A TRUE “USEFUL VOTE”

By Andrea Guachalla

The days go by and October 18th, the day on which Bolivia will hold presidential elections, comes closer and closer. With 6 candidates running for the presidency, an interim president who recently resigned her candidature, just like Jorge Quiroga who was leading Libre 21 and the widespread idea of the “useful vote”, i.e. voting for the candidate who has more support from the population – no matter who he is – in order to prevent the Movement Toward Socialism (MAS) from ruling the country again, the scenario is tense and unpredictable. Moreover, the concept of “useful vote” is especially challenging for Christians who must not only consider the danger of an authoritarian government ruling the country again but also must consider whose policies are more in line with what is good and “useful” in the eyes of God.

In this article, you will find a Christian conservative view of what a true “useful vote” is through a general review of the candidates, and what their stands are on central issues that should be considered by Christians as we assess and decide who will get our mark in the ballot. You will also find bibliographical references at the end of the article and throughout this document.

Importance of voting

Although the political and social instability of the country has caused Christians and the overall population alike to think of a “useful vote” as merely a vote for Carlos Mesa and his political party, Citizen Community (CC), a “useful vote” should be considered according to what each of the other parties proposes, the implications of their policies, and how strongly or weakly they stand for certain ideologies/practices that are in conflict with what Christians know is conducive to human flourishing.

Now, as citizens of a democratic country who have the right, responsibility, and power of participating in the presidential election, we must treat this responsibility with due importance. The truth of the matter is, by participating in the elections, we are giving someone else the power to rule a nation, and we must be sure that we are giving our vote to someone whose policies will be in line with what is right in the eyes of God. Furthermore, it is our responsibility to inform ourselves about the proposals of each candidate and assess the implications of the policies they plan to bring into law, evaluating which matters are more important than others, and which policies we, as Christians, can in good conscience support.

The candidates

Overall, one of the political parties is confessedly from the center – Libre 21. Four political parties belong to the socialist left-wing – Nationalist Democratic Action (ADN), Movement Toward Socialism (MA-IPSP), Bolivian National Action Party (PAN-BOL), ​Citizen Community (CC). This is evident by their policies on collectivism, equality, community, and welfare systems. Finally, two political parties are allegedly from the conservative right-wing – Front for Victory (FPV) and We Believe (Creemos). 

As it was seen in the presidential debates held these past weeks, and the proposals each of the candidates made, there is an emphasis on the economic re-activation of the country, policies for the correct management of the spread of COVID-19, enhancing the education and healthcare system, fighting corruption and narcotraffic, and different proposals regarding economical activities for the mining industry, tourism, Lithium exploitation, etc, all of these things are good, and do not require of us to choose between right or wrong. However, other issues and proposals do require from us to choose between what’s good in the eyes of God and what is not, as in the case of the degree os support these parties offer to feminism, the legalization of abortion, LGBTQ activism, and the adaptation of school curricula to teach sexual diversity and feminist ideologies (part of what is known as critical theory and intersectionality) that have not been so openly discussed. 

Dangerous ideologies

Throughout the whole world, the demands of feminists and the LGBTQ community (and in general critical theorists) have been the cause of division, and both rhetorical and violent conflict. They have also born profound consequences for society in both the long- and short-term. For more information and a conservative view on these issues you can listen to Mamela Flor, Agustín Laje, and Allie B. Stuckey, they expand on the scientific, ideological, and moral flaws of feminism, abortion, and gender egalitarianism. Here I will assume that as Christians we agree on that abortion is the murder of unborn babies and unacceptable regardless of the circumstances in which it is made (Exodus 21:22-25, Luke 1:43, Jer 1:5, Psalm 139, Psalm 51:5), and that it is a sin to practice homosexuality (Mark 10:6, Genesis 2:24, Leviticus 18:22, 1 Corinthians 6:9, 1 Timothy 1:10, Romans 1:26-27), therefore, we do not support the LGBTQ agenda that seeks to promote homosexual orientation and indoctrinate children in the school systems with the idea that gender is a social/cultural construct rather than biological.

The consequences of teaching these ideologies, the deconstruction of the nuclear family, and the normalization of abortion are tangible in countries like Italy, Germany, Spain, Austria, Canada, Russia, and others where the decrease in birth rate is predicted to not be enough to replace the older generation. The decline of the population in these countries is an ongoing threat. We may agree at this point that women fighting for the “right” to kill their own babies in the womb and asking the state to pay for it, and having the youngest generations being indoctrinated and confused by the teaching of sexual diversity is a sinfully low state which epitomizes human rebellion against God. We have history and global culture to clearly show us what these things do to societies, and how it degrades what was originally intended and designed by God.

What are the candidates saying about this?

According to an article published in Página Siete written by Carolina Mendez, none of the candidates has openly addressed the issues of gender equality, femicides, legalization of abortion, sexual diversity, and employment opportunities for transgender women to the degree that feminists, intersectionalists, transgenderists, systemic racism activists, etc. (critical theorists) demand.

The source goes on to say that the only issue that has been addressed by the political parties is the one of violence against women, gender inequality, and female fatalities due to male aggression. All the parties mentioned have rightly and duly promised to offer help to single mothers, girls that are sexually exploited, and women who have gone through any kind of violence. Before Jorge Quiroga resigned to his candidature, his party Libre 21, had stated that their Government Program aimed to change the “gender-stereotypes” for raising children without going to discuss further details. Two parties remained silent in this regard: PAN-BOL and ADN.PAN-BOL y ADN. Meanwhile Luis Fernando Camacho who leads Creemos has announced that he is pro-life and that he will not legalize abortion, he would on the other hand seek to solve the underlying problems that lead women to go for that option, lastly, he has stated that the nuclear family must be conformed to the way it was designed by God.

The source quotes the activist Claudia Araúz from Autonomous Feminists stating that the fact that all the political parties addressed this issue alone, while not addressing all of the other demands, is a sign of a chauvinist, homo-lesbo-transphobic society that neglects women and the LGBTQ community. Maria Galindo, renowned feminist-LGBTQ activist and founder of Women Creating (Mujeres Creando), broadly labels all these parties, – except for Citizens Community (we’ll get to that later) – as right-wing parties, fascists, and racists during a political analysis where she assesses each of the candidates along with the renowned political theorist Jorge Richter who in turn disagrees with many of her assessments.

Due to the lack of support from most of the candidates towards the feminist, abortionist, LGBTQ agenda, the representative of Autonomous Feminist goes on to criticize most parties’ disinterest in legalizing abortion. Likewise, Christian Egüez, an activist representing the Sexual Dissidence organization, goes on to complain against indifference toward the LGBTQ community and both catalog Bolivia as a “conservative, backward, religious” country.

The article concludes by showing a graph illustrating the extent to which their demands are supported by each party. Let’s now read what are their most reiterated demands:

1. Democratization of power and political participation of women.
2. Cultural, symbolic and material dismantling of patriarchy and new institutions for women.
3. Guarantees and conditions for the exercise of the right to live free of violence.
4. Autonomy and self-determination of women’s bodies: exercise of sexual and reproductive rights.
5. Women’s economic autonomy, equitable access to resources, income, work, opportunities, recognition of their economic contribution and revaluation of domestic and care work.
6. Environmental justice and gender justice.

Of course, action on behalf of the government is required for some of these demands due to the high rates of intrafamilial violence and sex trafficking that affect many girls and women throughout the country: these are certainly urgent things that require justice to be made and protection to be offered to the victims. However, these urgent things and justice-seeking have no direct connection with the demands of de-patriarchalization that would directly affect the education of children, and the legalization of the killing of unborn babies as part of the central axis of “sexual and reproductive rights”.

May the Lord help us discern what seeking justice truly means in His eyes, and not in the eyes of man who seek to normalize sin.

According to an analysis carried out by the Gender Observatory and PROTAGONISTS, it is reported that the political parties that have a higher level of inclusion of proposals from the National Political Agenda (Political agenda from women. Democizra paria towards depatriar) Citizen Community, and MAS- IPSP, the parties with a low inclusion level are Creemos, FPV and Libre 21, and finally the parties with initial inclusion levels are ADN and PAN-BOL. About some of the parties with lower levels of inclusion, it is reported that “explicitly conservative positions regarding women’s rights are expressed in FPV, Creemos, ADN and PAN-BOL.”

In conclusion, the political party that is receiving the most support with the idea of the “useful vote” is precisely the one that presents one of the highest levels of inclusion towards the demands of the PROTAGONISTAS collective. For further information about the party it is recommended to read section II of “EQUALITY DEVELOPMENT” in the Government Plan of CC, there the party addresses a broad plan for the benefit of women regarding maternity, calling it “integral work to face social norms that encourage early pregnancies and sexual violence against teenagers.” On the official website terms such as abortion or LGBTQ are completely avoided. To note, under the subtitle of “gender equality” their website reads: “It will be established that none of the issues pertinent [to women] such as sexual and reproductive rights, fight against violence and policies of gender and family promotion, will be decided by men.” The lack of definition or further explanation on some points make it hard to find a clear-ideologically defined statement on behalf of Carlos Mesa; however, the statistical analysis made by “Gender Observatory and PROTAGONISTS” show that regardless of the lack of Mesa’s definition on these issues, he is highly supportive of these movements/agendas.

There are not many details available on behalf of the other parties, except for their compromise of fighting violence against women and girls; however, before resigning the candidature, Jorge Quiroga from Libre 21 had stated in the section corresponding to EDUCATION in his Government Plan that he was planning to “change the gender stereotypes for raising children” and to implement “education on responsible and informed sexual health.” He had also promised to implement a better health system for pregnant women, which doesn’t seem to have any ambiguity that could be interpreted as support towards “planned maternity” or abortion. Lastly, he had also stated that he would de-ideologize education so it could be focused on producing workers/laborers.

The conservative political party, Creemos, has stated that they stand for the nuclear family as designed by God, (i.e. marriage between man and woman and parental involvement in the children’s education), as mentioned before, and that they will not legalize abortion, but rather will seek to solve the underlying problems that cause it to be thought of as an option. On the other hand, FPV ran by Chi Hyun Chung has openly and boldly condemned abortion, feminism, the deconstruction of the nuclear family, and during a debate even called out Carlos Mesa for his support to these movements, to which Mesa responded in mockery denying such allegations. The rest of the political parties have remained silent, though MAS had been supporting these movements since 2009 when the LGBT community was included in the section of “Fundamental Rights and Guarantees”, Art. 14, Par. 2 of the Political Constitution of the State, and later on, in 2016 approved a law allowing the legal change of gender.

Concluding remarks

There is not and there will never be a political party that satisfies all the demands of the people in a way that honors God. As mentioned in a previous article, for decades on end the general feeling has been that people vote for the lesser of evils, but at least we have the right and power to vote and give agency to the political party we think will respond to the needs of the nation in a better way. Oftentimes this means that we have to weigh what’s good and bad about the policies the candidates are proposing and seek God’s wisdom to decide which party will do better than worse. 

The question regarding all the issues discussed throughout the article is, which political party will rule the country and take care of the needs of the people while also clearly and boldly standing for the truth, and will view abortion as murder and homo-sexual orientation as sin as the Bible says? Which political party will protect the children and youth from having to be indoctrinated with the ideologies discussed? 

Besides seeking God’s wisdom in this regard, I highly encourage each of the readers to go through the references cited below and read the Government Plan of each candidate paying close attention to the way they refer to these issues and decide objectively who is worthy of a “useful vote” knowing that a true “useful vote” is not a vote that despairs and neglects the Lord of all. A true “useful vote” is a vote that honors our Triune God above all.

Author’s Note: The reader is informed with due apologies that due to an observation made on the statistics used in paragraph 16 of this article, the data was corrected today, October 14th at 9.00 am (UTC / GMT -4) according to the information available in the “National Political Agenda: Political agenda from women – Horizons to advance towards de-patriarchalization and parity democracy” of the Gender Observatory and PROTAGONISTS. Also, the central axes of their demands were corrected in paragraph 13. The bibliographic source is available in ‘References’.

---

References:

• ATB DIGITAL (2020). “#EnVivo #DebatePresidencial “El futuro de Bolivia”, en #ATBDigital.”
• Center For Reproductive Rights (2020). “The World’s Abortion Laws.”
• World Population Review (2020). “Birth Rate by Country 2020.”
• Carolina Méndez (September 28th, 2020). “Abortion and LGBTI rights, tabú issues in the candidates agenda.” Página Siete.
• María del Carmen Sánchez García(2020). “Informe: Agenda Política desde las Mujeres y Programas de Gobierno de las organizaciones políticas”. PROTAGONISTAS: paridad-poder-juventudes.
• Maria Galindo (2020). Diferencias entre ESTADO PLURINACIONAL y REPÚBLICA junto a JORGE RICHTER RAMIREZ. Radio Deseo 103.3.
• Citizen Community (2020). “Proposals: 6. Gender Equality.”
• Citizen Community (2020). “Government Plan: Solutions for the present and future of Bolivia.”
• Maria Galindo (2018). “Carlos Mesa and María Galindo, 19 de Septiembre 2018 – DEBATE.” Radio Deseo 103.3.
• Carlos Mesa (2016). “Identity and Identities | TEDxKantutani.” TEDTalks
• Libre 21 (2020). “Bolivia green digital heart 2020-2025. Government Program. Alliance LIBRE 21 – Freedom and Democracy.”
• Actualidad Live (2020). “Luis Fernando Camacho se proclama PRO-VIDA en entrevista en vivo.” Liberal Boliviano.
• Daniela Romero L. (2020). “Camacho, el caudillo antievista, ahora es el tercero que dispersa el voto.” Página Siete.
• La Razón (2020). “Chi vuelve a atacar a la comunidad LGBTI, tienen disturbios psicológicos y están en la prostitución.”

Other sources:

• Agustín Laje Arrigoni.
• Mamela Fiallo
• Allie Beth Stuckey
• Jonathan Leeman (2020). What Makes a Vote Moral or Immoral? The Ethics of Voting. 9 Marks.