GUIDO GALAFASSI
Argentina
is the name of a country whose elites for almost two centuries intended to
shape it as a “Nation – State”, that is to say a country with a
representative ‘democracy’ and a developed capitalist economy. This was
the intention , but obviously as a semi-peripherical country, Argentina has
never achieved that aim, which was restricted only to central countries.
However, at present Argentina is just a simple market, a place geographically
located in which speculative interests of big international corporations as
well as those of dominant social classes, both local and
foreign,
coexist.
Undoubtedly, Argentina is one of the major “ neoliberal peripherical
experiments” planned by the International Monetary Fund” ( IMF) and
executed by the national and multinational corporations being assisted by
traditional political parties. Considering the large profits of big capital
sent abroad and the constantly increasing growth of poverty and social
exclusion, the model has been a success.
The “Nation-State” destruction began during the last military
regime ( 1976-1983), which was the bloodiest period in Argentina’s history,
leaving 30,000 missing people behind. That regime was widely supported by
various sections of society. It is thought that the end of the above mentioned
regime was hastened by the unsuccessful Malvinas’ (Falkland Islands)
military adventure. The “Nation-State” destruction was deepened by the
democratic governments which succeeded the military regime. Therefore, the
notion of Argentina just as a “market” consolidates. It was precisely
Carlos Saul Menem (second constitutional president after Ricardo Alfonsin)
elected president for the Peronista Party, who turned Argentina into one of
the most adequate markets of the periphery to attract speculative capitals. It
is necessary to remark that the broad consensus of the peronista-neoliberal
government secured the support of almost all social classes (high – middle
– low). Such consensus did Menem achieve that he governed for two
consecutive periods and was elected by most of the citizens. The destruction
of the State during President Menem’s government (together with Domingo
Cavallo, Economy Minister) was complete. All Public Services State companies
were given away to the local and transnational capitals. Thus, on the one hand
the education and health systems were unattended, and on the other, a strong
concentration of wealth in some few social sections was allowed and favoured.
By the end of President Menem’s government about 30% of the population was
living under alarming levels of poverty. At the same time, he managed to stop
the hiperinflation process through the convertibility plan that pegged the
peso to the US dollar. This plan was the key of his electoral success. As it
was a peronista government demonstrations against it by the Unions, the
workers and low class strata of the population were almost non-existent. Only
some unemployed people asking for unemployment grants and a new Union Group
(Central de Trabajadores Argentinos, CTA) protested. At the same time, the
middle class celebrated the “stability” of prices without inflation,
whereas the higher class welcomed their own success over the already
non-existent State.
Meanwhile, the neoliberal “celebration” based mainly on the
“economic greediness” was reaching an end.
Interest payments for the foreign debt increased significantly
committing most of the public resources
to
them. With foreign investments drained, poverty and exclusion of big sections
of the population increased and corruption in local and national governments
became an evetyday issue. It was corruption which induced the middle classes
to choose an Alliance (Alianza) between the Unión Cívica Radical and Frepaso
political parties for the next government, which led to the election of
Fernando De La Rúa as president in 1999. President Carlos Menem was
considered to be a man of great initiative (in favour of the big national and
multinational corporations). President De La Rúa on the contrary, acted as a
man without initiative. Consequently, economic concentration, exclusion and
poverty continued to grow. The promise to fight against corruption was not
fulfilled and what is more a big case of corruption was discovered even within
some of President De La Rúa’s closest cabinet.
As it was already mentioned, during President Menem’s administration
the demonstrations were almost non-existent, apart from those by unemployed
people and Unions groups which were violently suppressed by the government
leaving dozens of dead people. The unemployed demonstrated in various parts of
the country, apart from the urban area. The severe crisis of the regional
economies caused more regional unemployment. Typical examples of such protests
were the ones which repeatedly occurred in oil areas such as Tartagal (Salta
province) and in Cutral-Co ( Neuquén province). A regional situation of
extreme poverty was caused by the privatization of the former State oil
company YPF (at the beginning of the 90s), leaving thousands of jobless
workers. Tartagal and Cutral-Co protests happened some years after the above
mentioned privatization process.
The scenario that was put in action by the elites implied not only
corporations having huge profits, but also a population suffering overwhelming
levels of poverty. For some years protesters blocking the high-ways
(piqueteros) only asked for an unemployment grant or some job. This situation
spread widely all over the country.
The
new Union (CTA), mainly formed by state workers, also manifested their
dissatisfaction about the neoliberal model. This was not surprising given that
state workers were and still are one of the most affected groups of the State
destruction. However, this stand was not adopted by the peronista Unions.
Although the
demonstrations against the neoliberal policies
were becoming more frequent as poverty and social exclusion were
growing, most of the population showed little interest in them. Some
even turned against high-way blockades just because of delays or
“pretended inconveniences”
―an attitude massively promoted by
the mass media.
During President De La Rúa’s administration, the economic crisis
worsened and the middle class,
which was the main supporter of De La Rúa campaign, criticized and disengaged
from government policies. The resulting lack of confidence was expressed after
two years of government, when the government party did not get the necessary
votes in parliament renewal in September 2001. More than 30% of the votes
were null or void in a deliberate demonstration of no confidence to the entire
political body. The peronista party got 40% of the votes, and the Marxist
left managed to have the best election in its history, with the election of
three national deputies.
Demonstrations
became even
more frequent and by December 2001, after the sequestration of
bank savings, Argentina collapsed into a so-called social explosion,
outbreaks of looting, riots and general chaos ( some of them encouraged by the
peronista party itself). President De La Rúa was only capable to declare the
national state of siege on December 19 th. Citizens reacted immediately in a
way reminiscing the events of 1810 and 1945 when the peronista party arose. In
Buenos Aires city and in some other big cities in the country people tooked
the streets inaugurating the pot-banging (cacerolazo) demonstration. Thousands
of Argentines, mainly middle class, marched through the city downtown streets
and gathered in the historical Plaza de Mayo. With demonstrations continuing
and growing the police repression ordered by President De La Rúa and
supported by the peronista party was brutal. Five people died in Plaza de Mayo
and more than twenty all over the country. The peronista party, greedy for
power, withdrew its support from De La Rúa who had no viable alternative but
to resign. The peronistas were now able to recover the Executive.
Provisional
presidency by Ramón Puerta (of the peronista party) lasted for two days. Then
Adolfo Rodriguez Saa, peronista governor for quasi-feudal San Luis province
was elected president by the parliament. However, his administration lasted
for only a week and on December
31st, Rodriguez Saa resigned because of a mass protest and the lack of support
from the peronista party. Three days of uncertainty followed in which Eduardo
Camaño (peronista deputy) was provisional president. Eduardo Duhalde former
vice-president of Carlos Menem’s presidency in its first period and former
governor of Buenos Aires province, who was responsible for the deep social and
economic crisis of the biggest district of Argentina, was elected president by
the parliament. Public rejection of this political manoeuvringby the elites, with the
use of well-known and unpopular politicians, was important but it was not
expressed in an organized way.
Meanwhile, the situation deteriorated as the sequestration of bank savings
(corralito) continued and President Duhalde ‘pesified’ all dollar deposits
at a rate of 1 to 1.40, in effect further devaluing them, following a previous devaluation of peso which soared the US dollar
to an exchange rate of 1-2,5 pesos. Once more, the banks made huge
profits at people’s expense.
Today, for the first time in the last decades, many Argentines
started to understand the terrible injustice of the neoliberal market economy,
which they had backed up for so long. Argentines who had not been interested
in political issues before, started to discuss the model of the country they
wished to have. New political organizations have been spontaneously formed in
different neighbourhoods (neighbourhood assemblies) in Buenos Aires City and
in some other cities in Buenos Aires province. Those assemblies have started
to discuss local problems such as unemployment, health, etc but also broader
issues about the economic and political situation of the country. The
neighbourhood assemblies meet once a week, generally in public places. They
discuss and debate all the various proposals that people presented, and then
at the end of the meeting a vote is taken on the motions. This way, they
decide what actions to follow in order to solve the various problems of their
own neighbourhood.
Every
Sunday, an “inter-neighbourhood” assembly is held. People from the various
neighbourhoods of Buenos Aires city, as well as some others cities in Great
Buenos Aires, attend this meeting. As each neighbourhood assembly is
independent, the inter-neighbourhood assembly simply attempts to complement
and unify proposals and resolutions.
People who participate in
the inter-neighbourhood assembly do not ‘represent’ neighbourhood
assemblies since the idea of representation is being deeply debated and mostly
rejected by these organizations. Therefore, the inter-neighbourhood assembly
can be considered as another neighbourhood assembly, which gathers people from
the whole of Buenos Aires city instead of only a particular neighbourhood. At
present, approximately 70 neighbourhood assemblies are meeting in Buenos Aires
city. It is much more difficult to know how many neighbourhood assemblies are
held all over the country, due to the limited information available. Taking
into account this shortage of information, it can be assumed that at least
30-40 neighbourhood assemblies exist in Great Buenos Aires, and at least
another 20-30 in the rest of the country. It is possible that many more
neighbourhood assemblies are spread all over the country, but this cannot be
verified due to the limited organisation of the assembly movement at this
early stage and the deliberate shortage of
information on the matter by the mass media. As regards the level of
participation, it varies locally and regionally. However it is possible to
estimate that approximately 30 to 100 people join each assembly every week,
whereas the inter-neighbourhood assembly in Buenos Aires city, gathers about
200 to 400 people every Sunday.
These
organizations support the idea of the replacement of the traditional political
institutions (the Executive, the Legislative and the Judiciary), challenging
even the very institution of representative democracy through the forms of
organisation they have adopted which are based on direct democracy . The
general feeling is that
politicians and big economic groups are a fraud deceiving people.
However, it should be stressed that only some of these assemblies propose to
replace the present political institutions
through a drastic reform of the National Constitution. In general, the
neighbourhood assemblies have not outlined a way out of the crisis due to
their embryonic organization and their political inexperience. The members of
such assemblies usually reject traditional politics. What is important however
is that these organizations, far from supporting the traditional solution to
crises in Argentina (a military coup) they struggle for direct democracy,
popular participation, rejection of the neoliberal market economy as well as
political independence. Some of the assemblies’ members also take part in
weekly protests against corruption in the Supreme Court. Moreover, every day
people besiege banks downtown protesting against bank institutions which are
the main targets of the collective fury. As a result banks have walled their
facades.
In conclusion, the lack of a
radical movement that will integrate all these neighbourhood assemblies,
street protests and high way blockades into a comprehensive political program
involving a clear alternative to the present political and economic
institutions has created a huge power vacuum in Argentina. Therefore, although
the events of the last few months represent a real transformation of politics
and of Argentinian society , the final outcome
is still open as the economic crisis is so deep that even the big
international corporations do not have a clear idea of what way to follow to
continue accumulating billions of profits. The strength and action needed to
produce a drastic social change towards fairness, equality and solidarity that
would eradicate the neoliberal market economy in Argentina is still to be
developed.