The proposal by Cristina K, Lavagna, the block headed by Menem and Rodriguez Saa, the ARI, the different wings of the radicals and the one posed by Macri if in the long last he decides to run for presidency, they all have something in common, they all propose that the great international monopolies should go on exploiting our natural resources and controlling the great industry, services, banks, foreign trade and that the great fraud, the foreign debt, should be paid. There can be no solution to the problems of inflation, unemployment, low salaries and old-age pensions that are not enough to live on or for education, environment and all the other problems that the toiling masses suffer.
Even if we agree with Pino Solanas as to the need of a great national campaign in defence of our natural resources, we cannot but point out some serious differences we have. Solana might run for presidency based on a proposal of some kind of “national capitalism}” and “redistribution of wealth” following the model set by Chavez or Evo Morales. Many a time have we pointed out that the Bolivian and Venezuelan governments, even if they do have important rubs with Bush, cannot advance much more in search of thorough solutions, because the split with the imperialist monopolies implies getting out of the capitalist framework.
In Venezuela and in Bolivia the multinationals still control the fundamental levers of their economies in spite of the partial measures such as increasing their taxes or reducing their participation in the property of the oilfield and the oil companies while poverty accrues and so does the exploitation of the people just as it would here were we to apply similar policies.
There is, therefore a roomy space, therefore, that none of these candidates can fill. This space could be occupied by left parties that share many of their fundamental proposals such as class independence of the workers, struggle for the nationalisation under workers’ control of all the fundamental levers of our economy: the non-payment of the foreign debt, a plan of public works to guarantee jobs for everybody, the defence of state education and health service, a salary enough to pay for the maintenance of a family homestead and 82% for old age pensioners, the defence of workers’ democracy against trade union bureaucracy, support for all the struggles of the toiling masses, punishment for the genocides and all the repressors, the demand for Julio Lopez and punishment for the murderers of Carlos Fuentealba.
There is no doubt that many workers who criticise the splits on the left would regard the formation of such an electoral front of all those who share these banners as clearly positive. We are but a few weeks away from the closure of the lists and it is urgent that we should pose a united response. We are especially addressing the leaders of the main left-wing forces, particularly
It is within their reach to build this front so that the most outstanding workers’ and popular fighters – as those who have recently led the struggles of the teacher, fishermen and oil workers of the south and many more – can embody for the entire population the expression of the deep solutions that the left proposes.
THE LAUNCHING OF CRISTINA KIRCHNER
Cristina Kirchner is launched at a time when the administration if trying to tackle problems they cannot solve and that have been tarnishing the splendour of her candidature. All the highlights have been focussing the earthquake at the Stock Exchange and the climbing of the dollar these days. After weeks when the topic of the day was the minister’s of economy bag-gate, and her resignation. At the same time there is the unleashed inflation- which the government cannot conceal by inventing rates – keeps on enhancing different sectors of workers to fight: from the fishermen in Santa Cruz, with their demand that profit tax should be eliminated up to workers of the National Bank and telephone workers who demand salary increase.
At all the fronts, the administration is driven back: the floor for the profit tax was heightened and an increase for the family bonuses was announced; Michelli’s resignation was accepted and dollars were sold to stop the stampede.
Cristina K launched her candidature with a classical response of Peronism when things get scorching: she proposed a “Social Accord” between entrepreneurs and trade unions with the state mediating. The meaning is familiar: the employers will have to yield a bit and the trade unions promise not go on strikes. In the past each and every one of those pacts ended in a blast of struggles for the simple reason that they are only a response to the anger for a brief time and they solve no deep problem.
There was a clear proof of that in the results of Cristina?s trip to
This means that the “Social Accord” will be based in the continuity of the old looting of the country by imperialism. We can, therefore, declare that – even if they do leave us some crumbs – inflation will go on soaring and so will unemployment, dearth of housing, collapse of health and education and crisis in energy, insufficient salaries, etc.
That is why there are many comrades who begin to envisage Cristina and her proposals, which are applauded by the entrepreneurs, as something alien to the needs of the toiling masses. Millions of workers and ample popular sector will, however, vote for her thinking that with Kirchner, at least, the worst of the crisis was over, or at least that there is nothing better in view. Unfortunately, with Cristina, as with her husband, the deep problems will continue unsolved. And we shall have to keep on struggling for everything that we have been claiming for.