The word honesty

Honesty is already central in Spanish politics: now, here, we have spent weeks and weeks in which not projects or programs are being discussed but degrees of corruption: you a lot, and you more, and you more more, and your boyfriend a lot.

It is pure honesty, but the word honesty has a problem: many have never heard it. Honesty is one of those very present concepts that did not have a word to represent them: the idea that the main cause of the ills of our societies is the corruption of their politicians — and that honesty, therefore, would be their solution. . It is, like so many, a self-serving fallacy.

In recent decades, corruption has become one of the main issues in politics and, above all, in the relationship of many citizens with it. Corruption is an abuse of trust, fraud in its strictest sense: officials and businessmen who have promised to comply with the laws take advantage of their powers—political, economic—to not comply with them and profit. Gentlemen and ladies defraud those who believed and elected them—and that causes a lot of, righteous, anger. Corruption is established on an unbearable principle: lies. Corruption is a lie in action, someone who secretly does the opposite of what he says and shows—and denies it by lying, fatally lying.

It is easy, from there, to reach the usual conclusion: of course, we are where we are because these corrupt people are stealing everything. But, although the operation is obscene, little would change if the money they stole were used for their legitimate purposes. What they do, yes, is show the character of each one, their principles, their goals. But the honestist reaction replaces the political debate with a police process. Where everything is nuances, opinions – I prefer this thing, you that other -, an indisputable element appears: he pocketed such money, paid such money, it is a crime and there is nothing more to talk about.

Thus, corruption has become something very useful: the substitute for any debate. What defines, let's say, the deterioration of healthcare in Madrid is not that a few relatives and insiders insist on taking a few million but that its government maintains, with all respect for the laws, a policy of reducing public care and promoting of the private. Since we cannot politically limit these decisions, we hope that corruption will come and save us: ah, they are thieves, we will be able to stop them. In reality, they are above all right-wing politicians who want to do what right-wing politicians do: promote the profit of a few, hand over the fate of the many to the market. But it is easier to talk about crimes than policies. In times when we don't fully know what we want, that simplicity is appreciated.

Honesty, of course, is indispensable: the zero degree of any action, public or private—and we should take it as such. Its control should be left in the hands of credible police and justice. And politics should focus on who proposes what, who loses, who benefits. They always say that corruption is neither left nor right, that it is beyond ideologies. It is another fallacy of honesty: corruption is, precisely, the triumph of an ideology, which makes them desire money, luxuries and advantages. (And how boring that all the corrupt people want money to buy big cars, big houses, trips, silicones, designer dresses, jewelry, surgeries. Sometimes it seems that the worst thing about this race is its lack of imagination, its very little ambition. Other times , which is something else).

That is why corruption is essentially right-wing but the corrupt and the honest can nest on any side. You can be very honestly on the left and very honestly on the right, and there will be the difference. Whoever administers very honestly in favor of those who have less—honestly dedicating public money to improving schools and hospitals—will be more left-wing; Whoever manages very honestly in favor of those who have more—honestly dedicating public money to improving highways and operas—will be more right-wing. Whoever very honestly decides to charge more income taxes and less VAT on bread and milk will be more leftist; Whoever very honestly decides to continue exempting financial activities or accumulated wealth from taxes will be more right-wing. And their governments, as honest as each other, will be radically different. That is why it would be so much better if, instead of focusing on crimes, we left them to where they belong and could engage in the ways we want for our societies. It would be so good, I say, if we finally gave up honesty.

_