The lawyer and rector of the University of Diego Portales, Carlos Peña (64 years old, Santiago de Chile), one of the most influential voices of the Chilean public, analyzes the politics and society of his country in the hours of the referendum for a new constitution. Peña is a columnist for El Mercurio and author of works such as The Politics of Identity (Taurus, 2021), Children Without a Father (Taurus, 2022) and Thinking About Discomfort (Taurus, 2020). He says that this Sunday, the 17th of Chile, “nothing or very little is in the immediate vicinity” and that “the proposal does not differ significantly from the Constitution in force today”. Professor at the University of Chile, full academician of the Academy of Social, Political and Moral Sciences, points to the emergency situations in Chile, such as the insecurity on the streets, the failure in school education and, among other things, the crisis in the private health system If there is a way out, he assures us, “the public system will plunge into a catastrophe.”
More information
Questions. What is at stake for the country this Sunday?
Answer. Nothing or very little in the near future. Chile is experiencing a process of restoring what we might call unity: that quiet consensus that enables cooperation and maintains the rules. And all of this will take time. It took seven years for the Letter of the 25th, which guided Chile for much of the 20th century, to really begin to take effect. Whatever the outcome this Sunday, this process of rebuilding consensus – which is ultimately a cultural process – will continue. In Chile, as in the rest of the region, there is usually a kind of fetishism of the rules, which consists in believing that when they are adopted, a different reality emerges. And that is not the case.
Q How would you characterize the proposal for a new constitution that will be put to a referendum tomorrow?
R. The proposal does not differ significantly from the constitution in force today. The core of public or social policy is the same as in the 1980 letter; but galvanized: basic goods such as health, education, pensions, which are the content of social rights, are financed from general income, but mixed provision is guaranteed, which provides for the existence of a state and a private system. So although the proposal proclaims the welfare state, it does so through the consolidation of a care model like the one I describe.
Q What is happening to women's rights?
R. As far as women's rights are concerned, it is not true that there is a setback from the 1980 Charter, which does not provide for it. And when it comes to indigenous peoples, multiculturalism is recognized. The truth is that there is not much difference between the 1980 letter and the proposal.
Q And what does the current constitution look like?
R. The 1980 Charter was reformed several times, reflecting a compromise agreement between those who supported the dictatorship model, which was ultimately economically successful, and those who were inspired by social democratic models and promoted its gradual improvement through several changes.
Q Is what governs today Pinochet's government, which has been reformed almost 70 times since 1989 (and bears the signature of Ricardo Lagos due to the 2005 changes), or is it just Pinochet's government?
R. It is undoubtedly a mixed bag. A mixture of the historical ideology of law, which is expressed in the rules of the economic order – such as private initiative, equal treatment of private individuals and the state in business matters, the supremacy of freedom of education – and another that gradually introduced rules of liberal democracy, such as the expansion of the originally limited pluralism, the strengthening of Congress, the disappearance of military power as a constitutional power, etc. But despite all these changes, the economic public order with strictly liberal roots was maintained, which is why, as I have said several times, the Left is involved in this Sunday is forced to choose between the worst and the hideous.
Q Based on this Sunday's result, does Boric's government have a chance of winning something or will it still be a defeat?
R. Gabriel Boric's political project has already failed. That's not worth throwing dirt in your eyes. This was the result of a poor diagnosis that failed to understand Chile's modernization, but saw in it a kind of fraud by the elites, and is the result of an undeniable incompetence of the younger cadres. Gabriel Boric's transformative goal was completely thwarted, and it was not because of the constitutional issue. What remains of the government will be an administrative government, and the president should focus on the cultural dimension of the changes in Chile, where, yes, he is a good interpreter.
Q And do you see President Boric signing a new constitution drafted mainly by the most extreme right?
R. Undoubtedly, Gabriel Boric has faults, but he has a great virtue: beneath his phrases, the sometimes exaggerated rhetoric, a late youthful impulse (late, since he is already mature), in him there lives someone with a sense of legality and righteousness, sincere respect the rules. He has proven it many times, so I have no doubt that when a favor wins, it will happen naturally.
Carlos Peña during the interview with EL PAÍS.FERNANDA REQUENA
Q What do the results mean for the right-wing, traditional and Republican parties?
R. Neither the right nor the left should interpret an outcome that appears favorable to them as ideological adherence. The victory achieved by the right in the previous referendum, when it flooded the Constitutional Council with its candidates, did not reflect that its ideas (many of which were typical of a cavernous right) had been interpreted by citizens.
Q And then what happened last May?
R. This vote was a rejection of the ideological and behavioral excesses of the previous convention (adorned with numerous antics). And the decision for the latter at the time was not an adherence to the pure identity movements that adopted it. The cultural changes in Chilean society – material improvement, expansion of autonomy, intergenerational progress, massification of higher education, the experience of life as the fruit of one's own effort – await a political agenda that can interpret them.
Q What lesson will Chile have learned after four years of complicated constitutional processes?
R. The most important thing of all that you will learn very soon, if you haven't already, is that constitutional changes neither change the appearance of countries nor, in themselves, lead to prosperity. It is very difficult to influence the development of countries through rules: social processes of various kinds take place under the rules and sooner or later they will be enforced.
Q Is this happening to Chile?
R. In the case of Chile, I believe that the changes experienced in the last three decades, which have partially transformed the subjectivity of Chileans, will continue to determine collective life until the rules catch up. In 1970, Aníbal Pinto noted that the problem at the time was that Chile had an expansive democracy and a petty and exclusive economy. And we emerged from this contradiction by abandoning democracy or changing the economy. Today the problem is the other way around: society is ahead of the rules and institutions.
Q Have Chile's attempts to change its constitution since Sunday ended in the short and medium term?
R. If the opposition wins, there is no doubt that despite what has been said, there will be reforms agreed upon by Congress. In this case there will be no global change process; but there will be reforms. And if the yes votes win, there will also be a long consensus process in Congress to adapt the institutions to the new rules. In both cases, party politics will be back.
Q What emergencies in the country should the political class focus on starting this Monday?
R. The most urgent thing will be to face the problems it faces that are unconstitutional: safety on the streets, fear of the other, which is particularly prevalent in the most humble sectors, which, moreover, are the ones that matter ; the failure in school education, which has increased in recent years instead of slowly disappearing and is harming the majority; We must solve the crisis in the private healthcare system, which, if there is no way out, will plunge the public system into catastrophe. As you can see, the most pressing reality, which is always the clear reality, will continue to exist and will now be knocking on the door without any pretexts so that it is not heard and there will no longer be the pretext of a constitutional amendment to be deaf or hide your own incompetence. .
Q The ones in Chile are big problems.
R. Although it may sound paradoxical, all these problems are the result of the material improvement that the country has experienced over the last three decades. But this improvement presents pathologies that must be addressed
Q What are the most important in the long term?
R. First, aligning the educational structure with the meritocratic ideal requires restoring the importance of education and the authority of the teacher, as well as gradually preventing the educational system from transforming the social class structure. Secondly, greater solidarity is necessary when sharing the risk of what Shakespeare calls the arrows and stones of fate, old age and sickness, and for the same reason greater solidarity is required in health and pensions. Third: improving security, the deterioration of which could also lead to a deterioration of institutions. All this does not seem to be at the level of a utopia that could ignite the enthusiasm of the masses or the new generations, but the time is not for utopias, but for modest ideals that meet the expectations of millions of people, proletarians the day before yesterday, Thanks to the last decades, they began to forge for themselves and their children.
Q What happens if crime isn't stopped?
R. If crime is not stopped, people are willing to pay any price to regain safety, including sacrificing their freedoms. Freedoms and due process will sooner or later become expendable luxuries for a society ruled by fear.