The strength of a democracy is measured not only by the solidity of its institutions. A nation can present all the elements traditionally referred to as pillars of democracy - periodic elections, independence between powers, individual liberties crystallized in legislation ... - but democracy can never be considered totally safe if there is no "breeding ground for democratic culture" Or, in the words of the philosopher Ernst-Wolfgang Böckenförde, "an ample bedrock of political culture." It is he who makes the warning: “If a democracy is lacking the people or groups of sufficient value to rise to the challenge of representative action and related consultations with the people; if not in parliament, in government, and in political parties, then democracy degenerates rapidly into forms of self-serving politics, or - in the case of difficult decisions - it enters into an agonizing situation, and there is no way to deter or direct it institutionally.”
The philosopher's claim comes from the realization that institutions are nothing without people - and they must be convinced of the authentic values that build a healthy society. With citizens convinced of the importance of putting the common good above individual convenience, it is possible to build what French politician and diplomat Alain Peyrefitte called "a society of trust", the title of one of his most celebrated books. In the prologue to this work, Peyrefitte defended the conviction that "the strongest and most fruitful social link is one based on mutual trust - between a man and a woman, between the parents and their children, between the boss and the men that he leads, between citizens of the same country, between the patient and his doctor, between the pupils and the teacher, between a lender and a borrower, between the entrepreneurial individual and his partners - while, conversely, mistrust sterilizes." In a society in which we can´t even trust in those who are closest to us – and the communist regimes have been prodigal in creating a culture of demarcation in which a person could be denounced even by his relatives - cannot prosper.
"Fidelity and loyalty are basic elements in the search for the common good"
And if it is not possible to move forward in democracy and economic development without trust, it is not possible to do so by adopting individualistic positions. When one evaluates an action as right or wrong only for its own benefit, when individual satisfaction is placed above the common good, the path to the erosion of democratic values opens. Individualistic mentality is behind the tolerance for innumerable behaviors that are, in essence, small acts of corruption, like giving or receiving tips, or resorting to clandestine connections of electricity, water or paid television, the famous "gatos." The individualist cannot recognize the link between these small acts and the great corruption scandals (which may be different in severity, but are the result of the same mentality) and demonstrates, with this attitude, a deep disinterest for others, for their wellbeing, for the sense of justice itself. The consecration of "everyone for himself" and contempt for the common good destroys good coexistence and eliminates the incentive for citizens to come together around an ideal - ironically, the perfect match for totalitarian regimes that proliferate more easily in environments in which there is no intermediate body between the individual and the state.
Trust, faithfulness, honesty, interest in the common good. It is not a question of "moralistic preaching”: It is to recognize that strong cultural and moral convictions, when properly grounded in the certainty of the immeasurable greatness of man's worth, are not the enemies of democracy - they are its condition. Respect for the freedom of others, in extreme cases, to the point of accepting even the consequences that could be detrimental to their own interests, is only possible for those who have a strong anchor in their experience that the end doesn’t justify the means. It is with these kind of people that you build strong and lasting democracies.
Deixe sua opinião