December 2010

Recreation is not only finite

The 2010 might be remembered in Europe as the annus horribilis of reformism. L ' Ireland, student model of neoliberal economic policies preached by the Chicago school, has had to resort to the rescue by the ECB and IMF. Continued cuts in public spending, put in place to rehabilitate the debt and to reassure markets, have finally resulted in recessionary effects, resulting in losses of revenue and further worsening the debt situation. A dog chasing its tail. [1] same fate that has faced the Greece, and which seem destined, in order, two other European countries: Portugal and Spain.

Obviously aid ECB and IMF are not handed out to "dead father", but conditional on the implementation of harsh policies of cuts and privatization, which are not difficult to imagine will benefit multinational companies in Germany and the U.S..

There was no room for possible mediation, no possibility of negotiation for the advocates of "reform" or soup or jump out the window.

So in Greece, the PASOK , the reformist center-left government had to assume political responsibility for harsh measures (the soup), while the right-wing opposition talked of the "first Budget Act limited sovereignty" and the party Communist, third strength of the country, calling for a "people's war" to ask forgiveness or debt rescheduling (jumping from the window), just as happened in Argentina (with some problems for small investors including Italian) with the former Peronist president Kirchner, died Oct. 27 of this year. [2]

In Italy, meanwhile, the Marchionne and Fiat unilaterally changed the relationship between business and unions, with the agreement Pomigliano and Mirafiori. Again, no room for negotiation.

Fiat said, these are the conditions to implement my investments, take it or leave it. There was no real negotiation. No space "reformist".

no coincidence that now comes on " Republic", the desperate cry of pain always punctual and rigorous Giannini, probably the best intellectual "organic" to the Democratic Party. [3] Very clearly, in fact, we take note of how the polarization of the clash between Fiom and Marchionne completely leave the canvas slings Pd (no cards to play ") and the Cgil , advocates of a more dialogue-but it was not possible in practice, forcing them to choose between two options. The government is rightly accused of inactivity (like hearing the litany of Bersani: "The government is to" provide "to tell us what they want to do"), but in reality the government is well aware which side of globalization want to stay.

course, some influential leaders Pd have already chosen, and chose Marchionne, as well deduced from statements of Fassino. For them, the agreement Pomigliano not least a bitter pill to swallow, but a "great opportunity", be approved with a " you." The same things that the much-maligned minister says Sacconi.

Equally of course, Giannini, are all extremists, bad and conservatives, but the Democratic Party and the Camusso . I think this is a distorted and totally misleading.

Marchionne is not bad, is not conservative or revolutionary, does his job as CEO Fiat. Similarly la Fiom e gli altri sindacati fanno semplicemente il loro lavoro. Di fronte al ricatto di Marchionne, hanno scelto ciò che credevano meglio per i lavoratori.

La verità è un’altra: la situazione politica mondiale attuale non lascia spazio ad illusioni riformiste, e questo principalmente perché i rapporti di forza tendono drammaticamente dalla parte delle multinazionali e degli istituti finanziari e non dalla parte dei “popoli”. Ed è venuto il tempo, anche per il Pd e la Cgil , di fare delle scelte chiare, di decidere da che parte della globalizzazione vogliono stare. Se mai una grave crisi del debito ( cosa che non mi auguro) dovesse interessare anche il nostro paese, la scelta non sarà più tra un’ impresa ed un sindacato: sarà una scelta molto più complessa e dolorosa!

Io scelgo la Fiom e lo sciopero del 28 gennaio!

Buon anno a tutte\i!

P.S: Vi saluto con un piccolo “divertissement”: una tabellina dove provo ad inquadrare le varie opzioni politiche in campo…a partire dal famoso riformismo.

The word "reform" is undoubtedly a term widely used in today's political jargon. But what is the real meaning today? The logic requires starting with a definition:

Reformism: 'tendency to change the social and political order through organic but gradual reforms "" A policy that merely marginal reforms in a social system, without changing its structure. " [4]

Before the advent of neoliberal globalization, the word "reform" was mainly used on the left, to distinguish who postulated a gradual transformation of the bourgeois state by whom, "revolutionary", he argued the need for immediate conquest of power.

In Italy, the PCI and PSI were reformist parties.

After winning neo-liberal ideology, the term "reform" is associated with those political forces who believe action is necessary to allow free market forces, trying to temper the more negative through the intervention state. In short, the cd. " social market economy" , which refer explicitly, in Italy, Democratic Party, Christian Democratic Union and PDL.

For "liberal " a perfectly free market, without state interference or dominant positions, would be the best way to combine development with social justice. In Italy they are "free" radicals.

are instead designated as " progressives" who believe it is necessary to change the current model to return to Keynesian economic policies, characterized by strong state intervention in economics. Typically, when it comes to progressive we refer to Latin American governments of the left che hanno incominciato, con diverse sfumature, a rendersi maggiormente indipendenti dalle istituzioni finanziarie mondiali ( Fmi e Bm), che dettano legge in tutto il mondo. Forse sono loro i veri rivoluzionari oggi.