The quote continues: “It contrasts the abandonment of the market to the fate of the peasantry who had acceded to the property, with the generous assistance given by the State to banks and companies, as well as to debtors in dollars or mortgages, most of them with high incomes. .. Barios billions of dollars represent fiscal transfers to banks. Debtors in dollars and mortgages. This alone explains the enormous effort that the State, and ultimately the country, must make to pay the external doubt, which while enjoyed was private “(NOTE 6).
In the context of an economy indebted beyond what is reasonable, the privatization trend expressed since the first phase of the Pinochet government was accentuated.
Apart from the stated objectives, which supposedly would have to do with a massive spread of the ownership of large companies, there are real profound objectives that show the effective orientation of the model based on repression and the systematic violation of human rights:
to secure new income to the Treasury through the sale of public companies, without even considering “national security” reasons that would discourage alienation. Given the distressing shortage of foreign exchange, this is a purpose of great importance;
try to shrink the State, in order to challenge it to power, seen as a potential threat by economic groups and sectors of the political right. Risk that increases in the event of a return to democracy. Through the dismantling of the State, the very society on which it rests and to which, as it is proclaimed, would like to give greater quotas of freedom, is weakened.
“It is … to atomize the decision-making process in such a way as to turn it into a chasm of individual calculations that make the recourse to collective action and globalization unnecessary and irrelevant. This supposes a society converted into a juxtaposition of segmented decision markets : on the one hand, a State increasingly reduced in its role as economic agent and in its redistributive capacity, but strengthened in its potential to authoritatively protect the rules of the game, and on the other, and finally, a political arena of representations limited to the options given within those rules of the game. A reduced State is in this conception a stronger State, not only because it is more manageable bureaucratically, but because it will avoid the proliferation of political actors under pressure to influence decisions that will no longer belong to its scope. That is, what is reduced is the sphere of politics “(NOTE 7).
Such a deeply anti-popular model, obviously, could only prevail and is maintained by force. She was directed against the majority political and social actors in order to destroy them, or at least neutralize them.