The effects of the global economic crisis in Latin America

Abstract

The aim of this article is to analyze the current phase of the global crisis and the way it has manifested itself in Latin America. The global crisis is the most important capitalist crisis since World War II. It is a new type of debt-deflation crisis, highlighting the limits of the finance-dominated regime of accumulation and characterized by securitization. Latin American countries have not been immune to the global crisis. Since it sets limits on globalization, the impossibility of maintaining exportdriven accumulation sustained by restrictive monetary and fiscal policies becomes clear. This time, there will be no way out in external markets for any country. That fact will force them to restructure productive systems and search for a way out in domestic markets and in regional spaces for integration.

CELAC: Mexican Foreign Policy Interest on Latin American and Caribbean Regionalism

“…This contributed to sharp currency devaluation in late 2008-early 2009. Mexico, Bolivia, Ecuador, and most major countries that are members of the Central America and the Caribbean were badly affected by the decrease in income from labor migrants (Guillén, 2011).…”

Central America Urbanization Review

“…Later during the 1990s, the regional economies flourished as the consolidation of peace, 2 sound macroeconomic policies and pro-trade reform, expanded foreign investment and positioned the region to take full advantage of the commodity boom. More recently, the region suffered the effects of the last global debt crisis indirectly through the United States, because of the country's importance as the region's major trade partner, investor, and source of remittances (Guillén 2011). Partly explained by sound macroeconomic policies, the crisis has not eroded financial markets in Central America as much as in other regions, but fiscal deficits and public debt have remained high since its outset in 2008 (IMF 2012).…”

Argentina y su desarrollo posterior a la crisis financiera

“…Además, se exploran las continuidades y diferencias entre las políticas previas y posteriores a la crisis en la intersección del capitalismo doméstico y global. Se argumenta que enmarcar el caso de Argentina en términos de un nuevo modelo enmascara las continuidades y tensiones con la acumulación neoliberal de la época anterior, como fue previamente examinado por académicos latinoamericanos tales como Azpiazu et al (1998), Cunha y Ferrari (2009) y Guillén (2011). Aún más, cuando el caso argentino más reciente es analizado en el contexto del discurso de un nuevo "modelo", puede ser atribuido a condiciones "locales" e interpretado como "autoimpuesto".…”

“…También se advierte del riesgo de superposición de modelos anglocéntricos para su estudio. Se afirma que enmarcar la historia reciente de Argentina en términos de un nuevo modelo conlleva el riesgo de enmascarar algunas de las continuidades y tensiones con el neoliberalismo de la antigua era, como fue examinada previamente por estudiosos latinoamericanos como Azpiazu et al (1998), Cunha y Ferrari (2009) y Guillén (2011).…”