[PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path From: John Gulick JG sez: I wince at the suggestion that I'm in the same league as Marty when it comes to the political economy of anything East Asian. I'm in no position to offer trustworthy insight as to what's really going on inside China very few are. Perhaps too intemperately, I was simply warning against drawing conclusions from CCP press releases. Even when policies coming from the central government sound excellent and deserve our critical support (FWIW, which ain't much!), they are routinely given lip service but not obeyed, subverted, ignored, etc. Despite conventional understanding China is very decentralized and chaotic and often Beijing can't do much more issue than pleasant-sounding directives. One has to be a seasoned political sociologist or veteran bureaucratic infighter to understand this and report credibly (and I am neither)... which is precisely why, Ravi, I considered Eric's postings to be so much insubstantial dross. CB: Would a fair summary of what you say be you are in no position to offer trustworthy insight as to what's really going on inside China.. BUT your are pretty sure that Eric's postings were so much insubstantial dross ? You don't know what's going on in China , but you _do_ know it's not what Eric and the CCP say ?
[PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
On Feb 18, 2008, at 10:03 PM, ravi wrote: Doug questioned the guys credibility by calling Fox News polemical genius and other such stuff They are geniuses of polemic. That's a completely noncontroversial statement. I'm almost embarrassed by the obviousness of it, in fact. Let me relieve your embarrassment then! I believe they are geniuses of nothing, even if they tend to offer the polemical, unless of course we consider success a sole measure of genius. i.e., Fox News is successful at riling up the obvious suspects and the cheapest instincts using tried and tested techniques. But you hardly need to be a genius to achieve that, yes? ^ CB: Yea, masters of demogogy would be more accurate. ^^^ On Feb 18, 2008, at 10:40 PM, John Gulick wrote: I wince at the suggestion that I'm in the same league as Marty when it comes to the political economy of anything East Asian. I'm in no position to offer trustworthy insight as to what's really going on inside China very few are. Perhaps too intemperately, I was simply warning against drawing conclusions from CCP press releases. Even when policies coming from the central government sound excellent and deserve our critical support (FWIW, which ain't much!), they are routinely given lip service but not obeyed, subverted, ignored, etc. Despite conventional understanding China is very decentralized and chaotic and often Beijing can't do much more issue than pleasant- sounding directives. One has to be a seasoned political sociologist or veteran bureaucratic infighter to understand this and report credibly (and I am neither)... which is precisely why, Ravi, I considered Eric's postings to be so much insubstantial dross. Well, yes, perhaps he has drunk the Kool Aid, but even if forms of doctrinaire positions/posts are not new, they do not automatically become insubstantial and non-productive. In fact, I tend to agree with your view (FWIW -- I have very little knowledge of China and its internal politics) but that is exactly the reason that I want to hear from someone who might offer an alternate view and a first-hand one at that. On Doug's LBO list, there are one or two individuals who consistently post news bits about the glories of the new India while refusing to be drawn into any discussion on the content presented or even giving us some insight into how they see/interpret these news bits relative to leftist ideology (both Western and Indian). Yet Doug and Co on LBO are happy to tolerate the material -- which is good since as a leftist I would be opposed to shutting people down for not following my preferred mode of dialogue. Yet, there is something to be learned from India's and China's development model (or should I just say: recent developmental history), irrespective of whether it is centrally planned or controlled. If someone were to pop up (as they already are!) and point to India's success as yet another example of the glories of capitalism (as the final solution, no pun), there is a need to understand and if necessary refute these claims. To me, it is of even greater interest should someone suggest that this recent success can be claimed on behalf of socialism, seen in some particular light, exactly because I would be hard-pressed to understand how that could be. Now, if something sounds incredulous one may choose to ignore it in order to save energy. But for those who do wish to engage that person, they can ask for no more than that the person be willing to carry out an urbane discussion, which Eric seemed capable of and interested in doing. I will readily accept that this being a technical list, such conversations may not be considered worthwhile to the majority. But that is not what the list moderator noted in one of the earliest posts on this set of threads. --ravi CB: It's ad hominem to criticize someone advancing arguments from the CCP.
[PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path On Feb 18, 2008, at 10:03 PM, ravi wrote: Doug questioned the guys credibility by calling Fox News polemical genius and other such stuff They are geniuses of polemic. That's a completely noncontroversial statement. I'm almost embarrassed by the obviousness of it, in fact. Doug ^ CB: Did you mean geniuses or grade A idiots ?
[PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
I have a few words for Doug, Louis, and you too John... Simple-minded Vicious Assholes. Simple-minded? No, in fact I was set off (and I suspect so too were Doug and Louis, but I'm not their mouthpiece) by Eric's consistently demonstrated simple-mindedness, his repeated insistence that one can learn most of what one needs to know about the reality of the Chinese political economy by tuning into CCTV and reading the English- language People's Daily. (Unfortunately characters like this, who no matter their well-meaning guise are not capable of Socratic dialogue, frequent Louis' list and he can smell them coming from a mile away.) Vicious? Well, I confess that I let my spleen get the better of me, not a felicitous trait... I lose all self-control when subjected to cloying boilerplate, no matter the source. Asshole? Oh dear, even my momma thinks I'm an asshole. I have more important things to do than read these vapid critiques instead of learning, teaching... Leigh, it is truly rich of you to harp on others' character flaws. I myself resided in Santa Cruz for the better part of a decade, yet never felt compelled to narcissistically subject a captive maillist audience to posts about local political minutiae, about which 99% of Pen-L members assuredly don't give a fuck. The impressing on other people of your own ideas/concepts about how thing work without a moronic piling-on to anyone who thinks otherwise. How fucking 'American' can you get. Care to expand on this? To me it seems like yet another provincial USian radical trying to show how cosmopolitan he/she is and in so doing betraying just how provincial he/she is... as the Chinese themselves have proven during various ideological campaigns, there's nothing distinctly American about gangs of bullies piling on. I'm out of here for a while... How does that adage about the door and your backside go again? _ Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail®-get your fix. http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx
Re: [PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
Leigh has left the list. I mentioned that I thought that Lou's first comment was a bit too harsh. I would have hoped that we could have learned something from Eric; that he could have moved beyond boilerplate engaged with John G. Marty. I am not sure that that could have happened. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com
Re: [PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
Leigh has left the list. I mentioned that I thought that Lou's first comment was a bit too harsh. I would have hoped that we could have learned something from Eric; that he could have moved beyond boilerplate engaged with John G. Marty. I am not sure that that could have happened. -- Michael Perelman It is actually not in very good form to subscribe to a mailing list and begin posting long provocative essays right off the bat. He would have been better off easing into the discussion. Frankly, I don't think he was that interested in discussing things.
Re: [PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
You may be right. On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 08:43:27PM -0500, Louis Proyect wrote: It is actually not in very good form to subscribe to a mailing list and begin posting long provocative essays right off the bat. He would have been better off easing into the discussion. Frankly, I don't think he was that interested in discussing things. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com
Re: [PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
On Feb 18, 2008, at 7:27 PM, John Gulick wrote: (Unfortunately characters like this, who no matter their well-meaning guise are not capable of Socratic dialogue, frequent Louis' list and he can smell them coming from a mile away.) Socratic dialogue! That's a new one! Its a good term though -- single- dimensional attack on the side of scientific critique. Vicious? Well, I confess that I let my spleen get the better of me, not a felicitous trait... I lose all self-control when subjected to cloying boilerplate, no matter the source. Good Socratic method, there. Kudos! Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail®- get your fix. Check it out. Figures! --ravi
Re: [PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
On Feb 18, 2008, at 9:45 PM, Michael Perelman wrote: You may be right. No, he is not. Michael, with all respect (to you and to LP), this is all guesswork on what he was interested in or not. And as Gulick's response demonstrates, there was no attempt to productively engage him, but quite the opposite -- Doug questioned the guys credibility by calling Fox News polemical genius and other such stuff, for crying out loud!! And as far as mailing list form goes, I believe what would have been good list etiquette would be (a) to give a newcomer some breathing room, (b) follow the recommendation of the moderator/owner (*). --ravi On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 08:43:27PM -0500, Louis Proyect wrote: It is actually not in very good form to subscribe to a mailing list and begin posting long provocative essays right off the bat. He would have been better off easing into the discussion. Frankly, I don't think he was that interested in discussing things. (*) I am not big on list owner dictatorships, actually, but you are hardly one, and here is what you wrote: I am very interested in this exchange -- even more so if Marty jumps in. Please try to keep the temperature down, but I think that we can benefit from tapping Eric's expertise, especially because his views are in the minority here.
[PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
MP posted: I would have hoped that we could have learned something from Eric; that he could have moved beyond boilerplate engaged with John G. Marty. I am not sure that that could have happened. JG sez: I wince at the suggestion that I'm in the same league as Marty when it comes to the political economy of anything East Asian. I'm in no position to offer trustworthy insight as to what's really going on inside China very few are. Perhaps too intemperately, I was simply warning against drawing conclusions from CCP press releases. Even when policies coming from the central government sound excellent and deserve our critical support (FWIW, which ain't much!), they are routinely given lip service but not obeyed, subverted, ignored, etc. Despite conventional understanding China is very decentralized and chaotic and often Beijing can't do much more issue than pleasant-sounding directives. One has to be a seasoned political sociologist or veteran bureaucratic infighter to understand this and report credibly (and I am neither)... which is precisely why, Ravi, I considered Eric's postings to be so much insubstantial dross. _ Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live. http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008
Re: [PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
On Feb 18, 2008, at 10:03 PM, ravi wrote: Doug questioned the guys credibility by calling Fox News polemical genius and other such stuff They are geniuses of polemic. That's a completely noncontroversial statement. I'm almost embarrassed by the obviousness of it, in fact. Doug
Re: [PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
(Unfortunately characters like this, who no matter their well-meaning guise are not capable of Socratic dialogue frequent Louis' list and he can smell them coming from a mile away.)Socratic dialogue! That's a new one! Its a good term though -- single-dimensional attack on the side of scientific critique. Well, Ravi, perhaps I/we were too quick to rush to judgment, but Eric's demonstrated habit of countering qualms about what he was posting with further postings cribbed straight from CCTV/China Daily rapidly convinced me/us that he is an all-too-familar sort who brings more clutter than enlightenment to left-wing maillists. This sort has basically driven me off Lou's Marxmail list b/c so much of the discourse consists of stale nostrums (not Lou's fault!). Maybe I/we too briskly pigeonholed Eric as one of these sorts when in fact he is merely naive to a fault... In any event I did not post my screed until after Eric signed off, so the issue of critical exchange was moot at that point. Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need yourHotmail®- get your fix. Check it out. Figures! Yeah, I really am quite the oaf... I don't drive a Toyota Priusor outfit my kitchen with Energy Star-certified appliances either. _ Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser! http://biggestloser.msn.com/
Re: [PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
On Feb 18, 2008, at 10:42 PM, Doug Henwood wrote: On Feb 18, 2008, at 10:03 PM, ravi wrote: Doug questioned the guys credibility by calling Fox News polemical genius and other such stuff They are geniuses of polemic. That's a completely noncontroversial statement. I'm almost embarrassed by the obviousness of it, in fact. Let me relieve your embarrassment then! I believe they are geniuses of nothing, even if they tend to offer the polemical, unless of course we consider success a sole measure of genius. i.e., Fox News is successful at riling up the obvious suspects and the cheapest instincts using tried and tested techniques. But you hardly need to be a genius to achieve that, yes? On Feb 18, 2008, at 10:40 PM, John Gulick wrote: I wince at the suggestion that I'm in the same league as Marty when it comes to the political economy of anything East Asian. I'm in no position to offer trustworthy insight as to what's really going on inside China very few are. Perhaps too intemperately, I was simply warning against drawing conclusions from CCP press releases. Even when policies coming from the central government sound excellent and deserve our critical support (FWIW, which ain't much!), they are routinely given lip service but not obeyed, subverted, ignored, etc. Despite conventional understanding China is very decentralized and chaotic and often Beijing can't do much more issue than pleasant- sounding directives. One has to be a seasoned political sociologist or veteran bureaucratic infighter to understand this and report credibly (and I am neither)... which is precisely why, Ravi, I considered Eric's postings to be so much insubstantial dross. Well, yes, perhaps he has drunk the Kool Aid, but even if forms of doctrinaire positions/posts are not new, they do not automatically become insubstantial and non-productive. In fact, I tend to agree with your view (FWIW -- I have very little knowledge of China and its internal politics) but that is exactly the reason that I want to hear from someone who might offer an alternate view and a first-hand one at that. On Doug's LBO list, there are one or two individuals who consistently post news bits about the glories of the new India while refusing to be drawn into any discussion on the content presented or even giving us some insight into how they see/interpret these news bits relative to leftist ideology (both Western and Indian). Yet Doug and Co on LBO are happy to tolerate the material -- which is good since as a leftist I would be opposed to shutting people down for not following my preferred mode of dialogue. Yet, there is something to be learned from India's and China's development model (or should I just say: recent developmental history), irrespective of whether it is centrally planned or controlled. If someone were to pop up (as they already are!) and point to India's success as yet another example of the glories of capitalism (as the final solution, no pun), there is a need to understand and if necessary refute these claims. To me, it is of even greater interest should someone suggest that this recent success can be claimed on behalf of socialism, seen in some particular light, exactly because I would be hard-pressed to understand how that could be. Now, if something sounds incredulous one may choose to ignore it in order to save energy. But for those who do wish to engage that person, they can ask for no more than that the person be willing to carry out an urbane discussion, which Eric seemed capable of and interested in doing. I will readily accept that this being a technical list, such conversations may not be considered worthwhile to the majority. But that is not what the list moderator noted in one of the earliest posts on this set of threads. --ravi
Re: [PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
Greetings Economists, On Feb 18, 2008, at 8:20 PM, ravi wrote: I believe they are geniuses of nothing, even if they tend to offer the polemical, unless of course we consider success a sole measure of genius. i.e., Fox News is successful at riling up the obvious suspects and the cheapest instincts using tried and tested techniques. But you hardly need to be a genius to achieve that, yes? Doyle, Oh yes indeed. Clotted sour milk Fox News. Well said. Keep it up. :-) Doyle
Re: [PEN-L] LM leaving list for a while/China's socialist path
Greetings Economists, On Feb 18, 2008, at 8:03 PM, John Gulick wrote: who brings more clutter than enlightenment to left-wing maillists. Doyle; Many Lists seem to function on the principle of argument and perhaps long threads with a lot of detail. What's the purpose? In most cases there is little done to work together toward common goals. Rather the oppositional stimulation between people is primarily what draws these small scale confrontations. My quarrel with lists is not so much flames as that the form yields such small results for such prolonged labors. It's not as if tech savvy people like Ravi don't offer occasional alternate courses, it's that the method of work to combine is so difficult to pull together into something larger. To me the call to limit list mail to a size too small to merit work in photography dooms the content to irrelevancy. Typically when doing pictures I'll work on something like a single 4 mb size file (reduced from 110 mbs of file space). Which 4 mbs might be the whole size of of the list for several days. The lists are 'text' friendly web hostile environments. The technology demonstrably does not build socialist connection. The few examples of working together tend like Michael Perelman working on econospeak to emphasize individual voices and sort of web page clunkiness. Probably augmented ubiquitous computing will start to change that. Ubiquitous refers to chips embedded everywhere rather than on the desk top. And augmentation is the antithesis of virtual. What this emphasizes and relieves in the current situation is the concept called presence. The sense that one's community is connected to one and that one is doing something with them. Right now that is crude social networking, but sometime this will convert to take advantage of skilled political thinking to build something besides argumentation. After that one will look back on this as a wonder. A wonder why people tolerated the limitations when they wanted to build socialist community. thanks, Doyle Saylor
