Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (109000)	4/13/2005 1:26:01 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793866

Google is no substitute for a thorough base before trying to defend dodgy positions. Millon, whom your article cites, and whose book on Zapata I have not read, is as far as I know the only individual who has suggested that Zapata "read" Marx or communist tracts, or anything of any significance, for that matter . The absolute thunderous majority of all scholars take the position that Zapata was illiterate or, at best, semi-literate, so it's hard to believe that an illiterate or semi-literate Zapata, busy fighting a revolution, ever took the time to read Das Kapital or any other similarly turgid piece. But I haven't read (or heard of) Millon's book, so I'll keep an open mind on that minute point since he may have had sources I don't know about. But even the source you cite seems to extend things a bit. See this: Millon argues that while the Zapatista movement has been characterized as strongly socialist, anarchist, or 'Indianist', the "Zapatistas undoubtedly were influenced by these concepts, but in this respect, one should be careful not to make a mountain out of a molehill."93 He goes on to state that: "Although anarchist concepts undoubtedly influenced some of the revolutionaries of the South, nevertheless... these ideas did not penetrate the revolution of the South sufficiently to warrant designating that movement as 'anarchist'... Thus, the men of the South wished to democratize the state, not eliminate it, and although they sought to distribute property widely, they also would have left sufficient lands in private hands to permit a bourgeois agriculture to flourish in Mexico."94 Millon continues his argument by emphasizing that Zapata's program looked to improve the workers', but mostly the peasants' conditions, but without a clear opposition to a capitalist framework. "Indeed, rather than anarchism per se, the intellectuals associated with the Zapatistas demonstrated as agrarian oriented, petty-bourgeois romanticism similar to that of Rousseau and Jefferson."95 Millon concludes that instead of Anarchism, the "goals sought by the Zapatistas may be summarized in one term: human freedom."96 216.239.63.104+Ideology++%22&hl=en Absolutely amazing. You claim that Mexican Marxists took over, then ran a virulent anticlerical campaign, killed nuns and priests, and now cite a tract that says Zapata--who never was part of the serious suppression of the Church--kinda maybe liked Marxism a bit but not really, and perhaps was more of a Jeffersonian than anything else. Not exactly supportive of your argument, is it? Not to forget that Zapata was killed before these badass Mexican Marxists took over and started killing off priests and nuns. Is that your support for the priest-killing Mexican Marxists fantasy? You have yet to cite any* evidence to support your claim that Mexican Marxists ran a vicious and virulent anticlerical campaign after they took over, as you suggested was the case. Nothing. Zip. Nada. A hint: As I explained earlier, there was in fact a very tough fight in the mid-1920s after the revolution was over involving Church suppression but it wasn't a bunch of hard left Marxists who did it. Google the history of the "Cristero" revolt for a clue as to whys and wherefores of the suppression. Better yet, figure out how it ended and what compromises were reached. These are your claims--defend them: had dinner last week with an Hispanic family who, as it happens, gave a lot of material support to victims of the Sandinistas during that era. One of the things that doesn't get brought up much is that they, like the Marxists who took over Mexico and Cuba, were virulently anti-cleric, and killed priests and nuns and others involved with the Catholic Church. Message 21219518 What was the ideological basis for religious persecution in Mexico following the Mexican Revolution if not Marxism? siliconinvestor.com