There is already a Spaniard who wants
to live and living begin,
between a Spain which dies
and another Spain which yawns.
Little Spaniard who is coming
to the world, may God watch over you.
one of the two Spains
will make your heart freeze.
I'd like to write my own version of this poem, one which is not so distant from the original, but can be read in a completely unrelated context and given new meanings. If I just replace "Spaniard" with "Argentine" and "Spain" with "Argentina" with a few other slight adjustments, I could accurately describe the reality of life in Argentina—or better said, the realities of life in Argentina.
"Little Argentine Who is Coming to the World"
There is already an Argentine who wants
to live and living begin,
between an Argentina which hungers
and another Argentina which summers.
between an Argentina which works
and another Argentina which abuses.
between an Argentina which is for Boca,
and another Argentina which is for River.
between an Argentina which is the capital,
and another Argentina which is the interior.
between an Argentina Kirchnerista,
and another Argentina Macrista...
Little Argentine who is coming
to the world, may God watch over you.
one of the two Argentinas
will make your heart freeze.
This post may be controversial. I don't want to take sides, though naturally or even unconsciously I fall into one or the other of the categories, though there are many more than the ones I included. It has been a month since Mauricio Macri assumed as president of Argentina, breaking the 12-year administration of the Kirchners. During his first month, Macri has made decisions which have elated half the population and distressed the other. I also don't want to get into details, after all this is a blog about a yankee goalkeeper in Argentina, but this was the first presidential election I witnessed outside of the United States.
 |
| Daniel Scioli (FPV) and Mauricio Macri (Cambiemos) before the head to head elections in December 2015. (photo: BBC) |
The night Macri won, there were tears and cheers, tears and cheers of joy and hope from those who voted for the winning candidate and tears of despair and sadness accompanied by cheers of farewell to the exiting president from those who supported the Kircherista candidate. The silence which permeated the streets of Buenos Aires on election day was reminiscent of the silence which reigned during the World Cup final in July 2014 as Argentina lost to Germany in extra time. The cheers and honking horns and celebration were also similar to the post final bittersweetness felt by the entire nation; however, this time, only half the Argentines felt like celebrating, while the other half displayed its anger, disappointment, and melancholy while continuing to support its political leader.
Here's where football comes in. After election day, during the week leading up to Macri's inauguration and even afterward, there were manifestations from both sides, but manifestations which more closely resembled a crowd, or an hinchada, in a football stadium. Chants led by political faction leaders, cheers, drums, and applause as the crowd demonstrated their support, whether for the victor or the defeated. Boca and River were not present, but the striking difference in the colors of the masses' clothing brought back memories of superclásicos, the white and celestial blue of the Frente Para la Victoria (Kirchner's party) versus the bright yellow of Cambiemos (Macri's party). Banners, flags, and arms waving, the smell of barbecue wafting through the air as many took advantage to put food stands along the way, selling the famed choripan (chorizo sandwich) and cold drinks on the hot summer day.
Passion. If one can compare football and politics in Argentina, maybe passion is what most closely ties them together. Passion in football is what drives a fan to cry when his team loses and occasionally when it wins, to hug a stranger after a goal or to punch a rival fan without any real reason than the color of his jersey, to travel miles and miles to see his favorite players, his idols, his escape from the dreary reality of work, routine, and the stress of daily life. Passion in politics is what drives a voter to cry when his candidate loses and to cheer and dance when he/she wins, to hug a stranger after a tight election victory or to punch someone who wore the other party's colors, to travel miles and miles to see his candidate or president give a speech in person under a brutal hot summer sun only to return to the dreary and often brutal reality of daily life.
Passion is not a bad thing. It can be a great thing. It can lead to a loving relationship, a successful career, unforgettable memories, but unharnessed and without a touch of "reason", it can also become poisonous. (I hope you'll forgive me the metaphor, a tool which can often be helpful in the communication of an idea but at the same time can restrict it and make the orator seem demagogic or pedantic.) I fear that uncontrolled passion in politics is a situation which can lead to significant problems, passion without reason can blind and divide. Today if you read the news in La Nación or Clarín and then grab the opposition's paper, Página 12 or Tiempo Argentino, more than likely you will conclude that you are not living in the same country. Two realities are described, two "truths," two versions of everything that happens. This didn't begin with the change of president but is the continuation of a progressive polarization of the media and of society. It is a polarization which transcends class, gender, or skin color, though there are polarizations within those categories as well. Two Argentines see the same event, hear the same speech, read the same law, and arrive at two opposing conclusions.
Perhaps the most obvious example of this was after the presidential debate previous to the head-to-head elections in December 2015. I watched the debate with my family, though I wish I had done something more productive in that hour and a half, then proceeded to open Twitter and Facebook to see what my friends had thought, many of whom supported Macri and many others who supported the Kirchnerista candidate, Daniel Scioli. Perhaps unsurprisingly, my Kirchnerista friends decided that it had been a complete blowout, Scioli had embarrassed Macri who had successfully evaded every question posed to him by his opponent. On the other hand, my Macrista friends arrived at the same conclusion but with the roles inverted, Macri had blown Scioli, who had tried to dodge every question posed to him by his opponent, out of the water. Did they watch the same debate? Or did they already know the winner before it began? One debate, two opposing conclusions. One nation, two (or more) realities.
No comments:
Post a Comment