This conversation took place on Sept. 2, 2024.

 Could you introduce yourselves and talk about your organizations? What are the main struggles your organizations are facing at the moment?

, the national Indigenous peasant movement in Argentina. I am also part of the 

Centro de Formación, Educación e Investigación Campesina Tierra

, which is a national center for political training. A fundamental element we need as movements at this moment is political training, to have unity in thought and action and address the political crisis we are experiencing within our organizations since Javier Milei was elected. Regarding struggles, we face many. In the province of Mendoza, we are deeply focused on advancing our demands and struggles for public policies on food production, defending Indigenous and peasant lands from multinational mining companies, and fighting for water rights. We are very committed to the struggle for peasant rights, which we are building together with 

 I am part of the continental secretariat of 

, a coalition of political parties and popular movements from around 25 countries in Latin America and the Caribbean that represents more than 400 organizations. ALBA Movimientos formally began in 2013, when its first assembly was held in Brazil at Florestan Fernandes, the political training school of the 

. ALBA represents Latin America and the Caribbean in the International People’s Assembly, which coordinates with five other regions worldwide. Its main objective is to organize and strengthen mass anti-imperialist struggles through research, communication, and political solidarity plans, including solidarity struggles with resistance peoples around the world. We also focus on political training and have built a continental political training system aligned with anti-imperialist struggles, Bolivarianism, and defending the revolutions in Cuba and Venezuela. Today, the secretariat is located in São Paulo.

 I am a former national coordinator of the Movimiento de Trabajadores Campesinos Indígenas Sin Tierra de Bolivia (MST-B) and the current Bolivian representative on the political committee of 

. I am also Bolivia’s secretary of Indigenous justice.

 The United States has a history of supporting coups in Latin America, including the coup in Bolivia in 2019 and the institutional coup in Brazil in 2016. Donald Trump is a great ally of the far-right president of Argentina, Javier Milei. How could the U.S. election affect the balance of power in these countries? Is it possible to analyze the different scenarios with a victory for Trump or Kamala Harris?

 The United States has a state policy of expansion and intervention, regardless of who is in power. In 2018, during Mauricio Macri’s presidency, the Trump administration endorsed a $57.1 billion loan to Argentina, the largest in the history of the IMF. The debt we’ve been carrying has severely impacted Argentina. The loan wasn’t used to improve people’s lives, as Macri initially promised. Instead it was used to guarantee financial speculation and once again hand over the country to international organizations that have various objectives against our interests. We ended up in debt, and that was only possible with Trump’s support. Macri’s economic reform program, which was market-oriented, was also backed by Trump. A Trump victory would have a significant impact for Argentina, especially because of his friendship with Milei. With the worsening economic situation, Milei’s legitimacy now depends on a new loan from the IMF. His approval rating has dropped. The Regime of Incentives for Large Investments (RIGI) proposed by Milei, which has already been approved by legislators, clearly opens the door for Trump and the U.S. to take control of Argentina’s natural resources. If Trump wins, he will signal support for Milei, which will impact the Argentine people.

 Giovani, how do you see the intersection between imperialism, the U.S. strategy of ensuring dependency through loans, and the anti-imperialist struggle?

 An important starting point for us within ALBA Movimientos is that it doesn’t matter who the tenant in the White House is. Democrat or Republican, imperialist policies will prevail. It’s always better if the far right loses, though. If Trump wins, the fascist project will be better funded — arms production will accelerate and the military-industrial complex will grow. If Harris wins, it doesn’t mean we will have a path of peace, security, and stability ahead. They have different tactics, but the bosses are the same for both candidates. A victory for Harris would signify a victory for the sectors that support a more classical neoliberal agenda. If Trump wins, it would be a victory for far-right sectors with a reactionary agenda. Economically, both are neoliberals, but the far right promotes a savage policy of completely annihilating those they identify as enemies.

Under Bolsonaro’s government, we saw what this meant for agrarian conflicts, mining, big landowners and large estates, as well as increased attacks on Indigenous peoples, small farmers, and peasants. We also witnessed a rise in evictions and police violence against these populations. Both Bolsonaro’s and Milei’s laws, as Marta mentioned, are purely about handing over national lands to foreign capital. What Milei is proposing would deliver maximum accumulation to foreign capital while leaving all the environmental destruction and damage to the Argentine people. We see the same in El Salvador with Bukele, in Ecuador with Noboa, and so on. There are many representatives of this neofascist bloc, which combines neoliberal policies with fascist actors.

Another bloc in the region represents what Álvaro García Linera has described as “

.” These are governments that, because of the conflicting interests within their broad coalitions, can’t fully implement a leftist agenda once in power. We see this with Petro in Colombia and Lula in Brazil — they are trapped in a very complicated national agenda, unable to fully articulate policies for their people’s dignity because parliament prevents them from advancing. The weak progressivism bloc won’t break ties with the United States or European imperialist countries if Trump wins, opting for a policy of minimal conflict. They will continue trading and working as usual. A third, socialist bloc, which includes Cuba and Venezuela, follows a different kind of politics. Whether Harris or Trump wins, this bloc will still suffer maximum pressure and sanctions, even though the empire depends on Venezuelan oil. Venezuela is the epicenter of the class struggle on the continent. These three blocs help us understand how the empire reacts depending on who leads the government. It’s a complex scenario, with many layers, but Trump’s defeat would also be a moral defeat for Bolsonarism in Brazil, making it a bit easier for us to continue our struggle. Since 2016, with the coup against Dilma Rousseff, our people have suffered many attacks from the pro-imperialist governments of first Michel Temer and then Bolsonaro, as well as Trump and the international far right.

Men wearing Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro heads hold a sign protesting Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes at an Independence Day rally, São Paulo, Sept. 7, 2024. Photograph by Miguel Schincariol/AFP, via Getty Images.

 Silvestre, could you talk about Bolivia and how popular movements are analyzing the U.S. presidential election? How could the results affect the balance of power in your country?

 U.S. state policy remains the same whether Democrats or Republicans are in power — it’s always about intervening in Latin American politics to control natural resources. Some, like Trump, are more aggressive about it. He’s more focused on Latin America than Democrats like Biden or Harris. For us, both candidates mean continued regional imperialist disputes over our natural resources: the lithium triangle; Venezuelan oil; agribusiness in Brazil, Bolivia, Argentina, and Paraguay; and the Guarani aquifers in the Paraná basin. All these natural resources are in dispute. Some U.S. candidates are more focused on Latin America, others more on the Middle East or elsewhere, as we see with the war in Israel and the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. But obviously, things are more complicated with Trump. We should remember that during the last months of Trump’s term, the U.S. was almost on the brink of civil war. For us, it meant direct interventions in our governments, especially the progressive ones, including the 2019 coup in Bolivia and the soft coup in Brazil via the judiciary. Trump means constant attacks on progressivism. Harris means continued disputes over natural resources in Latin America and worldwide. There will always be sanctions against countries that don’t align with imperialism. If Trump returns, the fascist sectors in Santa Cruz and Bolivia’s far-right political class, who always bow to the American empire, will react immediately. But as the others have said, whether Harris or Trump, intervention in Latin America remains constant. For us, the response must be to continue organizing, to keep resisting, and to strengthen our alliances between social movements and progressive governments in Latin America.

 Marta, how might the U.S. election affect or promote a change in strategy for popular movements fighting for land rights and healthy food in Argentina? Popular organizations have denounced Bayer, the owner of the American company Monsanto, for human rights violations in Latin America through the production of genetically modified soy. Will this type of strategy, based on denouncing capitalist companies headquartered in the United States, change depending on the election results, or will the strategy and tactics remain the same regardless?

 We are dealing with 18 percent of the population living in extreme poverty and 50 percent living in poverty. According to UNICEF, 1.5 million children have only one meal a day. This is the reality we are facing in Argentina. The approval of the RIGI is another looting, a sacrifice of the territory to Monsanto, transnational companies, agribusiness, and mining companies. Bear in mind that this law was approved under a police state and repressive blockade in Buenos Aires — nothing good will come out of that.

We are losing food sovereignty and many public goods, including those from the Ministry of Women and those provided by the Family Agriculture law. We have no resources to support agricultural production, and gas prices have gone up by 340 percent. Who can work the land, even on a small plot, with the cost of fuel and the takeover of local seeds? What strategy can get us out of this situation? This is the big question in our debates and political training sessions. We need to develop a collective understanding of what’s happening not only in Argentina but in the region and figure out how we can creatively build popular power. We must convince more comrades that the way out is collective action. We must rebuild a political project for the country where food sovereignty is one of the main goals.

I stress the importance of spaces for political training to have unity in action and prepare leaders. We need politically trained territorial leaders who, in a revolutionary moment, can build national and popular programs and sustain the political goals we have, like the struggle for agrarian reform, food sovereignty, and agroecology. We need creativity in forming leaders and working with other organizations, and we also need to shed a lot of the prejudices that often exist within our own organizations. We need to think about what we’ve been doing to build new strategies because clearly there was something the movements in Argentina did wrong for us to have Milei in power.

 with rural workers from Brazil and the United States, discussing the potential for strategic convergence between the two countries. Giovani, what are the possibilities for coordination with organizations based in the U.S.? Is this part of ALBA’s objectives?

Giovani Yes, absolutely. It’s strategic to build and weave relationships through political training, solidarity brigades, cooperation between organizations, exchanging organizational experiences, and strengthening one another’s political work. In April 2019, American anti-interventionist groups did not allow far-right Venezuelans in the U.S. to 

 in Washington, D.C., when the self-proclaimed president Juan Guaidó and the Venezuelan right wing in other countries tried to invade Venezuelan embassies.

I’d like to address whether the movements would change if Kamala or Trump wins. As Silvestre pointed out, one has a stronger focus on Latin America, while the other not so much. But what our movements are fighting against is the ruling class of our own countries. It’s this same ruling class that is the junior partner in this imperialist system. The fight will continue with the same intensity, because we know U.S. imperialism is in decline — compare the U.S.’s power in international politics in the 1990s and today. But what does that mean for us? From our perspective, it means even more violence in the world — the violence of capital accumulation. The ruling classes in our countries are becoming even more violent. So, from our side, there’s a tactical adjustment if Trump wins, and there’s a set of actions we must take into account. Having a Bolsonaro-type government is very different from a Lula-type government. There are different tactics for exerting pressure against a neoliberal resistance government. But at the end of the day, the enemy remains the same: the ruling class that is subordinate to the empire.

The three key issues for the working class are, first, the debts not only of governments but also of families — more and more the working class is in debt. The second issue is public insecurity and evictions, which are carried out by the ruling class’s guard, the police. And the third is the ecological crisis, which is leading to increasing violence aimed at accumulating water, land, and our natural resources. Exploitation and violence are strengthening.

Police evict Venezuelan and Colombian migrants living in tents at Plaza Brasil, Iquique, Chile, Sept. 24, 2021. Photograph by Martin Bernetti/AFP, via Getty Images.

 What is the popular movements’ strategy to confront the growing power of U.S. imperialism over natural resources in Bolivia?

 It’s clear that in every country, fighting against a progressive government isn’t the same as fighting head-on against a far-right government. Trump is very aggressive toward Latin America, and I’m not sure how Harris will be. But there’s a risk that the social crisis will deepen in Bolivia. Therefore, it’s important that we continue to develop regional and international alliances through La Vía Campesina, ALBA Movimientos, and other spaces that have been constructed as alternatives to the status quo.

Obviously, the ecological issue is crucial for us in South America. I believe Bolivia is one of the only countries on the continent where much of the territorial space and biodiversity still remain intact. In Brazil, practically all the land is used for cultivation and cattle farming; there’s almost no natural landscape left, and the same is true in Argentina and Paraguay. The burning of our biodiversity reflects the expansionist policies of the U.S. empire. Our forests burned three times this year. The 

 started in the Pantanal in Brazil and has now spread to the northern Bolivian Amazon. This is a 

 of everything the empire has been promoting.

We’re also under strong pressure from fascist movements in Argentina, and the Argentine crisis is severely impacting us in terms of food costs. It is also impossible for us to buy the supplies we need because we cannot trade in dollars. For example, fuel is sold in dollars, so how can we work? We believe that international alliances like 

 must work to create a regional currency capable of solving the exchange of goods between countries, rather than relying on a currency that has no real backing on a global level. We believe that weaving alliances between countries in the region and among social movements is the way to overcome all the attacks being carried out by the empire that is the United States.

Waldemar One of Hammer & Hope’s objectives with these roundtables is to share concrete experiences of struggle between organizations in Latin America and organizations in the United States. Marta, how do you see the connection between tactics and strategy in the movement you’re part of in Argentina and broader international alliances?

 As part of CLOC–La Vía Campesina, we have our training collective and the 

 (Latin American Agroecological Institutes). In the IALAs network, we have training spaces that are essential for cadre formation. We also have an annual national training program, the grassroots training schools across the provinces, spaces for peasant training, and two annual meetings to systematize our work. We exchange knowledge between provinces and countries, an idea we adopted from La Vía Campesina, which focuses on training peasants through the dissemination of agroecology, enabling political debate about the production model.

We’ve also worked on provincial alliances with unions and other companion organizations. We also work with community support houses, which are spaces where young and not so young people can seek help in finding their life’s project. We are also working a lot on the issue of gender-based violence. There are increasing numbers of femicides, and at our headquarters we have a women’s shelter, as well as a medical team and counseling services. There’s a lot of demand, and now that Milei has dismantled public services, there’s no support. Debt and suicides have increased significantly. The situation we are living through is extremely grave.

 There are a couple of actions that organizations linked to ALBA Movimientos are developing. For example, there are solidarity brigades in different countries strengthening organizational and productive ties, as well as technical and scientific cooperation. MST has permanent brigades in Haiti, Venezuela, and Cuba, where they work on agroecology and developing new farming techniques so that people in these countries don’t have to depend on agribusiness or the companies participating in the blockade against Cuba and Venezuela. Venezuela was well known for its dependency on imported food. This scenario has started to change. If you visited Venezuela in 2019 and then went back now, you would see a direct change in the amount of maize that is available. This is the result of the organization of comrades from the 

, which is like a federation of different communes. MST also has a permanent 

, where, along with Haitian peasant organizations, it develops new forms of food production. That aided food production in the face of extreme imperialist offensives against the sovereignty of the Haitian people. There are also literacy brigades based on 

There are various ways to organize through what we call internationalism of the people, based on direct cooperation between organizations and the idea that only the people can save the people. Each national movement already has a reservoir of resistance experiences, which will surely contribute to building and strengthening the popular movement in other countries. Above all, the struggles of solidarity are also a pedagogical way to grow our cadres, form our militancy, and carry out this international struggle. We fight from our countries, but we’re connected to a broad and global vision that the enemy is the same everywhere in the world: capital. Every blow we strike against capital contributes to this international struggle against the capitalist system and imperialism. Struggles, training, and organizational exchanges are tools that we use daily to strengthen the popular movements throughout this continent.

A celebration of the 26th anniversary of the founding of Bolivia’s  ruling party, MAS, La Paz, March 29, 2021. Photograph by Radoslaw Czajkowski/picture alliance, via Getty Images.

 The organizational diversity of Bolivia remains intact despite attempts to break it. In the first 20 years of democracy, the labor movement was an anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist unifying force, rooted in the miners’ and workers’ schools. The Indigenous peasant movement previously grew through organizing peasant unions and Indigenous-origin communities, and now has expanded into national and regional alliances and pacts. Organizations at the national level are working to structure the process of change through the 

Movement for Socialism — Political Instrument for the Sovereignty of the Peoples (MAS-IPSP)

. The Oriente bloc of MAS, based in the eastern department of Santa Cruz, focuses regionally on the joint struggle for the dignity of the territory but also its development. We’ve made considerable progress on dignity and the recognition of Indigenous nations and peoples. What were previously simply considered Indigenous groups are now recognized as nations and peoples, with their own languages, territories, and cultures.

We are now constructing tools to deepen the process of change in building alliances between the country and the city. This encompasses food sovereignty, organic agroecological production, and urban family agriculture. We are also strengthening and building alliances among regional organizational and political structures, such as peasant, urban, and youth congresses and territorial grassroots assemblies. At the international level, we also need to keep working with La Vía Campesina, ALBA Movimientos, and other progressive left-wing sectors to guarantee regional cohesion on strategies and clear positions in the face of the imperialist onslaught.

 What message would you like to send to activists and organizations in the United States?

 We internationalize the struggle, we internationalize hope. When we start talking, we see that we share the same problems, but little victories accumulate and help us keep moving forward. It’s important to understand that the task is collective, and we must trust in the saying that “the people save the people.”

 I also call on the people of the United States to organize and develop a political education process, because having an organized working class in the U.S. is fundamental. They should show solidarity with our struggles because these are working-class struggles — fighting against interference, fighting for the sovereignty and freedom of our peoples. There should be no interference by the U.S. in Cuba or Venezuela or by the ruling class in our countries. My wish is that the U.S. working class continue protesting in the streets, but that these large protests turn into organized movements against the empire’s system of exploitation. And that they vote for Claudia De la Cruz for president and support her political project.

 The latest waves of student protests against the war in Palestine give hope to the world and to Latin America that they can change the U.S. political system. For us, the United States is an imperialist dictatorship in full force. The best work the U.S. working class can do is to fight for democracy in their country, fight for the unity of the Americas. They cannot isolate themselves in a political space trapped between two parties that are the same. From Bolivia and South America, we believe that one day the people will wake up and build a true, full democracy. And we support that happening for the U.S. people.

Hammer&Hope

Silvestre Saisari

Contributions

Issue

5

Latin American Organizers Discuss the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election

FREE
TO READ

SIGN UP
TODAY