Lacalle Pou's "humanism": more state and less freedom
In recent hours, former President Lacalle Pou reappeared at a party event, stating, as it pertains to this note, that: “I have become less orthodox over time,” adding, “How nice it is to be orthodox when someone has no job, no home, no health. So freedom must be linked to the concept that justice is treating unequally those who are unequal… Our government was profoundly humanist.”
These statements deserve some reflections, which reaffirm that what is currently presented as opposition is more of the same. In fact, they are the opoficción, a simulation of opposition, that sits down to trade stickers with those in power and thus, successively and reciprocally. In the Uruguayan ideological ice cream shop, everyone has strawberry and chocolate ice cream, some with sugar and others in the light, fashion version, but in essence, they are the same.
The former president's speech seems to blame Freedom for people not having jobs, homes, or health. No, sir, the blame for the lack of work lies solely and exclusively with you, the politicians, the new nobility, with your constant interventions and regulations that have made the world of work impossible for those who want to undertake and work. In other words: if there is no work, it is because of the politicians and their regulations that block access to the labor market for the most needy and, in turn, the least productive. You have created labor legislation that is completely hostile to job creation. You are the explanation for the lack of work. You are the problem.
Work is the quintessential resource, as no activity can be conceived nor any service rendered without the contribution of work. By the principle of non-contradiction, something cannot both be and not be at the same time. How is it possible that, if work is the quintessential resource, there is unemployment? The answer to this question lies in the state intervention that continuously excludes people from the labor market. This is fundamentally because the state's intervention in setting minimum wages determines that those with low or no productivity do not qualify for the minimum level required by the government, that is, they do not have that “minimum” level of productivity, which results in their exclusion.
