The great wave of democratization that emerged after World War II It has been experiencing a worrying process of erosion for some time, which can be seen in countries with mature political systems and in countries with recent democratization processes. Less surprisingly, democracy appears to falter and even suffer setbacks in contexts with rich trajectories of coexistence and cooperation, in other contexts with highly successful transformations, and in less established cases. Thus, the “unfulfilled democratic promises” referred to by Norberto Bobbio, especially in social and economic terms, are added to the “cultural battles” to impose narratives involving new moral and even religious values and principles, along with the emergence of new leaderships. Strangers State capture by special interests explains the spread of concepts such as democratic stagnation, new generation authoritarianism, or the rise of “neo-fascism.” The crisis appears very severe, similar to the crisis that the country suffered almost a century ago, with the challenge represented by non-democratic regimes from the right and left.
From a comparative perspectiveArgentina is an interesting case to say the least: characterized by weak institutions and the failure of the state apparatus to provide basic public goods (security, justice, health, education, basic physical infrastructure, and environmental stewardship), as well as a harsh past of political instability and military coups, its democratic system is stable and enjoys great legitimacy. In fact, we have not had major governance problems in the past 25 years, and in the 2001 crisis there were efforts to preserve the existing rules of the game and ensure the continuity of the institutional system. A litmus test has been passed with the “let’s go all in” slogan put forward by CFK in 2012, a hegemonic and authoritarian project with implications for international alliances (the Memorandum of Understanding with Iran), which was defeated at the ballot box in 6 out of the 7 elections that followed. It has just passed another crucial test during the first two years of Javier Miley’s administration: a ruling party suffering from unprecedented and severe weakness in both houses of Congress, in the absence of its governors and under a handful of mayors, has managed to navigate the always difficult waters of national politics, deploy very ambitious goals and implement much of its economic stabilization policy. Moreover, we are among the countries in the world that most support the constitutional system, with 75% of citizens, according to recent opinion polls. This continues even though the country is materially much worse off than it was at the beginning of the transition to democracy. It also survives the weakness of the old party system and the very intense conflicts that polarized a large part of society ideologically and realistically. Unlike in other democracies, such as the United States, where these deep conflicts have tainted electoral institutions with suspicion on the part of both parties, Argentina has been able to “weld” this primary institutional field to achieve the purpose of selecting governing officials (leadership). Adam Przeworski asserts that the absence of relevant actors questioning democracy is the best symptom of democratic consolidation: “the only possible political game.” This is the most accurate description that can be given after 42 years of institutional continuity.
Hardness Democratic Argentina is a multi-causal phenomenon. The anachronistic controversies surrounding the appointment of a military officer to the Ministry of Defense indicate that the dramatic experience that the country suffered during the recent military dictatorship, particularly due to human rights violations but also due to incompetence manifested in the mismanagement of the economy, continues to generate a very solid foundation, and a vital impetus towards constitutional order. Moreover, one of the institutional pillars that explains our new democratic political culture is the trust generated by the electoral system as a whole. For more than four decades, we have not witnessed a single painful experience at the national level in terms of its legitimacy and transparency. There were always some doubts, speculations or specific claims, but even in a very close election, no questions were asked about the outcome. This occurs even though we lack an independent agency of political power to regulate the electoral process. That is, the governments in power are responsible for managing the elections under constant supervision and control by the electoral justice. However, this has not generated consistent doubts, despite the distrust and complaints among citizens in general regarding the work of the judiciary.
Looking to the future is the main challenge of our system The political consists in preserving (and enhancing) this quality. There are some outstanding issues, such as better regulation of the use of social networks in the public arena, especially during election campaigns, or reviewing the source of funds that support politics. The prevailing climate of the time and the narrative of the LAF government constitute a factor that would imply a reduction or even elimination of public funding for parties and campaigns. Aside from rhetoric, this issue must be discussed wisely and seriously, and an equal role must be guaranteed for the state, so that it sets limits on the use of economic resources, especially when election campaigns resort formally and informally to suppliers of technology and social networking strategies from abroad, which are usually under the radar of the relevant regulatory authorities.
with regard to Organizing election campaignsIn Argentina, a 2009 law became effective. After the severe electoral defeat suffered by Kirchner’s party in the midterm elections in the middle of that year, and after a comprehensive analysis of the reasons why the opposition coalition led by Francisco de Narvaez, which included important sectors of Peronism in Buenos Aires, had organized such a successful campaign, the government of Cristina Fernández encouraged major changes in electoral and information legislation. This “political reform” (counter-reform) focused on modifying the electoral system and political representation with a restrictive and controlling aim in the face of the danger of the emergence of alternative forces outside the traditional party system. Although networks have already taken the communications world by storm, the focus has been on traditional media. A decade later, there was an attempt to regulate the use of advertisements on social networks as part of electoral campaign strategies, within the framework of the new Political Finance Law (27504, issued on 5/31/2019). Therefore, we await specific regulations on this issue that address issues vital to the normal and fair development of electoral processes, in particular, impeding disinformation campaigns and ensuring equal access.
democracy Argentina, despite its obvious problems and huge number of broken promises, is healthy. It is ironic that one of the careful observers of our reality says these days: “It is a democracy with few democrats,” and how right he is. It would be a mistake to rest on our laurels: it is essential to keep antibodies active to avoid contracting the democratic reversal virus that many countries in the region and the world are witnessing.