90 Comments
User's avatar
Frederico Perlott's avatar

Very insightful, deep analysis, congratulations! As a Brazilian, this is the sad story about Latin America, a gifted land, with plenty of opportunities to be a world superpower (in some cases they even were), but ruined by bad policies, corruption, foreign influence during dictatorships and a fiscal irresponsability that seems to be eternal.

Expand full comment
Untrickled by Michelle Teheux's avatar

This is a cautionary tale for the U.S. A destructive political system like ours could certainly turn us into Argentina.

I’ve been there twice. It’s an amazing place! Wonderful culture. Terrible government.

Expand full comment
Tomas Pueyo's avatar

It is indeed. Geography is good, but it can only do so much

Expand full comment
Untrickled by Michelle Teheux's avatar

Your previous piece about the U.S. had me thinking, “well, perhaps we will be ok regardless” and now I’ve reverted to my usual pessimism!

I have a topic you could write better than I could, I think: Could you address the natural advantages of a given country, such as the U.S. or Great Britain and discuss how we tend to credit our superior culture and work ethic etc when really it’s the times and circumstances? I once read a piece (have never been able to find it) in the NYT that said GB’s golden age was in spite of, not because of, the way it did things. I’ve been pondering that ever since.

Expand full comment
Tomas Pueyo's avatar

The next article should make you feel a bit better. Then the following one a bit worse 😅

What causality did that article fight or support, specifically?

Expand full comment
Untrickled by Michelle Teheux's avatar

As I recall, it was an opinion piece that said British success in the past had nothing to do with their way of running things, yet they took great pride in crediting their success. If I remember correctly, the author said they did a poor job of choosing qualified leaders, particularly in colonies. I’ve searched for that piece many times. I wish I’d kept a copy. It fits with my theory that the same is often true of individuals placed in leadership positions politically and in business in the U.S. We have all seen ineffective people succeed in spite of their incompetence, simply because they were in a strong position.

Expand full comment
Siebe Rozendal's avatar

Joel Mokyr would strongly disagree on Great Britain. Check out Age of Invention on the origins of the Industrial revolution

Expand full comment
Pedro Afonso's avatar

I'm (pleasantly) surprised to see confirmation that you're not a geographical determinist. People's daily choices can, and do, make a difference.

Expand full comment
Tomas Pueyo's avatar

I’ll be more specific about it in the future too!

Expand full comment
BajoLimay's avatar

Excelente comentario Pedro. Coincido plenamente, aunque le faltó a Tomás comentar "una linea determinante"el impacto humano y económico de las dictaduras militares apoyadas por occidente.

Expand full comment
Del Cross v's avatar

As someone with a lot more relatives in NE Argentina than in the States, I can attest that it's not a geography/resources problem, it's a governmental one. Peron was a disaster for Argentina.

Expand full comment
Tomas Pueyo's avatar

But Argentina’s downfall predates him!

Expand full comment
Del Cross v's avatar

Fair ‘nuff. Peronistas were the last nail in the coffin though- for quite a while.

Expand full comment
BajoLimay's avatar

Bienvenido a "la grieta Argentina" Tomás. Parece mentira que las cosas se definan entre buenos y malos en pleno siglo XXI. Por eso el determinismo geográfico no ayuda mucho al debate.

Expand full comment
Wandering Llama's avatar

It was the populism - dictatorship cycle that killed our institutions.

If the fed didn't purposely pop the bubble in 1929 we might actually be a superpower now.

Expand full comment
Manuel Infante's avatar

Gracias Tomas.

Estoy suscripto hace 3 an̈os esperando este artículo. Respeto mucho tu enfoque de geohistoria y lo queria ver aplicado a mi país

Expand full comment
Tomas Pueyo's avatar

Me alegro! A ver si los siguientes están a la altura!

Expand full comment
Javier Fuchs's avatar

Argentine here (family of Volga-German immigrants who came from the Volga River to Parana River). I appreciate the analysis and I’m trying to think from “we know the problem” to “how do we actually solve it.”

Could you outline the concrete steps you think are most feasible in today’s Argentina—sequenced and time-bound?

A few things that would help readers like me:

Examples of countries that started from something similar and what they did first.

What a simple citizen like me can practically do?

Thanks, love your articles since the pandemic one.

Expand full comment
Tomas Pueyo's avatar

You gotta diagnose the pbm before solving it. This is what I'm going to do next.

Expand full comment
Marcelo's avatar

¡Muchas gracias por añadir la versión en Español!

Expand full comment
Sam's avatar

Quick translation note: under the first gdp per capita graph, in the spanish version of the article, it says Argentina didn't get left behind by the rest of the western world (the opposite of the original statement). You should add a 'solo' next to the 'no', as in 'no solo' (not only).

Expand full comment
Tomas Pueyo's avatar

Corrected thanks!

Expand full comment
Susan's avatar
4dEdited

Wonderful article! When I took my first class on Latin American History, I asked myself the same question and I ended up with a Latin American History major! I think that North Americans see Argentina smaller than it is because of Mercator projection maps that make Greenland look the same size as South America.

John H. Elliott wrote a wonderful article called “¿Tienen las américas una historia común? which was published in the June, 1999 issue of Letras Libres (the Mexican equivalent of TheAtlantic). It is available online. He looks at America from a continental point of view, taking into account the mother countries and the cultural diversity of the lands they conquered. His conclusions are interesting. (This one stimulated me to develop a class ln History of the Americas from pole to pole. The article was the first reading assignment!)

For me, a crucial difference between Argentina and the US was the difference in the institutions of their mother countries. Acemoglu and Robinson, in their book Why Nations Fail, tackle this

problem and conclude that the institutions (political and economic) brought by the mother countries in North America were inclusive and in South America were extractive. The first chapter is a gem: comparing and contrasting Nogales, Arizona with Nogales, Sonora.

Looking forward to your next installment!

Expand full comment
Tomas Pueyo's avatar

I agree! I enjoyed that first chapter

Expand full comment
Wandering Llama's avatar

My father is a European immigrant who moved to Argentina in the 80s, did a very similar analysis to this, and said "this country has everything, it will sort it's shit out and be the country of the future!"

Alas it didn't turn out that way. And while on an economic level his American dream did work out, he has also received a few ulcers trying to keep his gains through our many crisis since.

Expand full comment
John Dolan's avatar

My Dad was born in Argentina, I've been 4x, and have followed the downtrend in GDP and the value of the currency for 50+ years.  Good geography may be a necessary, but not a sufficient condition to becoming a world power.  Brazil has better economies of scale (and shorter trade routes), the Pampas get too little rain for anything except (amazing) meat, and the consolation of land ownership in too few hands resulted in political revolt.  A country can't thrive in the 21st century on resources alone.

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Tomas Pueyo from Uncharted Territories<unchartedterritories@substack.com> Date: Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 4:57 PM Subject: 325121 is your Substack verification code To: <johnhdolan123@gmail.com>

Here's your verification code to sign in to Substack:

325121

This code will only be valid for the next 10 minutes. If the code does not work, you can use this login verification link:

Verify email

© 2025 Tomas Pueyo 548 Market Street PMB 72296, San Francisco, CA 94104

610

Expand full comment
Nicolasz's avatar

Feeling a lot of Peter Zeihan vibes - meant a a compliment

Expand full comment
Tomas Pueyo's avatar

Interestingly I haven’t seen any monograph from Stratfor on Argentina. Unfortunate.

But thanks! I appreciate :)

Expand full comment
Nicolasz's avatar

pick up "Disunited Nations". Most of his books repeat the same themes but, in this one, he applies them to individual countries

Expand full comment
fswan's avatar

My comment is not about the piece, which I enjoyed, but about this maddening app. I subscribed so that I could "learn why Argentina is [a middle-income society instead if a superpower] but can find no working link in the app, the email, or the website leading me to the promised piece. Notice I said "working" link. And what a convoluted system to sign up - switching me between multiple emails, the app, and the website! Good grief. This is about to be the shortest subscription in history!

Expand full comment
Tomas Pueyo's avatar

That 2nd piece comes next week!

Expand full comment
Ira Bloomgarden's avatar

There's an old saying: "God created Argentina, but when he saw how perfect it was, he created Argentines as a balance.

Expand full comment
Jorge Hintze's avatar

Me pareció muy claro este primer artículo si lo tomamos como descriptivo y no valorativo. Algo similar a una tomográfía que muestra determinadas evidencias que son indispensables para cualquier posterior valoración. En el caso de las tomografías, hay un corpus de conocimiento que dice que los indicadores son pertinentes. En el caso de los de países que analiza Tomás (del medio intero natural principalmente), no cabe duda de que son relevantes pero, como muestra Argentina, no suficientes para pasar a la etapa de evaluación de la tomografía.

Para pasar a esa etapa, si recurrimos a tomar las naciones como sistemas abiertos, es posible describirlas en términos de la ecuación entre energía e información que consiguen obtener de sus recursos propios y del contexto (demás naciones) respecto del que entregan a dicho contexto.

El saldo positivo es crecimiento y el negativo decrecimiento. En estos términos, la evolución argentina en el último siglo fue de lento crecimiento neto con muy fuertes altibajos que no ocurrieron en otros países de la región salvo Venezuela. Este saldo neto, a pesar de todo, ha permitido que Argentina haya logrado mantenerse en una buena situación en relación en términos relativos a la región.

Dado que la influencia de los demás países del mundo en la región, especialmente los más poderosos, no ha sido demasiado diferente sobre Argentina, ni sus recursos naturales y humanos han cambiado demasiado, sólo queda como opción suponer un conjunto, acaso reducido, de causas endógenas.

¿Qué deberían explicar estas causas? A mi criterio, los altibajos. Es decir, la volatilidad de las reglas de juego específicamente influyentes en la ecuación input-output de este sistema-pais.

No son necesariamente sólo las de la política, porque hay ejemplos por doquier de cambios drásticos de gobiernos e ideologías que no se reflejan en indicadores asociados a este saldo, como el riesgo país.

Tomás deberá identificar y agregar datos adicionales a esta tomografía: ¿cómo es que tienes este estado físico excepcional y eres un deportista tan mediocre?

Expand full comment
Tomas Pueyo's avatar

A ver si consigo sacar algo interesante!

Expand full comment
BajoLimay's avatar

I leave you some economic growth data from the University of Groningen, which allows you to better understand and complement the geographic information provided by Tomás.

https://leodatri.substack.com/p/comparative-evolution-of-argentinas

Expand full comment