The popular vote and the Bolsonaro effect
Because Brazil went from the family stock exchange plan to order and progress, and how it affects Argentina.
Politics and Economics
It is interesting to see the confusion of the progressive political movements in the face of the evident support for the "right-wing liberal proposals" on the part of social sectors that considered themselves more in tune with socialist measures. To understand why the popular vote is inclined towards options such as Trump in the United States or Bolsonaro in Brazil, it is necessary to start from the premise that these political actors are children of the context and not the opposite. The modern liberal societies that formed on the idea of reason as a social agglutinant believed that order allowed progress and that all progress was good. They were conservative societies, with traditional values and a unique concept of truth. Without going into the criticisms or discussions of modern society, we can say that there was a "computer" frame of reference in which citizens found certainty, security and freedom regulated by law and custom. The transition to postmodernity destroys these ideas of order and progress, taking to the extreme the liberal concept of individualism. There is no longer a single truth, the post-truth is born in which nothing is certain because everything can be true, putting in check the notion of authority. This generated the sustenance upon which progressivism could advance in Latin America. But slowly, in recent years, this idea of progressive Latin American brotherhood sustained by popular governments and materialized by institutions such as UNSAUR was disarmed. The socialism of the nineteenth century was not sustained by national economic development integrated into the world but by a global process that benefited the emerging economies. In this context and while the United States was going through an administration that assigned little strategic importance to the region, there was the growing influence of China and countries like Iran in the most radicalized as Venezuela. When the economic bases that sustained them began to diminish, these popular governments showed their authoritarian side, leaving in evidence that their ideological conception was above society. They were still tied to the old idea of combating capitalism, and the citizens were warning that they were prisoners of an ancient ideological progressism that disguised itself as modernity in its discourse but could not provide a solution to the growing demands for greater security and freedom. The United States, with Trump in the presidency, began a new cycle and went out to renegotiate the benefits of globalization. In this context, Bolsonaro is much more than his speech and his extreme ideas, he is the person who interprets this moment. It implies a return to the idea of classic "Order and Progress", of a Brazil that recovers its claim to regional leadership. It is true that it refloats traditional values based on the power and prestige of the armed forces in Brazil, but its discourse is reinterpreted differently by each social actor. In the current context, the voter considers Bolsonaro a sincere man who manifests what he thinks. But even his most racist comments are filtered by the voter because he interprets that it will not be part of his government's policy. That is to say, he listens to the speech what he considers necessary for the country. That's why a homosexual votes for Bolsonaro knowing his homophobia, precisely because he doesn't vote deceived. The same goes for minorities or Afro-descendants. They understand that during their government their rights will not be extended or they will have explicit recognition but they interpret that there is no consensus in modern societies or in the world for measures against them. On the contrary, they privilege the discourse that proclaims security (Brazil has a record of 60,000 murders per year) and economic progress with freedom, not redistribution. Faced with the unpredictability and insecurity of a postmodern society, they agree to vote on a proposal that implies a state that uses its force to bring order and in this they coincide with the most conservative vote. The presidential chair usually moderates the extreme campaign positions and Bolsonaro has already transmitted some messages in that sense. However, his government's guidelines are very clear and the challenges are enormous. Surely you will see in Argentina in recent years a frame of reference to avoid repeating some measures that did not show the expected results. If so, how could it affect our economy? It is clear that for Argentina, a Brazil that grows is very beneficial. In the first place because each point of the GDP that Brazil grows represents an increase of approximately 0.25 of the Argentine GDP, and in the second place because it is our main commercial partner. However, given Argentina's need and dependence on foreign direct investment to improve its economy, it is a matter of concern that Bolsonaro concentrated the ministries of economy, industry and foreign trade in Minister Paulo Guedes. The future "Superministro Guedes" has already expressed its intention to immediately adjust public accounts in order to reduce the fiscal deficit and to devalue its currency until it reaches 5 reais in order to dynamize the exporting sectors before intervening strongly in the market (Brazil's reserves to date are at 381,000 million). A rapid rebound in economic indicators could make Brazil become a foreign investment vacuum, making it less attractive as an investment alternative to Argentina, which is also too divided in its economic decision-making to react quickly and in a coordinated manner to new circumstances. On the other hand, a devaluation of the Real that could be beneficial for Brazil since it does not generate inflation could cause the Peso to have to accompany the rise generating new inflationary pressures at a time when Argentina suffers the highest indices since 1990. For Macri's government, it will be very difficult to maintain the current scheme of decisions if Brazil is successful in the implementation of its economic and social measures such as those that Macri left aside when opting for gradualism. The room for manoeuvre for a country like Argentina shrinks when a giant like Brazil wakes up. Even more so when Bolsonaro intends to articulate a Washington-Brazilian axis to recover its position as representative of the region.