The constitutions, deluges, confragations or something less?

Luis Beltrán Guerra G.

By: Luis Beltrán Guerra G. - 07/06/2024

Share:     Share in whatsapp

One of the most common distinctions among human beings is that of being optimists (positive and hopeful outlook on the present and future) or pessimists (negative attitude towards life). Some censor others based on expectations and realities. There are a few who act as optimists, but who are rather irresponsible, in principle, those who imagine that they will achieve everything, despite minimal efforts. The deities lead them to think that God will provide. The pessimist, on the other hand, is seen as a fool and, given his negativity, he tends to even lose his body, given his bad vibes and in recent years because he is toxic. The duality between one and the other is still important in improving the living conditions of the population (“the promotion of well-being”) and in which the role of the State, promoter, generator and coordinator, is decisive. It is understood, as emphasized, “with the active participation of social, public and private actors.” The desired society and from its own creation. That is where politicians are criticized the most.

It is also known that in humanity, as is well known, multiple and varied attempts have been made for the most equitable possible promotion of "well-being", to the extent that it is not a utopia to affirm that it was born with that goal. If we were to look for evidence, it would be sufficient to turn to the constitutions, understood as “a form of political and social pact.” "Well, they integrate, establish, organize and constitute the guidelines that govern society."

A good exercise leads to reviewing those countries classified as powers: 1. The United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, guarantee national tranquility, attend to the common defense, promote “the general well-being and ensure the benefits of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity,” we hereby promulgate and establish this Constitution for the United States of America. This is what the preamble of the Magna Carta says of the still “giant of the north” and 2. Quite far beyond, both in miles and kilometers, but also, of a different philosophy “the Russian Federation” and in which it is reiterated “United for a common destiny, ratifying human rights and freedoms, civic peace and harmony.” But also, “In the interest of preserving the unity historically established by the State and supported by universally recognized principles of equality and self-determination of peoples. Taking the opportunity to pay tribute to our ancestors, who have transmitted to us their love for the Homeland and faith in goodness and justice. And it highlights “To revive the sovereign State of Russia and corroborate the firmness of its democratic foundation, ensure well-being and prosperity for present and future generations and recognize ourselves as part of the world community. “We adopt the constitutional regime that is described in documents.” The comparison between the two aforementioned constitutions, but also with respect to the rest, goes through “digitalization and the crisis of democracy, a process that is usually described as “infocracy” (For him, Korean philosopher and theologian Byung-Chul Han “Today, digitalization affects the political sphere and causes serious disruptions in the democratic process. Electoral campaigns are information wars that are fought with all imaginable technical and psychological means. Conspiracy theories and propaganda dominate the political debate. .

Going to the preamble of this essay, the imagery leads us to think that “the constitutional journey” is being carried out by “the duo of an optimist and a pessimist” and that from Russia they move to the People's Republic of China, confirming that Mao's heirs write: “This Constitution affirms the achievements of the struggles of the Chinese people of all nationalities and defines the basic system and tasks of the State in legal form. It is the fundamental law and has supreme legal authority. The people of all nationalities, all State bodies, the armed forces, political parties and public organizations and companies of the country must consider the Constitution as a basic standard of conduct, and observe the duty to defend the dignity of the Magna Carta. , guaranteeing its application.” But, the Text continues: 1. “The Republic is a socialist State under “the popular democratic dictatorship” led by the working class and based on the alliance of workers and peasants, 2. The socialist is the basic system of the Republic, 3 . The leadership of the Communist Party is the defining characteristic of socialism “with Chinese characteristics”, 4. Sabotage of the socialist system by any organization or individual is prohibited, 5. All power in the Republic belongs to the people and is exercised by Congress. National and local congresses at different levels, 6. The people administer the affairs of the State and manage the economic, cultural and social affairs through numerous channels and in various ways in accordance with the law. The optimist looks at the pessimist and the latter at the first, but no words are spoken.

The constitutional texts of the aforementioned countries evidence the premise of this essay, concerning that humanity since its creation has attempted “the materialization of political, economic and social equality.” Will he have achieved it? The reader must have the answer. Our suggestion is not to ask the pessimist or the optimist. The last one is because he is a South American who does business with Chinese companies and the first one is because, as is commonly expressed, “He hasn't hit a single one.”

Let's move, please, to France, the country of the revolution, for some glorious, but, according to others, quite the opposite. Turning to the “preface” or “exordium”, that is, as it is read, to “that which is said before what one wants to narrate”, those governed by François Mitterrand, Jacques Chirac, Valery Giscard d Estaing and whose emperor was Napoleon Bonaparte, killed in the Waterloo War by the British Army at the age of 52, wrote his first Constitution in 1791, establishing a constitutional monarchy (For the DRAE "in which the king symbolizes the unity and permanence of the State, as head of a moderating power of the functioning of democratic institutions"). The French solemnly proclaim their commitment to Human Rights and the principles of national sovereignty defined in the Declaration of 1789, confirmed and completed by the preamble of the Constitution of 1946. France is an indivisible, secular, democratic and social republic. It guarantees equality before the law of all citizens without distinction of origin, race or religion. She respects all beliefs. Its organization is decentralized. The law promotes equal access for women and men to electoral mandates and elective functions, as well as to professional and social responsibilities. The motto of the Republic is "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity." Its principle is: government of the people, by the people and for the people. National sovereignty belongs to those who exercise it through their representatives and through referendum. Suffrage can be direct or indirect under the conditions provided by the Constitution. The electors, under the conditions determined by law, are all the main French citizens of both sexes, who enjoy their civil and political rights. The parties contribute to the expression of the vote. They train and carry out their activity freely. They must respect the principles of national sovereignty and democracy. The law guarantees pluralistic expressions of opinion and the equitable participation of political parties and groups in the democratic life of the nation. The President of the Republic ensures respect for the Constitution. He ensures, through his arbitration, the regular functioning of the authorities, as well as the continuity of the State. He is the guarantor of national independence, territorial integrity and respect for treaties. The pessimist reads the optimist that "President Macron, in a press conference to present the course of the new Government at the Elysee Palace in Paris on January 16, 2024, recognized the complex social, political and economic moment that his nation is going through, for which justified his decision to reorganize the government cabinet by ensuring that France is experiencing a situation in which “audacity, action and effectiveness” are needed to ensure the future of the next generations.”“Social welfare is expensive amico” the optimist limits himself to saying. And also, that “governing is a serious thing (As Marco Tulio Brunicelli wrote in Venezuela during the five-year term of President Luis Herrera Campins).

It is the optimist who asks: What other nations do we have left? Those of South America, the pessimist answers ironically, reading that The media shows “the level of poverty in Latin America”: Uruguay 10.6%, Chile 10.8%, Panama 14.5%, Dominican Republic 21.0%, Costa Rica 23.0%, Paraguay 23.5 %, Brazil 23.7%. Peru: 25.9%, Ecuador, 32.2%, Bolivia 35.5%, Argentina 39.2%, Colombia 42.5%, Mexico 43.9%, Nicaragua 46.8%, Guatemala 59.3%, Honduras 59.3% and finally Venezuela 76.6%. The highest of all, which should worry you, since you are from Caracas. It is, as you will accept, the measurement of “social well-being”, yes, what all constitutions, democratic and not, preach as a goal. Finally, they are considering traveling to Mexico, attracted by the recent election as President of Claudia Sheinbaum, candidate of the outgoing Prime Minister Manuel López Obrador. The enthusiast gives up, because he has read on the website of the Interamerican Institute for Democracy that during the elections 37 candidates were murdered, 200 political crimes and 4,200 attacks occurred between militants from various groups. 30% of the country is controlled by drug trafficking cartels, due to the illegal passage to the USA in 2023, 2 million 400 thousand people entered, with the Argentine president, Javier Milei, the ties are damaged, as with

Ecuador and Peru. Mrs. Sheinbaum must solve the problems by demonstrating independence and good judgment so as not to be trapped in the web woven by her political boss (Article “Mexico in its labyrinth”, by Luis Gonzales Posada).

The end of the trip ends in Caracas in a comfortable restaurant and with common Scots. The optimist, after the first drink, expresses, “We can complain because the rose bushes have thorns or rejoice because the thorn bushes have roses.” It is from Abraham Lincoln, the pessimist correctly says, who replies “Life is an opaque longing and a torment.”

“Optimism is nothing more than the unjustified self-praise of the true creator of the world, that is, of the will to live, which looks pleased with its own work: hence it is not only a false doctrine, but even a pernicious one.” From Arthur Schopenhauer, answers the optimist.

Six drinks each have been counted. When saying goodbye, the optimist says I will vote in July, the pessimist shakes his head and says:

I won't do it!

Let's talk, they express themselves in unison.

Comments welcome.


«The opinions published herein are the sole responsibility of its author».