There is an important difference between promising authority and exercising it. The former requires conviction, a good slogan, and a willingness to speak loudly. The latter demands something more uncomfortable: making decisions, managing conflicting interests, and accepting that not everyone will be pleased. The difference becomes stark at La Moneda.
The truckers' conflict has confronted the government with that difference. It is paradoxical that an administration that made order a campaign credential must now negotiate under the pressure of protests that disrupt the very thing it promised to protect: the functioning of the country.
The Executive offered to reverse the fuel price increase and freeze prices until March. But the protests continue. The dispute over diesel tests its ability to set limits and hold to them.
It would be easy to contrast promises with concessions and conclude that governing is harder than campaigning. But the problem goes beyond this government.
A democracy needs organizations capable of representing interests and applying legitimate pressure. It also needs governments willing to listen, negotiate, and change course. Confusing negotiation with weakness would be as mistaken as confusing intransigence with strength.
The limit comes into view when obtaining concessions depends less on the legitimacy of a demand than on the damage its mobilization can cause. Truckers can block roads, disrupt supply, and shift costs onto…
AI Brief
Your highlights
Aton Chile DIEGO MARTIN/ATON CHILE Comments
There is an important difference between promising authority and exercising it. The former requires conviction, a good slogan, and a willingness to speak strongly. The latter demands something more uncomfortable: deciding, managing contradictory interests, and accepting that not everyone will be satisfied. The difference becomes clear at La Moneda. The truckers' conflict has placed the government facing this difference. It is paradoxical that an administration that made order a campaign credential must negotiate under the pressure of mobilizations that alter what it promised to safeguard: the functioning of the country. The Executive offered to reverse the fuel price hike and freeze prices until March. But the protests continue. The controversy over diesel is testing its ability to set and maintain limits. It would be easy to contrast promises with concessions and conclude that governing is harder than campaigning. But the problem goes beyond this government. A democracy needs organizations capable of representing interests and pressuring legitimately. It also needs governments willing to listen, negotiate, and correct course. Confusing negotiation with weakness would be as wrong as confusing intransigence with strength. The limit appears when obtaining answers depends less on the legitimacy of a demand than on the damage its mobilization can cause. Truckers can interrupt routes, affect supply, and pass costs onto the rest of the citizenry. Not everyone has that power. What then happens to those who cannot paralyze roads? Does the State listen based on the capacity to produce a crisis?
The increase in fuel prices has real consequences for transporters and the economy. But recognizing a legitimate concern does not oblige one to consider any pressure mechanism legitimate. Furthermore, there is another tension. A government that has defended fiscal discipline faces the demand to intervene to contain prices. The decision may be reasonable, but it requires explaining criteria, costs, and why some receive extraordinary responses while others adjust to the market. Governing also consists of distributing costs. Few decisions are as political as deciding who bears them. Democratic authority is not measured by the harshness of statements. It is built with rules, founded decisions, and rights that do not depend on the capacity for pressure. Kast promised to recover the authority of the State. The test is not resolved merely by yielding or resisting; it requires negotiating without turning every conflict into an exception and exercising authority without confusing it with force. Because when the State's response depends on who can interrupt the country, the problem ceases to be just the price of fuel. It becomes something much more costly: the weakening of the rules that should protect us all.
By Natalia Piergentili, Director of Public Affairs, Feedback. More on: Government Truckers Strike Gasoline Authority President NEWSLETTER Opinion Saturday, AM Ideas under tension, opposing views, and a clear analysis: elements to reveal the topics that divide opinions and will mark the agenda. By subscribing, you are accepting the Terms and Conditions and the Privacy Policies of La Tercera.