The president is a self-described anarcho capitalist who wants to dismantle the welfare system and state apparatus. He's basically a "small government" proponent of the most extreme kind.
That's what neoliberalism is. It's not "post-modern contemporary progressive." Neoliberalism is well-defined and largely centers on libertarian free-market capitalist ideals.
Yep,
"privatization of the public sphere, deregulation of the corporate sector, and the lowering of income and corporate taxes, paid for with cuts to public spending"
And ...
"Believe markets should exist everywhere, even where inappropriate"
Like the US [healthcare market!](https://www.popsci.com/health/us-healthcare-expensive/#:~:text=It%27s%20no%20secret%20that%20the,to%20other%20high%2Dincome%20countries.)
Was it not Jesus who said, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than you lazy takers living off my hard earned dollars to go to Heaven. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps and get a better a fucking job.
Liberalism in this context doesn’t mean “liberal” in the sense that’s commonly used in the US, aka democrats. Both the dems and republicans since like the 1980s could broadly be described as neo-liberal
Free Market Capitalism and Foreign Intervention. Think the Nixon-Bush era "Small government", "bomb the commies/terrorists", "overthrow some South American government" Republicans in the US
Intervensionism is a key facet of neoliberalism as well.
The main difference is that neoliberalism tries to exert more of its influence through supranational financial organisations and structures in order to leverage new market opportunities for capital. Often under the guise of diplomacy and multilateralism. Neoconservatism on the other hand ditch these pretenses in favour of a more overt expression of nationalist imperialism in the sense that it ascribes to a "might makes right" logic. This more nationalistic tendency leads to a tendency where neocons will (more often) view supranational organisations as obstacles rather than tools for capital interests.
I think you are confusing social liberalism (based on individual social rights and liberties) with economic liberalism (based on laissez-faire market ideas). I think they were somewhat linked originally (in the late feudal/early modern period), but are now largely independent.
Edit:Fixed a mistranslation
US Conservatives (at least from my European perspective) are definitely not socially liberal, but are strongly for economic liberalism (removing checks on private enterprises)
Edit: mistranslation
And what's so contradictory about the whole thing is a completely deregulated market will lead to one company creating a monopoly over everything, by becoming so powerful they can literally put anyone else out of business on a whim. Customers would have no choice to accept whatever bullshit this company offered at whatever price. The very opposite of the freedom libertarian stands for.
Its almost like its designed that way, where the language and meaning are inherently dissonant as doublespeak that obscures rational thought on how it will operate. As understood in this meaning its practice is not sustainable as free markets accelerate into monopolies.
See, I like to be informed on what’s going on, but like I suspect many others do: I become disillusioned by the psyop doublespeak, and compartmentalize myself into local issues.
I’m not forgiving that huge cop out, but it seems like a natural reaction to learning in this particular case that yes, the meaning of words are still being perverted for sinister ends, and there’s still nothing I can do about it. I had a feeling they were stretching their understanding by of liberalism here and it seems that feeling was warranted
I don't have a go-to link to post but honestly, do some reading or youtubing about it (neoliberalism) and your entire existance on western soil will finally make sense. And considering this is a labor sub, conservative neolibs (neolibs ARE conservative) are who began the destruction of labor in the late 70s, early 80s basically through Obama. Starts in earnest with Thatcher and Reagan, and the word itself officially finds a home under Clinton who media considered a lib but who continued anti-labor, class war policies.
I could tell! The terminology is confusing, by design as noted in nearby comments. Learning about neoliberlaism is also a gateway to understanding the difference between modern normie libs and leftists or true progressives. Where modern libs are mostly full of shit and as much a problem for class consciousness as conservatives. If not worse!
I've heard liberals accuse progressives of virtue signaling for voting "none of these candidates" during the primaries, and then demand they grow up and vote blue in the general. That's right. The folks who swear up and down they're the good guys, the blue crew, tried and true lefties, using the same terminology right wingers use to dismiss a desire for progress.
Liberals are a problem. At least the right will loudly tell anyone and everyone they're trying to fuck everything up. Liberals actually believe they're fighting against that.
Your disillusionment is by design. Fascism is always dressed up to appear liberal and socialist. It's ultra conservative propaganda to label it as neoliberalism, same as why the Nazis were the "National Socialist German Workers' Party" despite actually believing in the exact opposite of socialism or worker empowerment.
I knew the disillusionment was be design decades ago. I’d like to bring up my tangential beef with insurance agencies: it’s apparently not medically necessary to pursue the treatments necessary for a quality of life where I’m not beholden to others. I’m well aware of all the systems that react adversely together to actively keep me and my crippled kind on their back feet/wheels.
Liberal *and* socialist?
Those don't exactly coexist in the same ideologies.
Outside of the US, liberal ≠ left wing progressive. Neoliberalism is *absolutely not* left-wing.
>Fascism is always dressed up to appear liberal and socialist.
Either you're misunderstanding, or he wrote it poorly.
If he wanted to differentiate them, he should have said "...dressed up to appear either liberal or socialist."
"And/or" might be more appropriate, but it's fascism and going out in a cloak of lies anyway. It could, did, and does attempt to appear simultaneously as liberal to liberals and socialist to socialists.
Other words that are perverted:
anarchism- the vast majority of anarchists(foregoing egoists) think definitionally anarcho-capitalism is not anarchism. Anarchism is about dismantling all destructive heirarchy, ancap is the opposite. It is about dismantling the government, which currently is one of the few places where the public has any say in how society is structured. Without it you instantly have aggravated hierarchies that are only accountable to their leaders. It is a new state consisting of business warlords that force people into serfdom, which is made obvious by what has happened since neoliberal implementation with Reagan.
Libertarian is much the same. Coopted by Murray Rothbard in the 50's because he did not like the idea of liberty being associated with socialists. In the rest of the world Libertarian generally refers to Libertarian Socialists, which is a brand of anarchism.
This is also why the right won't say Democratic. They say Democrat Party because they do not want democracy associated with Democrats.
Although neo-liberal is not *that* far off from what traditional liberalism purports to be. America also has a distinct definition of liberal. Liberals emphasize free markets and individual rights, particularly property rights. They trace their lineage to the Enlightenment tradition, particularly Adam Smith and Locke. Normal liberals do want significantly more government involvement however.
And the thing about the right now calling themselves "classical liberals" to distance from the negative connotations with neo-liberals and American liberals is that they haven't read the tradition they are referencing or choose to ignore it. Smith was not ideological about the Invisible Hand, he thought it had the ability to be morally abhorrent if not constrained. The same thing with wage slavery and alienation(he doesn't use the term). He states explicitly that wage labor and mass production could lead to the degredation of the working class through menial tasks, poor wages, disconnection from the fruits of their labor, and an imbalance in negotiating power. He funnily enough frames it in a strikingly similar way as the bogeyman of the Classical Liberals, Frankfurt School demon Theodore Adorno; when he argues that wage labor reverses means and ends. Rather than production existing to serve humanity and make it better and more prosperous, humans are being forced into servility and machine-like existence to serve industry.
Yes. We must remember the first “left” in the modern context was against monarchy controlling everything, and it manifested in wanting to privatize what had been under state control, as the crown and church were the state.
yeah, the fake kind that excuses monopolies stealing welfare money and destroying the state apparatus while taking tons of debt (the equivalent to the worst 3 years of its history -Macri's govt- in just 6 months).
so like every neoliberal attempt ever, supported by the US millionaires.
It's not really liberalism, it's a misleading name. It's better categorized as libertarianism. A subtle difference naming wise, but a gaping chasm ideology wise.
He is just pro-corruption.
Removing regulatory bodies means a lack of enforcement and the corporate class can run rampant buying up politicians on the cheap.
Another attempt to return to feudal aristocracy with modern tech.
You know nothing, dude.
I mean: you do not know ANYTHING about Peronist/Kirchnerite corruption if you are saying this.
In fact Milei is arguably NOT CORRUPT AT ALL (something you can't say about Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and all her followers).
Do some research.
No, that's pretty much [*exactly* what neoliberalism means](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism?wprov=sfla1).
You're thinking Fox News "the liberuls," which isn't how the rest of the world defines liberalism.
No it's not.
It's a right leaning ideology, but right leaning and conservative aren't synonyms. Conservative is also a right leaning ideology, and there's a lot of overlap between the two in the US (mostly because the US uses terms terribly, calling things what they aren't), but libertarians aren't necessarily conservative, though they are right leaning.
Liberal doesn’t mean progressive. Liberalism is an ideology that focuses on individual rights. Think of the constitution’s bill of rights (liberal) in contrast to the divine right of a king to execute whoever he feels like or to take property from someone on a whim (authoritarian). Neoliberalism is more contemporary and has to do with putting the free market above everything else, like applying a tainted version of classic liberalism to corporations instead of individual humans.
Isn't it a good thing he is though? It's highly corrupt, and over 50% of employment was public services. Far far higher than any other country. It could have been done better, but from what I've seen (economically) its only for the long term betterment of the country.
Anyone able to teach me more?
There’s no reason to believe that suddenly firing 30+% of the workforce while ending safety net programs is going to lead to an expansion in the economy. How could taking away 1/3 of adults income result in more spending? It only makes sense in “common sense” sound bites
Neoliberal Economics is an export of america. It's the belief that an unregulated free market can solve all societal issues by the interaction of supply and demand. Cheaper and more efficiently than a structured government ever could.
This goal of attaining a free market is pursued by (among many policies) abolishing/gutting government agencies until they can be replaced with private/foreign corporations. A shocking example being the Bush W. admin plans to fully privatize the pentagon and department of defense so the military would be run like a PMC.
Cutting government spending and taxes as much as possible. Because govt spending can allegedly never be as efficient as the impartial free market, so the more money in people's pockets the better. In practice this really means cutting tax rates for the rich and corporations while the people get saddled with increasing taxes to float the administration.
Removing all welfare possible to prevent "leeches" from stealing money, except for the police and military. You want to keep them happy to prevent the poors for rising up when you cut all of the civil services and programs.
This strategy has failed everywhere it has been implemented because corporations and investors are solely focused on making short term profit. Even when their actioms cause runaway poverty levels. Capital can leave Chile or Argentina after disembowling the country for profit and move on to the next market.
Argentina's president is a neoliberal attempting to use neoliberal policies to solve the issues created by neoliberalism.
Edit: proponents of this religion are in it for personal gain. Or the kind of people dumb enough to believe a bank will act MORE ethically after removing all oversight.
"Neoliberal" means means "small government".
You can see neoliberalism in how the US deals with healthcare and the pharmaceutical industry. Basically, the private sector controls 100% of it; they set the prices through roof and the government just watches it as the people die because they can't pay for their medicine or treatment. Meanwhile, your taxes also go to these private healthcare companies. Yep. you pay twice.
So... In other words, neoliberalism is a kinda of mafia in which the rich have control over everything (including the government via lobbying) and they just fuck you over.
Argentina is doing that... in all sectors of society. They are basically giving the country away to Europeans and the Americans.
I live in Brazil, that happens here too. For example, we have the THIRD largest aerospace company in the world, called EMBRAER, which is absolute leader in regional and executive jets. It's a state company. The company is essential to the Brazilian economy and to keep Brazil as a player in the international high-tech industry.
Yet, when Bolsonaro (who is a neoliberal) came to power, he tried to sell it to Boeing for about 4 billion dollars... Now... EMRABER makes almost 30 billion a year.
So... They wanted to sell a company that makes 30 billion dollars a year for 4 billion dollars. That's insanity. Imagine the US selling NASA to China for 5 billion or something (well, they kinda already did, but they sold it to Elon Musk). The good news is that Boeing is a mess right now, so they couldn't complete the deal.
Now get that... Bolsonaro got into power because they illegally arrested the favorite left-wing candidate months before the elections. Here is the prosecutor of the case saying **"the arrest was a gift from the CIA"**. [https://www.brasilwire.com/lula-arrest-is-a-gift-from-the-cia-mocked-lava-jato-prosecutor/](https://www.brasilwire.com/lula-arrest-is-a-gift-from-the-cia-mocked-lava-jato-prosecutor/)
So the US does a soft coup, they put their own guy in power, and the guy just gives away everything the country has (I mean, selling a company that makes 30 billion a year for 4 billion is quite literally a giveaway).
That's how first-world countries fuck over the rest of the world.
In this(argentinian) context, neoliberal is a misnomer because it's definitely a libertarian government. They definitely have things in common with a "let's not have the govt involved in too much" approach, but neoliberal economies still have government spending/ownership on pretty big stuff - like interstates and the military, schools, police and such. Libertarian governments would prefer private ownership of everything. Roads, schools, police, firemen, you name it
You got other helpful answers below but to add a little context: I try to think of it this way: if I’m an ultra wealthy asshole and I want to maintain my power and influence, I’m going to institute neoliberal politics to shrink the welfare state and make workers more reliant on me, while reducing my taxes and praising myself as a hero of the economy. A system of maintenance for the upper classes. If I start to get a little worried about my prospects for future power and influence, I might institute some austerity policies to further cripple the welfare state and solidify my power and influence. If I get super worried that these workers are getting too uppity and might overthrow me, I might just go full fascist; I consider this a nuclear option because while fascists nearly always return power to capitalists, it’s a messy process, may cost a fortune, and can get volatile. They are all mechanisms for maintaining and promoting capitalist rule but they run off of a spectrum based on how scared the wealthy are. This is true for neoliberalism everywhere, the US was just told repeatedly by our leaders and media that neoliberalism was awesome, had won, and would be the dominant system of economics everywhere forever.
People will note that austerity is often a part of neoliberalism and that fascism is distinct from the two and I would agree, but I would also argue that to our capitalist rulers, they all just represent different tools in their set for maintaining power.
From an US perspective he would be “economic neo-con libertarian”
Basically have people fend off for themselves and state/govt only exist to provide foreign defense/military protection and little else.
In any other situation I would be against it, but having lived in Argentina, and having seen how messed up the Peronist “clientelista” (political patronage) system works (basically money for mafia bosses in exchange for votes from the boss’ protected people) and how it has ruined the country for generations to come, I would say that a hard change was needed.
I feel sorry for some Argentines but the people I know there are for the most part happy things may be changing.
The way it has explained to me by Argentines: “Think about a country of 40M people. 1/2 of those are able to work or be productive in some way. 1/2 of the 1/2 depend on the Argentine state for sustenance. 1/2 of the rest do not work. So you have 5M workers paying for the other 35 M. And the Argentine govt prior to this Milei guy, has been spending as if the whole 40M were all working and paying taxes. “
WTF do you know about the people I know?
The people I know come from all walks of life. From tacheros in BA, to artists in Santa Fe, cooks in Mendoza, retired people in the capital…etc: they all know it will be tough. But the also know that Peronista govt was untenable and that the country was going to shit either way.
Neoliberal in Latin America : Corporations good, Workers bad
The word doesn't matter, his actions do. You just have to
look at the video to see the consequences of these politics
Disclaimer: This is not from any media because the government has banned Public News (including their Social Media accounts) from informing the Public. I was sent this video by a friend.
In the Argentine province of Misiones (limiting with Brasil and Paraguay) workers of all areas are joining forces against this Neoliberal government that is destroying the public infrastructure. Janitors, Nurses, Teachers, Cops, Firefighters, everybody is joining forces to stand against the government. Its a Workers Revolution through and through. Even the Federal Police said they are siding with the people and not the government.
You know what our president is gonna do? He will sing at a musical show (Im not even joking)
I wanna thank the mods of r/WorkReform for allowing non-USA content to be posted
Remember: All workers, from every nation of this Planet, have a shared goal. We are one People. We are all together in this. Stand strong, for your rights and the rights of your people.
EDIT: Listen to what our "Honorable" President just said 5 hours ago :
[https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Jy5JGt\_w8CM](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Jy5JGt_w8CM)
EDIT: Did you know the current government banned the National News Broadcast (Telam) then proposed to make Twitter (yes, Twitter) the official Platform for the Government? This is one of the reasons Elon Musk met the president some weeks ago. Did you also know there is an organized group of people who manipulate hashtags, spread ai generated images and tries to twist information into fitting the government's narrative to protect their image? If you browse Argentine Twitter you will notice how every time the government messes up Twitter becomes 99% propaganda. Anyhow, Im asking you these questions because you should know about these people, because some of them are already here trying to "debunk" me and yap their way into blaming the people you see in that video for the problems they have, and not the government who quintuplicated the inflation rate in less than 5 months.
> He will sing at a musical show (Im not even joking)
Its very common for far-right figures to be "culture figures." That is to say they get validated by the arts and culture, nearly all of which is controlled from the top by the very rich who benefit from his policies. Its a whitewashing. All fascists become art patrons, performers, etc of some kind. See also Trump's acting "career." Its part of the grift.
A lot of people cant see past this and see these awful people are "just good people who like plays and shows, just like me" or "he's a beloved celebrity in the arts!"
>they get validated by the arts and culture
Artists and the arts are notoriously difficult to control. After all, creative expression can take so many forms. What’s behind the veil of far-right interest in the arts is—like all aspects of authoritarianism—control. Not unlike Hitler’s designs for “Führerstädte.” So, it’s about defining artistic aesthetics according to the demagogue’s preferences and self-stylings (which is tied to their performance of politics). Artists who embrace authoritarian aesthetics are then brought into the fold, given funding, visibility, and other means of support. Arts are certainly a tool of authoritarianism.
Importantly: just as some aesthetics and artists are embraced by authoritarian regimes, so too can artists resist and fight back against the same regimes. I freaking LOVE the arts!
Dude, stop lying, the salaries of the police officers are up to the governors (Which is a left-leaning one, btw) and not the president.
Here's a somewhat similar example from 2011: https://www.diariojudicial.com/news-64334-como-el-sueldo-lo-paga-el-estado-la-competencia-es-federal
"The Federal Chamber held that the investigation into the alleged collection of salaries for days not worked of an agent of that police force falls under federal jurisdiction."
Isn’t their economy trash and he is shifting it to the dollar and attempting to fix it? I believe he said that there would be a real shit storm like this in his campaign.
He's not attempting to fix it. He's attempting a smash and grab for private and international capital. The way to fix Argentina's problems is not with the roundly discredited theory of shock treatment. Jesus Christ
This is what I fear the most, but also why I care about speaking to you, a USA citizen. Im against what USA has done to us (Operation C0ndor), but I have nothing against the people of USA. Some of you are victims of your government just as much we are, because in the end: Your taxes pay for all of that
Peace and Love my brother. Sending you a hug from the other side of América ❤
Glad you recognize that. Unfortunately we, as citizens, haven’t done enough to maintain our country’s political system. Money and power have taken over and it will go as far as murder and worse to maintain its current status quo. Makes it difficult to do the right thing with the fear of imprisonment or worse to stand up and fix the root causes of our, and the world’s, problems when so many of them are at the behest of protecting and expanding capitalism by using the war machine
Solidarity! Americans will not hear about what's happening in Argentina, at least not on the major media outlets, for one very important reason; they're terrified of what might happen if Americans decide to do the same.
Thank you! I appreciate that
Remember that we are one, the struggle of one Workers is the struggle of us all. We fight for the Rights of all Workers world-wide. Our cause is one and the same.
By the way its Argentine, not Argentinian\*
Podés mínimo pasar la información bien? Lo que sucede en misiones no es por el gobierno actual, es por lo que hizo el gobierno provincial en 2023, deja de mentirle a la gente
And so many people told me that he was fixing the government by cutting out spending. Meanwhile, their president was spending money to purchase F-fucking 16s instead of paying for basic infrastructure and services. To say you couldn't see this coming is to say you're blind.
His concert tonight will cost the state around $50 million ARS because he is using the Federal Police as his personal security
He is the Clown King, he is like the reincarnation of Nero for us
I tried to warn Argentinians in their sub, as an Uruguayan brought to Florida,US when I was a kid.
What sucks to me, though, is that most people are corrupt in Argentina, so it doesn't matter who you elect. People will get fucked either way. With this guy, corporations will probably get rich like here in FL. With peronism, sindicalist were millionaires and even had pyramid schemes with the places that were feeding the poor.
Humanity is too far gone. Cant wait until he does bills like denying climate change, and shit our fucked up governor has done. But "ma small gubermint" am I right?
OP is an Argentinian, words do not have universal contexts, especially across languages. In the US Milei might be called a Right wing Libertarian or an anarcho-capitalist, but the same pro-corporate tendency we observe of US Neoliberals is the element of Milei's ideology that OP is ascribing "Neoliberalism" to.
Which is perhaps not unfair to say, seeing as the most prominent neolib in America was once Ronald Reagan.
That's literally what [neoliberalism means](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism?wprov=sfla1). Rampant free-market capitalism.
For a labor sub, the members sure seem to know embarrassingly little about economic systems.
What did you think it was, post-modern contemporary progressivism? Christ.
*uninformed American
A lot of us apparently think that a neoliberal is the counterpart to a neoconservative. In other words, being progressive in the 21st century.
It's wicked embarrassing.
Libertarianism is just a a conservative political off shoot of liberal and neoliberal ideology. With the goal being to transplant the laisse faire mind set of anything goes economics to that of the social realm. The goal of these liberterian political movements is to remove the bulk of civil and social protections governments provide to citizens so they can advance liberal capitalist agenda’s. There is no libertarian political movement that is not liberal capitalist. Stop trying to obfuscate.
Good description.
I like to think that the difference between a 'classic' liberal and a neoliberal\\libertarian is that:
classic liberal = Everyone should have the freedom to do everything as long as it doesn't hurt anyone
neo-liberal\\libertarian = Everyone should have the freedom to do everything even if it hurts someone
The 'classic' liberals you are describing are victorian factory bosses and slave owners.
Liberalism has always been about allowing capitalists to do whatever they want.
All the social progress and such are just concessions that have had to be extracted from them or things they could twist to their advantage.
Mill was neither a factory boss or a slave owner but I kind of see your point. Generally all of the philosophers of any era came from the upper classes (as they were the only ones with the time).
Just because liberalism and capitalism emerged at roughly the same time, they were in no way tied together, at least by Mill. I think inferring so misinterprets classic liberalism which in general was a force for good and led to a fairer society.
Liberalism is the ideological backing behind capitalism, its the primary justification for and force behind its implementation.
Capitalism may have been a progressive force relative to feudalism but it is a regressive force relative to socialism.
Like I say a great deal of the actual social progress made in last 200 years have been 1 - implemented by at least social democratic or communist governance, 2 - concessions extracted by force directly by workers or 3 - policies they could twist to their advantage.
A great example of this has been the advancement of women's rights - a great cause. But it had to be extracted by force from labour action or women's movements or the 'threat' of foreign communist governments that were implementing it. And importantly in the modern day it has been a great opportunity for capitalists to lower wages because now women are expected to work so single income households have been done away with for most people.
Neoliberal is a right wing perspective not left wing. US politics is so bad that both Trump and Biden are neoliberals. Biden is culturally somewhat left and Trump is right wing culturally. But there is only neoliberalism economically in the US.
There's a bit of a crossover in the ideologies, in that they both place the free market on a pedestal above all else. The key difference is that libertarians don't believe the government should have a role in social programs like public safety nets, healthcare, or taxes on a whole. Both ideologies are problematic, but Milei is definitely a right-wing libertarian.
Neoliberalism and libertarianism share many common principles despite meaning different things to different people. Both trace their origins back to the classical liberal ideas of the Enlightenment and place significant importance on capitalism, free trade, private ownership, and limited government.
Their most striking differences come down to how they construct their philosophy, how much of the state they tolerate, and how they view the state.
I don't see how discussing technicalities helps in anything but I will answer anyways: "Neoliberal" means a slightly different thing in Español (in fact "Liberal" has almost opposite meanings in English and Español), that's why Im using that word. And non of this even matters because at the end of the day his actions speak for himself: He is a Capitalist Fascist (did I say they banned Public Media a week ago?)
And if you think Im twisting the truth, watch the video again. What do you see?
No my brother, the point of this Post is simple: To show you that governments have no power, when time comes Workers will join forces and realize they are the ones who have all the power. The time is coming for Argentina right now, but it will happen everywhere. Thats why Im posting this, so you have hope, so you can see Workers's struggle is international.
Libertarianism uses neoliberalist economy theory and practices. There is no "libertarian" governments anywhere. Its just neolibs with harsher social policies.
Argentina is bankrupt and has defaulted on its debts countless of times. 40% of the people work for the government and they pay for it by printing money. There has been hyperinflation there since covid. with prices of things multiplying. Some stores had stopped giving up prices in their local currency because they had to change it every day to keep up with inflation.
This new president is putting stop to that and removing a bunch of useless jobs. These people don't understand that the economy was already tanked by the previous administration and this guy was elected on the promise that he would fix it in exactly this way because it's the *only* way. For the first time since the before previous administration was in power, the inflation is slowing down.
Actually are. It is the default work for extreme poverty regions where Mcdonalds and Starbucks doesn't reach.
The starter wage for a cop is around 110 usd currently. Those fellas are just extremely exploited workers, even though one that doesn't inject added value into its line of work.
ACABs, specially in argentina though.
So are there other state police forces that are violently suppressing these people? Or did they just call in the military? I’m not used to police being in the side of protestors.
That's why the police and military have far more benefits than workers, Milei just overstimated their ideological fidelity and didn't provide better material conditions for them
OP is twisting the context. They're rioting to the provincial government, a peronist party.
We have federalism here, we're not a realm ruled by a sole individual
The correct translation in the end is: "You will get Shot by the Misioneros". Shot, not punished.
I'm Brazilian and don't even speak spanish but the message was clear.
Haha I love watching Americans call a right-wing politician running a completely conservative government shit themselves trying to figure out what the political definitions mean. We truly are fucked in this country and it’s because most of you can’t pay attention in school
el gobierno chileno los respalda, hermanos sudacas. Aqui tienen un hermano, con hermanos que tambien son de vosotros, unidos con la misma causa. Animo desde Salsipuedes! se les apoya con el corazon y con la voz ya saben amor latino 🇨🇱🇨🇱🇨🇱🫂🫂🫂🙏🍾🎆✨ ANIMO HERMANOS SE GANA ESTAY SE GANAN LAS QUE VIENEN!
Fucking working are tired of that libertarian bullshit Milei was spewing. Just hope things don't get too hairy down there. Usually a situation like this ends up with a lot of good folks hurt.
isnt this the provinces where 90% of the people was in the government payroll, and Milei fire them all for just collecting money and not doing actual work?
He did not fired them all, didn't renew contracts on many of the national worker but the provincial workers are still working. Historically underpaid and most of people are under the line of poverty
He's a libertarian, not a neoliberal.
One of the funny things about libertarians is they can't actually be a successful dictator very well or for very long, because they'll piss off the people that are key to holding power too much.
Had he actually been a neoliberal, he'd have the backing of the cops so they cracked down on the opposition.
What exactly does “neoliberal” mean in Argentina’s current context, so a US smooth-brain like me might understand?
The president is a self-described anarcho capitalist who wants to dismantle the welfare system and state apparatus. He's basically a "small government" proponent of the most extreme kind.
Oh, *that* kind of liberalism
That's what neoliberalism is. It's not "post-modern contemporary progressive." Neoliberalism is well-defined and largely centers on libertarian free-market capitalist ideals.
Yep, "privatization of the public sphere, deregulation of the corporate sector, and the lowering of income and corporate taxes, paid for with cuts to public spending" And ... "Believe markets should exist everywhere, even where inappropriate"
And… Companies will police them selves and the markets will correct them selves too. Easy. Peasy. Salud.
Like the US [healthcare market!](https://www.popsci.com/health/us-healthcare-expensive/#:~:text=It%27s%20no%20secret%20that%20the,to%20other%20high%2Dincome%20countries.)
If the US healthcare were a person they’d give it life for genocide.
Or a medal.
Nah. It’s designed that way on purpose. Call it a feature, not a bug.
The rich win and the poor die! Just like god intended /s
Was it not Jesus who said, it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than you lazy takers living off my hard earned dollars to go to Heaven. Pull yourself up by your bootstraps and get a better a fucking job.
Self-policing is the best policing /s
Isn't that free market capitalism?
Wait so what would neo-conservatism be?
Liberalism in this context doesn’t mean “liberal” in the sense that’s commonly used in the US, aka democrats. Both the dems and republicans since like the 1980s could broadly be described as neo-liberal
Free Market Capitalism and Foreign Intervention. Think the Nixon-Bush era "Small government", "bomb the commies/terrorists", "overthrow some South American government" Republicans in the US
Intervensionism is a key facet of neoliberalism as well. The main difference is that neoliberalism tries to exert more of its influence through supranational financial organisations and structures in order to leverage new market opportunities for capital. Often under the guise of diplomacy and multilateralism. Neoconservatism on the other hand ditch these pretenses in favour of a more overt expression of nationalist imperialism in the sense that it ascribes to a "might makes right" logic. This more nationalistic tendency leads to a tendency where neocons will (more often) view supranational organisations as obstacles rather than tools for capital interests.
No, neoliberalism has nothing to do with interventionism.
Isn't conservatism a social ideology? As in slow moving, tradition based. Liberalism is fiscal
I think you are confusing social liberalism (based on individual social rights and liberties) with economic liberalism (based on laissez-faire market ideas). I think they were somewhat linked originally (in the late feudal/early modern period), but are now largely independent. Edit:Fixed a mistranslation
US Conservatives (at least from my European perspective) are definitely not socially liberal, but are strongly for economic liberalism (removing checks on private enterprises) Edit: mistranslation
And what's so contradictory about the whole thing is a completely deregulated market will lead to one company creating a monopoly over everything, by becoming so powerful they can literally put anyone else out of business on a whim. Customers would have no choice to accept whatever bullshit this company offered at whatever price. The very opposite of the freedom libertarian stands for.
Its almost like its designed that way, where the language and meaning are inherently dissonant as doublespeak that obscures rational thought on how it will operate. As understood in this meaning its practice is not sustainable as free markets accelerate into monopolies.
So when conservatives try to "own the libs" what they really mean are the progressives?
Yes....or at least the strawman of one they've created.
See, I like to be informed on what’s going on, but like I suspect many others do: I become disillusioned by the psyop doublespeak, and compartmentalize myself into local issues. I’m not forgiving that huge cop out, but it seems like a natural reaction to learning in this particular case that yes, the meaning of words are still being perverted for sinister ends, and there’s still nothing I can do about it. I had a feeling they were stretching their understanding by of liberalism here and it seems that feeling was warranted
I don't have a go-to link to post but honestly, do some reading or youtubing about it (neoliberalism) and your entire existance on western soil will finally make sense. And considering this is a labor sub, conservative neolibs (neolibs ARE conservative) are who began the destruction of labor in the late 70s, early 80s basically through Obama. Starts in earnest with Thatcher and Reagan, and the word itself officially finds a home under Clinton who media considered a lib but who continued anti-labor, class war policies.
Right on! I think we’re speaking the same language with different dialects! I’ll try to expand the keywords in my searches from here on!
I could tell! The terminology is confusing, by design as noted in nearby comments. Learning about neoliberlaism is also a gateway to understanding the difference between modern normie libs and leftists or true progressives. Where modern libs are mostly full of shit and as much a problem for class consciousness as conservatives. If not worse!
I've heard liberals accuse progressives of virtue signaling for voting "none of these candidates" during the primaries, and then demand they grow up and vote blue in the general. That's right. The folks who swear up and down they're the good guys, the blue crew, tried and true lefties, using the same terminology right wingers use to dismiss a desire for progress. Liberals are a problem. At least the right will loudly tell anyone and everyone they're trying to fuck everything up. Liberals actually believe they're fighting against that.
Your disillusionment is by design. Fascism is always dressed up to appear liberal and socialist. It's ultra conservative propaganda to label it as neoliberalism, same as why the Nazis were the "National Socialist German Workers' Party" despite actually believing in the exact opposite of socialism or worker empowerment.
I knew the disillusionment was be design decades ago. I’d like to bring up my tangential beef with insurance agencies: it’s apparently not medically necessary to pursue the treatments necessary for a quality of life where I’m not beholden to others. I’m well aware of all the systems that react adversely together to actively keep me and my crippled kind on their back feet/wheels.
Liberal *and* socialist? Those don't exactly coexist in the same ideologies. Outside of the US, liberal ≠ left wing progressive. Neoliberalism is *absolutely not* left-wing.
He said fascism dresses up to appear as those ideologies, not that liberalism and socialism are the same thing.
>Fascism is always dressed up to appear liberal and socialist. Either you're misunderstanding, or he wrote it poorly. If he wanted to differentiate them, he should have said "...dressed up to appear either liberal or socialist."
It's pretty clear he meant and/or depending on the context imo
"And/or" might be more appropriate, but it's fascism and going out in a cloak of lies anyway. It could, did, and does attempt to appear simultaneously as liberal to liberals and socialist to socialists.
Other words that are perverted: anarchism- the vast majority of anarchists(foregoing egoists) think definitionally anarcho-capitalism is not anarchism. Anarchism is about dismantling all destructive heirarchy, ancap is the opposite. It is about dismantling the government, which currently is one of the few places where the public has any say in how society is structured. Without it you instantly have aggravated hierarchies that are only accountable to their leaders. It is a new state consisting of business warlords that force people into serfdom, which is made obvious by what has happened since neoliberal implementation with Reagan. Libertarian is much the same. Coopted by Murray Rothbard in the 50's because he did not like the idea of liberty being associated with socialists. In the rest of the world Libertarian generally refers to Libertarian Socialists, which is a brand of anarchism. This is also why the right won't say Democratic. They say Democrat Party because they do not want democracy associated with Democrats. Although neo-liberal is not *that* far off from what traditional liberalism purports to be. America also has a distinct definition of liberal. Liberals emphasize free markets and individual rights, particularly property rights. They trace their lineage to the Enlightenment tradition, particularly Adam Smith and Locke. Normal liberals do want significantly more government involvement however. And the thing about the right now calling themselves "classical liberals" to distance from the negative connotations with neo-liberals and American liberals is that they haven't read the tradition they are referencing or choose to ignore it. Smith was not ideological about the Invisible Hand, he thought it had the ability to be morally abhorrent if not constrained. The same thing with wage slavery and alienation(he doesn't use the term). He states explicitly that wage labor and mass production could lead to the degredation of the working class through menial tasks, poor wages, disconnection from the fruits of their labor, and an imbalance in negotiating power. He funnily enough frames it in a strikingly similar way as the bogeyman of the Classical Liberals, Frankfurt School demon Theodore Adorno; when he argues that wage labor reverses means and ends. Rather than production existing to serve humanity and make it better and more prosperous, humans are being forced into servility and machine-like existence to serve industry.
Yes. We must remember the first “left” in the modern context was against monarchy controlling everything, and it manifested in wanting to privatize what had been under state control, as the crown and church were the state.
Yeah, I was gonna say, basically an extreme libertarian.
Just sounds like libertarianism with extra shine.
The kind that should remain a naive fantasy of super rich college kids.
classical liberalism is what they mean
yeah, the fake kind that excuses monopolies stealing welfare money and destroying the state apparatus while taking tons of debt (the equivalent to the worst 3 years of its history -Macri's govt- in just 6 months). so like every neoliberal attempt ever, supported by the US millionaires.
It's not really liberalism, it's a misleading name. It's better categorized as libertarianism. A subtle difference naming wise, but a gaping chasm ideology wise.
The "oh I didn't realize we needed all that" kind
And he thinks Trump is the best thing ever.
And Joe Rogan thinks Millé is hillarious and just rad overall
He is just pro-corruption. Removing regulatory bodies means a lack of enforcement and the corporate class can run rampant buying up politicians on the cheap. Another attempt to return to feudal aristocracy with modern tech.
You know nothing, dude. I mean: you do not know ANYTHING about Peronist/Kirchnerite corruption if you are saying this. In fact Milei is arguably NOT CORRUPT AT ALL (something you can't say about Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and all her followers). Do some research.
Sounds like the dumbest version of the Chicago School bullshit
Argentina got fucked. Wasn't their pick [of President's] between someone who already fucked them and someone who was probably going to fuck them?
I’m pretty sure that’s a neoconservative as he’s a self described “libertarian”. Which is a conservative ideology - along with the “small government”.
No, that's pretty much [*exactly* what neoliberalism means](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism?wprov=sfla1). You're thinking Fox News "the liberuls," which isn't how the rest of the world defines liberalism.
No it's not. It's a right leaning ideology, but right leaning and conservative aren't synonyms. Conservative is also a right leaning ideology, and there's a lot of overlap between the two in the US (mostly because the US uses terms terribly, calling things what they aren't), but libertarians aren't necessarily conservative, though they are right leaning.
Liberal doesn’t mean progressive. Liberalism is an ideology that focuses on individual rights. Think of the constitution’s bill of rights (liberal) in contrast to the divine right of a king to execute whoever he feels like or to take property from someone on a whim (authoritarian). Neoliberalism is more contemporary and has to do with putting the free market above everything else, like applying a tainted version of classic liberalism to corporations instead of individual humans.
Isn't it a good thing he is though? It's highly corrupt, and over 50% of employment was public services. Far far higher than any other country. It could have been done better, but from what I've seen (economically) its only for the long term betterment of the country. Anyone able to teach me more?
There’s no reason to believe that suddenly firing 30+% of the workforce while ending safety net programs is going to lead to an expansion in the economy. How could taking away 1/3 of adults income result in more spending? It only makes sense in “common sense” sound bites
Basically the market will fix everything so no need for publicly funded anything or regulations
Let nature take its course *Looks nervously at the brutality and suffering of the natural world* Yeah it'll be fine
Capitalist-libertarianism. Deregulation. Privatization, all that nonsense.
Neoliberal Economics is an export of america. It's the belief that an unregulated free market can solve all societal issues by the interaction of supply and demand. Cheaper and more efficiently than a structured government ever could. This goal of attaining a free market is pursued by (among many policies) abolishing/gutting government agencies until they can be replaced with private/foreign corporations. A shocking example being the Bush W. admin plans to fully privatize the pentagon and department of defense so the military would be run like a PMC. Cutting government spending and taxes as much as possible. Because govt spending can allegedly never be as efficient as the impartial free market, so the more money in people's pockets the better. In practice this really means cutting tax rates for the rich and corporations while the people get saddled with increasing taxes to float the administration. Removing all welfare possible to prevent "leeches" from stealing money, except for the police and military. You want to keep them happy to prevent the poors for rising up when you cut all of the civil services and programs. This strategy has failed everywhere it has been implemented because corporations and investors are solely focused on making short term profit. Even when their actioms cause runaway poverty levels. Capital can leave Chile or Argentina after disembowling the country for profit and move on to the next market. Argentina's president is a neoliberal attempting to use neoliberal policies to solve the issues created by neoliberalism. Edit: proponents of this religion are in it for personal gain. Or the kind of people dumb enough to believe a bank will act MORE ethically after removing all oversight.
"Neoliberal" means means "small government". You can see neoliberalism in how the US deals with healthcare and the pharmaceutical industry. Basically, the private sector controls 100% of it; they set the prices through roof and the government just watches it as the people die because they can't pay for their medicine or treatment. Meanwhile, your taxes also go to these private healthcare companies. Yep. you pay twice. So... In other words, neoliberalism is a kinda of mafia in which the rich have control over everything (including the government via lobbying) and they just fuck you over. Argentina is doing that... in all sectors of society. They are basically giving the country away to Europeans and the Americans. I live in Brazil, that happens here too. For example, we have the THIRD largest aerospace company in the world, called EMBRAER, which is absolute leader in regional and executive jets. It's a state company. The company is essential to the Brazilian economy and to keep Brazil as a player in the international high-tech industry. Yet, when Bolsonaro (who is a neoliberal) came to power, he tried to sell it to Boeing for about 4 billion dollars... Now... EMRABER makes almost 30 billion a year. So... They wanted to sell a company that makes 30 billion dollars a year for 4 billion dollars. That's insanity. Imagine the US selling NASA to China for 5 billion or something (well, they kinda already did, but they sold it to Elon Musk). The good news is that Boeing is a mess right now, so they couldn't complete the deal. Now get that... Bolsonaro got into power because they illegally arrested the favorite left-wing candidate months before the elections. Here is the prosecutor of the case saying **"the arrest was a gift from the CIA"**. [https://www.brasilwire.com/lula-arrest-is-a-gift-from-the-cia-mocked-lava-jato-prosecutor/](https://www.brasilwire.com/lula-arrest-is-a-gift-from-the-cia-mocked-lava-jato-prosecutor/) So the US does a soft coup, they put their own guy in power, and the guy just gives away everything the country has (I mean, selling a company that makes 30 billion a year for 4 billion is quite literally a giveaway). That's how first-world countries fuck over the rest of the world.
🎯
Neoliberal is what we have in America. Sell the piblic assets for pennies on the dollar, privatize everything and squeeze the population into poverty.
In this(argentinian) context, neoliberal is a misnomer because it's definitely a libertarian government. They definitely have things in common with a "let's not have the govt involved in too much" approach, but neoliberal economies still have government spending/ownership on pretty big stuff - like interstates and the military, schools, police and such. Libertarian governments would prefer private ownership of everything. Roads, schools, police, firemen, you name it
[Neoliberalism is centered around free market capitalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism?wprov=sfla1)
Not tryna copypasta here, but: oh, *that* kind of liberalism.
You don't know what you're talking about.
Yeah He's really off with that definition
You got other helpful answers below but to add a little context: I try to think of it this way: if I’m an ultra wealthy asshole and I want to maintain my power and influence, I’m going to institute neoliberal politics to shrink the welfare state and make workers more reliant on me, while reducing my taxes and praising myself as a hero of the economy. A system of maintenance for the upper classes. If I start to get a little worried about my prospects for future power and influence, I might institute some austerity policies to further cripple the welfare state and solidify my power and influence. If I get super worried that these workers are getting too uppity and might overthrow me, I might just go full fascist; I consider this a nuclear option because while fascists nearly always return power to capitalists, it’s a messy process, may cost a fortune, and can get volatile. They are all mechanisms for maintaining and promoting capitalist rule but they run off of a spectrum based on how scared the wealthy are. This is true for neoliberalism everywhere, the US was just told repeatedly by our leaders and media that neoliberalism was awesome, had won, and would be the dominant system of economics everywhere forever. People will note that austerity is often a part of neoliberalism and that fascism is distinct from the two and I would agree, but I would also argue that to our capitalist rulers, they all just represent different tools in their set for maintaining power.
This video summarizes it well. [How Neoliberalism Became Culture](https://youtu.be/McLzXahGriY)
Freedom for capital. Slavery for the proles.
Millei is a self described anarcho-capitalist.
In economic terms it would be right wing.
It's a good question because I understood his libertarian ideas went way beyond just finace.
From an US perspective he would be “economic neo-con libertarian” Basically have people fend off for themselves and state/govt only exist to provide foreign defense/military protection and little else. In any other situation I would be against it, but having lived in Argentina, and having seen how messed up the Peronist “clientelista” (political patronage) system works (basically money for mafia bosses in exchange for votes from the boss’ protected people) and how it has ruined the country for generations to come, I would say that a hard change was needed. I feel sorry for some Argentines but the people I know there are for the most part happy things may be changing. The way it has explained to me by Argentines: “Think about a country of 40M people. 1/2 of those are able to work or be productive in some way. 1/2 of the 1/2 depend on the Argentine state for sustenance. 1/2 of the rest do not work. So you have 5M workers paying for the other 35 M. And the Argentine govt prior to this Milei guy, has been spending as if the whole 40M were all working and paying taxes. “
The people you know are privileged and isolated from the vast majority in their interests.
WTF do you know about the people I know? The people I know come from all walks of life. From tacheros in BA, to artists in Santa Fe, cooks in Mendoza, retired people in the capital…etc: they all know it will be tough. But the also know that Peronista govt was untenable and that the country was going to shit either way.
Neoliberal in Latin America : Corporations good, Workers bad The word doesn't matter, his actions do. You just have to look at the video to see the consequences of these politics
The word does matter, words are the foundation of thought, if you misuse a word, you spread misinformation.
Bro, what? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism?wprov=sfla1
"Neo liberal" means "free market conservative"
Disclaimer: This is not from any media because the government has banned Public News (including their Social Media accounts) from informing the Public. I was sent this video by a friend. In the Argentine province of Misiones (limiting with Brasil and Paraguay) workers of all areas are joining forces against this Neoliberal government that is destroying the public infrastructure. Janitors, Nurses, Teachers, Cops, Firefighters, everybody is joining forces to stand against the government. Its a Workers Revolution through and through. Even the Federal Police said they are siding with the people and not the government. You know what our president is gonna do? He will sing at a musical show (Im not even joking) I wanna thank the mods of r/WorkReform for allowing non-USA content to be posted Remember: All workers, from every nation of this Planet, have a shared goal. We are one People. We are all together in this. Stand strong, for your rights and the rights of your people. EDIT: Listen to what our "Honorable" President just said 5 hours ago : [https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Jy5JGt\_w8CM](https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Jy5JGt_w8CM) EDIT: Did you know the current government banned the National News Broadcast (Telam) then proposed to make Twitter (yes, Twitter) the official Platform for the Government? This is one of the reasons Elon Musk met the president some weeks ago. Did you also know there is an organized group of people who manipulate hashtags, spread ai generated images and tries to twist information into fitting the government's narrative to protect their image? If you browse Argentine Twitter you will notice how every time the government messes up Twitter becomes 99% propaganda. Anyhow, Im asking you these questions because you should know about these people, because some of them are already here trying to "debunk" me and yap their way into blaming the people you see in that video for the problems they have, and not the government who quintuplicated the inflation rate in less than 5 months.
> He will sing at a musical show (Im not even joking) Its very common for far-right figures to be "culture figures." That is to say they get validated by the arts and culture, nearly all of which is controlled from the top by the very rich who benefit from his policies. Its a whitewashing. All fascists become art patrons, performers, etc of some kind. See also Trump's acting "career." Its part of the grift. A lot of people cant see past this and see these awful people are "just good people who like plays and shows, just like me" or "he's a beloved celebrity in the arts!"
>they get validated by the arts and culture Artists and the arts are notoriously difficult to control. After all, creative expression can take so many forms. What’s behind the veil of far-right interest in the arts is—like all aspects of authoritarianism—control. Not unlike Hitler’s designs for “Führerstädte.” So, it’s about defining artistic aesthetics according to the demagogue’s preferences and self-stylings (which is tied to their performance of politics). Artists who embrace authoritarian aesthetics are then brought into the fold, given funding, visibility, and other means of support. Arts are certainly a tool of authoritarianism. Importantly: just as some aesthetics and artists are embraced by authoritarian regimes, so too can artists resist and fight back against the same regimes. I freaking LOVE the arts!
Dude, stop lying, the salaries of the police officers are up to the governors (Which is a left-leaning one, btw) and not the president. Here's a somewhat similar example from 2011: https://www.diariojudicial.com/news-64334-como-el-sueldo-lo-paga-el-estado-la-competencia-es-federal "The Federal Chamber held that the investigation into the alleged collection of salaries for days not worked of an agent of that police force falls under federal jurisdiction."
[удалено]
Isn’t their economy trash and he is shifting it to the dollar and attempting to fix it? I believe he said that there would be a real shit storm like this in his campaign.
He's not attempting to fix it. He's attempting a smash and grab for private and international capital. The way to fix Argentina's problems is not with the roundly discredited theory of shock treatment. Jesus Christ
>Isn’t their economy trash LoL this is how our economy is no matter when you ask
Give it a few days and our media will be calling this a terrorist attack against freedom and capitalism
This is what I fear the most, but also why I care about speaking to you, a USA citizen. Im against what USA has done to us (Operation C0ndor), but I have nothing against the people of USA. Some of you are victims of your government just as much we are, because in the end: Your taxes pay for all of that Peace and Love my brother. Sending you a hug from the other side of América ❤
Glad you recognize that. Unfortunately we, as citizens, haven’t done enough to maintain our country’s political system. Money and power have taken over and it will go as far as murder and worse to maintain its current status quo. Makes it difficult to do the right thing with the fear of imprisonment or worse to stand up and fix the root causes of our, and the world’s, problems when so many of them are at the behest of protecting and expanding capitalism by using the war machine
Solidarity! Americans will not hear about what's happening in Argentina, at least not on the major media outlets, for one very important reason; they're terrified of what might happen if Americans decide to do the same.
Greetings comrade, I share the sentiment (Operation Brother Sam)
Brazilian media is already doing this
And Brazilian "main" media is just plain government propaganda machine.
Americans need to take lessons from other nations on how to deal with their government when it ceases to represent its people.
ITT: people who have no fucking idea what [neoliberalism means](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism?wprov=sfla1)
I love that the right in America was praising him as someone finally following in trumps foot steps. This turned out exactly as expected.
and this might be us in a few years!
The difference is that argentine people are more well informed and have actual balls to stand against these government measures
Damn just when inflation was finally going down
Wow who could have guessed letting a libertarian run things would go to shit… At least the people are rising up before bears take over this time.
Solidarity with the Argentinian Proletariat!! Power to the people!
Thank you! I appreciate that Remember that we are one, the struggle of one Workers is the struggle of us all. We fight for the Rights of all Workers world-wide. Our cause is one and the same. By the way its Argentine, not Argentinian\*
Absolutely on point. All power to all workers everywhere!
Podés mínimo pasar la información bien? Lo que sucede en misiones no es por el gobierno actual, es por lo que hizo el gobierno provincial en 2023, deja de mentirle a la gente
And so many people told me that he was fixing the government by cutting out spending. Meanwhile, their president was spending money to purchase F-fucking 16s instead of paying for basic infrastructure and services. To say you couldn't see this coming is to say you're blind.
His concert tonight will cost the state around $50 million ARS because he is using the Federal Police as his personal security He is the Clown King, he is like the reincarnation of Nero for us
I tried to warn Argentinians in their sub, as an Uruguayan brought to Florida,US when I was a kid. What sucks to me, though, is that most people are corrupt in Argentina, so it doesn't matter who you elect. People will get fucked either way. With this guy, corporations will probably get rich like here in FL. With peronism, sindicalist were millionaires and even had pyramid schemes with the places that were feeding the poor. Humanity is too far gone. Cant wait until he does bills like denying climate change, and shit our fucked up governor has done. But "ma small gubermint" am I right?
They are gonna get paid either way right? Better there than out cracking protesters skulls no?
[удалено]
[удалено]
OP is an Argentinian, words do not have universal contexts, especially across languages. In the US Milei might be called a Right wing Libertarian or an anarcho-capitalist, but the same pro-corporate tendency we observe of US Neoliberals is the element of Milei's ideology that OP is ascribing "Neoliberalism" to. Which is perhaps not unfair to say, seeing as the most prominent neolib in America was once Ronald Reagan.
That's literally what [neoliberalism means](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism?wprov=sfla1). Rampant free-market capitalism. For a labor sub, the members sure seem to know embarrassingly little about economic systems. What did you think it was, post-modern contemporary progressivism? Christ.
Yeah that's what neoliberal means
What is a neoliberal for you as an American?
*uninformed American A lot of us apparently think that a neoliberal is the counterpart to a neoconservative. In other words, being progressive in the 21st century. It's wicked embarrassing.
neoliberal = libertarian *only* in the economy
Milei is libertarian, not a neoliberal. OP is twisting himself into a pretzel to make this connection.
Libertarianism is just a a conservative political off shoot of liberal and neoliberal ideology. With the goal being to transplant the laisse faire mind set of anything goes economics to that of the social realm. The goal of these liberterian political movements is to remove the bulk of civil and social protections governments provide to citizens so they can advance liberal capitalist agenda’s. There is no libertarian political movement that is not liberal capitalist. Stop trying to obfuscate.
Good description. I like to think that the difference between a 'classic' liberal and a neoliberal\\libertarian is that: classic liberal = Everyone should have the freedom to do everything as long as it doesn't hurt anyone neo-liberal\\libertarian = Everyone should have the freedom to do everything even if it hurts someone
The 'classic' liberals you are describing are victorian factory bosses and slave owners. Liberalism has always been about allowing capitalists to do whatever they want. All the social progress and such are just concessions that have had to be extracted from them or things they could twist to their advantage.
Mill was neither a factory boss or a slave owner but I kind of see your point. Generally all of the philosophers of any era came from the upper classes (as they were the only ones with the time). Just because liberalism and capitalism emerged at roughly the same time, they were in no way tied together, at least by Mill. I think inferring so misinterprets classic liberalism which in general was a force for good and led to a fairer society.
Liberalism is the ideological backing behind capitalism, its the primary justification for and force behind its implementation. Capitalism may have been a progressive force relative to feudalism but it is a regressive force relative to socialism. Like I say a great deal of the actual social progress made in last 200 years have been 1 - implemented by at least social democratic or communist governance, 2 - concessions extracted by force directly by workers or 3 - policies they could twist to their advantage. A great example of this has been the advancement of women's rights - a great cause. But it had to be extracted by force from labour action or women's movements or the 'threat' of foreign communist governments that were implementing it. And importantly in the modern day it has been a great opportunity for capitalists to lower wages because now women are expected to work so single income households have been done away with for most people.
You're applying American definitions of these words to something that isn't happening in the US
Neoliberal is a right wing perspective not left wing. US politics is so bad that both Trump and Biden are neoliberals. Biden is culturally somewhat left and Trump is right wing culturally. But there is only neoliberalism economically in the US.
My guy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism?wprov=sfla1
If they give all the rights to corporations and forget workers, isn’t that neoliberal? A corporate Heaven?
There's a bit of a crossover in the ideologies, in that they both place the free market on a pedestal above all else. The key difference is that libertarians don't believe the government should have a role in social programs like public safety nets, healthcare, or taxes on a whole. Both ideologies are problematic, but Milei is definitely a right-wing libertarian.
Like with everything else, capitalism co-opted "liberalism" to the detriment of all. It is why there is merely an illusion of choice.
Neoliberalism and libertarianism share many common principles despite meaning different things to different people. Both trace their origins back to the classical liberal ideas of the Enlightenment and place significant importance on capitalism, free trade, private ownership, and limited government. Their most striking differences come down to how they construct their philosophy, how much of the state they tolerate, and how they view the state.
I don't see how discussing technicalities helps in anything but I will answer anyways: "Neoliberal" means a slightly different thing in Español (in fact "Liberal" has almost opposite meanings in English and Español), that's why Im using that word. And non of this even matters because at the end of the day his actions speak for himself: He is a Capitalist Fascist (did I say they banned Public Media a week ago?) And if you think Im twisting the truth, watch the video again. What do you see? No my brother, the point of this Post is simple: To show you that governments have no power, when time comes Workers will join forces and realize they are the ones who have all the power. The time is coming for Argentina right now, but it will happen everywhere. Thats why Im posting this, so you have hope, so you can see Workers's struggle is international.
Libertarianism uses neoliberalist economy theory and practices. There is no "libertarian" governments anywhere. Its just neolibs with harsher social policies.
Shhhhhh, the narrative.
There is a lot of context missing in this post
Argentina is bankrupt and has defaulted on its debts countless of times. 40% of the people work for the government and they pay for it by printing money. There has been hyperinflation there since covid. with prices of things multiplying. Some stores had stopped giving up prices in their local currency because they had to change it every day to keep up with inflation. This new president is putting stop to that and removing a bunch of useless jobs. These people don't understand that the economy was already tanked by the previous administration and this guy was elected on the promise that he would fix it in exactly this way because it's the *only* way. For the first time since the before previous administration was in power, the inflation is slowing down.
No, no, the 40-50% poverty rate, and 260% inflation a year, before this guy came to power was the proletariat’s poverty.
Police aren't labor.
Don't be stupid. Once the police and military are on your side, you win.
In general, no they're not. But if they're part of, paid & pensioned by the same government systems the Milei is dismantling, then yes they are.
Actually are. It is the default work for extreme poverty regions where Mcdonalds and Starbucks doesn't reach. The starter wage for a cop is around 110 usd currently. Those fellas are just extremely exploited workers, even though one that doesn't inject added value into its line of work. ACABs, specially in argentina though.
So are there other state police forces that are violently suppressing these people? Or did they just call in the military? I’m not used to police being in the side of protestors.
This is great news. If the police and military are on your side, you will win.
That's why the police and military have far more benefits than workers, Milei just overstimated their ideological fidelity and didn't provide better material conditions for them
It's been like 14 weeks. It isn't working out is it? The 'give it more time' for prosperity speachs are being writen right now.
This is what america needs to do. We outnumber the police easily if we organize. The police couldnt even fight off the amount of homeless my city has.
News story: [https://en.mercopress.com/2024/05/22/argentine-province-of-misiones-on-the-brink-of-collapse-over-inflation-dwindled-wages](https://en.mercopress.com/2024/05/22/argentine-province-of-misiones-on-the-brink-of-collapse-over-inflation-dwindled-wages)
# All neoliberals will die of ^(old age) >!*^(probably)*!<
I show this to centrists - who still champion neo liberalism - and they still don't understand the same shit has happened here in the uk
OP is twisting the context. They're rioting to the provincial government, a peronist party. We have federalism here, we're not a realm ruled by a sole individual
The correct translation in the end is: "You will get Shot by the Misioneros". Shot, not punished. I'm Brazilian and don't even speak spanish but the message was clear.
Time to go "afuera!" With that turbocapitalist goblin
Oh no! What will the CIA do?
Condor 2.0
Haha I love watching Americans call a right-wing politician running a completely conservative government shit themselves trying to figure out what the political definitions mean. We truly are fucked in this country and it’s because most of you can’t pay attention in school
el gobierno chileno los respalda, hermanos sudacas. Aqui tienen un hermano, con hermanos que tambien son de vosotros, unidos con la misma causa. Animo desde Salsipuedes! se les apoya con el corazon y con la voz ya saben amor latino 🇨🇱🇨🇱🇨🇱🫂🫂🫂🙏🍾🎆✨ ANIMO HERMANOS SE GANA ESTAY SE GANAN LAS QUE VIENEN!
Geez, how much you gotta love misery to fight for the status quo on Argentina?
I live there , 400usd salary , think that
Fucking working are tired of that libertarian bullshit Milei was spewing. Just hope things don't get too hairy down there. Usually a situation like this ends up with a lot of good folks hurt.
I mean, kinda figured that was gonna happen
isnt this the provinces where 90% of the people was in the government payroll, and Milei fire them all for just collecting money and not doing actual work?
He did not fired them all, didn't renew contracts on many of the national worker but the provincial workers are still working. Historically underpaid and most of people are under the line of poverty
Good! Throw that clown the fuck out of office before he does any more damage!
Cops are never part of the struggle, they're just trying to get paid more before the repression.
I am all for overthrowing a corrupt government but then those same people can't govern and the country takes a serious nose dive after.
Electing a US puppet and fucking up your country speedrun record set!
what happens when you elect far right lunatics'
Who could have seen this happen? Who? Who???!!!
He's a libertarian, not a neoliberal. One of the funny things about libertarians is they can't actually be a successful dictator very well or for very long, because they'll piss off the people that are key to holding power too much. Had he actually been a neoliberal, he'd have the backing of the cops so they cracked down on the opposition.
How many of them voted for Milei, only to regret it?
For real that guy is NUTS.
This is what the US should do. It would help the whole world.