[ad_1]
I still learn from party leaders (relevant or irrelevant, it doesn’t matter), retired politicians (with CV or no biography, it doesn’t matter), commentators-everything (even if nobody knows what they think) and journalist-activists (with the moral superiority of the anointed) that the law has been engraved in stone that there are intolerable characters in the public space and, in most cases, intolerant characters in the unhealthy political space.
Woe to anyone who recognizes the qualities of Andrea Ventura or emphasizes the reasonable positions of his party. If the theme of Chega’s fetish becomes part of anyone’s debate (even if handled wisely), then even Santa Barbara will not protect us. What the Democratic Party needs is to recognize an explicit or tacit understanding of governance, parliamentary influence, or go after the father of all evils of our regime. Coincidence in public events means condoning the return of the shadow of the new state.
Even at the coffee table, a good Portuguese cannot sit with such a politician. After all, breathing the same air as Ventura means being complicit in the threat of fascism. It wasn’t so long ago. We live in the heyday of redlining, a doctrine characterized, for lack of a more precise definition, by permanent virtue signaling, preferably in chorus, seeking the applause (real or imagined) of a few spectators or Twitter followers.
In view of Louis Montenegro’s “No means No”, as a member of an ideological camp that ardently defends democracy and freedom, uncompromising respect for human rights and uncompromising preservation of institutions that ensure the supremacy of the state of rights, I sincerely thank him, the red line is preaching to the fish. And words are more empty than expressions.
Perhaps because of the sun, domestic red lines forget that red lines must apply to both hemispheres of our politics—not distinguishing whether the threat to democracy is ten years or a hundred years old, whether the passion for tyrants is a historical or Transactions Summer, and there is no relativized infringement system based on ideological alliances.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine reminds us once again – except for the red lines, of course – of the essence of the Portuguese Communist Party (PCP), which, out of hatred for the United States, the European Union and capitalism, is quicker to denounce any support for a country and a crippled people fighting for sovereignty and freedom than to aggressors.
The PCP, which is treated with the usual kindness by some media that raise their fists, and by superficial creatures who love the pages of newspapers or the low-audience programs that we all finance, from social networks and lux, has not changed and will not change. The consequences of the Venezuelan “elections” are just another reminder.
Only those with a totalitarian ideology or those who tend to accept dictatorships contrary to Ventura’s friends would believe that it is okay to side with those who threaten their own people with bloodshed if they lose an election, as Nicolás Maduro has done. Only those who do not take the rule of law seriously would admit that political leaders use the armed forces and police as shock troops and prevent some international observers from entering their territory. Only those who do not particularly like democracy would condescend to a leader who falsifies election results – if what is happening in Venezuela is worthy of the name. Only those who make peace with tyranny would take the detention of political opponents relatively (at the time I finish this article, Edmundo González and María Corina Machado, fortunately, have not yet been arrested).
You can only “surprise” the people you want. The PCP has always been in alliance with dictators, as long as those dictators are not in alliance with the United States – those who are in the clear will be reduced to “unfortunate political propaganda machines,” as Pedro Tadeu, a former newspaper president and CNN commentator, wrote. News Diarymaking the argument that Maduro is not a communist because even the Communist Party of Venezuela does not support him.
I assume that Pedro Tadeu knew the way to Soero Pereira Gomez, or he could have written “Quinta da Atalaia” on his GPS and when he got there he was communist enough to tell his comrades that he would not accept the praise of that man. A little note from the party, because after all, everything is ripe and his children They do this in Venezuela, and to its people, it’s not exactly communism.
Well, there is no benign totalitarianism in Caracas or Havana, in Managua or Tegucigalpa, in Moscow or Beijing, in Tehran, Pyongyang or Lisbon. It is impossible to be a red line on Monday, Wednesday and Friday and advocate for a left front including the PCP on Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday, because only a single-member party with its own name is free.
I also don’t understand how a person can be a red line all week and support and vote for the candidate proposed by the Communist Party of the Philippines on Presidential Sunday. In 2021, Ascenso Simões did this, claiming that João Ferreira’s vision of the role of the president is very similar to his own and Isabel Moreira, who believes that the Communist Party is the best candidate to stop populism.
Drawing red lines, besides being a question of colour, is about consistency of theory and consistency of strategy. I do not expect those who shrugged their shoulders when António Costa introduced the PCP into the governance framework to do so, but neither do I expect to pretend that I did not see what I saw. One of two things: either we are democrats, or we sleep effortlessly with non-democrats.
For some, redlineism, both on the left and the right, is a healthy ironclad belief. For others, the redline is nothing more than an empty, opportunistic concept. For a few seconds, it is enough to keep your people in power. The lines can be red, yellow, blue, green, orange, pink or any other color. It does so much for them. It does not matter to them.
Former journalist and communications expert
[ad_2]
Source link
