Forwarded from Nestor (Marxist government officials)

Louis Proyect lnp3 at
Sat May 5 16:26:51 MDT 2001

I made so many errors in my life, that a few more would not be harmful. I
am afraid, however, that I can't see the "errors" Julio is pointing out in
my own postings. 

What I see, on the contrary, is that I was very right in defining his
Marxism, on very scant evidence, as a colonialized ("NAFTA") Marxism. It is
his negative attitude towards anything that does not well out from THE BOOK
that confirmed me in my conviction. I am also glad that I posted the brief
note on Dr. Juan B. Justo and the Creole strikers of Tucumán in connection
with Julio's views, because as these develop they look more and more like
those of the first translator of _Capital_ to Spanish (just like Justo,
Huato translates Capital to Spanish but does not understand it; Justo at
least had the personal insight or decency of publicly saying so).

I will answer to Julio, point by point, on a later posting. I am having a
happily busy weekend, so that I cannot sit down and expose his errors (not
better -anyway- than he is doing it himself, for education of all of us
here, something I thank him with all my heart because my job will be so
much the easier). 

But I will take this opportunity, where I am promising a longer answer, to
explain what is the usual _end result_ of the kind of Marxism he espouses.

The usual final station in the road is _acceptance of the highest
responsibilities in imperialist-led governments in our countries_. This is
what has been happening consistently in Argentina, during the whole 20th.
Century. And I dare say that the same runs with Latin America as a whole.
Just a few Argentinean examples:

It was a Marxist-economist, Federico Pinedo, who broke with the Socialist
Party in the 20s to form the Independent Socialist Party and then act as
the most lucid and fervent representative of the local oligarchy and
foreign financial capital in Argentina up to his death in the early 60s. He
had the highest responsabilities during the 30s, an age that is known here
as the Infamous Decade, and in such character he drafted much of the Legal
Statute of Colonial Status, AKA Roca-Runciman Agreement, which transformed
Argentina in a hypo-colony of Great Britain up to the early 40s.

It was a group of Marxist-economists who, after Perón was overthrown in
1955, offered the "popular alternative" of developmentism within the
framework of colonial rule, the Frigerio group of President Frondizi. These
Marxist-economists had the weird idea (shared, in fact, by Moreno, by the
way) that while British imperialism was predatory, American imperialism was
an "industrializing imperialism", much in the way Julio Huato thinks.

It was a group of Marxist-economists who are providing _today_ the staff
for the economic ministry of the post-1983 (now De la Rúa) governments and
give a "humane" face to the plunder that is effected on Argentina today. 

One of them, what's more, was the head of the Communist Youth in the School
of Economics in the University of Buenos Aires during the 60s. Another one
was his aide de camp, and is now in charge of further jibarizing the
Argentinean state. I could go on.

It is on this kind of "socialists" that Cavallo attempts to give a
"popular" hue to his policies, having recently stated that his ideas welled
out directly from Juan B. Justo's book "La Moneda". Which is true, of
course. Only that Justo tried to find a way to defend workers' salaries
from inflation.

And why should we be astonished, when the representatives of the Swiss
Banks in Argentina, people whose hands drip workers' blood, define
themselves as "socialists" (I am talking of the Alemann brothers)?

Julio Huato considers that none of the above is "substantial". He wants to
have an ahistorical and bloodless debate, on cold economic categories. He
will have it, and he will get what he deserves, which I am sure will make
him very happy. But suffice it to say that I am afraid that he will not be
able to understand a word of what I have to tell to him. His views are
already so much geared towards denying the existence of imperialism, and
this denial is so important a necessity of the Mexican reactionaries, that
the old Spanish saying "no hay peor ciego que el que no quiere ver" fits
him as a surgeon's glove to the hand.

It is no news for us in Latin America that the best heads of the petty
bourgeoisie are co-opted by the Empire. This is, in fact, the kernel of our
Latin American drama and the only reason why this debate with Huato may
prove fruitful. And, by the way, dear John Enyang, the fact that you have
not had this kind of "leftist" proimperialists in Africa is a blessing. In
Latin America they are everywhere, that is, everywhere the actual masses
are NOT.

En relación a Nestor's errors, el 4 May 01, a las 18:34, Julio Huato dijo:

> Nestor writes:

[many "unsubstantial" things which, methinks, will soon be substantiated in
a way few can expect, hopefully by Mexican workers and peasants]

Néstor Miguel Gorojovsky 
gorojovsky at

Louis Proyect
Marxism mailing list:

More information about the Marxism mailing list