====================================================================== Rule #1: YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. ======================================================================
Not sure Gorojovsky’s distortions need any reply, they pretty much self-refute themselves (which, incidentally, is a form of “proof”). Gorojovsky is G, and I’m LK. G: “As to the Ferreyra murder (the only thing Koslof knows about Galasso is what was his stance on this issue, which paints Koslof as the ignorant sectarian he is), well, let it simply be said that” LK: Ah, we’re about out of ideas, now Goro speculates on what I know or do not know, and since his catechisms cannot for a moment come down to the level of an objective argument it follows I’m an “ignorant sectarian”. Well, being called names by someone who can only call names, doesn’t really do anything for me, guess I need more cowbell. To give Gorojovsky credit, I have not read Galasso’s ‘Peron’ but I skimmed through it (you can see it in google books), if Gorojovsky can refer me to an excerpt where Galasso approaches remotely closely the reasons for Peron’s rise, I’ll be obliged. For the most part I saw a load of quotes about what fulano and mengano said about Peron, (because haven’t you heard? the class struggle is about what people *say*). Followed by distorted narrations, cherry-picked quotes from Peron, etc. etc., curiously I couldn’t find any mention of Peronist repression against, to mention one important case, workers in Tucuman in 1949. But hey, it’s a big book, it must be good… I did read more from Galasso about how he wants to paint the 1810 revolution as led by a group of petty-fogging lawyers which surprise surprise obscures all the social transformation of the time, i.e. the penetration of capitalist relations of production to the core, which was led not by lawyers who didn’t have anything better to do with their time, but pretty bloody Jacobinists like Mariano Moreno. A friend, Fabian Harari, who I translated some things for in the list, has written two books critiquing these and other apologetics, which are only the natural concomitants of a doctrine whose only principle is that Argentina is semi-semi-colonial, semi-bourgeois, without a bourgeois State, etc. etc. If you go to razonyrevolucion.org you should be able to find more articles on this. Will I read more from Galasso in the future? Only if it’s necessary, I have no expectation of finding a historical explanation that will guide my action from a (bad) symphony of abstractly juxtaposed “facts”, which for Gorojovsky, is “concrete history”. Curious how the only thing Gorojovsky Galasso et al. can do is condemn the left about being “abstract”, as if God (something you will often find as “proof” and “reasoning” in Gorojovsky’s argumentation) had provided them with the mantle of concreteness…ah yes, “contradictions”, “dialectics”… G: “a) the case is under investigation basically because of the pressure put on it by two Peronists, Néstor Kirchner and Hugo Moyano (don´t know if you are aware of who they are or were)” LK: Ahhh, that was it, the Peronists, how could I not see that?? Don’t they always make it all right them good guys and gals? But…hmmm… what about when Nestor and Cristina threw a party at the River plate stadium which convoked the whole of the Union Ferroviaria?, should I post a picture of compañera Cristina wearing its hat again? Should I post a picture of Cristina giving a talk with Moyano and the “now criminal” (but formerly “best union element”) Jose Pedraza? What about Tomada’s (minister of labor) pacts with la cupula (bureaucracy) led by Pedraza? Oh Moyano, that “best union element”, that savior from the Juventud Sindical Peronista. Well Gorojovsky, why don’t you cut the bs and tell us all where Moyano came from and what he was doing in the JSP-Mar del Plata (for which he’s now being interrogated by justice), if you want to pretend that you have at least a modicum of honesty, that is. But comrades, all that happened, it was an accident! Unfortunately, that’s how politics work, How could Nestor and Cristina know? Haven’t they been fighting for worker’s rights all their political lives? G: “b) this murder was something that could be expected to happen, given the policies developed by the Política Obrera group in their confrontations with the union bureaucrats and their thugs” LK: Comrades, This murder was NOT an accident, (nevermind the above, now) it was expected comrades! It was going to happen! Don’t you see the “policies” of “Politica Obrera” (Gorojovsky seems to have a 70’s backlash, it’s the Partido Obrero now) were just too hardcore, too “objectively aiding reactionary forces”? After all, isn’t this such an inclusive democratic popular Argentine government that workers have to cut off the railroad in order to be heard? tsk tsk When will workers learn?. Seriously what kind of apolitical non-sense is this crap?: there were “confrontations”, it was “expected”…, WTF do you mean Gorojovsky? That because it was “expected” this wasn’t a political assault against the “tercerizados” combative workers, the ones who contrary to your version of history with good nationalist leaders that “fix” the problem after shit hits the fan, were and are the ones who are pushing the hardest for the government to recognize the reality of the struggle. Yeah…like Kirchner was gonna go after Pedraza just out of the good will of his sacred patriotic heart…pffft…well, when you stop looking at reality and struggle from a materialist perspective, the only thing one is left with is the psychologistic fairy tales about the good and abstract will of Peronistst, no surprise here. G: “c) Galasso made exactly this precise point, which Altamira (the leader of the Política Obrera group) and Koslof, of course, consider at least slanderous and at most police work.” LK: Well, Gorojovsky got this one right actually, as Pablo Pozzi said in the link I provided in the other thread, “lo de Galasso es canallesco”, which one can interpret as police work, or maybe as “cudgel brandishing”, yes, that’d be more accurate. G: “d) Patria y Pueblo, the Confederación General del Trabajo and many others condemned the crime and claimed for its full clarification immediately.” LK: Ah full clarification…sure…I can see that, right from the CGT, jajaja. But why the effort Gorojovsky? Wasn’t it all “expected”? G: “e) Ferreyra´s brother, a man who had passed through the Política Obrera lines before, tends to agree with point b above.” LK: <shrugs> and?… ________________________________________________ Send list submissions to: Marxism@greenhouse.economics.utah.edu Set your options at: http://greenhouse.economics.utah.edu/mailman/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
