The adviser, a key figure in the old and new bureaucracy, a person trusted by people in power, a figure who manages without risk, advises without compromise and exerts influence without going on stage. He is the one who designs policy, invents strategies, pushes decisions. And it never appears; and if he appears, he knows nothing and is not responsible for anything. She evaporates when it suits her, she almost always hides.

Counselors are in the secrets of power, in inventing ideologies of circumstances, at the base of elections and in the design of propaganda, which is the essence of democracy reduced to general places, words and, above all, gestures that They attract the primary adhesion of that kind of “silly mass” which is pompously called ” civil society”.

Damaged in itself?

If the secret history of advisers and sages is written, the story of states will be complete, because what is seen and said is only what is convenient, what is “politically correct”. The rest remains in the shadows and you never find out the full truth, or you know that it is twisted and hidden. It is this army of men behind the throne, well paid and covered, who do the important work. For example, legislators, they were called representatives of the most middle Congress or exalted assemblymen, could not, could not, without advisers, could not do without advisers and counseling, which are postmodern and sophisticated forms of the same. thing.

democracy header

Advisors have always been part of politics and the essence of bureaucracy. But as leadership became diluted in speeches, as polls became the logic of power, the science of advisers became necessary for survival, building propaganda and inventing the appropriate language for the impunity of leaders. At the same time, and in front of formal power holders – ministers and directors – his influence, but also his anonymity, grew.

(…) they are in the secrets of power, in inventing ideologies of circumstances… and in the design of propaganda.

The Republic is “the government of the public” and therefore should be transparent. Questions of general interest should be aired, asked and questioned without more reservations than those naturally required by the questions involved in the concept of security. However, the proliferation of advisers in the political keys of countries distorts these concepts. Now what is said and what is proposed is only the tip of the iceberg that is never fully revealed. Therefore, almost all republics are opaque.

It is obvious and necessary that he be consulted. Undeniably. Listening to advice is without a doubt permissible. To hire studies, of course, since no one knows everything, and sometimes no one knows anything, especially if what dominates is the blah blah blah of leaders and budding leaders. But for advisers to do political work from their anonymous desks, to distort what the voters entrusted to those they believed to be informed and capable, is unacceptable. AND It is unjustified that faceless advisers stick their noses in everything, sell their ideas and interests, and even propose political profiles of a country.. (OR)