A estas alturas del “proceso” nadie puede dudar de su naturaleza ideológica castro-comunista y de su vocación totalitaria militarista. Ni el sistema educativo ni la economía ni la propiedad privada ni las organizaciones obreras y patronales ni la agricultura and agribusiness and oil companies in Guyana or not the system of public and private health or pensions or wages and, somewhat important, not the political system with its rules of alternation of power and respect for election results will be less likely to maintain its historical structures created by democracy. Understanding the above should lead those who oppose this state of affairs to several conclusions: There is no possible negotiation that can lead, through dialogue, a change in the nature of the system (you can not negotiate with evil.) It is unrealistic to collaborate with the regime in exchange for benefits that will always be temporary (bad no solidarity) For Important as the institution or the person's cooperation does not positively affect the system (Evil does not support influences) Finally, what more encouragement given to evil is the indifference and disunity (can not think "I do not touch me ").
addition, the scheme has a single leadership, 13 years of experience in the use and abuse of power, almost infinite material resources and a lack of ethics and morality that allows you to break the law, human rights and blatantly lying in response the many accusations that are made inside and outside the country. Therefore, the opposition has to be one. With a single structure. A single leader and a single sense of direction. We understand that in a society like ours that has been plural in their political views, social and economic it is almost unnatural. But the dilemma should be seen as a clear dichotomy: either the Castro-communism or a subordination of the interests plurals to one objective: to defeat Chávez.
speak of a polarization that divides the country into two almost equal halves. The truth is not so simple. Are the so-called undecided (neither-nor) that if went to the polls would likely be divided into parts like the rest of the country. The problem is that there is a high abstention among them and is not known with certainty how we divide that abstention. There are also structural abstention (never voted) Additionally, there are many disillusioned Chávez supporters and do not know what to do to change their votes.
All this is said but what that might complicate, even more, the electoral landscape of 2012 is the political polarization in the opposition. The creation of ideological groups (progressives, social democrats, social Christians, independents, etc) that although a commitment to support a single presidential candidate might adversely affect the support of citizens who favor a block on another. Therefore, the MUD can not be divided. On the contrary should be restructured and create committees which are present the country's institutions including NGOs, universities, students, labor-management organizations, academia, elected officials of the opposition. That is, no assemblies (the MUD would lead the process with institutional support) the opposition would create a great national front in defense of democracy. When we emerge from this nightmare will be time to restore pluralism.
is not the time to create between us, other polarizations.
0 comments:
Post a Comment