The Price of Not Telling the Truth | El precio de no decir la verdad

Editorial, El Dia:

Bolivia is paying the price for having chosen an ambiguous, anesthetizing and relativistic discourse in the face of an economic reality that demanded sincerity, firmness and structural decisions from day one. Rodrigo Paz came to power by building an intermediate narrative. He was not the open continuation of masismo, but neither was he the frontal rupture proposed by other candidates. While some warned that Bolivia was on the verge of an energy, fiscal and productive crisis, he chose to minimize the inherited disaster. He relativized the magnitude of the problem, avoided talking about drastic measures and conveyed the idea that the situation was serious but manageable without major sacrifices.

That discourse allowed him to win. Many sectors found in Rodrigo Paz a kind of comfortable transition: change without trauma, alternation without rupture. He did not speak of privatizations, did not propose dismantling the state apparatus, avoided mentioning the return of the DEA or an open rapprochement with the International Monetary Fund. His message was one of moderate, conciliatory capitalism, without shock or confrontation.

Once in power, reality ended up imposing itself. The new government began revealing the dimension of the economic collapse left by masismo: uncontrolled deficit, unsustainable subsidies, energy crisis, lack of dollars and a gigantic state apparatus impossible to sustain. Then the discourse changed. The same president who had relativized the crisis began talking about structural reforms, cuts, elimination of subsidies and international negotiations to avoid a greater collapse.

Those who voted for that project [Rodrigo Paz] now feel deceived. Many of the sectors that today block roads, protest or pressure the government are precisely those who believed the country could continue functioning under the distributive logic of masismo, although with a new face. They expected continuity with anesthesia, not adjustments or sacrifices.

And that is the difference between winning elections and building legitimacy to govern. A leader may win votes by promising moderation, but afterward needs moral authority to make difficult decisions. That authority is born from having been honest from the beginning.

Bolivia remains trapped in the culture of political fiction. For years the population was told that the model was sustainable, that subsidies could last forever and that the State could continue distributing wealth even when it no longer produced enough. Rodrigo Paz decided to partially prolong that illusion in order to gain electoral governability. Today he faces the consequences.

The problem is that economic reality does not negotiate with discourse. Money runs out, energy becomes scarce and the model collapses regardless of the political narrative. When a government takes too long to tell the truth, it ends up losing twice: first because it inherits a crisis; and second because it destroys the trust of those who believed in it. That is the true price of not telling the truth.

Leave a comment