A poor defense of democracy

Arms and flowers [Flores]

The reification of publicity

The pre-electoral panorama in Guatemala

News Briefs

A POOR DEFENSE OF DEMOCRACY

Some days ago, Walter Araujo, the head of the ARENA party faction in the Legislative Assembly, defended the laws of democracy. The occasion for this was the commentary made by political analyst Alberto Arene about the need for a greater presidential protagonism on the question of the election of the new president of the Comptroller’s Office. Araujo protests vehemently against what he considered a call for interference by one state entity in the functions of another because this would constitute an attack on the separation of powers and would, as a consequence be, an attack on democracy. Arene had already revealed the weakness in Araujo’s posture when he declared that, contrary to what the ARENA deputy thinks, to propose that the executive branch ought to assume a greater protagonism in affairs of national interest —especially when those affairs are clumsily handled by the Legislative Assembly— does not constitute an attack on democracy because democracy demands of state entities a permanent vigilance and reciprocal control.

In the case of El Salvador —where the weakness of the institutional framework is extreme— to leave transcendental decisions crucial for the progress of the country —be they legislative, executive or judicial— exclusively in the hands of a state entity could bring on disastrous consequences, being, as they are, not open to discussion precisely because of the fragile nature of the institutional framework, the exercise of discretion, incompetence and mediocrity of the political functionaries could mark (and, in effect, have marked) these entities which exercise power with a dynamic contrary to the interests of the majority of Salvadoran people.

On the other hand, in countries with a strong presidential political tradition —among which El Salvador is to be found— what is being dealt with here is to make of the executive branch (with all of the institutional and symbolic force concentrated there) a fundamental support for democracy. For at least one tendency in social sciences, a strong executive office has been decisive for advancing in the processes of democratization in the context of which a strong executive branch has shown signs of an enormous capacity for flexibility and adaptation. A strong and vigilant presidency, then, does not necessarily mean a weakening of democracy if the constitution is not violated. From this, one can surmise that Walter Araujo’s defense of democracy on the specific point which we have indicated here may not be such, but rather a defense of the political rules of the game which, in addition to facilitating the subjective exercise of discretion, blackmail, pork-barrel politics and the lack of responsibility, obstruct the advance of democracy and the possibility for increasing and deepening the exercise of democracy.

Of course, the separation and independence of the powers of the state is something which must be defended in the name of democracy. But what must be defended with the same stamina, and also in the name of democracy, is the need for checks and balances on the relations of control to be established in such a way that none of them can enforce autonomy beyond what is required by the very democratic order. In both cases, it is a question of, far from being mutually exclusive, actually being complementary. To pretend to allow anti-democratic autonomy of one of the state powers —for example, the Legislative Assembly— to pass for the defense of the separation of powers —and, as a consequence, as a defense of democracy— is an underhanded maneuver resulting from bad faith or the most astounding ignorance. This, neither more nor less, is what Walter Araujo has attempted to do, perhaps without being fully aware of the serious implications for the country of the absence of checks, controls and balances in an entity such as the Legislative Assembly, an entity plagued by politicians who are, in their majority, incompetent, corrupt and irresponsible.

The incipient Salvadoran democracy must be defended from real threats, to which it might behoove Araujo to pay attention, above all and before all else, from the rapacity of our political class whose most ambitious members have made of the corridors of power such as the Legislative Assembly, a space in which to seek benefits for themselves and their followers without concerning themselves seriously about the problems of the country. The day in which the national political class is made up —at least the majority of it— of competent, honest and responsible persons with a calling to serve, that day Salvadoran democracy will have made a step forward in the deepening of the democratic process.

In second place, one of the weaknesses of Salvadoran democracy has to do with the unrestricted submission of party members to the dictates of the party leadership bodies. As concerned as Araujo is with the independence of the Legislative Assembly, he does not seem to notice that the submission of the deputies to the dictates of their party seriously undermines the function of representing citizen interests which, in a democratic regime, corresponds to parliament. There is nothing more contrary to democracy than the position assumed by the Minister of the Interior, Mario Acosta Oertel, who, given the resistance of various ARENA deputies in refusing to support the ratification of Francisco Merino as President of the comptroller’s Office, raised a hue and cry because the party sanctioned them for not having followed the dictates of the ARENA leadership. For Acosta Oertel, those deputies broke with "the internal party discipline", for which, in their way of seeing things, ought to be sanctioned by COENA. This is to say, the ARENA deputies cannot even dream of responding to popular interests —under pain of being sanctioned— because they are bound by the dictates of their party.

Nascent democracy in El Salvador must be defended, but this must be done with skill and without skipping steps. To lose sight of the fact that many of the enemies of our democracy are to be found in the very power structures of the state, the defense of democracy —when it comes from someone who moves within these power structures and knows them— is nothing more than a cheap rhetorical exercise. Salvadoran politicians cannot seriously defend democracy if they do not do so with honesty and courage —honesty to recognize their own vices and courage to confront the vices of others who— (as in the case of the Minister of the Interior) do not hide their authoritarian calling.

ARMS AND FLOWERS [FLORES]

Once the electoral campaign was over, it became evident that Francisco Flores was not the leader of renovation which he wished to appear (see Proceso, 857). Many continue giving the benefit of the doubt to "Paquito", supported, perhaps by the short time he has had in office, by his youth, his intellectual capacity and his supposed good intentions. But his support of the Arms Law is certainly one more indication of the crass contradiction between the image the new president has fabricated for himself and the reality of his political merits —with all of the limitations this implies. The fact that Flores has studied sociology and philosophy gave hope to the idea that his manifest respect for democracy and his declared intention to seek democratic solutions to the problems of the country were based on humanistic principles, historically related to the defense of life, dignity and the humanization of people.

Parting from this premise, then, it was surprising that "Paco" could have risen through the ranks of his party, the most outstanding characteristics of which have been intolerance, belligerence and authoritarianism. So then, although it may be too early to judge, what is certain is that Flores has continued showing signs of not being concerned about the expectations which arose surrounding his election. The easy approval that he gave to the arming of the society and the declarations he made concerning it would serve to give the lie to the humanistic ideals which have been attributed to him. It is surely obvious that arms are the friends of death and not defenders of life and, far from dignifying, they contribute to the deterioration of the quality of life of individuals by making violent practices possible. Far from contributing to humanization, arms keep societies in the perennial vicious circle of the violent resolution of conflicts.

"Perfection is the enemy of goodness", runs the phrase with which Flores tried to justify his support for the law. This is rhetoric of the same kind that "we must give equality an opportunity", a phrase from his presidential discourse. These are the most notable of Flores’ comments, with which he has been able to make those who are not cautious believe that his presidency would be of a higher intellectual level than those of former administrations. However, this is only a facade for a kind of pseudo-philosophy, a confection of ideas which helps "Paquito" appear to be consequent with his political commitments.

One must ask, however, what exactly does it mean to say "give equality an opportunity"? That Flores believes in an egalitarian society? If this were the case, what is it that he understands by the term "social equality"? Perhaps it is, in his terms, charging the Value Added Tax to the basic food basket and medicines that will open up opportunities for someone? By the same token, what does Flores mean when he declares that "perfection is the enemy of goodness"? Could it be that he means to say that arming society is good but not perfect? Or could it mean that this is what happens with the law? Or is it that what he wishes to say is that society is never perfect but that this law could make it good? None of this is particularly clear.

Another of the president’s brilliant visions was to say that, at this point in time, it was necessary to approve the law and that it would not be until it was implemented that one might be able to see with clarity the corrections which it would be necessary to make. This is a typical example of the way our politicians reason: decisions must be made in any way whatsoever, even with the knowledge that certain errors are irreversible and, afterwards, the disasters created thereby can be corrected.

The election of Peñate Polanco as Ombudsman for Human Rights is the most shining example of this line of thought. But, fortunately, this case can be corrected. The tragedies which customarily result from the carrying of arms, on the other hand, cannot be reversed. The panorama in which Flores will have to modify the law which he now supports unconditionally, cannot be darker —if it is the case that more darkness is possible in a country where it is considered "normal" to lose such an enormous number of lives and mutilate forever through accidents or ricocheting bullets or meaningless quarrels which become serious because someone decided to use his or her gun.

Beyond what is under discussion here, the president has said nothing more about the legalization of the use of arms by the civilian population. We can only suppose that this lack of argument means that Flores has embraced the idea that what "honest" citizens need to defend themselves against crime is more arms. It is what the deputies of the Legislative Assembly said when they approved the law and social entities such as the Patriotic Movement Against Crime (MPCD) said so as well. This last entity merits an additional comment because it is nothing more than the entity which, with such success, has encouraged a campaign so that people could exchange their arms for goods.

If we are not mistaken, the initial idea was to take arms out of the hands of civilians. The project culminated in the creation of a peace monument made from the metal of the guns collected after the signing of the peace accords. But it turns out now that David Gutierrez, director of the movement, asked Flores not to veto the law. This is an inconceivable paradox. Perhaps what his organization wishes is that this campaign be perpetuated until the end of time.

Gutierrez’ justification for his position is that it is false to believe that society is armed as a result of the law because "society is already armed". This argument could lead us to the absurdity that, if what we are dealing with is the legitimation of everything that the society already does, then we should legalize corruption, the trafficking in and consumption of drugs, the disrespect for traffic laws, child prostitution... If the prerequisite for something being legal is not a serious and profound discussion about what is best for society, but simply that this "something" should occur in practice, then there would not be a need even for laws because everything that takes place would be permitted.

That Flores, given the intellectual breezes and the reputation for being a friend for democracy which float about him, has not given even a minimal explanation of why he thought it should be permitted that people be armed to the teeth must give us the opportunity to think that he is in agreement with these lines of reasoning, the which would make him a very irresponsible person. First of all because the legalization of the bearing of arms is equivalent to the legalization of citizens taking justice into their own hands. From now on, it will not only be the judges but also community members who have the authority to decide the fate of criminals. And, although the death penalty has not become law, the Arms Law advocates for its becoming law in an indirect way, with the serious risk of making of an armed, angry, frightened or drunk person into a court of law.

Secondly because —again— it is contradictory for Flores to aim to encourage a security plan and, at the same time, support a law aimed at personal defense against crime. Flores’ task is to make it possible for the state to defend the population from the crime wave, not to procure the arming of the population. Thirdly, because in the most violent country in Latin America, where those who drive vehicles kill each other because of simple quarrels over cars, where it is difficult to draw the line between "honest" citizens and "dishonest" ones and where it continues to be extremely easy to falsify documents and violate the law, it is a shot in the dark to be in favor of any person whatever being allowed to carry a gun.

In conclusion, it seems as if, at the moment when one examines the deeds and practice of the Flores Administration, nothing new is to be found. That he has stopped engaging in permanent confrontation with the FMLN and that the president decorates the podium where he delivers his speeches with sacks are not the only changes hoped for. Certain administrative readjustments can only be evaluated with the passing of time. What is disheartening is that, at the present time, the foundations are being laid for a poorer and more violent five-year period.

THE REIFICATION OF PUBLICITY

Some years have passed since publicity left off being a simple complementary instrument in the communications media. Currently, it has a life of its own and has certain specific qualities. Its function in society goes beyond persuading consumers to buy products or services, even when this is its basic raison d’etre. Publicity has become the object of recognition, to the point that those publicity products considered to be "the best" are given prizes by academies and critics. In other words, publicity, whatever its nature, has created its own world.

To this, other qualities are attributed, apart from its mere utilitarian character: it is capable of entertaining, creating, reinforcing stereotypes, prejudices, specific forms of behavior, and, above all, it provides guidelines to the individual concerning "the idea that he or she should have of himself". This is owing to the fact that publicity is, doubtless, an "ideological tool", the global situation of which permits it to move agents in the society at its whim and convenience. "Publicity has the imperative of the massive and permanent creation of consumers and, in the last analysis, of a culture centered on consumption".

What publicity generates is, then, a whole social and cultural manipulation which, far from being innocent, employs a series of deliberately designed stratagems in order to comply with its objective. The constant aim of creating consumers gives rise, at the same time, to the rest of the ideological characteristics of publicity. This is translated into a latent attempt against health, the respect for other human beings, and especial against the female sex. Publicity becomes dangerous in the measure in which it plays with and manipulates human beings and their social roles in order to succeed at its aims. The most outrageous examples of this are sexist ads.

Although some businesses have opted for another kind of messages and still others have modified them in form and content, the use of sexist publicity around the world takes on huge proportions and El Salvador is no exception. Women are the central point of sexist publicity. In a subtle, subliminal and even agreeable way on some occasions, women are induced to play a special social and family role, to adopt a specific image and relate in a precise manner to people around her. This is, of course, accompanied by buying a product or service, linked, in one way or another, to that social label of what a women "ought" to comply with.

This kind of publicity is more complex than it appears to be. In the first place, sexism can be hidden and discovered in language, in images and in the use of texts, etc. In second place, it has been designed in such a way that it is shared by men as well as women of all ages, but each one interprets it in a special way. This is to say, sexist publicity, when it is directed to men, presents women, basically, as an object of conquest and as a masculine belonging. The image of women is used, even in degrading ways, to promote products which have little to do with the most human dimensions of a woman.

On the other hand, when sexist publicity is directed at women, it is done on the basis of classification. In this way publicity can distinguish publicity for housewives, for fat women or those who wish to "maintain their figure"; for the professional woman; for the wife, the mother of the family and for adolescents. But all ads, without exception, as much those which are aimed at men as those destined to reinforce or allude to a role and a gender stereotype. Publicity provides a determinate "value" for women which corresponds to compliance with imposed laws: of beauty, of youth, of maternity, of love, of the wife, of dedication to the family. Models of admiration, of being economically responsible for the home, of being an intellectual, an adventurer, of being strong and sure of himself are imposed on the man.

This means that what is being sold is more than a product: values are being promoted. When one buys an article, a concept is being bought, elaborated by publicity, of which women and men "ought to be a part". It is possible to think that the risk of sexist publicity is rooted in what is present in the female sex as an object, but the reality is, evidently, much more complex. The products presented appeal to different human instincts, for which reason the response of the consumers is, practically, predictable. It is in this sense that socio-cultural manipulation takes place. Publicity attracts the spectator appealing to sentiments, values, beliefs, canons and criteria which, apparently are adopted or complied with when specific merchandise is paid for.

For example, in recent years, sexist publicity has included in some messages references to "women’s liberation", which consumers can obtain by buying certain items. These make promises to women, making them independent and free to buy products such as domestic appliances, cosmetics, kitchen utensils, exercise machines, etc. Nevertheless, at bottom, this publicity continues accentuating traditional feminine roles thereby assuring the permanent existence of the community buying the item.

For these and other reasons, in many countries, including El Salvador, sexist publicity is considered to be a serious gender problem of which women are the principal target. Nevertheless, the masculine body is used to eroticize certain kinds of commercial article, although in lesser measure than that of the woman’s body. Men are also the object of publicity manipulation and begin to see themselves as stereotyped and classified. The masculine sex, then, is also a victim of reification by publicity. Reification is what publicity aims to do with people —it spreads throughout society a consciousness of human beings as things.

Internationally speaking, sexist publicity is considered to constitute a lack of respect and a violation of human dignity and rights, although it is not classified legally as a crime. It should be remembered that publicity is supported by the right to freedom of expression. In countries such as Spain, specific programs exist to denounce this kind of publicity. The mechanism is that anyone can appeal for censuring or modifying of ads considered to be sexist. This is done on an anonymous form and, generally, businesses have had to change or withdraw publicity which is denounced because it is an implied violation against human rights.

In El Salvador, this problem has already been detected. A document with the title National Policy of Women, published in 1997 by the administration of ex president Calderón Sol, establishes the fact that one of the bases for action is aimed at formulating a change in the image that communications media present of women. Given that publicity is a fundamental part of the communications media, it is necessary that this section of the governmental document be taken up and put into practice so that the continuous exploitation of the unequivocal cultural patterns about women, might be mitigated in the realm of publicity.

THE PRE-ELECTORAL PANORAMA IN GUATEMALA

A new electoral scene is opening up in Guatemala. This time, everything appears to indicate that the upcoming November 7 elections will offer to the citizens of this country an opportunity without precedent: that of moving forward into the new century with a renewed system of political representation and give it a new opportunity for democratization. For those who view the Guatemalan pacification process with optimism, the most propitious conditions for the exercise of the sovereign will of the people are a given. Two important historical steps have been taken, at least at a formal level: on the one hand, the beginning of the process of demilitarization of political power, begun in 1985 by the governing military regime since 1970; and, on the other, the end of the thirty-year armed conflict and the consequent implementation of the peace accords.

But the reality of Guatemala is far from inspiring that confidence among the population. During these 15 years, demilitarization has not been a synonym for democratization, nor have the peace accords succeeded in giving strength to the process. In that sense, although the November elections have historic importance which is impossible to ignore in immediate terms, that importance is reduced to two aspects which, by themselves, do not represent factors for change in Guatemalan society: (a) for the first time, government programs of the parties which will participate in the elections have a written guide —the peace accords— which could well guarantee their commitment to the changes demanded after the end of the war; and (b) for the first time, the social and political participation of the diverse sectors are basically assured, given that the political spectrum of the left has grown —and with it the incorporation of the erstwhile clandestine URNG— and civil society now enjoys certain arenas for political participation.

Nevertheless, four months before the elections are to be held, of the dozen or so political parties formally registered, only some few appear to be prepared for the race. Therefore, the need to strike a balance among the political forces which have succeeded in locating the vanguard of the electoral race —principally because of the concern shown for defining their political cadres at an early stage, in carrying out an organizational definition of their governmental proposals and in publishing their institutional image— provide important elements for making conjectures about the impact which the results of these elections will have on the peace process and the process of democratization in Guatemala.

At the outset, perspectives are somber for the emerging political left. In spite of the relative success of the New Guatemalan Democratic Front (FDNG) in the elections of 1995, internal conflicts which the party has undergone during the last four years and the obscure leadership of its general secretary, Rafael Arriaga, made of this first left political project a whirlpool of fingerpointing and intrigues. In this way, the New Nation Alliance (ANN), the principal success of the unarmed URNG which reunited to the FDNG and another two self-named center left parties, did not succeed in laying the foundations for the most dynamic incorporation of the left in the political spectrum. Now the Frente has been expelled from the coalition and, with this, the possibility that the political offering of the opposition might be strengthened has been made yet more distant.

The Guatemalan NGOs, which, at one moment came to the point of considering themselves the conciliating bridge between the political class and the civilian population, have not succeeded in occupying their space within the election process. Those which at one time presented themselves as the center of attention of the international community and of the population itself, have not done anything more than demonstrate their lack of capacity for giving a response to the ups and downs in the compliance with the peace accords. The organizations which found a place within the entities verifying the peace, succeeded, thanks to their complicity with certain political power groups. Electoral reforms aborted in the congress, growing apathy among the indigenous ethnic organizations dealing with political offers, a process of pacification left in the hands of PAN... This harvest, inherited from the entities comprising civil society, almost directly benefited the parties with a long past in the recent political life of Guatemala.

The Guatemalan Christian Democracy (DCG) is perhaps witnessing the beginning of its disappearance. After various businessmen and well-known professionals closed the doors to a possible presidential candidate, the party had to face reality —it did not have the capacity to present a presidential formula. With only 4 seats in congress (won in 1995) and suffering constant internal struggles, the DSG did not expect to mobilize many voters in November. Its leadership also declared itself against establishing alliances with other parties, in an attempt to preserve an identity which is less and less attractive to the electorate.

As a result, the most promising panorama in terms of electoral possibilities is enjoyed by the right. Certain analysts declared some years ago that "the extremes" found themselves —for the benefit of the country— on the road to extinction. This appreciation was fed by the idea that PAN constituted an example of "the new Central American right" with ideas for renewal and with a broad commitment with egalitarian and self-sustaining development. The counterpart of PAN, the Guatemalan Republican Front (FRG), seems to tend toward a beneficial modernization of its cadre and its principles. There is nothing farther from the truth. It was more likely to expect that in these elections the FRG would displace the old representatives of the extreme right —the MLN and the disappeared PR— and that PAN would win more and more terrain from the conservative tendency, apparently under the banner held high by President Arzú, would succeed in placing the mayor of Guatemala, Oscar Berger as a presidential candidate.

Now, it appears that the majority of voters will opt to choose between PAN and FRG, in the electoral race for the next president as well as the composition of the forces to make up the legislature. In fact, an opinion poll carried out at the end of March revealed that these two parties would capture almost 49% of the votes in the elections. According to the poll, their candidates would enjoy the support of a little more than 55% of the voters. The URNG and the FDNG hardly won 7.1% of their preferences. Given this horizon, what would be the real offering resulting from these elections to the process of democratization and political participation in Guatemala? It would not be out of line to think that none of these processes would be achieve favorable results.

If the right comes to enjoy a comfortable majority in the congress, the peace accords will only with difficulty provide the basis for definitive changes in Guatemalan society, because PAN has only used them to maintain certain sources of international financing; financing that has been invested almost in its totality in public structures —its best card for the November elections. The FRG, for its part, has not altogether abandoned the whole idea that the peace accords are an attack against the stability of the country, above all because of its marriage to the old military caste. Even more serious is the participation and political opening assured by the end of the war has not stimulated to population to opt for distinct projects for the right, much less has it provided incentive for the exercise of the vote which would overcome the high indices of abstentionism which have been documented during the last five years. As things go, the pre-electoral panorama poses more doubts than certainties for Guatemalan democracy.

STRIKE ANNOUNCEMENTS. Trade unions and workers’ organizations of the different state institutions have decided that by the carrying out of work stoppages, they can pressure the government. The trade unionists of the Social Security Institute (ISSS) will begin the first of three stoppages in the same number of governmental institutions. On July 20, a stoppage was also called by the trade unionists of the Ministry of the Treasury, in which they declare that they will paralyze all of the customs and cashiers of the country. The third stoppage will be carried out on July 20 and July 21 by the National Association of Salvadoran Educators (ANDES 21 de Junio), which last week carried out a work stoppage. The ISSS work stoppages will affect regular service to patients, except for emergencies and programmed surgeries. Outpatient services and administrative activities will be the services principally to be suspended. The ANDES work stoppage will paralyze classes in the public schools. The three union actions aim, fundamentally, at winning a review of salaries. The Director of the PNC, Mauricio Sandoval, in response to the union declarations, declared that the institution which he heads will intervene if the judges rule the labor stoppages to be illegal. For the moment, it is not impossible that other organizations will join in the wave of work stoppages (La Prensa Gráfica, July 19, p.4).

REACTIONS. For ARENA deputy Julio Gamero, the work stoppages carried out by the teachers in ANDES and the trade unionists of the ISSS and the Ministry of the Treasury are being stimulated by the FMLN to promote destabilization. The deputy based his accusation on a document which was made public in one of the left party conventions, the convention in which the FMLN members announced a hardline opposition by the new government to the neoliberal project encouraged by ARENA for more than ten years. Gamero does not discount the possibility that work stoppages may be part of the FMLN strategy to measure their strength against the presidency. In response, Salvador Sanchez Cerén, of the FMLN, declared that this kind of statement by the government was part of a policy aimed at delegitimizing the image of his party. "To insist that the FMLN helps trade union organisms...is part of its near-sightedness about the reality of the country which does not permit them to see beyond their own ideological reality", stated Sanchez Cerén. For his part, political analyst David Escobar Galindo, considered that in the strikes, the economic motive weighed more than political motives. In his judgment, the strikes are actions to which attention should be paid and considers that the difficult economic situation is the motive for demanding salary increases (La Prensa Gráfica, July 19, p. 5).

PRE-CANDIDATES. Two months now before its regular assembly, ARENA is still holding talks with potential candidates for the Mayor’s Office of San Salvador. According to the ARENA leader who prefers to remain anonymous, the party is seeking an additional pre-candidate for the four which are already sure candidates: Elizabeth de Calderón Sol, the ex-First Lady of the Republic; Antonio Saca, president of ASDER; Rodrigo Samayoa, departmental director of ARENA and Rodrigo Avila, ex-director of the PNC. Avila confirmed, on July 21, that he was holding "unofficial talks" with the leaders of the party. "What is going on are "unofficial talks" with some members of the [ARENA] party; there is no position or official offering", declared Avila. In spite of this, the ex-director of the PNC would not be willing to reject opportunities. "Of course, if, at some point in time there is an official offering, naturally we are going to consider it", stated Avila. Concerning Hector Silva’s lobbying to obtain support for his re-election, which it appears will depend upon his being able to turn "a broad coalition of parties" around so that it will favor his re-election, the ARENA head of faction, Walter Araujo stated that Silva has not been a good mayor and that in his party there are better professional people. According to Araujo, ARENA would be seeking a candidate "who will be a winner at the simple mention of his name" (La Prensa Gráfica, July 22, p. 6).