Desarrollo

More details about the student mobilizations.

Quite some time ago, I wrote that I would try to explain my view of what is going on in Chile with respect to the student movement. I said I would break it into chunks to keep the size manageable, I wrote the first chunk, and then I promptly forgot about the project. However, since the paro (strike) has now entered its sixth month in many schools, I figure it's high time to revisit the subject. As the last chunk was posted over a month ago, I'll repost it below before moving on.

Note: I will try to approach this issue from a more general perspective, but most of my informal investigation of the topic has tended to focus on economic analysis and my personal experience. My apologies in advance for any economics jargon or boring anecdotes that may slip in.

Chunk 1: the March of the Penguins

One of the principal antecedents of the current movement was another student mobilization in 2006. This movement was called "the march of the penguins", so named because the students' uniforms made them look like penguins. The main objective of these protests was to achieve greater equality in education. Some specific demands were free/reduced student fares in public transportation, reduced/waived fees for taking the university entrance exam, and repealing the eleventh hour omnibus education bill that constituted the Pinochet government's parting gift to Chile. In answer to the protests, the center-left government promised a lot and delivered little. Many students today feel betrayed by their politicians for the lackluster response to the march of the penguins.

End of Chunk 1

Chunk 2: Imposed freedom

The more general antecedents of the movement have to do with the history of Chile. After the military coup in 1973, the Chilean economy went through a twenty-year liberalization process. This series of reforms, aimed at opening the economy to foreign trade and investment and at privatizing historically government-controlled markets, was primarily guided by a group of Chilean economists called the "Chicago Boys", so called because they had received their economics training at the University of Chicago. Their ideas were heavily influenced by Milton Friedman and reflected a marked preference for free markets over government regulation. Despite what Friedman described as the "Miracle of Chile", in which the Chilean economy experienced relatively high GDP growth in the late 80s and early 90s, many Chileans feel the economic reforms were extremely damaging to the country because the economic gains primarily benefited a very small group of wealthy families.*

Chile has a long history of social and economic inequality stretching back to when it was the southern border of the Inca Empire. The arrival of the Spaniards, and subsequent subjugation of the indigenous peoples introduced new and equally rigid social stratification. The process of independence, expansion, and industrialization were also dominated by the economic and social leadership of a select class of elites. Needless to say, capitalism rampant at the end of the 20th century didn't help very much. The gap between rich and poor continued to grow. (In 2008, the CIA calculated Chile's Gini coefficient as 54.9, roughly on par with the rest of Latin America.)

One of the primarily gripes that Chileans have with the military dictatorship's free market reforms (many of which remain in effect today) is the privatization and/or deregulation of natural monopolies and public goods. Some examples are utilities like power and water, health care, and university education... especially university education. A lot of people believe it was exceedingly unwise to unleash profiteering in these areas and that as a result the lower classes are paying heavily for the lucrative returns being carved out by businessmen in sectors where the state ought to protect consumers.

The takeaway from all of this consists in four points. Currently in Chile we have:

1. An economic culture oriented towards unregulated, and often unfair, competition.
2. A high degree of income inequality.
3. Profiteering in social necessities like education.
4. Resentment of all of the above.
   

Next chunk I'll talk about why these are important in the context of the student movement today.

*And of course, many Chileans feel exactly the opposite. As with many elements of the Pinochet regime, there is definitely no consensus of opinion among Chileans on the topic of economic reforms.

End of Chunk 2.