Economía y política. Disputas hegemónicas entre los actores de poder en torno al proyecto de expropiación del Grupo Vicentin durante el gobierno de Alberto Fernández
Cargando...
Archivos
Fecha
Authors
Título de la revista
ISSN de la revista
Título del volumen
Editor
UNR Editora
Resumen
Este trabajo investiga los posicionamientos y disputas discursivas entre los actores políticos clave en torno al proyecto de expropiación del conglomerado Vicentin, durante el gobierno de Alberto Fernández (junio-julio de 2020). Como resultado del análisis empírico-discursivo, encontramos una intensa lucha hegemónica en torno al proyecto. Por un lado, hallamos un paquete de discursos que se expresaba a favor de la medida y se condensaba en la defensa de la soberanía alimentaria, el rescate de una empresa estratégica para regular los precios del mercado interno, controlar las divisas y evitar devaluaciones bruscas, preservar los puestos de trabajo y garantizar el pago a sus acreedores. Además, afirmaba que se trataba de una medida excepcional, destacaba que Vicentin se hallaba en quiebra y acusada de maniobras fraudulentas. Por el otro, encontramos un paquete discursivo contrario al proyecto, que invocaba como argumentos la inconstitucionalidad de la medida y sus efectos negativos sobre la seguridad jurídica y la confianza necesaria para atraer inversiones. Además, sostenía que todos los argentinos tendrían que hacerse cargo de la deuda de una empresa privada, catalogaban como una “excusa” la defensa de la soberanía alimentaria y consideraban que Argentina iba camino a un modelo “chavista”. En la última parte del artículo, abordamos el impacto hegemónico de la medida a nivel institucional y social, que derivó en protestas sociales y una judicialización de la política y concluyó en el bloqueo del proyecto.
This paper investigates the positionings and discursive struggles between the key political actors around the expropriation project of Vicentin conglomerate, during the government of Alberto Fernández. As a result of the research work, we found an intense hegemonic struggle around the project. On the one hand, we found a package of discourses that expressed itself in favor of the measure and was condensed in the defense of food sovereignty, the rescue of a strategic company to control prices in the domestic market, regulate the foreign exchange and avoid abrupt devaluations, preserve jobs and guarantee payment to their creditors. In addition, it affirmed that it was an exceptional measure, stressed that Vicentin was bankrupt and accused of fraudulent maneuvers. On the other, we found a discursive package contrary to the project, which invoked as arguments the unconstitutionality of the measure and its negative effects on legal certainty and confidence necessary to attract investment. In addition, it maintained that all Argentines were going to take over the debt of a private company, classified the defense of food sovereignty as an ‘excuse’ or considered that Argentina was on the way to a ‘chavista’ model. Finally, we address the hegemonic impact at the institutional and social level, which generated social protests and a judicialization of politics and ended in the blocking of the project.
This paper investigates the positionings and discursive struggles between the key political actors around the expropriation project of Vicentin conglomerate, during the government of Alberto Fernández. As a result of the research work, we found an intense hegemonic struggle around the project. On the one hand, we found a package of discourses that expressed itself in favor of the measure and was condensed in the defense of food sovereignty, the rescue of a strategic company to control prices in the domestic market, regulate the foreign exchange and avoid abrupt devaluations, preserve jobs and guarantee payment to their creditors. In addition, it affirmed that it was an exceptional measure, stressed that Vicentin was bankrupt and accused of fraudulent maneuvers. On the other, we found a discursive package contrary to the project, which invoked as arguments the unconstitutionality of the measure and its negative effects on legal certainty and confidence necessary to attract investment. In addition, it maintained that all Argentines were going to take over the debt of a private company, classified the defense of food sovereignty as an ‘excuse’ or considered that Argentina was on the way to a ‘chavista’ model. Finally, we address the hegemonic impact at the institutional and social level, which generated social protests and a judicialization of politics and ended in the blocking of the project.
