THE CAPITOL CRISIS, a social and political truth that brings the United States even closer to the Latin American reality.
Written by Abril Trankels
The recent attack on the United States Capitol last week opens debate to several unknowns beyond how a group of civilians can enter on foot and attack what was supposed to be one of the safest buildings in the world? ...
Among the topics that came to the fore is on the one hand the guilt attributed to President Donald Trump and on the other hand all the collateral wounds that have deepened as a result of this fact.
As for the responsibility and to whom it should be awarded, most of the media point to the current president as the initiator and promoter of the event that occurred. However, it did not issue any direct statement or indication to carry out a violation and attack on a federal space and especially protected by the same government. Which does not mean that it was a fact totally unrelated to any speech that President Trump has delivered. Minutes prior to what happened, the same president suggested holding a march to the Capitol in a symbolic way, claiming for the fraudulent elections. (Before which it is necessary to clarify: none of the legal procedures could prove said accusation).
Beyond the false premise of the president about the veracity of the electoral result, there is no objective reason to attribute responsibility for a criminal act carried out by third parties (specifically, adults). Especially if we consider the communications after the event in which he made explicit that such modes of manifestation were not representative of North America and its principles. In other words, President Trump's opposition to this tragedy was clear. Which does not mean that his discursive modes require greater subtlety and caution.
From the Latin American perspective, the feeling of surprise and identification abounds in this scenario. On the one hand, at the institutional level, there is little to expect from the third world countries when what was supposed to represent the rise of democracies, suffers such a transfer of its own “civil and political principles”. In addition to the immense drop in credibility that the electoral process generates in the citizenry, since a large percentage of voters do not trust the system and its results, as polls from 2016 and 2020 have shown.
Which leads to the feeling of identification, it seems that both the South and North America today reveal more than ever one of the most latent crises of the century: the crisis of democracy. Latent especially in Venezuela, Peru, Colombia among several others.
We do not speak here specifically of democracy as a system of political tools, since proving such a crisis would involve several much deeper analyzes. If not, of democracy as an ideology, of citizen trust in a system and institutions capable of exercising and representing the so-called “government of all”.
By decant, it is necessary to mention a last point that has been aggravated after the attack on the capitol and of which Latin America is also a witness: political and social polarization. Moral consensus within civilizations seems to be a more and more utopian ideal, and transcends the mere "right vs. left" division.
Today this is perceived in various media platforms in the US, reflected in the following argument, totally fallacious, which could be formulated in the following way: those who consented and carried out the attack on the American Capitol are Republicans, and responsible for such abuses, therefore therefore every republican is responsible for said crime.
Although most of the popular leaders who today represent the Republican party, directly repudiated the attackers on the Capitol (including President D. Trump himself); this fact is perceived on the other side as an event representative of the entire Republican spectrum. Which, is confirmed by the own words of the future president Joe Biden, who affirmed that this type of movements, was something "predictable" and known by all those who decided to vote for the Republican party, and therefore Mr. Trump in 2016. Which leaves much to question coming from a candidate who lacked the courage to explicitly and swiftly denounce urban terrorist attacks by groups like BLM or Antifa, carried out in the name of "anti-racism."
In summary, after a very brief analysis and a panoramic view of the last few months it is clear that the weaknesses of the American security agencies are not the only concern to consider after what happened. Above all, two key points could be highlighted: the image of President Trump; that will be clearly remembered in direct connection with the COVID crisis and the guilt, (erroneously attributed by various media), regarding the Capitol tragedy. And second, a premise worthy of being considered by the next administration.
LA CRISIS DEL CAPITOLIO, una realidad social y política que acerca a los Estados Unidos aún más a la realidad Latinoamericana.
El reciente ataque al capitolio de los Estados Unidos hoy abre debate a varias incógnitas más allá del ¿cómo un grupo de civiles puede ingresar a pie y atacar lo que suponía ser uno de los edificios más seguros del mundo?...
Dentro de los tópicos que salieron a flote se encuentra por un lado la culpabilidad atribuida al presidente Donald Trump y por otro lado todos las heridas colaterales que se han profundizado a causa de este hecho.
En cuanto a la responsabilidad y a quien debería serle adjudicada, la mayoría de los medios señalan al actua