The anniversary of the fall of the dictatorship and the clear course of four decades. Editorial of “El Círculo Rojo”, a program on La Izquierda Diario that broadcasts on Thursdays from 10 p.m. to midnight on Radio Con Vos, 89.9.

  • They were fulfilled 40 years since the restoration of constitutional regime in 1983 and some commemorative events took place, rescues of the figure of Raul Alfonsin and books were published. I am reading one from the Economic Culture Fund that is titled 1983. An unfinished project by Jennifer Adair that has some interesting contributions; Others circulate focused on the electoral campaign at that time or on The History of the Last Military Dictatorship, such as the one by Gabriela Ávila who published Siglo XXI and which I recently read.
    See this post on Instagram

    A post shared by El Círculo Rojo (@elcirculorojo.899)

  • However, the round anniversary It takes place in a climate very different from that imagined by those who placed their aspirations and dreams in the democratic restoration.. Because, in fact, a question is installed in the environment that is sometimes formulated openly or sometimes implicitly and which would be more or less like this: How can it be that 40 years after democracy was restored, a force — like La Libertad Avanza — that denies the most basic democratic freedoms, that militates against genocide denialism, etc. Do you have the support you have?
  • Let’s reflect a little on this.
  • Once, one or two years after the democratic restoration, someone said: “The democracy It would be fiction for him niñothe man or woman with the body and the mind turned off by the insufficiency of foods”. One could add—without violating the spirit of the statement in any way—that it would also be a fiction for people with the broken body for multiple employment, exhausted due to the situation of structural poverty or stressed to the extreme due to a daily life that gives no respite (because money is not enough, because it is an odyssey for many people to find a place to live, due to the precariousness of work and life in general). Well, this announcement was issued by Raúl Alfonsín when he presented the “National Food Program” (the PAN box), it was a program to distribute food among millions of people who were in poverty after the economic devastation applied by the dictatorship.
  • Now—beyond the specific circumstance in which this sentence was pronounced—note that the one who is considered “the father of democracy” (which at that time said that “with democracy you eat, you heal and you educate”) is quite direct and crude: he did not say “democracy weakens” or “it is weaker,” He said that if these are the social conditions that affect bodies in a very harsh way, democracy for these people becomes “a fiction.”.
  • Just watch what happened in these four decades in social terms (at that time poverty was around 20-25%) to have some clues as to why today, for many, democracy has the importance it has on their scale of values.
  • And why are we in this situation? On the one hand, because The economy was guided during the last decades by the core guidelines left by the dictatorship. That was the real heavy inheritance. On many occasions, the famous “democratic pact” instituted in 1983 places emphasis on the ruptures between one stage and the next, and not on their continuities. How much of the dictatorship—or of the essential objectives of the dictatorship—did they continue to inhabit democracy?
  • The restoration of the constitutional order was the product, first of all, of a relationship of forces. There is a certain “revisionist” historiography circulating about those years that are revaluing the role of popular mobilization in the fall of the dictatorship (a process that began in 1979 that included strikes, neighborhood mobilizations and, of course, the human rights movement). Because it is true that the defeat of the Malvinas war It was decisive for the military’s departure from power, but the Malvinas adventure responded to a previous crisis of the regime that was very discredited. Malvinas – raised in the terms of the military junta – was the cause and effect of the regime’s crisis.
  • Now, from a more general perspective, The return of the constitutional regime was based on a defeat of the popular sectors, sealed in the disappearance of the most dynamic of a generation. That’s why we had Trial of the Boards, but also Due Obedience and Final Pointin addition to pardons (later annulled by Néstor Kirchner’s government after the 2001 rebellion). Even the Trial of the Juntas was paradoxical because the executors of the genocide were accused and convicted, but not the trialists; the military leaders, but not the direct or indirect economic and political beneficiaries.
  • The legacy of the dictatorship was transformed into the politics of the “State party” under democracy. In the Alfonsinist years, the “ideals of social reform” quickly mutated towards realpolitik and the pragmatism of “structural reforms” for a modernization that presupposed adjustment, subordination to the IMF, salary cuts and privatizations. Because few remember this: the privatization program had already begun to be deployed by the late Alfonsín (later the radical candidate, Eduardo Angeloz, transformed it into a campaign). In a sense, the National Food Program (the PAN box), intended for those working families expelled from the productive process by the industricide of the military economic program, was a recognition of that defeat: there was no intention of reversing the results of the plan, those workers were not They were going to return to the companies, at most they could be beneficiaries of the most minimal assistance, food assistance.
  • There was also continuity formally: Nearly 420 laws established by the de facto regime are currently in force, among them the Financial Entities Law, the Customs Code, the Foreign Investment Law or the Agricultural Products Export Regime. 10% of the legal body in force today in our country was established under the military regime and not exactly the least relevant legislation.
  • He wild debtthe structural poverty which today is around 40%, the precariousness and the labor informality which affects 35% of workers, the huge salary reduction and the novelty of the “poor workers” cannot be understood without taking that heritage into account. AND The “crisis of democracy” cannot be understood without these results. Perhaps because it is necessary to differentiate democratic freedoms from a regime that, due to its class characteristics, limits even those same freedoms.
  • In any case, the balance at the level of living conditions cannot be separated from the perception of the advantages and disadvantages of a political regime. A political balance is still pending that is not limited to the formal and goes to the substantive.
  • Politics / Democracy / The Red Circle


    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *