Argentina: the crisis is hitting the workers
- This topic has 74 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 8 months, 2 weeks ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Do you really know the economic history of mankind?
Oh yes, probably much more than you, Mr think-you-know-it-all. The main difference between us is that I have no need to constantly brag about my knowledge.
So you’re saying that people don’t like change but a minority was able to enact change against the wishes of that majority?
What on earth are you going on about? Reference was being made to the transition from Feudalism to Capitalism where the overwhelming majority, the peasantry, had no say in the matter
—————————-
Given that there WAS a transition from feudalism to capitalism even if the overwhelming majority, according to you, had no say in the matter (really?), what could have prompted the minority in this case to push for a change in this direction?
According to your dogmatic arch-conservative interpretation of history, “People generally hate change, particularly change which is untried and untested”. Well at some point in time capitalism was most definitely “untried and untested” so what, according to you prompted the minority then to try it????
It’s the same with your assertion (with its Thatcher-like overtones of “there being no alternative”) that since people generally hate change, particularly change which is untried and untested…” capitalism remains the only game in town.”
What makes you so cocksure that this is the case and what makes your position any different from, say, the feudal nobility who could not conceive of a world in which capitalism prevailed and they were reduced a mere sideshow or beheaded?
ps On the subject of people generally “hating change” wasn’t one of the core ideals of the Enlightenment period that of continual progress and improvement? Have people abandoned these ideals today in your opinion?
…what could have prompted the minority in this case to push for a change in this direction?
There’s an abundance of material on the subject as well you know. e.g.
“What on earth are you going on about?”
I was trying to work out how you were linking the statement “people don’t like change” to the response you gave.
“Reference was being made to the transition from Feudalism to Capitalism where the overwhelming majority, the peasantry, had no say in the matter.”
Yes good. Capitalism didn’t come about through choice but force.
That history does not mention something very important, it is what Karl Marx called the original sin of capitalism which is the original, or primitive accumulation of capital, before capitalism came about, there was a large appropriation of wealth
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch26.htm
engels/marx_part8.htm
Milei is promising to abolish the Central Bank of Argentina, echoing the demand of US currency cranks who want to abolish the Federal Reserve.
It would be instructive to see what would happen if he did actually abolish it. We would then see if banks on their own can “create credit” without being part of a system involving a central bank which uses them to put new money into circulation. With no central bank to issue new money it would certainly stop inflation.
But his plan still involves a central bank — ironically, the US Federal Reserve itself as that would be a consequence of his plan to “dollarize” the Argentine economy (“Dollarization is the term for when the U.S. dollar is used in addition to or instead of the domestic currency of another country”.)
So, we wouldn’t actually see what would happen in a capitalist state if there was no central bank at all.
Milei calls himself and is called an “anarchist-capitalist” but whether they would regard him as one of them is another matter. We know them of old and have debated against them many times, in both writing and speech. So it would be interesting to see one of them have a go at trying to implement their policy (even though it might be thought that an anarcho-capitalist president was a contradiction in terms).
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2007-aug-04-fi-dollarize4-story.html
Dollarization has been implemented in El Salvador and the situation for workers is worst than before it was adopted and the Central Bank was not eliminated, and the policy was initially promoted by an anarchist capitalist.
Let’s see if the anarchist-capitalists of Argentina are going to create a capitalist society without state, it is going to be a good experiment for the total discredit of the anarchist capitalist movement, and to prove that a capitalist society without state can not be established.
He is just another money crank, but like in El Salvador he is going to need dollars from the US Central bank, or the Federal Reserve Bank, and they are going to evaluate if they have enough reserve to replace Pesos for Dollar. The Dominican Republic had a national currency equal to the dollar ( one peso for one dollar o viceversa ) but right now it is completely devaluated, the exchange rate is 60 pesos for one dollar.
In Puerto Rico the central bank was renamed and they started to issue money equal to the dollar, and the US dollar is the currency for the whole island, but they have a branch of the US Central Bank, or Federal Reserve Bank and most major banks are from the USA
Yes good. Capitalism didn’t come about through choice but force.
===================================================================================
Engels has an unfinished pamphlet about the role of force in history . Capitalism was imposed in the human societyHere is Milei explaining some of the implications of anarcho-capitalism as a nightmare dystopia where everything, literally everything, is subjected to being bought and sold:
“In June of last year, he referred to the sale of organs as “just another market” during a radio debate. “Who are you to determine what [a person] does with his life?” Milei questioned. Things then spiraled out of control. Days later, a journalist asked him if he subscribed to another theory that suggested “the sale of children.” Milei replied, “It depends,” and further got himself tangled up. “Shouldn’t the answer be no?” the journalist pressed. “If I had a child, I would not sell it,” Milei said. “The answer depends on the terms in which you are thinking; maybe 200 years from now it could be debated.”
There are several contradictions within his proposals, one of them is that he says that private property is absolute, and that peoples own their own body as private property, and they can do whatever they want with their own body, but he does not support abortion.
He calls himself a pro life but he supports the market of human organs which might induce to produce crimes and killing of human beings like in Mexico and Brazil
He is already digging his own hole with the Catholic Church which has a lot of influence within the Argentinian society, specially in a country where many citizen are descendent of Italians.
He wants to convert himself to Judaism, and antisemitism in Argentina and Brazil is widely spread, way before the time of Peron who also supported Germany, Spain and Italy and the Axis
He wants wants to dollarize the economy and eliminate the Central Bank but he is going to be getting dollars from the US Federal Reserve Bank, that is another contradiction
BUENOS AIRES, Oct 13 (Reuters) – Far-right libertarian Javier Milei is leading the polls ahead of Argentina’s Oct. 22 presidential vote, but it remains a tight race between the top three candidates, three surveys showed.
All three surveys had Economy Minister Sergio Massa in second place and conservative opposition candidate Patricia Bullrich in third.
Two of the polls showed the three candidates within a 10-point range, indicating that a runoff round is likely as none of them may secure the votes to win the poll outright.
To win outright, a candidate needs to secure either 45% of the vote or over 40% with a lead of more than 10 points over their closest rival.
Milei, an economist and political outsider who won a shock victory over establishment heavy-weights at the August primaries with radical proposals, has 34-35% of the vote this month, according to a poll by Opina Argentina. Massa has 29-30% while Bullrich has 24-25%.
Wherever the leftists have tried to reform capitalism, the workers have voted against them and that includes France.
Hmm, more than likely they voted to retain the status quo.
People generally hate change, particularly change which is untried and untested.Which is why capitalism remains the only game in town.
—————————————————————————————–
If the Argentinian workers wanted to retain the status quo they should have kept Peronism which has governed that country for many years, and capitalism has existed for many decades too, even more, several years ago Argentina was considered a first world country due to its vast industrialization, social benefits for the workers, and large agricultural production, independent capitalist development, large nationalization of several industries, in reality to elect an anarchist capitalist is to vote against state capitalism which has existed since the time of Domingo Peron. Argentina has a long history of workers struggles and workers movements, and political organization of different tendencieshttps://www.leftvoice.org/what-explains-the-rise-of-the-far-right-in-argentina/. The workers are supporting a right wing candidate because there is a discontent against the failure of the left and the right wingers have used that discontent in order to obtain the support of the workers. It does show that capitalism can not be reformed to benefits the vast majority of the members of the working class, the Peronist’s were forced to do the same thing that was implementing the government of Mauricio Macri
Thanks, Alamamater, for the history and good links in your
#247621.You mention:
‘[…] Argentina was considered a first world country due to its vast industrialization, social benefits for the workers, and large agricultural production […].
Question: Approximately when was this? From when up until when?
One of my message was not posted
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.