Bag the revisionist

Security Minister of the Maoist Internationalist Movement gets sentimental over MIM's first quarter-century in his latest eructation, "Mass Line and MIM's 25th Anniversary." While acknowledging up front the bitter truth ("we have not overthrown imperialism"), Security Minister admits to no bitterness, but writes lyrically on youth, women, lumpen, Marxist science and Ward Churchill. Gone, finally, the lacerating self-criticism of the last few months; withdrawn, apparently, the vow to shut down the website.

No, Security Minister has discovered, and answered (at least to his own satisfaction), the real question: why has MIM, despite being (as he modestly notes) "the vanguard in the imperialist countries over these last 25 years," failed to overthrow (or even be noticed by) imperialism? Other people's stupidity and cowardice, of course:

Where we continue to have difficulty is that we have people looking at what we are doing, but still do not grab a hold of science and practice it. Once we practice the science of revolution for a while, we see that scientific integrity requires guts. Without guts, science lies unapplied or even worse, breaks down into falsehood. Fear leads to ignorance.

But MIM, at least, still has the guts to apply science as it should be applied--to everything, even affairs of the heart:

We had a recruiting situation with a female once, where she had a serious romantic relationship with a revisionist. The scientific judgment of this female told her that the party was correct on line. She also had persynal friends in the party and suspicion was, potential boyfriends in the party as well. The party told her to bag the revisionist before she could join the party.

Do you suppose MIM has, like, a clubhouse or something? What am I talking about? They don't even have an e-mail address. So how do these licentious leninists meet up? In any case, from this Landersian analysis Security Minister turns to Ward Churchill:

Another example of the mass line we have learned about, even in connection to intellectuals is Ward Churchill. The University of Colorado said Ward Churchill could just be removed, and it was Lynne Cheney behind that. . . .

Don't forget Bill O'Reilly and David Horowitz!

On the other hand, we can imagine if we had gone to the University of Colorado and said, "love Ward Churchill," this actually would have set back the scientific struggle. . . . That means in that context, we absolutely have to give the imperialists their shot at Ward Churchill. So if they say Ward Churchill is like diseased excess toe-nail that can just be removed without recurrence of disease, we have to listen to them say that and let people chew on that, let them try to prove their point. . . .

Security Minister is almost Proustian here--madeleines, diseased excess toenail, same diff.

If we say "love Ward Churchill," we sabotage him by making him look dumb. We say Ward Churchill is not a dead-ender, because the oppression of the First Nations cannot be extirpated from history, despite casino and Uncle $am money being spread around to promote profits of Disney productions on the North American natives.

As it turns out, there was no scientific substance in the University of Colorado's Law School-led report and the University of Colorado had to admit that its report on Churchill compiled by several scholars has no academic merit--none.

Funny, that's exactly what the Little Churchills say. And Chief Deputy Little Chutch Ben Whitmer returns the favor by saying MIM "spews shit" (third update). Ungrateful puppy. For, as Ward himself has well and truly said, "the Maoist International Movement have used their weekly papers to advance some of the best analysis of my case and its implications yet published." Security Minister continues:

It took a long time for the University of Colorado to figure that out, but hey, it could have been worse. . . . At least they did not wait till he was dead to pay attention to the critics of Churchill's critics. . . .

There is that.

As we stated in the example of a lesbian outsider attacking the party [just read the damn thing], the reverse is also true concerning love/fuzz logic. Some people go for years without letting a Churchill state his case. They do not read what he says or maybe they have a question that Churchill never was asked to confront. That is a breakdown in mass line and it can come as a what-goes-around-comes-around from denying truth. If we say KKK leader David Duke is wrong when he says 2+2=4, then we cannot be surprised when people tune out Ward Churchill for equally stupid reasons. In this case, it's gutlessness in Churchill's attackers. They do not read Churchill's works and MIM's
defenses. . . .

Some of us do.

Yet the attackers are prepared to nuke him, with all the international consequences.

Have to admit, I'd never considered the international consequences of nuking Ward Churchill.

This is a breakdown for emotional reasons, and MIM always said fear leads to ignorance. What difference does it make if we "love Ward Churchill?" Whether or not smallpox killed as many as Ward Churchill says maybe even months or years after a settler leaves a place is a question that can be asked of third party public health professionals, as many as one could want.

Churchill's most important discovery: the "formite" transmission of disease.

It has nothing to do with Churchill in a certain way . . .

No, of course not.

. . . but one must have the guts to ask. MIM did and published the result on our web page. The scholars at the University of Colorado did not ask the question, and the result was racism.

Er . . .

MIM has been vindicated on this point time and time again, but only among people who cool off enough to ask, and fortunately they do, sometimes years after a struggle, as our 25 years can attest to.

Happy birthday, MIM, and many, many more.