The opposition protest has put the 2017 pre-election period on a different track, compared to same periods from previous elections. I think this has spurred many contradictory reactions.
I am referring to that group of people that welcome the protest but do not support it for one reason or another. First, I want to stress that the logic guiding the opposition and that it wants to convey through this protest is this: A government caught in the clutches of crime cannot organize fair elections.
I can argue in three ways why this logic does not make sense. First, because their premise might not be true. In other words, the government is not caught up in crime, so that there is no reason to believe that it cannot organize fair elections.
Second, because the inference may not hold. Let us accept that the government is caught in the clutches of crime, but there still exists the possibility that the fairest and the best elections ever could be organized.
And this, because even though the logic of the opposition is sound, their solution is wrong. In other words, the government is caught in the clutches of crime and cannot organize fair elections, but this cannot be addressed through protests, or, to be more precise, this cannot be solved through protests of the opposition or the Democratic Party.
I want to pause at those who agree that the government is caught up in crime and cannot organize fair elections and agree on protesting about it, but do not think it can be resolved with an opposition protest. My question is simple: Then why don’t these people open their own tent on the square?
The opposition has tried to reaffirm in each statement that this is not a Democratic Party protest but a people’s protest. You have the right to be skeptical about these statements. If you think that the protest is important but the caretaker government not so, why don’t you open your own tent in the square and present your alternative?
If you think protest is good, but you have a vision different from the Democratic Party’s, why don’t you take to the square to spread your vision? If you think you should protest without music or card games, why don’t you open your own tent with the atmosphere you want? If you don’t support militantism but think that protest is important, why don’t you take your umbrella and take to the streets, without joining the tent, but with a high civil responsibility, as heroes of critical thought? If you think there are only a few people in the tent opened by the opposition, why don’t you open your own tent with many more people? All ifs and buts… why don’t you open your own tent?
It is no surprise that you don’t find it reasonable to protest. It is no surprise to find oneself unclear and unsure what to do. In both cases, just stay and wait, and maybe pray for better days to come. It is strange to accept the protest and find personal excuses for the people and events happening inside the tent. A symbolic and classical place for protests is the main square. If you don’t find your place in the tent, the square has plenty of place for all.
