Daniel Arroyo: “Governments last four years, and people get tired quickly.”

Daniel ArroyoNational MP Union for the homelandstated in Fontificia modeby Net TV and Radio profile (AM 1190), that today’s society “accelerates” political processes and governments last only one term. In this sense, he doubted the possibility Javier Miley He will be re-elected in 2024, with Congress arguing that “a replacement will be built for 2027” given voter fatigue.

Daniel Arroyo holds a degree in political science, is a university professor, and a politician. He was Minister of Social Development of the Nation during the presidency of Alberto Fernández. Previously, he served as Minister of Social Development of the Province of Buenos Aires between 2007 and 2013, and Secretary of Social Policies of the Nation between 2003 and 2007. He holds the position of National Representative and chairs the Disability Committee of the Argentine National Assembly. He has promoted projects such as the Emergency Law for the Disabled.

Crosses and loud boos under the gaze of the militia in the box: what was not seen from the swearing-in of the new representatives

Where were you in the 1990s when Yomagate was denounced, for example? Menem’s victory in 1995 with 50% of the vote eliminated all corruption complaints. I make an analogy about whether Javier Maile’s victory today in October means that the complaints in the disability case or the Libra case fall into the idea that victory confers rights for any reason.

In the 1990s I was at FLAXO, in academia. We were very critical of Carlos’s government. Soft and From neoliberalism. We had a lot of intellectual production and saw complaints of corruption. Moreover, we were very critical of the economic situation, and at some point I was convinced that we were born to be a minority, that we were very limited and that it would not be transcended, that we were simply proposing ideas that were too broad for a sector, but it was not the majority. Until later it accumulated, and finally some of the ideas we were proposing, after the 2001 crisis, became the majority. When after 2001 I started listening to what was planned for the future, I said: “It’s the same thing we’re thinking about.”

There comes a time when society does not take the facts of corruption or problems, but keeps every issue in a part of its head. This means that Menem clearly wins in 1995 amidst numerous acts of corruption as well as high levels of unemployment. Society told him: “Keep going, keep going.” But he noticed this, and after two years in the Menem case, things turned around and a big change began to take shape. For me the same thing will happen with Miley’s case.

I think an important part of the community that’s with Miley realizes that disability is atrocious, that there are serious issues that the government is addressing, and that it’s ridiculously breaking a lot of things. People think they have to give air to cross the river, but notice that and at some point, all of this builds a new majority. I believe that a new leadership will be built in Argentina in the future, partly based on the many people who accompany the government today. And at some point they’ll say, “No, this is going nowhere.”

In the same vein, I will mention Cristina Kirchner in 2011. She was re-elected with 54% of the vote, with the slogan “Let’s do it all.” The opposition felt it necessary to build an alliance. Then in 2013 Sergio Massa won the Buenos Aires Province, jointly at that time with Mauricio Macri. Today, what you see in Congress is not complete dispersion?

In principle, the alliances created initially were building an idea. Christina wins in 2011 and Renewal Frontwhich I’m a part of, won in 2013 with an idea “The wide street in the middle”with chart. An idea is constructed which is then consolidated into a political unit. The same thing happened with the alliance with Menem. he Freepasso He was denouncing the issue of corruption, and it seemed like something fringe, progressive from the federal capital and nothing more, even at one point it was in the process of construction. First ideas are built and then alternatives are built.

For me, the difference between these processes and current processes is this Governments last four years and people get tired quickly. Not only because Macri and Albert Fernandez only spent four years. I think today’s political system in general is four years old. What used to take eight years in a tiresome process, or ten years in a softener, no longer does so today because the processes are accelerating. I generally find it difficult to re-elect a government in Argentina, because the same society that orders it to cross the river is looking for another alternative.

My impression is that in a very dispersed Congress, with a lot of freelancing, with a lot of people who just talk for the video, and then try to say anything obscene to get out for two minutes and be able to go viral, a first idea will emerge, like the wide boulevard in the middle, like Frebasso had with the corruption idea with Menem, and an alternative will be built for 2027. I see four-year governments, not generally long governments today in Latin America.

Menem had been there for eight years when the corruption allegations, which had been made four years earlier, began in 1997. In the case of Kirchnerism, it was in 2013, ten years after its beginning, with four from Nestor and six from Christina. Is the waiting capacity that the community had 20 or 30 years ago, which lasted eight years, now four?

Yes, because social networks, dynamics, information overload and the search for quick results, which applies to any person in his life, also applies to politics. I find that long-term governments are generally very difficult today in Latin America, because even a society that partly agrees demands another alternative. In the 21st century, everyday life has become much faster, and so has politics. It seems very difficult to me that we should have long governments. Now, what comes after this process may or may not be good, interesting or not, it depends on the ideas that are built and the political alternative that is built.

Lorena Villaverde has resigned from her seat in the Senate, but continues her term as a representative

14 PRO deputies went with Patricia Bullrich to La Libertad Avanza. The same thing happened with radical representatives, many of whom were from other regional parties and part of Peronism, separate from the general bloc. What is being realized today is the exact opposite of what we mentioned, since the political forces realized that the course is about to change. There seems to be a winner-takes-all effect and everyone wants to ally with Miley, assuming that not only will Miley do well during those two years, but will get re-elected.

Partially yes. I think what also happens is that House of Representatives It turned into something similar to Senate. The Senate belongs to the provinces, so the logic of a senator from a particular province is that he votes for the interests of his province. The House of Representatives was supposed to be the House of Commons, which belonged to the people, but the logic was not so. The government is talking to the governors so that their deputies can form a separate bloc. Do this and that. It happens at the regional level in Argentina, because on the one hand it is federalized, but regional issues are separated. Three of this district set up their own bloc; Four from this district, their own block; Some provinces come together. This makes more sense for senators than for representatives.

Yes, it is true that part of the political system reads that this will happen. But not so much that “it will work” and the government will do well, but rather who will end up compiling the lists in two years’ time will almost certainly be the government. ¿Where will the power be when it comes to closure and definition? Certainly it will be the government. I think that a large portion of the representatives who take this side read this as meaning. It is true that the government is working to consolidate more power, and it is clear that it will have the pen when it comes to determining the candidates, not the next election round, and that whoever behaves well and whoever does not will succeed. But society is something else, and what he will say is: “That’s it, now let someone else come, now let’s make a difference and let someone else come.” Community speeds up processes. Politics reads where the power of power lies and tries to get closer to it, but society has a very fast dynamic today for everything: for a TV show, for sports, for daily life, for a job, for politics.

Your language and analysis reflect all the academic studies of those flaccid years. Could it be that we are facing a loss of ideas and that what is happening is that the government is facing a vacuum in the opposition and that there are no ideas, and that this diaspora of representatives reflects that they do not see new or superior ideas?

Yes, There is a loss of appetite for 21st century ideas. There are ideas, but going backwards, this is what society does not want and does not make sense. Yes, there are ideas about, “This is a pendulum, we are returning, the state must return,” but there is a lack of ideas to move forward. I will finish my term on December 10th, and I want, from an academic perspective, to once again help build other ideas outside the box. Perhaps ideas at this time do not come from political spaces, from parties, but from the media, from universities, from other places, because Politics has the problem, especially Congress, and there is a black and white moment. One could say that this labor reform is meaningless. But there comes a time when you have to vote yes or no, and a large portion of them will vote no because they are against certain government proposals. Then the dimension of richer things and other perspectives is lost. I think there is a loss of 21st century ideas, and they will come from outside political parties. The parties will embrace it, it will build leadership, but it will come either through the media or through the academic and intellectual sphere.

television

that.