>I don't understand your position of these issues, Louis. Are you opposed to >cross-class alliances (such as the "popular front" that Dmitrov advocated)? >but aren't a lot of the third-world causes you support organized as >cross-class alliances? for example, wasn't Peron's movement a cross-class >one? > >Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] & http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
Peron's was the leader of something called the Labor Party of Argentina. It had all the class characteristics of the British Labor Party during the same period, which it was specificaly modeled on. In other words, it was committed to increasing the worker's share of the pie. There were bourgeois parties in Argentina, including the Radicals who trace their origins to the urban middle class of the early 1900s, and the party of the estancieros (ranchers) whose name I don't have handy. Marxists in Argentina had sharp differences over how to evaluate Peron's movement. I would side with those who argued it needed to be defended against imperialism, just as Hugo Chavez's today. In other words, if I were a Marxist in Argentina in the 1940s or in Venezuela today, I would have organized demonstrations against any coup attempt. By the same token, I would try to patiently explain to the masses that the only way that the social experiments of Peron and Chavez could be safeguarded was through a break with imperialism and the local compradors. Louis Proyect Marxism mailing list: http://www.marxmail.org
