We have all seen ourselves at some point in our lives. life in the imperious need to distinguish the urgent of the important. In the companyin it public service or in our Personal developmentwe often confuse it. The urgent demands the need for a response. Its nature is of the order of the immediate. It important It requires focus, and therefore a greater degree of depthIt takes us back to the origin of any problem and therefore to an origin in time. The urgent is exhaustedwhile What is important is the projection of the future.
I attended two public events that immediately placed me in this subtle distinction. The first concerns the gay pride commemoration. This call in which the sexual orientation gives way to the dignity of a human being. In principle, it is celebrated by the LGBTIQ+ community (lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, intersex and queer), plus all those who believe in a society built on the basis of rights and social plurality. You only build community from difference.
The second is in response to an invitation issued by the National Civic Front (FCN). One of the organizations civil society participants during the past electoral process. An agenda for political action is being worked on. There is discussion about the feasibility of building a new political party.
While it is true that the ruling party intends to concentrate all power, the incentives for social coexistence are still unclear. Beyond political coercion, what role does the opposition see in power in the new regime?
The reform of the judiciary and the legislative overrepresentation of MORENA, lose sight of the need to build a nation together. It could be said that those who won do not need to listen to the arguments of the defeated, in case they had arguments. However, no one benefits more than the victors from the future viability of Mexico.
Today, discussions, articles and even dialogues have a “stink” of weariness. Neither of the positions, government or opposition, wants to listen to the other. It does not matter if one of the camps accuses the judges of betrayal when dispensing (in)justice, nor the denaturalization of said power when elected by popular vote. The same is true of the interpretation of the law when distributing seats, the entire spirit of the law must be subject to political will, that is what “the people” want.
In this dialogue of the deaf, “understanding” the reasons of the “other” is unnecessary. However, the underlying problem is that it brings us back to a nation with a long past, but little future. This is the challenge for the new president, Claudia Sheinbaum; her predecessor had to destroy. She had to take on what was truly important: the need for a model that lays the foundations for coexistence in the future.
We are witnessing in today’s world the repetition of a strange paradox, I remember reading Dominique de Villepin some years ago. The French-Algerian politician, diplomat and man of letters referred to a world changing at a rapid pace, in which the only certainty was uncertainty. We do not know, he said, whether our steps are multiplying on the ashes of what is gone, or the foundations of what is to come.
Thus, the end of the political regime in Mexico reached us 24 years after the beginning of the 21st century. Our confusion hindered the efforts of the alternating governments to consolidate the regime of freedoms. They raised the fight for democracy for 61 years, only to not know what to do with power. There was too much past and little future. More than power itself, what is truly important is its capacity to survive in the medium and long term. It is not by suffocating the opposition that the regime will endure. The historical experience of the PRI government is rich in experiences of this type. But that is material for another reflection.
So be it.
Juan Alfonso Mejía has a PhD in Political Science and is a social activist in favor of education.
More from the same author:
#matters
