Could you explain, first of all, which part of the Bensaïd excerpt serves as "a justification of reactionary repressive actions in the socialist camp due to historical features"? The particular examples Bensaïd selects, from Marx's work and his own thinking, to discuss the general question of discordance are the relation between the Roman law and the modern production; Greek art's appeal to us; and changing understanding of Marx's work. You would have to be very creative at red-baiting to see anything like what you allege in his words.
In any case, if anyone wishes to justify "reactionary repressive actions" by any camp, what he should do is not to wax philosophical about Marx's notion of temporality but to say simply that it was regrettable but necessary to do X (X being whatever reactionary repressive action he committed) in order to defend the public from terrorism. -- Yoshie
* Calendar of Events in Columbus: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html> * Anti-War Activist Resources: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/activist.html> * Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osu.edu/students/CJP/>