Jesus, the constitutionalist
By: Luis Beltrán Guerra G. - 25/09/2023
Share:
Stating that the world is not right is a truism. It is not that it has achieved, since it existed, absolute perfection, but that it has been better than now, it is very difficult to deny. Determining whether the current moment will be your worst moment seems meaningless due to the complexities involved in knowing for sure what “infinity is.” Knowing that it cannot be denied that “imaginary”. And at least in the determining majority of its aspects.
Hence the title of this essay, since one option seems to be that Jesus Christ returns as “the constituent”, since he was in these parts, sent by God, with the order that justice reign (Georges Chevrot, Simon Peter). That Magna Carta maintains its validity, despite their mistreatment, which is why it causes us to express, in the face of the disaster at the hands of man, that it would be, at the very least, useful for the Lord to send his son again, in order to rescue the guidelines that were established. We have no doubt that he will tell us like the current King of the Church that: 1. “He must not command what he pleases, but decide according to truth and justice, taking into account the mission entrusted to him and the good of those over whom.” possess authority”, 2. Dispense with all subjective impression and not guide the disciples to their whim. Finally, “Cephas” must give an account of his obedience, dying the same death as his master.” Or perhaps “the gospel” is also in acute crisis.
It is difficult to predict whether the humanitarian collapse has its source mainly in the tremors of nature itself or those of us who make it up. We are inclined to affirm that our responsibility somehow surpasses “the vibratory, rapid and violent movements of the Earth's surface.” In those that could be classified as typical of humans, the evidence is a few: 1. The global economy faces the risk of a long period of low growth, as the persistent effects of the COVID-19 pandemic remain unresolved and 2. Likewise , the increasing impact of climate change (due to the work of man) and macroeconomic structural challenges (UN) have been decisive. And with respect to those countries still classified as “less developed” (until recently from the third world), It is stated that they would be “well below the 7% growth established in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” “The risk of a recession in 2023” is apparently possible. This is how we read.
A summary of other symptoms of our own responsibility reveals: 1. Every day, all over the world, there are people who must leave their homes in search of a better life, 2. They are migrants or refugees, as they flee their countries due to the risks of their own lives. An objective analysis and perhaps the most significant evidence is “the war.” Guterres, the President of the UN, affirms “Ukraine is a crisis that affects us all”, to the extent that it can lead 1.7 billion people, more than a fifth of humanity, to poverty, destitution and hunger.” THE latest world conflict, already evident, corroborates the assessments of the Former President of Portugal.
To these manifestations are added “constitutional implosions”, derived on the one hand from what the “Law of Laws” establishes, which derives from the constituents and on the other from the recipients of its precepts. When both circumstances are present, more often than we believe, the Magna Carta implodes. It is read that “constitutional theory has been fed by “popular constitutionalism”, which has put “classical” against the wall, which “strengthens the principle of “popular sovereignty”. The crux of modern democracies, it is said, is not who governs, but “how it is governed”, that is, what are the limits to observe to do so. The Constitution, it must be understood, constitutes a limit to absolutism (in which power resides in a single person without being accountable to a parliament or to society in general, valid until the first half of the 19th century). This new trend has expanded in the United States and Latin America, particularly in Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia, a consequence of political modifications, in principle, fueled by the qualification of the Constitution as a limiting mechanism of the power of the people (Jorge Alberto Diegues, Argentina ). “The formula” conceives of the people as the call to make and therefore to interpret and apply the Constitution, backed by “the threat of popular application.” The last word in constitutional interpretation does not belong to any judicial power, “no matter how supreme it may be.” On the contrary, “it is up to the citizens themselves.” To accept the former is to incur “judicial supremacy or imperialism.” The assessment, it must be remembered, has prominent academics from Harvard and Yale. Political representation is disputed, since it makes democracy more conservative, “hindering popularly desired changes.” Classical democracies are distinguished as “the exclusive government of the majority”, characterized by feeding on a dark distrust of the common people, as well as a heightened sense of responsibility and a contempt for popular values. The risk, the institutional values different from those of popular culture and even opposite. Raúl Gustavo Ferreyra, also an Argentine professor, in “Constitutionalism of Citizens,” lists that the Constitution is a human invention “made by men and women who,
In the academy, the position of “Popular Constitutionalism” has achieved strong opposition, also based on the supporters of the US regime: 1. Most of the founding fathers who supported the healthiest doctrines for democratic perfection. He did not come from the popular class, 2. Jefferson, Madison, Hamilton, Washington, Adams, Stuart Mill enjoyed high positions, 3. Juan Bautista Alberdi, Argentine philosopher, politician, congressman and diplomat, in the same status, 4. This was not an obstacle so that they have been creators of a modern democracy, 5. It must be clear that the most significant thing is the purity of their heart and not appearing to belong to the people. The determining factor is to be at their side, 6. The tension between constitutionalism and democracy subsides if they are equated to assimilate them and to the right extent. Against the grain, he confirms that the ambivalence persists. It is also examined that when “the protector of the people comes to power he does not rest in his power.” Oppositely, he “becomes a tyrant.” Could it be a manifestation of a dilemma between classes? Answer, difficult.
In the so-called “pink wave”, in which today's Latin American regimes tend to identify themselves, this conflict does not exist. The constitutional assemblies are dominated by “pseudo representatives” of “a supposed people”, whom they get rid of as soon as they finish being elected. Moran has the double aspect of supporting the people, but, at the same time, the government, even though it is disastrous.
In light of the considerations presented, if we still respect the Lord, perhaps we should ask Him to send Jesus again, because His lessons are needed, as much as in His first appearance. And let him come with “Cephas” and the other apostles.
Comments welcome.
«The opinions published herein are the sole responsibility of its author».