Aurelia Peru: Energy crisis created preconditions for opposition parties to take revenge

The energy crisis created preconditions for the political entities that remained outside the corridors of power to take revenge. However, we should make a clear difference between constructive criticism of the reformist parties that want just to warn and to come with support for the current government – the PPDA, the Party of Law and Justice - and the second front that consists of parties of the left, which are categorical and prepare the public opinion for a more turbulent spring, with protests,” Doctor Habilitate of Political Science Aurelia Peru, PR and political communication expert, stated in a public debate hosted by IPN.

The expert said the opposition parties do not act in unison and will never make a common front against the Party of Action and Solidarity or the parties of the center, the center-right risk losing their identity, including the doctrinaire one. Therefore, the methods used by the opposition parties are different. “The opposition (of the left, e.n.) uses harsh rhetoric and aggressive vocabulary, such as “anti-popular government”, “antisocial government”, “criminals”, “genocide” and others. It seems that they started to also bank on the neuro-linguistic programing of voters,” stated Aurelia Peru.

She voiced hope that the government has a team that studies the proposals of the opposition parties that level constructive criticism. “It is a situation when the government should be maximally concentrated as it has to cope with a set of crises, such as energy, social determined by the higher bills, credibility and image ones. These three crises can lead to a political crisis that we do not experience at the moment.”

Aurelia Peru noted that the acceptance of the opposition’s suggestions can affect the image of the ruling party. “If they accept the support of center, center-right parties, this will mean they will recognize the fact that they could not cope alone, that the monocolor government hasn’t been the happiest post-electoral solution.

“As usual, when a crisis ends, there should be a scapegoat. We will see if the government finds a scapegoat. But this would also mean “mea culpa” and a step backward, a lower level of arrogance. Or no head will be “cut off” and they will continue to struggle to cope with the pressure. We will see if the PAS government continues to struggle for image, for credibility, for obtaining stability and wellbeing alone or accepts the support of parties that are sincere in rhetoric and do not aim to take political revenge.”

The public debate titled “Energy crisis as seen by government, opposition and society. Why does each of the parties behave as they do?” was the 222nd installment of the series “Developing Political Culture through Public Debates”. The project is implemented by IPN with support from the Hanns Seidel Foundation.

Вы используете модуль ADS Blocker .
IPN поддерживается от рекламы.
Поддержи свободную прессу!
Некоторые функции могут быть заблокированы, отключите модуль ADS Blocker .
Спасибо за понимание!
Команда IPN.