[Marxism] Argentina: Coup-plotting oligarchs pose as democrats:they will not succeed!

S. Artesian sartesian at earthlink.net
Mon Jul 28 16:21:34 MDT 2008


No bait.  Legitimate question.  And the reason I ask it is I believe there 
is a danger of making an artificial distinction is being made in order to 
"ally," "support," defend a "real" an "authentic" "national bourgeoisie," 
which appears to be the organs of the government if they can be detached 
from the oligarchs and the imperialists.

That being said, I think there are problems with both your formulation of 
"capitalists" or "bourgeoisie," and oligarchs.  You state:

"Capitalist ruling classes who not only fail to work in that sense are bound 
by the imperialist structure of global capitalism today (and by mercantile 
imperialism in older days) to act against all the tendencies of deveolpment 
of capitalism that Marxism associates with the growth of bourgeois 
formations."

Act against all tendencies and act against all tendencies forever?  But then 
how do we explain periods of relative growth in Latin America, prior to say 
1973, and after 1989, and periods of relative non-growth, with the same 
system, the same classes, in the critical social arrangement.  And how do we 
explain that those prior periods of growth, and austerity, occur in the most 
intimate connections with the global economy of advanced capitalism?

What I think makes the situation in Latin America, the situation in 
"developing" countries so acute, is that every impulse to capitalist 
accumulation, to expanded reproduction, runs smack into the walls of private 
property, the remaining walls of landed property, and landed labor on such 
property, that are/have been so essential to maintenance of the ruling 
classes, and capitalism runs into that wall from the inside.

Does the use of term oligarchy, or your use of the term, include all agents, 
representatives, facets, sectors etc. of the ruling class?  I don't think 
so, and I think you make that clear when you draw the analogy to the 
slaveholders in the pre-Civil War U.S.  First we are 140 years beyond that 
moment in history, and capitalism has proven its willingness, ability to 
integrate the most archaic elements into the very fabric of its existence so 
that there can be no disentangling the "oligarchs" from the bourgeoisie. 
The Reconstruction period, the post Reconstruction period of the US is most 
instructive in this matter where the former slaveholders were reintegrated 
into the national ruling class, and as the "sectional" ruling class, in 
order to 1) control black labor and 2) facilitate Northern commercial 
interests (i.e. the Pennsylvania RR's desire to consolidate and control a 
rail system in the south, linking the Atlantic areas with the inland and 
western areas, and break the stranglehold the various, particular, 
mercantile interests had on the movement of commodities.

Needless to say, the Southern "oligarchs"  lost the war, but won the power, 
(control the legislative branch of government and the military), and there 
was then, as there is now, no way of disentangling the "retrograde" 
oligarchs and their property from the bourgeoisie and capitalist property as 
a whole.

Anyway, nothing you said was insulting, and I hope nothing in my response is 
viewed as an insult.




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Néstor Gorojovsky" <nmgoro at gmail.com>
To: <sartesian at earthlink.net>
Sent: Monday, July 28, 2008 3:23 PM
Subject: Re: [Marxism] Argentina: Coup-plotting oligarchs pose as 
democrats:they will not succeed!


> 2008/7/28, S. Artesian <sartesian at earthlink.net>:





More information about the Marxism mailing list