@The Economist. Old Socialist comments on ‘The new anger’.

The new anger

Headline: 2019 in review: protest and populism in Latin America

Sub-headline: Scandals, autocracy and anger at inequality stir unrest across the continent


Under the rubric of ‘The new anger’ needs further explication provided by the headline and sub-headline of this ‘News Story’. The use of the lower case in this framing as ‘The new anger’ softens what looks like hysteria.  The causes this reader might offer for this ‘protest & populism’ are American Imperialism & its NGO’s subversion of the indigenous Reformers, on the Left,  by way of the Neo-Liberal cudgel. E.g. Macri’s utter failure & de Kirchner’s political rehabilitation provide an object lesson?  Note that Macri defaulted first, using the euphemism of payment delay, on the Argentine debt according to The Financial Times December 20.2019:

Headline:Argentina delays payments on $9bn in dollar-denominated debt

Sub-headline: New government asks bondholders to show ‘good faith’ amid wider restructuring talks

The last payment delay was announced by the previous government of Mauricio Macri, shortly after a primary vote result that signalled he would lose his bid for re-election in October’s national election, which sent the peso reeling and increased the cost of insuring against a debt default.

The announcement came as little surprise to investors, given Argentina’s record on debt repayment and the central bank’s dwindling stock of foreign reserves, used in the battle to control high inflation and a weak currency.


Should the reader take Argentina as a paradigmatic case of  Neo-Liberalism’s failure. An object lesson on how the IMF operates in that that ‘forgotten continent’?  Not to forget that the Posh Boys & Girls @TheEconomist are a reliable source for Capitalist Apologetics, heavily garnished with the pretense of something resembling prescience?

Old Socialist




About stephenkmacksd

Rootless cosmopolitan,down at heels intellectual;would be writer. 'Polemic is a discourse of conflict, whose effect depends on a delicate balance between the requirements of truth and the enticements of anger, the duty to argue and the zest to inflame. Its rhetoric allows, even enforces, a certain figurative licence. Like epitaphs in Johnson’s adage, it is not under oath.' https://www.lrb.co.uk/v15/n20/perry-anderson/diary
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.