By Pete Dolack
May 16, 2024
Source: Systemic Disorder
Protestors in Argentina. (Photo: Phoebe Moore)
As always when a representative of the right wing tells you he or she is campaigning to bring “freedom,” be afraid. Very afraid. For “freedom” in these cases means freedom for the richest financiers and industrialists to do whatever they want.
For them, “Freedom” is for capital, not for human beings without capital to invest. Today’s exhibit is the offensive against working people that is taking place in Argentina, where the new extreme right president, Javier Milei, is determined to see how far capitalist ideology can be pushed. So far, Argentines have pushed back but Milei, cheered on by domestic and international big business leaders, is nothing if not determined to ram through his austerity packages. And he has shown no inclination to allow mere democracy to stand in his way.
Nonetheless, there is no surprise here. President Milei ran on a program of extreme austerity, brandishing a chainsaw at his election rallies. Unfortunately, enough Argentines bought his siren songs, or were desperate enough to try anything given the country’s punishing inflation, to elect him, ending a one-term period in executive office by the ordinarily dominant Peronists. Alas, doing something new for the sake of doing something new, when it is aimed at you, rarely works. And here there is actually nothing new. President Milei simply promoted standard hard right ideology, albeit promoting it with unusual vigor. Snake oil is snake oil, as Argentine working people are already finding out.
People filled the streets of Buenos Aires and Argentina’s biggest cities to demand “memory, truth and justice” for the victims of state violence (photo by Izquierda Diario)
Still waiting for benefits to trickle down, aren’t you? For more than 40 years, the same tired propaganda has been peddled, and has been implemented in various countries, starting with Augusto Pinochet’s murderous military dictatorship in 1973, in Chile, and gaining speed with the election of Margaret Thatcher in Britain in 1979 and Ronald Reagan in the United States in 1980. “Neoliberalism” is the term that the world came to adopt for this vicious austerity. (The term references how the world outside of North America uses the word “liberal” to mean minimal government regulation to enable decisions to be made by market forces; this is termed “libertarianism” in North America. Capitalist “markets,” however, are nothing more than the aggregate interests of the biggest financiers and industrialists and are not the neutral arbiters loftily sitting in clouds even-handedly dispensing justice as conservative propagandists would have us believe.)
The ideology that undergirds austerity programs has a long history and has to be incessantly promoted, all the more so because traditional “laissez-faire” ideas had become discredited during the Great Depression, leading to post-World War II Keynesianism becoming entrenched. The need for capitalists to give concessions to save their system due to the mass revolts of the 1930s and the failure of fascism as a “solution” to capitalists’ difficulties in maintaining profits helped the temporary acceptance of (or resignation to) Keynesianism. Perhaps the most influential ideologue of laissez-faire/neoliberal economics is Friedrich Hayek, who went so far as to assert that solidarity, benevolence and a desire to work for the betterment of one’s community are “primitive instincts” and that human civilization consists of a long struggle against those ideals. “The discipline of the market” is the provider of civilization and progress, he wrote. His most prominent student, Milton Friedman, would supply the Pinochet dictatorship with its economic program, the first modern case of “shock therapy” being imposed with maximum force because there was no other way it could be implemented.
What Thatcherism had in store for Britons was demonstrated by her crushing of the miners’ strike and Reaganism in turn showed its teeth by crushing the air traffic controllers’ strike. Punishing austerity was to follow on both sides of the Atlantic as declining profits and increasingly stiffer and more globalized competition required pushing down wages and working conditions, reducing or eliminating regulations and outsourcing production to wherever labor was cheaper and regulations fewer. Making all this work required dropping barriers to trade, thus bringing on the age of so-called “free trade” agreements that put regulation outside political or democratic control, and cracking open countries outside the capitalist core of the Global North to expose those economies to plunder with legal defenses stripped away by unaccountable multinational organizations. Debt is used to enforce these prerogatives, with multinational lending organizations such as the World Bank and International Monetary Fund imposing draconian conditions on loans that are used to pay off earlier loans, sending Global South countries into deeper debt. The European Union is another neoliberal offensive, a supranational organization run by and for bankers that overrules democratically elected governments at the national level.
The Milei offensive in not new to Argentina
Argentina, although among the biggest countries outside the capitalist core, has suffered multiple rounds of neoliberal austerity. President Milei’s draconian attempts to maximize corporate profits are not new.
The fascistic military dictatorship of 1976 to 1983 laid waste to the Argentine economy while unleashing horrific human rights abuses. Upon seizing power, the military handed over economic policy to a well-connected industrialist, José Alfredo Martínez de Hoz, who ruthlessly implemented a severe neoliberal program of shock therapy, backed by a savage campaign of torture, “disappearances” and killings waged by the military and two allied fascist groups. The CGT union federation was abolished, strikes outlawed, prices raised, wages tightly controlled and social programs cut. As a result, real wages fell by 50 percent within a year. Because of the collapse of internal consumption caused by this austerity, ten percent of Argentina’s workforce was laid off in 1976 alone. For the last five years of the military junta, 1978 to 1983, Argentina’s foreign debt increased to US$43 billion from $8 billion, while the share of wages in national income fell to 22 percent from 43 percent.
Upon the return of formal democracy, the debt did not go away. A civilian president, Carlos Menem, imposed an austerity program in the early 1990s in conjunction with selling off state enterprises at below-market prices. This fire sale yielded $23 billion, but the proceeds went to pay foreign debt mostly accumulated by the military dictatorship — after completing these sales, Argentina’s foreign debt had actually grown. The newly privatized companies then imposed massive layoffs and raised consumer prices. By 1997, about 85 percent of Argentines were unable to meet their basic needs with their income. In contrast, banks underwriting Argentine government bonds earned an estimated $1 billion in fees between 1991 and 2001, profiting from public debt. As one example, an investment bank that arranged a restructuring of Argentina’s debt, under which a brief pause in the payment schedule was granted in exchange for higher interest payments, increasing Argentina’s debt, racked up a fee of $100 million
.
Argentines participating in the March 24, 2024, truth and justice demonstration in Buenos Aires draw parallels between the military dictatorship and Palestine (photo by 1985Idea)
It all finally imploded at the end of 2001, when the government froze bank accounts and the country experienced so much unrest that it had five presidents in two weeks. The last of these presidents, Néstor Kirchner, suspended debt payments. Had Argentina resumed scheduled payments in 2005, interest payment alone on the debt would have consumed 35 percent of total government spending. Kirchner announced that Argentina intended to pay only 25 percent of what was owed and any group that refused negotiations would get nothing; in the end, Argentina paid 30 percent to bondholders who agreed to talk.
Almost all of Argentina’s debtors accepted the 30 percent, seeing 30 percent as better than nothing. Many of Argentina’s creditors were not the financial institutions that originally made the loans; much of the debt had been sold to speculators. There were two notable holdouts, however — the hedge funds Elliott Capital Management and Aurelius Capital Management. These two speculators demanded full payment of the face value of the debt that they bought for pennies on the dollar. How to extract money out of a country where living conditions had already sunk to perilous lows? The head of Elliott Capital and its NML Capital affiliate impounded an Argentine Navy ship docked in Ghana, tracking the ship and waiting for it to reach the country that would be most favorable to its tactic of seizing an asset. This was no aberration; that speculator, Paul Singer, has a documented history of buying debt owed by poor Global South countries for pennies on the dollar and demanding to be paid full face value, no matter how dire that country’s condition.
The speculators on Argentine debt could use the tactic of impounding ships because a U.S. federal judge had issued a series of rulings declaring that Argentina must pay the full amount to the holdouts. Those rulings were not isolated instances of an out-of-control judge; the U.S. Supreme Court would later issue two rulings that fully backed the speculators. The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 is supposed to bar lawsuits in U.S. courts against non-U.S. governments, but a 7-1 bipartisan majority of the Supreme Court decided that the law is malleable when not convenient. The Argentine bonds had been sold with a provision that New York law would be used to settle disputes related to them, which gave U.S. courts the excuse needed to extend U.S. law to Argentina. In essence, the high court ruled that financiers are more sovereign than a national government.
Standing up to finance capital
Nonetheless, the administrations of Néstor Kirchner and Cristina Fernández refused to kneel. Their left-wing populism has been overstated — they left capitalist relations untouched and at best merely tolerated the movement of recovered factories — but they did consistently put the interests of Argentine working people ahead of international financiers. That came to an end when a new right-wing president, Mauricio Macri, took office and fulfilled his campaign promises to put an end to the country’s sovereignty. As a reward, Buenos Aires was again allowed to borrow on international financial markets — so that it can borrow money for the sole purpose of paying billions of dollars to speculators. The Macri administration committed itself to paying $6.4 billion to the holdouts, which could only be paid off by more borrowing.
President Macri served only one term, with the Peronists regaining office. Now a hard right president is again in power. President Milei wasted no time implementing a program that is a dream for Argentine capitalists; his chainsaw is not an empty metaphor. Acting immediately — after all, “shock therapy” is also not just a metaphor — President Milei devalued the peso by 50 percent, reduced transportation and utility subsidies, lifted price controls and dissolved half of the government’s ministries. He also announced a new “protocol” to limit public protests and the creation of a “registry” under which activist organizations would be sent bills for the expenses of the state repressing their public protests. The purported purpose of this protocol is, you guessed it, to achieve “peace and order.”
This program, naturally, has drawn rapturous praise from business interests. Elon Musk, he of the mass firings, poor pay and notorious hostility to unions and regulations that protect employees, has endorsed President Milei, and “top Argentine CEOs” “heap praise” on him, Bloomberg reports. The president has in turn lavished praise on Margaret Thatcher, calling her “brilliant.”
It all finally imploded at the end of 2001, when the government froze bank accounts and the country experienced so much unrest that it had five presidents in two weeks. The last of these presidents, Néstor Kirchner, suspended debt payments. Had Argentina resumed scheduled payments in 2005, interest payment alone on the debt would have consumed 35 percent of total government spending. Kirchner announced that Argentina intended to pay only 25 percent of what was owed and any group that refused negotiations would get nothing; in the end, Argentina paid 30 percent to bondholders who agreed to talk.
Almost all of Argentina’s debtors accepted the 30 percent, seeing 30 percent as better than nothing. Many of Argentina’s creditors were not the financial institutions that originally made the loans; much of the debt had been sold to speculators. There were two notable holdouts, however — the hedge funds Elliott Capital Management and Aurelius Capital Management. These two speculators demanded full payment of the face value of the debt that they bought for pennies on the dollar. How to extract money out of a country where living conditions had already sunk to perilous lows? The head of Elliott Capital and its NML Capital affiliate impounded an Argentine Navy ship docked in Ghana, tracking the ship and waiting for it to reach the country that would be most favorable to its tactic of seizing an asset. This was no aberration; that speculator, Paul Singer, has a documented history of buying debt owed by poor Global South countries for pennies on the dollar and demanding to be paid full face value, no matter how dire that country’s condition.
The speculators on Argentine debt could use the tactic of impounding ships because a U.S. federal judge had issued a series of rulings declaring that Argentina must pay the full amount to the holdouts. Those rulings were not isolated instances of an out-of-control judge; the U.S. Supreme Court would later issue two rulings that fully backed the speculators. The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 is supposed to bar lawsuits in U.S. courts against non-U.S. governments, but a 7-1 bipartisan majority of the Supreme Court decided that the law is malleable when not convenient. The Argentine bonds had been sold with a provision that New York law would be used to settle disputes related to them, which gave U.S. courts the excuse needed to extend U.S. law to Argentina. In essence, the high court ruled that financiers are more sovereign than a national government.
Standing up to finance capital
Nonetheless, the administrations of Néstor Kirchner and Cristina Fernández refused to kneel. Their left-wing populism has been overstated — they left capitalist relations untouched and at best merely tolerated the movement of recovered factories — but they did consistently put the interests of Argentine working people ahead of international financiers. That came to an end when a new right-wing president, Mauricio Macri, took office and fulfilled his campaign promises to put an end to the country’s sovereignty. As a reward, Buenos Aires was again allowed to borrow on international financial markets — so that it can borrow money for the sole purpose of paying billions of dollars to speculators. The Macri administration committed itself to paying $6.4 billion to the holdouts, which could only be paid off by more borrowing.
President Macri served only one term, with the Peronists regaining office. Now a hard right president is again in power. President Milei wasted no time implementing a program that is a dream for Argentine capitalists; his chainsaw is not an empty metaphor. Acting immediately — after all, “shock therapy” is also not just a metaphor — President Milei devalued the peso by 50 percent, reduced transportation and utility subsidies, lifted price controls and dissolved half of the government’s ministries. He also announced a new “protocol” to limit public protests and the creation of a “registry” under which activist organizations would be sent bills for the expenses of the state repressing their public protests. The purported purpose of this protocol is, you guessed it, to achieve “peace and order.”
This program, naturally, has drawn rapturous praise from business interests. Elon Musk, he of the mass firings, poor pay and notorious hostility to unions and regulations that protect employees, has endorsed President Milei, and “top Argentine CEOs” “heap praise” on him, Bloomberg reports. The president has in turn lavished praise on Margaret Thatcher, calling her “brilliant.”
Entre Rios province, Argentina (photo by Felipe Gonzalez)
Those who are at the receiving end of the Milei administration’s attacks, and those who represent them, have a decidedly different take. The General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), Luc Triangle, said, “The IMF is celebrating the budget surplus in Argentina, but it’s indefensible to ignore the human cost of this economic shock therapy. Pensions have been slashed, thousands of public sector workers fired, public services are on the verge of collapse, unemployment is growing and food poverty spreading. These kinds of misguided, far-right economic measures deepen inequality and erode democratic foundations. It is no surprise that Milei also wants to bypass Congress and repress civil liberties — this is the anti-democratic ideology at the centre of his regime.”
What is it that the International Monetary Fund is celebrating? Inflation that had reached 160 percent in November, on the eve of President Milei’s inauguration, has steadily increased, reaching almost 290 percent in March. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the club of advanced capitalist countries and large Global South countries, predicts that Argentina’s inflation will be 251 percent for 2024 and that its economy will shrink 3.3 percent for 2024, easily the worst performance among G20 economies.
Democracy? What democracy?
The decrees mentioned above were only the beginning. Days into office, President Milei in December 2023 issued an 83-page “Necessity and Urgency Decree” intended to eliminate hundreds of regulations, erode labor rights and open the door to mass privatizations of state-owned enterprises. Both houses of Argentina’s National Congress must vote in their majorities to overturn the decrees, or they go into effect. The Senate voted it down but has not yet faced a vote in the Chamber of Deputies. In the interim, a court, hearing a challenge by the CGT trade union federation, voided some of the decree, suspending it until the Congress fully considers it. But there was still more to come.
Following up on his decree, President Milei a week later introduced an omnibus bill with the Orwellian name of “Foundations and Starting Points for the Freedom of the Argentine People,” a 351-page document that contains 664 articles. If passed, this bill would declare an “economic emergency” and delegate more than 1,000 powers from the legislative to the executive branch until December 31, 2025. This would enable the president to bypass Congress. Noting that President Milei said “the state is an enemy,” Professor Tom McDowell, writing in CounterPunch, summarized this offensive:
“Grounded in the same logic as neoliberalism’s conventional demand for freedom from the state, democratic institutions increasingly appear as impediments to the logic of the marketplace. … The anti-parliamentarism at the core of the neoliberal theoretical outlook has increasingly transformed into a populist program that mobilizes a general dissatisfaction with politicians against democratic institutions as such. Neoliberal politicians, such as Milei, use this reasoning to manufacture the conditions for the ongoing use of emergency powers and the concentration of authority in the executive branch.”
Those who are at the receiving end of the Milei administration’s attacks, and those who represent them, have a decidedly different take. The General Secretary of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC), Luc Triangle, said, “The IMF is celebrating the budget surplus in Argentina, but it’s indefensible to ignore the human cost of this economic shock therapy. Pensions have been slashed, thousands of public sector workers fired, public services are on the verge of collapse, unemployment is growing and food poverty spreading. These kinds of misguided, far-right economic measures deepen inequality and erode democratic foundations. It is no surprise that Milei also wants to bypass Congress and repress civil liberties — this is the anti-democratic ideology at the centre of his regime.”
What is it that the International Monetary Fund is celebrating? Inflation that had reached 160 percent in November, on the eve of President Milei’s inauguration, has steadily increased, reaching almost 290 percent in March. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the club of advanced capitalist countries and large Global South countries, predicts that Argentina’s inflation will be 251 percent for 2024 and that its economy will shrink 3.3 percent for 2024, easily the worst performance among G20 economies.
Democracy? What democracy?
The decrees mentioned above were only the beginning. Days into office, President Milei in December 2023 issued an 83-page “Necessity and Urgency Decree” intended to eliminate hundreds of regulations, erode labor rights and open the door to mass privatizations of state-owned enterprises. Both houses of Argentina’s National Congress must vote in their majorities to overturn the decrees, or they go into effect. The Senate voted it down but has not yet faced a vote in the Chamber of Deputies. In the interim, a court, hearing a challenge by the CGT trade union federation, voided some of the decree, suspending it until the Congress fully considers it. But there was still more to come.
Following up on his decree, President Milei a week later introduced an omnibus bill with the Orwellian name of “Foundations and Starting Points for the Freedom of the Argentine People,” a 351-page document that contains 664 articles. If passed, this bill would declare an “economic emergency” and delegate more than 1,000 powers from the legislative to the executive branch until December 31, 2025. This would enable the president to bypass Congress. Noting that President Milei said “the state is an enemy,” Professor Tom McDowell, writing in CounterPunch, summarized this offensive:
“Grounded in the same logic as neoliberalism’s conventional demand for freedom from the state, democratic institutions increasingly appear as impediments to the logic of the marketplace. … The anti-parliamentarism at the core of the neoliberal theoretical outlook has increasingly transformed into a populist program that mobilizes a general dissatisfaction with politicians against democratic institutions as such. Neoliberal politicians, such as Milei, use this reasoning to manufacture the conditions for the ongoing use of emergency powers and the concentration of authority in the executive branch.”
The Puerto Madero district of Buenos Aires. (Photo by Juan Ignacio Iglesias)
Following a one-day general strike in which 1.5 million people took to the streets, the omnibus bill was voted down in Congress. The fight was still not over, because the omnibus bill was trimmed and sent back to Congress, with the new version passed by the Chamber of Deputies on April 30. The Senate is debating the bill with a May 25 deadline to act; although the pro-Milei parties do not have a majority in the Senate, one of the left-wing parties that voted against it in the Chamber, Frente de Izquierda, does not have a Senate seat, leaving the outcome uncertain, according to the Buenos Aires Herald. The revised bill would still privatize nine state-owned enterprises, down from 41, implement “reforms” to pensions and labor law, make “maximizing profit obtained from exploiting natural resources” state policy and cut taxes for foreign companies.
The need to step up the fightback
Despite the militant action that stopped the December decree, opponents of the Milei administration on the Left decry a lack of resolve by mainstream labor organizations. Samuel Karlin, writing for Left Voice, writes that union bureaucracies and center-left parties are containing the ability of the working class to fight back. He writes:
“Months later the law is once again advancing due in large part to the refusal of the CGT — the country’s largest federation of trade unions — to mobilize workers against the attacks. The CGT — in addition to not holding assemblies or promoting the organization of the working class and a plan of struggle until the law falls — negotiates behind closed doors with the government, preventing the workers’ strength from being expressed against the adjustment and the law in the streets and workplaces. The CGT is more afraid of the mobilized workers than of the Milei government itself. Meanwhile, the centrist and center-left Peronists who lead the union bureaucracies and social movements have sought to negotiate the terms of the attacks rather than wage a fight against it.”
Nonetheless, militant pushback is happening, demonstrated by 800,000 students, educators and allies protesting cuts to public universities, including reductions in teacher pay and the closures of some schools. Mr. Karlin notes, “Milei is advancing U.S. imperialist penetration in Latin America and developing the Far Right movement internationally. As Israel becomes increasingly isolated due to its genocide of Palestinians, Milei has become one of the Zionist state’s fiercest allies. Milei wants to use Argentina as a laboratory for his far-right reaction, instead we should use it as a laboratory for fighting back the Far Right.”
Another dangerous initiative of the Milei administration is its denial of the massive crimes committed by the fascistic military regime of 1976 to 1983. The total of those murdered, “disappeared,” arrested, tortured and/or forced into exile likely is in the hundreds of thousands, with an estimated 30,000 killed. The administration’s ministers, including the president himself, either deny the toll the military regime took or attempt to justify it. Thus an annual demonstration in March against the military dictatorship drew large crowds, who had an increased sense of urgency.
What has the new government achieved? Argentina’s poverty rate has risen to 57 percent, the highest rate in two decades. The president openly celebrated firing 50,000 state workers, with plans to fire another 70,000, and the removal of 200,000 from social-benefit programs. In addition, reductions to pensions were the largest in 30 years. The previous hard-right president, Mauricio Macri, took out a $57 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund and the cuts demanded by the IMF in exchange led to austerity, a downward cycle that threatens to accelerate.
Regardless of what country we live in, we all have a stake in the Argentine people’s success in fighting off the Milei austerity package. Industrialists and financiers, and the public office holders who love them, are undoubtedly watching closely the events in Argentina. If a country with one of the most militant working classes can have extreme austerity imposed on them, similar offensives will soon be on the way elsewhere. Capitalists around the world understand well their common class interest. The working people of the world, the overwhelming majority of Earth’s population on whose backs the wealth of those elites is built, need to understand their common interest.
Following a one-day general strike in which 1.5 million people took to the streets, the omnibus bill was voted down in Congress. The fight was still not over, because the omnibus bill was trimmed and sent back to Congress, with the new version passed by the Chamber of Deputies on April 30. The Senate is debating the bill with a May 25 deadline to act; although the pro-Milei parties do not have a majority in the Senate, one of the left-wing parties that voted against it in the Chamber, Frente de Izquierda, does not have a Senate seat, leaving the outcome uncertain, according to the Buenos Aires Herald. The revised bill would still privatize nine state-owned enterprises, down from 41, implement “reforms” to pensions and labor law, make “maximizing profit obtained from exploiting natural resources” state policy and cut taxes for foreign companies.
The need to step up the fightback
Despite the militant action that stopped the December decree, opponents of the Milei administration on the Left decry a lack of resolve by mainstream labor organizations. Samuel Karlin, writing for Left Voice, writes that union bureaucracies and center-left parties are containing the ability of the working class to fight back. He writes:
“Months later the law is once again advancing due in large part to the refusal of the CGT — the country’s largest federation of trade unions — to mobilize workers against the attacks. The CGT — in addition to not holding assemblies or promoting the organization of the working class and a plan of struggle until the law falls — negotiates behind closed doors with the government, preventing the workers’ strength from being expressed against the adjustment and the law in the streets and workplaces. The CGT is more afraid of the mobilized workers than of the Milei government itself. Meanwhile, the centrist and center-left Peronists who lead the union bureaucracies and social movements have sought to negotiate the terms of the attacks rather than wage a fight against it.”
Nonetheless, militant pushback is happening, demonstrated by 800,000 students, educators and allies protesting cuts to public universities, including reductions in teacher pay and the closures of some schools. Mr. Karlin notes, “Milei is advancing U.S. imperialist penetration in Latin America and developing the Far Right movement internationally. As Israel becomes increasingly isolated due to its genocide of Palestinians, Milei has become one of the Zionist state’s fiercest allies. Milei wants to use Argentina as a laboratory for his far-right reaction, instead we should use it as a laboratory for fighting back the Far Right.”
Another dangerous initiative of the Milei administration is its denial of the massive crimes committed by the fascistic military regime of 1976 to 1983. The total of those murdered, “disappeared,” arrested, tortured and/or forced into exile likely is in the hundreds of thousands, with an estimated 30,000 killed. The administration’s ministers, including the president himself, either deny the toll the military regime took or attempt to justify it. Thus an annual demonstration in March against the military dictatorship drew large crowds, who had an increased sense of urgency.
What has the new government achieved? Argentina’s poverty rate has risen to 57 percent, the highest rate in two decades. The president openly celebrated firing 50,000 state workers, with plans to fire another 70,000, and the removal of 200,000 from social-benefit programs. In addition, reductions to pensions were the largest in 30 years. The previous hard-right president, Mauricio Macri, took out a $57 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund and the cuts demanded by the IMF in exchange led to austerity, a downward cycle that threatens to accelerate.
Regardless of what country we live in, we all have a stake in the Argentine people’s success in fighting off the Milei austerity package. Industrialists and financiers, and the public office holders who love them, are undoubtedly watching closely the events in Argentina. If a country with one of the most militant working classes can have extreme austerity imposed on them, similar offensives will soon be on the way elsewhere. Capitalists around the world understand well their common class interest. The working people of the world, the overwhelming majority of Earth’s population on whose backs the wealth of those elites is built, need to understand their common interest.
Pete Dolack is an activist, writer, poet, and photographer. He has been involved in various activist organizations, including Trade Justice New York Metro, National People’s Campaign, and New York Workers Against Fascism, among others. He has authored the books "It’s Not Over: Learning from the Socialist Experiment," which examines attempts to create societies outside of capitalism and explores their relevance to the present world while seeking a path to a better future and "What Do We Need Bosses For: Toward Economic Democracy," which analyzes past and present efforts to establish systems of economic democracy on a national or society-wide basis. He authored the book "It’s Not Over: Learning from the Socialist Experiment," which examines attempts to create societies outside of capitalism and explores their relevance to the present world while seeking a path to a better future.
Argentina: Unions hold second general strike over Milei’s austerity
May 16, 2024
GREEN LEFT Issue
Argentina's Senate is now debating an "omnibus" bill that contains
some of Milei's neoliberal economic policies — including making privatisation
easier. Photo: @CTAAutonoma/X
Argentina's primary trade union federation held another nationwide general strike on May 9, the second called since President Javier Milei, a far-right economist, took office in December and began pursuing sweeping austerity and deregulation.
The South American nation's unions organised the strike "in defense of democracy, labor rights, and the living wage," according to a statement from the General Confederation of Labor (CGT), the Argentine Workers' Central Union (CTA) and the Autonomous CTA.
"It is a day of resistance and demand," the groups said, blasting the Milei government's "brutal" attacks on labour rights, social security, public health, education, science, and "our cultural identity". The policies of austerity, say opponents, have disproportionately impacted working people and retirees.
The labour groups called out the government for promoting "dangerous policies for the privatisation of public enterprises" and pushing for "a phenomenal transfer of resources to the most concentrated and privileged sectors of the economy".
The CGT celebrated the 24-hour strike's success on May 10, declaring that "Argentina stopped" and sharing photos of sparsely populated roads, transit hubs, and other public spaces.
As the Buenos Aires Times reported: “In the nation's capital, streets were mostly empty, with very little public transport. Many schools and banks closed their doors while most shops were shuttered. Garbage was left uncollected.
“Rail and port terminals were closed, while the industrial action forced the cancellation of hundreds of flights, leaving airports semi-deserted. Some buses—from firms that did not take part in the strike—were running in the morning, although with few passengers. Cars were circulating, but traffic levels were similar to that seen on weekends.
“The port of Rosario, which exports 80% of the nation's agro-industrial production, was all but paralysed in the midst of its busiest season.”
A spokesperson for Milei, Manuel Adorni, claimed the nationwide action was "an attack on the pocket and against the will of the people" by those "who have curtailed the progress of Argentines over the last 25 years," the newspaper noted.
Meanwhile, union leaders stressed that the strike was the result of "a government that only benefits the rich at the expense of the people, gives away natural resources, and seeks to eliminate workers' rights," as CTA secretary general Hugo Yasky put it.
As the action wound down on March 9, Yasky described it as a "display of dignity of the Argentine people" that sent "a strong message" to Milei's government as well as the International Monetary Fund "that intends to govern us" and the country's senators.
Argentina's Senate is now debating an "omnibus" bill that contains some of Milei's neoliberal economic policies — including making privatisation easier — after the package was approved last week by the Chamber of Deputies, the lower congressional body.
Rubén Sobrero, general secretary of the Railway Union, signaled that more strikes could come if lawmakers continue to advance the president's policies, telling The Associated Press that "if there is no response within these 24 hours, we'll do another 36".
From Europe to North America, trade union groups around the world expressed solidarity with Thursday's strike.
"Milei's policies have not tackled the decadence of the elites that he decries, instead he has delivered daily misery for millions of working people. Plummeting living standards, contracting production, and the collapse of purchasing power means some people cannot even afford to eat," said International Trade Union Confederation general secretary Luc Triangle in a statement.
Triangle noted that "the government is targeting the rights of the most vulnerable sectors of the population and key trade union rights, such as collective bargaining, that support greater fairness and equality in society, while threatening those who protest with police repression and criminalisation."
"In this context, the work of the trade unions in Argentina is extraordinary. They have emerged as the main opposition to the government's dystopian agenda, uniting resistance and building a coalition in defense of workers' rights and broader democratic principles," he added. "The demands of the trade unions in Argentina for social justice, democracy, and equality are the demands of working people across the world. Their fight is our fight and that is why the global trade union movement stands with them."
[Reprinted from Common Dreams.]
Argentina at the rendezvous with its history
TUESDAY 14 MAY 2024,
A SITUATION OF DEADLOCK
This situation is representative of the impasse in which Argentina has found itself for 75 years: neither of the two conflicting political projects has been able to fully impose itself against the other, whether it is the agro-export model defended by the right or that, more focused on the development of the domestic market, supported by centre-left Peronism. As Antonio Gramsci had noted, this polarisation and immobility of political forces has led to the exhaustion of both sectors and opened the way to a third actor, the ultra-neoliberal and authoritarian right of Javier Milei and the libertarians. Based on the elimination of state intervention in all areas except its repressive component, the libertarian project is not new.
It advocates:
A strong deregulation of the economy, through the elimination of all state controls. This includes the liberalisation of prices, including those of basic necessities.
A compulsory fiscal balance, accompanied by a significant reduction in the state’s participation in the fields of social security (pensions, health, education, scientific research), and a reduction in the number of workers within its structures.
The dollarization of the economy, with the elimination of the peso and the privatization of the Central Bank.
The removal of all export restrictions.
The privatization and fiscal austerity measures specific to the neoliberal state.
This project was first and foremost driven by Decree 70 (“Decree of Necessity and Urgency”). It corresponds to a radical version of the austerity program already championed by previous neoliberal governments, which has led some to refer to the Milei phenomenon as the “fourth neoliberal wave” in Argentina. This underlines its continuity with the dictatorship of 1976-1983 and the democratic governments of Menem and De la Rua (Justicialist Party – PJ – and Radical Civic Union – UCR, from 1989 to 2001) as well as that of Macri (Republican Proposal – PRO – from 2015 to 2019) that preceded it. The originality of this government, however, lies in its authoritarian dimension, i.e. its contempt for the fundamental norms of liberal democracy, established in Argentina after the dictatorship, and its decision to radically abandon any social welfare role attributed to the state. First of all, this has had an impact on the living conditions of the popular masses, through the dismantling of all support and development programs, but also on the endowments of the various provinces (autonomous regions), through the cessation of all economic transfers and collaboration with them, in order to guarantee the payment of the foreign debt and the profits of the multinationals.
The government’s first measures were introduced by Decree 70 and the “omnibus law”. [1] They have already caused enormous damage to the people: a 120% devaluation, inflation at 70% in three months, the elimination of social assistance programs, the opening of export markets, the halt of public investment in infrastructure as well as the closure of many public bodies. These measures have led to thousands of redundancies (150,000 in the construction sector alone, 15,000 in the civil service) and the closure of many companies, causing a snowball effect on economic activity. At the moment, the lack of management of the dengue epidemic that is wreaking havoc in the country accentuates the inability of the state to guarantee the protection of the population in terms of public health.
A NEOLIBERAL AND AUTHORITARIAN ETHOS
We are clearly facing a government that is trying to definitively resolve Argentina’s historical impasse, breaking any capacity of the popular masses to resist. It is understandable, despite its poor results, that it still enjoys the favor of big business (national and international), the IMF and the United States, which are multiplying declarations of support. What is more difficult to understand is the support it still enjoys among the popular layers (about 53%, according to surveys). This could be explained by multiple factors:
The first is, without a doubt, the persistent economic crisis, which has continued to grow since 2012. The stagnation of the economy has increased precarious work; inflation has hit the popular classes hard, and the pandemic has only exacerbated shortages.
Another factor is the fact that the outgoing Peronist regime had shown an inability to solve the most pressing problems of the population. It had also shown a willingness to manage the system “as it is” (i.e. in its capitalist and neoliberal form), while integrating progressive elements, such as the fight against SGBV, which have however proved insufficient to improve the living conditions of a large majority of the population.
Finally, another factor is the inability of the left (governmental and “extra-parliamentary”) to adapt to the new realities and its failure to propose credible and desirable alternatives.
In this context, a small part of the popular sectors has lost its historical bearings, moving away from Peronism without approaching the left, and has therefore shifted to the libertarian project.
RESISTANCE
The inability of President Alberto Fernández and Sergio Massa, his Minister of Economy and candidate to succeed him, to manage economic and social problems, to control persistent inflation and to restore the purchasing power of the popular masses foreshadowed Massa’s defeat in the elections.
The popular reaction to the reactionary government of Javier Milei, on the other hand, was unpredictable (and in a way remains so). It is difficult to know what capacity the popular masses can develop to mobilize to thwart the government, especially since the government has resorted to repressive and intimidating measures to discourage resistance.
However, there are several positive signs that show a state of mobilization, if not general, at least of readiness for significant change. From the government’s first actions, protests emerged, thanks to the mobilizations of people affected by the reforms but also to the emergence of organizations such as neighborhood popular assemblies, a means of self-organization for the inhabitants of large cities, especially in Buenos Aires, as well as social movements in the suburbs or factory committees. In this perspective, the scale of popular mobilization has prevailed, surprising even its organizers, which could foreshadow a cycle of intense struggles in the months to come.
FIRST GENERAL STRIKE ON 24 JANUARY
After two mobilizations of unexpected magnitude on 20 and 27 December 2023, the unions broke their inertia and organised a first day of general strike on 24 January 2024. The aim was to pressure the National Assembly to reject the first “omnibus bill”, a package of measures aimed at granting broad powers to the executive to deregulate the economy and impose reforms by decree, without debate in parliament – where Milei’s government is clearly in the minority.
Although the strike was poorly supported, the mobilization was a remarkable success, bringing together more than a million demonstrators in the country and about 300,000 in the capital. Its intensity has created the necessary conditions to constrain the room for manoeuvre of the dialogue wing of the opposition and thus push the government to
back down and withdraw its project.
8 MARCH, DAY OF STRIKES AND FEMINIST REVOLT
In the face of a reactionary government that has not hesitated to make misogynistic and anti-feminist remarks and has even considered repealing the law on voluntary termination of pregnancy, the call for a global feminist strike on 8 March has taken on particular importance in Argentina. Feminist collectives denounced the attacks on organizations fighting against discrimination and racism and the elimination of programs to support female victims of sexual and gender-based violence.
The call, aimed at defending the gains made and fighting against the oppression of women workers, met with a massive echo. The mobilization was commensurate with the situation, with hundreds of thousands of women occupying the National Congress Square and surrounding streets, as well as numerous demonstrations throughout the country.
SOCIAL MOVEMENTS IN ACTION
From its first measures, the government cut off all aid to the poorest social sectors. This concerns the inhabitants of “villas miseria” (slums) and working-class suburban neighbourhoods, where the organisation of soup kitchens is crucial as a social support mechanism. In Argentina, the state guarantees access to food, while voluntary work is normally carried out by “social movements”: political, social and unemployed organizations, often very divided between those that claim to be Peronist, leftist or Christian.
The current situation has begun to force unity in the struggle. It had its baptism of fire on 18 March, a day marked by more than 500 street blockades and mobilizations to denounce the abandonment of the state in a context where more and more people are seeking help.
The movement was repressed by the police, who applied an unconstitutional “anti-blocking protocol”, denounced by the United Nations. Despite the repression, this day marked the significant entry of popular organizations into the protest against Milei’s government.
24 MARCH, MEMORY WITHOUT UNITY
March 24 is an important historical day for Argentine society, marking each year a mobilization against the dictatorship, for democracy, justice and human rights. This year’s event was particularly significant because, for the first time in Argentina’s 40 years of democracy, a government that claims the legacy of the dictatorship is in power and seeks to destroy the social consensus built by the historic struggle of human rights organizations and social organizations against state terrorism. It is also a day on which a democratic and inclusive model of society is defended, albeit vaguely.
As predicted, the protest was massive, mobilizing millions of people across the country. This year, Peronist unions, including the powerful CGT, which do not usually participate in the 24 March organization, also took part in the event.
This new configuration unfortunately prevented the construction of a unitary demonstration; As in previous years, it split in two with, on the one hand, some organisations of the extreme left such as the PTS having decided to march separately and, on the other side, the other political, social and trade union components.
GOVERNMENT DEFEATS CONCEAL PARTIAL VICTORY
Although the mobilization is beginning to be felt, pushing the Assembly to reject many anti-social measures, the government nevertheless retains the initiative thanks to various institutional tools: Decree 70, the most important, remains largely in force until its examination by the National Assembly. For the time being, the government, which had to deal with the Senate’s rejection of the order-in-council, has managed to delay its consideration. It has also bought time (and initiative) by presenting the opposition with a new draft agreement called the May Pact, which is beginning to be discussed (and approved in principle) by the provinces governed by Mauricio Macri’s PRO.
As long as Decree 70 continues to be implemented, even partially, Milei’s government retains the necessary tool to continue its project of dismantling the state and destroying the social gains won over a century of struggles. It is therefore continuing its offensive, without showing signs of weakening: 15,000 redundancies have already been announced among state employees with the promise of reaching 70,000, while new cuts in public spending and new anti-popular measures are looming.
THE CRISIS OF PERONISM
Alberto Fernández’s disastrous management and the accumulation of his political failures have led some observers to note the loss of support for Peronism among a part of the Argentine popular classes. If for the moment they remain orphans, they are already the object of a new hegemonic conflict. This situation of political vacuum is currently benefiting the far right, although this change is not yet definitive.
What is certain is the current state of great weakness of Peronism, which is expressed by its great difficulty in reacting, in a context of frontal attacks against the popular masses it claims to represent. Disoriented, “Pan-Peronism”, conceived as the aggregation of different Peronist currents, is now living in a state of crisis with no apparent way out, at least in the short term. As a result, it struggles to influence conflicts and is often overwhelmed by the autonomous action of social bases.
A NECESSARILY PARTIAL CONCLUSION
In this context of the crisis of Peronism, certain sectors of the far left are delighted to see the left take the lead in certain struggles, sometimes even as a driving force in them. This may be an overly optimistic but encouraging conclusion. If we also consider that the social movements are beginning to mobilize and gain courage, that within the unions (including the bureaucratic structures) the date of the next general strike is being discussed, and that this month students are starting to go back to school, these conditions still allow us to nourish a little optimism.
However, the left will have to travel a long way in building a favourable balance of forces: unifying the class against Milei will be its fundamental mission.
April 2024
Translated by International Viewpoint from Revue l’Anticapitaliste.
P.S.
If you like this article or have found it useful, please consider donating towards the work of International Viewpoint. Simply follow this link: Donate then enter an amount of your choice. One-off donations are very welcome. But regular donations by standing order are also vital to our continuing functioning. See the last paragraph of this article for our bank account details and take out a standing order. Thanks.
ATTACHED DOCUMENTSargentina-at-the-rendezvous-with-its-history_a8523.pdf (PDF - 926.2 KIB)
Extraction PDF [->article8523]
FOOTNOTES
[1] The name given to the 660 provisions aimed at reforming the economy, commerce, culture and criminal law, proposed by Milei after his inauguration, reduced to 300 articles after reading by parliament.
TUESDAY 14 MAY 2024,
BY NICOLAS MENNA
INTERNATIONAL VIEWPOINT
Since the coming to power of the ultra-neoliberal and reactionary government of President Javier Milei, the eyes of the global left have turned to Argentina to try to understand the phenomenon of the rise of the extreme right in Latin America and around the world. Much has already been written about its neoliberal, authoritarian, anti-popular and misogynistic nature, as well as about possible developments in the context of the struggle of the Argentine popular and progressive masses. This article attempts to take stock of the situation and identify ways to understand the balance of forces engaged in the class struggle in Argentina.
The 2001 crisis in the country ended with the affirmation, for about fifteen years of a so-called progressive project: the center-left national-popular sector of Peronism consolidated itself as the dominant force. More than a party, it is a conglomerate of groups, organizations and movements, all united under the umbrella of their adherence to the figure of Perón and his strategies of political construction. In one way or another, this is still the preferred form (or refuge?) of organization by the popular masses (including the proletariat) in Argentina.
This does not mean that the bourgeoisie, inextricably linked to imperialist interests, has agreed to move towards a development model based on investment and the strengthening of the internal market, as proposed by Presidents Kirchner (Nestor and Cristina). From 2012 onwards, faced with economic stagnation, these conservative sectors began to regain ground, until the victory in 2015 of Mauricio Macri’s neoliberal right, which led to a social regression without managing to impose itself in the long term. Macri was not re-elected in 2019, and was once again replaced by a Peronist government, that of Alberto Fernández, which failed to reverse the trend or emerge from economic crisis.
INTERNATIONAL VIEWPOINT
Since the coming to power of the ultra-neoliberal and reactionary government of President Javier Milei, the eyes of the global left have turned to Argentina to try to understand the phenomenon of the rise of the extreme right in Latin America and around the world. Much has already been written about its neoliberal, authoritarian, anti-popular and misogynistic nature, as well as about possible developments in the context of the struggle of the Argentine popular and progressive masses. This article attempts to take stock of the situation and identify ways to understand the balance of forces engaged in the class struggle in Argentina.
The 2001 crisis in the country ended with the affirmation, for about fifteen years of a so-called progressive project: the center-left national-popular sector of Peronism consolidated itself as the dominant force. More than a party, it is a conglomerate of groups, organizations and movements, all united under the umbrella of their adherence to the figure of Perón and his strategies of political construction. In one way or another, this is still the preferred form (or refuge?) of organization by the popular masses (including the proletariat) in Argentina.
This does not mean that the bourgeoisie, inextricably linked to imperialist interests, has agreed to move towards a development model based on investment and the strengthening of the internal market, as proposed by Presidents Kirchner (Nestor and Cristina). From 2012 onwards, faced with economic stagnation, these conservative sectors began to regain ground, until the victory in 2015 of Mauricio Macri’s neoliberal right, which led to a social regression without managing to impose itself in the long term. Macri was not re-elected in 2019, and was once again replaced by a Peronist government, that of Alberto Fernández, which failed to reverse the trend or emerge from economic crisis.
A SITUATION OF DEADLOCK
This situation is representative of the impasse in which Argentina has found itself for 75 years: neither of the two conflicting political projects has been able to fully impose itself against the other, whether it is the agro-export model defended by the right or that, more focused on the development of the domestic market, supported by centre-left Peronism. As Antonio Gramsci had noted, this polarisation and immobility of political forces has led to the exhaustion of both sectors and opened the way to a third actor, the ultra-neoliberal and authoritarian right of Javier Milei and the libertarians. Based on the elimination of state intervention in all areas except its repressive component, the libertarian project is not new.
It advocates:
A strong deregulation of the economy, through the elimination of all state controls. This includes the liberalisation of prices, including those of basic necessities.
A compulsory fiscal balance, accompanied by a significant reduction in the state’s participation in the fields of social security (pensions, health, education, scientific research), and a reduction in the number of workers within its structures.
The dollarization of the economy, with the elimination of the peso and the privatization of the Central Bank.
The removal of all export restrictions.
The privatization and fiscal austerity measures specific to the neoliberal state.
This project was first and foremost driven by Decree 70 (“Decree of Necessity and Urgency”). It corresponds to a radical version of the austerity program already championed by previous neoliberal governments, which has led some to refer to the Milei phenomenon as the “fourth neoliberal wave” in Argentina. This underlines its continuity with the dictatorship of 1976-1983 and the democratic governments of Menem and De la Rua (Justicialist Party – PJ – and Radical Civic Union – UCR, from 1989 to 2001) as well as that of Macri (Republican Proposal – PRO – from 2015 to 2019) that preceded it. The originality of this government, however, lies in its authoritarian dimension, i.e. its contempt for the fundamental norms of liberal democracy, established in Argentina after the dictatorship, and its decision to radically abandon any social welfare role attributed to the state. First of all, this has had an impact on the living conditions of the popular masses, through the dismantling of all support and development programs, but also on the endowments of the various provinces (autonomous regions), through the cessation of all economic transfers and collaboration with them, in order to guarantee the payment of the foreign debt and the profits of the multinationals.
The government’s first measures were introduced by Decree 70 and the “omnibus law”. [1] They have already caused enormous damage to the people: a 120% devaluation, inflation at 70% in three months, the elimination of social assistance programs, the opening of export markets, the halt of public investment in infrastructure as well as the closure of many public bodies. These measures have led to thousands of redundancies (150,000 in the construction sector alone, 15,000 in the civil service) and the closure of many companies, causing a snowball effect on economic activity. At the moment, the lack of management of the dengue epidemic that is wreaking havoc in the country accentuates the inability of the state to guarantee the protection of the population in terms of public health.
A NEOLIBERAL AND AUTHORITARIAN ETHOS
We are clearly facing a government that is trying to definitively resolve Argentina’s historical impasse, breaking any capacity of the popular masses to resist. It is understandable, despite its poor results, that it still enjoys the favor of big business (national and international), the IMF and the United States, which are multiplying declarations of support. What is more difficult to understand is the support it still enjoys among the popular layers (about 53%, according to surveys). This could be explained by multiple factors:
The first is, without a doubt, the persistent economic crisis, which has continued to grow since 2012. The stagnation of the economy has increased precarious work; inflation has hit the popular classes hard, and the pandemic has only exacerbated shortages.
Another factor is the fact that the outgoing Peronist regime had shown an inability to solve the most pressing problems of the population. It had also shown a willingness to manage the system “as it is” (i.e. in its capitalist and neoliberal form), while integrating progressive elements, such as the fight against SGBV, which have however proved insufficient to improve the living conditions of a large majority of the population.
Finally, another factor is the inability of the left (governmental and “extra-parliamentary”) to adapt to the new realities and its failure to propose credible and desirable alternatives.
In this context, a small part of the popular sectors has lost its historical bearings, moving away from Peronism without approaching the left, and has therefore shifted to the libertarian project.
RESISTANCE
The inability of President Alberto Fernández and Sergio Massa, his Minister of Economy and candidate to succeed him, to manage economic and social problems, to control persistent inflation and to restore the purchasing power of the popular masses foreshadowed Massa’s defeat in the elections.
The popular reaction to the reactionary government of Javier Milei, on the other hand, was unpredictable (and in a way remains so). It is difficult to know what capacity the popular masses can develop to mobilize to thwart the government, especially since the government has resorted to repressive and intimidating measures to discourage resistance.
However, there are several positive signs that show a state of mobilization, if not general, at least of readiness for significant change. From the government’s first actions, protests emerged, thanks to the mobilizations of people affected by the reforms but also to the emergence of organizations such as neighborhood popular assemblies, a means of self-organization for the inhabitants of large cities, especially in Buenos Aires, as well as social movements in the suburbs or factory committees. In this perspective, the scale of popular mobilization has prevailed, surprising even its organizers, which could foreshadow a cycle of intense struggles in the months to come.
FIRST GENERAL STRIKE ON 24 JANUARY
After two mobilizations of unexpected magnitude on 20 and 27 December 2023, the unions broke their inertia and organised a first day of general strike on 24 January 2024. The aim was to pressure the National Assembly to reject the first “omnibus bill”, a package of measures aimed at granting broad powers to the executive to deregulate the economy and impose reforms by decree, without debate in parliament – where Milei’s government is clearly in the minority.
Although the strike was poorly supported, the mobilization was a remarkable success, bringing together more than a million demonstrators in the country and about 300,000 in the capital. Its intensity has created the necessary conditions to constrain the room for manoeuvre of the dialogue wing of the opposition and thus push the government to
back down and withdraw its project.
8 MARCH, DAY OF STRIKES AND FEMINIST REVOLT
In the face of a reactionary government that has not hesitated to make misogynistic and anti-feminist remarks and has even considered repealing the law on voluntary termination of pregnancy, the call for a global feminist strike on 8 March has taken on particular importance in Argentina. Feminist collectives denounced the attacks on organizations fighting against discrimination and racism and the elimination of programs to support female victims of sexual and gender-based violence.
The call, aimed at defending the gains made and fighting against the oppression of women workers, met with a massive echo. The mobilization was commensurate with the situation, with hundreds of thousands of women occupying the National Congress Square and surrounding streets, as well as numerous demonstrations throughout the country.
SOCIAL MOVEMENTS IN ACTION
From its first measures, the government cut off all aid to the poorest social sectors. This concerns the inhabitants of “villas miseria” (slums) and working-class suburban neighbourhoods, where the organisation of soup kitchens is crucial as a social support mechanism. In Argentina, the state guarantees access to food, while voluntary work is normally carried out by “social movements”: political, social and unemployed organizations, often very divided between those that claim to be Peronist, leftist or Christian.
The current situation has begun to force unity in the struggle. It had its baptism of fire on 18 March, a day marked by more than 500 street blockades and mobilizations to denounce the abandonment of the state in a context where more and more people are seeking help.
The movement was repressed by the police, who applied an unconstitutional “anti-blocking protocol”, denounced by the United Nations. Despite the repression, this day marked the significant entry of popular organizations into the protest against Milei’s government.
24 MARCH, MEMORY WITHOUT UNITY
March 24 is an important historical day for Argentine society, marking each year a mobilization against the dictatorship, for democracy, justice and human rights. This year’s event was particularly significant because, for the first time in Argentina’s 40 years of democracy, a government that claims the legacy of the dictatorship is in power and seeks to destroy the social consensus built by the historic struggle of human rights organizations and social organizations against state terrorism. It is also a day on which a democratic and inclusive model of society is defended, albeit vaguely.
As predicted, the protest was massive, mobilizing millions of people across the country. This year, Peronist unions, including the powerful CGT, which do not usually participate in the 24 March organization, also took part in the event.
This new configuration unfortunately prevented the construction of a unitary demonstration; As in previous years, it split in two with, on the one hand, some organisations of the extreme left such as the PTS having decided to march separately and, on the other side, the other political, social and trade union components.
GOVERNMENT DEFEATS CONCEAL PARTIAL VICTORY
Although the mobilization is beginning to be felt, pushing the Assembly to reject many anti-social measures, the government nevertheless retains the initiative thanks to various institutional tools: Decree 70, the most important, remains largely in force until its examination by the National Assembly. For the time being, the government, which had to deal with the Senate’s rejection of the order-in-council, has managed to delay its consideration. It has also bought time (and initiative) by presenting the opposition with a new draft agreement called the May Pact, which is beginning to be discussed (and approved in principle) by the provinces governed by Mauricio Macri’s PRO.
As long as Decree 70 continues to be implemented, even partially, Milei’s government retains the necessary tool to continue its project of dismantling the state and destroying the social gains won over a century of struggles. It is therefore continuing its offensive, without showing signs of weakening: 15,000 redundancies have already been announced among state employees with the promise of reaching 70,000, while new cuts in public spending and new anti-popular measures are looming.
THE CRISIS OF PERONISM
Alberto Fernández’s disastrous management and the accumulation of his political failures have led some observers to note the loss of support for Peronism among a part of the Argentine popular classes. If for the moment they remain orphans, they are already the object of a new hegemonic conflict. This situation of political vacuum is currently benefiting the far right, although this change is not yet definitive.
What is certain is the current state of great weakness of Peronism, which is expressed by its great difficulty in reacting, in a context of frontal attacks against the popular masses it claims to represent. Disoriented, “Pan-Peronism”, conceived as the aggregation of different Peronist currents, is now living in a state of crisis with no apparent way out, at least in the short term. As a result, it struggles to influence conflicts and is often overwhelmed by the autonomous action of social bases.
A NECESSARILY PARTIAL CONCLUSION
In this context of the crisis of Peronism, certain sectors of the far left are delighted to see the left take the lead in certain struggles, sometimes even as a driving force in them. This may be an overly optimistic but encouraging conclusion. If we also consider that the social movements are beginning to mobilize and gain courage, that within the unions (including the bureaucratic structures) the date of the next general strike is being discussed, and that this month students are starting to go back to school, these conditions still allow us to nourish a little optimism.
However, the left will have to travel a long way in building a favourable balance of forces: unifying the class against Milei will be its fundamental mission.
April 2024
Translated by International Viewpoint from Revue l’Anticapitaliste.
P.S.
If you like this article or have found it useful, please consider donating towards the work of International Viewpoint. Simply follow this link: Donate then enter an amount of your choice. One-off donations are very welcome. But regular donations by standing order are also vital to our continuing functioning. See the last paragraph of this article for our bank account details and take out a standing order. Thanks.
ATTACHED DOCUMENTSargentina-at-the-rendezvous-with-its-history_a8523.pdf (PDF - 926.2 KIB)
Extraction PDF [->article8523]
FOOTNOTES
[1] The name given to the 660 provisions aimed at reforming the economy, commerce, culture and criminal law, proposed by Milei after his inauguration, reduced to 300 articles after reading by parliament.
