Thank you, Pedro Nuno Santos (PNS)! And I apparently thought very wrongly that the PS was sleeping. Just an article from you and … Oops! We are already dealing with five articles – four from a supposed answer – to your text of January 31 in PUBLIC. I’ll explain later why I think they’re a non-answer. But as Mr. von La Palice would say, let’s start at the beginning.
I cannot fail to underline because not all authors have the same relative importance to me or the country and especially because on a personal level not everyone deserves the same consideration, some references that shocked and did not portray me, nor almost anywhere an answer to what PNS thought was good to defend and that it was good to have done.
I admit that I have always thought that the strength and wealth of the PS and what made me join the only party in which I have lived as my political house for over 40 years, its enormous diversity and sometimes the coexistence of different ones Trends was tough and difficult, but always free and healthy. I never understood that there is only one left in the PS or that “my” left “is our” left. No, no and no. There are mine, yours, his / her and all, yes all, together form “our” left, our political home, the Socialist Party. Nor do I accept that on “our” left, the legacy of all and all militants of the PS, it is advocated that some are poor people who have a simplified view of the world and history that is divided between good and bad and that nothing they perceive, what is going on around them, is jokingly and ironically described as the “true” socialists.
I think that’s exactly the kind of argument that shouldn’t be made. This divisive yes, and unfortunately let’s admit a little primarily. They are people who lean on pages and don’t realize how irrelevant this is. Times are different there. You miss the bare minimum and impoverish the party. Apparently it has to satisfy her. Sorry compensation! And when I, who will be 77 years old, I am already a little tired of the demagoguery that some use in chivalrous doses, if it is useful even if it is unreasonable, I don’t know how it is still admired afterwards that young people are not particularly attracted to the ideas. The reason is simple: this type of reasoning does not represent a debate about ideas. Just a certain bitterness and the inability to accept that each of us, with his differences, but with the common love of the Socialist Party, builds “our” left together. I can understand why this is not noticed by columnists, commentators and others. For important party cadres, I find this worrying.
However, let’s get to what I think is important: facts and consequences of these facts in the presidential election:
Fact 1 – More than six months before Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa (MRS) officially announced in a meeting in Autoeuropa whether or not he was a candidate for the presidency of the republic, the prime minister of a socialist government – António Costa – starts unexpectedly ” Your application without prior consultation with the PS. According to some commentators on our place: “spontaneously”. I will say of these that you do not know him. António Costa is anything but impulsive. He is a very intelligent man, a capable, experienced politician, an expert in bridge building, and an icy pragmatist who pays little attention to states of mind. He did it because he understood that it was the best and most stable solution for the Portuguese government.
Fact 2 – A few months later, the PS National Political Commission approved by a majority the Secretary-General’s position, which was to give militants freedom of choice, as the PS would not present a candidate. Obviously, given the position of the Secretary General and the Prime Minister, the solution could hardly be any different. The PS with one candidacy and the Secretary General with another ?! Impossible.
Fact 3 – Ana Gomes (AG) starts her candidacy without the support of the PS. It is important to restore the exact parameters for those who would like to reduce the results of the GA application – 13% – compared to the results achieved by Sampaio da Nóvoa and Maria de Belém five years ago together with about 26%, where they forgot that Sampaio da Nóvoa was very “helped” in the militancy and not only by the PS, which was not the case with the AG.
Fact 4 – Furthermore, the same Secretary General and Prime Minister stayed outside the MRS candidacy five years ago, having previously failed to express his satisfaction with having won the presidency of the Republic since the PS had one unofficial candidate – Sampaio da Nóvoa. Such “support”, also subliminal, makes the difference
Fact 5 – As far as I can remember, five years ago no high-ranking figure voiced his or her personality for the MRS candidacy like it did in this election, with a list of personalities who were not on an honorary committee for that reason did not exist. It is impossible to believe that it is fair to make comparisons between the two times.
Fact 6 – If there hadn’t been a candidacy for the AG, the messianic candidate would have been in second place (in his opinion). For some, this wasn’t very important. They do not want to recognize that the desired stability can only be achieved in a truly democratic, inclusive and pacifying society in which the fascinating jitter and anti-democratic assumptions are rejected by the people. You will tell me that people mostly voted for Marcelo. It is true, but without Ana Gomes after Marcelo’s victory and the defeat of the extreme left, nothing would have been left but the so-called anti-system candidacy. Can someone explain to me what it is like that it is an anti-system, a MP who is paid by the public purse and with a party that has been perfectly legalized by the Constitutional Court and is allied with the headquarters to be the center of the system ride and be a government?
Fact 7 – AG is a warrior. Your profile is much better suited to a member of the government or a parliamentarian. He presented himself without a network, without the support of one of the major parties. She decided to go into battle alone, knowing in advance that she would not even win, but decided that as a citizen, democratic socialism should be present. It boasts of courage and determination. Of course, the AG made mistakes, mistakes that were expendable and harmful to his campaign, such as the gratuitous harassment of the Prime Minister and the PS leaders, without realizing that by their harassment he was also harassing the militants who see themselves in their choice of leaders . In fact, the majority of voters don’t like aggressive campaigns. Some voices from the “usual suspects” emphasized the fact that MRS was the only candidate who did not attack the government. It could! Marcelo’s goal was not just to win, but to win with the greatest number of votes possible and perhaps get a result close to that of Mário Soares. Without the votes of the socialists, it was an impossible mission.
Conclusion: I have known MRS for many years. Maybe I am one of the socialists you have known the longest. I really like him as a person. I appreciated your mandate and your relationship with the government. I wouldn’t say much of this negatively, and I like to think that it contributed to such a peaceful and inclusive society. But my project for society is different. Sometimes it’s not just setting different priorities or goals that are to be achieved. These are the methods chosen and the ways to achieve them. I am decidedly left and as long as I go here and have the courage I will never give up fighting for the victory of my / our left in every election in every corner of my country.