A new public controversy has emerged around the Carajo streaming channel after Alejandro Sarubbi Benítez, host of La Trinchera, made violent and discriminatory comments about residents of Greater Buenos Aires. The segment circulated on social media and drew condemnation for a tone of territorial dehumanization directed at one of the country's most populated areas.
During the broadcast, Sarubbi Benítez described Greater Buenos Aires as a region with no way out and linked that view to what he portrayed as a cultural and marginality problem. From that framing, he moved on to proposals that included sterilizing part of the population, enclosing the territory with a wall and imposing arbitrary controls over entry and exit.
The most heavily criticized portion of the intervention was the reference to placing snipers to prevent people from crossing and to using napalm attacks from aircraft. The remarks, delivered in a political streaming format, were interpreted by critics and users as a normalization of segregationist and extermination rhetoric against millions of people defined by where they live.
The controversy was also tied to the channel's political profile. Carajo is identified with the libertarian sphere and with communicators close to La Libertad Avanza. Among its most visible figures is Daniel Parisini, known as El Gordo Dan, host of La Misa and a reference point in the government-aligned cultural battle.
Although the remarks were made by Sarubbi Benítez and were not presented as an official position of the national government, the episode again brought into focus the relationship between political communication, digital provocation and public responsibility. Javier Milei's previous appearances on the channel add attention to a space that operates near the pro-government conversation.
The immediate background is not isolated. Earlier broadcasts from that environment had already drawn criticism over artificial intelligence images used to attack a political leader with disability-related insults, as well as homophobic remarks, attacks on journalists and politicians, and verbal attacks against former Uruguayan president José “Pepe” Mujica after his death.
The case reopens a sensitive debate for Buenos Aires: how public images of Greater Buenos Aires are constructed and what political effects arise when persistent social inequality is turned into an object of contempt. The discussion is no longer only about the limits of humor or provocation, but about the circulation of messages that present an entire population as a threat.
