Left and the Falklands – Malvinas war

The work devoted to the intellectual discussions that took place in Argentina in the context of the Falklands / Malvinas war of the 1982. The article argues that while the left parties supported the war, a minority of intellectuals on the left Ted Grant, Adolfo Gilli, Alan Woods, Alberto Bonnet and some other opposed it. According to the left parties the war between Argentina and the United Kingdom over the Falklands – Mal-vinas islands contained a progressive content on Argentina side. The attack on the Falklands – Malvinas islands was di-rected against British imperialism. The left parties presented the war as ending “one of the last refuges of colonialism” in Latin America. They argued that since Argentina was a semi-colonial country it should be supported in the war. Marxists have always given support to national struggle against imperi-alism. The struggle for national liberation. The intellectuals on the left censured the war. The war was reactionary on both sides. Their attitude to war between Britain and Argentina was determined by which class is wage the war. On both sides it was capitalist powers which were involved and therefore they were opposed the war on both Britain and Argentina. Argenti-na was not a poor exploited colony although there are some semi-colonial features, particularly dependence on foreign capital. It is, of course in no position to play an imperialist role on the world scale like USA and Great Britain, but the Argentina bourgeoisie had imperialist ambitions within South America. The claim of the Argentinean bourgeoisie to posses-sion of the Falkland – Malvinas on the ground of self-determination had no basis. If there had been a population on the islands composed of argentines, opposed by the British and fighting to unite with Argentina. In that case the Marxists would be duty bound to support them in their struggle against British imperialism but there was not a single Argentine living there. All of them English speaking. The conquest of the Falkland – Malvinas by the Argentine army was not an act of liberation but an act of violence against them. By invading the Falklands – Malvinas in 1982 the Argentina junta armed to disorient and deceive the masses at home.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Latin-american Historical Almanac
Published
2024-11-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.32608/2305-8773-2024-44-1-118-139
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Political and Social Dynamics in Chile and Latin America
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.13
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Left and the Falklands – Malvinas war

Владимир Казаков
1 citations
Latin-american Historical Almanac
Political and Social Dynamics in Chile and Latin America
1.13
article

Left and the Falklands – Malvinas war

Владимир Казаков
article en
1 citations

Abstract

The work devoted to the intellectual discussions that took place in Argentina in the context of the Falklands / Malvinas war of the 1982. The article argues that while the left parties supported the war, a minority of intellectuals on the left Ted Grant, Adolfo Gilli, Alan Woods, Alberto Bonnet and some other opposed it. According to the left parties the war between Argentina and the United Kingdom over the Falklands – Mal-vinas islands contained a progressive content on Argentina side. The attack on the Falklands – Malvinas islands was di-rected against British imperialism. The left parties presented the war as ending “one of the last refuges of colonialism” in Latin America. They argued that since Argentina was a semi-colonial country it should be supported in the war. Marxists have always given support to national struggle against imperi-alism. The struggle for national liberation. The intellectuals on the left censured the war. The war was reactionary on both sides. Their attitude to war between Britain and Argentina was determined by which class is wage the war. On both sides it was capitalist powers which were involved and therefore they were opposed the war on both Britain and Argentina. Argenti-na was not a poor exploited colony although there are some semi-colonial features, particularly dependence on foreign capital. It is, of course in no position to play an imperialist role on the world scale like USA and Great Britain, but the Argentina bourgeoisie had imperialist ambitions within South America. The claim of the Argentinean bourgeoisie to posses-sion of the Falkland – Malvinas on the ground of self-determination had no basis. If there had been a population on the islands composed of argentines, opposed by the British and fighting to unite with Argentina. In that case the Marxists would be duty bound to support them in their struggle against British imperialism but there was not a single Argentine living there. All of them English speaking. The conquest of the Falkland – Malvinas by the Argentine army was not an act of liberation but an act of violence against them. By invading the Falklands – Malvinas in 1982 the Argentina junta armed to disorient and deceive the masses at home.

Latin-american Historical AlmanacVol. 44
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Political and Social Dynamics in Chile and Latin America
1.13
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.