By the late sixties the Argentine exponents of liberalism and Marxism were at the margins on the “industrial- export consensus.” Liberals criticized the ISI model but also the redefinitions of economic policy undertaken in those years because the state continued increasing its participation in the direction of the process which, in their estimation, created severe distortions in the economy. The Marxists debated at length the characteristics of the national bourgeoisie and its “historic objectives” among other subjects. Their proposals embraced non-capitalist development paths difficult to realize without monumental social changes. Yet, it remains clear that a relative consensus was gestating at the beginning of the 1970s surrounding the obstacles to development imposed by the technology question, foreign control of the national economy, or at least its growing concentration that had an impact on the content of economic policy. The ministries of Ferrer and especially José Gelbard drew from these arguments to attempt a change in direction for industrial growth. Although their proposals did not suggest upending established property relations, they sought to resolve the economy’s structural limitations by means of a greater state intervention that would propel a more nationalist model of growth.