Neo-liberalism in latin america

[Brady]

I'm debating with some right-wing twat about the appalling effects of IMF neo-liberal policies on the South American working class. He keeps bringing up Chile, Brazil, Colombia and Mexico as examples that the system 'works'. Can anyone provide me with some statistics that will shut the dick up?

[thescarface1989]

I know Chile has one of the biggest gaps between the Poor and rich in the world

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0908770.html

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/apr2000/chil-a29.shtml

[Brady]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 12:56 am
I know Chile has one of the biggest gaps between the Poor and rich in the world

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0908770.html

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2000/apr2000/chil-a29.shtml
Just what I was looking for, thanks.

[Raúl Duke]

You could also mention the IMF's effects on Argentina; which has suffered from economic depressions (or something of that sort) possibly because of the IMF's neo-liberal policies.

Although, one good thing (I suppose) is that the workers there have recuperated their closed factories and turned them into collectives and such.

[Brady]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 01:12 am
You could also mention the IMF's effects on Argentina; which has suffered from economic depressions (or something of that sort) possibly because of the IMF's neo-liberal policies.

Although, one good thing (I suppose) is that the workers there have recuperated their closed factories and turned them into collectives and such.
Yeah, already mentioned the meltdown in Argentina. Needless to say he had no answer to that one.

[Pawn Power]

Statistics on the economic situation do indeed outline a growing gap between the rich and the poor, most dramatically after the neoliberal reforms in Bolivia.

Moveover, there has been growing popular resentment in Latin America against neoliberlism. The "water warriors" in Chile protested the privization of their water, resulting from state submitting to neoliberal reforms, eventually winning.

In Mexico, which has also seen increased poverty (particularly agrarian laborers in Chiapas) there has been popular resistance to neoliberalism- in the 1980's against Mexico's "MegaProject" and most notably in Chiapas where the Zapatistas have articulated a stance rejecting neoliberalism as detrimental to the indigenous peoples in the region.

[Red Scare]

You could talk about the corrupt neo-liberal governments run by drug lords in parts of Latin America that produce the Coca plant. You could bring up matters about how the workers there are oppressed and the people running the government are born and bred rich, and make policies that benefit the drug lords. You could also bring up how the United States is funding the very same government that gives money to the drug lords.

[Bilan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 10:46 am
I'm debating with some right-wing twat about the appalling effects of IMF neo-liberal policies on the South American working class. He keeps bringing up Chile, Brazil, Colombia and Mexico as examples that the system 'works'. Can anyone provide me with some statistics that will shut the dick up?
What the hell? None of those governments work. Infact, I'd say those are some of the worst. What the hell is he talking about?

[Raúl Duke]

Originally posted by Proper Tea is Theft+November 30, 2007 11:06 pm--> (Proper Tea is Theft @ November 30, 2007 11:06 pm)
[email protected] 01, 2007 10:46 am
I'm debating with some right-wing twat about the appalling effects of IMF neo-liberal policies on the South American working class. He keeps bringing up Chile, Brazil, Colombia and Mexico as examples that the system 'works'. Can anyone provide me with some statistics that will shut the dick up?
What the hell? None of those governments work. Infact, I'd say those are some of the worst. What the hell is he talking about? [/b]
Some people are just that stupid...

Although it wouldn't strike me surprising if someone here (where I live) argued the same things since Doral is the place where all the Latin American "bourgeoisie" (not sure exactly, but they are surely anti-left in any form. i.e. anti-chavistas.) go.

Once I heard someone argue that Pinochet did more good than bad because if not "they would have ended up like Cuba." ( :rolleyes: ; Democratic "Socialism" never did/will end up "like Cuba" and most importantly, and also unfortunately, any closer to communism.)

[Brady]

His argument is that the IMF rescued Brazil from financial collapse in 2002, and that Chile has recorded consistant economic growth over the past few years. I brought up the shocking inequality and he just said latin America has always been like that, neo-liberalism is the solution not the problem as it prevents governments from wastefully spending money they dont have etc... It goes without saying that he's deeply opposed to Chavez and insists that Venezuela will be bankrupt as soon as oil prices drop.

[Pawn Power]

Originally posted by [email protected] 01, 2007 04:00 pm
His argument is that the IMF rescued Brazil from financial collapse in 2002, and that Chile has recorded consistant economic growth over the past few years. I brought up the shocking inequality and he just said latin America has always been like that, neo-liberalism is the solution not the problem as it prevents governments from wastefully spending money they dont have etc... It goes without saying that he's deeply opposed to Chavez and insists that Venezuela will be bankrupt as soon as oil prices drop.
You could also mention the lengths state governments go to put in place neoliberal policies. In Mexico, Bolivia, and Chile, violence has been the "driving force" for that state in protecting corporations control over their citizenship. It is indeed ironic that as the state privatizes its governmental services under neoliberalism it simultaneously strengthens its oppressive forces. This can also be seen in your friends example of Brazil, where favelas are becoming increasingly poor which the privileged of the country become increasingly rich.

[Ander]

I would say that if those are supposed to be examples of neo-liberalism working, then that's fine, but that's exactly why I want to destroy it and create a new system.

If you really want to get into it though, there are a number of issues you can discuss.

First of all, there is a huge misconception that a high GDP and the amount of wealth a nation has means that the economic model it is following is working. What many capitalists fail to realise is that the majority of the wealth is held tightly by a small elite, especially in Latin America. What is the use of a country having a booming economy when the vast majority of the population is starving? As someone who has lived in Brasil, I can tell you that neo-liberalism has only served to create a massive gap between the rich and poor and nothing else. Sure, Brasil has one of the strongest economies in the region, but a huge percentage of the people living there are considered under the poverty line.

While a bit dated, the following source should paint a picture of the social situation in Brasil:


Originally posted by Human Development Report Office

Number of rural poor (million) (approximate), 2003
15.6
Poor as % of total rural population, 1998
51.4
Population living below $1 a day (%), 2001
8.2
Population living below $2 a day (%), 2001
22.4
Population living below the national poverty line (%), 1998
22.0
Share of poorest 20% in national income or consumption (%), 2001
2.4
You could easily look up poverty statistics for some of the other Latin American countries that your opponent mentioned and I can guarantee that most, if not all, will be quite similar or worse than the case of Brasil.


I brought up the shocking inequality and he just said latin America has always been like that, neo-liberalism is the solution
What kind of racist garbage is this? Latin America is just like that? So I'm guessing he thinks that Latin Americans need the kind white man to help them get things done? Give me a break, this is a ridiculous thing to say. It's been the constant meddling of capitalists and imperialists that has created problems for the region and kept them in the positions that they are stuck in. It's only staunch anti-imperialists like Chavez who have brought any kind of empowerment to Latin Americans.

As Pawn Power said, you could easily attack the way in which domestic and foreign governments act in order to enact or maintain neo-liberal policies. State repression as well as foreign (American for the most part) intervention has cost thousands of lives and wasted both time and money simply to keep savage capitalist practices in place.

I once saw a film that talked about the oppressive measures taken by Pinochet's regime in Chile. It mentioned such grotesque acts as placing rats inside of women's vaginas and other disgusting torture methods. Does that sound like progress in a modern world or some kind of barbaric practice more suited for the Dark Ages?

And to say that capitalism is the best system we've got! :lol: