A debate that is still open, what to do with the International Monetary Fund? Editorial of “El Círculo Rojo”, a program from La Izquierda Diario that is broadcast on Thursdays from 10 pm to 12 midnight on Radio Con Vos, 89.9.

  • These days I heard an interview with Myriam Bregman, candidate for one of the lists left front for the presidential elections.
  • Among the many themes that came up in the interview was the question of debt and what to do International Monetary Fund.
    View this post on Instagram

    A publication shared by The Red Circle (@elcirculorojo.899)

  • He alignment what did he achieve Sergio Massa, which in turn is aligned with the Fund’s demands, is truly striking. I say because you will remember that when I was Martin Guzman in charge of Economy, the Kirchnerism questioned in the speech the subordination of the minister to the body and —beyond the fact that he institutionally enabled all channels in Congress so as not to hinder the approval of the agreement— some of his referents voted against and in public discourse they criticized him, sometimes very harshly.
  • However, now the support is complete when proven by hard numbers that the adjustment required by the Fund was deeper in the Massa era than in the Guzmán era.
  • That is why there is no more debate in the official coalition or even a “mimicry of a debate” (because everyone agreed on the content) about the famous “correlations of force”. the radical leader Leandro Santoro who had specialized in justifying any agreement with the Fund on the basis of “correlations of forces” they were always adverse, he no longer talks about the subject and now he is a candidate for the head of the City Government. But at the time of his, his interventions on this issue were intended to respond to the hard core of Kirchnerism who criticized the agreement.
  • Well today none of that exists: not only is the man who continues and deepens this agreement not criticized, but he is even designated presidential candidate.
  • Exist unanimity in traditional politics with respect to the Monetary Fund, and in the two main coalitions it is more than evident.
  • To justify this subordination, a form of reasoning that has a lot of self-fulfilling prophecy. Many people say —when faced with statements like Bregman’s that you have to go towards a sovereign ignorance of the debt—that they would be completely okay with that, but that in the actual conditions it is impossible. and they point different elements: the composition of the Congress, the advance of the right, the international conditions, ultimately, although they do not say it that way: the “correlations of force”.
  • And why do I say that this reasoning has a lot of “self-fulfilling prophecy” and a bit “tragic” component? because it is stated that the conditions are not given for a more firm position before the Fund (there are numerical, political and even legal arguments to support it) and this leads to a place of obedience and that same location generates correlations of adverse forces (or favorable to the Fund and credit agencies). Sometimes we synthesized it like this: I don’t fight because there is no correlation of forces and there is no favorable correlation of forces because I don’t fight. That way, there’s no way to not be right at the end of the road.
  • Then the enablers They ask: But what can be done? And one says summon the mobilization of the people and immediately they answer “but, with a march it will not be solved etc. etc.”, caricaturing the issue, because we all know that “with a march” the correlation of forces is not changed. When one speaks of mobilization one speaks of a general awarenessa clarification in the eyes of the majority of the fraudulent nature of the debt and a call to organizations that have “fire power” (the unionslas Social Organizations) whose constituents are the most affected by the policies imposed by the Monetary Fund, to put the majorities of the country in such a disposition that they must be taken into account by hierarchs of the organizations.
  • Because — let’s see — we know how the powerful generate correlations of force in their favor: with money, corruption, using the weight of their own power. Now, how do popular majorities generate favorable correlations of force? Without the lobbying power of the powers that be, no more effective way has been found than through popular mobilization. The great tactics of the great negotiators that “have access” to many contacts, friends here or there. Now that is said about Massa (who has many contacts, etc.), but remember that the same was said about Guzmán (who was a friend of the Pope, who also knew Joe Biden and who could get help from the US to influence him). in the IMF, all verse).
  • Because, in addition, a general question must be taken into account: when Fund does not care about the twine that lends I say this a bit provocatively (because he cares), but before a credit transactiondebt is a political mechanism: he loan is a means to subordinate the country and then demand economic plansdelivery common goodslooting of those goods, international geopolitical alignment etc etc So, the Fund does not want to solve the debt issue, wants to perpetuate it because with debt as a means, you get more benefits overall. The debt issue it is not an economic problemIt is a question deeply policy.
  • If one becomes aware of this dimension that is essential in the issue of debt, one realizes that the Fund never reaches the fulfillment of the goals: if a “fiscal balance” is reached, they say that it is necessary to accumulate reserves; if reserves are accumulated, they say that a balance is lacking in the entire economy. So, there is no way to “conform” at the bottom. They are always running the goal, because if there is no resistance it is a sloped field all the time.
  • That is why we have to change the logic: because it is not a mere creditorIt is an organism that responds to imperial powers who want the subordination of the country. Facing him with the same decision is not just a minimum measure of national defenseis also —and increasingly— a matter of survival.

    • Politics / IMF / Sergio Massa / The Red Circle

    Source: www.laizquierdadiario.com



    Leave a Reply

    Related News

    the left holds a public hearing against layoffs and privatization of the railway

    the left holds a public hearing against layoffs and privatization of the railway

    November 22, 2024
    Sara Aagesen will replace Teresa Ribera as third vice president

    Sara Aagesen will replace Teresa Ribera as third vice president

    November 22, 2024