While in other parts of the world governments of different characteristics, be they progressive, conservative or centrist, do not hesitate to cool down the local economy because they understand that there is no other way to curb inflation, in Argentina there are few willing to pay the political costs that It would take them to act so firmly.
When they hear the word “adjustment”, many local politicians react with horror, only to swear that nothing would make them commit such an unspeakably vile crime against humanity as cutting public spending because there is no way to finance it. In his opinion, only a far-right tyrant would take measures that the rest of the planet would consider essential. Populist leaders, trade unionists, piqueteros and, of course, progressive intellectuals, agree that inflation is a lesser evil compared to what would happen if a government were encouraged to make a genuine effort to combat it.
This attitude makes understandable the economic catastrophe in which a country endowed with many comparative advantages is struggling that, without suffering any geopolitical calamity or being subjected to a communist experiment, has managed to impoverish itself to such an extent that it risks ending up like Venezuela. . Had it not been for the fear of adjusting, even when it was evident that it would be terribly dangerous to allow the public sector to continue devouring resources without giving anything in return, Argentina could have overcome with relative ease the sporadic financial crises that, like all other countries, would have had to face even if those in charge of running the economy did everything right. By choosing to live with inflation rates noticeably higher than those considered bearable in other latitudes, the national political elite assured that, sooner or later, the day would come when they would have to apply a financial tourniquet to the country that would be extremely painful.
At this point, to attribute the adjustment, which has already partially begun, to nothing more than the pressures of the International Monetary Fund or to the perversity of capitalism, and then to declare itself resolved to oppose it by means that are in defense of the poor and national sovereignty, may be politically advantageous for those accustomed to profiting from the misfortunes of others, but it will in no way help the country to overcome the very demanding test that awaits it. On the contrary, begrudgingly trying to adjust would increase the possibility that the resulting disaster would spell the ultimate death of the Argentine project by condemning the country to play a marginal role in tomorrow’s world, that of a virtual no man’s land mired in chaos and the extreme poverty that, to keep famines at bay, would depend on the charity of others. Otherwise, since he has a reputation as a serial defaulter, until further notice he will remain the world’s most notorious international financial pariah.
Will there be an alternative to the sad fate thus assumed? Only if the eventual successors of Cristina, Alberto, Sergio and company, are members of Juntos por el Cambio or of a team improvised by Javier Milei, those chosen to govern a country that is slipping into an abyss, do they discuss the great adjustment that will touch them undertake as an opportunity to reshape Argentina so that, finally, it begins to close the gap that separates it from the already developed countries with which, in cultural terms, it still has much in common. If they take a defeatist stance, claiming themselves innocent victims of a cosmic calamity and thereby inviting the population to indulge in collective self-pity, it would be surprising if a new government would last more than a couple of months.
For obvious reasons, it is always convenient for those in charge of the economy, and therefore of the destiny of the country, to feel a certain enthusiasm for what they have to do. Although it would be natural for members of the government that emerged from the elections that are already imminent to sometimes imply that they did not like being forced to take certain measures at all, they would have to convince the people that they would soon deliver positive results since, otherwise , will demoralize those who would like to believe that they are fighting an epic battle in defense of the country.
Here is one reason why the attempts by Horacio Rodríguez Larreta, Gerardo Morales and others to expand Together for Change by incorporating figures such as the Cordovan Peronist Juan Schiaretti have caused such a stir. Although it is legitimate to suppose that a government that, as the mayor of Buenos Aires insists, had the support of seventy percent or more of professional politicians, would be in a position to carry out a reform program that would have a very significant impact for a while. negative, it would be foreseeable that in such a case many recently converted to the official faith would try to ensure that the Minister of Economy did not do anything that could harm them. It would therefore be an essentially conservative government, in the proper sense of the word, in which many would try to defend a status quo that has turned out to be ruinous.
For those convinced that the great Argentine debacle is the work of a corporate political class whose members are more interested in their own well-being than in anything else, it is foolish to assume that, with the exception of the most fanatical Kirchnerists and leftists, all its members they would be willing to collaborate to put an end to the self-destructive process that they themselves have helped to set in motion.
The socioeconomic model that is falling apart has long enjoyed majority approval. It is not based on a perfect consensus, since there have always been dissidents, but in its own way it reflects the way of thinking of the bulk of the population and therefore of those who have become accustomed to modifying their points of view to ingratiate themselves with the electorate. things, a genuinely reformist government would necessarily have to be led by people who do not share the dominant corporate ideology, which, of course, poses many problems in democratic societies.
However, a window of opportunity has been opened. With the bulk of the population realizing that voluntarist populism of which Kirchnerism is only the most recent manifestation has completely failed, it would seem that the majority is looking for a genuine alternative to the established order. For now at least, those most favored by the growing repudiation of traditional schemes are Patricia Bullrich and Javier Milei, while Rodríguez Larreta, who last year seemed to have the presidency at his fingertips, has been weakened because he seems to be a typical politician who privileges his relationship with other members of “the caste” without daring to break with populist orthodoxy.
Today, said orthodoxy is merely verbal. The state of the national economy is so serious that everyone knows that there will be no way to remedy it without a very severe adjustment. Even so, many politicians understand that it would be in their interest to make them think that, if they had to be part of a government, they would try to prevent it from being implemented. Although no politician wants to appear as a petty guy who loves to make people suffer, in a country that is being devastated by an inflationary hurricane – in other parts of the world, I would describe it as hyperinflationary – and that lacks reserves, both the current government in what remains of his term as his successor will have no choice but to drastically reduce public spending.
Given the not good circumstances in which the country finds itself, only an irresponsible demagogue would speak out in favor of leaving things as they are, but here such characters abound. To the surprise of some, Elisa Carrió, who made a valuable contribution to the foundation of what would eventually become Together for Change, seems determined to be one. According to her, when approaching Milei, Bullrich, promoted by Mauricio Macri, “goes for a very brutal adjustment on the middle class in four months” and will be willing to trample Justice, the Republic and human rights, because it will be necessary to “repress even kill if necessary. She seems to believe that, for the hard wing of Together for Change, the dreadful economic crisis is nothing more than a pretext to subject the country to a ruthlessly neoliberal regime.
Although it is possible that the next government will face a situation as dire as the one predicted by Carrió, in addition to characters like Aníbal Fernández and Juan Grabois, it would not be because the trio they accused of preparing to install an ultra-right dictatorship wanted it. but because a long series of governments have deprived the country of the capacity to satisfy the minimum demands of its inhabitants. Some, like those of the first Juan Domingo Perón and Cristina, will have done so for ideological reasons or out of hostility towards the American “empire”, but others, proud of their supposed moral superiority, because they imagined that it would be inhumane to pay attention to the damn numbers. . Even if it were only by omission, the soft ones by principle have been among the main authors of the Argentine tragedy.
