L. PASO, E. PALOMBA, M. LITTER, P. CALDERON. Compendio de Historia Argentina. (Desde la colonia hasta 1943). Buenos Aires. Ediciones Directa. 1982. 380 p.

L. PASO, E. PALOMBA, M. LETTER, P. CALDERON. Essay on the history of Argentina. (From the colony to 1943)

The publication of the book under review is an important stage in the development of Argentine Marxist historiography. The Essay is the first attempt to summarize the results of many years of research by Marxist historians of this country on specific problems of its history and to give on this basis a complete scientific concept of the development of Argentina up to the middle of the XX century. The book was prepared by a team of authors led by the prominent Argentine historian L. Paso, whose works are well known in our country1 . The authors proceed from the belief that knowledge and objective, scientific interpretation of the past serve a deeper understanding of the current stage of development of Argentine society. The relevance of the work also lies in the fact that it contrasts the Marxist concept of the country's history with the tendentious, subjectivist concepts of bourgeois and petty-bourgeois historians.

The authors focus on elucidating the processes of socio - economic and political development of Argentina on the basis of concrete factual material, identifying and characterizing the most important stages of its history. The history of the country is considered against the background of world history as its integral part. This makes it possible to identify both general patterns and specific features of the development of Argentine society.

The first sections of the work are devoted to the almost 300-year colonial period (1536-1810), which largely determined the ways of further evolution of Argentina. The colonization of the La Plata basin by Spain, the authors point out, caused the predominantly feudal nature of the society that developed in the colony (p, 21). At the same time, in their opinion, the impact of local traditions of pre-colonial Indian society, as well as the global capitalist market that was already forming in that era, also affected. As a result, with the predominance of the feudal system as a system-forming one, the colonial society on La Plata developed as a multi-layered one, with the presence of patriarchal, pre-feudal, and early capitalist elements.

The book draws attention to the fact that agriculture in the La Plata basin did not develop significantly until the second half of the 19th century, and consequently there was no large class of dependent peasant farmers, characteristic of the countries of classical feudalism. The basis of the country's economy in the XVIII-XIX centuries were extensive cattle-breeding latifundia, focused on the foreign market. The authors define the system of economy that prevailed in the coastal areas of La Plata 2 conditionally as "feudal-bourgeois", meaning the predominance of pre-capitalist forms of exploitation in pastoral latifundia, and at the same time the process of their inclusion in the world capitalist economy through the external market (p.24). This was the starting point for the further development of capitalism in agriculture along the "Prussian path". These provisions are very clear

1 In 1981, L. Paso's monograph "The Historical Roots of Argentine Dependence" was published in Russian, and his articles were also published.

2 Refers to the coast and interfluve of the La Plata, Parana and Uruguay Rivers.

page 153

important for understanding the entire subsequent development of Argentine society.

The paper also identifies territorial and regional differences in the country's development during the colonial period and after independence, in particular between the interior and coastal regions, which complicated the process of consolidation of Argentina into a single national state.

The period of the War of Independence ( 1810-1826), which marked the beginning of the formation of an independent state and is still the subject of heated discussions among Argentine historians, is considered in particular detail in the book. The May Revolution of 1810, the subsequent events on La Plata, and in general the War of independence of the Spanish colonies in America are assessed in the Essay as an early bourgeois revolution that fits into the framework of the world era of bourgeois revolutions of the XVI-XIX centuries. From these positions, the socio-economic, political and ideological background of the May Revolution is clarified.

The book highlights the outstanding role of M. Moreno, M. Belgrano, J. San Martin, B. Rivadavia and other leading ideologists and leaders of the May Revolution, champions of independence and bourgeois-democratic transformations, who did much to involve the masses in the struggle and give it a social character. At the same time, the authors draw attention to the narrowness of the social base of these revolutionaries in conditions when the emerging bourgeois elements could not become the necessary support for deep social transformations. As a result, the leading positions in the country were captured by the landowner-latifundist groups of the province of Buenos Aires, which led to the limitation and incompleteness of the war of independence as a bourgeois revolution. These conclusions are supported by specific factual material.

The authors emphasize the role of the dictatorship of J. M. Rosas (1829-1852) in " the consolidation of the social formation that determined the fate of the nation up to the first decades of the present century, both in its class content (the predominance of the Buenos Aires landowner-pastoral oligarchy) and in its political form, i.e., the predominance of Buenos Aires over the entire the country" (p. 194). This closed the prospect of free development of capitalism for the country, contributed to the preservation of backward socio-economic forms and the country's dependence on the external market, which then facilitated its enslavement to foreign capital. Focusing on the conservative nature of the Rosas dictatorship, the authors expose the myth of bourgeois "revisionist"historians3 about Rosas as the creator of "one Argentine nation", "champion of progress" and "fighter against imperialism". The Essay emphasizes that Rosas never aspired to national unity and showed "a complete lack of national feeling" (p. 207). He was concerned only with preserving the hegemony of the Buenos Aires oligarchy, its monopoly on power, which he achieved by encouraging the parochialism and separatism of landlord groups and their leaders in other provinces (p. 206).

Only the fall of the Rosas dictatorship, according to Argentine Marxist historians, opened the way for national consolidation of the country and created somewhat more favorable prospects for its bourgeois progress. In this regard, the activities of General J. H. Urquiza, the victor of Rosas in the Battle of Monte Caseros (1852) and head of the government of the Argentine Confederation in the 50s of the XIX century, are positively evaluated, the important role of the constitution of 1853, which established the federal bourgeois republic, as well as the progressive activities of D. F. Sarmiento, its president in 1868, is noted - 1874, its role in stimulating agriculture, immigration from Europe, in the development of industry and transport, education and culture. The Essay shows Sarmiento's desire to weaken the hegemony of the landlord-pastoral oligarchy and democratize the political life of Argentina (pp. 246-247). However, these measures were not enough to undermine the position of the landlord-commercial oligarchy, which managed after the group of General H. A. came to power in 1880. Roka (President in 1880-1886 and 1898-1904) to impose on the country a conservative way of developing capitalism based on agro-export latifundism and attracting foreign capital (pp. 258-259).

The pages of the book clearly show the contradictory nature of the development of Argentina during the oligarchic regime of 1880-1916. On the one hand, it is

3 The current prevailing in modern Argentine bourgeois historiography, revising the concepts of traditional bourgeois liberal historiography from reactionary-nationalist positions.

page 154

It was a time of economic growth, rapid development of capitalism, and the formation of new social classes and strata - the industrial proletariat and the industrial bourgeoisie, the middle strata, and small and medium-sized farmers. The authors consider the importance of the influx of mass immigration from Europe in these processes. At the same time, as the Essay rightly emphasizes, these were the years when the traditional socio-economic structure of Argentine society was finally formed, with the dominance of agro-export latifundism and related foreign capital in the economy, and serious imbalances in the economy arose. Capitalism developed only within the framework and limits defined by this structure. This corresponded to the "narrowness of political life" controlled by oligarchic circles (p. 269). Only a small "elite"had access to real participation in it.

However, as the Essay shows, the development of capitalism and the formation of new social classes and strata were inevitably accompanied by the invasion of the political arena of the mass workers ' and democratic movement. In the 90-ies of the XIX century. the first political parties with a mass social base appeared - the Socialist and Civil-Radical Union (GRS, radicals), which entered the path of struggle for the renewal of society. The book briefly describes the main milestones of the labor and socialist movement in Argentina since the end of the XIX century, the role of socialists, anarchists, syndicalists, the struggle of reformist and revolutionary trends, the rise of the class struggle of workers in 1902-1910 and in 1917-1921, and emphasizes the importance of the creation in 1918 of the Communist Party of Argentina, which became the Communist Party of the vanguard of the workers ' and democratic movement in the republic. An important place is given in the book to the development of the radical movement in the late XIX - early XX centuries, which manifested the desire of broad sections of the population for democratic changes. The authors point out that it was the development of the workers ' and democratic movement that precipitated the crisis of the oligarchic regime and led to the introduction of the State Duma in 1912. universal suffrage, and in 1916-to the coming to power of the radicals led by I. Yrigoyen.

The Essay contains a convincing description of the progressive reformist activities of the radical governments of 1916-1930. (first of all, Yrigoyen, head of the GRS party and president in 1916-1922 and 1928-1930), who contributed to the democratization of the country, its economic development, weakening the position of the local oligarchy and dependence on imperialism. At the same time, it reveals the inability of the Argentine radicals and their leader Yrigoyen to overcome the framework of bourgeois reformism and significantly affect the socio-economic foundations of society. The authors explain this by the relative weakness of the local national bourgeoisie, its fear of the proletariat, which has already launched active battles for its demands, the opposition of the local oligarchy and foreign capital, and disagreements among democratic and progressive forces that have failed to reach mutual understanding.

All these factors in their totality, as the authors of the Essay rightly believe, in the context of the economic crisis of 1929, ultimately determined the failure of the reformist attempts of radical governments, the narrowing of their social base, and the removal of radicals from power in 1930 as a result of a reactionary military coup. It is regarded as an event that interrupted the period of bourgeois-democratic development of the country (1912-1930) and brought the landlord-bourgeois oligarchy back to power. The coup of 1930 marked the beginning of a long period of active military intervention in political life, social and political instability, which was based on the beginning of a chronic crisis of the traditional foundations of Argentine society.

The landlord-bourgeois governments of the 1930s proved incapable of lifting the country out of its crisis and stopping the growing struggle between the working class and democratic forces. In this connection, the authors point to the growth of the class struggle of the working people in the mid-1930s, the strengthening of the Communist Party's position in the labor movement, and the growing struggle for the unity of democratic forces against the reactionary regime. The extreme narrowing of the social base of the oligarchic regime, its degradation, and the prospect of a broad united front of democratic forces prompted the nationalist circles of the local bourgeoisie, which had grown stronger by that time, to raise their voices in support of the oligarchic regime.

page 155

with the help of the army, to carry out a military coup on July 4, 1943, which significantly changed the course of events. The country has entered, as the authors write, a new, modern period of its history (p. 369).

We can express some regret that less attention is paid to the period from the end of the 19th century to 1943, especially in the 20s and 30s, than to the previous ones. As a result, many important problems and events in the history of Argentina in the first half of the 20th century are covered only in a general form.

In general, this is a generalizing study that recreates the development of one of the largest Latin American republics.

page 156

Permanent link to this publication: