Marketing vs balloting: the demise of democracy
Published on Sunday, August 22nd 1999 on The San Juan StarBeing a firm believer in the process of evolution, I must sadly conclude that democracy is at the threshold of its extinction. Government will no longer honor and obey the will of the majority of the people. Decisions will no longer be taken on the basis of balloting. The new form of government will be determined by clever and/or malicious marketing. Those who take their vote seriously must feel insulted by the radical policy changes that result from studied marketing strategies by a strident minority.
Whomever evokes more clamor, gets more headlines, becomes the darling of the press, screams the loudest, takes the seemingly boldest moves, and makes the most noise, will rule. Remember that many members of the press sympathize with this camp, and that they often edit not necessarily by how they write, but rather by what they cover with more prominence, which is also a form of editing. The silent majority now has to take a back seat to the marketing –rabble-rousing– minority.
Clearly a minority adept at marketing wants to rule over a majority adept only at balloting. Marketing holds so much power over balloting that a pro-statehood administration elected by balloting has buckled under a clever strategy of independentist marketing, and is even embracing a contrary separatist stance. Some New Progressive Party leaders have embraced the goals of Independence: get the Armed Forces out; assume and endorse an anti-U.S. attitude; get the U.S. out of Puerto Rico.
To be good at marketing, you have to have an instinct towards the very visible, and the very safe. What can be more visible –and safe– than defying the greatest naval power on earth? Specially when you know that this military power is militarily and politically constrained against civilians, and is morally impeded from fighting back. It's so easy, so comfortable –so safe– to enter into "battle" when you are certain your opponent must protect you and cannot hurt you even while fighting back!
What can be more visible and safe than defying physical removal or arrest when you are certain that the arrestors will treat you with kid gloves and safely make you even more visible in the process?
What can be more visible than picnicking out indefinitely on a luscious beach while still safely on the public payroll and being pampered by your followers and by the media? Wish I could do it!
What can be more visible than misconstruing the Vieques issue and sandwiching it with the release of anti-U.S. activists on the mainland, who were imprisoned for real crimes? No one, of course, likes to have anyone imprisoned, so it becomes easy and safe to plead for their release even if the public spokespersons of the imprisoned unilaterally refuse to abide by the mandatory –legal– probation and sentence reduction due process because it does not suit the spokesperson's political agendas. Has anyone asked the prisoners if they want out and are willing to comply?
What can be more visible than defying the world's greatest power by wanting to trick the United States into having to say that they hold or have held political prisoners, an admission that would have constitutional overtones to which the U.S. cannot be submitted? And what mainland figure can be more visible and safe than Jesse Jackson for this particular issue? Puerto Ricans and Afro-Americans –sometimes referred to as spiks and blacks– are often held in the same category.
Great marketing! And, like I said, the marketing of 3% of the population will override and squelch the balloting of the silent majority.
But all coins have two faces. Now, let's play what if. What if some statehooders on the far right have concocted all this, or at least are just going along with the gag to reap from it in the end? What if we allow the anti-U.S. sentiment on the island to become so nasty and so visible that it will be met with the backlash of an equivalent dose of anti-P.R. sentiment on the mainland? What if some of the not so enlightened in Congress opt to do away with these gnats from Puerto Rico once and for all, and decide to reduce all aid, all benefits, put quotas into their mainland entry, get the Navy out, shut down Roosevelt Roads, eliminate the National Guard and give us independence –cast us adrift– in one fell swoop?
Because, you see, most of our anti-U.S. posing is often just chic cocktail stuff, specially by our U.S.-Ivy League-educated intellectual independentists. We often play anti-U.S., but we are not anti WIC, nor anti FEMA, nor anti food coupons, nor anti welfare, nor anti Social Security, nor anti Medicare, nor anti U.S. currency, to mention just a few.
Maybe this is just a way of getting the silent majority to come up with its own marketing strategy. Yes, forget balloting. It's all marketing.
On the other hand, what if this is all a U.S.-generated preamble to a Congress-sponsored plebiscite in which they will have us pick between (1) a progressively more separate associated republic and (2) independence, with no statehood option? Like, "Get these gnats off my back". Is there a single Puerto Rican member of Congress other than our Resident Commissioner who is pro-statehood?
Beware. The democratic voting process no longer has anything to do with it. The preferences of the majority of the voters are being squashed by the preferences of a feeble minority, but very adept at marketing.
Quietly, in a lonely corner, there may be some weeping and gnashing of the teeth.