The problem of the student’s violence

During the last few weeks, the different sectors of the Salvadoran society –the communication media, the Ministry of Education, the National Civilian Police, the parents- are alarmed by the violent events in which the students of the different private and public schools are involved (either as victims or attackers). The violent deaths have been added to the street fights –which have become daily events at the different areas of San Salvador-. The motivations or the identity of the murderers are not clearly established yet. Without a doubt, the murders have forced the authorities to pay attention to a problem that is not as new as many people who ignore the historical facts of this country usually believe.

The problem of the violence among the students, it is true, became more critical after the Peace Agreements were signed. In this sense, this kind of violent acts followed the dynamic of other types of violence that also became more critical during the post-war period. In other words, the violence among the students cannot be isolated from the other types of violence that presently shake the country. However, the violence among students cannot be included in other types of violence, such as delinquency or the gangs, even if these aspects are present. Therefore, it is necessary to try to understand how specific this problem actually is, without confusing it with other types of violence. In the second place, it is necessary to focus it on a wider historical perspective, otherwise, its apparent novelty can hide its most profound aspects. Although there is no systematic information available, there is enough evidence to support a thesis according to which the violence among students is not something absolutely new, and nevertheless a direct inheritance of the past civil war. To see this problem as such is an easy approach, but it cannot be sustained if the evidence is thoroughly examined: before the war, the violence among the students was not only regular –the sports events were the traditional arena-, but much of the youth’s rebelliousness found a channel through the left-wing organizations, which were not necessarily characterized by their pacifism.

The armed conflict –in which many young people were involved, in the FMLN ranks as well as in the army- tarnished other forms of juvenile violence, and some times it even diluted them. However, those forms of violence –following the continuous line of the past- prevailed. Once the war was over –and when the political motivation had disappeared- they reappeared with its everlasting energy in a country with a considerable level of deaths caused by violent acts. To acknowledge this idea is not to justify the present violent acts committed among students, it is only an attention call for those who believe in the instant and the short term solutions for the complex and structural problems.

The violence among the students has to be treated with subtleness, accuracy, and intelligence. The instant solutions do not work and they obey more to the propaganda demands than to the social challenges that the country faces. That violence is part of a wider problem: the youth. However, this problem, at the same time, cannot be separated from another conflict: the adults. What are the coexistence formulas and the values that the Salvadoran adults offer to their young ones? What kind of society have they inherited –or are inheriting- to them? Obviously, it is not a fair and equal society, and many values and norms do not encourage patience, respect, solidarity, or dignity. Instead, those are completely different values and norms: a voracious competition, the abuse over the weak ones, fanaticism, and the “run for your own life” example.

In other words, the problem of the adults comes before the problem of the youth in El Salvador. And this problem is being ignored. Most of all, the adults –politicians, business people, teachers, parents- have not been capable of organizing a society in which the new generations feel comfortable. There are not many options to lead a decent life. The adults are those who spread values and rules that are opposite to a pacific coexistence. They are the ones who promote the disrespect to others and a set of double moral standards; both of these attitudes are harmful to the country: they condemn and insult everything they consider “bad”, but they do not hesitate on doing the “bad” things when they think that “nobody is looking”. Those double moral standards lead them to pretend that they are the “role model” for the youth, forgetting that the younger ones are neither blind nor stupid. The adults are the ones who disrespect the right to be young, including the risks and the dangers that it comes along with. Absurdly, the adults pretend that the young ones not experiment the process of making mistakes. However, the most critical mistakes are committed during adulthood. Many of those who want to “protect” the young ones did not even know how to protect themselves or the country. Finally, the adults are the ones who have mixed up everything: they have mixed up juvenile rebelliousness with delinquency, tattoos with gangs, sexuality with immorality, and music with perversion, everything with a halo of morality, which divides things in the “good” ones and the “bad” ones. They associate the good things with a lifestyle that only a few people can have: absolute moral rectitude, a total control of the human passions, discipline, asceticism, and tidiness in their wardrobe, among other things.

In summary, the adults of the present have forgotten that they were young once, and that most of their parents did not understand them –mostly when they had political worries- and that it frustrated them. Why does their sons’ situation have to be any different? Definitively, nobody can ask the young to stop being young, or prevent them from thinking and deciding by themselves. No one can ask them to behave according to an idealistic role model –respectful of the law, supportive, tolerant, dedicated to study, willing to serve others-, when their parents and teachers, as well as the civil and the religious authorities most of the time set a completely different example, and when the society is a hostile place for most of the young ones.

The businessmen take the pulse of politics

One of the arguments of John Keynes to discard a classic postulate, according to which during an economic crisis the equilibrium would be automatically reestablished by firing some employees and adjusting the salaries, was that the unions are powerful enough as to avoid the reduction of the salaries. From that moment, Keynes recommended the intervention of the state to encourage the demand during an economic crisis. Sixty six years after the publication of the General Theory, the Salvadoran businessmen intend to contradict Keynes’ approach. They do not only use an euphemism called “labor flexibility” to reduce the salaries of the workers, but they also support a series of economic measures that do not necessarily count with the approval of most Salvadorans. In this sense, the National Encounter of the Private Business Sector (ENADE 2002, in Spanish) wants to take the pulse of politics.

The private business sector does not need to parade on the streets to be heard. In El Salvador, the higher circles of power are “naturally” willing to listen to their needs. And, for this year, the businessmen identified the privatization of the remaining companies of the state, the labor flexibility, and the “radical changes” in the performance of the Salvadoran Institute of Social Security (ISSS, in Spanish) as the most urgent measures. To achieve these goals, ENADE 2002 does not skimp on efforts to convince everyone that those are measures that will contribute with the national interests. There is no doubt that they will be present at the meeting of the most important political leaders to guarantee the national character of the proposals made by the businessmen. President Flores will definitive give another pompous speech to highlight the perspectives of the ANEP.

After the annual meeting of the business sector is over, those present will have demonstrated how enormous is the political support it counts with. By then, this sector will have gathered not only those who take the most important political and economic decisions of the country, but also the country’s most important news media will announce how remarkable are the proposals of the business sector, which seek the welfare of the Salvadorans. In addition, they will assure certain advantages for the business sector they feel identified with; and, if they do not become the owners of the privatized companies, they will associate themselves with some foreign investor to gain a piece of the cake.

Will the lives of the Salvadoran workers actually change with that? Probably not. This is the third business encounter of this kind in El Salvador, and none of the former ones fulfilled the promises that were made to the country and to those who suffer the most. In addition, the proposals of the businessmen are not dealing with the most important issues. With this, not even the apparent inclusion of the workers’ demands has been helpful to incline the scale: according to what has been publicly spread, the demand for a salary increase, made by the labor sector, has not been included in the agenda.

Instead, the ANEP’s annual meeting has turned into an excellent political tribune for its most important members and the ARENA representatives. The arrangements for the encounter coincide most of the times with new declarations of the business and the official elites about the economic benefits that the free market brings along, the valuable bet made by the right-wing party for an economic openness, and the dangers that any decision made by the left-wing could represent, since it would attempt against these dogmas. President Flores, in his regular speeches, usually emphasizes on his approval to the businessmen’s initiatives, his disposition to practice their proposals and predict important changes on the economic situation of the Salvadorans.

The former ideas confirm the opinion which sustains that the ENADE is nothing but an opportunity for the businessmen to advertise their political strength. They are the only ones who count with such an important tribune which, in addition, is the center of attention of the news media. The media even rave about the “productive sector”. As it is becoming more evident nowadays, previously to the private business sector encounter, there are no limits about the positive appreciations that some reporters might come up with when it comes to talk about the already mentioned meeting. The businessmen are considered, in substitution of the politicians, as the main leaders of society, who, in addition, would have most of the power to evaluate the different solutions to the problems that worry the citizenry.

Is that what the Salvadorans want? This is a question that, evidently, those who are busy culminating the installation of the businessmen’s kingdom do not ask themselves. They are not only looking to put politics at the service of these gremials’ projects, but the representatives elected by the citizenry are declared inept when they criticize the business sector’s proposals. From this moment on, there is no room for discussions or for heterodox appreciations of their proposals: the business sector’s perspective is imposed and this puts an end to the debates. This is what the business sector’s contribution to resolve the national problems has been reduced to: a parody of the participation of the country’s different forces.

That is why the unions, another ignored social sector, should be organized to find its key role in the efforts to construct a new society. It is legal that the businessmen become organized to have an impact on the political decisions, but it is unacceptable that the other actors are excluded under the pretext of their left-wing tendency or because of their disagreement with the Neoliberal project. Everyone should be able to participate in the construction of the social destiny. And the politicians should understand their mission as the sector that, with its decisions, intends to harmonize the different interests that represent a social conflict. That is why it is completely unacceptable to deal every day with a joke called “the national compromise of our days”, when what is presented to us is a partial appreciation of the national problems. Propaganda and exaggerated declarations about the good intentions of the businessmen who sponsor the ENADE 2002, are nothing but an evidence of this unilateral manipulation of the facts.

In reference to this issue, the social actors, specially the political and the business elite, should pay more attention to the country’s problems. Experience has taught us that the social conflicts that El Salvador has known are the result of the exclusive and the obnoxious power that those who administrate the country have over the rest of the population. It would be a wise choice if the institutions that make most of the decisions would find a mechanism to naturally revert the tendency to ignore the claims of those in need. The continuous consolidation of the political and the social improvements achieved after the Peace Agreements depend on such mechanism. This is the opportunity for the the politicians to show that they have learned a lesson from the country’s history, and that they are not willing to repeat the same mistakes made by the former generations.

The decisive variables for the investment in El Salvador

The economic theory proposes an hypothesis according to which the investments are related in an inversely proportional way with the interest rates: the low levels of the interest rates do correspond with high levels of investment and vice-versa. Some finer versions about this approach explain that the investments can also depend on other aspects, such as the investment and the general savings decisions of the Capitalists, as well as the variations in the profits and the collection of the capital through a pre-established amount of time.

However, in El Salvador and in many other countries, reality defies theory and introduces new elements that have to be considered. The former idea can be stated because it seems that the interest rate does not always have positive effects over the investment levels, to judge by the national experience. For example, during 2001, when the interest rates on the one-year (and over) loans fell in almost two percentage points, the private investment fell from $1,848 million to $1,761 million, a slight reduction, but a considerable one. In this case, a reduction in the interest rates produced a similar effect on the investments, which contradicts the theory.

It is difficult not to notice that during the last six years the production has been reduced to low rates, reaching only 1.8 % in 2001, despite that the interest rates have been continuously reduced, even before the dollarization of the national economy (see Proceso 986). In that same period, the consumption level and the importations grew strongly, to the point of increasing its participation in the GNP. Between 1997 and 2001, the consumption level went from representing a 96.5% of the GNP to represent a 97.9%; while the importations went from a 37.6% to a 42.9% of the GNP, during the same period.
This suggests that most of the added demand is destined to consumption –supplied through importations- and not to the investments. The domestic production would not be taking advantage of the new demand, nor generating a considerable growth of the exportations enough to mitigate the clear tendencies towards the instability of the commercial balance.

In El Salvador, the reductions in the interest rates have not been turned into higher amounts of investment, although that does not mean that the consequences of this phenomenon are, in every case harmful. It has had positive effects for the clients of the banking system, but, most of all, for the financial sector because the former pay lower interest rates and the latter has a achieved a larger financial spread ( that is the difference between the active and the passive rates).

However, it is necessary to admit that it has also generated negative effects for the savers and those affiliated to the new pension system, who now receive less interests for their savings and for their contributions to their individual accounts. Additionally, the reduction process of the interest rates reveals that in El Salvador the investment promotion policies depend on other factors such as, for example, to obtain concessions that provide an easy access of products to The United States and the policies that promote the creation of “competitive” advantages for the country, including a restrictive salary policy. These approaches will be briefly explained throughout the following article.

An examination of the official economic indicators shows that the interest rates (active ones) for one year term (and over) loans have been reduced from 11.11%, in December 1998, to 9.01%, in March 2002. In other words a reduction of 2.1%, which turns pale compared to the reduction of the passive rates for deposits of 360 days –to mention those that were not considerably reduced-, which went from 6.50% to 3.56%, that is, they were reduced in 2.94% during the same period. The former idea has quite a few implications:

1)The debtors pay less interests for their loans;
2)The savers receive less for their savings;
3)The banks and the financial companies charge less for the granted loans, but they pay less for the savings that they receive and, therefore, end up making more profits than they did before. The spread in the former example went from 3.61, reached in December of 1998, to 5.45, during March of 2002.

On the other hand the fall in the private investment in 2001 suggests that new theories should be approached to explain the behavior of the investment. The interest rates can have an influence on the environment, however an economy that opens itself more to the exterior an to the globalization process should also consider the external tendencies and conditions. A sample of that is the atypical way in which the maquila investments behave, one of the most dynamic sectors of the economy. The domestic interest rates do not seem to be a considerable factor when it comes to decide how and when to invest, mostly because, generally, the investments in those sub-sectors are not financed with the resources of the local banking system, but with international capitals.

Instead, the investment decisions are influenced, more or less, by factors such as the special concessions made by The United States for the access to its markets; the flexibility of the labor and tax legislation; the conditions of the communication resources; the macroeconomic and social levels of stability; the low salaries; the qualification of the labor; and the geographic situation of the destination (the market in The United States, in this case). There is no doubt that if The United States makes the norms more flexible to have access to their markets, a “boom” of investments would get started, and new ways of using the resources of the “beneficiary” countries would begin. The flourishing of the cattle-raising activities and the cultivation of cotton during the sixties and the seventies was encouraged mostly by the possibility to export to The United States’ market. However, at the same time that the access to the markets generated investments, growth and employment, it also promoted an unsustainable use of the natural resources and a higher concentration of the income and the wealth.

The free access to the textile products assembled in the countries that are benefited by the Caribbean Basin Initiative (ICC) explains the phenomenon of the vigorous process of investment in the textile maquila. At the same time, the differences connected with labor legislation, salaries, infrastructure, geographical location, and the fiscal privileges turn into elements that the investors will consider to decide in which country of the ICC to invest.

This is how the considerable variables to invest are connecting themselves to concessions that turn into obstacles for the sustainable development of the “beneficiary” nations. Some of them are the permanent low salaries (some presidents have explicitly pointed out that the minimum wages are not increased to encourage the investment on the maquila); the economic growth based on activities that do not pay taxes, but which do require a public expense (this situation turns into a limit for the control of the fiscal deficit and for the social investments); and the precarious level of the production, employment, and exportation, because these factors are instable (and can even disappear if the ICC is dissolved).

In this context, an eventual free trade agreement with The United States involves the possibility of formidable volumes of investment for the chosen countries, but it also brings along the possibility that the investment is based on low salaries and “fiscal vacations” for the foreign companies. That is why the investment promotion strategies should not only point out to the creation of extremely profitable conditions for the foreign companies, but also to the encouragement of strategic investment in the sectors that generate higher levels of the value added, taxes, and salaries. If it is done in another way, the poverty of the workers and the fiscal deficit will remain as the most difficult economic problems.