By Julio C. Gambina on February 9, 2021
Recent protests in Haiti
The mobilizations in Haiti against the anti-democratic maneuvers of government perpetuation, as well as the demonstrations against the violence exercised by the carabineros in Chile, or the Ecuadorian elections themselves, are evidence of new social consensuses in Latin America critical of the liberalizing offensive of the most concentrated capital operating in the region. There are signs of social consensus disputes at a time of worsening health problems due to COVID19 and its economic impacts. These are aggravated by a slowdown that has been dragging on for some time and, to which are added structural problems that leave a serious balance of increased poverty, unemployment and loss of social rights. At the same time, there is an enormous concentration of wealth and income in the hands of a few. This confirms the trend of increasing inequality, as confirmed by the data published by the Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA)
A quick analysis of this situation points out the political difficulties in the region, with limits to the “neoliberal” offensive built since the early 70s of the 20th Century, challenged by the multiple resistances under new organizational forms of traditional subjects and new visibilities of organization and struggle of native peoples, feminism, environmentalism, trade unions and workers’ organizations in the territory, in cooperatives and in various forms of economic self-management. All this converged to make possible the processes of political change that were the subject of worldwide consideration in the early years of the 21st century. Let us remember that this process of change was hindered by a dynamic that appeared to favor rightward orientations with coups of a new type (Honduras, Paraguay, Brazil, Bolivia), and even electoral processes (Argentina, Brazil). Political volatility has been expressed in recent times in a strong critical imprint of the social dynamics of protest, especially in Chile and Haiti, but also by recent electoral processes in Mexico, Argentina, Bolivia and now in Ecuador, still uncertain until the second round next April.
There is a political crisis, in the region and in the world. It is curious to listen to the speeches of the main referents of the world capitalist system in order to understand the phenomenon of political crisis in contemporary capitalism. We have mentioned in previous articles about several pronouncements in the traditional Davos Forum, where adjustments are demanded in the policies to be sustained, taking into account the economic and sanitary gravity aggravated in the conditions of the evolution of the coronavirus in 2020. The same happens with the struggle of international organizations to sustain financial assistance policies in the face of the fear of the overflow of discontent and, ultimately, of the social conflict that threatens the “normality” of the regime of exploitation and plundering, which is the one that ensures profits and capital accumulation. In this sense, it is worth reading the 2008 Nobel Prize in Economics, Paul Krugman, demystifying the concern for public spending and public debt, to the detriment of the expected “confidence” of investors. The economist calls attention to the audacity required in the US today in the economic and political sphere to address the seriousness of the moment, in a message that goes against the hegemonic discourse against state intervention. The New York Times article points out to the new US Democratic administration not to make the same mistakes as in 2009, in the midst of the crisis, since they fell short with economic and financial assistance to avoid the aftermath of the great recession. It should be added that this lack of audacity aggravated the problems of a considerable part of the American population, which then turned its support to Donald Trump.
Let us look at the Ecuadorian case, with the triumph of Andres Arauz with 32% and the discussion for second place with two postulations close to 20% each and the fourth with almost 16% of the votes expresses the fragmentation of electoral options. Among the four options, they account for 90% of the social will. Of these options, only one expresses in all its magnitude the will to continue a reactionary course. The different coalitions that ran in the elections express social and political diversities that debate the course of the country, as it happens in most of the countries as part of the political crisis mentioned above. The electoral result of February 7 in Ecuador can be read as a defeat of the liberalizing offensive and against the turn to the right assumed by the government of Lenin Moreno that is coming to an end. Strictly speaking, the dynamics of struggle and organization of the popular movement will define the political course, beyond any electoral alchemy towards the second round. Lenin Moreno himself, with IMF assistance, could not sustain a legacy associated with adjustment and reactionary restructuring sustained by external investors.
Be it Ecuador, Haiti, Chile, Bolivia, Mexico, Argentina, or any other country of Our America, what can define the situation of political crisis is the organization of a will for substantial changes in the social relations of production and circulation, assuring new beneficiaries of the social product of labor among the majority of the population. The aspirations for change in countries defined by socialism will be able to overcome the isolation to which they are subjected to by imperial sanctions, which are renewed by US foreign policy if the whole of Latin America redefines its course in a perspective contrary to the logic of profit and liberalization and in favor of cooperation, solidarity and independence.
Source: Red in Defense of Humanity, translation Resumen Latinoamericano, North America bureau