Chapter 2
Bauen SACIC’s hidden plot
“Too much money for a few people,” said Senator Federico Pinedo in opposition to the expropriation of the hotel Bauen for the cooperative, when it was being discussed in the National Senate. This a common ideological stance, which is also held by some judges who objected to the Constitutionality of expropriation laws for businesses recovered by their workers, which says that the “public utility” on which these laws are based would not make sense, because they concern “a private group” or “a small number of people.” One can argue with many examples and reasons why a business recovered by its workers is not “a private group” (while cooperatives are private entities according to Argentine legislation, it is clear that they are not companies that belong to one person or for-profit corporate group, and in many countries of the world, they are recognized as social property) and even less “a small number of people,” because they carry out social, cultural, and economic activities for the common good, and are basically collectives that restart a productive organization that strengthens the economic fabric of the country and especially of the communities they work in.
In the case of the Bauen, however, this stance shows absolute ignorance or the greatest hypocrisy, because if ever there was a situation in which a “private group” received a fortune for enjoyment of a “small number” of people (in this case, Marcelo Iurcovich and family) it was precisely the Bauen SACIC business. And this situation happened in times that were not the least bit democratic: the civilian-military dictatorship of 1976-1983.