Inspirational Balls
Plenty of Chileans are seriously disaffected with the economy, hopelessness prevails, everything's corrupt, they feel. But even the hardest of hearts will respond to a message of hope, it's human to want to be inspired.
Which is why it's that much more sickening that this Ethical Wage debate rages on, a complete red herring that it looks like The Santiago Times just picked up and ran with.
In an article covering union leaders' and politicians' outcry over the 200-1 disparity between the wages of executives and employees at supermarkets, the Times reports how the opportunistic fucks that politicians are got all Ethical Wage about it. I mean, that's fine. That's good reporting, etc, and it's an important article, but there's a serious gap which needs filling.
First, though, the mundane. They describe a "current US$145 minimum monthly wage", when they mean to say CH$144,000 which is the equivalent of about US$280, still bad of course, but not that bad ;-)
More substantially, the article goes on and on about a clever union-busting technique that Chilean supermarkets use.
Pinochet's 1980 constitution was a contract written under duress, yet 18 years after the restoration of "democracy", it's still the backbone of public policy in Chile. Eighteen years of a "representative" government hasn't gotten around to striking one of the biggest anti-labor scams off the books.
"Ethical Wage" is not the point. The point is to change the constitution and give labor a fair shot at negotiating salaries. But this "socialist" government continues to suffocate the la gente with pillows of buena onda.
"Ethical Wage" holds absolutely nobody accountable, boy ain't that something they can stand behind. Especially when something as important as supermarkets' abusive wages comes up - instead of taking a stand against the constitution, politicians voice loud support for a DOA initiative. All they care about is looking good.
And meanwhile everybody knows that the "Ethical Wage" won't work because:
1. Business won't pay more for unskilled labor when they're not legally obliged to
2. Anne Kreuger of the IMF says it won't.
I don't necessarily agree with Kreuger and the fascist Chilean economists who take up similar arguments, but their objections will only solidify the final result. Populists on the right and left and from the church can pose as the underdogs who took the side of the people, whoever does it best could pick up some seats in parliament, maybe even a presidency.
But the Times didn't even mention that constitutional context for the union-busting law, and that's what's so lame about that paper. All too often it runs with the national narrative and fails to take a more critical view of what people aren't talking about - maybe that's the most important part of "news".
Anyway, one Chilean described to me a feeling of elated excitement when Lagos first unveiled plans for Transantiago, many years ago. It promised to end pollution, and that truly inspired people. Now, Santiago is in the midst of an ongoing public transportation debacle which has only helped worsen the smog in Santiago.
Yes, many Chileans are poorly educated, and so politicians exploit that lack of understanding in order to get away with false promises. But at a certain point it's not about intelligence, or education. A message of hope is psychologically powerful. Marketers know that it's more effective than fear mongering. So it's not that Chileans are stupid - they're just normal people, the victims of pathological lies. Jaded, and able to be inspired - their hope consistently abused.
Which is why it's that much more sickening that this Ethical Wage debate rages on, a complete red herring that it looks like The Santiago Times just picked up and ran with.
In an article covering union leaders' and politicians' outcry over the 200-1 disparity between the wages of executives and employees at supermarkets, the Times reports how the opportunistic fucks that politicians are got all Ethical Wage about it. I mean, that's fine. That's good reporting, etc, and it's an important article, but there's a serious gap which needs filling.
First, though, the mundane. They describe a "current US$145 minimum monthly wage", when they mean to say CH$144,000 which is the equivalent of about US$280, still bad of course, but not that bad ;-)
More substantially, the article goes on and on about a clever union-busting technique that Chilean supermarkets use.
“Lider [a D&S chain] operates under 158 different trade names. This atomizes the company and destroys the collective bargaining force of the workers. This has made unionizing very difficult because unions must now negotiate store by store, not just with one company,” said Dep. Aguilo.Unfortunately, the article fails to, well, articulate why that is so. This funky little upstart called 21st Century Socialism does:
The use of multiple trade names among single chains presents a legal obstacle to unionization. Stores within the same chain may still be legally established as unique entities. A 2006 strike at Lider locations in Region V helped organizers recognize the difficulties.
Labour laws included in Pinochet’s 1980 constitution, forbid ‘inter-company’ negotiation, and many businesses are made up of many different companies, supposedly separate, to prevent the workers negotiating as one body. The biggest supermarket chain, for example, is composed of a holding company and 170 subsidiaries, one for nearly each shop.
Pinochet's 1980 constitution was a contract written under duress, yet 18 years after the restoration of "democracy", it's still the backbone of public policy in Chile. Eighteen years of a "representative" government hasn't gotten around to striking one of the biggest anti-labor scams off the books.
"Ethical Wage" is not the point. The point is to change the constitution and give labor a fair shot at negotiating salaries. But this "socialist" government continues to suffocate the la gente with pillows of buena onda.
"Ethical Wage" holds absolutely nobody accountable, boy ain't that something they can stand behind. Especially when something as important as supermarkets' abusive wages comes up - instead of taking a stand against the constitution, politicians voice loud support for a DOA initiative. All they care about is looking good.
And meanwhile everybody knows that the "Ethical Wage" won't work because:
1. Business won't pay more for unskilled labor when they're not legally obliged to
2. Anne Kreuger of the IMF says it won't.
I don't necessarily agree with Kreuger and the fascist Chilean economists who take up similar arguments, but their objections will only solidify the final result. Populists on the right and left and from the church can pose as the underdogs who took the side of the people, whoever does it best could pick up some seats in parliament, maybe even a presidency.
But the Times didn't even mention that constitutional context for the union-busting law, and that's what's so lame about that paper. All too often it runs with the national narrative and fails to take a more critical view of what people aren't talking about - maybe that's the most important part of "news".
Anyway, one Chilean described to me a feeling of elated excitement when Lagos first unveiled plans for Transantiago, many years ago. It promised to end pollution, and that truly inspired people. Now, Santiago is in the midst of an ongoing public transportation debacle which has only helped worsen the smog in Santiago.
Yes, many Chileans are poorly educated, and so politicians exploit that lack of understanding in order to get away with false promises. But at a certain point it's not about intelligence, or education. A message of hope is psychologically powerful. Marketers know that it's more effective than fear mongering. So it's not that Chileans are stupid - they're just normal people, the victims of pathological lies. Jaded, and able to be inspired - their hope consistently abused.
posted by Chileno @ 8:42 PM
Share on Facebook
Search This Blog:
7 Comments:
Fantastic post, Chileno. You hit the nail on the head when you say the Chilean people are hope, abused. That reminds me of how millions of people have donated to an organization supposedly dedicated to helping abused children. Del Nino Agregido doesn't really exist. Or the people who give alms to women beggars with babies that aren't really their own babies, they just borrow them to get more money.
Chilean people have had their trust and their hope abused way too much.
Ah, the memories of shopping in Lider...
If you ever get anything there, check your receipt. Almost every single time, there will be an item which just happens to cost a bit more than advertised. Only nobody bothered to update the price tags...
Another favorite tactic consists in selling several brands of a product, and shelving the expensive stuff where the label for something cheaper is, so that you are misled to believe you are buying something which costs less than it does. if you complain you will have to put up with the rudest staff in the world, who often tells you "you should just pay attention" as if stocking items where they belong is your job.
One of the most cynical things Lider has done is add the chilean flag to their uniforms, trying to pass themselves off as something which belongs to the people, underlining how they stand up for people in hard times with their "esfuerzo adicional" ads.
A friend of mine once interviewed for a corporate job there. This emblem of chilean entrepeneurship which is expanding abroad has job interviews which include such questions as "are you Catholic?" and "who did you vote for in the last elections?"
Way to go, Chile...
Christian, are you suggesting that a Jew should be able to work at Lider?
True and nice post.
But facts do not erase a general trend.
An interesting article by the economist:
http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9645174
and by the way what do we see on front page in Liberation ( french left newspaper) today ?
http://www.liberation.fr/
An interesting article and you tube link where we see the nice canadian police dressed in "delincuentes "infiltrating a protest just to create violent stuff.
I told you so ? lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=St1-WTc1kow&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eliberation%2Efr%2Factualite%2Fmonde%2F274056%2EFR%2Ephp
Lago, that Economist article is ridiculous and I hope that's what you meant by "interesting".
The fact that alternative ways of measuring poverty are now being discussed is a sign of how far Chile has come in the past two decades.
WTF? That is such a pathetic way to conclude an already baseless vouching for Chile's so-called progress. A few social programs and refrigerators that will take 30 years to pay off is fine. But for Christ's sake it's as if the author didn't want you to finish the article, where the truth is revealed. 27% poverty.
Oh, but that's according to European standards, which Chileans obviously don't deserve, therefore it's okay to slap up a nice little graph showing Chile's near abolishing-of-poverty. What unadulterated crap.
This article is a beautiful example of why the Economist's no-byline policy is a failure. Who would ever put their name to such a self-contradictory piece of rubbish.
After reading this, one can only conclude that the real progress is that people are allowed to opine about things. Gimme a break! As if that were a revolutionary step forward???
Pinochet stepped down from office 18 years ago, dude. Even in Putin's Russia, in Mubarak's Egypt, you can say whatever you want. But like in Chile, the media that most people access is controlled with an iron grip by the forces in power, in Chile's case, neoliberal business interests. In fact, there was even more ideological diversity under PINOCHET than today!
And Lagos did a much more effective job at driving up inequality than Pinochet ever managed.
Progress.
There was so much FLUFF in that Economist article, they tried so hard to convince you that things are improving, they wanted it too much, you can tell by the sappy, flowery writing that pollutes most of the piece -- I do credit them for pointing out the extreme poverty by European standards, and I'm surprised they did so. I guess they have good standards in that regard but to save face they shouldn't have published that piece in the first place.
I spent the morning hanging out with Marcel Claude (of Political Ironies to Cry About fame) and he put it this way: if you consider 400/month/person to be a poverty line, then 8 out of every 10 Chileans are poor. Not destitute, like the Hogar de Cristo, but that your life sucks and you're constantly worried about money. You KNOW that Santiago is fucking expensive, Lago.
Anyway, about that YouTube video I'll watch it when I have more time but I don't really see what it proves. That cops in Canada are bad? Fine, you win. But I never said they weren't. When I wrote the "I told you so" post it was about Bachelet's jumping the gun and accusing the police of acting wrongly in that specific situation before an investigation could occur. I warned those jumping on that bandwagon that they were being ridiculous. I was right.
"Marcel Claude"?? Oh boy, now I get it. Now I know why this gringo who never visited Chile 20 years ago, thinks progress in this country has been zero, and that we're all some brown, poor, chipmunks-looking people that he supposedly loves.
Well, duh, if you hung out with extreme-leftists like Claude, that's to be expected.
So impressionable, are you, gringo?
Do you really know the country that is paying your bills?
>>>this gringo who never visited Chile 20 years ago, thinks progress in this country has been zero,
I don't recall making a blanket statement about progress being zero, please point out exactly what you're referring to, so I can back it up. I think progress is a relative term, but let's have a closer look at what you're referring to before I go any further.
>>>that we're all some brown, poor, chipmunks-looking people that he supposedly loves.
What is your point? Has progress made you less brown (as if brown were bad) less poor (certainly some have benefited, and perhaps conditions have improved for some)
Regarding the chipmunk thing it's amusing that you recall that :-) If you're not aware by now, it is extremely common in literature, film, conversation, etc to use animal features to describe humans, (and vice-versa), and I've done so in jest all my life, it is not something I reserve specifically for Chileans so if you take offense, don't, none is intended and please don't confuse it with politics or your own very probable racism, as it's quite clear (unless you just phrased your above comment badly) that you are very ashamed that Chileans could be brown, as well as poor.
>>>Well, duh, if you hung out with extreme-leftists like Claude, that's to be expected.
Can you provide substantial arguments against those of Claude? I would be happy to engage you in intelligent debate about his ideas. That "extreme-leftist" would somehow preclude the validity of his arguments puts you in a conundrum, because by labeling others you must be subject to a label yourself. Let's say "center right" for the sake of argument. As such, one can just as easily preclude the validity of your argument as you can Claude's. You only do yourself a disservice.
>>>Do you really know the country that is paying your bills?
What the fuck are you talking about? I pay for practically everything I consume here. The one thing I occasionally don't pay for is the bus, which is paid for by its users, not by "Chile".
And even if Chile were somehow "paying my bills" as you erroneously assume, so what? (BTW: whose bills does Chile pay?). Would that be some sort of hush money? Because someone receives services from the state does that negate their right to free speech?
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home