In Russia, the total one-man government of Vladimir Putin becomes perpetual.
Gustavo Luis Carrera
The emergence of the republic and the democratic ideal points out as one of its fundamental supports the principle of alternation in political power. The obvious purpose was to end forever the eternal, lifelong rule of kings and emperors. It was thought, then, that the presidents -republican figures- would complete their constitutional term, giving place to the newly elected president for the following term.
But, in reality, this principle has been betrayed, grossly violated, by heads of state seeking legal resources or the use of force to continue ad eternum in command of the poor country where, unfortunately, they exercise their dominance.
THE LEGAL AND LOGICAL TIME. The constitution of each country establishes the duration of the presidential term. The basic criterion is to establish a mechanism that ensures alternability; fundamental principle in a true democracy. Since its inception, the republican system raised as an emblem of political health its conception of an effective and rigorous succession of opportunities in the exercise of public power. It has been a primary symbol of democracy. And it is that, apart from constitutional regulations, beyond legality, the limited duration of a government is a matter that is governed by logic: if the original purpose was to eliminate the absolute power that sovereigns exercised for life monarchists, it was necessary to put a limit to those who were elected. It is natural, as well as being legal. (I remember that in my years at the UCV the order was as follows: the President of the Republic lasted five years in office; the Rector of the University, four; the Deans of each Faculty, three; and the Directors of Schools or Institutes, two. And these periods seemed reasonable to all of us, and we abided by them, based on the Law on Universities and rational logic). It is evident that in this case the legal and the logical go hand in hand.
THE PERVERSE TEMPTATION. It happens with astonishing frequency that the leaders (bossies) succumb to the temptation of continuing for as long as possible, or their entire lives, in the absolute exercise of power. Some manage to modify the Constitution, establishing the possibility of re-election (as in the United States); what is already the alteration of the healthy principle of strict alternability. (In this regard, the economic, strategic and functional advantages that a president has in an election should not be forgotten). But, the majority (as it happens in this attacked and humiliated Latin America) is inspired by the ignominious figure of kings and emperors, and they decide to impose, by any means, their ad infinitum permanence in power. They declare themselves “saviors of the homeland”, or “promoters of a great country”, or “enemies of imperialism”, and even “defenders of democracy”, and with the necessary allies (military, politicians, businessmen), they arrogate the condition of owners of a country, which they feel is their private property. The obsession with command and economic benefits of the despot on duty and his accomplices reaches that extreme. They do not mind embodying the denial of the democratic principles that they claim to respect, trusting in the real power of demagogy and how easy it is to manipulate a community harassed by hunger and the need to concentrate on finding the means to survive and not starve to death It is, in short, as we say, to become monarchs for life.
DISASTROUS RESULT OF PERPETUATION. The panorama that the bosses who perpetuate themselves in power show before world opinion is unfortunate and above all reprehensible. Let’s see a little: in North Korea there is a lifetime sovereign, who also represents a hereditary monarchy: the current dictator is already from the third generation of an absolutist family; in Iran the theocratic rule of the ayatollah is eternalized; in Russia Putin’s total one-man government becomes perpetual; In countries like China, Cuba, Vietnam, for much more than half a century the Communist Party has been the full and despotic owner of power. And the list could go on. But, let’s go to our Latin American panorama. Here the painting hurts us in our own flesh. This is not the case of dictators, at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th, who seized power and exercised it despotically, like Porfirio Díaz, in Mexico, for twenty years; or Juan Vicente Gómez, in Venezuela, for twenty-seven years. It is the contemporary panorama of elected presidents who decide not to relinquish power, trickily getting themselves re-elected, with dreams of monarchical eternity: the Castros in Cuba, Morales in Bolivia, Chávez in Venezuela, Correa in Ecuador, Fujimori in Peru, Lula in Brazil, Ortega In Nicaragua. Some perpetuate themselves in command; others leave and return, with a clear intention to continue. And the result could not be more lamentable: countries stopped in time, societies silenced by misery or fear, economic bankruptcies, poverty as the sign of identification of entire peoples. And the most obvious: absolute absence of democratic values. In short, perpetuation in power is not only a stab in the heart of democracy, but also the continuation of despotic rule and corruption that plunders public money. Meanwhile, there is the risk of collective submission. And if we need the warning of a particularly illustrious figure, let’s go to the sentence of Simón Bolívar: “Nothing is as dangerous as letting the same citizen remain in power for a long time. The people get used to obeying him, and he to order it; and that is where usurpation and tyranny originate”.
VALVE: “The legal and logical time of a presidential term, which establishes a normal alternation, is the foundation of democracy. In a perverse way, many rulers give in to the temptation of wanting to perpetuate themselves in command, changing the constitutional period to impose their presence for life. Basically it is a monarchical aspiration, like that of kings, that the Republic set out to eradicate. These new “sovereigns”, in addition to making their countries go back to a past that seemed closed, base their dominance on the use of weapons by powerful allies, as well as vile demagogy. Not only do they take the community back to a time that seemed to have been overcome, but they also plunge it, through personalism and corruption, into the most reprehensible backwardness”. [email protected]
https://www.larazon.net/category/carrera/