Leer en Español
A second pink tide is spreading throughout Latin America. The original one, led by Chávez and Lula, may end up paling in historical significance in the face of it. The fact is that societies that historically had been refractory to socialist projects are succumbing to its influence (see the constituent process in Chile, the election of Castillo in Peru and the wave of vandalism in Colombia).
The lefts, new and Jurassic, red and rainbow, make their way through subversion and sabotage. All this in order to capitalize electorally on the chaos. Employing a modus operandi that can be qualified as “dissipated molecular revolution” (in the manner of Guattari filtered by López Tapia), the issue is reduced to the very old formula of creating a problem and then selling the solution.
Faced with this situation, the non-left (to speak of the right is not only imprecise, but an abuse of generosity) has had a very weak response or, in cases such as Chile’s, has directly paved the way for changes in the model and processes of re-foundation. The NGOs, appendages of globalism, act as a reinforcement of victimizing discourses when the already weak and self-conscious regional governments try to reestablish internal order. The course of events reveals how little can be done from political positions when there is no support from the media, universities and other organizations. In short, when political action is reduced to partisan dynamics.
Those who seek to stop the Pink Tide must understand, in the manner of the sovereigntists of the Old Continent and the America First movement in the United States, that the culture war has replaced the Cold War. In terms of the adversary, it could be said that the great mistake of a certain subcontinental liberalism is to have neglected for too long the superstructure (way of thinking, values, beliefs, etc.) concentrating on the structure (i.e.: mode of production).
Economistic thinking is not the answer for an unhinged era where even the most elementary notions on which our societies rest (what is a man and what is a woman, for example) are questioned. Without an epic, without a story, without a mobilizing narrative, the non-left has believed that promises of good governance were enough. It has abused a discourse that combines fear (“The Reds are coming!” and “We will be a new Venezuela”) with a demagogy that promises entry into the first world only with the adoption of market reforms. He offers practically nothing positive.
A space that represents a true alternative – and that can bring together from liberals to conservatives, including nationalists – must start from the local level to articulate a regional response. It seems counter-intuitive, because globalism (with its eagerness to destroy the nation-state as an instance of decision and representation) is what we usually associate with the interconnection of countries. It is a question of seeking a joint response to the joint action of the opposites (Puebla Group, São Paulo Forum, etc.). Sovereignty must be pursued, but we cannot think of acting alone in the face of such formidable threats.
A space that represents a true alternative must produce leaders, not just CEOs.
A space that represents a true alternative must safeguard our historical heritage, instead of removing moments and statues in anticipation of the iconoclasm of the new barbarians.
A space that represents a true alternative must stand up to the harmful woke ideology, which, although outside academic and activist environments is strongly resisted, is already seeking to impose itself from the political elites. It must do so, moreover, because it is totally alien to our societies: it is an attempt to transfer the social tension that confronts the United States to totally different contexts in terms of values and ethno-religious composition. We have enough problems of our own without importing others.
For too long the non-left has pretended to replace politics with technocracy; prey to its complexes, it adopts aseptic and de-ideologized discourses. Perhaps when it is once again willing to descend to the terrain of the cultural war, when it transcends the Manichean dynamic of ‘place-communism’ versus plain communism, when it is something more than fake smiles and yellow balloons, Latin America may cease to be one-armed. Perhaps then it might even be called right-wing.
Silvio Salas, Venezuelan, is a writer and Social Communicator, with an interest in geopolitics, culture war and civil liberties // Silvio Salas, venezolano, es un comunicador social interesado en temas de geopolítica, libertades civiles y la guerra cultural.
Sigue a Silvio Salas en Twitter: @SilvioSalasR