There is an idea, whether expressed as a possibility or as a desire, which is the end of kirchnerism or the beginning of it. To answer this hypothesiso To give you a framework of understanding, I will start from a series of questions that I will answer throughout the development.
The first question is about electoral competition from the return to democracy to the present. To do this, let us take as a starting point that from 1983 to 1999 the competition between PJ and UCR as two large institutionalized parties. The demands were captured by both and it was not possible for another party to enter the electoral contest and this was, in part, due to the electoral institutions of that period.
Due to the changes in the electoral system, the possibility of coming to power through a coalition arose and thus the Alliance arrived. Due to the abrupt departure of the De La Rúa government and the different presidents who passed through La Rosada without success, politics suffered a great crisis and several fronts came out to fight in 2003.
government coalitions
In this context, Néstor Kirchner proclaimed himself president. Although the Front for Victory (FpV) was a coalition, the Kirchner bloc quickly took the lead and practically it was more a single thing and not a set of things.
With some definitions, this Kirchnerist bloc remained until the 2015 elections where opposition parties formed the coalition let’s change (henceforth: JvC) that he won in the presidential elections. This coalition was different in its behavior in relation to FpV: JxC never became macrismo.
2023: Overflowing coalitions and inert elections?
The parties that formed the coalition continued with their identity, which made the “governing coalition”. We can argue and say that it is not a government coalition as understood in European parliamentary systems, it is true, but it is a consequence of the constitutional reform of 1994 and the 2001 crisis.
In the 2019 elections, a coalition also came to power: the Front of All (FdT). These, much clearer than JvC, is a coalition of different parties that we will not go into detail one by one because they are obvious to any observer.
Well then, since we have a brief summary, I will dare to make a classification between coalitions of “high, medium or low internal conflict” and if the resolutions tend to be horizontal or vertical.
With the first criterion I refer to how the relationship between coalition partieswhile with the second if the political actions are rather consensual (horizontal) or that a sector of the coalition is predominant and the only one that acts (vertical).
This is schematic, it does not mean that in practice it is as it is, it is in order to provide a framework.
Coalitions: end of Kirchnerism?
The Frente de Todos has a “high internal conflict”, but horizontal resolutions -we cannot say that the one who governs is only one-. JxC, in its 2015-19 experience, began with an internal media conflict with an upward trend, at the end of its cycle.
However, unlike FdT, its resolutions were closer to being vertical than horizontal – “macrismo” had a greater weight in the coalition.
Summit of the PRO leaders: sign of unity and the agreement of a meeting with José Luis Espert
The behavior of JxC is disfigured if he sees the current offer for the 2023 elections. The coalition tries to demonstrate that it would maintain internal conflict in the media, but that its actions are going to be more horizontal than vertical.
Facing him is a new coalition headed by Javier Milei that could clearly be classified the same as the FpV: low internal conflict and a tendency towards vertical resolutions.
After this analysis, it is worth asking what will happen after 2023 And here we can discuss whether or not it really is the end of Kirchnerism. Everything depends on the paradigm being maintained.
If the government coalitions with horizontal resolutions are installed successfully, Kirchnerism will have a rather secondary role of what was in his past.
However, the appearance of the “libertarian” coalition puts this paradigm in check.
In other words, I think that horizontal coalitions (of resolutions) are at stake versus vertical coalitions. I keep calling them coalitions because they are still alliances of parties that can go bankrupt, that is, of parties with low institutionalization, different from the radicalism and Peronism of the last century.
As far as I know, There is no better scenario for Kirchnerism than that of vertical coalitions where it was highly successful as a movement. Place where other movements show certain weaknesses.
You may also like
