Autor/es
Descripción
ver mas
Colaborador
Gradin, Agustina
Materias
Temporal Coverage
2015-2019
Idioma
spa
Extent
293 p.
Derechos
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 2.0 Genérica (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)
Formato
application/pdf
Identificador
Cobertura
CHL
ARG
2015-2019
Abstract
In this research we investigate, from a decolonial perspective, two movements of resistance to neoliberal pension reforms, the “Coordinadora Nacional de Trabajadores y Trabajadoras NO+AFP” from Chile (2013-2019) and the “Frente de Personas Mayores” de Argentina (2016-2019), to inquire on a less explored dimension in the literature on social movements: the knowledge that these organizations use to resist, act and dispute the hegemonic knowledge with which these reforms are promoted by the governments of Sebastián Piñera (2018-2022) and Mauricio Macri (2015-2019), from the logic of modernity/coloniality. We also analyze this way of promoting reforms and what issues were made invisible with it.
Affirming that these reforms were promoted from the modernity/coloniality logic (Lander, 2005; Mignolo, 2014a; 2007b; Escobar, 2003; 2010b; 2014; Dussel, 2005, 2014; Quijano, 2005, 2014a), means that they were presented as unique alternative to achieve the universal well-being of the elderly, even when its implementation deteriorated their living conditions, benefited a minority, and generated resistance in society. That even so they were approved, results from the legitimizing effectiveness of this logic that interprets the negative consequences of the reforms as derivative issues and not constitutive of their implementation: they are costs to achieve a better pension system or a result of the lack of tools to achieve a top model.
To do this, these reforms operated through a form of construction of knowledge, typical of the neoliberal civilizational project, based on “a-priori and universal principles of the modern individual”: being acting, desiring of real goods and free, condition of possibility of the modern order (Friedman, 2012; Friedman & Friedman, 1993; Hayek, 1990, 1995, 2007; Lippmann, 1938; Menger, 2007; Mises, 1968, 2002). On this, a “colonial difference” was established that in a neutral and objective way classified what knowledge was legitimate or not to contribute to the social security debate. And arguing that any intervention to these principles would mean a setback in human evolution and could only give negative results, the exercise of “epistemic violence” on others knowledge different from this narrative was justified, denying them, delegitimizing them or making them invisible (Walter Mignolo, 2003, 2007a, 2007b, 2014ª, 2014d).
In the interstices of this logic, we identify the knowledge that the “Coordinadora NO+AFP” and the “Frente de Personas Mayores” used to resist, act and dispute the hegemonic knowledge with which these reforms were promoted and that have delegitimized, made invisible or denied their alternative proposals.
To analyze the knowledge of the “Coordinadora NO+AFP” and the “Frente de Personas Mayores”, and the way in which the reforms were promoted from the modernity/coloniality logic, we used a qualitative methodological approach, based on the study of multiple cases. For the first point we carried out: in-depth interviews with leaders of both movements, content analysis of written and audiovisual material produced by them, the media and the academy; and non-participating observations. For the second point, we carry out content analysis of government public policies for the elderly and their proposals to solve pension problems, including reform bills; and we analyze the speeches and statements of the respective presidents and their officials.
Among the findings of this thesis is that in the processes of emergency, resistance and action against neoliberal pension reforms promoted from the modernity/coloniality logic, these movements used different knowledge. The “Coordinadora NO+AFP” used the knowledge acquired through the union experience of its referents, knowledge that showed the failure of the neoliberal Social Security System. He also developed new knowledge and ways to build it to make visible other ways to achieve the well-being of older people other than neoliberal. Among these are the technical proposal for a new pension system, and the collective and participatory forms of knowledge construction and interference in public policies. The “Frente de Personas Mayores” used knowledge acquired from the political experience of its members –understood as the articulation between political generations and militant ethos– to identify that a neoliberal government was not going to be good for the people and that it could attack the pension system. They also built new knowledge to defend the rights of the sector, such as retirement rights as a universal right and the social protection system as global and systemic, and the conception of older people as political subjects with the right to participate in policy decisions.
These knowledge and alternative forms of construction allowed to dispute the epistemological foundations of the neoliberal pension reforms based on the figure of the acting being, desiring of real goods and free, which in the case of the reform of the Piñera government we identify in a supposed law of human nature that impels man to save in times of abundance (active life) to have in times of scarcity (retirement), being the amount of pensions the result of the effort and responsibility of each worker in complying with this law and the ownership over the savings. In the reforms of the Macri government, we identify this figure in the concept of retiree as one who should be rewarded for have had a “truly genuine job” produced in the private world and have belonged to the “work culture”. In both cases, these conceptions served to substantiate in an "objective and true" manner the delegitimization, denial or invisibility of any alternative proposal to pension reforms, as they were obstructing the only way to achieve the well-being of the elderly and the development of the country, thereby making the deepening of the wealth and poverty gap invisible and the articulation of their pension proposals with the power relations of societies, presenting them as inexorable processes to achieve well-being.
Affirming that these reforms were promoted from the modernity/coloniality logic (Lander, 2005; Mignolo, 2014a; 2007b; Escobar, 2003; 2010b; 2014; Dussel, 2005, 2014; Quijano, 2005, 2014a), means that they were presented as unique alternative to achieve the universal well-being of the elderly, even when its implementation deteriorated their living conditions, benefited a minority, and generated resistance in society. That even so they were approved, results from the legitimizing effectiveness of this logic that interprets the negative consequences of the reforms as derivative issues and not constitutive of their implementation: they are costs to achieve a better pension system or a result of the lack of tools to achieve a top model.
To do this, these reforms operated through a form of construction of knowledge, typical of the neoliberal civilizational project, based on “a-priori and universal principles of the modern individual”: being acting, desiring of real goods and free, condition of possibility of the modern order (Friedman, 2012; Friedman & Friedman, 1993; Hayek, 1990, 1995, 2007; Lippmann, 1938; Menger, 2007; Mises, 1968, 2002). On this, a “colonial difference” was established that in a neutral and objective way classified what knowledge was legitimate or not to contribute to the social security debate. And arguing that any intervention to these principles would mean a setback in human evolution and could only give negative results, the exercise of “epistemic violence” on others knowledge different from this narrative was justified, denying them, delegitimizing them or making them invisible (Walter Mignolo, 2003, 2007a, 2007b, 2014ª, 2014d).
In the interstices of this logic, we identify the knowledge that the “Coordinadora NO+AFP” and the “Frente de Personas Mayores” used to resist, act and dispute the hegemonic knowledge with which these reforms were promoted and that have delegitimized, made invisible or denied their alternative proposals.
To analyze the knowledge of the “Coordinadora NO+AFP” and the “Frente de Personas Mayores”, and the way in which the reforms were promoted from the modernity/coloniality logic, we used a qualitative methodological approach, based on the study of multiple cases. For the first point we carried out: in-depth interviews with leaders of both movements, content analysis of written and audiovisual material produced by them, the media and the academy; and non-participating observations. For the second point, we carry out content analysis of government public policies for the elderly and their proposals to solve pension problems, including reform bills; and we analyze the speeches and statements of the respective presidents and their officials.
Among the findings of this thesis is that in the processes of emergency, resistance and action against neoliberal pension reforms promoted from the modernity/coloniality logic, these movements used different knowledge. The “Coordinadora NO+AFP” used the knowledge acquired through the union experience of its referents, knowledge that showed the failure of the neoliberal Social Security System. He also developed new knowledge and ways to build it to make visible other ways to achieve the well-being of older people other than neoliberal. Among these are the technical proposal for a new pension system, and the collective and participatory forms of knowledge construction and interference in public policies. The “Frente de Personas Mayores” used knowledge acquired from the political experience of its members –understood as the articulation between political generations and militant ethos– to identify that a neoliberal government was not going to be good for the people and that it could attack the pension system. They also built new knowledge to defend the rights of the sector, such as retirement rights as a universal right and the social protection system as global and systemic, and the conception of older people as political subjects with the right to participate in policy decisions.
These knowledge and alternative forms of construction allowed to dispute the epistemological foundations of the neoliberal pension reforms based on the figure of the acting being, desiring of real goods and free, which in the case of the reform of the Piñera government we identify in a supposed law of human nature that impels man to save in times of abundance (active life) to have in times of scarcity (retirement), being the amount of pensions the result of the effort and responsibility of each worker in complying with this law and the ownership over the savings. In the reforms of the Macri government, we identify this figure in the concept of retiree as one who should be rewarded for have had a “truly genuine job” produced in the private world and have belonged to the “work culture”. In both cases, these conceptions served to substantiate in an "objective and true" manner the delegitimization, denial or invisibility of any alternative proposal to pension reforms, as they were obstructing the only way to achieve the well-being of the elderly and the development of the country, thereby making the deepening of the wealth and poverty gap invisible and the articulation of their pension proposals with the power relations of societies, presenting them as inexorable processes to achieve well-being.
Título obtenido
Doctora de la Universidad de Buenos Aires en Ciencias Sociales
Institución otorgante
Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales