|
|
|
|
|||
|
| |||
opinion
Also in this section: Democratic conditions for the canal debate by Raúl Leis R. --- raulleisr@hotmail.com
It seems ironic, but the public debate over the canal's expansion has now begun, but without the citizenry having in its hands the official proposal that we must debate, in order to decide whether or not it's appropriate in a referendum. In practice we've been experiencing for months now an intense government publicity campaign that seeks to put the expansion in a favorable position in different idioms and environments in advance of when the official proposal is known. What we do have in hand is a serious counter-proposal entitled "About Our Canal and Our Mega-port," elaborated and thrown into the debate by a group of notable Panamanians, which presents as an alternative to the expansion in the form of the building of a mega-port.
For all of this it is indispensable to state the imperative necessity for democratic conditions for the debate, so that an informed and conscientious vote can be cast in the referendum to come.
The first of these conditions is to immediately know the official proposal in an objective and transparent form.
The second is to have the necessary time to fully debate it.
Third, it should be understood that the debate is senseless if it isn't as horizontal as possible, with a back-and-forth relationship among diverse points of view. It's about forming an opinion and a decision on a subject of national interest such as the future of the canal, for which there must be the necessary spaces to contrast the statements and reasons behind the different visions of and foci upon this very important matter. The mere reiteration through the media in favor of the official proposal would inevitably convert the debate into a series of monologues. On the contrary, to elevate the space for dialogue and pluralist debate on a level playing field above the mass propaganda campaigns should be the ideal focus of the public discourse. There is no democracy without public opinion, but the construction of this public opinion is done on the bases of respect for diversity, freedom of expression, and the creation of and access to spaces for national and local debates, in the media and face-to-face.
Fourth, as to the participants in the debate it's important to state that everyone who has an argument or opinion should take part in the process. Despite the technical angles of canal matters, the debate must not be circumscribed around experts, leaving the citizenry outside. It's evident that some sectors and persons will participate more actively than others on the bases of their interests, commitments and capabilities, but their actions create public opinion, which was skillfully defined by Maurice Oriau as "an ocean of discussion." In other words, opinion forged in an open, constant and heterogeneous debate, because when such a debate is lacking the foundation of democracy itself is shattered.
The fifth condition is the ethical handling of information, which makes it imperative to exclude the psychological coercion that goes along with mass propaganda and public relations marketing that's basically oriented toward exploiting emotions and casting reason into the shadows. For example, saturation with advertising slogans that disrespect the dignity of citizens and try to justify the means with the end of gaining support, stating in a simplistic way the advantages as absolutes and eliminating or filtering the disadvantages. We cannot accept the falsification of a specified reality through the abuse of the poor information or knowledge that many people may have. Reality should not be clouded, least of all the nature of real problems, in this way. To do this would be to impair the people's participation and to deny their necessary joint responsibility in this matter. To falsify the message exterminates the essence of democracy and retards the community's political maturity.
In this framework, opinion polls are ever more present elements in society and they should neither be treated as absolute nor used as elements of dissuasion. These are not always on the mark and are best seen as a valid but not infallible resource. The polls should not be manipulated for this debate. Let us remember that it's commonplace to challenge the assertion of their absolute validity, the sincerity of the responses and the fact that they only offer "snapshots" of the popular sentiment. The sum of individual opinions, although they may reflect the majority, does not reflect authentic opinion. To equate the referendum with the polls would be a form of manipulation, as for many people they would be converted into an element against which nobody would want to go for fear of being left in the minority, creating a spiral of silence that would alter and/or pervert the public debate. In this regard it's important that whatever happens in the electoral process, the use and abuse of polls must be clearly foreseen.In the civic debate and decision about the future of the Panama Canal.
It's not just the destiny of the interoceanic waterway, but also that of the country itself, that's at stake.
Also in this section:
News |
Business
|
Editorial
|
Opinion
|
Letters
|
Arts
|
Review
|
Community
|
Fun
|
Travel
Make the
Executive Hotel your headquarters in Panama City --- http://ww.executivehotel-panama.com Find the boat of your dreams through Evermarine --- http://www.evermarine.com |
||||||||
|
