Bolivia with Luis Arce: Evism without Evo Morales

By Franz Flores / Latin America21

Political scientist, professor and researcher at the Universidad San Francisco Xavier de Sucre, Bolivia. Doctor in Social Sciences with a mention in Political Studies from Flacso Ecuador headquarters.

One year after the election of Arce as president of the Bolivian State, it is convenient to ask if his way of governing is similar or not to that of Evo Morales (2006-2019). At first glance it seems so: Arce, like Evo, has an aggressive discourse with opponents those he accuses of being without a country, of coup plotters without redemption or sanction, and of loose and unpunished massacres who can only be persecuted and imprisoned.

In this sense, his profile as an economist and university professor, as a man of mathematical formulas, his image as Evo’s Minister of Economy, has been overshadowed by the appearance of this evista version of Arce.

But, beyond Arce’s fiery speeches, his insistent reminiscence of the months of the “de facto” government of Jeanine Áñez, really Arce cannot, no matter how hard he tries, be the best version of evism. I postulate that there you can find the cause of the problems and tribulations of a government that, in less than a year, has regressed in several political initiatives, one of the most notable being the Law against the legitimization of illicit profits.

When Morales governed, he had under his command not only the country’s first magistracy, but also the leadership of his party, the MAS-IPSP, plus the leadership of the nine federations of coca growers in the Chapare. In other words, it had (all) state power, all party power and dominance over one of the most important unions in the country.

Instead, Luis Arce only has part of the governmental power, he has very little influence over the party that is still in the hands of Morales and it does not arrive with the peasant bases, accustomed or dazzled or convinced by the figure of Evo.

Second, as Fernando Mayorga (2019) notes, a characteristic feature of Morales’s style of government was the concentration of decisions on his person.

Morales, although he listened to his bases, listened to his ministers and attended the advisory councils, he was the one who finally made the last decision, many times in frank ignorance of the opinion of his closest circle.

Morales faced conflicts, made them last, lengthened them, ignored them, despised them and only when he had protests at the gates of the Government Palace did he back down, go back in his decision and agree to the demands. It was then that, in front of his opponents (exhausted by the fatigue of the long struggle), he announced that he was backing down in his decision under the speech he had heard from the people, of which, in a populist wave, he felt he was an interpreter.

Reference can be made to the mobilization of doctors against the Law of the new Penal Code that lasted almost three months (2017-2018) and implied the permanent presence of doctors in the streets and the decisive participation of other sectors. Only when Evo saw that the government’s refusal was untenable, did he proceed to annul the aforementioned Law.

On the other hand, Arce, before the first headwind, before the first threat of mobilization, he recoils, gets scared, seeks to establish or reestablish peace. In October of this year, the conflict that aroused the Law on the legitimation of illicit profits lasted only a week: before the sole announcement that strategic actors such as cooperative miners and union members were joining the mobilizations, the Government stopped in their tracks the treatment of the Law in the Legislative Assembly.

Morales engages in politics at all times, in his free hours, when he plays sports or plays soccer against opponents who, curiously, always lose; has a long experience in conflicts, in street and road fights and, despite exhibiting an enviable display case with doctor’s degrees honoris causa, he has only achieved high school.

Instead, Arce did not have a political career but an academic one, he does not come out of some union quarry, not even from the Masista high leadership, he likes to teach and is an efficient and career bureaucrat. If Evo lacks classrooms, Arce lacks streets.

However, this is a partial explanation. The political and social context also plays a lot. Morales ruled a country where the opposition was a mere test balloon for economic elites scared by the emergence of a populist party. It, whether due to the approval of the new Constitution in 2009 or its failure in the recall referendum in 2018, had suffered a moral defeat from which it was difficult to get out.

In addition, it had a society satisfied with the effects of the boom in the economy and the social mobility associated with it.

On the other hand, the political context of the Luis Arce government is completely different.

He has behind him a serious political defeat with the departure of Morales from power in November 2019. Although in the narrative of the MAS (of which Arce has become an enthusiastic transmitter) there was a coup d’état engineered by an oligarchic elite that manipulated unsuspecting masses, in reality, behind the setback in Arce’s decisions is the fear that, as happened in 2019, the conflict will trigger a greater one that, once again, puts the government in check.

In sum, there are three elements that problematize the management of Luis Arce. In the first place, Arce cannot concentrate decisions, in fact he only has full control over the economic area. Second, it lacks the political experience to manage and carry out a controversial political initiative, and third, It does not seem that it has a greater arrival in the social movements related to the MAS.

President Arce urgently needs to give identity and political project to his government, he can be the leader that faces, for example, a profound reform of Bolivian justice, until now drowned in corruption, inefficiency and submission to government power. For this, the support of several actors not taken into account until now is necessary. Every politician seeks to leave a testimony of his time in power, to continue under the parameters of evism, it does not seem to be enough. (I)