The political world Andres Malamud Analysis of the present of government Xavier the following He identified a characteristic that makes him resemble the previous president when making decisions Juan Domingo Peron. “They are high-risk gamblers.” The political analyst said in an interview with Carlos Bagni V Argentine Odyssey (LN+), about the libertarian leader and historical founder of the Justice and Development Party.
For Malamud, this is a trait of a leader that generates emotion, and although it can be useful, it can also cause problems. “Today everything is a party, despite the structural problems of the Libertarian administration. But they may say: “Everything is going according to plan.”“They programmed the agreement with (Scott) Picente for a day trip, and activated it when they needed it… Milley could also say he had billions of dollars he promised to turn into dollars,” Malamud said.
Malamud emphasized that part of Miley’s strategy was to make bets, such as supporting Trump when he was not yet president of the United States. “Miley is a high-risk gambler, like Peron. A bet can go well or poorly, but it is not a mistake until it is completed. If you put everything in red it’s not an error, at least until the number appears. But the day you bet it all and he doesn’t come out, you’ll go home naked. At the moment he has this anticipation,” developed the Doctor of Social and Political Sciences.
In the case of Trump’s endorsement, the political analyst proved it Smart move This is contrary to what might be expected based on states’ search for self-government in the twentieth century.
“Today there is no autonomy. The European Union bowed to Trump. The President of the European Union met him in Europe, but at his court in Scotland. In the White House, leaders sat like students taking notes. Miley’s alignment may seem disgusting from the 20th century, but he’s aligned and won more, he seems smarter than everyone. What Argentina is doing is useful (…) and it is an effective process because it has obtained dollars; If not, there will be no victory (in the elections).”
In the same way, for Malamud, Miley and Perón share more characteristics. The other thing is the way they got into government. “(Carlos) Menem, (Raul) Alfonsin, and Néstor (Kirchner) came to power with pre-existing parties. But Peron and Milli did not. They came to power in ways unusual for a party democracy and then built their own parties. Peron had to create the state, but he presented himself before a union of three parties, then created Peronism and changed its name.“.
“Miley also had important financial support. He knew how to play with those who wanted to hurt each other Sergio Massa and Together for changeWhich he financed at various stages until he came to power. “It’s not that he came from nowhere, without money,” recalls the researcher from the University of Lisbon.
On the other hand, the political scientist pointed to the influence of Miley’s personality in Argentina as a symptom of the times and explained why La Libertad Avanza began to “change itself.”
“Argentina is very pro-cyclical: we get excited when things are going well, depressed when things are bad, and we infect the world. There are a lot of people who trust something new, and Miley hits the final nail on the head by being anti-establishment, what he calls a cult. He’s a rock star: he moves emotions, he fills stadiums. All individual characteristics. How he screams and how he sings. The issue of freedom and standing against something is one that is spreading throughout the world. There is anti-establishment everywhere. Miley, out in the world, embodies, in a certain celebratory way, those negative feelings she harbors everywhere.“.
However, according to Malamud, those tendencies that came out against the entire class “changed” and no longer faced the class, but rather half of it, embodied in the character Christina KirchnerBecause the other half got it. “In 2023, he had a very transversal voice: from rural to urban, but he no longer has it. This continued for two years.
“Now, how he has had better elections in places with more resources, and worse elections in places with fewer resources. He responds to the same proportionality as Cambimos, the party of professionals and radicals of the past: at a higher formal economic, social and practical level, more votes; and at the bottom of the social scale, less. Peronism is the opposite.”