During his trip to Argentina, Professor Jean Ruffier, president of USF, met with a higher education specialist in Argentina. This is his perspective since Milei’s election.

His diagnosis: Argentina is in a situation close to that of 1970 (i.e. before the military coup). In 1970, Argentina was as rich as Spain. Since then, it has only descended relatively to Spain. The country gives the impression of a permanent revolution, but in fact it is extremely stable. A former head cook of the presidential residence pointed out: «the presidents change regularly, but those who come to dinner are always the same» (ed. even during the military period). The status quo was very solid and is a model of impoverishment by creating all kinds of rents for the dominant groups. Trade unions receive 3% of total wages. Big business leaders have done a lot to close the economy. Pressure groups are so powerful that governments are tempted to buy them for peace; there is no other way but to reduce the cost of such crippling privileges. The idea is, to separate from these rentiers of the social movement and to reduce these incomes, opening the market of the labor and that of the products.

Basically, owners will be able to directly choose their employees without going through an agency, the products will no longer be sold by monopolies. Most of the laws were drafted by the military in all of aviation and space. Which means we’re no longer competitive. The same goes for communications. Private groups are obliged to pass through a monopoly that controls and taxes the other actors of the domain. Royalties are taken on all activities. The navy is also a monopoly, as a result of Argentina having virtually no fishing industry, at least not competitive. He then quotes Gramsci: Gramsci said that, in order to win power, socialists must begin by taking over universities, culture, NGOs, trade unions. I deduce that for Milei’s team Peronism is the objective, but not the only objective: there are also the army and the pressure groups of the historical national capitalists. The adviser contradicts me saying that he has nothing against the Peronists, the army, etc., who simply wants to blow up a cultural system that makes the price of fertilizers double in Argentina than in neighboring countries. For him, this government was chosen to put on the table things that until then were taboo. The first result is that a wall of silence has fallen. Debate has begun over the need to question the system. The President strikes hard, but it remains within the framework of democracy: in democracy all views are correct, but there must be debate and voting. Argentina is not used to this debate.

The strategy to reduce the blocking system by unions, and rentier monopolies: all uncommitted combat is lost, and therefore with the means it has, the government will carry out all the struggles it can to open this system to the idea of an end to rents and privileges. It intends to attack directly the system resulting from history and assumes that the progress achieved will be enough to reverse the trend towards more debate and, above all, more political effectiveness.

He also believes that Argentina is the country where people refuse to discuss politics between the two main Peronist and anti- peronist political tendencies. Even the Chinese are used to debating political positions by narrowly opposing friends, and without too much risk of being heard. In Argentina, to remain friends, we must not say that we are on the other side. People can be friends knowing they have different political ideas, but they cannot discuss them between Peronists and anti-peronists.

In conclusion, I found the focus of this specialist more culturalist than strategic. It seems that Milei is satisfied with the constant dissemination of transgressive ideas, and that goes in the sense of a cultural vision: they want to make a cultural revolution. Perhaps this is their main weakness: to think that they are capable of provoking a cultural shock without directly attacking pressure groups that are apparently so well installed. But, well, it remains to be seen what they will do.
For further information and discussions, please contact Professor Jean Ruffier, jean.ruffier@usf-awb.net.