In it PP They go from blue summer to a red autumn like the one that changes the summer polo shirt for the winter coat with the obvious ease of someone who has all their clothes in the same drawer. For those who do not distinguish colors or styles, autumn from spring and mid-season heat, the moment will come when the mixture of types forces them to carry out a senseless composition, combining what should never be combined. I’m talking about politics, not fashion.
In one of the worst electoral campaigns in the recent history of Spain, the PP decided to give excitement to some polls that did not offer it and articulate a communication and marketing plan worthy of merit. Of course, for this purpose he put in front the person who best represents the abdication of ideas and the collusion with those who despise him for being in the PP, and hate him for not being left-wing, although the latter would be immediately refuted by its bearer. The Semperian apostles of the eternal amendment are still proud of the reddest blue summer of any we have ever seen.
The worst thing that a spokesperson representing an organization can have is not being, precisely, the voice of the organization, that is, defending those who maintain it, which, in the case of the PP, are its voters, the main shareholders of the organization. brand. If between ETA and its victims you answer “neither of the two”, between Israel and Hamas you answer “neither of the two” and when faced with the choice between autocracy and freedom you affirm “neither of the two”, or when between Sánchez and Abascal you decide, proudly, that your choice is not to be with anyone if you need it, you have a problem of moral balance between good and evil, or a Stockholm syndrome as pronounced as it is impertinent in the exercise of public representation. The first examples serve to validate the eternal survival complex that has nested in Genoa since Aznar He created the term center-reformist so as not to defend the liberal-conservative principles of a modern right.
In politics, moderation is not an antonym of firmness nor is calm synonymous with tolerant. Equidistance is the refuge of cowards. Because there is no middle ground when you have to choose between terror and those who fight it, the murderers and their victims or the autocrat and those who defend freedom. Since Feijóo took over the leadership of the Popular Party, we are witnessing a continuous exercise in rhetorical balancing to avoid offending those who will never vote to the right, at the cost of not telling them the truth about the ideas, actions and history of the left.
The latest statements by the PP spokespersons show that to be leftist it is no longer necessary to vote for the PSOE and be part of a federaloid coven of acronyms, additions, subtractions and communist divisions, but rather to stand in Genoa and announce that you are a friend of Sémper, a spokesperson who, with each statement, is closer to singing the International than to support a national project that first respects its voters, and then articulates an alternative that does not involve buying the broken product of the left. What we see when we listen to Galician and Basque, perhaps advised by the same social democracy that plunged the last Ciudadanos into incompetent whispers, induces tranquility in Ferraz: not a bad word, not a good deed.
In the same way that surrendering Spain to its enemies to hold power with ignominy is not embracing coexistence, but rather indignity, surrendering your principles – and your voters – to the left so that they accept you and applaud you is not embracing temperance and moderation. , but cowardice. Let someone say in Genoa that managing Sanchismo is not a plausible voting option, nor is temperate socialism a reliable destiny. By pleasing those who will never vote for you, you will lose those who have always voted for you. To those who say that Spain lacks a social democratic party, I respond that they already have one.
