I hope that I'm not behaving like a Stalinist suppressor.  I understand your 
sensitivity about the term, "conspiracy theorist."  I don't know about other 
people, but I find the evidence for the truther's case unconvincing. The 
problem here on the list is that the discussion on the subject follows a 
predictable loop that degenerates into personal attacks.

One thing I think all of us can agree on is that the available information on 
the attack is intentionally limited and will probably never be fully made 
available.



Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929

Tel. 530-898-5321
E-Mail [email protected]
michaelperelman.wordpress.com

From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul Zarembka
Sent: Sunday, April 26, 2015 8:53 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [Pen-l] Response to Michael: "conspiracy theory"

Michael,

Actually, I had said nothing more after 3 p.m. Thursday, when your message came 
over aimed toward me.   Several others have been involved afterwards.

I am planning to write a paper with a title something like " 'Conspiracy 
theory' is a CIA concept, not a Marxist concept".  The CIA consciously and 
vigorously promoted its use pejoratively from the late 1960s -- even if it had 
been used before without a negative connotation -- so as to become an 
anti-intellectual weapon ideologically.  It's pretty effective, actually.

It is now used most often as a put-down, a big put-down.  It is used 
anti-intellectually (demand: don't consider an alternative!).  Among supporters 
of governments, I can understand why they use the phrase over and over 
negatively and try to fix the phrase negatively in the public's mind (much like 
Nazi propaganda's efforts).  But I cannot countenance its use that way among 
Marxists, knowing that conspiracies are part of history.  See, for only one 
example, my article with David MacGregor discussing Marx's understanding of 
Louis Bonaporte in The Eighteenth Brumaire -- published in Socialism and 
Democracy, on-line since 2011.

Relatedly, I don't understand a call to "drop a subject" seemingly because 
different people have different viewpoints, even if very strongly felt in any 
direction. If I were in error to address the concept, so is Socialism and 
Democracy.  That journal wants to promote openness of discourse, not close it 
down.

I am not accusing you personally of this, of course (I know you too well), but 
am reminded of Stalinist suppression.

Paul


Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2015 23:56:53 +0000

From: "Perelman, Michael" 
<[email protected]><mailto:[email protected]>

Subject: Re: [Pen-l] Critique of Rebekah Roth's Tea Party novel that

  has all 9-11 planes landing in Westover, MA



Paul, I wish we could drop the subject. I suspect that the high-tech visual 
effects group would be able to produce and imaginary attack with sufficient 
number of actors to display the fictitious horror of the event, we could still 
have a war on terror.  We live in a world in which a large number of Americans 
live in fear of being subject to sharia law. Rationality is very scarce 
commodity in our society.





Michael Perelman

--
==== Research in Political 
Economy<http://www.emeraldinsight.com/books.htm?issn=0161-7230> (since 1977) | 
Editor's webpage<http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/%7Ezarembka>
Sraffa and Althusser Reconsidered; Neoliberalism Advancing (2014)
Contradictions: Finance, Greed, and Labor Unequally Paid (2013)
Revitalizing Marxist Theory for Today's Capitalism (2011), with R.Desai
The Hidden History of 
9-11<http://catalog.sevenstories.com/products/hidden-history-of-911> (2nd ed., 
Seven Stories Press)
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to