De Venancio Pulgar Manuel Rosales, the same lie
El Zulia has become the epicenter of a real electoral battle. For a meticulous observer, it is simply a personal confrontation between Chavez and Rosales, but there are elements that show us who attended a discussion policy, defined as the presentation, discussion and advocacy of a political platform with another antagonistic political reference.
For the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) the race is looking for two key objectives: 1) to rebound from the defeat of the last 2-D, 2007, when the structure of the party failed in its attempt to pass the constitutional amendment and 2) regain lost political space in the region, the product of internal divisions, civil strife and political disorganization. These tasks are not easy to perform. The behavior of the electorate Zulia is elusive as a serious obstacle. Furthermore, the Manichean management Rosales arises from the Zulia, its links with politics and religion, has not been sufficiently removed by the Campaign Command Di Martino, but the constant visits of President Chavez has sought to remedy this deficiency.
to Rosales, the 23-N process is vital for his political survival. It is undoubtedly a manifestation of political ambition. On the one hand, corresponds to a test of the electoral machinery of Un Nuevo Tiempo (UNT), while that is a catalyst for the existence of an effect Rosales, able to translate their personal support to other candidates placed under its wing action. Los Rosales challenges are manifold: 1) demonstrate the ability of survive a new confrontation with President Chavez, 2) consolidate the national leadership of UNT and 3) prevent the advance of Primero Justicia (PJ) as another option to the core of the opposition.
All these elements allow us to understand the particular strength of the campaign in Zulia. The debate has been diverted from the discussion of a policy agenda to be typecast in the field of defense or attack Zulia. By focusing the debate on this issue, the command Rosales scored an important advantage, which decreased to the extent that the President introduced the prospect of direct confrontation between him and Rosales. There is no doubt that the strategy of political communication command current Governor obeys the logic of generating organic identity between himself as a "candidate" (political figure) and Zulia as a whole, in such a way that an attack leaves raised him (Rosales) is a direct attack Zulia. At this point we note the historical advice. Rosales's strategy is the same used by Venancio Pulgar in 1859-1863, when it was raised - almost the same terms, the policy dilemma. It will be recalled
Zulia showed elusive to accept submission to central government from the moment of separation from the Department of the Republic of Venezuela-Colombia so-called Gran Colombia, in 1830. From that period and even the prelude to the federal War, resources and access to communication of the Andean states Zulia (Trujillo, Tachira and Merida) were key to the Venezuelan economy. This fact was exploited by Venancio Pulgar leadership to build a sense of identity manipulation of Zulia, voluntarism identity used for personal gain and in those moments where personal ambition collided with the interests of the Venezuelan state of Zulia and summoned in defense, with the excuse that it was the region which was under attack and not his political ambition. Result: all the historic space Maracaibo, including Zulia state borders and certain areas bordering the state of Falcon, were the subject of an intervention of the National Executive restoring order and generating the flight of thumb, leaving the entire state and its citizens subjected to the consequences of political adventurism. Yesterday and today, the situation arises in the same terms. We are astonished to hear
Rosales noted that when attacking him attacking the Zulia. With more than 120 years later, we encounter expressions such as those outlined in a national channel in the sense that he hate Chavez expressed his hatred of Zulia. It is certainly an example of the impact of historical and cultural manipulation exerted on the Zulia. Confrontation is two (2) political projects, not against a region and its citizens, but to stand as an attack on identity seeks to raise cultural solidarity can be expressed in the form of votes for candidates of Rosales. Again, we witness and regional history is manipulated for personal political interests. It is up to Zulia decide whether to allow this manipulation or otherwise remains to be articulated within the national project preserving its historical and geographical determinants. As the 23-N will see the results and know that we fulfill our duty as historians to denounce the cultural Manichaeism. John E.
Historian
Romero Juane1208@gmail.com
17/11/2008
0 comments:
Post a Comment