Nestor's abusiveness

[Xxxx Xxxxxx <xxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 10/25/01 10:37 AM,marxism-digestowner-marxism-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:

> Because I KNEW that he would react the way he did. Please note: he has taken
> with calm spleen every adjectivation linking him with the British
> imperialists,
> even with some haughty derision and silence. But now, here comes this Latin
> American and exposes him as a supporter of a Latin American bourgeois!
>
> This is too much for him to stomach. Being a supporter of imperialist
> bourgeoisies is acceptable, being a supporter of the semicolonial bourgeois is
> not. Now, this filthy position is all that is needed to be an imperialist
> "progressive".

Oh please Nestor, this is just absurd. I've tried to ignore your personal
rants whether they're patronising ("dear child") or abusive ("imperialist,
idiot") not because I accept them but because it was clear you were just
using them in desperation and the best response was to ignore your bait and
try to find what little substance there was in your arguments but, frankly,
if I am a supporter of imperialism then you are a supporter of Galtieri and
that is what is behind my outburst, it's that simple. The class
collaborationist attitude which you've displayed from the beginning of this
discussion is most disturbing. Militant did oppose the war and for all the
faults of its 1982 position it maintained an independent class position at
both ends of the question, something you have failed to do in some sort of
bizarre adaption to stageism. (First we support the junta's attempt to
conquer the Malvinas, despite the fact that it's a desperate attempt to hold
on to power and divert the revolutionary movement to nationlist goals, we
put aside any class demands during the conflict for the sake of national
unity and then, at some future date, we'll talk about socialism once again).

Andy


~~~~~~~
PLEASE clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.