The vast majority of survivors of the atrocious Spanish Civil War of 1936 and of subsequent generations were convinced that we would “never again” suffer a similar tragedy. And this, both for the absolute moral rejection of deadly hatred between compatriots, and for the certainty that education, development and – one day – democracy would generate – with an irreversible character – a respectful, tolerant and peaceful citizenry.
This story gradually became integrated into the collective imagination throughout the second half of the last century, especially from the recovery of democratic institutions, to the point that, at the beginning of the 21st century, we saw ourselves as one of the most peaceful towns in Europe. The most forceful demonstrations in these decades have had to do with peace and the resounding rejection of violence, apart from the claims of “freedom, amnesty and Statute of Autonomy”.
In our political culture, the free expression of ideas and convictions was a matter of course, respect for the interlocutor, a natural expectation, and the temptation to turn the opponent into an enemy, absolutely inconceivable. The truth had such prestige that missing it was hardly forgivable and had high political costs. And the presumption of respectability of the interlocutor predominated.
This spirit of civic cohesion, unusual in our troubled history, has presided over decades of progress, modernization, push and vigorous recovery of the country, as if we had released all the springs that had held us down, and has placed us at the European level. However, something has changed in recent years. With the unusual speed with which social and cultural changes tend to occur in our country, the story described has been subject to profound modifications.
The most negative is the invention of fake news and the inconceivable cynicism with which it is used with apparent impunity. Once the veil is opened, the rigor, the effort, the truthfulness… are left over, and the misrepresentations and slanders fly in the air. At a short distance in terms of severity, there would be disrespect, personal and institutional, and its derivative, insults, of varying severity.
It is to be feared that the sum of falsehoods, cunning and contempt, used in a regular way, will have a devastating effect on the trust of the citizens in the political class and in the institutions. Not to mention how dysfunctional and anti-pedagogical these practices are when it comes to forming the civic and human quality of the new generations.
Equally negative is the promotion of polarization, the growing fragmentation of a public good as precious as social cohesion, a process that only produces pain and waste. Causing polarization and rejection among citizens is an unforgivable civic sin, especially if it is done in contradiction with the presumed values ??of those who act in this way to achieve their goals, above the general interest of the country.
Exchanging hatred for votes is a lousy business for Spain. This idea links to another negative change: the loss of sense of State, of vision of what suits society, and that must prevail over particular interests. Including respect for the public matter, which should have a presumption of objectivity and rigor.
In this relationship of negative modifications we could add the setback in respect for the internal diversity of our country. Forty years ago, some nostalgic citizens of the past expressed a certain discomfort with the existence of languages ??other than Spanish. Today, there may be many more uncomfortable citizens, if not openly hostile. Could someone explain how the existence and vitality of a particular language harms the general language? Despite the federalizing spirit of the Constitution, its full virtuality is not addressed calmly and decisively.
Faced with the negative evolution of recent years, there are two alternatives, the inertial and the reformist. Inertia will lead us inexorably, sooner or later, to resurrect the dialectic – which we believe has been banned forever – of the two Spains: lies, insults, polarization, disrespect… and hatred, which has already begun to emerge in our society, they will end up translating into the existence of conflicting and irreconcilable positions.
Nevertheless, there is the possibility of unanimously agreeing on the reformist alternative, aimed at improving the quality of our democracy. Assuming that it is not a given forever, but a constant process, neither linear, nor irreversible, and very vulnerable. And that a good democracy needs good and many democrats among the citizens. With the understanding that being a democrat is not only learned by osmosis, but through knowledge, critical spirit, ability to listen, respect and reflection… In other words, everything that mainly the education system can give us, especially if we endow it with enough resources.
There is little doubt that this alternative would be very positive for the future of our country and for the hope of the citizens. Paradoxically, it is what the results of 23-J give us, which, in their subtle complexity, could allow a loyal and integrative update of the spirit of the transition, if our political class had the greatness and patriotism necessary to to this
TRACE AND PEACE, made up of Jordi Alberich, Eugeni Bregolat, Eugeni Gay, Jaume Lanaspa, Juan-José López Burniol, Carles Losada, Josep Lluís Oller, Alfredo Pastor, Xavier Pomés and Víctor Pou
