It was the noise of a crash in the middle of the silence. Something similar to that happened when the survey of polyarchy (and then the measure of approval of the Government of the Di Tella University), according to the government has very low approval ratings, dramatically low, and the approval ratings of the entire ruling nomenklatura collapsed. Argentina is a country inhabited by a dissatisfied society, full of discomfort and also deprived of a notion of destiny. It is striking that, faced with such a social landscape, the Government and its partners dedicate themselves only to airing their poor disagreements or wasting time on insignificant, although no less serious, institutional maneuvers. Was it necessary to manipulate the institutions that meant artificially dividing the official bloc of senators just to have one more councilor in the Judicial Council? Was it necessary to disregard the right of the opposition senator Louis Judge to occupy that position that the ruling party slapped him? Was it politically opportune that the President chose to close the case for the Olivos party scandal, in the midst of the longest and strictest quarantine in the world, offering compensation of several million pesos? The prosecutor is not without reason when he says that the President does not have fewer rights than any other citizen, but he failed to say that he has more obligations. should be reminded Alberto Fernandez to the essential Simone Weill when he proposed a society organized not only from rights, but also from duties. How to explain to this social weariness that the same president who offers Argentina as a safe supplier of food to the world asks Parliament for support to increase withholdings for rural producers, although he was later incredibly denied by his Minister of Agriculture? What producer, rural or industrial, will invest in a country with such a hesitant future, subjected to mere chance?
Some are likely to say that society is preoccupied with economic issues, not those issues. However, prestigious public opinion analysts maintain that the Argentine malaise has economic reasons, but also political and institutional ones. Ordinary people cannot understand a governing leadership devoted almost exclusively to itself. No, above all, when economic hardship and uncertainty lie in wait. The crisis of 2001 and 2002 had its origin in specific economic decisions: the corralito, the corralón, the seizure of savings in dollars, the consequences of the festive default. The current crisis, on the other hand, is the product of many factors, some of them imperceptible. “It is also a human crisis”, explain those who know social movements.
Why human? The pandemic was an unprecedented health crisis, which caused high doses of social suffering. The isolation; the loss of freedom, which was considered a definitive conquest; the even greater empowerment of the power that exists, and the realization that there is what we know exists, but could be close: the border between life and death. Those who emerged unscathed from such a crisis believed that they would once again find the fullness of life, with the certain possibility of progressing and with some certainty about destiny, both collective and personal. None of that happened. No one now knows where he is going or why he does what he does. Therefore, anger is deeper than what is perceived at first sight. It is the tantrum of a society that feels the indifference of its rulers. Although the category of responsibility is different, the opposition should also be careful not to appear absorbed in their own disputes.
The economic crisis is a vector of society’s moodiness, but not the only reason that fuels it. The famous festival of Olivos is just a symbol
The Economist Faust Spotorno He usually says that the cheapest thing in the country is the labor cost. His partner, orlando ferrerescoined a phrase that could explain much of the social crisis: “In rich countries, things are cheap and people are expensive. In poor countries, people are cheap and things are expensive.”. Private and formal employment has not grown since the recovery of freedom after the pandemic. 40 percent of the labor market corresponds to black work or self-employment (the monotributistas). Many millions of people do not make social security contributions and lack social work. Only 30 percent of the work is formal. Informal work, or public employment, grew a little, a little nothing more, which is the way the ruling party found to cover up unemployment and finance political militancy. Each person who loses their job in turn creates a trail of concern around them. Those who know that person also fear being out of a job and those who aspire to a job are convinced that they will never have one. The definitive disappointment spurs the exodus of Argentines.
According to measurements by private economists, economic activity slowed down in February. In March and April, the economy recorded the same pace as in February. Strictly speaking, If you look closely at the numbers of the economy, it has been in free fall since December of last year; since then it is touching the very limit between expansion and contraction. Only some items grow, such as construction, hotels and restaurants. This is explained in a simple conclusion. There will always be between 10 and 15 percent of society with the ability to save or spend. Since he does not have the possibility of accessing the Argentine savings currency, which is the dollar, he prefers to spend the pesos on things that he would not have done under normal circumstances. With today’s unbearable inflation rates (already closer to 70 than 60 percent), pesos are hot coals in the hands. You have to throw them away because they burn. Nor is this social sector satisfied, because they simply lost the freedom to save or spend as they would like to. Workers, formal or informal, wage an unequal battle against inflation. Salary increases compensate for past inflation, when they compensate it, but they are not enough to cover the current (and sometimes growing) inflationary rhythm.
Within that photograph appears the fight of Cristina Kirchner with the President for economic decisions. The vice president believes that Alberto Fernandez leads a government inept to solve the most urgent social problems. “She is sure that the President is leading things towards defeat,” they say next to her. And the increases in public service rates are still missing, the social consequences of which no one can predict. Is the vice president wrong? Maybe not. The problem is that she doesn’t have an alternative plan either; her only plan consists of criticizing the management of the head of state. The institutional crisis it provoked is very serious. Let’s go back to the years of the great crisis, 2001 and 2002. Then, the voluntary resignation of the then president happened, Fernando de la Rua. His Vice President Carlos “Chacho” Alvarez, resigned long before, when he understood that the dissidence between them was incorrigible. It was an institutional crisis that was completely different from the current one, because at that time there was no Vice President in office in revolt against the President. Now, on the other hand, the vice president wants to keep her position, preserve control of 70 percent of the national budget through her delegates in the administration and, in addition, become head of the opposition to the President. This is the political and institutional anomaly that public opinion analysts do not rule out among the reasons for social anguish. The economic crisis is a vector of society’s moodiness, but not the only reason that fuels it. The famous festival of Olivos is just a symbol: other parties, other wars and other distracting spectacles explain the malaise and decadence.