The election dispute for dignities in the state exposes the worst evils and flaws of our society. To say this, unfortunately, can already be a useless confirmation of our inability to have authorities dedicated to the greatest possible rationality in decision-making. Ecuadorian politics is increasingly based on the desire to achieve power in order to use the visible and hidden interests of the groups that parties and movements represent, to collect symbolic debts or in cash, to make persecution the line of government, to ensure the minimum vote percentages…

Social scientists agree that politics is important; and it is, because that is why there are countries as different as Sweden or Venezuela. But the actions of politicians – in the campaign and in exercising power – are now less and less educational: it is no longer about teaching the principles or visions of the country, but simply about demarcating and even highlighting the shortcomings that they have. In politics, it is irresponsible to be graphic because at every election the fate of millions of Ecuadorians who live in precarious conditions and need the attention of the state is at stake.

With the political culture we have inherited, as a people we have no choice. We are always on the alert that something catastrophic will happen if some candidates win. We did not educate ourselves to make the best possible decision, because the masses are always dazzled by brave and macho men, women who worked on television, ignorant and loud presenters, folklore candidates. More than ten years ago, the Spanish philosopher Javier Gomá Lanzón coined the term ‘public role model’ to ask what makes us perfect as citizens in a democratic civilization.

(…) there is something tricky about politics because it creates the illusion that societies are collectively improving.

Gomá begins with a devastating statement: “Vulgarity is a sign of our time.” But this vulgarity is not the sum of all evils; on the contrary, she is “the unlikeable, but desired and unique daughter of two distinguished parents: freedom and equality.” Vulgarity began to dominate huge areas of public and private life. Therefore, a commitment to public exemplarity would tend to mitigate the effects of that vulgarity. A citizenry brought up in exemplary adherence to civilization and negation of barbarism, which has taken on and understood the values ​​of correct behavior in public service.

This exemplary character would lead us to choose candidates who show some decency, because to choose means to devote oneself to the development of an alert public opinion. But there is something tricky about politics because it creates the illusion that societies are collectively improving. About this Gomá says: “We misuse, with excessive emphasis, the language of liberation when what is urgently needed is to prepare the cultural and ethical conditions for personal emancipation.” Our electoral system, embodied in the National Electoral Council, seems to be designed so that each election deepens the vulgarity of the candidates and the stupidity of the voters. (OR)