Is she the one who hates?

In her first public message after the attack, Cristina Fernández once again called for dialogue.

He said that the attempt to assassinate her means “a rupture”, which forces a “reconstruction process”.

He remarked that “We are not going to achieve that by talking only among those of us who think in one way.”

As if to leave not the slightest doubt, the vice president mentioned her meeting with the economist Carlos Melconián and repeated that “Grace is not getting together with those who think the same. The grace is to get together with those who think differently and see if, at least in economics, we can have a minimum agreement”.

Moderately an agreement on that to rebuild, he underlined in a third sentence practically consecutive to the previous ones.

As if that were not enough, answering your own question about whether it is possible to rebuild the country and the economy when you only insult and offend, in irrefutable allusion to ideas or projects to combat hate speech, CFK warned that “no special law is necessary”.

Sincerely, he emphasized, reconstitute what we worked so hard to achieve since 1983 does not require the sanction of any law. “Those that are in force are enough and are left over.”

Incredibly, or the oppositeNeither did the official media give priority to these statements made by Cristina in her meeting with Priests Villeros, Priests in Option for the Poor and sisters, religious and lay.

It was preferred to make it outstanding that CFK awarded God and the Virgin the miracle of being alive, which left room for feverish crosses -more of one’s own suit than of the other- around whether entrusting oneself to deities speaks well or badly of the vdeputy president

The opposition media made cheap psychology, and obvious projections, about what Cristina means by noting how little it seduces her to get hooked on another presidential chance, because she has already experienced it twice along with having accompanied her husband’s turn.

Neither one nor the other was responsible for taking the node of what was claimed by the leader who continues to take light years to the rest of the political arc, whether they love her or hate her.

Parallel to Cristina’s insistence, by summoning for almost the umpteenth time a dialogue that could allow agreement on basic aspects, Larreta made a show of force by bringing together some 150 cambiamitas from all over the country.

The generalized interpretation was that the mayor of Buenos Aires, for the sake of his presidential project, sought to mark the internal court for a Comandante Pato -and prior to or by extension Macri- who did not deign to condemn the attack, even formally.

It is false or only partially true that the move had that exclusivity.

Larreta made it clear a while ago that his dialogue invitation excludes “Kirchnerist Peronism”, unionized in about 20/25 or, at the most, 30 percent of society with whom they will never have to sit down to talk a whistle.

In fact, in that meeting at the Recoleta Cultural Center and aside from a string of commonplaces, the mayor warned that the national government “does not have a plan.” Only “internal, Chicana and raised fingers pointing guilty.”

Even more: it is also in the official and opposition media from where it is communicated, through off-screen spokespersons, that Cristina’s request for dialogue is at the expense of “hard Kirchnerism”, or just her, and/or that, First, they must agree on the basis for such a consensus.

This is sensational.

Now it turns out that Cristina would be accused of being a moderate and that the moderates, because they wanted to kill her, became tougher than she was.

It turns out that they trigger her in the head, she is the one who reopens her hand and it is the others, her own and others, who try to close it.

It is ratified that, instead of the factual and intellectually honest interpretation of what Cristina says and does, there is the construction that each person needs to formulate about what she would represent.

There are people who vociferate that way because of ancestral gorillaism. Or because of ideological melancholy. Or out of classless resentment. Or by the noble drive to cling to utopias subject to a figure. etc.

Thus, in the savage band of hate, the group that prepared and produced such an “episode” is nothing more than the staging of a self-attack (Defining them as “the cups” is not an innocent semantic: it lowers the price of what, as colleague Pedro Brieger warns, the FBI defines as domestic terrorism).

The revolver was instrumentally a toy.

And the invention is a textbook, to talk about that frippery in place of a tremendous inflationary process or the crisis of the Front of All.

Or this way, it is better to build an inflexible Cristina, determined not to negotiate absolutely anything, who does not say or do what she is but what I need her to say and do.

As already expressed in this space, it is very complicated (not to say unlikely, or directly impossible) to imagine that dialogue can be held with those who think that Peronism should be pulverized. Don’t beat him. Liquidate it.

Nevertheless, It is Cristina who once again has the greatness of placing herself in a statesman’s role. That, as has already been argued here, is (far) ahead of the mistakes or the excesses that she may have incurred when she harmed the Government that she integrated and integrates.

Beyond how “well” it seems to have gone for Sergio Massa on his tour to kick the ball around, with the IMF and surroundings, and the presentation of a national budget whose optimistic prospects do not quite believe or in the official castCFK knows that with this inflation it is not that there is no government that can stand it. There is no country that can stand.

Alfredo Zaiat, in his column this Sunday in Page 12, explains precisely and technically that the economy navigates without anti-inflationary anchors and with no more bets than to comply with the program of the Monetary Fund.

So far, despite the certainty that adjusting “the macro” is not enough, but without composing it it is not possible, Massa -the government, come on- is only concerned with dealing with the financial emergency.

That is why CFK calls for some type of agreement that, in the implementation, could consist of some change shock in the monetary sign. Or segmentation in this regard, simpler than madness? or the inventions of various exchange rates. Or to implement a fiscal deficit that does not go through leaving out millions of workers.

The Argentine (neo)liberals, virtually without exception and without the need to fall into humorists like Milei, are creepy. They plot an Excel and solve everything with how much goes in and how much goes out. Any classical academic with a tendency towards individual egoism as a productive stimulus factor, not Keynes, would reprove them with signs of repudiation. For donkeys.

It’s people like that that Cristina, the vindictive, the outcast, the silly, the mare, tells them that it doesn’t matter.

That we sit down to talk, because this is going to hell and we are going to pay for it. But you too.

Or does anyone imagine that this country is governable against Peronism whom Larreta, Macri or the gunslinger Bullrich intend to exterminate?

Source: Pagina12

Disclaimer: If you need to update/edit/remove this news or article then please contact our support team Learn more

Varun Kumar

Varun Kumar is a freelance writer working on news website. He contributes to Our Blog and more. Wise also works in higher ed sustainability and previously in stream restoration. He loves running, trees and hanging out with her family.

Leave a Reply