Forwarded from Nestor (reply to Mac)

Louis Proyect lnp3 at
Thu Mar 29 14:57:46 MST 2001

Lou, could you post this?  Thank you.

Macdonald quotes me:

> The recent rally by the SPS in Belgrade (which I would compare to a mass
> by Peronists in, say, Argentina February 1956, that is with something that
> NEVER happened because had it happened then Argentina would have turned
> socialist)

And bites the hook I left dangling in the pool:

"You don't think you can just throw that out without being called for an
explanation, do you? How do you see, in the dangerous "alternate history"
guessing game, this result of a mass rally by left-nationalists in Argentina?"

Not only I did not think that, I left the idea unfinished ON PURPOSE. You
were  one of my candidates, Macdonald. Thank you.

I did not want to enter into a long lecture on the issue, but expected
someone  to make your point, Mac. Because what is at stake here is the
concrete  character of these two very different nationalisms, the Yugoslav
nationalism  as represented today by the SPS and the Argentinean
nationalism as it was  represented, in 1955, by Peronism.

I think that the mass rally in Belgrade expressed not only the different
objective conditions (that is, basically that the Army is _with_, not
_against_, the protesters in Belgrade while in Argentina imperialism had
managed to corrupt our officers by way of Cold War propaganda), but also
the  different ideological makeup of Serbian Socialists as compared to

In these situations, initiative after the defeat is the crucial issue. Lou
Pr  has pointed out recently that if the overthrown socialist parties in
Eastern  Europe did not take the streets, then they were ruined. SPS acted
as if they  had listened to him. They decided to take to the street and to
stage a massive  action which may well become the starting point of a
struggle for the balance  of forces in political Yugoslavia.

The slanderers have not been able to produce a single bit of evidence. They
 are commiting illegal arrests, and also murder, as well as unleashing an
atmosphere of ideological terror. There is, under such a situation, only
one  way ahead, that of taking the offensive. If you do not do it (which
happened  with Peronists) then the enemy will enhance its control of the
dominating  heights, and will in the end destroy you. If you do, then the
whole building  may begin to shake, and the development of events may take
to ever bolder  action.

There is no "what if" in my argument, then. What I made was a historic
analogy  between two very different movements, one based on national
bourgeois  premises, the other on socialist premises.

But allow me to give a tentative, though sterile since history is not what
would have been, but what it is, to Mac´s defying question.

If Peronists, provided they had had a political structure to allow them to
do  it, had taken to the streets in 1956 (and not to organizing a coup
which ended  with death, mass shootings and blood --it takes only ONE
traitor to generate  such a thing) they would have put in question the
whole grip of the  anti-national bloc over Argentinean military --that is
to civil war.

Under such circumstances, the measures that would have been necessary to
strengthen the position of the Peronists would have soon become socialist,
by  way of expropriation of traitors to the country, and so on. But this
would  have never happened, because to begin with the national bourgeois
leadership  and the Bonapartist management of Peron made it impossible for
such a  political structure as mentioned above in this same paragraph to

This makes twice as important the rally held in Belgrade on March 24th. By
the  way, a nasty date: in 1933, it was the date of Hitler´s full ascent to
power,  in 1976, it was the date of Videla´s coup, and in 1999 it was the
date of the  NATO bombing...

Lic. Néstor M. Gorojovsky

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list:

More information about the Marxism mailing list