Basic foundations for a better society

I have started a series of conversations with candidates for the elections of April 2021 in Chile (you can see it on my instagram account). The idea is to generate a space for reflection of ideas and visualization of different positions on the current country and what we want for the future, always convinced of the need to build, among all people, a society that welcomes us widely and allows us to grow as human beings.
Although I have a strong interest in politics, as an area of social life that helps us, not only to give order to the administration of power, but to use it to serve the needs and aspirations of each of us, this space is without partisan flags or the intention of convincing “voters” but to share, talk and reflect.

It is in this context, where it seems important to me to share my position on some fundamental guidelines, or as I have called this publication: basic foundations for a better society, not only to share some ideas but also as an exercise of transparency of my personal position on some of these issues, positions that by the way, are not in any case a static manifesto in time.
Truth versus popularity: In this new era where pleasing, having followers and seeking the approval of the masses seems to be more important, I believe it is essential to build a society that puts truth first, not opinion, but truth, that is, that which can be substantiated and verified. When we talk about this we can think of many people in the political class who move according to the polls; these behaviors seem reprehensible to us and we condemn them, but what about our individual behavior, we forget very easily that this common space is built among all people, so I personally believe that the future must consider this value as something central. Regardless of whether something sounds good or popular, we must review whether it is truthful as a basic element of critical thinking in a society that lays its foundations on the real.

Congruence versus moral flexibility: People change and we have the right to do so, just as everything around us changes, for without change there is no evolution or growth. However, I believe that a society that is a better home for all people must prioritize congruence as a relevant value, the personal journey, the consistency between what is said and what is done, pursuing that the life of each one of us is that which speaks louder than any speech or light flyer. Moral flexibility and extreme relativism do not help us to have solid bases for coexistence. When we consider that the faults are those of others but those committed by us are only slips, mistakes or something that can be swept under the carpet, when we play the theory of the moral tie or turn a blind eye to those who are “ours”, while we put together the crosses to put those who seem to be “others”. I go for congruence.

Respect versus tolerance: Tolerating another person is the same as denying his particularity but doing it with a better face, however, respect calls us to a validation of the other, allows us to welcome their similarities and differences, without the need to share them, but promoting the encounter of the different as a space for mutual learning, growth and transformation. How not to remember the phrase attributed to Voltaire, “I do not agree with what he says, but I would give my life for his right to say it”.

Opportunity versus prizes: A society that offers opportunities and not prizes or the palace of subsidies, is finally, in my eyes, a society that promotes the development of its citizens. The prize is discretionary, at times even whimsical, it gives rise to clientelism, populism and other “isms” equally destructive for a space where everyone has the options to build their own path, in freedom, with vocation, without the need to get right in the space where the so famous “chorreo” allows to be anointed with the “correct” slogan of the moment. Opportunities are open and even doors, without the need for “positive” discrimination or philosophical searches for “some more equal than others” in the purest Orwellian style.

Work versus assistance: The best opportunity to learn, grow and nourish oneself in life is to have a space where one can do, experiment, make mistakes and learn, and that space is not only educational institutions, but also work, with the difference that the latter also allows people to obtain the income that helps build the material wellbeing of themselves and their families. Work is fundamental for the integral development of people and should be a central focus. Today, when many seem to be really convinced that living off the work of others is a “worthy” and “fair” way to grow, I personally think that the best way is to have the spaces (and there are always some) so that we can put our talents at the service of other people and thus, also at the service of ourselves and our growth. To stop giving away fish to teach how to fish is fundamental, but it only works if we make fishing our daily work.

These elements seem to me to be a first value guide (obviously from my personal perspective and nothing more than that) to be able to guide the public and social spaces. Personally, it is not possible for me to support those who lead the way with deceitful lies and moral baseness (although many turn a blind eye because they are “their own”), nor those who call to live off the work of others, those who with euphemisms and oddities seek to explain their incongruities, not only discursive but also personal, and so on and so on.

However, we always come to a common point, none of this happens if we do not start changing and improving individually in our own lives, both public and, mainly, private. Finally, just societies are built by just people, and self-defeating societies are made by people who devour each other in pursuit of values that are as unsustainable as they are senseless.

Tags: No tags

Comments are closed.