Naomi klein on Argentina and I.M.F.
disributorz | 28.03.2002 11:36
Revolt of the wronged
Argentina was a model IMF student. And it's still suffering as a result
Naomi Klein in Buenos Aires
Thursday March 28, 2002
The Guardian
On the same day that Argentinian President Eduardo Duhalde was embroiled in yet another fruitless negotiation with the International Monetary Fund, a group of Buenos Aires residents was going through a negotiation of a different kind. On a sunny Tuesday earlier this month, they were trying to save themselves from eviction. The residents of 335 Ayacucho, including 19 children, barricaded themselves inside their home, located just blocks away from the National Congress, and refused to leave. On the concrete façade of the house, a hand-printed sign read: "IMF Go To Hell."
It may seem strange that an institution as decidedly macro as the IMF would be implicated in an issue as micro as the Ayacucho eviction. But here in a country where half the population has fallen below the poverty line, it's hard to find any sector of society whose fate does not somehow hinge on the decisions made by the international lender.
Librarians, teachers and other public sector workers, who have been getting paid in hastily printed provincial currencies, won't get paid at all if the provinces agree to stop printing the money, as the IMF is demanding. And if deeper cuts are made to the public sector, as the lender is also insisting, unemployed workers - close to 30% of the population - will be even closer to the homelessness and hunger that have led thousands to storm supermarkets demanding food.
If a solution isn't found to the recently declared medical state of emergency, it will certainly affect an elderly woman I met on the outskirts of Buenos Aires. In a fit of shame and desperation, she pulled up her blouse and showed me the open wound and hanging tubes from a stomach operation that her doctor was not able to stitch up or dress due to lack of medical supplies.
Maybe it seems rude to talk about such matters here. Economic analysis is supposed to be about the peg to the dollar, "peso-ification" and the dangers of "stagflation" - not about children losing their homes or old women with gaping wounds. Yet reading the reckless advice being hurled at Argentina's government from beyond its borders, perhaps a little personalising is in order.
The international consensus is that the IMF should see Argentina's crisis not as an obstacle to further austerity but as an opportunity: the country is so desperate for cash, the reasoning goes, it will do whatever the IMF wants. "During a crisis is when you need to act, it's when Congress is most receptive," explains Winston Fritsch, chairman of Dresdner Bank AG's Brazilian unit.
The most draconian suggestion has come from Rocardo Cabellero and Rudiger Dornbusch, a pair of MIT economists writing in the Financial Times. "It's time to get radical," they say. Argentina "must temporarily surrender its sovereignty on all financial issues". The country's economy - its "spending, money printing and tax administration" - should be controlled by "foreign agents" including "a board of experienced foreign central bankers".
In a nation still scarred by the disappearance of 30,000 people during the 1976-83 military dictatorship, only a "foreign agent" would have the nerve to say, as the MIT team does, that "somebody has to run the country with a tight grip". Yet it seems that repression is the necessary precondition to the real work of saving the country, which, according to Cabellero and Dornbusch, involves prying open markets, introducing deeper spending cuts, and of course a "massive privatisation campaign".
Only there's a hitch: Argentina has already done it all. As the IMF's model student throughout the 1990s, it flung open its economy (which is why it's been so easy for capital to flee since the crisis began). As far as Argentina's supposedly wild public spending goes, a full third goes directly to servicing the external debt. Another third goes to pension funds, which have already been privatised. The remaining third - some of which actually goes to healthcare, education and social assistance - has fallen far behind population growth, which is why shipments of donated food and medicine are arriving by boat from Spain.
As for "massive privatisation", Argentina has dutifully sold off so many of its services, from trains to phones, that the only examples of further assets Cabellero and Dornbusch can think of privatising are the country's ports and customs offices. No wonder so many who sang Argentina's praises in the past are now rushing to blame its economic collapse exclusively on national greed and corruption. "If a country thinks they're going to get aid from the United States, and they're stealing money, they're just not going to get it," Bush pointedly said in Mexico last week. Argentina "is going to have to make some tough calls".
Argentina's population, which has been in open revolt against its political, financial and legal elite for months, hardly needs to be lectured on the need for good governance. In the last federal election, more people spoiled their ballots than voted for any single politician. The most popular write-in candidate was a cartoon character named "Clemente", chosen because he has no hands and therefore cannot steal. It's just that it's hard to believe that the IMF is going to be the one to clean up Argentina's culture of payola and impunity, especially since one of the conditions the lender has placed on new funds is that Argentina's courts stop prosecuting the bankers who illegally pulled their money out of the country, drastically deepening the crisis. As long as the destruction of this country is presented as a uniquely national pathology, it will conveniently keep the spotlight off the IMF.
In the familiar narrative of an impoverished country begging the world for a "bail-out", a crucial development is being obscured: many people here have little interest in the IMF's money, especially when it will clearly cost them so much. Instead, they are busily building new political counter-powers to both their own politicians and the IMF. Tens of thousands of residents have organised themselves into neighbourhood assemblies, networked at the city and national levels. In town squares, parks and on street corners, neighbours discuss ways of making their democracies more accountable and filling in where government has failed. They are talking about creating a "citizen's congress" to demand transparency and accountability from politicians. They are discussing participatory budgets and shorter political terms, while organising communal kitchens for the unemployed. The president, who wasn't even elected, is so scared of this growing political force that he has begun saying the asambleas, as they are called, are anti-democratic.
There is reason to pay attention to all this. The asambleas are also talking about how to kick-start local industries and renationalise assets. They could go even further. Argentina, as the obedient pupil for decades, miserably failed by its IMF professors, shouldn't be begging for loans; it should be demanding reparations. The IMF had its chance to run Argentina. Now it's the people's turn.
· www.nologo.org
Argentina was a model IMF student. And it's still suffering as a result
Naomi Klein in Buenos Aires
Thursday March 28, 2002
The Guardian
On the same day that Argentinian President Eduardo Duhalde was embroiled in yet another fruitless negotiation with the International Monetary Fund, a group of Buenos Aires residents was going through a negotiation of a different kind. On a sunny Tuesday earlier this month, they were trying to save themselves from eviction. The residents of 335 Ayacucho, including 19 children, barricaded themselves inside their home, located just blocks away from the National Congress, and refused to leave. On the concrete façade of the house, a hand-printed sign read: "IMF Go To Hell."
It may seem strange that an institution as decidedly macro as the IMF would be implicated in an issue as micro as the Ayacucho eviction. But here in a country where half the population has fallen below the poverty line, it's hard to find any sector of society whose fate does not somehow hinge on the decisions made by the international lender.
Librarians, teachers and other public sector workers, who have been getting paid in hastily printed provincial currencies, won't get paid at all if the provinces agree to stop printing the money, as the IMF is demanding. And if deeper cuts are made to the public sector, as the lender is also insisting, unemployed workers - close to 30% of the population - will be even closer to the homelessness and hunger that have led thousands to storm supermarkets demanding food.
If a solution isn't found to the recently declared medical state of emergency, it will certainly affect an elderly woman I met on the outskirts of Buenos Aires. In a fit of shame and desperation, she pulled up her blouse and showed me the open wound and hanging tubes from a stomach operation that her doctor was not able to stitch up or dress due to lack of medical supplies.
Maybe it seems rude to talk about such matters here. Economic analysis is supposed to be about the peg to the dollar, "peso-ification" and the dangers of "stagflation" - not about children losing their homes or old women with gaping wounds. Yet reading the reckless advice being hurled at Argentina's government from beyond its borders, perhaps a little personalising is in order.
The international consensus is that the IMF should see Argentina's crisis not as an obstacle to further austerity but as an opportunity: the country is so desperate for cash, the reasoning goes, it will do whatever the IMF wants. "During a crisis is when you need to act, it's when Congress is most receptive," explains Winston Fritsch, chairman of Dresdner Bank AG's Brazilian unit.
The most draconian suggestion has come from Rocardo Cabellero and Rudiger Dornbusch, a pair of MIT economists writing in the Financial Times. "It's time to get radical," they say. Argentina "must temporarily surrender its sovereignty on all financial issues". The country's economy - its "spending, money printing and tax administration" - should be controlled by "foreign agents" including "a board of experienced foreign central bankers".
In a nation still scarred by the disappearance of 30,000 people during the 1976-83 military dictatorship, only a "foreign agent" would have the nerve to say, as the MIT team does, that "somebody has to run the country with a tight grip". Yet it seems that repression is the necessary precondition to the real work of saving the country, which, according to Cabellero and Dornbusch, involves prying open markets, introducing deeper spending cuts, and of course a "massive privatisation campaign".
Only there's a hitch: Argentina has already done it all. As the IMF's model student throughout the 1990s, it flung open its economy (which is why it's been so easy for capital to flee since the crisis began). As far as Argentina's supposedly wild public spending goes, a full third goes directly to servicing the external debt. Another third goes to pension funds, which have already been privatised. The remaining third - some of which actually goes to healthcare, education and social assistance - has fallen far behind population growth, which is why shipments of donated food and medicine are arriving by boat from Spain.
As for "massive privatisation", Argentina has dutifully sold off so many of its services, from trains to phones, that the only examples of further assets Cabellero and Dornbusch can think of privatising are the country's ports and customs offices. No wonder so many who sang Argentina's praises in the past are now rushing to blame its economic collapse exclusively on national greed and corruption. "If a country thinks they're going to get aid from the United States, and they're stealing money, they're just not going to get it," Bush pointedly said in Mexico last week. Argentina "is going to have to make some tough calls".
Argentina's population, which has been in open revolt against its political, financial and legal elite for months, hardly needs to be lectured on the need for good governance. In the last federal election, more people spoiled their ballots than voted for any single politician. The most popular write-in candidate was a cartoon character named "Clemente", chosen because he has no hands and therefore cannot steal. It's just that it's hard to believe that the IMF is going to be the one to clean up Argentina's culture of payola and impunity, especially since one of the conditions the lender has placed on new funds is that Argentina's courts stop prosecuting the bankers who illegally pulled their money out of the country, drastically deepening the crisis. As long as the destruction of this country is presented as a uniquely national pathology, it will conveniently keep the spotlight off the IMF.
In the familiar narrative of an impoverished country begging the world for a "bail-out", a crucial development is being obscured: many people here have little interest in the IMF's money, especially when it will clearly cost them so much. Instead, they are busily building new political counter-powers to both their own politicians and the IMF. Tens of thousands of residents have organised themselves into neighbourhood assemblies, networked at the city and national levels. In town squares, parks and on street corners, neighbours discuss ways of making their democracies more accountable and filling in where government has failed. They are talking about creating a "citizen's congress" to demand transparency and accountability from politicians. They are discussing participatory budgets and shorter political terms, while organising communal kitchens for the unemployed. The president, who wasn't even elected, is so scared of this growing political force that he has begun saying the asambleas, as they are called, are anti-democratic.
There is reason to pay attention to all this. The asambleas are also talking about how to kick-start local industries and renationalise assets. They could go even further. Argentina, as the obedient pupil for decades, miserably failed by its IMF professors, shouldn't be begging for loans; it should be demanding reparations. The IMF had its chance to run Argentina. Now it's the people's turn.
· www.nologo.org
disributorz
Comments
Hide the following 6 comments
GO ARGENTINA!!!!
28.03.2002 12:59
Unfortunately, you can guarantee that the IMF, World Bank, possibly the UN and particularly the good ole USofA (defenders of truth, liberty and democracy ) will have something to say about this. No doubt GWB and the other three horsemen will eventually stampede over any semblance of true democracy in this country. They'll either bomb or starve the people into submission, or they'll just shackle them with crippling debts.
I have high hopes for the people of Argentina, but i also have great fears for them.
Best of luck! Fuck 'em all!!
chronic
Argentina Solidarity Campaign
28.03.2002 17:46
internationalist
Homepage: http://www.geocities.com/argentinesc
Klein Not One Of Us
28.03.2002 21:19
The worrying thing, as anti-capitalism develops as a subject in college curricula, liberal assessments of anti-ca such as 'No Logo' will be staple texts.
Klein is indeed a logo, all of her own making.
Definately one of us
predicatble
28.03.2002 21:56
Do you actually have anything to say in disagreement with what Naomi Klein has said?
Either in this article or otherwise?
You're just jealous that she's made a name for herself.
The book No Logo has made a valuable contribution to this movement. And her Guardian articles have also made a valuable contribution by reaching an audience who would otherwise not be in touch with the arguments the movement is putting forward.
Yeah she is doing the speaking circuit. That's because people want to hear her speak! OK so she's made quite bit of money but if you'd written a book that lots of people bought then you'd have lots of money as well. OK so she could have given it all to charity... but would you? My arse you would. My big hairy arse. Actually my arse isn't big or hairy, but er.. someone else's big hairy arse instead.
This is a broad movement and that is a strength. It really pisses me off when people slag off people like Naomi Klein and George Monbiot and Noreena Hertz and John Pilger for being part of the movement in a liberal middle class radio 4 sort of way rather than on a street level. We need voices in all levels of society.
Surely that's more constructive than your "fuck the guardian readers to hell with them and hope they disappear" ostridge mentality.
HOw the fuck do you spell ostridge anyway? It's ostrich isn't it? fuck knows.
.
Depends on what you mean by 'one of us'?
29.03.2002 02:37
Here, instead of an 'anti-capitalist' following through of a critique of the IMF, to a critique of the market economy itself, Klein simply continues to blame the IMF's 'bad' policies.
While her support for that part of the argentinian assemblies demanding 'accountable politicians',
'renationalisation','participatory budgets', and 'shorter political terms', suggests that she thinks 'another world' means better management of the existing one with added participation...
auto
klein/hertz
30.03.2002 00:55
but just about naomi klein and noreena hertz, at least the former seems to do proper research and have something to say, whereas hertz seems to be simply a consultant to capitalism who's found an interesting new job as a distracting voice and poster girl.
zedhead