AMENDMENTS, ELECTIONS AND POLITICAL COMMUNICATION
electoral process Venezuelans live Sunday February 15, have a set of meanings that explain itself the nature of political communication handled by options Yes and No.
In 1st place, the amendment itself involves a debate about two different ways of seeing the constitutional right. Of those who based elitist perspective consider that participation in the political debate be restricted to the mere election of officers and for whom the constitutional bodies should not be reformed, since the reform of the rule leads to lawlessness and conditions instability. Moreover, in the opposite are those within the New Latin American Constitutionalism (NCL) argue that popular sovereignty is a condition of building citizenship and therefore should be extended to the maximum, while think that the Constitutions are imperfect structure and incomplete, subject to change. From one to another position, the distance is abysmal, both in their ideological underpinnings and political practice.
In 2nd place, the amendment reflects a discussion about the true meaning of popular sovereignty, understood as a space for expression of political will and its relationship to the theory of good government, which paradoxically is part of a theory arising from liberal thinking, particularly linked to the idea of \u200b\u200brepresentative government and effective management of the mandate.
In 3rd place, which was discussed in Venezuela on Sunday, is being proposed in Latin America and shows the impact of institutional change on the continent. This is a legal and political debate about the relevance of constitutional legal norms adjust to the accelerated process of change that is experienced in our societies. In the background is the question of how the right can think and incorporate the process of change in the rule of law.
In 4th place, obviously in these parameters previously established in the amendment results in a revision of the conditions of domination and subordination that characterize all the capitalist system, and certainly the Venezuelan system typically maintains even exploitative and thus the amendment becomes a risk to existing relations between capital and labor.
In 5th place, the amendment to support and promote the theory of good government, puts many sectors of the opposition to decide on whether to compete with a charismatic leadership and certainly has a high social impact, through a policy of revival of the rule of law. This is a huge disadvantage, even more so when one considers that the options Chavez lack a political program as an alternative to Simon Bolivar Project presents a vision of the country for the period 2001-2013.
These 5 elements combine through the field of political communication understood as the close relationship between governor and governed as expressed through the intermediation of the mass media. Political communication in the election campaign has clearly identified two vectors: 1) the vector of the expansion of democracy and the exercise of good governance and 2) the vector of the illegitimacy of the amendment. On 1 of them has resulted in a propaganda insists that the benefits of management during 10 years of the Chavez government and the possibilities of broadening and deepening the Bolivarian project through the elimination of restrictions on the times you can run an official exercise. The 2nd says that the illegitimacy of the amendment is part of a series of irregularities conducted by the Chavez government. Accompanying addition to the management of fear as a factor of restraint in political volunteerism triggered by public policies carried out by using the huge oil resources.
Political propaganda has stressed these two vectors ideas: good governance and illegitimacy-hazard of the amendment. The ads have moved through the use of images and audiovisual resources that seek to reinforce that perspective or representation frameworks of interpretation. This is one side of raising a cultural continuity with the development of a policy of strengthening citizenship, but on the other side is to propose a cultural clash with the "apparent" identity "politics of Venezuela. These strategies have the same goal: to achieve greater mobilization of voters. Pugan The two sectors are aware of the proportionality of their forces and seek to mobilize achieved supremacy over the other. Anyone who wins, it will be on stage with one abstention to be around 35% to 40%, hopefully on Sunday to see the results. Dr. John E.
Historian
Romero
Juane1208@gmail.com
10/02/2009
0 comments:
Post a Comment