Be warned. We are facing a scenario in which our democracy could come out very battered from the next four years of government
By
< i class=”i-share-btn twitter”>
File photo. Jurors at a polling station await voters during the congressional elections and presidential consultations in Bogota, Colombia, March 13, 2022. REUTERS/Luisa Gonzalez
Today, at the end of the day, we will know which presidential candidates made it to the second round and, as my first column for Infobae Colombia comes out just on Election Sunday, I would like to take the opportunity to reflect a little on the nature of this electoral campaign; but I don’t want to talk about the form, I want to talk about the substance.
This electoral process has overtones of a Greek tragedy. As in classic works, from the beginning you know that things are going to go wrong. The hero, no matter what he does, cannot escape his fate. The tragic result is that in this electoral process a relatively new political alternative ended up weakened and whose existence is fundamental for the historical moment in which we live, I am referring to the misnamed “political center”.
I think there are two types of explanations for why we reached this stage, some of a structural nature and others that have to do with the way in which the center decided to campaign. Undoubtedly, the structural causes were more important and unavoidable than the latter and created a scenario against which the center had very little chance of prospering; however, it has to be said, the way the campaign was targeted and conducted didn’t help much either.
Let me elaborate. There are two fundamental factors or situations, intimately related to each other, that made it practically impossible to construct an alternative discourse to those exposed by the left or the right. First, inequality and poverty intensified in a way that unprecedented during the confinement and, second, the collective disenchantment with the political class sharpened to the extreme. This fatal combination meant that people had no ears for responsible, considered and programmatic proposals for gradual transformation.I say that both factors are related because, for years, neither the political class nor the institutions managed to respond to the social and economic crisis, but neither did they during the emergency caused by the pandemic. His ineptitude (at best) or his complete and blatant indifference (at worst) were laid bare and made them vulnerable.
People want to be able to put their three plates of food on the table NOW, they want to have a way to work and educate their children NOW. Not tomorrow, not in a few months, NOW. Likewise, the people do not tolerate one more minute under the leadership of an indolent political class that has governed for its own benefit and with its back to the country. Not-a-minute-longer.This boredom reached its peak and therefore any sign of moderation is understood as complacency with the intolerable. In such a scenario, promoting a discourse of change with responsibility and unrestricted respect for institutions was political suicide. Most people, in the face of the crisis, today do not give a damn about maintaining the forms and rules of the game. People do not find in the defense of democracy and its institutions a discourse that translates into improving the situation of thousands of Colombians; On the contrary, many believe that the rules of the game and the institutions were co-opted by the powerful to govern for their own benefit and, therefore, they have no incentive to defend them.
It is for this reason that, for example, making alliances with groups questioned for their links to paramilitarism and/or for having been involved in major corruption scandals has become a lesser evil. People are so desperate that they are willing to look the other way as long as an alternative comes to power that produces immediate results. For this reason, the importance that the center gave to doing politics in a clean and transparent way did not help much.
But the decline in the political strength of the center can have very serious consequences for the country. The campaign alliances with these questioned groups will have a great cost during the possible governments of those who reach the Casa de Nariño with their help. Nothing is free in this life. And to this we must add the fact that, because there is no electoral return on a commitment to the maintenance and protection of institutions, it is very likely that those who are in government will not feel obliged to unrestrictedly respect that institutional framework (in which no one believes but which is of vital importance for the survival of our democracy). We must warn you. We are facing a scenario in which our democracy could come out very battered from the next four years of government.
Hopefully the center managed to define itself better politically and ideologically, managed to find its reason for being, managed to find its mojo. Because their role will be fundamental, from the government or from the opposition, to stop the deinstitutionalizing impulse that seems to be more irresistible every day.
*Sandra Borda is an associate professor in the Department of Political Science from the University of the Andes. He has extensive experience in the area of International Relations and combines his investigative work with work in the media such as El Tiempo, Canal NTN24, Radio Nacional de Noticias, BBC London, among others.
*Sandra Borda is a Political Scientist from the Universidad de los Andes, Master in International Relations from the University of Chicago and Master in Political Science from the University of Wisconsin. She is also a doctor (PhD) in Political Science from the University of Minnesota, and has a Post-Doc in Foreign Policy at the University of Groningen. She has worked in media outlets such as NTN24 Channel, El Mercurio Newspaper, BBC London, AP International News Agency, Semana Magazine, El Espectador Newspaper and Russia Today. She was a member of the Foreign Policy Mission.