The End of the Blockade and a Glimmer of Hope | El final del bloqueo y el esbozo de esperanza

By Diego Ayo, Brujula Digital:

Machiavelli argued that political destiny is shaped by virtue and fortune: the ability of the ruler or sheer luck. Was what happened the result of skill or a stroke of luck? I find it hard to believe it was a triumph carefully orchestrated from within the government. My hunch, which resists attributing even a hint of presidential talent, does not diminish the significance of what occurred: the blockaders were defeated.

We should remember that this political tactic—the blockade—has brought down governments since the beginning of the century. A recurring sequence took hold, built around four stages: blockade, repression, death, and resignation. This chronological order followed an almost unalterable pattern. Or nearly so: Luis Arce did not fall into the trap and avoided repression.

What does that formula consist of? Efficient management of time. The blockaders operate in the realm of the immediate. The government’s success, whether due to incompetence or sophisticated political strategy, lay in acting on a longer political timeline: the realm of the intermediate and long term. The blockaders operated in fifth gear; the Paz government acted in second gear. The clash of these different time horizons was evident. It ultimately exhausted the insurgents. First noteworthy milestone.

The unifying notion of “social movements” as a collective entity representing the “dispossessed” was broken. The ability to gather diverse social grievances under a single banner, as had been done for twenty years, has run its course.

Today, Evo Morales, Nilton Condori, Vicente Salazar, and Mario Argollo do not form a single unified group. Midway through the blockade campaign, they seemed poised to prevail under the ever-recurring thesis of the “discriminated majority.” It did not work. Loud victimhood once again sought to claim the gold medal, but it ended in defeat. This is neither final nor cause for celebration, but it is important to recognize that its purity and cohesion were damaged for the first time in more than eight thousand days. Second noteworthy milestone.

At the same time, the deterioration of the left is evident. It must reinvent itself. The discourse centered on “social movements” served as the foundation of the hegemonic political position of that left for more than two decades. That narrative foundation can hardly be preserved today.

There is a vast distance between the emancipatory blockades of the early 2000s and the blockades that now tear apart the social fabric. That distance reveals how a promise ultimately became a misfortune. What is needed is a left that thinks, not merely a mafia-like left that mobilizes. Third noteworthy milestone.

Likewise, the seeds of a less statist economy have been planted. People no longer necessarily want gasoline supplied by YPFB; they simply want gasoline—even if it comes from a foreign source. Ironically, the trauma caused by contaminated fuel has helped create a social demand for market-based solutions without the need for overtly “neoliberal” announcements in the style of Milei.

The street clashes between blockaders and those affected by the blockades make it clear that the state cannot solve everything. I am not saying that government inaction was correct. Nevertheless, faced with a bloated and fragile state that sought to manage every detail of national life, the message is clear: the state is neither omnipotent nor capable of healing all problems. Fourth noteworthy milestone.

We can also identify another significant point: the photograph of the agreement signed with the COB (Bolivian Workers’ Center). Internationally, it projects the image that Paz is not Bolsonaro: he can negotiate with organized labor and reinforce the image of a social-democratic government. Is that true? Yes. And in the face of an overwhelming international sensationalist press still attached to the outdated dualism of “creoles versus Indigenous people,” this alliance is not insignificant. This is especially true considering that a small Argentine “revolutionary left” contingent was reproducing that simplistic struggle between good and evil without taking the time to read even a basic history manual on Bolivia. Fifth noteworthy milestone.

Is there anything else worth highlighting? The burdensome nature of coalition-building in the democratic era. Paz made the mistake of failing to establish any formal understanding with the dominant parties in the Legislative Assembly. An agreement with Tuto Quiroga and Samuel Doria Medina would have lent credibility to a pact capable of approving the ill-fated Decree 5503.

That did not happen, and the government acted alone. A mistake, certainly, but one that does not diminish the greater flexibility displayed by the government today. Had it entered into a “neoliberal-style” pact back in November 2025, it might have been forced to impose a state of emergency, with all the risks previously mentioned. Paz maintained a “flexible solitude” that proved undeniably useful. Sixth noteworthy milestone.

We have managed to take the essential steps forward. Not a single step has yet been taken toward outlining a new political and economic model, but perhaps—I want to believe—we have finally finished demolishing the rotten mastodon that dominated the last two decades.

Diego Ayo is a PhD in Political Science.

Leave a comment