"I give the devil the benefit of the law for my own safety..."
Sir Thomas More (1478-1535)
As we say in Venezuela: so much swimming to die on the shore. That is what I immediately thought when I read the headline of the Noticiero Digital: Guaido proposes agreement with Maduro for free elections with lifting of sanctions. (see in Spanish ND, in https://www.noticierodigital.com/2021/05/guaido-propone-acuerdo-con-maduro-para-elecciones-libres-con-levantamiento-de-sanciones/). The Presidency in Charge ended up accepting what the "opposition" parties are doing in practice throughout the country, that is, getting ready for regional elections with the CNE appointed by an illegitimate National Assembly. And I put the term "opposition" in quotation marks because with this news they definitely ceased to be so officially. If this is already a fact, as it indeed seems to be, Venezuelans do not have to look for anything else than the continuity of the regime of Nicolás Maduro Moros.
Guaidó's decision to give in, not only to the authoritarian pretension of the G4/FA parties that clearly ended up collaborating with the regime in a shameless and open manner by accepting those elections arranged by an illegitimate CNE, but to the authoritarianism of the regime itself, gives us the exact calibration of the low moral and ethical tessitura of the political leadership, which inexorably leads to disrespect for popular sovereignty on the part of the main opposition leaders. The former leads to the latter in a cause-effect relationship. But in doing so, they miss the most important point: politicians seeking office require us to fulfill their pretensions. They have to convince us to go down a route that the population has not only rejected in a public, notorious and communicative manner, but has also expressed it as a mandate through the means of participation and protagonism of the people established in the Constitution in a binding Popular Consultation.
What should have been the conduct of that leadership? Do you think it would be naïve of me to think that they should have complied with the mandate of the sovereign people established in the Popular Consultation? In a situation of total collapse of ethical and moral values that has led us to this very serious situation we are living today, it was easy to think that they would not comply with it. But each person has his own conscience and one cannot generalize the ethical and moral conduct of anyone to guess what he will do until he has actually done it, so I can perfectly infer that if the politicians of 37 parties that signed a Unitary Pact on September 7, 2020, where the Popular Consultation was introduced as a means of summoning the popular sovereignty, it was clear to me that they would be in the full disposition of the full compliance of the result of what the people decided. Good faith is presumed, bad faith must be proven. And unfortunately, with the declaration of the parties announced by the President in Charge, we have definitely proved it.
And although we Venezuelans can cite local examples of political integrity to contrast those who show themselves as triumphant because they believe that by announcing a political course of action for the country, Venezuelans will blindly follow them because they believe they are the masters of our destinies, I wish today to invoke the patron saint of politicians and rulers, so proclaimed by the late Pope John Paul II in October 2000, Sir Thomas More (1478-1535), better known as Thomas More, I wish today to invoke the patron saint of politicians and rulers, thus proclaimed by the late Pope John Paul II on October 31, 2000, Sir Thomas More (1478-1535), better known as Thomas More by his Spanish name, author of the famous work Utopia and many others. More was declared a saint by Pope Pius XI in 1935. (see Thomás More, in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_More).
The story of how Thomas More died was told in an extraordinary film, winner of 6 Academy Awards, entitled in English as "A Man of All Seasons" and whose synopsis is accurately reported on the website FILMAFFINITY (see "A Man of All Seasons", in https://www.filmaffinity.com/cr/film566004.html): “The story takes place in 16th century England. But men like Sir Thomas More, who love life yet have the moral fiber to lay down their lives for their principles, are found in every century. Concentrating on the last seven years of English chancellor's life, the struggle between More and his King, Henry VIII, hinges on Henry's determination to break with Rome so he can divorce his current wife and wed again, and good Catholic More's inability to go along with such heresy. More resigns as chancellor, hoping to be able to live out his life as a private citizen. But Henry will settle for nothing less than that the much respected More give public approval to his headstrong course”. More acted according to his conscience and that cost him his life. I recommend anyone, and especially those dedicated to politics, to watch it, not once but many times for a better understanding. (see "A Man of All Seasons" https://gloria.tv/post/7xrWDirXHfWG1XEXHywhDJfs1). The film's dialogue was taken from the surviving records of Thomas More's life.
The final corollary that the life and death of this saint teaches us is: one cannot give in to the authoritarianism of the rulers, even if it costs one's life. To give you an idea of the thinking of this individual, I transcribe part of the dialogue of the visit of More's family to prison, where his daughter Margaret tries to make him desist from his attitude so that he will recognize the illegitimate marriage of Henry VIII and let him go free:
-Margaret: In any state that was halfway good you would be very high now and not here for all that you have done.
-More: Yes.
-Margaret: You are not to blame for this one being ¾ parts bad.
-More: No.
-Margaret: So if you choose to suffer for it you set yourself up as a hero?
-More: Maybe you're right, but hear this: if we lived in a state where virtue was profitable, common sense would not be to be saints. But if we see that avarice, anger, vanity and stupidity yield more profit than charity, modesty, patience and intelligence, rebellion is justified, even at the risk of being heroes....
Does the type of state to which Thomas More refers seem familiar to you? It is indeed Venezuela, and according to the saint of politicians and rulers, rebellion is justified. Even more so when a clear majority decided and gave a mandate for a course of action completely different from the one decided by those who still at this point claim to represent us. And yet, as the saint in that story also said, "I give the devil the benefit of the law for my own safety...".
Why do we say this? Because the route we have designed to enforce the Constitution and reestablish it includes them, even though they have turned their backs on the Venezuelan people as their constituents. The Citizens' Pact for the Constitutional and Democratic Reestablishment commits all of us -even those who have denied the constitutional mandate- and that is precisely what gives us the security within the exercise of the Constitution to get out of the hole where they put us, and intend to continue leaving us, by negotiating with the regime.
If there is no longer morality or ethics in the actions of those who in bad times had to lead the opposition struggle in the country, that does not mean that there are not those who have it to spare and fight to show another way. Not only do we have the moral and ethical obligation not to give in to authoritarianism as clearly stated in the teaching of the saint Thomas More, but also to show the right path over the moral and ethical deviations of those who sold out popular sovereignty, "even at the risk of being heroes...". That is the right thing to do.
Caracas, May 12, 2021
Blog: https://ticsddhh.blogspot.com/
Email: luismanuel.aguana@gmail.com
Twitter:@laguana
Instagram: @laguana01
Telegram: https://t.me/TICsDDHH
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario