MAX WEBER NO VOTARÍA EN LA FARSA DE ABRIL NI ESTARIA SENTADO EN LA REPÚBLICA DOMINICANA

Me baso, para decir esto, en una charla dada por Weber, en Enero de 1919,  a estudiantes de Bavaria . La charla se tituló: “La Política como vocación”.

Confrontado con la tragedia venezolana he tratado de examinar con alguna atención lo que dicen algunas grandes figuras intelectuales sobre el tema de la ética y la política. Una recomendación de Gustavo Tarre me ha llevado a leer esta conferencia de Max Weber sobre este y otros temas. La he leído  en su versión en inglés.

El texto es majestuoso. Verlo completo en: http://anthropos-lab.net/wp/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Weber-Politics-as-a-Vocation.pdf .  Alternativamente diáfano, lleno de grandes hallazgos y ocasionalmente oscuro y hasta contradictorio, como un lago de  aguas profundas que no dejan ver el lecho. Lo que hecho es seleccionar trozos que me parecen de especial relevancia para nuestros dilemas venezolanos, con la esperanza de encontrar en ellos la linterna que ilumine el camino a seguir ante la tragedia de nuestro  país. Después de trabajar con la versión en inglés descubrí una traducción al español, cuando ya había trabajado sobre la versión en inglés, por lo cual pido excusas. Se puede leer completa en: http://disenso.info/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/La-poltica-como-vocacion-M.-Weber.pdf. Aquí transcribo los párrafos seleccionados, con mis comentarios:

1.      There are two ways of making politics one's vocation: Either one lives 'for' politics or one lives 'off' politics. By no means is this contrast an exclusive one. The rule is, rather, that man does both, at least in thought, and certainly he also does both in practice. He who lives 'for' politics makes politics his life, in an internal sense. Either he enjoys the naked possession of the power he exerts, or he nourishes his inner balance and self-feeling by the consciousness that his life has meaning in the service of a 'cause.' In this internal sense, every sincere man who lives for a cause also lives off this cause. The distinction hence refers to a much more substantial aspect of the matter, namely, to the economic. He who strives to make politics a permanent source of income lives 'off' politics as a vocation, whereas he who does not do this lives 'for' politics. Under the dominance of the private property order, some--if you wish-- very trivial preconditions must exist in order for a person to be able to live 'for' politics in this economic sense. Under normal conditions, the politician must be economically independent of the income politics can bring him. This means, quite simply, that the politician must be wealthy or must have a personal position in life which yields a sufficient income.

Mi comentario: En Venezuela hemos tenido destacados hombres y mujeres quienes han vivido para la política: Betancourt fue uno de ellos, ciertamente. Pero a medida que estos hombres fueron dejando la escena se impuso, más y más, la presencia de quienes viven de la política. En términos generales y respetando las excepciones, ello ha conllevado una mediocrización de la política venezolana y a un deterioro del cuadro ético en el cual se desempeña la actividad.

2.      Either politics can be conducted 'honorifically' and then, as one usually says, by 'independent,' that is, by wealthy, men, and especially by rentiers. Or, political leadership is made accessible to propertyless men who must then be rewarded. The professional politician who lives 'off' politics may be a pure 'prebendary' or a salaried 'official.' Then the politician receives either income from fees and perquisites for specific services--tips and bribes are only an irregular and formally illegal variant of this category of income-- or a fixed income in kind, a money salary, or both. …With the development of the money economy, perquisites and prebends especially are the typical rewards for the following of princes, victorious conquerors, or successful party chiefs. For loyal services today, party leaders give offices of all sorts --in parties, newspapers, co-operative societies, health insurance, municipalities, as well as in the state. All party struggles are struggles for the patronage of office, as well as struggles for objective goals

Mi comentario. De nuevo, en nuestro país la política ha sido vista, con creciente frecuencia, como la vía de acceso a la riqueza por parte de lo que ha sido, con frecuencia, una legión de aventureros. A diferencia de otros países como los nórdicos europeos o los Estados Unidos o Canadá, donde mucha gente rica entra en la política para lograr poder, en Venezuela mucha gente accede al poder político para hacer dinero. Quienes está sedientos de poder, a lo Chávez y Maduro, a veces se olvidan de robar ellos, aunque no les importa que sus amigos lo hagan.

3.      To take a stand, to be passionate--ira et studium--is the politician's element, and above all the element of the political leader. His conduct is subject to quite a different, indeed, exactly the opposite, principle of responsibility from that of the civil servant. The honor of the civil servant is vested in his ability to execute conscientiously the order of the superior authorities, exactly as if the order agreed with his own conviction. This holds even if the order appears wrong to him and if, despite the civil servant's remonstrances, the authority insists on the order. Without this moral discipline and self-denial, in the highest sense, the whole apparatus would fall to pieces. The honor of the political leader, of the leading statesman, however, lies precisely in an exclusive personal responsibility for what he does, a responsibility he cannot and must not reject or transfer. It is in the nature of officials of high moral standing to be poor politicians, and above all, in the political sense of the word, to be irresponsible politicians. In this sense, they are politicians of low moral standing, such as we unfortunately have had again and again in leading positions

Mi comentario: Weber habla aquí de como la pasión, la adopción de una postura decidida, es  un atributo esencial del líder. En contraste, dice, el burócrata debe limitarse a obedecer, aun cuando la orden no cuadre con sus convicciones. El habla de esa sumisión como disciplina moral. Aquí difiero. Nadie debe hacer lo que considere inmoral. En lo que se refiere a la pasión, Weber no considera que esa pasión pueda ser fingida, en cuyo caso estamos frente a un demagogo. Ese fue el trágico caso de Chávez.

4.       Naturally power actually rests in the hands of those who, within the organization, handle the work continuously. Otherwise, power rests in the hands of those on whom the organization in its processes depends financially or personally--for instance, on the Maecenases or the directors of powerful political clubs of interested persons (Tammany Hall). It is decisive that this whole apparatus of people-- characteristically called a 'machine' in Anglo-Saxon countries--or rather those who direct the machine, keep the members of the parliament in check. They are in a position to impose their will to a rather far-reaching extent, and that is of special significance for the selection of the party leader. The man whom the machine follows now becomes the leader, even over the head of the parliamentary party. In other words, the creation of such machines signifies the advent of plebiscitarian democracy.

Mi comentario: Al leer esto recuerdo a Henry Ramos Allup. Él ha sido un gran trabajador político y por ello ha sido el jefe absoluto de los restos de la maquinaria que fue Acción Democrática y tiene el poder de esa organización en sus manos. El otro dueño del poder en organizaciones políticas es el que tiene el dinero para financiarla. En el caso del chavismo ello fue posible gracias a la total discrecionalidad de Chávez sobre el dinero petrolero, facilitada por la inmoralidad de sus colaboradores, una verdadera pandilla de malhechores.

5.      Now then, the boss is the figure who appears in the picture of this system of the plebiscitarian party machine. Who is the boss? He is a political capitalist entrepreneur who on his own account and at his own risk provides votes….  The typical boss is an absolutely sober man. He does not seek social honor; the 'professional' is despised in 'respectable society.' He seeks power alone, power as a source of money, but also power for power's sake….The boss has no firm political 'principles'; he is completely unprincipled in attitude and asks merely: What will capture votes? Frequently he is a rather poorly educated man. But as a rule he leads an inoffensive and correct private life. In his political morals, however, he naturally adjusts to the average ethical standards of political conduct, as a great many of us also may have done during the hoarding period in the field of economic ethics.

Mi comentario: En este párrafo sobre financistas y eminencias grises vemos el retrato de un Luis Alfaro Ucero, de un Luis Miquilena, quizás de un Pedro Tinoco, los poderes detrás del trono. No un José Vicente Rangel, quien ha tratado inútilmente de serlo y  de lograr la presidencia del país, maniobrando toda la vida, sin poder conseguirlo, apenas relegado a ser un miembro más de la comparsa.

6.      Well, first of all the career of politics grants a feeling of power. The knowledge of influencing men, of participating in power over them, and above all, the feeling of holding in one's hands a nerve fiber of historically important events can elevate the professional politician above everyday routine even when he is placed in formally modest positions. But now the question for him is: Through what qualities can I hope to do justice to this power (however narrowly circumscribed it may be in the individual case)? How can he hope to do justice to the responsibility that power imposes upon him? With this we enter the field of ethical questions, for that is where the problem belongs: What kind of a man must one be if he is to be allowed to put his hand on the wheel of history? One can say that three pre-eminent qualities are decisive for the politician: passion, a feeling of responsibility, and a sense of proportion

Mi comentario: Aquí entramos en el asunto medular. ¿Qué clase de persona es la indicada para optar al poder? Weber responde que son tres las cualidades requeridas: La pasión, un sentido de responsabilidad y un sentido de la proporción. Al pensar en sentidos de responsabilidad y de  proporción, dice Weber, no es posible separarnos del campo de la ética.

7.      The sin against the lofty spirit of his vocation, however, begins where this striving for power ceases to be objective and becomes purely personal self-intoxication, instead of exclusively entering the service of 'the cause.' For ultimately there are only two kinds of deadly sins in the field of politics: lack of objectivity and-often but not always identical with it--irresponsibility. Vanity, the need personally to stand in the foreground as clearly as possible, strongly tempts the politician to commit one or both of these sins. This is more truly the case as the demagogue is compelled to count upon 'effect.' He therefore is constantly in danger of becoming an actor as well as taking lightly the responsibility for the outcome of his actions and of being concerned merely with the 'impression' he makes. His lack of objectivity tempts him to strive for the glamorous semblance of power rather than for actual power. His irresponsibility, however, suggests that he enjoy power merely for power's sake without a substantive purpose. …It is a product of a shoddy and superficially blase attitude towards the meaning of human conduct; and it has no relation whatsoever to the knowledge of tragedy with which all action, but especially political action, is truly interwoven.

Mi comentario. Aquí Weber es tajante. Habla del riesgo que enfrenta el político de desviarse por el deseo de poder por el poder, por la vanidad y  la carencia de objetividad. Cuando cede a esos riesgos, añade Weber, el político se convierte en un demagogo ejerciendo el poder por el poder mismo, sin un propósito sustantivo.  Entonces, diríamos, el político se convierte en un traidor a su pueblo y a sí mismo, el caso de Chávez.

8.      what relations do ethics and politics actually have? Have the two nothing whatever to do with one another, as has occasionally been said? Or, is the reverse true: that the ethic of political conduct is identical with that of any other conduct? Occasionally an exclusive choice has been believed to exist between the two propositions--either the one or the other proposition must be correct. But is it true that any ethic of the world could establish commandments of identical content for erotic, business, familial, and official relations; for the relations to one's wife, to the green-grocer, the son, the competitor, the friend, the defendant? Should it really matter so little for the ethical demands on politics that politics operates with very special means, namely, power backed up by violence?

Mi comentario: Aquí Weber se pregunta sobre la relación entre política y ética. ¿Será que no tienen nada que ver la una con la otra?  Weber distingue entre la ética del fin último y la ética de la responsabilidad. La primera promueve la acción sin pensar en las consecuencias, bajo la acción de un imperativo ético. La segunda tiene en consideración los resultados de su acción. Aquí parecería que Weber tiene una cierta inclinación a pensar que la ética que se aplica a la relación con el verdulero no debe ser la misma que la que se aplica a la relación con  la esposa. Añade que no debe olvidarse que la política opera bajo condiciones especiales, como es el poder apoyado en la violencia. Aquí Weber me deja confundido.

9.      We must be clear about the fact that all ethically oriented conduct may be guided by one of two fundamentally differing and irreconcilably opposed maxims: conduct can be oriented to an 'ethic of ultimate ends' or to an 'ethic of responsibility.' This is not to say that an ethic of ultimate ends is identical with irresponsibility, or that an ethic of responsibility is identical with unprincipled opportunism. Naturally nobody says that. However, there is an abysmal contrast between conduct that follows the maxim of an ethic of ultimate ends--that is, in religious terms, 'The Christian does rightly and leaves the results with the Lord'--and conduct that follows the maxim of an ethic of responsibility, in which case one has to give an account of the foreseeable results of one's action….. But even herewith the problem is not yet exhausted. No ethics in the world can dodge the fact that in numerous instances the attainment of 'good' ends is bound to the fact that one must be willing to pay the price of using morally dubious means or at least dangerous ones--and facing the possibility or even the probability of evil ramifications. From no ethics in the world can it be concluded when and to what extent the ethically good purpose 'justifies' the ethically dangerous means and ramifications.

Mi comentario. Aquí Weber sigue en la onda de arriba, pero me tranquiliza al  presentar otra faceta del asunto. Dice que el político debe estar dispuesto a pagar el precio de utilizar medios de dudosa moralidad para lograr sus fines, ya que esos medios pueden llevarlo a perversas ramificaciones. Ninguna ética, añade Weber, puede justificar que una buena intención justifique el uso de medios éticamente peligrosos y sus ramificaciones. Aquí yo creo entender que Weber, si viviera hoy, no estaría de acuerdo con ir a las elecciones anticipadas en Venezuela, bajo la rectoría de las bandidas del CNE y de los corruptos de la ANC.

10.   it is immensely moving when a mature man-- no matter whether old or young in years--is aware of a responsibility for the consequences of his conduct and really feels such responsibility with heart and soul. He then acts by following an ethic of responsibility and somewhere he reaches the point where he says: 'Here I stand; I can do no other.' That is something genuinely human and moving. And every one of us who is not spiritually dead must realize the possibility of finding himself at some time in that position. In so far as this is true, an ethic of ultimate ends and an ethic of responsibility are not absolute contrasts but rather supplements) which only in unison constitute a genuine man--a man who can have the 'calling for politics.'

Mi comentario: Me siento muy identificado con esto que dice Weber. Cita a Martín Lutero: “Aquí me planto. No puedo hacer nada más”, como ejemplo de responsabilidad. Cada uno de nosotros, dice Weber, se verá en algún momento en esa necesidad de plantarse, de definirse. Weber dice que, cuando eso ocurra, es muy probable que se le pueda hacer el honor a la política. Es cuando las actitudes son ambiguas y divorciadas de la ética que el político decepciona.

11.   Politics is a strong and slow boring of hard boards. It takes both passion and perspective. Certainly all historical experience confirms the truth --that man would not have attained the possible unless time and again he had reached out for the impossible. But to do that a man must be a leader, and not only a leader but a hero as well, in a very sober sense of the word.

Mi comentario: Para Weber el buen político debe ser un líder y un héroe. Esa dualidad elimina a muchos de los políticos venezolanos de hoy, especialmente aquellos que se preparan para participar en las elecciones anticipadas convocadas por el Consejo Nacional Electoral de Tibisay y la ANC de Delcy.

Weber no estaría sentado en República Dominicana.