The previous debate and vote on a law in the Senate of La Nación leads us to an old saying, well-known but very clear:…”where can a stolen elephant be successfully hidden…? Answer: in the middle of a herd of elephants.
The parliamentary chroniclers and the improvised chroniclers (parliamentarians), many of them with absolute ignorance of rituals and protocols, in addition to ignorance of parliamentary mechanics, covered the session of the week of June that closes on the 14th and began on journalist’s day. They had to stay until the time of sleep of 95% of the population and become chroniclers of the late night of the media they represented. Unhealthy work in a place that is classified, by libertarians, as an unhealthy place.
Clarification: old calculations maintain that the mentioned percentage, 95% of urban inhabitants, sleep at a fixed time that, supposedly, closes around midnight, when 5% of the population remains awake, including bohemians, prisoners, hospital nights and insomniacs and that reopens the eyelashes 95% around 6 in the morning. When a late-night program has a very high audience percentage, it is above a ceiling, which indicates 5% of the awake population. We assume, for the parliamentary debate of the Senate of the Nation and the votes, an alteration to this classic warning about audience measurement, but it is just an assumption.
One of the constants of Javier Milei’s media campaign, which he focused on, because he warned, according to a study that suggested this consideration, which became real, overwhelming, was the popular and indiscriminate rejection of professional politicians. He made accusation and condemnation a constant. His identification with “the caste” gave him considerable benefits. He still gets them.
An unanswerable point is this: “the Caste” was exposed for their transactions, their overdrafts and favors, their quality as stagehands, slangers, street vendors; That genetics of peddlers and careless people became public, Milei did it. From journalism we exposed every transaction close to blackmail, pressure and smelly concession but be careful, be careful, be careful: isn’t politics the art of parliament and consensus? But?.
We are very bad but we would be fine…? Let’s assume that yes, that it is good, that that is not bad but the obvious. There are two threads left. They appeared exposed to the entire viewer, the reader of the sockets, the listener of the commentators, the consumer of networks and that is a thread that corroborates the adjectival or substantivation: Caste. But alas, alas, alas… it was those who came to take power away from La Casta who negotiated. Libertarians with everything frayed, both the blush and the purity and the innocence. Are those who negotiated with “La Casta” equal to the caste? Don’t ask me, I’m a journalist, I’m the one who asks the questions.
If I had to answer, I would say that…this would be the true drilling below the waterline.
Javier Milei was what he is, an Omnipresent of a government that only belongs to him. He is a kind of “The Little Prince” without innocence, with evil, self-destruction, revenge, ignorance… a summary of the 56% who vote for him… or not? He negotiated, didn’t get much and turned them into valid interlocutors.
The president lost his parliamentary virginity. His unusual ship continues adrift with a very high popular support, silent and popular, but there are signs. So much ignoring, so much despising, so much insulting to end up like the others. Phew. Deaf noises are left to be heard…
It is the second perforation of the hull. The first was the money from the Universities. University students are “tribes”, which is not the same as “castes”. Let’s derive: all these definitions are with the only valid interlocutor: Javier Milei, perhaps in the shadows with his therapeutic companion, Karina Milei. It is at that incandescent point of power, that is: Javier and his therapeutic companion, where he has stuck below the waterline. You negotiated, little bug of light… the chronicle cannot be denied, not even friends pretended.
There must be a thousand messages on networks saying that they are the caste and we are the pure ones. I think they are not so pure after the vote in the Senate.
Milei must also hide his elephant of sin, concession and clumsiness in negotiation. The cameras, the chroniclers, from those who know to the botched, improvised and daring, all witnessed the violation of innocence or the fall of the mask and the garter belt.
To traffic elephants, they paraded these elephants for 24 hours through each media site that exists on Argentina’s radars. As this is a Unitary country, the elephants were seen on all the television networks and their repeaters in “the interior”. We live with elephants.
A side element, many of us maintain as minor, that reappears from time to time is that of a qualifying word: terrorism. It is too clear that a terrorist is someone who wants to impose their socio/political/economic ideas through terror. There is no terror without its basis: violence. The converse is not always valid. Violence is not always terrorism, it is always violence and as such unworthy and with reprimand, capture and condemnation.
These official confusions in the classifications of violence in the streets hurt the normal people and irritate the terrorists who survive and the exegetes, the militants who live from that twisted memory that vindicated them. Let’s clarify. Terrorists are always violent and have the absolute possibility of becoming murderers. The violent must be condemned.
One question remains with the exposed elephants and the confession that the fact indicates: you negotiated, little bug of light, you cannot deny it, that is what urban consciences say in insomnia. Even characters as chrematistic as the former cadet of the Diario de Masera or the son of the primitive sports reporter, who unrestrictedly adhere to your monothematic government, had to accept the end of virginity with one word, a twist: “intense negotiations.”
If you think about it with a glass half full, asking for dialogue and consensus, what happened is good. They talked, they negotiated. The same glass half full, but from other drinkers suggests that… “had to snout and negotiate.”
For many, Milei is useless (not very useful, not at all useful, of no use for a certain issue that the context indicates) and his therapeutic companion is unaware of the monarchical/republican system he exercises. Mayans, the Feudal Lord’s man, Gildo Insfram, like Lousteau, the peacock under the orders of the vice-rector, do nothing more than demonstrate that the elephants are in good health.
This may be outrageous but… elephants with a therapeutic companion? Elephants who left their prebendary pockets exposed on television? Elephants as any solution to public management? After the law voted in the Senate…Are elephants a successful breed? Did they come back? Did they never leave? Don’t ask me, I’m a journalist, I’m the one who asks the questions.
