This book explores the dilemmas confronting the recently installed democracy in Argentina. Poneman is a sympathetic observer with personal interest in his subject, which allows him to bridge the gap between scholarly tome and journalistic tract when addressing the myriad problems of this quixotic nation. Distilled, his argument is simple: the corporate-authoritarian ethos that has permeated Argentina since the days of independence continues to frame political-economic conflicts in zero-sum terms, making it rational for contending social groups to pursue antidemocratic strategies of self-satisfaction based on egotistical calculations unburdened by communitarian principles. This has promoted a cycle of political instability marked by abrupt shifts in regime and a spiral of intersectoral violence that reached its apogee during the self-styled “Proceso de Reorganización Nacional” of 1976-83. In such a mass praetorian environment, democratic conventions such as due process, concession, and compromise give way to arbitrary rule, opportunism, corruption, subterfuge, and speculation, with the rule of law rendered meaningless by the real power variables: coercion, money, and demagoguery. These are the source of the travails of the democracy headed by Raúl Alfonsín.
Poneman examines these depressing features in detail, pointing to the ingrained obstacles Argentine institutions and conventions pose for democratic consolidation. His pessimistic reading is elaborated via a brief historical chronology, an analysis of the major power contenders, and an examination of the legal and economic contradictions that lie at the heart of the Argentine malaise. Less relevant is his description of the Argentine nuclear program, which he maintains demonstrates that Argentines can in fact cooperate when they have a commonly recognized goal. The entire sketch is punctuated with observations on how the deleterious effects of sectoral egotism, intransigence, and the penchant for quick-fix approaches to complex problems have contributed to the national decline and the persistence of antidemocratic attitudes in Argentine society.
Though the exposition is lucid, much of this ground has been covered before. Moreover, while Poneman’s bibliography is extensive, it curiously ignores the work of Argentina’s most respected political analyst, Guillermo A. O’Donnell. As a result, he does not fully explain key issues that O’Donnell and his students have addressed at length, specifically how Argentina’s reliance on certain export-oriented wage goods (beef and grain) has been the root structural cause of the zero-sum conflicts of the twentieth century. Most worrisome, however, is Poneman’s use of unsustainable stereotypes to characterize Argentine society. Witness his comment on page 10 that there is a “Latino dictum” in Argentina that mitigates against individual participation in social and political activity (which completely ignores the Peronist phenomenon and the fact that it was state terror under the “Proceso” that begat the “no te metas” syndrome). Equally disturbing is his comment on the following page that “[t]hen there is the traditional Latin emotionalism” which, along with authoritarianism, promotes the desire for caudillismo. Given his later allusions to the need for strong democratic leadership (à la FDR), one wonders if Poneman thought seriously before writing these passages. Fortunately, they occur early in the book, and are ignored in favor of a more measured analysis in subsequent chapters. For this reason, and despite the flaws mentioned, this book provides a useful addition to the introductory literature on modern Argentina.
