Between clientelism, institutional decay, and the punishment of disruption
– Short political memory as a system survival mechanism
– Clientelism as the emotional foundation of power
– Social punishment of those who disrupt the structure
Once upon a time… there was a very beautiful and very rich country.
A country that was a delight for tourists, offering a wide variety of places depending on individual tastes.
A country that about a hundred years ago rivaled the United States in many aspects.
A country to which Spaniards, Italians, French and many others arrived in great numbers.
But… it turns out that this country, in the current century—without going too far back—fell into the hands of a mafia-like couple who began to steal public funds almost openly, supported by their accomplices.
However, in general, people said they felt fine. That is, those who worked little or not at all and were not required to do much.
At a certain point, the “monarch” died. Some say under somewhat irregular circumstances, but in any case, that is (or was) a legal and forensic matter, not to be addressed here.
The “queen” remained alone, though only in appearance, since an entire people supported her. Curiously, the more expensive items she acquired and displayed, the more adored she became.
Generously, she rewarded her beloved people—sometimes mockingly called “benefit recipients”—with basic provisions. Occasionally, even a sausage in bread. And yet, that segment of society felt comfortable because they were not required to work.
The plan, or little plan, was secure.
But, as usually happens, things eventually became more difficult.
External and internal creditors, conflict with the productive sector, pressure from the IMF, and shocking images of corruption made everything collapse.
With prices skyrocketing, money became nearly worthless.
Still, those dependent on state support continued receiving their portion.
To maintain loyalty, the “queen” handpicked a presidential candidate known precisely for making things even worse.
Eventually, a disruptive figure came to power.
And those who once depended on the system now despise him.
Not only them, but also declining figures in journalism.
And how do they attack him?
By focusing on trivial matters.
Isn’t democracy extraordinary?
Isn’t it magical how it allows forgetting yesterday?
And what about meritocracy?
Ah, no. That’s considered dangerous.