The formation of the table for reconstruction is a political paripé that will not solve the problem.
That the advance of what is called the reconstruction table is led by Patxi López and a communist lawyer, Enrique Santiago, whose career is summarized in having advised the FARC and participated in the Couso and Pinochet cases will supply society Spanish the same guarantees of success that if an uncle dressed in a white coat had to perform an open-heart surgery on our elderly mother with the only experience of having gutted a cricket as a child.
Unfortunately, with some exceptions, the idea that this pandemic has caught us devoid of a notable political class is demonstrated by the fact that the debate on the formation of the reconstruction table has turned more in terms of political power than qualification. professional. As if the distribution of sector subsidies was at stake here, and not the future of present and future generations. But what really worries is that a totally reactionary ideology has crept into it.
In an interview, Enrique Santiago, secretary general of the Communist Party and surprising vice-president of the Congress Commission for the Social and Economic Reconstruction of Spain, vindicates the figure of Lenin as a model for the construction of an alternative State and goes so far as to ensure that, if if the conditions of the October Revolution were to exist, he would go to the Zarzuela Palace as the Bolsheviks once went to the Winter Palace. Perhaps it is that when these barbarities are said these boys are always joking and the simple mortals do not share the same codes of humor.
There is a tendency among comrades to believe that Lenin was the good man of Soviet communism and that it was the mischievous Stalin who blackened the history of the Revolution. The truth is that we do not know Lenin’s full potential because when he died in 1924 he had on his back a million and a half victims, most of them in the context of a civil war. Everyone attributes to Stalin the responsibility for the criminal repression that was later applied in the Soviet Union and that took millions of people ahead, but few say that it was Lenin himself before dying the intellectual author of article 58 that allowed arbitrarily declare any Russian an enemy of the revolution and therefore scum. Stalin used it relentlessly even against his own.
With this background, it is normal that yesterday many took the appointment of Santiago almost jokingly. A tweeter calling himself Chinese from China ironically applauded the decision to put a race communist for reconversion. Not surprisingly, he came to say, “in Cuba they have been rebuilding for 60 years and they already have a nickel plated country.” It was a mirage to think that a Pablo Isla, a Josep Piqué, a Javier Solana, a Carlos Solchaga or any other name with a certain business background or management free of political vehemence, which is what is least needed now, could have taken the rudder to try to find a realistic solution.
I’m afraid those in charge of doing it don’t think so much about rebuilding as they do about deconstruction. A term that in the culinary field consists of making a potato omelette without eggs or potatoes, an impossible product that very few then have access to. And that in the philosophical field is heir to the German word destruktion, which proposes reducing everything to nothing to rebuild. Given the composition of the table and the first proposals in terms of occupation and operating conditions of the productive fabric, it is possible that someone is thinking of taking advantage of the coronavirus so that companies become more humane, more supportive, more … Let them bullshit. Companies have to be profitable again. If they don’t, this country will be more than lost.
Iñaki Garay, deputy director of EXPANSIÓN