COMENTARIOS AL ARTÍCULO: LOS PRINCIPIOS Y LOS INTERESES Y EL DESARROLLO HUMANO.

Por: Maria F. Garzón

Estoy de acuerdo con que el estado no es capaz de mantener el equilibrio intereses/principios, por las razones que se expone en el artículo. A riesgo de simplificar demasiado las cosas, me parece que el verdadero problema de fondo es la explosión de la posverdad (“storytelling”) que es la narración de juicios sobre hechos u opiniones que no se ajustan a la verdad, que ni el estado ni quienes defienden principios pueden controlar. Por un lado, quienes defienden principios ni siquiera están conscientes de que ese “storytelling” es precisamente el gran poder que deben controlar o enfrentar para promover eficazmente dichos principios. En cambio, se desgastan desarrollando buenos argumentos, completos, bien documentados y racionales que desgraciadamente no ven realmente la luz pública.  Por otro lado, los principistas carecen de recursos y experiencia para controlar el “storytelling”. En realidad, el mayor control lo ejercen los que tienen y defienden intereses particulares (corporaciones y los elementos del estado con intereses específicos). Ellos si están muy conscientes del poder absoluto que tiene el “storytelling” y tienen los recursos económicos y la experiencia que usan para maximizar este poder.  Para complicar las cosas, en el contexto en que vivimos, con millones de mensajes diarios, solo aquellos mensajes sobre-simplificados, ”sanitizados” y minimizados— es decir sólo aquellos mensajes que cuentan la verdad a medias o tergiversada y que sirven a intereses particulares bien limitados— alcanzan visibilidad y son realmente “consumidos”.

De hecho, el mayor poder sobre el “storytelling” incluye la capacidad de suprimir contenidos. En mi opinión solo este poder puede restablecer (establecer por primera vez?) el equilibrio entre principios e intereses.

Tratando de entender este problema lo he identificado en la educación moral y académica de los niños en general, en las retoricas políticas, en la confusión que el macro-contexto le genera a los adultos en cuanto a lo que es moral y, en realidad, en la forma como los humanos estamos interactuamos unos con otros. Es decir, tengo una profunda preocupación sobre la moral social en estos tiempos.

El gran problema es ¿qué hacer? Siendo un tema complejo, modestamente, creo que es necesario condensar de manera deliberada y sistemática, lo más fundamental y elemental de los principios (sea como un todo, o uno por uno, si es necesario).  Es decir, es necesario obtener las piezas de información mínimas y completas de los principios, , para convertirlas en módulos de contenido consumibles de información y distribuirlas como “productos”. Desafortunadamente tal vez la forma para hacerlo sea a través de la maquinaria tradicional de publicidad y mercadeo y redes de “influencers” desarrolladas con este propósito. Es imprescindible atacar las fallas morales de la posverdad o storytelling.

THE PERUVIAN LABORATORY AND POLITICAL ATOMIZATION: 

Efraín Gonzales de Olarte 

The atomization of politics in Peru, shown in the recent congressional elections, with 21 political organizations competing for 130 seats in the congress, is a fact worthy of the greatest attention and concern, for its repercussions on governance and on the development of Peru.

This electoral process can be seen as a social experiment, almost a laboratory, which consists in how to choose 130 congressmen – for a year and a half – that represent the wishes, expectations, frustrations and hopes of more than 20 million voters. It is necessary, however, to take into account that the context, in which the elections were held, had four major components that have certainly conditioned the vote.

First, we come from a political crisis of representation, which concluded in the dissolution of the Congress of the Republic. Second we lived an unprecedented period of fight against corruption with prosecutors who have investigated the former presidents of the republic and some notable politicians. Third, the economy has begun to stagnate in part due to external factors – the US-China trade war – and internal factors, the relative inability of the government to execute its investment budgets, and finally we live in an atmosphere of citizen insecurity and violence of gender and criminal unpublished in Peru. With these big problems in mind, 21 electoral organizations were registered, of which maximum three could be accredited as “political parties”, the rest were organizations with electoral purposes, without doctrine, without organization, without all those attributes that are required to aspire to alter in serious politics.

Normally, serious countries have bipartisan systems, in some others they have up to four political parties or movements that aspire to govern, which allows us to propose great policy and governance orientations. But having 21 organizations, with a political system fragmented to the extreme obviously the electoral preferences no longer go through the great policy options – conservative, liberal, social democratic or socialist – but to the small needs of the population, which in the Peruvian case are many.

These “experimental” elections have shown us that insecurity is a big problem, that is why people have voted for the organization and for the leader who offers them security, for those who represent the forgotten and discriminated Peruvian who also has a religious ideology with a biblical ethic, but they have also voted for those who are unhappy with the economic model and political structures, which in the end propose “hard-handed” governments, that is, an important group of Peruvians do not believe in this state and want a more authoritarian. But, they have also voted for some organizations with some experience and with global proposals to govern Peru, one of which points to cheap and cardboard education, as a means of social ascent. In addition, these elections have punished politicians and their organizations that made congress a machine favorable to corruption, to low-law politics. This choice has thus been a process of social catharsis. Basically, all the proposals converge on the need for more State, but above all for a strong one in democracy. These elections tell us that Peru is fragmented to the extreme and since no one has achieved a majority beyond 10%, the question arises: is it possible that 10 political organizations can agree on a common agenda? We do not know, it is an unprecedented and interesting situation, almost a social experimental laboratory. I presume that a common agenda would be the list of promises of each group: fight against insecurity, inclusion policies for the less favored, especially in rural areas, continuity in the fight against corruption, more and better social policies – education and health – and greater efficiency and effectiveness of the state. It is an unknown if the necessary reform of the political system and its parties, and the mechanisms of future election can be approved quickly with this congress.

The government of President Vizcarra will have to tune into this agenda. However, this congress will not only be one year and more, but also this year begins the presidential campaign for the general elections of 2021 and there are several new congressmen who feel presidential. This makes me think that we will remain more or less the same, because too many scenarios are crossed and the time of this congress and the government is already short. Finally, in a situation of atomization of political representations and with enough improvisation, what will count is who are the representatives with their own name, somehow the most voted will count for possible agreements, rather than their platforms. When there are crises in which the institutions stop working, they are replaced by the notable ones, which in this case are the most voted.

I will return to the subject in a month, when we know the composition of the congress, the government has taken note of the results and Peru has digested these laboratory results. I cannot fail to recognize that despite all Peru is processing its crises while maintaining its democratic system, almost a miracle.

02.03.2020