AND
he criminal and devious attack against the distinguished communicator Ciro Gómez Leyva tells us about the intense and undesirable validity of the lethal couple that, for a long time, has haunted our political dramas. Since 1994, with the assassination of Luis Donaldo Colosio, but also the uprising of the EZLN in Chiapas and its overwhelming political sequel. Before we had to attend the macabre dance of deceit with which another great attack against freedom and rights was involved in the person of the great journalist Manuel Buendía.
We had to surrender to the evidence: politics and crime not only assume each other, but have formed a lethal couple, present in our daily lives and their cloudy perspectives. One of the great tasks of the emerging democracy should have been the dissolution of that disastrous bond, but it was not, and in its place stood before us the growing, openly illegal and corrosive power of organized crime.
Lethal for the exercise of journalism and its obligatory freedoms and rights, as our country has painfully declared, attacks such as the one that Ciro Gómez Leyva has been a victim must lead us to escalate that diabolical marriage and place it at the center of interest and political commitment, demand from the authority a prompt and punctual investigation that, without artificial pauses, leads to direct and intellectual leaders and, furthermore, in the most explicit way possible, speaks to us seriously and responsibly of the weight that the environment that surrounds politics today has to fully address, as the State has to do, that nefarious vicious and corrosive union between crime and the exercise and struggle for power.
The environment is not only physical or architectural, climatic, but above all mental and public ethics. By giving nature to the trivialization of exchange and criticism, to invective and systemic suspicion, the door is opened for violence to erupt and from politics it can even be normalized. The what are they getting into or who knows what they were up to
they become authoritative and first-hand arguments to begin to define a responsibility from which the constituted power cannot be oblivious. Less becoming a submissive echo of those shadowy legends that have brought us here.
The impartial comments, criticisms and verbal attacks into which the President has fallen and become daily rhetoric are not next to or outside of this sinister scenario that inevitably presents itself to us as a terrible and hypnotic circle of violence. Whether the president wants it or not, they are at their epicenter and their overflow is felt over and over again in the ravings of morenismo in the Chambers or the councils. And even in their assemblies where verbal and sometimes physical confrontation has prevailed.
Violence, which not infrequently leads to crimes, has accompanied the deployment of the great transformation
in acts of government or deliberative exercises as there must be in all open and plural politics. The degree to which this violence marks democratic politics as an ominous present and future cannot be reduced and submitted to the rule of law, today it appears to us as ineluctable, and the expressions of solidarity of the leaders with the journalist so artfully attacked are of little use . The State has to assume what happened as an obligatory matter that cannot and will not be overcome without a necessary and urgent re-legitimization of the constituted power, today subjected to the embarrassing spectacle of a political reform simulacrum that has no future if it continues to be based on a priori disqualification of the adversary or the dissident, both obligatory, inalienable characters of any plural and democratic politics like the one we all say we want.
Once again, as if it were a fatality that jumps at the slightest provocation, we are facing a crime that for its own good the State cannot let pass. Neither allow it to go to the shameful archive of the impunity that drowns us.
