Thus, if during the ISI period social policy responded to the diagnosis that dependency would be overcome through endogenous development, and justified an interventionist state of a corporatist nature a la Bismark, which operated through social security models that were poorly inclusionary, in which social services involved purely public assistance benefits, and were extremely peripheral in their institutional design, what is happening today?
Así, si durante el período ISI la política social respondía al diagnóstico de superar la dependencia mediante el desarrollo endógeno, y se justificaba un Estado intervencionista de corte corporativo a lo bismarckiano que operaba mediante modelos de seguridad social poco inclusivos en los que los servicios sociales eran puramente benéficos, asistencialistas y sumamente periféricos en el diseño institucional, ahora ¿qué pasa?