For some they are “nuances”, for others “differences”. There are those who think that the tension is superficial and others that it is deep. However, within the Communist Party they agree that within the Political Commission and the Central Committee the waters are not still, “there are different views” and “critical tones” regarding the progress of the Government and the strategy to change the economic model. Beneath the PC’s mantle of obedience, divergence emerges.
As explained in the official community, an example of the internal tension was the dispute between the deputy Karol Cariola and the former ambassador to Argentina Bárbara Figueroa for the general secretary of the party, where the latter won by 58 votes against 26 for the legislator.
Other examples, explained in the community, are the resignation of deputy Marisela Santibáñez from the party due to differences with the head of the caucus, and the CUT’s call for a strike in April. Its general secretary, Eric Campos, and vice president Karen Palma, are members of the Central Committee of the PC, while the international vice president, Guillermo Salinas, is a member of the store’s Political Commission, and close to the president of the communists Lautaro Carmona.
In this framework, Campos explained his differences with the Government after a meeting between leaders of the group with President Gabriel Boric two weeks ago.
“We have confirmed to President Boric the concern we have about the way he relates to the social movement (…) the relationship with businessmen has been privileged when ultimately what is required is a relationship with the social movement. The strike is ratified.”
The tension over the Group of 6 in the Communist Party
Within the 15 members of the Political Commission of the Communist Party there is talk of the existence of two opposing factions. One led by Lautaro Carmona and the general secretary of the PC, Barbara Figueroa, which contrasts with another rather dissident one, called “The Group of 6”, whose leadership is headed by Camila Vallejo and Karol Cariola.
“The political commission is divided between the so-called Group of 6, which is made up of Camila, Karol Cariola, Daniel Núñez, Marcos Barraza, Claudina Núñez and the person in charge of PC cadres, Javier Albornoz. They are articulated and tend to have a half-dissident vision of Lautaro Carmona and Barbara Figueroa, who have the support of six other members who constitute the majority: Juan Andrés Lagos, Guillermo Salinas, Lorena Pizarro, Daniel Jadue, Jaime Gajardo and Rosa Ahumada. The president of the Communist Youth, Daniela Serrano, joins the 6 by right, so the correlation of forces is complex and precarious,” says a member of the Central Committee.
According to one leader, there is a sector that “is more accommodating with the Government, while another is more critical.”
Furthermore, knowledgeable about the internal situation of the PC, they comment that the Group of 6 is the one that is most empowered within the Government, and that the Ministers of Labor, Jeannette Jara, and of Education, Nicolás Cataldo, are closest to this sector. .
They add that the so-called “Group of 6” articulates so that the party does not show any distance from the Boric government, as there was after the funeral of former president Piñera where a sector accused Boric of being a “denialist.”
Different nuances in the social network “x”
In fact, shortly after the Executive confirmed the death of former President Sebastián Piñera, a new differentiating “nuance” emerged within the Communist Party.
On the social network “x”, deputy Carol Kariola published a message of condolences to the family of the former president alluding to the tragedy.
Meanwhile, in the same application, his counterpart from the bench Lorena Pizarro, former president of the Group of Disappeared Detainees, placed a collage with the faces of 31 people who suffered severe eye injuries during October 18 and, later, reposted a message that highlighted that “his body could be found” in Lake Ranco, while others “despite the years we continue searching.” .
“The Political Commission is divided by the different political perspectives that exist, disagreements occur. The underlying political debate is whether there are transformations or not. And this is no longer a government of social transformations, it is one of neoliberal stability. At the beginning of the Government the idea was to end the AFP, but now the great goal is 3 plus 3. Boric is only giving stability to a model. Some of us see that we end up stabilizing an economic model that we always repudiate, neoliberalism, where some of the group of six defend that the goal is to end a good government and return again,” says a PC source to The counter.
According to what they explain in the community, the differences have been occurring for a long time, but after the death of Guillermo Teillier they have become more marked and frequent.
Usach academic Rolando Álvarez Vallejos – doctor in history, party activist and author of the book “From the turn to the government of the new type. The Communist Party of Chile in the first decade of the 21st century” – is considered one of the main historians of the contemporary left. Although he points out that his thing is not the analysis of the situation, he sheds light to understand the internal nuances.
According to the author of eleven books, the Communist Party after the return to democracy defines that in Chile, despite the arrival of the Concertación governments, “a total democracy” was not obtained and that there were spaces for the recovery of democracy as a pending task, among them “changing the institutionality of the dictatorship.”
“(Since the 90s) the traditional political line of the Communist Party (has been) to end the institutional, economic and cultural heritage of the dictatorship, that would be like the main axis of the political line of the PC and that was to make changes in the model economic and in the Constitution, (…) then a new institutional framework, a new economic model and profound changes in labor legislation,” says Professor Álvarez.
“Nuances for strategy to dismantle the neoliberal model”
The historian adds that “the dismantling of the legacy of the dictatorship that in the social sphere had to do with the end of the AFP, the end of the ISAPRE or the reform of the health system”, and that what exists now – and What is more evident – in the current debate of the Communist Party is that “within this common program there are nuances about where progress can best be made” to complete this program of social demands.
“The PC has not had major divisions since the 90s in general, there is a consensus,” he says and specifies that what there are are differences around where it is best to build this process, “if with a more institutional commitment, than the PC has always valued, which is participating in elections, having deputies, senators, councilors, municipalities, in the government or an action more focused on the social world, of workers, unions, social movements.
“There are nuances of visions about what is the best strategy to dismantle the neoliberal model, one more focused on the social, union movement, and another focused on the more institutional strategy (…). The leaders of the PC who come from the union world, have, due to their social roots, and their activity, a vision that values much more the presence in the social movement, grassroots organizations, in the union world, and the demands that are pending, because the The government, for reasons that are long to analyze, which are the composition of Parliament, has not been able to carry out the more structural reforms that the Communist Party has always desired (…) the pension reform, the health issue, are being discussed, of the Isapres, but everything has had to be very consensual due to the correlation of forces in Parliament,” says Álvarez.
“The discussion is critical”
“The leaders linked to the union world, for example, have a vision that is what the leaders of the CUT have expressed (in a call for strike). Instead, Those who are ministers, who are in the Government, have a vision that values more the possibility of development from the Government, public policies, etc. Those nuances are expressedwhich are more or less evident in the statements of the communist leaders (…) The discussion is critical today, regarding this strategy, but I do not see it as a moment of internal rupture within the Communist Party, despite the discussion that can have its tonalities at times, because for the communist militancy a possibility of a left government outside the current coalition is not seen as viable,” maintains the historian.
A member of the Political Commission, close to Lautaro Carmona and Barbara Figueroa, confirms the existence of differences and tension with a group within the instance. However, he lowers his profile and maintains that “they do not hinder the direction of the party.”
“In every family there are differences. It is normal that there is. Now, without a doubt, the important thing is not to give material to the political adversary with internal differences,” says a leader from the capital.
Another panel from the instance maintains that, after Teillier’s death, Carmona assumed leadership unanimously, but that always in a large community “there are certain flats” that emerged for the election of the general secretary of the PC.
Finally, sources from the community maintain that it is expected that the differences will be channeled internally in the PC Congress that will begin to take place in May and will end at the end of June.
-
For more analysis and to discover the secrets of politics, join our community +Político, El Mostrador’s bet for those who think that politics is essential for a better democracy. Sign up for free HERE.