Tomás Mosciatti: “Chile’s danger is to look like Argentina, not Venezuela”

Santiago, Chile.- A well-known name in Chile, Tomás Mosciatti (lawyer, 61) is a leading political analyst and communications entrepreneur. Is the current director of Radio Bío Bío and one of most influential opinion leaders in the country.

Grandson of Italian immigrants and a member of a family of eight siblings, his outspoken and enlightened style is part of a stamp that also complements a see which incorporates the religious use of suspenders. At the Palacio de La Moneda, his speeches are listened to with attention and his reading of internal reality, so upset in recent years, does not admit of indifference.

“In Chile, there has been a change of epoch. If it was France, we would speak of the sixth republic “, says Mosciatti, referring to the historic process that shook the country and that went hand in hand with the proliferation of several milestones born since the social outbreak of October 2019, and a transformed process that progressed with the constituent elections and the defeat of the hegemonic blocks of the center.

“The change of epoch is produced by the collapse of the coalition which had governed for almost 30 years, with some interruptions from the right. It started to happen in 2010, when Sebastián Piñera’s first government took office and this center-left bloc realized that something had to happen for the right to win these elections. And this coalition has never accepted that the right has won an election. It was something unthinkable, intolerable, and even immoral for them, that people who had had close or distant connections with Pinochet had prevailed in a democratic election. And the center-left became a masochistic entity, in which they said everything they had done was wrong, and they were left speechless. Therefore, the collapse of the center-left was due to their huge mistakes, but also because they did not recognize their successes. And that was a mistake because the center-left ruled and generated huge growth in the country. Although it is uneven, all Chileans have improved. Now they also had corruption issues, and that took the bill to a new generation, ”Mosciatti says.

– Does another decisive aspect stand out in the new era that Chile is going through?

-There is a gigantic cultural change. Today’s democracy-dictatorship divide is different: now it’s liberalism or anti-liberalism. And this divide was lost by the center-left because people today associate them with neoliberalism, which is why the political dispute is absolutely lost. When the center-left started to rule in Chile, it was made up of parties that had been renewed, but many of them came from Marxism and it turns out that, as the Berlin Wall had recently fallen, they remained without references. The only benchmark they had was the Pinochet business model, which they started to administer, with modifications, with modifications, and worked well. The country grew for almost 30 years, they were calm and they liked the exercise of power.

Young people don’t want a car, they prefer to have a bicycle. Or they want to work four days a week and have more free time, even though they earn less

-But many promises have not been kept.

-Exactly, mainly the promises of the market. Just as Pinochet’s economists repeated certain things like a mantra, the center-left began to endorse them as well. And they said the market was the best allocator of resources. Or for there to be a market, they had to have many suppliers and many seekers, in addition to enhancing the value of meritocracy. But it turns out the market was concentrated, the meritocracy didn’t work – because they were still the same – and the institutions started to slowly degrade due to little signs that were never addressed and , eventually, their collapse occurred. Then, with the social outbreak, a change was born which is not only political, but also cultural. Today the predominant thing has to do with the young Chileans, who think in a totally different way and with a political class that has not been able to see it or deal with it. Therefore, today these representatives must retire.

– Has inequality mobilized the new generation of Chileans?

-Inequalities have not only mobilized young people. There are studies that indicate that people would rather have something worse with less inequality, than something better, but with more inequality. Inequality is a terrible thing because people have their life totally determined from the moment they are born. What merits do they speak to me about when students don’t have opportunities because companies separate resumes from those who live in more modest neighborhoods? In Chile, inequalities are huge and young people today think differently: young people don’t want a car, they prefer to have a bicycle. Or they want to work four days a week and have more free time, even though they earn less. They don’t get married, they don’t want to have children, and they prefer to have a pet. Young people can live in apartments of 40 square meters and be happy. Then the country changed enormously and the political class was not able to realize what they thought and integrate issues such as environmental issues.

There has never been more public disorder than precisely what happened in a right-wing government like this. There is no governance

-How do you think the Chilean center-right will rearm?

-The center-right also suffered from this collapse because it did not realize that there was a majority of people who needed other parameters in society. They have been making mistakes for a long time because they have been very reactive when it comes to changing the Chilean binomial electoral system. They have always defended spaces and their relations with large business groups are highly criticized. The right has defended the economic system, but in reality it has not defended it, it has defended a system where there are abuses. For many years the retail he charged usurious interest and made big capital to liquidate small businesses. The right is constantly contradicting itself, because it theoretically wants it to be competition; however, it allowed the elimination of competition.

– The Chilean right has remained without history?

-Absolutely. He has not even been able to protect what is essential for the sector, namely public order. In other words, there has never been so much public disorder as the one that happened precisely in a right-wing government like this. There is no governance. And the question is deep because the right has spoken of merit and in Chile there is no merit. The right has spoken of the value of work, while in Chile people receive more money for financial activities than for work. These are permanent contradictions in the industry that have never been resolved and, when they tried to defend the model at the last minute, the right was unable to do so. There were many opportunities to improve the pension system and the AFPs (private pension fund managers), and there was also no room to do so.

-How do you see the possibility for Chile to elect a communist president?

– I believe that the victory of the left in the last elections could be greater than that obtained by Salvador Allende in 1970. And I say this because Allende won the presidency with only 36% of the vote, he has always been a minority . And, secondly, because Allende never wanted to change the Constitution, but rather negotiated to obtain the presidency for a strengthening of the Constitution with the status of democratic guarantees. And in this case, the left has the possibility of writing the Constitution, which is a gigantic power in addition to obtaining the government. Now, if you are asking me if there can be a Communist president, maybe it is because the Communist Party that ruled with Michelle Bachelet had ministers and had a strong influence. Having said that, I believe that Daniel Jadue will not be president. Everything is to be written of course, but it is very likely that it is Yasna Provoste, who is able to summon more people, people from different backgrounds. The alliance under Provoste is broader.

-If communism wins, the version has always appeared that the capitals are leaving. Do you see it like that?

-Sorry, but the capitals are already leaving. Today, in Chile, the amount of legal remittances abroad is enormous. Interest on mortgages has increased, country risk has increased, but the main economic consequence that this will have is that with the last elections, the death of AFP and the private health system has been signed. And it turns out that AFPs are the big engine of the Chilean economy. The poorest countries have no savings, but this did not happen because in Chile there were economies which, although forced, led to investments and therefore to growth. AFP savings are used in the production system and have facilitated growth in recent years. Now, with the end of this system, the car that had an engine of two thousand cubic centimeters will now have one in a thousand. Chilean potential growth immediately declines. And, therefore, there will be a very big economic pressure and that is why many people withdraw their funds, including not rich people, who sell their house and open dollar accounts abroad. It also happens that companies that were planning to make investments in Chile do not develop them.

-In your opinion, could the election of a moderate change this panorama that you describe?

-It is that the next president will be essentially someone from the administration, because he will not decide big things during the drafting of a Constitution. Now I think there is an opportunity for the center-left to talk about the economy again, which it has stopped doing in recent months. I have spoken with left-wing economists who tell me that when they want to raise the issue in their parties, they silence them. Chile has always been a test tube, a country of experimentation, but there is now a great opportunity for the sector to talk again about growth, balancing the economy, respecting the fiscal rule, a stable tax reform for the future, and that there is a better distribution, but respecting this type of thing. If this is the case, and if we have a modern Constitution, where the environment is respected, where digital challenges are worrying, Chile could be a reference for many countries in the region after a very exacerbated liberalism.

-Do you see an equivalence with the Argentinian process?

-The Argentinian process has a problem and that is that Kirchnerism has known many acts of corruption. The people who try to rule in Chile have a history of their own because they did not rule. We don’t know if they will have it in the future, but it makes a very big difference. Yes, it is possible that in Chile there is a temptation to have a clientelist policy; that is, the obligations are not temporary but permanent, that the retirement money is used for six or seven years in permanent obligations that change the mentality of the country. The danger is that Chile looks like Argentina and not Venezuela, because in Chile the armed forces will not be involved, as is the case in Venezuela.

Conocé The Trust Project