“It’s not me, it was the previous one”: the paradox of inherited crises


Visión Liberal – Although the current Argentine president promised not to use that argument again, his direct collaborators and the infallible militant communicators are successfully working to install this repeated account.

Nothing will be resolved soon. You cannot expect magical changes. The conditions are deplorable because they have left an infinite list of issues to face. These are just a few phrases that could be said at the beginning of any brand new presidential term.

If there were some self-criticism, the makers of this cocktail should assume the paternity of this spawn, but that would imply thinking that politicians can assume traits of sincerity and humility. Those are not attributes that can be expected from those engaged in this activity. Fall of the shares and bonds in Argentina

What is happening should not surprise anyone. It is almost manual. Those who were before and those who are now, have only complied with routine forecasts confirming a long tradition.

At this point, it is clear that the previous management was very bad and not only when evaluating its concrete results that deserve little discussion, but also in terms of the list of unfulfilled expectations.

More poverty and recession, more unemployment and indebtedness, very high inflation and overflowed state spending are only part of a huge grid of issues that have little ceiling to be refuted.

Despite the mantle of mercy that some wish to place when it comes to observing in detail what was carried out in those years, the achievements have been limited and the significance of the failure overshadows any supposed victory.

That stage has only certain mitigating mitigations, but in no way justifications that seriously explain the magnitude of the disaster that brought about the lack of courage and ideas, the stubbornness and inability of those who boasted of being brilliant and ended up defeated at the polls.

The most interesting to analyze are the ingredients of this present. When only the superficial is read, one can get caught up in prejudices, misconceptions and even believe certain falsely generated legends.

It is indisputable that the general situation is quite bad, even worse than when those who just left took over. But just there lies much of the diagnosis that should be reviewed in depth.

In 2015, a political cycle culminated with a currency exchange, a giant state expenditure, millions of social plans, strict control in prices, a very significant certified poverty, withholdings to the field at discretion, a suffocating tax burden plus that constant inflation that never stopped.

Today, with the criticized transition concluded, the picture is not identical, but it seems too much. In any case, some aggravating extras, further worsen that rugged panorama and thus complicate the possible solutions.

It will be possible to be affirmed that several of those that were returned, while several will say that they were not exactly the same protagonists. It is a debate that has a relative scope, but that adds controversy.

If you want to see this process from the partisan, it should be argued that those who govern today found themselves with the same bomb they left and that those who passed temporarily not only could not, nor knew how to deactivate, but also added dangerous and unprecedented triggers.

The country is worse today than four years ago. There is some scope to take positions with respect to the institutional climate, the international framework and even an approach to political freedoms and corruption could be established, although this will always be an opinion and elements are still lacking.

What does not merit discussion is that everything is more complicated economically, that the horizon is neither simple nor optimistic, despite the childish auguries of those who live exclusively on hope.

Except for those issues linked to the excessive increase in debt, which is a novelty with respect to the past, the rest of the accessory problems should not be considered as major challenges to overcome.

Today’s dilemmas are exactly the same as the past and some new ones that added to this calamity. Those that already existed have increased not only in size but also in seniority and gravity.

If there were some self-criticism, the makers of this cocktail should assume the paternity of this spawn, but that would imply thinking that politicians can assume traits of sincerity and humility. Those are not attributes that can be expected from those engaged in this activity.

In short, those who built this pathetic dynamic, with their demagogic delusions and crazy ideas today have a democratic responsibility to try to mitigate or solve each of these challenges. To avoid misunderstandings, it is worth clarifying that this catastrophe is not the exclusive work of a party or political sector, nor has it been the merit of single management. There have been many mistakes that have been made and accumulated for decades to make this happen and still last today.

Most of the nation’s structural problems are the product of an intricate mix that combines the perversity of many, the mediocrity of some, the ineffectiveness of others and the cowardice of almost everyone.

Society will judge results. It will look for variants if everything goes wrong, or applaud them by rewarding them if they succeed. The rhetoric is useful in the short term, but the story is ruthless and will take care of assigning blame properly.

By Alberto Medina Mendez

Share on facebook
Share on google
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin

Ultímos Artículos