When it is about politics, Javier Milei and Cristina Kirchner resemble. They are maniquee. They love drastic dichotomies. Both want to appear as leaders of good in a cosmic struggle that is fighting against the evil they are incarnated in the other. Although their respective ideals are very different, the two have much in common: extreme egocentrism, often arbitrary dogmatism, the disdain for freedom of expression, the tendency to demonize adversaries and cover them with hurtful epithets.
It is not surprising, then, that the dialogue through the networks that the duo has filed – if it would seem that Cristina’s star is going out, they are still the two most important politicians in the country – it has turned out to be so spawning, with the “Che Milei, an expert in economy with or without money … and crypto scams” of Cristina, and the replicas of Milei with her “Che Cristina … North American Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, who finally achieved what he wanted to do for years and announce that the former president will not be able to enter the United States for “significant corruption participation.”
In the mouth of Cristina, the “Che Milei” will make some sense: the same as the man who, at the international level, took over the interjection so Argentine and that he wanted to state absolutely everything, the fanatic of the free market despises the Gay although, unlike the emblematic guerrilla, he does not think about shooting them or putting them in concentration fields. Sometimes the ends are touched.
The most valuable political capital of Milei consists in its willingness to do as much as it is necessary to end inflation that, ultimately, is the result of the irresponsibility of generations of politicians. That of the Kirchnerists is “the memory”, duly distorted, of the military dictatorship that ruled the country between March 24, 1976 and December 10, 1983. It will be because they understand that they benefit them to repudiate a dictatorship that went well before the vast majority of the inhabitants of the country that the Kirchnerists and their classmates have become accustomed to celebrate on March 24 -He same of having prospered his “process”- with much more fervor than on December 10, an ephemeris that belongs to the radical Raúl Alfonsín.
Milei is resolved to deprive those committed to the “story” of what they believe is a source of legitimacy. He is doing it in the name of “the complete memory” that, of course, is much less simple than the one built by the Kirchnerists with subject who provided them with veterans of Montoneros and their biological or cultural heirs.
To mark the anniversary, the Government spread a video produced by the writer and historian Agustín Laje who pointed out, with Mable, that the version spread by its ideological enemies of what had happened in the country half a century ago was decidedly skewed, that the “young idealists” had also perpetrated endless crimes against humanity and, for the scandal of the believers, which is arbitrary that the sacralized number of disappeared, 30,000.
Because it is a matter of a faith of faith, denying that said figure corresponds to the verifiable truth motivates more indignation among those who adhere to the movements that continue to take advantage of the crimes of the dictatorship that criticizes the role in the bloodthirsty drama of those times of the terrorist organizations and the pusilanimity of the politicians and members of the Judiciary who left everything in the hands of the military. Unfortunately, they will have to take more years before society can objectively face what happened in the seventies of the last century.
There are other dichotomies that fascinate politicians. One is the contrast between the Federal Capital that, for many, symbolizes civilization, and the hard Bonaerense conurbano, which in his opinion is surrendering to barbarism. The macristas dreamed of incorporating into the city that dominated the rest of the country; Many Peronists would like the conurbano to seize the porteño redoubt of macrismo, hence the frequent allusions to “amba” and how good it would be to treat it as a unit.
The impression that Greater Buenos Aires has degenerated in an immense zone barely governable has been strengthened by the already routine savagery of young criminals who do not hesitate to kill those who attract their attention even when they are people willing to give them everything they ask for or children who for some reason hinder them. Such heartless subjects may be “victims” of the society in which they raised, but it does not mean that it is progressive to resign themselves to allow them to continue killing until they have turned 16.
Although it would be an exaggeration to say that Argentine politics revolves around the violent conurbano that usually contributes many votes to Peronist candidates who are hostile to change, who continue to govern it are supposed to frustrate the plans of those national governments who refuse to give priority to their immediate interests. Are they? Judging by his reaction to the violent disturbances of a couple of weeks ago they took for an attempt coup by Buenos Aires Caciques, Milei and their relatives do not believe it. Rather, they are convinced that efforts agree to intimidate them from those who have become accustomed to dominating the overpopulated and poor territory contiguous to the capital.
In his opinion, the truculent episodes that were starring Peronists, leftists and sociopathic bands served to remind others that there really is no civilized alternative to their own administration, which must be chosen between libertarism on the one hand and feral Kirchnerism for the other. Those resolved to take advantage of the drama from the elderly who charge the minimum, since the following week they celebrated a much more peaceful protest will have coincided. The fact that such characters have concluded that street violence could harm those accused of provoking it is a positive signal.
Fortunately, it would seem that the options before the country are less limited than the Mileists and their most cerrile opponents believe. It will not be black and white, but to find the way of amalgamating economic realism with respect for the institutional rules that are typical of a democratic society. However, the one who and those around him do not like nuances raises many dangers. One is that, to conquer the will of the inhabitants of the conurbano, they end up spreading from the vices of the historical “barons” of the most ruined municipalities.
Milei’s supporters talk a lot about “the cultural battle” that they say they are fighting against the political correction Woke, the “fiscal degeneration” and other diseases, but it has become painfully evident that they are not worried at all cultural phenomena linked to personal behavior. Thanks to the lack of preparation combined with an exceptional degree of arrogance of too many official legislators, they have collaborated with the most combative Kirchnerists and leftists to ensure that the sessions of the lower house resemble gallows of roosters that give alien shame. It is as if the Mileists believed that behaving less unworthy would be typical of macristas and radicals whose good manners are, in their opinion, warm symptoms. They resist understanding that, as the saying goes, “the courts do not take away the brave” and that a well -expressed argument can be much more effective than a barrage of puerile insults or physical attacks.
Milei bets that the elections that are approaching allow him to have more deputies and senators. Unless you make more unfdded mistakes in the months that separate us from the vote, it is likely to get them, but those of the new litter resemble libertarians who already occupy seats in the legislature, the president will run the risk of facing almost everyday rebellions that will be far from helping him. It would seem that Milei and her sister, “the boss” Karina, are as
The same as other outsiders who, to the surprise of politics professionals and those interested in their activities, succeed in elections, Milei was benefited by the disseminated conviction that it would be easy to replace the venal mediocrities of “caste” by much more suitable men and women who, he occurred, abounded in the country. It is possible that those who think so are right, but it is also that some life members of “the caste” have arranged them to discredit the policy to such an extent that no one who is talented and honest would dream of devoting themselves to it. In this case, the country will have to resign themselves to be governed until new notice by people who, despite their ideological differences, share the same style, one that, it goes without saying it, is inappropriate for a mature democracy.
