In a recent essay Time magazine alleged that one of the big problems is that autocracies select their staff for their loyalty, not honesty. This has some logic. The leader requires total support and loyalty to his policies, his ideology and his whims. If your collaborators are honest men, they could not support the regime's corruption and unacceptable reasons put forward to obviously wrong decisions or filled with dark intentions. For example, how can you support an enabling law passed with the vaunted purpose of making decisions to benefit the victims and then under that umbrella allow the President to issue an Act of the militia? How parliamentary inquiry set aside cases of rotten food, certain agreements such as the PDVSA Pearl barge that sank and allegations of Makled? How can you tell the President that the blame for the recession the debt is inherited from the Fourth Republic when his regime has increased more than three times? Guyana briquette that now produce more than before nationalization when rods have to be imported as ever. How to speak of a strong union movement when pursuing these institutions and prohibits collective bargaining? How dare Chavez to compare the results of nationalized companies to private old (Sidor, cement, agricultural enterprises)? Nothing expropriated by the state would stand up to audit how you can support agreements with Cuba, Nicaragua and Uruguay gifts. Financial contributions to Ecuador and Bolivia. The case for Argentina. The loss of millions of dollars of pension fund PDVSA and the blatant lie in the National Assembly of the minister / president to argue that the fund is managed by the retirees? How to explain the use and abuse of the millions who manages the President in a parallel budget? How to support the scheme when it claims to have no funds to maintain roads. Increase salaries. PDVSA to invest in companies of Guyana. Solve the electrical problem. Repair and condition to repair and build hospitals and schools in the country missing? I put here a long list of supporters by regime officials decisions and omissions that are the result of a loyalty that must be defined as a service and not as a virtue. Moreover, the above is not loyalty, is submission (action of submitting to the will of another person)
Honesty is another thing, in the words of Professor Stephen Carter requires three steps: 1. Discern between what is right and wrong. 2. Act according to the discerned even at personal cost. 3. Accept publicly that it acts according to a preference of good over evil. The latter is important in a country where we are ashamed of our honesty, our ideology (capitalist) and refuse to support institutions such as Fedecámaras because we no longer instill the notion that all businessmen are dishonest. Also allowed the regime to rewrite history by being afraid to defend the recent past that was much more achievements and strengths that can display the current regime.
look with optimism to 2013 when we have a new government will handle the concepts of loyalty and honesty as fundamental virtues of staff thinking and not submissive.
0 comments:
Post a Comment