Re: [A-List] Argentine spontaneous insurrection(s)

["Macdonald Stainsby" <mstainsby@xxxxxx>]

I was hoping (and expecting) that you would make the analogy you did comrade, so
thank you for not disappointing. The Argentines are not like the Germans in WWI,
but more like Afghanistan today, in that they are not to be confused with a
First World country.

The situation of two sided, all imperialist conflict means simple desertion as
the basic strategy. There is no point in even expanding on this. Nonetheless, a
victory in the Argentine situation extends far beyond the borders of Argentina.
To defeat one imperialist army (such as the British in 1982) would have the
immediate effect of limiting the *political* will and freedom of imperialism-
from any source. This reality did not elude Washington, who belatedly discovered
the worse features of the Galtieri cabal. Imperialism as a unit against the semi
and directly-colonial countries needs strength more than against any one state
*as a general rule*. The will of one imperialist state can go a long way in
impeding the will of the other, then meaning Thatcherites and Reaganites (among
many).

I don't see how, in the absence of a Bolshevik party in Argentina, it makes
sense to say anything other than that reconquering *their territory* would
indeed open up local space as well. The Lenin analogy simply doesn't work, and I
do noyt believe for a minute that Lenin would have transposed his strategy from
1917 Petrograd to 1982 in Buenos Aires.

Macdonald
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Jones" <mark.jones@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Far from being unworthy, my position  was leninist. Or
> so i thought anyway.
>
>
> Mark
>