Skimming history: Peronism and women's rights (Was Re: Clemenceau une autre fois plus (was Re: Deutschland Schon Wieder))

["Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky" <Gorojovsky@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

En relación a Re: Clemenceau une autre fois plus (was Re: Deuts,
el 15 Jul 00, a las 23:42, Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx dijo:

> For example, Kemalists in Turkey granted women voting rights in 1934
> in order to distance themselves from fascist Germany and Italy, and to
> look liberal and modern to the West, despite being authoritarian What
> about Peron fellow?

To begin with, and in general: there are some connections between
Peronism and Kemalism, though they are more or less at the same level
of the connections between Nasserism and Peronism. The Nasser era in
Egypt, the Vargas era in Brazil, the Sukarno era in Indonesia, the
Lázaro Cárdenas government in Méjico, are more suitable paralellisms,
and if one looks at the socialist camp, perhaps Tito could look like
a "socialist" Peron. Will extend further on another posting.

But now on to women.  In Argentina, women voted for the first time in
1952. This means that although we had feminists and sufragists
already in the 1900s and 1910s (the wife of the founder of the once
important -but unfortunately proimperialist and anti-Creole racist-
Socialist Party, Alicia Moreau de Justo, was one of our first female
medical doctors, of the first feminists and sufragists). The fate of
women has been narrowly linked to that of the thrifty semicolony that
Argentina turned out to become between 1890 and 1910. Any
progressiveness of the project of the Argentinian Generation of the
80s (who in fact gave birth to modern Argentina) was dead by those
years. This generation, which included even socialists (I always
recall that the Engineer Hermann Aue Lallemant, a friend of Engels
who came to Argentina as a topographer for the railroad companies
was, at the same time, founder of our Socialist Party and a respected
member of the scientific elite of the Argentina of the 1880s1900s),
took power in 1880 with a very advanced program of modernization to
which feminist (and, in particular, sufragist) positions would not
have been alien. But as the whole movement lost momentum, and when
the scheme made crisis in 1930, the progressivism was substituted for
a reactionary conservatism which, as always, included seclussion of
women and restricted voting franchise (for males only).

The 1943 military movement which eventually took Peron to power was
intent on putting an end to the Argentina of the 30s.  Anti-peronist
(and by the same token pro-imperialist) socialists in Argentina saw
this Colonel, later General, fulfill all and every one of the claims
that they had been voicing for decades. Among them were the voting
rights for women. There is an anecdote here: Peron's wife, Eva Perón,
was already dying of cancer -and anti-Peronist anonymous militants
painted "Long live cancer!" on the walls- but she had the privilege
of casting her ballot in her dying bed; at the same time, anti-
Peronist women (among them, Socialists and not few Communists)
declared that "This way, we do not want to vote"...

Peronism meant much more for women than voting rights. Its
ideological face was sternly conservative. The ideal of woman was
more of the "good housewife in a nice clean Californian style little
home" who would take care of husband and children after working hours
than of what we would now call a free woman in equal stand with men.
But the material realities of the country that was under a strong
industrialization effort spoke otherwise, and women flocked out of
the hearth into factories and offices, which was in itself a socially
liberating movement. Unions, even Parliament members, began to see
women filling their leading ranks. The textile mills employed
hundreds of thousands of women, and there were even tangos that spoke
of the "fabriqueras" (that is, young women who worked at a factory)
in a tender and lovingly way. This was another liberatory movement.

When in 1973 Peronism returned to power, after 18 years of oligarchic-
imperialist dictatorship, new gains were obtained by women, including
the much hated by capitalists the monthly "feminine day", which
allowed each working woman a free day during her period, and the
equiparation in the rights of natural and legitimate children (this
law was passed through the offices of an otherwise conservative -even
reactionary- Labor minister, Otero, who however was of humble origin
and must have been witness to the plight of women with illegitimate
children in the old, oligarchic Argentina that preceded Peron).

These are just a few, only a few hints of what did _in practice,
though not in ideology_ Peronism mean to women.

>
>
> comradely,
>
>
> Xxxx
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky wrote:
>
> > En relaci¢n a Re: Clemenceau une autre fois plus ,
> > el 15 Jul 00, a las 15:38, Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx dijo:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > >Nestor Miguel Gorojovsky wrote:
> > >
> > > > >En relaci?n a Re: Deutschland Schon Wieder,
> > > > >el 14 Jul 00, a las 21:56, Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx dijo:
> > > >
> > > > >> During the debates about war reperations, I remember Keynes
> > > > >> arguing that the allies, particulary the British, should be
> > > > >> less coercive with
> > > > > enforcing payment of reperations on Germany, or change the
> > > > > priority of
> > > > >> payments at least-- an idea, which was actually championed by
> > > > >> American international bankers who were agents for reperation
> > > > >> payments created under the Dawes plan of US.  It seems
> > > > >> Keynes' bourgeois anticipation matched with the German
> > > > >> nationalist critique of liberal order at that
> > > > > >time.
> > > >
> > > > >Blaming the German "unfinished bourgeois revolution" for
> > > > >Fascism, useful and right as it is for comrades struggling in
> > > > >Germany, is a partial truth, and provides an alibi for the
> > > > >bourgeoisies of the remaining imperialist countries.
> > >
> > > Comrade Nestor, I think there is a misunderstanding here. I was
> > > not blaming the German "unfinished bourgeois revolution" for being
> > > responsible for the rise of fascism. I don't subscribe to
> > > Kautskian version of orthodoxy/ mechanistic theory of stages.  My
> > > suspicion is that it was not the *lack* of capitalism, but rather
> > > its very existence, even in immature form, that brought about
> > > fascism in Germany. Fascism is one form of capitalism; not absence
> > > of capitalism. Therefore, my Keynes example was meant to
> > > illustrate the fact that the imperialist allies, despite the
> > > inter-imperialist conflict between the French and the British at
> > > some moments during negotiations for war reparations, under the
> > > Dawes plan, were indeed aiming  to restructure German industrial
> > > capacity/capitalism, and hence directly/indirectly enforcing
> > > Germany into fascism, despite bourgeois Keynes' warning.
> >
> > No misunderstanding at all, on my side at least.  Maybe my poor
> > English took you to misunderstand me. Because, in fact, I do fully
> > agree with your comments above. And that is precisely what I wanted
> > to stress in my intervention. Fascism in Germany was as much a child
> > of German bourgeoisie as it was of British and French bourgeoisies.
> > My "Subject" line tried to recall Keynes's account of the greedy and
> > cruel attitude of Clemenceau.
> >
> > >From that time on, Germany was already
> > > entering into a capitalist phase of development with a state
> > > monopoly bourgeoisie *benefitting* from massive flows of capital
> > > channeled into German economy.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, of course, I can not end up blaming the German
> > > bourgeoisie for what it did, not for it what *failed*, but for
> > > what it *actually* *accomplished*, that is, fascism, which was
> > > reinforced by *international capital*, not always in *conflict*,
> > > but also in *allience* with German capitalism. American Ford had
> > > investments in Germany. During the Nazi regime, his name was being
> > >  published on the front page of anti-semite publications that were
> > > deliberately involved in the creation of international jew
> > > conspiracy. Rise of fascism was not a simply a *function* of
> > > Germany's victim position in the international political economy
> > > (Germany was never technically imperialized to begin with).
> >
> > Moreover, I would add, in the line of Jos?'s posting on Peronism,
> > that in imperialized ("globalized"?) countries nationalisms have
> > little or nothing to do with Fascism, and when they have something
> > to do it is just as a thin ideological layer or as a clumsy reaction
> > of hatred against the "democratic" imperialist powers of the West
> > (the enemy of my enemy, etc.).  This formal and limited relationship
> > cannot be predicated on the structure and meaning of the movement
> > itself.
> >
> > I am preparing a long and explanatory letter on the origins of
> > Peronism and the FALSE assumption that Per¢n came to power in order
> > to put a safety valve to an upsurge of working class militancy. He
> > rather boosted it, in fact. The bourgeoisie in Argentina knew this
> > very well: by October 10, 1945, for example, when a cold coup within
> > the military government forced Per¢n to resign and reaction seemed
> > to have already won the battle against this Colonel, workers who
> > went to claim for the wage rises that had been recently awarded
> > under Per¢n's order were greeted by the words  "Go, tell Per¢n to
> > pay the rise!". A week after that, we had the great political
> > appearance of the Argentinian working class in the October 17, 1945,
> > demonstration.
> >
> >  Germany was too aiming to become another
> > > capitalist/imperialist power.
> >
> > It was a capitalist/imperialist power, before WWI. You are a little
> > shy in this characterization
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > regards,
> > >
> > > Xxxx
> >
> > Regards from someone who looks at your postings with great interest,
> >
> > N?stor Miguel Gorojovsky
> > gorojovsky@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > NUEVA DIRECCI N ELECTR NICA DESDE EL 10 DE JULIO DE 2000
> > NEW E-ADDRESS AS OF JULY 10, 2000
> > gorojovsky@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> --
>
> Xxxx Xxxxx Xxxxxx
> PhD Student
> Department of Political Science
> SUNY at Albany
> Nelson A. Rockefeller College
> 135 Western Ave.; Milne 102
> Albany, NY 12222
>
>
>
> ____________NetZero Free Internet Access and Email_________
> Download Now     http://www.netzero.net/download/index.html
> Request a CDROM  1-800-333-3633
> ___________________________________________________________


Néstor Miguel Gorojovsky
gorojovsky@xxxxxxxxxxx
NUEVA DIRECCIÓN ELECTRÓNICA DESDE EL 10 DE JULIO DE 2000
NEW E-ADDRESS AS OF JULY 10, 2000
gorojovsky@xxxxxxxxxxxx