[ad_1]
It has been an intense week for the opposition amid unsuccessful attempts to reach an agreement on primaries that would include all the parties of the former New Majority and the Broad Front, as well as Unity for Change.
Finally, there will be three pacts in the opposition that will face each other in the next elections, amidst accusations for not having unlocked the main knot: the armor.
In conversation with BioBioChile, the president of the Comunes party, Jorge Ramírez, who is part of the Broad Front, questioned what happened with the parties that make up the Progressive Convergence (PPD, PR and PS), Christian Democrats, Ciudadanos and the PRO, assuring that “ the worst of the Concertación kitchen returned ”.
What happened to the failed agreement of the Broad Front and a sector of the opposition?
To say that there was an almost agreement is to lie, what there were were positions that one felt they had the possibility of meeting the next day for generating a space of more or less fair competition between forces.
And to say that Unity for Change asked for shielding, it seems to me that it is quite unfair on the part of the former Concertation, particularly because not only had they done it, but also the Christian Democrats had done it and also part of those who make up Convergence Progressive.
The only ones who always manifested the position of competing in all regions was the Broad Front. So, to come to say that we bow to the shields, seems really false to me. Unity for Change, Progressive Convergence and the DC had been having conversations for a long time, not including the Broad Front, and they already had mutual armor agreements.
It must be recognized that Unity for Change was always very clear in stating that for them there were fundamental questions in terms of the possibility that they had to be assured of competing in a very balanced way. And the Christian Democrats always showed a willingness to try to find an agreement with them in that sense. And therefore, the agreement was not only hampered by the possibility of shielding some of the political forces, but rather in the way of understanding how the agreement was being built.
Was there a generational clash between the different ways of doing politics?
It is true, I believe that there is indeed a way of constructing the narrative and the politics that leaves us as Frente Amplio quite disappointed with those who had said that they were willing to overcome the Concertación.
Between the decency of the Communist Party’s performance with its honesty always on the table versus the lying manner in which the Socialist Party and the PPD in particular have come out to defend their positions, it seems to me that they really show the worst of our politics. country, is to return to the policy of the Concertación.
There is a way of doing politics, particularly of the Socialist Party and the PPD, which only reflect the interests of those parties to maintain power for power, without showing a true willingness, not only to give up a quota, but to have the capacity to collectively build agreements that allow citizens to generate transformations.
Do you think that ideological differences prevailed between the Broad Front over the Concertación’s “old kitchen”?
I think the worst of the Concertación kitchen returned. In politics we are clear that we have differences not only from an ideological point of view, but also in the way of constructing spaces for discussion and debate, and therefore differences are manifested that leave us in a very complex position for what That comes, of great mistrust with sectors that rightly lied in their statements and therefore one wonders how unity is built with those who have in their top leadership this longing for the way in which the Concertación has made politics the last thirty years.
What will happen to the Broad Front?
We are going to get closer to the people, the social leaders and the organizations, and put aside these dialogues with these sectors that showed the worst of politics and that sought to return to a Concertación 2.0.
In Chile there are again two blocs, those that defend the richest 1% of this country and those that we are convinced that politics has to be done with 99% of the people.
They made a decision that is very serious for Chile, they lied to them for months from October 18 stating that they were looking for mechanisms and articulations with social movements. And what we realized that this was a speech to the press, but that in closed spaces they were rebuilding the Concertación 2.0 because ultimately it is the natural space of those who for 30 years sat in the kitchen of the richest of this country to negotiate the bills and therefore, what is there is to retake from the political point of view a way of building power relations that brings them closer to the right wing sectors.
There is a way of doing politics, particularly of the Socialist Party and the PPD, which only reflect the interests of those parties to maintain power for power
– Jorge Ramirez
Is there a lesson to be learned from all this?
We are very self-critical, because we do not understand politics from negotiation, we understand it from the articulation of forces that are diverse but have common purposes, and therefore, we always understood that politics was made through concrete proposals, but also with common minimums that allow us to build a path that brings us closer to both.
If there is a self-criticism that we have to do, it is that perhaps we should have tried to articulate and dialogue much earlier because that way we would have perhaps much more promptly had certain looks of what was going to happen and perhaps we would not have ended up giving the show that unfortunately was He ended up giving yesterday and in that fact we have to have a self-criticism.
[ad_2]
