To the intellectuals who support Macri

A few days ago, 150 intellectuals signed a declaration expressing their support for the candidacy of Macri and Pichetto. It seems positive that every person who wants it, and even more so when he has a public life, expresses his political opinions. Therefore, because of the political stance opposed to those who signed this statement, we invite them to publicly discuss our differences. While affirming that dissent and dialogue are essential to the construction of democracy and that there is also a plurality of representatives of the public media, we propose that it be organized in these places or on any other medium wishing to discuss fundamental questions of our country.

We have been deeply drawn to the fact that your statement makes no mention of the economic situation of Argentina, poverty, hunger or people living on the street. Is it possible to take a position without explicitly considering the socio-economic reality of the country? We would like to invite you to reflect on the need to sensitize all Argentineans, including Macri voters, to this extremely serious situation created by the economic policies of those years.

We understand that parties do their best to win votes, but we believe that intellectuals must retain an essential purpose. We have been publishing criticism for years about the measures and actions of the previous government. The signatories report errors in the Macri government, but they do not report any concrete mistakes. "Error" seems to be a euphemism that makes invisible a reality that is needed every day harder.

We want to know more about what they think. Consider an error of having promised zero poverty or having implemented policies that have increased poverty? Do you consider it a mistake to say that inflation would be reduced in a few months or have policies that have led to higher inflation for years? Do you consider it an error to have promised to "reunite the Argentines" or to have had explicit policies to deepen the split and crack? Do they consider it a mistake to have returned to the IMF, to have destroyed UNASUR, the policies of Patricia Bullrich, the total freedom of capitals swallowed, the time bomb of Lebac and Lelic, the return of the timba financial?

What is your opinion about the president's claim that the problem was born 70 years ago? Do you guarantee that in this sentence you deny the consequences of state terrorism, military dictatorships, 18 years of proscription? Do not you think it's time to accept the rationality of our different political opponents? We have opposing plans for the future of Argentina. But the project you support is not irrational, it is the same way that the current government officials refer to "non-rational peronism." Speeches that stigmatize opponents end up generating hatred and weakening democracy. Before the failure of the economic program, before widespread disappointment due to non-fulfillment of promises, the ruling party seeks to take refuge in a harmful strategy ranging from the doctrine of Chocobar to the embrace of Bolsonaro.

We will now take a few paragraphs from your statement to better represent our argument graphically. One of the statements that surprised us most about his statement is that during these four years, "the foundations of development that we all aspire to have been discarded". Macri's promise not to change anything that had been done well and to change what was wrong in 2015 was disappointed. There is more poverty, declining GDP, deindustrialisation. We do not see any basis for development.

They claim that "Macri has respected the division of powers and has refrained from using state tools for partisan purposes". They give the example of pluralism in the public media. What are they based on to affirm this supposed pluralism? How many times have opposition candidates been professionally interviewed in these media? We also found with great difficulty how more than 4,500 journalists were fired during these four years. The current government has used state institutions for partisan purposes. The irrefutable case concerns the management of Laura Alonso within the Office of fight against corruption. But the silence of the officials before the attitude of Prosecutor Stornelli, who included a photo near the president while he was already in absentia, is another eloquent example.

With regard to corruption in the previous government and the current government, you make strong claims that are not based on the constitutional precept that "everyone is innocent until proven otherwise". Cristina Kirchner is innocent according to the laws in force in Argentina. He has never been convicted, even at first instance. As you know, Macri was sentenced in the second instance. And there are conflicts of interest among various officials of the current government that need to be clearly investigated. The case of Aranguren is patent. Therefore, we do not see how you "make radical changes to transparent government actions". The so-called "independent" justice does not investigate the current government.

The badertion that the insertion of Argentina in the world in the previous government has privileged relations with Venezuela and Iran is not correct. Argentina, since 2003, has strengthened its relations with Brazil and Mercosur, has been the protagonist of the immense success of the creation of UNASUR, renegotiated its external debt with the "world", rejected the FTAA as well as other neighboring countries. You talk about the "world" that turns our backs on us. We are convinced that there are several "worlds", not just one of the great powers endowed with neoliberal governments. The United Nations has overwhelmingly endorsed Argentina's proposal to restructure sovereign debt against vulture funds. And the powers that now finance the Macri campaign through the IMF have turned their backs on the UN resolution.

When they list the country's shortcomings, we are also surprised by the absences. First, we have already said that they do not refer to poverty and hunger. Second, they do not mention the serious problem we have with education. Third, they do not mention the decline in scientific and technological research. Fourth, they do not explicitly mention the problem of the independence, transparency and efficiency of the judiciary. We think it would be very serious to consolidate the current course that has led to critical situations. The future of inclusive development requires a new social agreement to transform yesterday into a better future combining production, labor, education and regional integration.

The authors are respectively anthropologist and sociologist of UNSAM, member of Agenda Argentina.