A "Methodology" for Criticism / Fernando Dámaso


To criticize, a verb that was absent from the national press for too many years, in recent time, times of the actualization of the model, has appeared in some media, although in a rather moderate way. Here and there, once in a while, some occasional criticism appears, although mostly relating to minor matters and not those that are really important and transcendent. Regardless: Welcome!

This critique, offered by journalists or even by letter-writing citizens, seems to respond to a methodology where it is established that, at the beginning or end, or sometimes within it, it must, perforce, be noted that the government is good, gentle, intelligent, honorable, concerned, austere, capable and responsibility, usually far from whatever is being criticized, the fault of which lies, by preference, in some misguided official, or insensitive director, who doesn’t meet the standards established by the authorities since the beginning of time. The sugar-coated critique appears to be the only kind that can be published, given its abundance in the media. It seems that the other, the hard critique, which could help to solve problems, is still missing.

As long as the strait jacket continues to establish where, when, how and to whom one can level criticisms, there will be not criticism. Who determines these parameters? The methodology? Is this latter perhaps some bastard daughter of the absurd previous principle.

The one and the other serve the same thing: the harmful and immobile complacency, incapable of breaking the barrier of fear and telling the truth and facing the possible consequences. Criticism doesn’t need to be authorized, nor regulated by anyone, much less conditioned between barriers and ceilings.

The shadow of criticism offered by our media, doesn’t satisfy anyone nor meet any citizen expectations: it’s more of the dame, with a hint of color to make it seem different. If that if the path chosen by the authorities to help undo the accumulated wrongs, they have chosen badly and have been mistaken once again. The responsible citizens demands a serious critique, deep, capable of pointing out the real causes of problems, in order to resolve them, and not sugar-coated words.

This methodology is not original, it’s already been used elsewhere, and has failed in many places. The failures of others should, at least, serve as a lesson to us, or if not, a warning.

April 26 2012