Ollanta Humala and Keiko Fujimori, in that order, will star in the second round. His success has been undeniable and legitimate, it is unobjectionable. Both candidates, despite being the most resisted in the group of five who applied this time to the presidency of the republic have managed to capture the highest number of votes. Those are the rules of democracy, who enters the race must be prepared to win and lose, a politician must be big in victory but much larger in times of defeat.
few months ago, even the most optimistic supporters of Ollanta Humala and Keiko Fujimori could have imagined this scenario. The polls put former President Alejandro Toledo and former mayor of Lima at the top of voter preferences. In the words of President Alan Garcia, Peru's future was assured, the anti-system, with particular reference to Humala, were not more likely, our country would choose for an option democratic, Peru elect a candidate to represent and ensure the continuity of the economic model and political system. What happened then?
Beyond the existing personal responsibilities, which undoubtedly must be taken by whom it may concern, beyond finger pointing, because apparently that's the tenor of most journalists and media in our country, we must ask the structural reasons that lead to almost 50% of the electorate is tilted, authoritarian and democratic credibility low. It is true that Toledo made many mistakes in the campaign, which reminded us of times why throughout most of his government his approval rating was less than double digits, it is also true that pride played a trick on him, but do not think the former president is solely responsible for this debacle.
second preferences, Mr. Castaneda strove desmostarnos disability and his enormous talent to take on a fight of this type. Mr. Castañeda demonstrated or confirmed the rule that in our country, no former City Mayor does win the presidential election. The mayor was never able to build a campaign capable of tuning in to the city, especially with the inhabitant of the country. Their lack of communications capability, its continued disagreements with the press who questioned his management, his lack of ability to sink their own mistakes, his stubbornness and obstinacy at the time of blaming everyone but itself for its environment, its precipitous fall and his pathetic attempt to appear always pursued, eventually buried. The mayor left the management with nearly 80% approval, failed to reach even 10% of the votes at the end of the day.
These two figure sum of PPK, a candidate who at times, especially in the days before the announcement of his candidacy, generated high expectations, PPK ended up becoming a clown more in this circus which we falsely naming race. PPK, renowned professional national and international experience in the public sector, Minister of State in the governments of Fernando Belaunde and Alejandro Toledo, who tried to discredit him throughout the campaign, in a gesture that Personally, I left serious doubts about the concept of loyalty and personal benefits of this gentleman, quickly turned his campaign into an entertainment program. Voters expected, given his ability and attitude of a statesman, something more than colorful pin with the initials of his name, more than his awkward dance to the rhythm of PPKUY (the mascot of campaign), more than their journeys aboard the PPKAMION distributing shirts and calendars. PPK quickly gave up, put under lock and key government plan, and went on to do the one thing that politicians in our country can do, rant against the adversary, farandulizar the campaign, to the rhythm of huayno, cumbia or another are , and impoverish political debate, but debate may call what we have is falling into an exaggeration. Undoubtedly, both PPK, Castañeda, Toledo, as the two winners, Ollanta Humala and Keiko Fujimori, gave us the worst campaign in recent years.
I, unlike the claims of some "analysts" or TV commentators, that if it is seeking makers would have to pull you ears and little something more, not only these three gentlemen, but the entire political and business class they represent. His pettiness, his eagerness to prominence, his desire is to become a strongman the only predestined to save the republic from the disaster to the democratic health and economic development are to be the two remaining candidates, made impossible the development of a comprehensive and coherent center, capable of seducing the great majority of our country, bringing together all democratic sectors in a single ticket, with a message of political and economic stability, which serves as the basis for the social changes that certainly should be in a country where over 30% of the population still lives below the poverty line. The plurality of centrist candidates, Democratic candidates, some more so than others, made it possible for extremist candidates, appealing to a populist and authoritarian capitalize on this lack of unity, standing in front of citizen preferences. How different the picture would have been if the meanness has not been taken over the minds of these "leaders" once again the failure of dialogue and consensus among our political class, present throughout our republican history, pushes us to a situation as hopeless as the current time.
I also heard some newspaper editors, especially one that is often branded as communist or terrorist, who does not think like him, no doubt José Carlos Mariategui also be a Ferruco as despicable as Abimael himself in the logic of this gentleman, that this choice is the result of ignorance of the voters. I've heard say, as on other occasions in which their preferred candidate fails to positive results, or who vote for Humala Keiko, but apparently voters Keiko is more comprehensive, is somewhat less that mentally retarded. I've heard that only idiots can not be aware of the profound ideological and programmatic contradictions of both candidates. However, against this barrage of comments, I can hardly call thoughts or ideas to what this man says that the only thing they do is reduce the electoral political analysis to a confrontation between educated and educated voters versus the ignorant and uninformed, I think we reflect on the underlying reasons, structural reasons that make nearly half the electorate opts for applications such as Ollanta Humala and Keiko Fujimori, despite the danger that they generate.
In my opinion, it is no coincidence that, having in Peru to nearly 30% of the population in poverty, is the same percentage, and a few more points, the preferred option for change, radical, populist, right or left. Analysts say that this sector of the population always choose so thoughtless, and therefore they who give life to the anti. I asked: How do I ask a person who lives on less than three dollars a day, which has no water service, electricity or drainage, which live in a climate of insecurity and continuing violence, which has no health services treating their illnesses and their children, which looks like the administration of justice given the back, which is outraged with the corruption present in every "democratic" and that these are seen as always or almost always go unpunished, which creates in the political system that creates economic model that creates a model not brought them out of poverty, much less the public has become? In my opinion, ask this sector a level of analysis and reflection absent even in areas A and B, is such an injustice. I do not know how some opinion leaders can look into the eyes of those branded as ignorant, do not blush, knowing that these people's pockets are only filled with misery. Being
the view that one can express many things. There is a segment of the population, nearly a third of it to which the development has not come, there is a third of the population living in extremely precarious conditions, there is a segment of the population wants change, he is willing to give jump to the hole, it has nothing, and therefore has nothing to lose. There is a sector of the population that is willing to waive his rights and civil liberties in return if the gift or receive welfare support from the State. For many of these people, and possibly for yourself if you were in their situation, such an option, populist and patronage is a lesser evil, their situation no worse than what is, why believe in what newspapers called market or democracy, if more than 20 years of economic growth, family situation has not changed, if malnutrition among children is still the same. The problem is that analysts gentlemen apparently in our country, poverty has continued to outrage, and has become part of the landscape of our society.
I'm not happy with the outcome, would never have opted for an option like that Ollanta Humala or Keiko Fujimori represent. Both, from my perspective they are or are outside the system, do not believe in the basic rules of democracy, both present authoritarian discourses, left or right, for that matter is the same. Both threaten the achievements of recent years. Both can trigger a catastrophe in the country. To me there is no major difference. In any event, thing to do is make a deep reflection, a collective mea culpa, wondering how to convince the voter, the poorest of all, that development is possible in a climate of freedom and respect for democratic values. We must show that democracy is efficient, which is effective, which is capable of improving people's lives, which is able to fight corruption, that democracy is not only people with resources are citizens. Ollanta candidates ideologically and Keiko represent sectors that are the antithesis of the political scene but from a social point of view, the electorate is the same, is the resident of Sector C, D and E, is the resident of central highlands, rural, marginal urban sectors. Has been the inability of the political class, the selfishness of the sectors of economic power, and our indifference, which today does not pass the bill, a bill that we pay for long 5 years. Sunday's result is not the responsibility of a special person, a particular sector of a candidate, we are all to blame, and at the height of cynicism dare call ignorant of those people to whom we have always ignored.
0 comments:
Post a Comment