A peasant president, leader of the Peruvian teachers (the “Profe”), supported by the peasant rounds, who spent forty-five days in Lima demanding that their votes be respected (“Keiko” Fujimori wanted to annul them), was dismissed without being heard and without respecting the regulations of Congress itself. His vacancy is procedurally illegitimatey the regime murdered more than sixty people that demanded the reinstatement of the first rural president in the history of the country. This double criminality cannot deny the racist imprint that reiterates that the place for poor peasants is the Sierra and not Lima: “Puno is not Peru,” warned Mrs. Boluarte
It is no longer possible to hide the fact that it is a new and perverse chapter in the persecution against popular leaders (Correa, Lula, Evo, Cristina, Petro, Dilma, Zelaya, Lugo). In the Peruvian case the engine is the concessions-laws of the Fujimori era which expire this year, although its “anti-terrorist laws”, contrary to any human rights convention and after more than three decades of the cessation of violence in the country, are now applied to those who protest. Pedro Castillo In truth, he is in prison because he stated that he would not renew them. That was his main sin.
who believe that the democracy it is not entirely good, but we do not know better, we are alarmed by its fate in our America. Media oligopolies create unique realities, just like the “Völkisches Beobachter” or the “Pravda”; a demagogue inaugurates a concentration camp; a madman expels citizens; judges criminalize popular leaders and guarantee impunity for financial criminals who mortgage countries and give away natural wealth; Presidents are removed in soft and not so soft coups. It is no longer about subtle methods, but about a brutal return to those of times that we thought had passed.
The media are captivated by the scandal of the moment; If it doesn’t exist, they invent it. At the same time, very serious events are omitted in their virtual realities; Since they are not informed, we believe that nothing happens, although everything continues to happen.
Peru stopped being news in the hegemonic media, a woman who assumed the presidency betraying her running mate, without a party or parliamentary bloc, legitimized more than sixty deaths and says that the dead are “terrorists”, exploiting the bitter memory that her people keep of that word. Now there are children and women terrorists? Are there terrorists without weapons? Do students commit terrorism without leaving the University? Do you think she wields power, with her band and her neat outfit, surrounded by the military and police? Doesn’t she realize she’s a power toy? Are you unaware that Fujimori’s concessions expire? Did no one warn you that Rome does not pay traitors?
Faced with the illegal imprisonment of Castillovictim of ancestral racism, there are judges who affirm that this is irrelevant because, in any case, he had no defense argument. He is in prison accused of armed rebellion, when he knew that he did not have the support of a single military man or a single police officer. And the judges affirm that he also committed armed rebellion because “in other circumstances that would have been very dangerous.” There is no conduct that in other circumstances would not be dangerous. They didn’t even bother to invent equally invalid legal tricks, but at least a little more sophisticated.
And they ask us to respond legally? But how can you legally argue against someone who says “I do it because I feel like it”? In Peru, the judges who keep Castillo imprisoned confess it; in Ecuador, the foreign minister offended after denying for two years the safe conduct of exit to a minor Argentine citizen and a former minister convicted by interim judges appointed by the traitor who today is under arrest for bribery; In our country, a court issues two kilograms of conviction without evidence and orders the request for sanctions against the defenders for their allegations. What legal arguments fit against these bravado?
They have removed us from the right, we are in the space of the “a-legal”, of lawless chaos. Although the law is also political, there are tasks that are “pure politics.” And leaving the “a-legal” to return to the legal is not a legal task, but pure politics. We must promote it, but the people will do it, as they become aware that they are being cheated. They will resist and fight for democracy and for the right and they will not fall into the trap that the colonial agents set for them, inciting them to violence, since they already know who brings the dead.
The more than sixty deaths in Peru are from the south, from Puno, Ayacucho, Cusco, It seems that their lives are worth less than if they were from Miraflores or San Isidro -our Recoleta-, and the ministers of Boluarte babble “conspiracies”, when the “conspirators” are they, who are exercising a usurped power without respecting the regulations of Congress.
Paradoxes of fate! Before, the discourse of order belonged to the reactionaries, but now we must wield it ourselves to help in the difficult situation of overcoming the chaos created by the representatives of the late-colonial financial interests. The difficult task that we have ahead of us is the reconstruction of the institutions, of democracy, of legality. It was said that where Attila’s horse put its horseshoes, not even the grass grew again. But where they put their fine shoes, what disappears is the greenery of the dollars!
