Views: 2

It is more deeply rooted than many people think. It occurs under both right-wing and left-wing ideologies, although it tends to manifest in different ways. It is a way of viewing the architecture of our society in which no actors are allowed beyond those who appear in public institutions.

According to this logic, the full legitimacy granted by democratic elections to those who are chosen to sit at the plenary table is also seen as a sufficient argument to delegitimize anyone else who wishes to participate actively in public life.

The system works through two complementary mechanisms. On the one hand, those who have not gone through the ballot box lack the credentials to speak publicly. And those who still insist on interfering are seen as proof that they are in fact a covert agent directed by another political group.

This issue is not new, but it has come back into fashion these days. Since the conservative side is now in power, it uses tools more typical of this ideological spectrum, such as withdrawing public support from the most inconvenient organisations. This has happened three times in Menorca within just two years of the current legislature—and it had already happened in previous terms.

Meanwhile, there are sectors of the left which, despite having a different set of ideas, may share the same exclusive view of public life. In this case, instead of cutting funds, they cut visibility. In Menorca, we lost a timely grant for education on waste issues because a progressive government demanded the return of buildings that had been donated, reclaimed, and made functional for educational purposes with next to no money. The justification was that a large public programme had to be launched, which—as usual—disappeared into thin air, and in the process we lost the working resources we already had.

In the 1980s, there were repeated cases of political groups promoting their own people to take control of associations. Many organisations were lost or faded away as a result. Today, in light of the current landscape, those times are missed more than ever.

Only in the Basque Country and, especially, in Catalonia is there a culture that meaningfully includes grassroots organisations—spaces where people come together with genuine goodwill, contribute their free time, and very often, their own money. In most other nearby regions, organised civil society is usually seen with suspicion, as if it were hiding an agenda—or, at best, as a cheap labour force for certain public services.

In truth, few things enhance democracy as much as people who organise, stay informed, join efforts, and make collective projects possible—projects that neither private enterprise (because the main return is not economic) nor public administration (because its pace is too fast and long-term commitment is needed) are truly able to carry out.

When someone who holds this fragmented vision of community management comes to power, their actions give them away. In response, what is needed is greater commitment and strength. Circumstances are fleeting.