The scarecrow tactics at its highest, part two.
dmschanoes at earthlink.net
Wed Jul 9 08:15:09 MDT 2003
I'm almost worried about you, Nestor. You can't seem to get
anything right. You get the Philippines all wrong. You even
refer, in a last ditch attempt to preserve your lack of
knowledge re the actual rebellion, that Aguinaldo was an
"integrationist," implying that he was attempting to
integrate Spanish culture into the Katipunan revolt, as
if the glorious term of integration would suffice to
obscure the real history of the terms of that revolt.
It's not out of respect that you don't want to review the
Philipppines. It's self-preservation.
You refer to a workers' organizaton leading a seizure
of a factory in Argentina as riddled with police, only
to admit to getting the organization wrong.
Now you can't even get straight who asked comrade Proyect if
there was any data to back up your claim that the US Civil
War was a conflict between US capital and British capital.
I did that. Since my experience has been that you never
provide evidence for your assertions, and comrade Proyect
is more than generous in providing access to relevant
background information, I directed my request to him.
So perhaps you can provide, in any language you care to; while not fluent in Spanish, I can read it, and what I can't read,
my co-workers will translate for me; what the determinants are
of a conflict of capitals, the manifestations of the conflicts, in capitals, the actions, events, and resolution of this
supposed civil war between the British and US bourgeoisie--
and we're not talking speeches, editorials, letters from
home, we're talking concrete actions-- i.e. intervention,
i.e. recognizing the Confederacy as a sovereign power, not
just a belligerent, i.e confiscations of property, after
the Trent Affair.
As always, ad hominem attacks cheerfully acknowledged.
More information about the Marxism