By Alfredo Serrano Mancilla
In the first place, those who dream of finally ending this change of era that took away the monopoly of decision-making power join this party. With great will, these actors strive to gradually reduce the universe of hopes and illusions forged precisely at this change in time. The strategy is not to argue backwards.
What's done is done, and no matter how much they don't like it, the objective and subjective result in favor of the majority is unquestionable. Rather, it is about ending the idea that there is still much to be achieved, to improve. Around this purpose, today resides the true tug of war of Latin American geopolitics.
The new regional right, the one that is already of legal age, has learned that it cannot be won with press headlines that are far from the reality that the Latin American majority currently lives, much more included, with more social rights, with more democratized levels of consumption .
This does not mean that the mainstream media, as well as the more traditional party forces, insist on their old knack of scaring, alarming and unsettling by affirming this or another cataclysm. But what is really new and surely increasingly central to the strategy to oppose the processes of change in Latin America is to end the myth that “we can still advance much more”.
The end of the cycle is based on an embryonic stage in making us believe that everything that could be done has already been done, that is, there are no more conquests to be achieved on the horizon.
This thesis seeks to be propagated with the help of the current external restriction that threatens many Latin American economies due to the global economic contraction. The fall in the prices of oil and other commodities puts in trouble some countries that managed to implement a true sovereign economic policy in favor of the reappropriation of natural resources. What used to sell for 100, today sells for less than 50.
This means that half of what was going in goes in. What critics once called a "tailwind in favor" should now be called a "tailwind against". Although they don't. Now they directly prefer to use the (bad) ominous term of “end of cycle” as a self-fulfilling prophecy to see if with so much going to the fountain, one day it ends up breaking.
Other sectors (social, political, citizens) are also added to this invitation with a great predilection for precocious and always destructive criticism with almost nothing propositional. In this space coexist: 1) those who from almost the beginning opposed almost everything thinking that change is a path of roses without obstacles, and 2) others who begin to waver in strength and enthusiasm in these times when battles are increasingly difficult. If something must be valued about the historical enemy, it is precisely his perseverance and optimism; there are political options that despite having lost for example 18 out of 19 times, in just 15 years, they still believe that their political proposal is the one most supported by the social majority.
This virtue should be taken into account when fighting against this opponent who never tires, nor throws in the towel, and who keeps trying by any means, whether legal or not.
The pessimism prevailing in some self-styled "progressive or left" ranks paves the way for those who really do want a conservative restoration. Lean times are always conducive to those who get off at the next stop.
The growing disenchantment in our ranks paves the way for the return of the caravels in the XXI century version. This would be giving the enemy too much advantage in these times of dispute. Criticism is welcome as long as it is accompanied by a search for solutions, engines that generate new hope, without ending up yielding to the blackmail of disenchantment.
At this point lies the real challenge of the current geopolitical dispute: assuming that perhaps a period of "waiting" is necessary but with a common sense full of hope. Waiting does not mean sitting idly by or throwing stones at everything that happens. Rather, it is about understanding that we are facing a new stage in the political struggle in this intriguing geoeconomic contest.
Neither ebb nor end of cycle; At best, attempts at conservative restoration have not yet managed to break this insurgent hegemony still under construction in Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina. In this new stage, each process of change has its political tempo, its way of facing adversities, of overcoming different tensions and contradictions, whether within the bloc or derived from the confrontation with the outside.
It is a new stage characterized by the need for new movements so that the positions achieved are irreversible.
What was a victory yesterday, today is fortunately naturalized as a right. The change of era requires attending to new questions to avoid falling into the error of giving old answers.
The next months / years are to look for new discursive categories, new stories, new signifiers-teachers, new mobilizing factors and next flags to be raised.
In short, the dispute is almost always the same, between those who appeal to the restoration of disenchantment with a "no alternative" and those who will continue to engender an infinite universe of hopes, always tirelessly searching for new alternatives.
* Alfredo Serrano Mancilla, CELAG Director, Doctor in Economics,