Note: be sure to read Dave’s previous article, “Home thoughts from Uruguay”
First, you need generous proportions of monetized debt. The more you can muster the better. You will not get the results you want (rampant inflation and a widening of the gap between the rich few and the many poor) without it.
Second, you need to add a sprinkling of corrupt politicians. Their role is to provide the illusion that the ordinary people of any country (known these days as Plebs in Britain) actually have some say over their lives. In reality, politicians are there to make sure that genuine local economies and communities are dismantled and national assets and infrastructure are stripped bare. Now things are really cooking.
Third, add some genetically modified education; this will ensure that the capacity of the masses for independent critical thinking is destroyed.
Finally, don’t forget to ice it all with an artificially sweetened, bought and paid for mass media in order to mask the taste of the unsavoury filth that has been cooking inside – and viola!
The Argentine financial collapse of 2001-2
Next to Chile, Argentina is the South American country where the stench of neo-liberalism lingers the longest in the nostrils. I first came here nearly ten years ago. The Argentinean banking collapse and hyper-inflation of 2001-2 meant that it was an incredibly cheap destination for a traveller from Britain.
I remember staying in Buenos Aires’ famous Hotel de la Republica, with a balconied room that overlooked the city’s Obelisco, for just $14 a night. Nowadays, I have to pay rather more for what is, shall we say, accommodation of a somewhat more modest kind.
My other abiding memory of that first visit to this country was of the dented sheets of corrugated iron that were still covering the windows of the banks; a tangible relic of the desperation of the thousands of ordinary people who had lost their life savings at the flick of a switch. Even today, I know of many Argentineans who would prefer to keep their cash under their mattresses than ever entrust it to a bankster again.
History repeating itself? Looting returns to Argentine cities
Today, inflation has returned to Argentina with a vengeance. Even the official statistics, which few Argentineans believe, has inflation hovering around the 20% mark. A couple of months ago, Argentineans took to the streets again – just as they had done more than a decade ago – beating their pots and pans in peaceful protest against the diminishing value of their pesos.
On December 20th, looting broke out in the southern resort town of Barioloche. It soon spread to supermarkets on the outskirts of Buenos Aires and to the country’s other two great cities of Rosario and Córdoba.
Is this the history of ten years ago repeating itself? Not quite, it would seem. Ten years ago, the supermarkets were certainly looted, but the perpetrators then were making off with basic foodstuffs. The recent looting has been of luxury goods, such as televisions and computers. The mainstream Argentinean press has been quick to identify the looters as young people, who are neither educated nor employed.
Parallels with Britain: another symptom of globalization?
I find a curious parallel here with the rioting and looting that took place in Britain in 2011; initially in London, but which soon spread to other large British cities such as Liverpool, Manchester and Birmingham. There too, the looters were identified as predominantly young people who were neither employed nor educated (labelled by British officialdom as NEETS). They too looted designer and luxury goods, rather than the staples of daily living.
What is happening here? Is this the next step in the dismantling of the social fabric that is being ushered in by globalization? There are, I think, several factors that may be causing this trend – if indeed it is a trend.
Economic asset stripping and social collapse go hand-in-hand: and it’s being done deliberately
One consequence of globalization is that the majority of people in certain geographical areas become consumers of goods, rather than producers of wealth. The culture of consumerism has been carefully crafted as the counterpoint to the globalist strategies of outsourcing and the removal of manufacturing jobs from certain traditional industrial communities. (In my experience, places such as Michigan in the United States and the north of England are two regions to have suffered acutely from this quite deliberate economic asset stripping).
Hence, in these regions, large sections of the population no longer have the wages to buy consumer goods; neither can they participate in the lifestyle images constantly dangled before their eyes by the corporate media. They are repeatedly being urged by today’s not-so-hidden persuaders to buy, buy, buy, but they do not have the means to do so. Is it any wonder then that they take matters into their own hands?
The deliberate erosion of higher human values, or globalist social engineering
What is more, we are seeing a world-wide deliberate erosion of traditional communities with their distinct identities and strong value systems that have been grounded in ethical and spiritual principles other than the material. Globalization is replacing these local and natural cultures with variations on the theme of a manufactured celebrity culture that is rooted in nothing more than superficial ostentation and glitter.
This goes hand-in-hand with inculcating the “need” to acquire certain pre-defined lifestyles and their associated global brands. This drive towards materialism is effectively removing any restraint from going out to forcibly take what you are told to aspire towards if you do not have the means to do it “legitimately”.
The so-called education that young people now receive does nothing to enable them to appreciate and develop any sense of higher human values. Indeed, it does quite the reverse. Young people are taught that they have to strive in an “ever-more competitive global marketplace” to be a success. What packaged and processed knowledge they are taught is done so solely to test their potential for being a productive unit in that fictional marketplace. It has nothing to do with enabling them to become happy self-reliant and compassionate human beings. The majority, of course, cannot succeed in this fictional marketplace by definition, simply because they are not meant to.
Whilst this may be true of countries like the US or Britain, what of Argentina? A few years ago, an Argentine friend told me of a growing trend in murders in particular parts of Buenos Aires. People were being killed, it seemed, simply because they were wearing certain designer labelled clothes that their murderers wanted.
In today’s media-driven free-for-all anything-goes world, acquisition trumps all else, moral sensibility and human life included. It is no coincidence that the recent looting in Argentina took place just before Christmas; the time of the year when the urge to acquire even more consumer goods is at its strongest.
As above, so below: cause and effect?
You may think that Renaissance Hermeticists were simply being superstitious when they invoked the ancient dictum, “As above, so below,” but in one respect at least their identification of affinities between apparently unconnected factors has the ring of truth about it: look to the higher echelons of the economic and social ladder to understand what is happening below.
Greed, a lack of compassion and rampant acquisitiveness are all equally hallmarks of the globalist ruling elites and their more visible political servants. The Argentinean commentator and polemicist Adrian Salbuci has made this very point many times, which he characterises as the replacement of the rule of law with the rule of power. In short, he sees those who would like to see a New World Order as simply a bunch of gangsters, lacking in any moral or ethical sensibilities and intent on enslaving the rest of us. He believes Argentina has been, and continues to be, the testing ground for many of the plans hatched by the globalists. [i]
The Liberal Democrat “academic” perspective on today’s Argentina
Others see the situation in Argentina today in a rather more nuanced way. James Petras [ii] considers the current Argentine government of Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner as being caught somewhere between a rock and a hard place. His view is that she is a populist and largely progressive President, who is finding it difficult to finance her worthy program of social reforms, largely because Argentina is being squeezed in the international money markets by EU and US banking interests.
Even so, Petras does recognise that the Kirchner presidency has been keen to embrace neo-liberalism. He points out that Kirchner has opened up the country to foreign speculators and has relaxed the laws governing the spraying of toxic chemicals near agricultural communities. Ms. Kirchner, it would seem, is a great friend of Monsanto and their ilk.
Squaring the circle of neo-liberalism and “progressive” politics can’t work and isn’t meant to
Until recently, Kirchner’s policy of progressive reform, coupled with neo-liberalism had seemed to work. However, with the increased credit squeeze in the international money markets and the resulting economic hardship, a curious opposition alliance between the left and right has emerged.
In addition to the recent rioting, there has been a general strike and other mass protests. This was why the Kirchner presidency was quick to denounce the trade unions as being behind the spate of looting before Christmas. It was, of course, characteristic political expediency on her part, but it does reflect a growing paradox in world politics: an apparently left-of-center government that embraces neo-liberalism, drawn into conflict with alliances between the more radical left and the right.
Kirchner’s government reminds me of Blair’s New Labour Project in Britain. It too was a self-proclaimed “progressive” government that did introduce reforms, such as a minimum wage and tax credits. (Kirchner has greatly increased the minimum wage in Argentina). At the end of the day, however, such reforms and self-avowed progressiveness mean very little to ordinary people.
In Argentina today, there is an ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor. Likewise, New Labour left power in Britain in 2010 without making any impact at all on the gap between the rich and poor; today, that gap is wider than it was forty years ago. [iii]
The problem with such governments is that they do little more than provide a window-dressing of social justice, whilst at the same time they embrace wholeheartedly neo-liberalism and the globalization agenda. It is the latter that has the real impact on countries and economies. The multi-nationals and corporate banking interests are the real ones calling the shots.
Kirchner is doing the bidding of international bankers and corporations in her policy of developing international agri-businesses and mining at the expense of locally-based manufacturing. The “social justice” of a minimum wage means nothing if inflation is spiralling above 20%, even if the country may be able to import cheap wheelbarrows from China so that workers can take their wages home.
There’s always cash to spend on surveillance and on limiting individuals’ freedom
Curiously, although there are now no resources in Argentina to alleviate poverty, or to promote locally based industry, and therefore boost employment, there is plenty of money to spend on developing biometric identity cards for all of Argentina’s 40 million or so citizens.
Again, this is another parallel with New Labour in Britain, which was obsessed with spending some £4.5 billion (over $7 billion), on a scheme that was scrapped before it was ever implemented. I am waiting for a forthcoming pronouncement from the Kirchner presidency explaining how their new biometric system will help put an end to rioting and looting in the future.
Didn’t you just know you always needed it? It is invariably more profitable to treat the symptoms than tackle the root causes, just take a page out of the book of Big Pharma.
What the ordinary Argentineans, rather than US academics, say
James Petras’ portrayal of Kirchner as essentially well-meaning does not have the ring of truth about it; at least from what I have gleaned from my conversations with ordinary Argentineans I have met recently.
They speak of someone who courts popularism for her own ends in a way that reminds me of the last days of Republican Rome. Her supporters love daubing slogans on to walls and, if you dare to speak out and question the effectiveness of her policies, you are denounced by them ad hominem as a guerrilla, rather than being engaged in a political debate.
Cristina has made good use of the dispute with Britain over the Malvinas (Falklands), a subject dear to the Argentine heart, as a way both of courting popularity and of distracting public attention from internal economic and social problems. Yet at the same time, the Argentinean Malvinas veterans of the 1980s war with Britain have been treated shamefully by her presidency.
It’s about the oil, stupid
Incidentally, the real reason Britain and Argentina went to war, and continue to dispute the Malvinas/Falklands, is that there is an immense oil field surrounding the Islands. Cristina’s nationalization of the oil company YPF, formerly a subsidiary of the Spanish oil giant Repsol, should really be seen in the context of this dispute.
Feudalism 2.0 comes to Argentina
Several Argentineans I have met also speak of neo-feudalism, where whole tracts of this vast and sparsely populated country are under the control of certain rich and powerful vested interests. These can be multinational corporations (a policy that Kirchner has been keen to pursue), the old land owning elite, or the political elite.
It is little wonder then that I have heard many comments about democracy being apparent, rather than real, in today’s Argentina. This could be dismissed as mere cynicism were it not for the fact that Argentina was a military dictatorship until comparatively recently. Many of the people I have spoken to are all too well qualified to talk about life under totalitarianism.
The Kirchner dynasty: politics or soap opera? Confused? You will be!
Another recurrent theme brought up in my conversations is that of corruption. Even if you dismiss Adrian Salbuchi’s characterisation of Cristina Kirchner and her deceased husband, the former President Nestor Kirchner, as El Matrimonio Delictivo Kirchner (the Criminal Kirchner Marriage – a sort of Argentinean version of the Clintons), there is much talk amongst ordinary folk these days of patronage and of dirty deals being struck.
Just as in recent US politics, it all has a rather dynastic feel to it. Nestor’s sister, Alicia de Kirchner, served as Nestor’s minister for social affairs when he was governor of the province of Santa Cruz in the 90s. When Nestor became President in 2003, he appointed ] sister Alicia to his cabinet as social affairs minister. Two years later, Alicia was elected to the Argentine Senate, replacing sister-in-law Cristina, who just happened to decide to stand for a different seat in the same election.
Evidently, the burdens of democratic representation proved too much for Alicia so brother Nestor welcomed her back with open arms to her former cabinet position in 2006. The latest twist in this dynastic game of musical chairs is that Alicia has been chosen, fait acompli, as a candidate for Deputy of the Province of Buenos Aires in the forthcoming elections in 2013, thereby bypassing the normal candidate selection process.
Jack-booted skeletons in Alicia de Kirchner’s closet
If all this is not enough, recently details have emerged of Alicia’s murky past when she apparently worked for the Military Junta in the social affairs department of Santa Cruz Province during the 70s and 80s. Needless to say, questions are being asked about why this particular part of Alicia’s career history mysteriously disappeared from her résumé. [iv] In this context, the alternative media in Argentina has been keen to point out the shallowness of her pronouncements about human rights. (Have you noticed how politicians these days never talk about individual liberties any more, but always use this politically correct terminology?).
Hints at how the political marionettes are controlled in Britain and Argentina
There is something in Alicia de Kirchner’s political career, apart from its incestuousness, that reminds me of that of Peter Mandeleson (a close friend Nathan de Rothschild and an arch globalist) in the Blair and Brown Governments in Britain. Like the proverbial English bad penny, he always seemed to return to a position of power, notwithstanding any scandals and dirty deals that came to light over the years. My contention is that he was a direct link to the puppet masters and therefore was the real power behind the political initiative that was manifested to we, the British people, as the New Labour Project.
Kenneth Clark plays a similar role in today’s British Government. He has been instrumental in destroying our ancient system of Common Law, as well as in the implementation of secret courts. In a recent re-shuffle of the British cabinet, he has been given a free role to intervene in policy development across all of the British Departments of State. Oh yes, and he just happens to be a Bilderberg steering committee member too. When you identify these people, you also find the real agenda behind the political masquerade.
Cristina and Alicia: ushering in the New World Order in Argentina?
What is so telling about the interesting career of Alicia de Kirchner is that she has consistently worked in a position of power, formulating social policy, regardless of whether it was for the military dictatorship, or the supposedly “progressive” government of brother Nestor. Some people would argue that social policy is closely allied, of course, to social engineering.
I am left with the uneasy feeling that Alicia may be making a career out of dismantling the social fabric of Argentina, as much as sister-in-law Cristina has done so through selling off the country’s national assets to the multi-nationals. Watch this space; I sense that Argentina is about to experience some more interesting times in the years to come.
One World Agenda, but with different factions to divide and rule
Petras’ analysis of today’s Argentina falls short of the mark because it fails to recognize the most fundamental dynamic that is taking place in the country, and throughout the world. For example, he sees Cristina de Kirchner’s enthusiasm for Mercosur – the South American trading bloc – as something positive. In his thinking, it allows Argentina, and its other trading partners, to be free of the influence and control the United States.
In reality Mercosur and all other such initiatives to transcend national boundaries and sovereignty (NAFTA and the EU are but two) are just the latest way of setting up new dialectics to divide and conquer the people of the world. He perhaps needs to revisit his copy of Nineteen Eighty Four. After all, Orwell had been an insider; he knew what the game plan really was.
Behind the curtain of apparent difference, the same agenda creeps forward with a slow and monotonous certainty wherever you are in the world. As shocked as I had been to discover Argentina’s enthusiasm for biometric identity cards, I had never expected to find its Mercosur partner, Bolivia, adopting the same policy; but it has.
In Britain, even though popular opposition to the New Labour biometric scheme meant it was scrapped when the coalition came to power, the current government is working hard to achieve the same ends by more diverse means. There are other policies on this agenda too, of course.
You can recognize them because they creep forward, no matter what we the people of the world want, think, or do to stop them. Look at genetic modification, vaccinations and nuclear power, to name but a few. We can stop this incremental slide towards slavery only when we recognize that we are being sold a pack of lies by the political elites who have been bought and paid for long ago.
Edited by Madison Ruppert
Source
No comments:
Post a Comment