By Sebastián Lacunza
Editor-in-Chief
Argentines are living a democracy in which words are being
set apart from facts
If we assume Voltaire’s premise that “a word misplaced
spoils the most beautiful thought,” Argentina’s politics has not been shining
for too long. Perhaps an appropriate example would be the speech by Miguel
Ángel Pichetto, head of the Victory Front caucus at the Senate.
Pichetto has been a key political player in Congress
representing Peronism in all of its variants — right-wing populist, opposition,
interim government or centre-left populist — over the last twenty years. His
Wednesday evening speech in the Senate, during the debate on the holdouts bill,
included memorable passages — the xenophobic tirade against the Senegalese
(with previous such remarks against the Chinese, the Uruguayan and Albanian
communities), his contempt for Bolivia, his open admission that he loses his
ability to have critical thought when he serves a ruling party, and his
intended criticism of rivals that sounded more like praise. Moreover, his
entire speech gave everyone the overall impression that words just dropped from
his mouth and pointed fingers against him.
Pichetto, a senator for Río Negro province, is a skilled,
tenacious political player, good enough for pragmatic presidents to hold him in
esteem. Pichetto’s black and white view of things means that he is far from the
epitome of the poorest discursive consistency among his peers in the political
elite. Without going any further, former presidents Carlos Menem, Eduardo
Duhalde, Néstor Kirchner and Mauricio Macri were far from eclipsing the
much-praised rhetoric of their predecessor Raúl Alfonsín. Cristina Kirchner,
whose oratory skills were far better than those of her recent predecessors and
now her successor, worsened her performance with endless, presumptuous
speeches. It was no coincidence that this happened during her administration’s
decline.
Such flat rhetoric speaks volumes about a democracy in which
words are being increasingly set apart from facts.
That is how corrupt politicians speak about honesty, liars
claim to defend the truth, authoritarian leaders bore with their praise for the
“consensus,” haters profess “love” ... when everything can be promised without
facing consequences (that is to say, the electoral campaigns), candidates even
deny draconian increases of utility rates and huge devaluations that will be
implemented just weeks later.
The facts. Cristina Kirchner won 82.11 percent of the vote
in the northern province of Santiago del Estero in 2011. Scioli earned 63.07
percent last year in the same district, one of the poorest in the country.
There was a similar situation in Formosa, in the country’s far north. However,
the will of most of their citizens who didn’t vote for Macri in November did
not prevent all the Peronist senators of both provinces to vote in favour of
the deal with the holdouts.
This is no time for Kirchnerite mourning in the face of such
a big victory for Macri in the Senate — the like of which previous governments
rarely enjoyed. From the first to the last day, the Néstor Kirchner and CFK
administrations appealed to the same pragmatism (checks, as critics call the
method) that last Wednesday’s result in the Senate suggests about Macri. Those
who like to live by the sword more than is recommended will perish by the
sword. Some of those leaders who protested against the predatory “vultures”
just months ago were seen last week wasting words in favour of the
reintegration into the world and the virtuous benefit of taking debt. Such an
obvious contradiction not only confirms the degradation in the forms of the
discourse but also in the discourse itself.
Meaningless words also can be read in a bitter end of the
week for the Pink House. Macri’s entourage has validated for years the poverty
statistics provided by the Argentine Catholic University (UCA), while the
Kirchners denounced the reports as a biased intent to tarnish its social
achievements. Spurred on by fraud at the official statistic bureau INDEC, the
debate on poverty was trivialized to an extreme. Ruling and opposition
spokespeople — both politicians and the media — switch sides now, once the
UCA’s most recent report showed a sharp rise in the poverty level during the
first quarter of Macri’s term in office, reaching an unprecedented level in the
last eight years.
It seems unsustainable that a third of Argentines live below
the poverty line, as UCA says. It would mean that Argentina recognizes it is
one of the Latin American countries with the highest poverty rate (for
instance, the official statistics of Peru indicated a poverty rate of 22
percent in 2014). However, the most significant side of the UCA Index is that a
government that exposes an overwhelming intention to shape the social
perception and its image abroad, received the most stunning displeasure of his
brief tenure from the hands of the Catholic Church. The growing conviction that
there are more people living in poverty is crossing political and social
borders. Irreparable damage for the mantra of “zero poverty” created by Macri’s
spin doctors.
@sebalacunza