference "Between Capitalism and Democracy," and your engagement with
responses to this posting, I recognize that you are representing a serious,
thoughtful, committed Revolutionary Marxist position which should be taken
seriously, and engaged in a similarly intellectually and politically
responsible manner by critics of what you have written.  Your critique of
Ellen Meiksins Wood is a critique of a prominent public figure with
considerable standing and influence on the contemporary "left"; it is
therefore entirely legitimate, and, insofar as it points to serious problems
with Wood's "Marxist" position (such as her movement towards complicity with
Laclau and Mouffe in rejecting the priority of political economy and class in
the infrastructure of captalist society, and as indispensable categories for
making sense of this infrastructure) of urgent importance.  


I call upon all critics of what the Revolutionary Marxist Collective has
written to demonstrate intellectual and political responsibility by offering
a critique of this position rather than simply dismissing it out of hand,
and, worse than that, trivializing the issues raised by the RMC, denigrating
and insulting its members and their motives, and engaging in retrograde
policing tactics designed to prevent any encounter with this position.
 Marxist discussion lists should be engaged in discussing how to make sense
of the complex historical  legacy of Marxist theory 
and practice, and, more importantly than this, in discussing how to bring
Marxism, as a still vital and dynamic mode of revolutionary praxis, to bear
in critiquing and transforming contemporary capitalism as part of an ongoing
commitment to socialism.  The RMC have made a contribution of  just this kind
to these lists; I urge others to show that the RMC are not the only ones who
participate in these lists that are able and willing to take Revolutionary
Marxist critical theory and socialist struggle seriously.   Do not hide
behind charges of "sectarianism," "ultra-leftism," and "stalinism"; if this
is what you understand the RMC to be doing, and what you understand the RMC
to be all about, show how this is the case -- argue for these charges.  As
is, these charges have been directed at the RMC in ways far more reminiscent
of  Cold War -- and McCarthyite -- "anti-communism" than anything else;
certainly they have nothing in common with -- for instance -- Trotsky's
principled, theoretically informed and politically astute critiques of
stalinism.   While sectarianism, ultra-leftism, and stalinism have been
significant historical problems for the American Marxist left, these have
often been equalled, if not in fact frequently exceeded, as serious problems,
by opportunism, accomodationism, pragmatism, populism, anti-intellectualism,
and revisionist conflations of "socialism" with liberal democracy.   The only
way to do justice to the genuine seriousness of any of these problematic
tendencies as they exist today is to offer a dialectically concrete rather
than a metaphysically schematic critique.   I challenge the RMC's critics on
the supposedly OPEN discussion lists to which they have posted their critique
of Wood and the conference "Between Capitalism and Democracy"  to offer such
a critique if they have one, and, if not, to take the time to read, think
about, discuss, and learn from what the RMC have written.   I further
challenge all those critics of the "style" in which the RMC writes their
critiques to offer a theoretical accounting for how they conceive of "style,"
its difference from and relation to "substance," and its "proper" forms and
"useful" effects.    I challenge these critics to explain how they conceive
of the historicity and materiality of language and discourse, and of semiosis
and communication.   I challenge these critics to explain their conception of
the social and political significance of the institution of the (higher
educational) academy, and of the most advanced and powerful forms of
knowledges that are developed and disseminated within, and from, this
institution (such as "postmodernism").  I challenge these critics to explain
how their response to "postmodernism" -- often,  from what I have read,
equivalent with simply making fun of it -- is in any way a MARXIST response
to a powerful reactionary phenomenon (recalling, for instance, Marx's
critique of "irreligious" critiques of religion in his _Contribution to the
Critique of Hegel's Philosophy of Right_).  



You may post this message  -- In Solidarity for an Intellectually Rigorous
and Politically Committed Revolutionary Marxist Praxis,



Bob Nowlan
Chief Editor, _Red Orange: a Marxist Journal of Theory, Politics, and the
Everyday_
P.O. Box 1055
Tempe, AZ 85280-1055
rnowlan961 at aol.com
     
 



     --- from list marxism-thaxis at lists.village.virginia.edu ---