The Left Berlin News & Comment

This is the archive template

Social Movements in the Face of Milei’s Government

Javier Milei’s government in Argentina is the latest attempt of the global right to exert its power. But it can be stopped

Opinion Article by Cecilia and Darío from Bloque Latinoamericano Berlin

The world has paid close attention to the first months of Javier Milei’s government in Argentina. At one level, Milei is part of a new generation of ultra-right leaders along with Trump in the US, Meloni in Italy, Bukele in El Salvador and Bolsonaro in Brazil, among others. At the same time, he constitutes an extreme example, going a little further and potentially extending the boundaries of possibility for the international Right. In earlier articles on this site we analysed the measures Milei’s government has applied, or tried to apply, in its first weeks, and the economic impacts, such as hyperinflation or austerity policies, deepening the social and economic crisis in Argentina. We also described how distinct political sectors are positioning themselves in relation to these measures, and the nature of political resistance.

In this article we focus on social movements—key factors in Argentinian politics for over 20 years—during these first months under Milei. We speak with comrades who build resistance every day through the Front of Organisations in Struggle (FOL) to understand their perspectives and experiences.

Milei: violent with the poor, submissive before corporations

In his drive to ensure that everything should be determined by the market, Milei is not only trying to destroy or defund all areas of the state linked to social and labour policies, but also to break up another of the fundamental support structures for working people’s lives: social movements.

“Milei’s policy towards social movements is one of total confrontation with the objective of destroying them. His principle argument is that the movements are intermediaries or ‘CEOs’ of poverty, which themselves benefit from the misery of our people. This argument is intended to hide the fact that it’s these movements which give practical responses to the social necessities for supporting working people over the past two decades,” says an FOL comrade.

Arising during the profound crisis of 2001, the movements have since taken a central role in working class districts across the whole country. This role goes far beyond offering access to basic rights such as food, education, healthcare and work. The presence of the movements plays a part in community cohesion through solidarity and social support.

Through defunding, intimidation, persecution and media vilification, Milei clearly has a systematic plan against social organisations and working-class politics. Some examples of this include:

  • The protocol drawn up by the Ministry of Security to prevent street mobilisations; permitting, among other things, that repressive forces act without the authorisation from a judge
  • Ending all food provisions for almost 40,000 communal workers’ dining halls across the whole country which feed more than 4 million people every day, the great majority children
  • Defunding the urban integration social fund, responsible for improving the quality of life in the poorest districts by introducing basic services such as running water and sewers
  • A media campaign to discredit those who receive and manage social plans
  • Closure of the biggest social security and labour programme, “Enhancing Work”, which bolstered the incomes of 1,400,000 people

So why does Milei show such malice against popular organisations? An obvious reason is that, from his perspective, they represent a distortion of the free play of supply and demand, which according to neoliberal theory is the best possible way to allocate resources. But there are reasons to believe that his motivation goes beyond this, and is aimed at destroying collective forms of life and resistance.

It was the social movements and organisations on the Left which orchestrated the first mobilisation against the Milei government’s policies and forced the abandonment of Minister of Security Patricia Bullrich’s indiscriminate repression policy. Social movements also played a key role during Macri’s government, successfully mobilising against policies such as reform of the pension system or cuts in public spending on social services, which would have severely impacted the most vulnerable social groups.

Milei’s political objective is to “reset” community networks in Argentina, sweeping away a consensus established decades ago on the roles played by the state and social movements to guarantee rights  for society’s most marginalised.

“The government knows that the popular movements can lead resistance to it, and therefore it aims to break us up and eliminate us as actors in the territory,” say FOL comrades. “This will leave fertile ground for the advance of narco-trafficking, as has happened more in other Latin American countries than in Argentina, where the narcos establish themselves forcefully in working-class districts as a group that can give some sort of response to the urgent necessities of social assistance.”

“For a world where we are socially equal, humanly different, and totally free”: the FOL as an example

With the aim of giving a concrete and tangible form to the discussion around social movements, we spoke with FOL comrades about the work they have been doing for more than 15 years, and how they are responding to the current situation.

The FOL was founded in 2006 by activists in Greater Buenos Aires in the course of the struggle against unemployment and poverty. In this sense it forms part of the wider “picket movement”, the name given to a new type of movement which arose from unemployed workers’ organisations and adopted a new method—the blocking of roads, or “picketing”. Over the years the FOL defined itself as a movement which undertakes complex territorial work—this means taking on the problems of working class districts, in different spheres of life: housing, work, gender, children, education, environment and more.

This work enables the construction of popular power from below in a struggle for the delivery of concrete necessities in the here and now, and at the same time the construction of “a world where we are socially equal, humanly different and totally free”. This quote from Rosa Luxemburg, which the FOL adopted as its slogan, is more relevant than ever, as the idea of freedom is being appropriated by the right.

The construction of popular power is illustrated in FOL’s framework in different ways, for example:

  • Different initiatives promoting self-managed work, which allows those participating not only to create their own sources of work but also to take ownership of its value, as is the case with construction squads formed by women, in textile production groups, or in the production and distribution of agro-ecological products.
  • The Picket University is a space of popular education for the social movements, in which comrades from across the country collectively develop the different types of knowledge necessary for social transformation
  • The People’s Gardens, student support initiatives and the “popular baccalaureate” guarantee access to education
  • The improvement of working-class districts, recycling initiatives and the cleanup of contaminated streams guarantee access to a sustainable environment
  • Embodiment of the struggle against patriarchy by supporting those affected by gender-based violence and through the establishment of women’s assemblies

In order to measure up to the current situation, the FOL proposes reinforcing its presence across the country with specific tools needed to deliver necessities. It has also decided on, as its central guideline, “a policy of unity across the whole spectrum of social movements, including with those with whom we’ve had differences in the past, in order to form a united front against government attacks” an FOL comrade says.

Confronting Milei is an international task

As stated at the above, Milei is today one of the most extreme expressions of the global Right. Whatever he manages to achieve in Argentina will be incorporated into a playbook of extremist and repressive neoliberalism internationally. The support of institutional and ideological allies at the international level, such as the investment fund Blackrock, Elon Musk, or the International Monetary Fund, indicate that this battle is not only critical for Argentina but also for the centres of global power.

Argentina has been characterised historically through its extensive social organising and a high level of trade union membership relative to international statistics. This has enabled working people, even in situations of poverty, to retain access to acquired rights and to defend their community forms of living. “We believe”, say FOL comrades “that big capital intends, through these ultra-neoliberal, fascist and conservative governments to change the rules of the game, showing the world that it’s possible to smash the working class anywhere, even in Argentina. This is something that we cannot allow.”

It is critical to understand the new Right’s project through a global lens that shows the importance of spreading information on the resistance to Milei’s government throughout the Left at local, regional and international levels. Opposition to Bolsonaro in Brazil and in the region is an example of how this is possible, as the slogan “Not him” echoed around the world as the actions of his government were internationally scrutinised.

How can an internationalist resistance to Milei in Argentina be constructed? Ideas include:

  • Exposing, via social networks and media coverage, the social impact of Milei’s policies; above all, the concrete experiences of organisation and self-governance of the social movements which are under threat can increase the political cost to the government should it proceed with these measures
  • Constructing a wide network of civilian organisations in different parts of the world could enable the denunciation of violations of human rights (such as the removal of food from dining halls, or of medicines from people with terminal illnesses) and help protect the physical and legal safety of social movement participants
  • Mobilising financial resources can help ensure the continuity of structures which guarantee access to basic necessities for the most vulnerable sectors, as state financial support is abruptly removed
  • Constructing spaces of interaction between Latin American and European Lefts, in a horizontal, non-paternalistic form, is key in securing mutual support for local centres of resistance against the attacks of the global Right. 

This article originally appeared in Spanish on the Bloque Latinoamericano Website. Translation: Ian Perry. Reproduced with permission.

++ BREAKING NEWS ++ Court decision in favour of Oyoun confirms our integrity and ends defamation

Court rules that claims made in the Tagesspiegel are false

Press Release from oyoun – Berlin, 25.3.2024

We are delighted to announce that the Berlin Regional Court has ruled in Oyoun’s favour in the preliminary injunction proceedings against the Tagesspiegel. This decision represents a victory for credibility and sends a clear signal about the dangers based on unfounded allegations.

The court ruled that the Tagesspiegel may no longer publish three of the claims it stated in an article dated 20 February 2024.

In particular, it found that the allegation that the Senate favoured Oyoun due to family ties was unfounded. The allegations regarding alleged antisemitic incidents at Oyoun were also found to be unfounded.

This decision confirms the integrity of Oyoun and marks an important victory against defamation.

In light of this court decision, we would like to emphasise that Oyoun has always sought an open dialogue with the media and promoted fair reporting. Although Oyoun has been exonerated of false accusations, it will take some time to fully restore its reputation. This decision emphasises the importance of a fair and impartial legal system that respects the presumption of innocence and delivers just verdicts.

We would like to thank our lawyers – Laaser law firm for arts and creative sector – for their successful and conscientious legal representation and look forward to continuing our work without the shadow of defamation.

For further information or queries, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Press contact: Louna Sbou, Wayra Schübel – kommunikation@oyoun.de

HANDS OFF STUDENT RIGHTS: Campaign Against Forced Exmatriculation

Demonstration: Rotes Rathaus, Tuesday 26th March, midday

The Berlin Senate plans to tighten the Higher Education Act, despite widespread opposition from the student body. The introduction of forced exmatriculation as a disciplinary measure, outlined in the proposed Paragraph 16, not only marks a return to pre-2021 disciplinary regulations, comparable to other federal states, but represents a significant escalation with far-reaching encroachments on the freedom of students. Originally introduced in the context of the 1968 movement, disciplinary regulations were aimed at suppressing protests and student politicization. Now, this repressive instrument is being resurrected by the governing parties CDU and SPD, instigated by the far-right AFD. Given the political shift to the right and the constriction of critical voices, this development is extremely concerning.

The proposed law includes a range of disciplinary measures, from mild warnings to expulsion. The severity of the penalty is determined by a disciplinary committee whose composition, procedures, and transparency are not stipulated by law. The vague criteria and discretionary power of the disciplinary committee could lead to severe consequences for minor violations, such as hanging posters or disrupting classes. While the Senate claims these measures aim to protect students, discrimination is not punishable by exmatriculation among the listed offenses. With this symbolic policy, the government coalition is unmistakably signaling opposition to a politicized and democratic university, opening the door to discrimination against marginalized and/or dissenting students. We condemn this course of action and demand the retraction of the proposed measures.

We recognize that these disciplinary regulations will affect us all, regardless of our political activities as students: from educational strikes to climate protests, event disruptions, and the public denouncement of right-wing or abusive professors, as well as solidarity with Palestine. The threat of expulsion not only puts freedom of expression at risk, but also jeopardizes the safety of many, especially international students. It threatens not only our academic careers but also our livelihoods, jobs, residences, and visa statuses in Germany. The climate of fear and intimidation created by the mere possibility of expulsion is an attempt to intimidate politically active students. 

Support our campaign against forced exmatriculation: Hands off student rights and come to our Protest on Tuesday the 26.03. at 12:00 infront of the Rote Rathaus!

Expansion of the Zone of Taboo

The German definition of “antisemitism” harms open debate and excludes foreign and Jewish Artists and Intellectuals


24/03/2024

“The Ghetto is being liquidated” wrote Masha Gessen regarding Israel’s conduct of war in Gaza. Here in Germany, this sentence, which appeared in the New Yorker magazine, led to a scandal. For in Germany, we have a very far-reaching understanding of everything that one may – or may not –  say with respect to Israel.

The corridor of opinion is becoming increasingly narrow. It could become even worse if Culture Secretary Claudia Roth bows to the pressure which has risen after the Berlinale. It is a bad sign that the Israeli ambassador Ron Prosor praised her and the Culture Minister because they want to place arts promotion under suspicion of “antisemitism”.

Since 2017, Germany has relied on an antisemitism definition which is propagated by the Israeli government. It was declared by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA). Critics complain that it stamps justified criticism of Israel as antisemitic, and worry that it opens the way to arbitrariness from the authorities. They point suspiciously to Donald Trump and Viktor Orbán who happily accepted the IHRA definition.

People like Gessen, who compare Israel’s actions with Nazi crimes, are antisemitic according to the IHRA definition. Full stop. Gessen comes from a Jewish family of Holocaust survivors and did not want to trivialise non-German Nazi crimes. Rather Gessen and others wanted to ‘de-normalise’  Israeli war crimes. and show them to be the scandal they are. But the IHRA definition is clumsy and cannot deal with such differences. For this reason, overwhelmingly Jewish authors and experts drew up an alternative text in 2021 – the Jerusalem Declaration – a definition which strictly differentiates between criticism of Israel and antisemitism.

Nazi comparisons are not per se taboo

In Germany, the IHRA definition has by now acquired a quasi-official status. The German government recommends using it in the education of school students and adults, in justice, administration and the police. Five years ago, the University Chancellors’ Conference adopted it. Using the IHRA definition as a framework, the Bundestag passed its controversial BDS resolution in 2019. Then, it was said that calls to boycott Israel evoked “the worst phase of German history” – a comparison with the Nazis which, remarkably, received little criticism.

But Nazi comparisons are not per se taboo in Germany. If Putin or Erdoğan are compared with Hitler, few people are enraged. If Israel’s prime minister Netanyahu equates Hamas with the Nazis, Israel’s UN ambassador wears a yellow Star or the spokesperson of the Israeli army describes the Hamas massacre as a “mini-Holocaust”, they can find advocates here in Germany.

Such double standards have increased. Interior minister Nancy Faeser banned the Palestinian slogan “From the River to the Sea”. Head of the Green Party, Robert Habeck – even called the slogan an “extermination fantasy”. The number of registered antisemitic crimes has also risen as a result, because the authorities have decided to strictly pursue such slogans. But what, then, does this say about the almost identically sounding formulation in the founding programme of Netanyahu’s Likud party, which since 1977 makes a claim for a larger Israel from the Mediterranean to the river Jordan?

Which words are still permitted?

The German permanent outrage about politically apparently incorrect criticism of Israel leads to the taboo zone becoming even larger. If someone on a demonstration calls “Kindermörder Israel” (child murderer Israel), some will immediately call the police. But which words are appropriate to denounce Israel’s actions in the Gaza strip – which have taken the lives of more children as all wars together in the last 4 years? The destruction of Gaza is unprecedented. But says the German state – don’t dare call it a “war of extermination”!

Recently, some have even maintained that red palms – a universal symbol for someone with “blood on their hands” means something quite different in Israel than in the rest of the world. This madness is even propagated by serious feature writers.

Cultural-intellectual provincialisation

Germans have the reputation of being a people of know-it-alls and thought police. Zealous “antisemitism” hunters like Volker Beck confirm this cliché. In the culture scene, this has led to a climate of fear and (self) censorship. This affects above all foreign – and often Jewish – artists and intellectuals.

The Saarland museum cancelled a planned exhibition by the South African Jewish artist Candice Breitz. A lecture tour by the 88-year old Holocaust survivor Marione Ingram in her home city of Hamburg was cancelled. The list could go on and on. Meanwhile, Elon Musk can share as many antisemitic conspiracy theories on X as he wants. When he visits Berlin, the mayor stands up for a selfie with him.

World-class intellectuals, like Achille Mbembe, Judith Butler, however, have been staying clear of Germany for a long time. The US artist Laurie Anderson withdrew from a guest professorship at the Folkwang Universität der Künste in Essen. This year’s Biennale for contemporary photography was cancelled. The future of documenta is unclear. And who still wants to come to Berlinale, and be accused afterwards of being an antisemite? The German magazines like Bild Zeitung and right wing blogs don’t care, they just fuel a moral panic.

According to an Allensbach survey from last year, only 40 per cent of Germans still believe that they can freely express their opinions, and stated that they restrained themselves because of this. The exceptions from this rule are ‘Greens’ and ‘academics’. Maybe there is a connection between the toxic antisemitism debate in this country and willingness to freely voice opinions. The climate now intimidates many people.

This article first appeared in German in the taz newspaper. Translation: Phil Butland. Reproduced with permission.

Anti-German and other Germans

A set of two poems


23/03/2024

Anti-German

 

O Israel, long live thou!

We’re the offspring of Nazis,

and there is no One greater

than the IDF

 

We’re proudly aghast

at our ancestors‘ crime!

Which, as long as we live,

must never happen again!

 

O Hatred of Jews

In Eternity

Shall our bond be renewed

When we fight against thee

 

Our guilt is our pride

Our capital, too

Siemens, Diehl, Rheinmetall

Thyssenkrupp, AEG, Heidelberg Zement

 


Other Germans

 

Listen, I also don’t support
what Israel is doing in Gaza.
Look at all the dead children!

You’re right, Germany is sending weapons!
It’s a shame!
And now people are even starving!

What are you saying? Protest?

Yeah, I heard about those! In Sonnenallee, right? Those Arabs, Muslims…
They first gotta learn that in Germany they can‘t… Antisemitism…
Islamists, Israel-haters, Hamas-supporters, terrorists, Breitscheidplatz-why-do-they-hate-us … Violence-prone young men… Criminal clans… Failed integration… Shisha bars…

You know, I’m not that bothered by what’s happening in Gaza.