Well folks, it seems that my incomplete answer about Peronism and socialism being core issues related to many of the problems here somehow caused the discussion to get off track and went from me not understanding the difference between Peronism, Socialism and Communism and then proceeded to get into issues about the US targeting children in their non-war(s).
I think I'll expound a little more on what I meant.
First, both elements of Peronism and socialism exist in this country. Anyone who doesn't think this is an accurate statement needs to go check the definition of both. By saying both elements exist here, I'm not saying they are the same thing. I understand the difference between the two, but both consist of the government controlling the economy in one fashion or another.
Peronism is defined (briefly) as "social justice, economic independence, and political sovereignty". I believe that they use some socialist policies to implement what they consider to be all three pilars of their "faith". I doubt the majority of the people here could really define the difference between Peronism and Socialism, particularly because both are not solid, well-stated policies, but rather generalized philosophies.
Someone had made a comment in exception to my comment and added that (paraphrasing) he dreamed of a socialist state here in Argentina so that the trains don't kill people any more, Moreno goes to jail and streets are clean of dog shit.
Well, like many pipe dreams, that's a good one, and one that either is based in a misunderstanding of people in general, or perhaps people in Argentina. I'm not sure which. However, I can state categorically that simply having a Socialist system here will not fix ANY of the things mentioned in the paraphrasing I presented. At least we agreed that Peronism, in particular, is something that is bad for Argentina (or any country, for that matter, in my opinion).
But socialism won't fix these issues because it doesn't give people any incentive to CHANGE. I can't believe anyone really thinks we need a government policy to force people to clean dog excrement from the sidewalks. Peronism and socialism by themselves have NOTHING to do with why Moreno doesn't go to jail, but has everything to do with the country being corrupt. I doubt implementing "pure socialism" will cause people to suddenly start maintaining trains properly either.
When I say the country, I am not talking about the government, I am talking about the populace. However, the government is often a reflection of the populace.
I did a search, because I can't remember where I saw it now, but a few months ago a buddy of mine showed me an article in one of the local papers dealing with corruption. It was about a poll that was conducted related to how people here feel about corruption. There were a number of points in the poll, but one I remember was over half of the population that was polled stated that they were OK with corruption as long as they benefited as well.
The problem here is not, per se, either Peronism or socialism, but rather the populace itself and what it demands of its leaders - and of itself.
We are all humans and we all look at things differently. A lot of the way we look at things is based on our own cultural bias, and also from what we learn over the years.
Here, the government seems to use revisionist history to say things like "it's us against the rest of the horrible, evil world" (particularly the US and Europe). They use emotions very well to evoke things that people here have always "known" - if it wasn't for the greedy rich of the world and those of a like mind here, Peronism would work fabulously.
The overall feeling I get when I talk to people here who are "non-capitalists" is "I deserve ____" (just fill in the blank). From an economic point of view, that doesn't come over real well, unless that is followed up with something like "...and I work hard as hell to get it." I don't see that here, for the most part. People seem content to continue with life as it is, without making any real changes.
You don't need socialism or Peronism to clean dog crap off of the streets, unless you are talking about from the aspect of a government big enough to do everything, including cleaning dog crap off the streets. I used to live in a middle-class neighborhood in Houston. We had NO ONE to clean the streets or the dog crap. We all cleaned our portion of the street in front of our house and when we walked our dogs (I had three) we carried a plastic baggy to pick up the crap ourselves.
You don't need socialism or Peronism to make sure trains are maintained properly - you need responsible people, accountability and a lack of corruption.
You don't need socialism or Peronism to make sure people like (allegedly) Moreno go to jail. You need a populace who are outraged when things are done wrong, and will do something about it, repeatedly, until the issue is taken care of. You need a lack of corruption and pressure from the populace.
So why did I mention Peronism and Socialism as a problem here? In my opinion Peronism and Socialism, here, are a reflection of the desires of the populace to be taken care of.
I believe that socialism can be a viable political system. Personally, I don't like it. I don't like central planning from a government, among other things. However, given a population that is willing to do its part, socialism can solve many social problems. I just think it gives the government too much control over the direction of things and governments are too impersonal and by definition end up trying to fit round, square, trapezoidal, or what-have-you, shapes into a a round slot (yes, some of the effort does work - those who are round are very happy).
However, I think you need a well-educated and mature majority of the populace to make socialism actually work properly, otherwise it's putting a lot of the people's money in the hands of a relative few and if you can't reasonably trust those people to do mostly good with that money, then...well, you have a situation that is very similar to Argentina.
I don't see much good in Peronism, personally. I think it's worse than socialism because it tries to directly control the economy and social justice through putting itself between the worker and business directly. Peronism rejects capitalism, which even China realizes has some good things about it and tends toward isolationism, which even China realizes is not a good thing - at least not for ALL of its population, anymore.
So my comment about Peronism and Socialism being a problem in Argentina is because here it is used to get things, often for the people in power, while the people in power seek to maintain the status quo at all costs. Meanwhile the people themselves just continue to accept the status quo.
I am a Libertarian, personally. I mention this so people don't start arguing that I am a "crony capitalist" or a "neo-con", etc. I believe that people should be responsible for themselves and their families first and foremost, and should be philanthropists among their fellow men any time they can be. In a strong economy there should be plenty of work for all. Allowing a government to take care of "needy" people only allows people to take advantage of the impersonal and bureaucratic nature of government to play the system and get something for nothing at the expense of those who are truly contributing to a strong economy. It makes things less efficient and productivity goes down.
It is so easy for people to say "sure, I don't mind that I pay taxes and that the government gives money to people to help make things 'equal'. Why not, it's what's accepted as "correct", right? How much more effort would it take for a person to go work in a private- or church-run soup kitchen, or take in someone that they know who is having problems, or work as a volunteer to help train people for new skills? (I've done all of those things, personally - not to mention going to a very poor part of the world and try to raise at least a small group of people out of extreme poverty) Nah, that takes too much work for most people, and therefore they feel comfortable with giving up their money and at the same time forcing others who would like to take responsibility and actually become philanthropistic to spend that same money. The result is that the money is never spent as efficiently and at best it is impersonal help that the taxpayer is giving. Very easy. And very wasteful of resources, on many levels.
I don't believe that any government is capable of doing as well in governing economies and redistributing wealth as a truly free market system is. I specifically mentioned not being a "crony capitalist" because, as an example, the US has never had, nor probably ever will have, a free market economy - it is a "crony capitalist" system for the most part and is moving away from a free-er market every day. Even though I'm from the US, I believe that the US is on its way down because socialism is not right for enough of its people and the battle between socialism and crony-ism is real hot right now, but few are fighting, really, for true freedom.
A free market system with good, fair laws applied equally to all, in my opinion, gives the best chance for the most people to enjoy freedom and wealth that they, themselves, have created.
So, the only way to get rid of Peronism here, in my opinion, would be to change the mindset of people in this country away from "I deserve ____", to "I am going to make ___ happen myself". If they got that far, they'd probably even be successful with socialism. But Peronism is a dead end.
