SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
debt
Argentina General Strike Demands End to Milei's 'Chainsaw' Austerity Policies
"The Milei government has picked a fight with workers and pensioners, and now they will feel the full force of organized labor," said one union leader.
Apr 10, 2025
Increasingly fed up with economic policies under which poverty and inflation have soared while vital social services, wages, and the peso have taken huge hits, disaffected Argentinians took to the streets of cities across the South American nation Wednesday for the third general strike of right-wing President Javier Milei's tumultuous 16-month presidency.
Led by the General Confederation of Labor (CGT)—an umbrella group of Argentinian unions—the "paro general," or general stoppage, drew workers, the unemployed, pensioners, educators, students, and others affected by Milei's severe austerity measures and his administration's plans for more deep cuts. Demonstrations continued throughout Thursday.
"In the face of intolerable social inequality and a government that ignores calls for better wages and a dignified standard of living for all, the workers are going on strike," CGT explained ahead of the action.
Airlines canceled hundreds of flights as air traffic controllers and other airport workers joined the strike; many schools, banks, and other offices shut down; and ports, some public transport, and other services ground to a halt.
"The only thing the administration has brought is a wave of layoffs across state agencies, higher poverty rates, and international debts, which are the biggest scam in Argentina's history," the Association of Airline Pilots (APA) said.
Rodolfo Aguiar, secretary general of the Association of State Workers (ATE), said Wednesday that "after this strike, they have to turn off the chainsaw; there's no room for more cuts," a reference to both Milei's ubiquitous campaign prop and his gutting of public programs upon which millions of Argentinians rely.
"Right now, the crisis Argentina is facing is worsening," Aguiar added, warning about government talks with the International Monetary Fund. "The rise in the dollar will quickly translate into food prices, and the new deal with the IMF is nothing more than more debt and more austerity measures."
Milei's government is nearing agreement on a $20 million IMF bailout, a deeply unpopular proposition in a country left reeling by the U.S.-dominated institution's missteps and intentional policies that benefit foreign investors while causing acute suffering for millions of everyday Argentinians. Argentina already owes $44 billion to the IMF.
"We already have experience as Argentinians that no agreement has been beneficial for the people," retiree and striker Rezo Mossetti told Agence France-Press in Buenos Aires Thursday, lamenting that his country keeps getting into "worse and worse" debt.
CGT decided to launch the general strike during a March 20 meeting that followed a pensioner-led March 12 protest outside the National Congress in Buenos Aires. After fringe elements including rowdy soccer fans known as "barrabravas" joined the protests and committed acts of violence and vandalism, police responded by attacking demonstrators with "less-lethal" weapons including water cannons and tear gas. A gas canister struck freelance photojournalist Pablo Grillo in the head, causing a severe brain injury that required urgent surgery.
This, after Argentinian Security Minister Patricia Bullrich invoked controversial measure empowering more aggressive use of force against protesters and rescinding a ban on police use of tear gas canisters. The Security Ministry also filed a criminal complaint dubiously accusing organizers of the March 12 protest of sedition.
Milei and his supporters have portrayed the general strike as a treasonous assault on the fragile Argentinian economy and those taking part in the day of action as lazy and jobless.
When Clarín, the country's largest newspaper, cited a study by the Argentine University of Enterprise claiming that the general strike would cost the national economy around $185 million per day, University of Buenos Aires professor Sergio Wischñevsky retorted: "Very revealing. It means that's the magnitude of the wealth workers produce every day. It's the best argument to stop ignoring workers."
As he has done with past protests against his rule, Milei has also framed the general strike as "an attack against the republic" and repeated his threat that police would "crack down" on demonstrators.
Orwellian use of state infrastructure by Milei's "anarcho-capitalist" gvmnt. in Argentina. As the 36 hr. general strike begins, signs & loudspeakers at train stations across Buenos Aires read: "Attack against the republic! The syndicalist caste punishes millions of Argentines who want to work."
[image or embed]
— Batallon Bakunin ( @batallonbakunin.bsky.social) April 10, 2025 at 4:11 AM
General strikers largely shrugged off the threats of police violence and state repression.
"The right to strike is a worker right and I think there has to be more strikes because the situation with this government is unsustainable," Hugo Velazuez, a 62-year-old worker striking in Buenos Aires, toldReuters.
While the Argentinian mainstream media's coverage of the general strike was largely muted, images posted by independent progressive media showed parts of central Buenos Aires appearing practically empty.
Workers around the world showed solidarity with striking Argentinians.
"The Milei government has picked a fight with workers and pensioners, and now they will feel the full force of organized labor," said Paddy Crumlin, president of the London-based International Transport Workers' Federation (ITF), which boasts nearly 20 million members in 677 unions in 149 nations. "The international trade union movement stands ready to fight back with our Argentine comrades. We will not rest until these attacks on workers' rights are defeated."
ITF noted that various sectors of Argentina's transportation sector "are under direct threat of privatization," including the national commercial airline, Aerolíneas Argentinas, the National Highway Board, and the Argentinian Merchant Marine.
Milei—a self-described anarcho-capitalist who was elected in November 2023 on a wave of populist revulsion at the status quo—campaigned on a platform of repairing the moribund economy, tackling inflation, reducing poverty, and dismantling the state. He made wild promises including dollarizing Argentina's economy and abolishing the central bank.
However, the realities of leading South America's second-largest economy have forced Milei's administration to abandon or significantly curtail key agenda items, leading to accusations of neoliberalism and betrayal from the right and hypocrisy and rank incompetence from the left. According to most polling, Milei's approval rating has fallen from net positive to negative in just a few months.
Particularly galling to many left-of-center Argentinians is Milei's cozying up to far-right figures around the world, especially U.S. President Donald Trump.
Andrew Kennis, a Rutgers University media studies professor specializing in Latin America, noted similarities between the protests in Argentina and anti-Trump demonstrations in the United States.
"It's no coincidence that 5.2 million people were in the streets in all 50 states just this past Saturday and that the U.S. is now catching up with the mass resistance that's long been going on in Argentina," Kennis told Common Dreams Thursday.
Kennis—who this week published a deep dive on Milei's "destructive chainsaw theory" in Common Dreams—added that in the cases of both Milei and Trump, "there was no real honeymoon period, as there almost always is" for most new presidencies.
"In both countries, people were in the streets pretty damned fast and furiously," he added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
In the Ongoing Billionaire Heist, Schumer and Fetterman Are Driving the Getaway Car
While the senators claim to be fighting for the working class, their actions—like voting for a government funding bill that slashes social spending while protecting corporate interests—show they’re more focused on keeping the machine running than fixing what’s broken.
Mar 18, 2025
Let’s discuss something happening under our noses: The middle class is disappearing.
Last week, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) teamed up with Republicans to pass a government funding bill. If you ask them, they’ll say, “We did this to save American workers!”
But, if they cared about American workers, they wouldn’t have cut $13 billion from healthcare, education, and infrastructure while adding $6 billion to defense. Unless the average American is now classified as a fighter jet, that extra money isn’t going to help you.
So the next time a politician tells you they’re fighting for you, ask them: What are they doing to take wealth and power away from the billionaire class?
And that’s the problem. Over and over, we’re told that these decisions are in our best interest. Yet somehow, the rich keep getting richer while the rest of us are left with higher bills, lower wages, and a government that never seems to have money for schools or healthcare—but always has billions for bombs.
Why? Because the billionaires at the top have turned the economy into a giant vacuum—and guess what? It’s sucking up everything you own.
Here’s the kicker: Most people don’t even realize it’s happening. Things cost more. Your savings may be shrinking. But you still have food on the table, so it doesn’t feel like a crisis—yet.
Seniors notice it first—property taxes and school taxes. Their fixed income isn’t stretching as far, so they complain about taxes because they assume the government can do nothing about rising prices but can lower taxes.
Younger people? They know something is off, but they’ve been told to blame immigrants. ”They’re buying up your homes! They’re driving up rent!” That’s exactly what the rich want you to believe—because as long as we’re busy fighting each other, we’re not paying attention to the people rigging the system.
Are we going to fall for it again? Or are we going to start paying attention?
While Schumer and Fetterman claim to be fighting for the working class, their actions—like voting for a government funding bill that slashes social spending while protecting corporate interests—show they’re more focused on keeping the machine running than fixing what’s broken.
What’s broken? The fact that wealth isn’t disappearing—it’s just being moved.
The Pandemic Was Among the Biggest Wealth Transfers in History—And You Paid for It
It started how these things always begin: with regular people getting squeezed. Offices shut down. Businesses closed. Millions of people were laid off overnight. Rent was still due, bills kept coming, and suddenly, survival wasn’t just about avoiding a virus—it was about making it to the next month without losing everything.
Meanwhile, something very different happened in a parallel universe occupied by the world’s wealthiest men. In just two years, the 10 richest men on the planet doubled their net worth—going from $700 billion to $1.5 trillion. That’s an extra $15,000 per second. Not for doing anything new. Not for inventing anything, building anything, or working harder than anyone else.
At the same time, 160 million people fell into poverty. That’s roughly half the U.S. population—wiped out financially while the wealthiest men on Earth raked in $1 trillion.
This wasn’t an accident. It wasn’t a glitch in the system. It was the system. The pandemic proved that the real money isn’t in work; it isn’t in clocking in early and staying late. It’s in ownership. If you have read Rich Dad, Poor Dad, Robert Kiyosaki tried to teach us this; the rich listened.
Billionaires became more prosperous by owning companies that laid people off, raising prices, and cashing in on government bailouts. They owned the companies from which we bought food, mortgages, and electricity. The system isn’t designed to reward labor but to reward the people who profit from it.
Trillions of dollars in stimulus money flooded the market. Some of it went to everyday people, but most of it—directly or indirectly—ended up in the pockets of those who already had more money than they could ever spend. And just like that, the most significant wealth transfer in modern history was complete.
Your Wealth Didn’t Vanish—It Was Transferred Upward
During the Covid-19 pandemic, the government injected massive cash into the economy to prevent total collapse. And let’s be clear—that was the right move. Despite all the hand-wringing about inflation on the news, people needed money to survive.
But then, when workers didn’t immediately rush back to low-paying jobs, the rich threw a tantrum. Suddenly, they claimed that the government had “overstimulated” the economy—suggesting that people were so flush with cash that they just decided to stop working.
You’re not struggling because of bad luck or bad budgeting. You’re struggling because the rich own everything—and they’re making sure you own nothing.
Like most economic takes from the ultra-wealthy, this was a complete lie. Yes, increasing the money supply can contribute to inflation, but this kind of inflation is easy to manage. You can pull money back out of the economy through taxation or adjustments to monetary policy. The real problem wasn’t too much money—it was that, for once, regular people had a tiny bit of breathing room, and billionaires didn’t like it.
Here’s how they pulled off the biggest wealth heist in modern history:
We Pay Them for Everything
The rich don’t make money by working. They make money because they own everything, and because they own everything, we’re forced to pay them for everything.
- They own our homes → We pay rent.
- They own the businesses where we shop → We pay for goods and services.
- They own the farms and energy companies → We pay them every time we eat or turn on the lights.
- They own the banks → We pay them interest when we borrow money.
They Raise Prices—Because They Can
Now, here’s where it gets worse. Since they own everything, they set the prices. And what do they do? Raise them.
- Housing is unaffordable. That’s because investors buy homes and turn them into overpriced rentals.
- Grocery prices are ridiculous. That’s because big corporations own the farms, the processing plants, and the grocery chains.
- Energy bills keep rising. That’s because the same handful of companies own the power plants, oil refineries, and gas pipelines.
And when everything gets more expensive, what do we do? We pay them more, and now they have us blaming immigrants.
They Loan Us Money—And Make Us Pay Them Back With Interest
Since prices are rising faster than wages, most people can’t keep up. But instead of fixing the problem, the rich found another way to profit: debt.
- Can’t afford a home? Here, take out a mortgage—and pay them interest for 30 years.
- Struggling with everyday expenses? Just put it on a credit card—and pay them interest forever.
- Want to get an education? Take out student loans—and keep paying them long after you graduate.
So, we pay them for necessities, and when we can’t afford those things, we borrow from them—and pay them even more in interest.
The End Result?
Every year, the rich own more because they’re constantly collecting our money. Every year, we own less because we’re constantly paying them for necessities. And it gets worse. The more money they collect, the more they buy up assets—houses, land, businesses—making it even harder for the rest of us to catch up.
Schumer and Fetterman Just Helped Keep This Rigged System in Place
So why does this all matter? Because instead of addressing these problems, our leaders keep making them worse. Schumer and Fetterman’s latest vote shows exactly where their priorities are. They passed a funding bill that keeps the government running but at the cost of cutting billions from social programs. Meanwhile, defense spending—where corporations and wealthy investors make billions in profits—keeps growing.
It’s Time to Face the Truth
You’re not struggling because of bad luck or bad budgeting. You’re struggling because the rich own everything—and they’re making sure you own nothing. And as long as our leaders keep protecting them, things will only worsen.
So the next time a politician tells you they’re fighting for you, ask them: What are they doing to take wealth and power away from the billionaire class?
And let’s be clear—Chuck Schumer is not the leader we need right now. Under his watch, Democrats failed to deliver real economic relief, leaving millions frustrated enough to turn to President Donald Trump. Under his leadership, the party keeps acting like taking the high road will somehow fix a rigged system. It won’t.
It’s time to fight back. And that starts with demanding new leadership—because Schumer has already shown us whose side he’s on.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Neo-Feudalism: the Enemy the Left Must Name to Defeat
The only way forward is to complete the unfinished revolution against feudalism—not through reactionary nationalism, but through systemic transformation.
Mar 18, 2025
In 1776, America declared independence not just from a king, but from an entire feudal order. The promise was radical: no more lords and vassals, no more aristocratic monopolies, no more inherited rule. It was a vision of self-governance, economic freedom, and political democracy.
As we know, this promise was deeply flawed from the outset—built atop the brutal reality of chattel slavery, which entrenched a racial caste system even as the revolution sought to break from feudal hierarchy.
Still, the revolutionary spark—that governance should belong to the people, not an inherited elite—set a course for future struggles, from abolition to labor rights to civil rights. The unfinished promise of 1776 has always been to extend that right to everyone, dismantling old forms of domination wherever they persist.
The fight against neo-feudalism must be reclaimed by a left willing to challenge entrenched power at its roots, not merely manage decline.
Yet nearly 250 years later, we find ourselves under the shadow of a system that eerily resembles the one we once revolted against. Power is no longer held by monarchs but by corporate oligarchs and billionaire dynasties. The vast majority of Americans—trapped in cycles of debt, precarious labor, and diminishing rights—are not citizens in any meaningful sense.
We talk around this reality. We call it “money in politics,” “corporate influence,” and “economic inequality.” But these are symptoms, not the disease. The disease is neo-feudalism—a system in which power is entrenched, inherited, and designed to be impossible to escape. And unless we call it by its true name, we will never build the movement needed to fight it.
Feudalism may have faded in name, but many of its structures remain. Today’s hierarchy mirrors the past in ways we can no longer ignore.
- Then: Lords owned the land, and peasants worked it under their control.
Now: A handful of corporations and investment firms own vast swaths of housing, farmland, and industry. - Then: Aristocracies passed power down through hereditary privilege.
Now: Dynastic billionaires and corporate monopolies ensure that wealth remains concentrated in a ruling class. - Then: The peasantry was bound to their lords by custom, debt, and necessity.
Now: Student debt, medical bills, and stagnant wages trap entire generations in perpetual economic dependence. - Then: Political power was controlled by a small elite who ruled by divine right.
Now: The illusion of democracy masks the fact that billionaires fund both parties, controlling policy no matter who is elected.
This is not the free society America was supposed to be. It is a highly stratified system in which the many serve the interests of the few, with no meaningful path to real power. And worse, the establishment left—rather than challenging this order—has come to represent it.
The Democratic Party was once the party of the working class. Today, it has become the party of the professional-managerial elite—the bureaucrats, consultants, and media figures who believe that governing is their birthright.
The establishment left has in many ways absorbed the role of the aristocracy—not just in terms of wealth but in the way it positions itself as the enlightened ruling class. They claim to stand for “equity” and “democracy,” yet do nothing to challenge the real structures of power.
Instead, they manage decline while maintaining their own privilege—careful not to upset the donor class that sustains them.
As newly elected Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin put it, “There are a lot of good billionaires out there that have been with Democrats, who share our values, and we will take their money. But we’re not taking money from those bad billionaires.”
Pronouncements from global elites certainly don’t help either. The now-infamous slogan “You’ll own nothing and be happy”—popularized by the World Economic Forum and widely interpreted as a blueprint for a hyper-managed future—only fuels growing resentment toward an emerging system where ownership, autonomy, and mobility are increasingly out of reach for the average person.
This is why figures like Steve Bannon and reactionary populists have hijacked the narrative of neo-feudalism. Despite his own ties to oligarchs, Bannon has correctly identified that America is no longer a capitalist democracy but a feudal order where power is locked away from ordinary people.
He explicitly frames this crisis as a return to feudal hierarchy: “The ‘hate America’ crowd… they believe in some sort of techno-feudal situation, like was in Italy, back in the 14th and 15th century… where they are like a city-state, and there are a bunch of serfs that work for them. Not American citizens, but serfs, indentured servants.”
He has also drawn direct comparisons between modern economic conditions and serfdom: “Here’s the thing with millennials, they’re like 19th-century Russian serfs. They’re in better shape, they have more information, they’re better dressed. But they don’t own anything.”
However, Bannon’s solution—a nationalist strongman government—represents just another form of vassalage.
Reactionary populists like Bannon, President Donald Trump, and Tucker Carlson exploit real economic grievances and redirect them into a revenge narrative. Instead of seeing neo-feudalism as a system that transcends party or nationality—one that has evolved from medieval serfdom to corporate vassalage—they reframe it as a nationalist grievance.
Bannon likens “globalists” (an ambiguous term) to feudal overlords, but insists that nationalism can break their grip. Trump labels the deep state and liberal elites as the enemy, but assumes the role of a strongman to restore justice. Carlson says the working class is being crushed, but blames cultural elites rather than the billionaire class as a whole.
This misdirection is key. Rather than exposing the true architects of neo-feudalism—corporate monopolists, financial barons, and entrenched dynasties—these reactionaries redirect public anger toward an amorphous “cultural aristocracy” of media figures, academics, and bureaucrats. The real oligarchs escape scrutiny, while the working class is fed a narrative that pits them against cultural elites rather than the economic structures that keep them in servitude.
The only way forward is to complete the unfinished revolution against feudalism—not through reactionary nationalism, but through systemic transformation. The fight against neo-feudalism must be reclaimed by a left willing to challenge entrenched power at its roots, not merely manage decline.
The question is no longer whether neo-feudalism exists. The question is whether the left will finally recognize it—and act before it’s too late. If it fails, the fight will be lost to those who see the problem but offer only deeper subjugation as the solution.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular