Certain Ecuadorian social groups have always been in touch with the most important global civilizational achievements, understood them and adhered to them, copying – with adaptations of the case – these ways of life in their personal, family and group spaces. Many local citizens lived and studied in foreign countries and were influenced by their way of life and worldview. Some did it because they had the necessary financial resources, and others because of the desire to learn, experiment and assimilate ways of being and acting in rich countries.

The relationship of these citizens with European societies and other leading regions of the Western world meant for them the acquisition of a kind of cultural and intellectual prestige that created recognition and, in a certain way, respect from the Ecuadorian community, which considered that those who experienced this circumstance had some positive elements in their favor that made their criteria more elaborate and better than the criteria of those who never experienced it.

However, this fact has ceased to be valued as a determinant of the quality of approach and point of view to things and coexistence. Other members of society, who historically did not have the opportunity to leave the country for several reasons, developed their criteria locally and relativized international experience as an argument of authority, primarily due to the flagrant and stubborn incoherence of their actions. and the group’s activities are intellectually linked to advanced social doctrines developed abroad, to its political and philosophical discourse.

Thus, those who, historically expected, always waited for the social system and political, economic and administrative structures – led in the country by those who knew them firsthand – to function effectively, allowing the validity of equality, justice, solidarity and other great goals world humanism, they felt firsthand the failure of this doctrinal proposal and built their own ways of acting and living, which in many cases are at the antithesis of law and political speech, from their own criteria resulting from marginality and exclusion. His fight for his life and the life of his family rejects the system as inoperative and consequently despises his mentors and theoreticians, who were never sufficiently coherent with his discourse which only served to maintain his status and was never seriously considered to implement it. and give it real validity.

From this perspective, the traditional institutionality composed of legal and political elements is collapsing horribly, positioning in its place chaotic social forms to which the large impoverished social groups and hated by conventional doctrine ardently adhere, because despite everything they are spaces that welcome, proposing a better present than the barren and of the lost scene of the emptiness in which they survive. (OR)