If I can get the spoon, with the appropriate apologies to the owner of the blog, testing a response to an old argument.
.
To say that the guerrillas gave a justification for the coup "should be ignored at least 60 years of Argentina's history. Look a little back: 1930, 1943, 1955, 1963/66 ... five coups And where was the guerrillas needed to "justify"?
To say that the guerrillas gave a justification for the coup "should be ignored at least 60 years of Argentina's history. Look a little back: 1930, 1943, 1955, 1963/66 ... five coups And where was the guerrillas needed to "justify"?
.
is at least naive to assume that the bourgeoisie and its armed forces need a "justification" for a coup d'etat. The facts show that no. But there is more ugly, and that is saying that Argentina would seem to be that everyone lived a little calm and happy until they reached the guerrillas lunatics and clear ... rotted everything.
is at least naive to assume that the bourgeoisie and its armed forces need a "justification" for a coup d'etat. The facts show that no. But there is more ugly, and that is saying that Argentina would seem to be that everyone lived a little calm and happy until they reached the guerrillas lunatics and clear ... rotted everything.
.
Not so: the guerrillas appeared in a country already shaken by the violence of the ruling classes. Baptism of fire for Marine aviation was bombing the Square May 1955 killing hundreds of workers who did not have a gun in his hand. Hardly an army can be covered with shame more repugnant than bombing their own people. The first was missing the metal worker Felipe Vallese in the '60s. Santiago Pampillón deaths of Altermann, in Sirota, Coninter plan, etc. etc. and more so. were made prior to the existence of any guerrilla What appeared in these cases as "proof"?
Not so: the guerrillas appeared in a country already shaken by the violence of the ruling classes. Baptism of fire for Marine aviation was bombing the Square May 1955 killing hundreds of workers who did not have a gun in his hand. Hardly an army can be covered with shame more repugnant than bombing their own people. The first was missing the metal worker Felipe Vallese in the '60s. Santiago Pampillón deaths of Altermann, in Sirota, Coninter plan, etc. etc. and more so. were made prior to the existence of any guerrilla What appeared in these cases as "proof"?
.
Going back further back: the electric prod was invented in 1933, unfortunately, the police invention Argentina Why do guerrilla fighting? A no: at that time "justification" for the repression of workers and trade unionists gave wayward.
Going back further back: the electric prod was invented in 1933, unfortunately, the police invention Argentina Why do guerrilla fighting? A no: at that time "justification" for the repression of workers and trade unionists gave wayward.
.
If you look at the facts with some good logic easily reach the conclusion precedes repression in decades guerrilla What happens then? Something very simple: the coup was no "reaction" against the guerrilla actions, it was not that of '76 as they were not any of the foregoing. Is reversed: the guerrilla was an attempt to response to decades of violence and state terrorism.
If you look at the facts with some good logic easily reach the conclusion precedes repression in decades guerrilla What happens then? Something very simple: the coup was no "reaction" against the guerrilla actions, it was not that of '76 as they were not any of the foregoing. Is reversed: the guerrilla was an attempt to response to decades of violence and state terrorism.
.
More surprising - if anything - is the question "Do you not think that socioeconomic inequalities are now much more deep at that time? ". One of the reflexes and automatic cynicism imposed" democracy "from 1983 is to blame the guerrillas for the effects of repression, in other words, blame the victim for the actions of the perpetrator . The question pareece suggest that repression is not only attributable to the guerrillas ... also the socio-economic disaster later! Following that line Santucho going to blame the economic policies of Martinez de Hoz.
More surprising - if anything - is the question "Do you not think that socioeconomic inequalities are now much more deep at that time? ". One of the reflexes and automatic cynicism imposed" democracy "from 1983 is to blame the guerrillas for the effects of repression, in other words, blame the victim for the actions of the perpetrator . The question pareece suggest that repression is not only attributable to the guerrillas ... also the socio-economic disaster later! Following that line Santucho going to blame the economic policies of Martinez de Hoz.
.
What the revolutionary organizations, made mistakes? Sure. They made many. But the self can not deeslizarse to blame EVERYTHING guerrillas happened, naively believing "If there were no guerrillas, then none of this had happened." The guerrillas did not come from the idyllic peace of a peaceful Argentina emerged in conditions of violence that were already installed in society and who had already claimed many victims, not to mention the setbacks socioeconómicos.El emergence of the guerrilla and strike of '76 were only the final escalation of social conflict which was gaining in intensity, but that social conflict was not invented by the guerrillas, already existed. To ignore this is to distort history.
Health. 21/11/2008 8:35
What the revolutionary organizations, made mistakes? Sure. They made many. But the self can not deeslizarse to blame EVERYTHING guerrillas happened, naively believing "If there were no guerrillas, then none of this had happened." The guerrillas did not come from the idyllic peace of a peaceful Argentina emerged in conditions of violence that were already installed in society and who had already claimed many victims, not to mention the setbacks socioeconómicos.El emergence of the guerrilla and strike of '76 were only the final escalation of social conflict which was gaining in intensity, but that social conflict was not invented by the guerrillas, already existed. To ignore this is to distort history.
Health. 21/11/2008 8:35
....................................... ..................................... Small
addenda:
.
What is true of raising the guerrillas Florencio is profoundly underestimated the capacity for action of the armed forces. In this there was a good dose of voluntarism, of assuming that the value of its members could make a huge difference in what touches firepower. The ERP is a long and unnecessarily exposed to military combat became autonomous of political struggle.
What is true of raising the guerrillas Florencio is profoundly underestimated the capacity for action of the armed forces. In this there was a good dose of voluntarism, of assuming that the value of its members could make a huge difference in what touches firepower. The ERP is a long and unnecessarily exposed to military combat became autonomous of political struggle.
.
It is true that the guerrillas despise the masses, or that seek to replace, as the PRT tried to act on many fronts, political and trade union bodies and with a remarkable success (which never says.) It was the Marxist organization that did more walking in the working class in less time (consider the PC and other left parties much more history and experience that could not then and can still say the same).
It is true that the guerrillas despise the masses, or that seek to replace, as the PRT tried to act on many fronts, political and trade union bodies and with a remarkable success (which never says.) It was the Marxist organization that did more walking in the working class in less time (consider the PC and other left parties much more history and experience that could not then and can still say the same).
.
The bourgeoisie regarded the PRT a very dangerous enemy for two reasons: because they rightly raised the question of power and because he could compete for the working class against a Peronist who at that time was in top form and offered many outings left. Critics of the PRTs by "isolated from the masses" do not see a simple fact: that the PRT had nearly a decade of life, if it is a fair balance for the fleeting existence that it had and the difficult conditions under which unfolded insertion that achieved in the mass is remarkable.
The bourgeoisie regarded the PRT a very dangerous enemy for two reasons: because they rightly raised the question of power and because he could compete for the working class against a Peronist who at that time was in top form and offered many outings left. Critics of the PRTs by "isolated from the masses" do not see a simple fact: that the PRT had nearly a decade of life, if it is a fair balance for the fleeting existence that it had and the difficult conditions under which unfolded insertion that achieved in the mass is remarkable.
.
Jack Celliers.
0 comments:
Post a Comment