acerca de los "nini" electorales...

Antes de que llegue la tapa de La Nación ( por qué tardó tanto esta vez ?) sumándose al ya tradicional show de "la caída de la imagen de Cristina" , leemos a Martín Sivak en un inteligente panorama de la coyuntura político-social nacional aparecido ayer en el New York Times

En el recorrido de la nota se muestra la centralidad absoluta del kirchnerismo en el escenario político, y la adversión de los medios opositores, un cuadro socioeconómico equilibrado para lo que se lee en estas pampas , y se inaugura para Argentina una buena figura periodística ya observada en Venezuela: Los Ni-Ni electorales ... 

ARGENTINA’S RIVALRY

By MARTÍN SIVAK

BUENOS AIRES — After two years of economic havoc, Néstor Kirchner took office in 2003, and in his inaugural speech he made the simple promise to Argentines about a future where they could live in a “normal country.” Today, after eight years of China-like economic growth, Argentina’s economy has slowed to a rate of 2.5 percent and the leaders of the opposition believe that the main obstacle to achieving “normalcy” is Kirchner’s widow, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, who has been president since 2007. When the public debate is focused entirely on Kirchnerism, it is difficult to envision a future without it.

In Argentina, almost everything is classified as pro- or anti-government. At the end of 2010, when I moved back to Buenos Aires after five years out of the country, pro- or anti-Kirchner forces had caused friction in some family relations and reorganized the short list of barbecue guests. One of my neighbors placed a sticker beside his doorbell that read: “If you are ‘K’, don’t ring this bell.” Four blocks from my house, the first Peronist-Kirchnerist theme bar opened, playing host to top officials while poking fun at opposition leaders on the menu.

If you dislike moderation but still fail to identify yourself as a supporter or opponent of the Kirchners, you will feel as if you are living in another time, or at least you don’t understand your own.

Argentina is not on a path to fascism, as detractors of the current administration have claimed. But this rivalry-soaked atmosphere hinders our ability to resolve urgent issues like social inequality, an inefficient public-transportation system, the pervasiveness of “under the table” employment (40 percent of all workers), the regressive tax system, environmental problems especially in the mining sector, energy dependency and the persistence of corruption.

With Cristina, there is an outsized importance devoted to her public performances, which combine a dose of condescension with the pain of widowhood and an obsession with her physical appearance. Too much is about Cristina herself, what she says and how she says it.

Unlike some atypical South American leaders of the past ten years (Brazil’s Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Bolivia’s Evo Morales, or Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez), the Kirchners, lawyers by profession, were and are pragmatic career politicians from the oil producing province of Santa Cruz. What makes them exceptional is the crisis they have had to confront.

The Kirchners’ popularity rests on the economic expansion after the 2001 collapse, a recovery that coincides with their time in power. During the worst period of the national crisis, Argentina had five presidents in ten days. But from 2003 to 2011, poverty and unemployment rates fell, while consumption expanded thanks to a combination of effective policies and favorable international markets for Argentine commodities.

The Kirchners have pursued an agenda that combines liberal and non-liberal policies. The liberal policies have included open immigration laws, same-sex marriage legislation, a universal subsidy for the poor, the prosecution of crimes committed by the last dictatorship, reforms to improve the Supreme Court and the judges selected for it, the defense of labor rights and a taxation system with stricter collection policies. On the flip side, some aspects of economic regulation have been arbitrary, and the tax authorities have been used as a weapon against critics.

The government has also nationalized some private companies, limited access to public information and put restrictions on monetary exchange — an attempt to de-dollarize citizens’ savings and protect the Central Bank’s reserves. Meanwhile, some pro-Kirchner governors, congressmen and intellectuals are intent on changing the Constitution so Mrs. Kirchner can be re-elected to a third term.

The Kirchner government dances alone the tango of its two agendas while relying on the absence of a viable opposition. That role has been filled by the media.

According to official statistics, the annual inflation rate is about 8 percent; unofficial organizations peg it closer to 25 percent. Backed by the Ministry of Labor, unions bargain and obtain salary raises using the unofficial rate, suggesting that the government does not believe its own numbers. While official statistics estimate that the poor comprise 6.5 percent of the population and the extreme poor 1.7 percent, the Roman Catholic Church says the poverty rate is 21.9 percent and extreme poverty 5.4 percent.

Equis, the only private consultant willing to release its figures, places the poverty rate at 16.8 percent and extreme poverty at 4.7 percent. 

In 2004, a small group of Venezuelan citizens baptized themselves the Ninis (or Neither-Nors) to escape from the rigid pro- or anti-Chávez labels. Today the Ninis, a heterogeneous mass of voters that resembles the politically undecided, are likely to have an important influence in the presidential election in Venezuela in October.

When faced with the Kirchner legacy the Argentine Ninis, still in the shadows, will need to do the work of sorting apples, preserving the good and tossing the bad, all far from the relentless music of pro and anti-Kirchnerism. Their job will be to envision something much more adventurous than a “normal country.”

(Martín Sivak’s recent book is “Evo Morales: The Extraordinary Rise of the First Indigenous President of Bolivia.”) Traducción de la nota acá