Sergio Berensztein for Poder & Dinero and FinGurú
“We need dialogue, to forge a culture of encounter, to urgently stop the hate,” said the Archbishop of Buenos Aires, Jorge Garcia Cuerva, during the traditional Tedeum on May 25, in a general exhortation to set aside mistreatments, disqualifications, and humiliations towards others. The star listener at the Metropolitan Cathedral was Javier Milei, closely followed by cameras that recorded his total indifference towards the presences of Victoria Villarruel and Jorge Macri. The posts on X that followed this episode, with the caption “Rome does not pay traitors,” demonstrated that the ecclesiastical call for calm was merely a daytime anecdote for the president, more interested in showcasing the gesturality of power, exercised relentlessly, before the defeated Mayor of Buenos Aires.
Meanwhile, the reappearance of Cristina Kirchner, in an unusually brief speech, brought an invitation to her audience to reflect on the social sectors discontented with the current direction of the government, who at some point voted for Peronism but are no longer willing to opt for Peronist candidates. This would explain, according to the former president, the marked decline in voter participation in the city's poorer neighborhoods and communes in the last election.
Could the decrease in electoral participation be part of a circumstantial event, revealing the perceived lack of relevance by citizens in elections for “minor” positions? Or is there a testimony to a more structural phenomenon? One might understand that Argentina is converging towards global trends of democratic disaffection. Such an event emerges as a consequence of the growing distrust in certain institutions, such as political parties, as already portrayed in 2013 by political scientist Peter Mair in “Governance in the Void.” Thus, parties fail to provide organic ties with citizens and become mere electoral vehicles.
From La Libertad Avanza (LLA), there are indications that they feel comfortable in an environment where hard cores from both sides stand in contrast, betting that somewhat dissatisfied voters with the presidential style will ultimately converge towards the libertarian option, being the only competitive instrument to prevent a victory for Kirchnerism. This stance proved to be quite convincing in the city elections, but it is prudent for the government to consider it a hypothesis and not a law.
According to the latest report from Political Preference Indicators (IPP) that we develop monthly with D’Alessio IROL, Unión por la Patria and La Libertad Avanza are competing for the first place in a hypothetical national electoral scenario, with 31% and 30%, respectively. In parallel, about 25% of respondents have been systematically leaning, in recent months, towards the option “none” when asked about the party with the best proposals and candidates.
The same occurs when asked which space has the best teams and management capacity to resolve the country’s problems. In the current context, is there a possibility that sufficiently competent and competitive electoral alternatives will emerge, with an attractive prospective message, and with the necessary persuasive capacity to generate a beneficial disruption in the party offer?
It is not expected that what today appears disorganized and fragmented in the opposition universe, with particular bewilderment among those actors committed to political liberalism, the defense of institutions, and macroeconomic stability, will find a synthesizing format in the short term. If it is too early to understand what the opposition to the libertarian government is and who is best positioned to represent it, it may also be too premature to make a categorical judgment about who Javier Milei is. Only a year and a half has passed since the start of his management, while challenging reforms remain ahead to articulate and implement, in an increasingly unpredictable international context.
We are going through a period of political anamorphosis, in which we are surrounded by images and landscapes that seem chaotic, distorted, and hardly intelligible for conventional comprehension schemes. In anamorphosis as an artistic technique, the observer can only grasp the coherent appearance of the figures when positioned at a certain angle, from which they can complete the meaning through an optical construction. It is possible that LLA was the first political force to reach that vantage point from which things seem clearer and from which “everything goes according to plan” (TMAP). They managed to solve the riddle before anyone else; it would be reckless to assert that they will be the only ones.
Sergio Berensztein Doctor in Political Science (University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill) and Bachelor's in History (UBA). He obtained a Certificate in Social Science Research at CEDES (Centro de Estudios de Estado y Sociedad). He is president of Berensztein®, a political and strategic analysis consultancy that he founded in 2014, with a regional and comparative perspective based on rigorous and innovative research methods, both traditional (qualitative and quantitative) and big data. In it, he works with some of the leading figures in Argentina and the region, from both the public and private sectors, helping them understand the changing domestic and global environment and make decisions in a context of high uncertainty. He usually gives lectures and masterclasses both inside and outside Argentina, in Spanish and in English. He also serves as a professor in the Master's in Business at the Faculty of Economic Sciences at UBA. Since early 2019, he has been appointed president of IPS (International Pres Service) for Latin America.
He has served as an advisor to major international institutions such as the Andean Development Corporation (CAF), the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), and the World Bank (WB).
He was director of the Master's in Public Policy and Professor of various programs at Torcuato Di Tella University (1997-2017), where he served on the Board of Directors (2012-2014). He was also a visiting professor at academic institutions abroad, such as the universities of Duke, Georgetown, Stanford, Princeton, New Mexico, FLACSO, and CIDE (Mexico) and Salamanca (Spain).
He is the author of the books “The First Fiscal Rebellion in History. Law 125 and the Conflict with the Farm” (together with María Elisa Peirano, Margen izquierdo, 2020), “Are We All Peronists?” (El Ateneo 2019), “Why Do All Governments Fail?” (together with Marcos Buscaglia, El Ateneo, 2018), “Masters of Success” (with Alberto Schuster, Edición, 2017), “The Benefits of Freedom” (together with Marcos Buscaglia, El Ateneo, 2016), 125 Years of Banco Nación (Banco Nación, 2016), and “The Narco Power” (together with Eugenio Burzaco, Sudamericana, 2014), among others. He has also published more than 30 academic articles in specialized journals and edited volumes.
He hosts “Power and Money,” on Americano Media (Miami). He is also the host of El Tornillo (City Channel) and co-host of Radioinforme 3, by Cadena 3 Rosario. He was co-host of the radio programs “Politically Incorrect” (Radio Rivadavia), “Return Flight” (Milenium), and “Politics and Soccer” (Splendid). He was also co-host of “Intellectual Emergency” (América TV), a panelist on “Unleashed Animals” (América TV), and a columnist for A24. He regularly publishes opinion columns in the newspaper La Nación, TN.com.ar and El Cronista Comercial and previously also in the newspapers Perfil and La Gaceta, and is frequently consulted by the main media outlets in the country and abroad.
Comments