2024-10-13 06:22:00
On October 9, President Javier Milai once again addressed businessmen, this time at the plenary session of the Business Council for Latin America (CEAL). In front of an audience sympathetic to his economic plan, amid laughter and applause, Milley returned to his accusations of social justice and taxes. So in Argentina, where child poverty stands at 70 percent, the president unabashedly celebrates rising inequality.
This article analyzes Milley’s strategy from three aspects: his national economic program and the consequent rise in inequality, his foreign policy and his alliance with the world’s billionaires, and finally, his discursive construction and efforts to justify it. The cultural struggle over sex. As Tocatlyan noted, at the United Nations — as in other forums — Milley was speaking not to governments but to a small group of billionaires associated with large digital companies. Far from continuing to position the president as a lunatic, a comprehensive understanding of his plans and alliances should provide the necessary basis for identifying the main contradictions—who are the oppressors and the oppressed—that will allow him to position himself in an increasingly in fierce competition. Anti-mileism.
Acemoglu insisted that if democracy did not belong to workers, it would die. The economist offers a simple explanation for the crisis of democracy in the industrialized world (and not only): that the system fails to deliver on its promises. The incomes of Europe’s bottom and middle classes have been losing purchasing power for years, especially since the 2008 crisis, a situation reflected in declining confidence in institutions, while social networks and digital media have fueled polarization. This process is intensifying in Argentina in 2024.
Dictators don’t like this
The practice of professional and critical journalism is a fundamental pillar of democracy. That’s why it bothers those who think they have the truth.
During the ten months of La Libertad de Avanza’s government, the poverty rate increased by one percentage point per month (from 41.7% to 52.9%). Liberals claim this is to be expected: if GDP falls by more than 5% in 2024, we will all be poorer because the pie shrinks. The reality is that although Argentina after the military-civilian dictatorship has serious structural problems with income distribution, this economic process has two very special characteristics: it is an endogenous process (created by the government itself), and it strives to benefit those who .
If we measure the change in income by decile, we see that the change is much more severe for those with the lowest incomes, while the richest decile only lost 5% of their income. Notably, a recent Cedlas report on income underreporting revealed that the country’s top earners don’t declare everything they truly earn. Concealing income such as property rentals and financial income. Another very important clarification is that the first decile of income earners generally have no savings or accumulated resources, whereas the richest can make up for the loss in purchasing power. In fact, there was an elite that benefited from Caputo’s financial bubble (the equivalent of Martinez de Hoz’s Table 2.0). To put it more simply, if you could only buy milk from home with your money, and you paid 700 pesos for it in December 2023, you would buy it for 1,600 pesos today if you were lucky. However, if you have extra pesos to earn MEP or Blue Dollars, then you bought MEP in December 2023 for 1,300, you can buy it today for 1,200 or less. This is called income transfer.
This brutal transfer of income from popular industries to those with high purchasing power is accompanied by specific economic policies that are more favorable to the industry: money laundering, tax moratoriums, reductions in personal property taxes, and other measures. The result: In just six months, inequality, as measured by the Gini coefficient, rose sharply, back to covid 19 pandemic levels.
It’s no coincidence that we’re talking about this pandemic again. Wealth associated with the pharmaceutical and food industries, especially owners of big tech companies, grew significantly in 2020 around the world. This trend of rising inequality is not a national phenomenon but is driven by global structures.
The report “Multilateralism in the Age of Global Oligarchies” by Oxfam International, a London-based NGO best known for its opposition to financial globalization, highlights rising poverty and inequality as a global trend. Notably, the richest 1% own more wealth than 95% of the world’s population, undermining the ability of governments to serve the majority and fostering a new global oligarchy.
Oligarchy is a system of government in which power is concentrated in the hands of a small group of people who make decisions for their own benefit and ignore the needs of the majority. In this context, global oligarchy refers to how a handful of super-rich individuals and large corporations exert disproportionate influence over public policy, exacerbating inequality and diminishing the role of the state. Oxfam highlights how a handful of large companies control global strategic sectors. Two companies account for 40% of the global seed market, while the three technology giants account for 75% of global digital advertising revenue. Despite the rhetoric of free markets or free markets, what dominates is a system controlled by a few, which exacerbates inequality.
The report also criticized the use of tax havens by the super-rich to evade taxes, as seen in the money laundering activities of Macri and the current government in Argentina. Debt crises in emerging countries such as Argentina benefit creditors and perpetuate financial dependence, trapping countries in a vicious cycle.
Despite the gloomy outlook, there is still hope for the resistance of countries in the Southern Hemisphere, and Argentina and Brazil can play a fundamental role in defending their sovereignty and resisting external pressure. This highlights the need to promote social justice and regain control over decisions that impact communities.
Culture war. In this framework, the end of the state advocated by Millais has great consistency for the global oligarchy and especially for the “owners” of these global corporations. The current president has made more public appearances with Big Tech owners like Elon Musk than with any governor in our country, which is no small thing. He recently hosted the “Wolf of Wall Street” (Jordan Belfort, convicted in the US for fraud, money laundering and stock market manipulation) at a government building as if he were the head of state. These practices are not arbitrary but have a clear interest in our country’s natural resources.
Javier Millay‘s speech about the idea that taxation is an aberration and social justice is an aberration was relevant to those he intended to benefit from state policy. For the most neglected, there is nothing; for the wealthy who escape money laundering and tax benefits.
We face global challenges. Nation-states as we know them are in crisis. Power mechanisms are being reconfigured and global oligarchic power is rising, not just economically but also politically. The situation in Argentina reflects these global tensions, exacerbated by a government that is aligned with these interests and, among other things, does not recognize the multilateral nature of today’s world. Not integrating BRICS, violating the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals and the 2045 Global Compact, and confronting strategic and historical allies are some examples.
We are undergoing a transformation of capitalism, and technology is changing the labor market. In this context, it is necessary to find new alternatives that defend institutions that protect the majority and promote inclusive multilateralism that resists the concentration of power and wealth, alleviates poverty and inequality, creates decent jobs and protection policy. Against this complex backdrop, Argentina and the rest of the global South must seek a path to a more just and equitable future that benefits the vast majority of people. This is not a reaffirmation of ineffective policies and strategies, but rather a defense of the values of solidarity and justice by defending the state as the only possible instrument for combating inequality. The discussion today and tomorrow will be about whether capital is led by the state or subordinated to it to force its dissolution.
* Economist and Director of Banco Ciudad.
1728802110
#Millais #advocate #global #oligarchic #cultural #struggle
