Our relationship with Peruvian politics is based in two unbreakable pillars: a feeling of permanent dissatisfaction and a chronic state of collective resignation. Like those couples that have been living with each others during many unhappy years, but are still there, together, we are still here, condemned to bear with our reckless government. In relationships like these, a cynical and sad point, in which nothing seems able to even cause a shrug, is reached. Perhaps we are at this point. Maybe we are even a little further… who knows…?
Parliamentarians from a political group used public money to travel to a partisan event and they assume that since they returned the money, we should be all grateful and in accordance with the Ethics Committee of Congress, which said that what happen is no big deal. The solution proposed by an official representative, and the party of travelers, is to suspend the delivery of flight tickets. As if the problem was the availability of the tickets and not the selfishness of these lawmakers who only care for their personal benefits.
In our political context -in which two former presidents and candidates (Toledo and Alan) have pending criminal investigations, and the leading candidate took advantage from the dirtiest, most vile and corrupt government of Peruvian history… his fathers’- we should ask ourselves if there is still something left. Is there something that could move our resignation to weariness or our indifference to outrage? Is there something worth to keep waiting? Can we expect that a reform of electoral rules, as the elimination of preferential voting, may contribute to an effective improvement on Peru’s political activity? I think it is worth waiting. By removing the mandatory voting, Peru will, without a doubt, grow exponentially. In that way the quality of the electoral process’s participants would improve because their vote would be informed. Lets make the political parties face the challenge of moving us to vote, and lets assume, for once and for all, the cost of our inaction and the (ir)responsibility of our decisions.
Parliamentarians from a political group used public money to travel to a partisan event and they assume that since they returned the money, we should be all grateful and in accordance with the Ethics Committee of Congress, which said that what happen is no big deal. The solution proposed by an official representative, and the party of travelers, is to suspend the delivery of flight tickets. As if the problem was the availability of the tickets and not the selfishness of these lawmakers who only care for their personal benefits.
In our political context -in which two former presidents and candidates (Toledo and Alan) have pending criminal investigations, and the leading candidate took advantage from the dirtiest, most vile and corrupt government of Peruvian history… his fathers’- we should ask ourselves if there is still something left. Is there something that could move our resignation to weariness or our indifference to outrage? Is there something worth to keep waiting? Can we expect that a reform of electoral rules, as the elimination of preferential voting, may contribute to an effective improvement on Peru’s political activity? I think it is worth waiting. By removing the mandatory voting, Peru will, without a doubt, grow exponentially. In that way the quality of the electoral process’s participants would improve because their vote would be informed. Lets make the political parties face the challenge of moving us to vote, and lets assume, for once and for all, the cost of our inaction and the (ir)responsibility of our decisions.