Like in the sculpture the citizenship is embedded in the wall, claiming for changes from a weak position, tied to a culture in which is submitted to a powerful political class that rules their lives. Not matter the results politicians “sells” a framework of security and a misleading model of safeguarding national interests in exchange of policies with an important lack on accountability and transparency.
Politicians and citizens must hold a relationship that represents the two sides of the same coin. Citizens rule politicians, not the other way round and to see on an active citizenship a left-wing position is outrageous in a democratic system. Democracy means “power of the people” and is it here where relies the rights of the citizenship, not from an ideological position. A democratic system ought to be ruled by the citizenship and the inverted way brings incongruence and promotes corruption.
Thanks to Panama scandal, politicians are also embedded in the wall, forcing to wake up to new realities in which the role of the political class and the system around them (included their own political parties) must respond to citizens expectations and needs. A study concludes that politics is the occupation most common among Panama papers[1]. Impressive isn´t it?. To be a politician is an occupation that should be a transparent business committed with national interests and with a close supervision of the citizenship, however it has become just an utopia and is currently the leading sector in fiscal evasion.
Extremist parties reinforce these contradictions with an exacerbated defense of national interests but without a clean and transparent display of their private finances. Clear example we have it with Donald Trump and their basically “anti-system” message, in addition with their stubborn negative to release tax returns; or in France with the Presidential candidate Marine Le Pen also involved in Panama scandal with their family. Although, with a fierce defense of an extreme nationalism. Indeed Le Pen propose to rule France under an isolationist strategy of a “pseudo sovereignty” defence with her own financial family interests focus far away of what represents a safeguarding of a national strategy. Be “anti-something” (anti-migrants, anti-system, anti-establishment, anti-global, anti-European) has become a good tool for undermining citizenship minds and see on this weak -and not proven proposal- the hope for a better future. The real solution in the long term is exactly the contrary: to be pro-system, pro-integration, pro-openness in an attempt to be released from that darkness of current political system that is literally killing the possibility of a resilient strategy. Not surprisingly extreme nationalist leaders like D. Trump denied the existence of climate change and see the enemy in the own solutions to address multiple global crises, special migration. Accepting climate change or the global nature of migration crisis means a proactive focus that search for a smart adaptation and an in-depth shape of not just a new system but a new model of globalization. Naturally is harder and maybe less profitable for electoral purposes but is the only fair, feasible and practical manner to get to a reformed system that could lead to a resilient world.
Currently, politicians and citizens move under a contradictory relationship, which by no means could be possible within a democratic system. There is no contradiction and both sides are part of the same game in which citizens are leading actors and a “decision agent” with a veto power to any decision that goes against their interest’s or/and a law framework.
Politicians and citizens shouldn´t be embedded in the wall but part of an active and flexible system of counterweight and accountability.
*Sculpture: Matteo Pugliese, “Embedded in the wall”
thesustainabilityreader 