My first memories of any political campaigning were those of Balaguer in ?86 and ?90. ?En la bemba de Pena Gomez aterrizan los aviones!? was all you could hear. From that point on, Balaguer was portrayed to me as a gentle, wise sort-of savior of the Dominican people. (the East was very pro-Balaguer) He actually looked harmless, like a grandfather. When I started hitting the history textbooks, I learned more about him. His relation with Trujillo is mentioned, though he was disconnected from the regime?s deeds. At no point was the oppression of the ?12 years? mentioned in the textbooks. As an apprentice of Trujillo, Balaguer learned to manipulate all information at Dominican?s disposal (like textbooks) to seal control.
When I got older, my father explained his hatred towards Balaguer. Many here know how much damage this man has done to our country. No matter what people say, Balaguer was a continuation of Trujillo. The corruption, fraud and oppression of his 12 years (known as neotrujillismo) prove this. The style of corruption we see today (which is eating us up) is a result of Balaguer. He introduced many of the bad habits among politician which hinder our development. Despite my father?s hatred for Balaguer, at the same time there was a certain sense of admiration for the man. This love/hate view of Balaguer is shared by many Dominicans, which contribute to the lack of closure expressed by many recently.
It is no surprise that the same happens with his mentor. Trujillo is considered a horrible dictator, yet many he is admired by many Dominicans. Many see the Trujillo Era as a ?Golden Age? of stability and order unlike today. His propaganda machine?s effects (mass media, the church, etc.) still linger in DR today. A significant portion of the population call for the return of some sort of Trujillismo. An ironfisted government that will make Dominicans proud. The ambiguity of Trujillo?s legacy (the ?what should be admired or not?) has distorted our view of democracy.
Closure is the key here?
We didn?t have closure from Trujillo. Trujillismo should?ve been isolated and cut off from our society like the cancer that it was (and still is today). The images of many crying after his death shows how far Trujillismo had gotten in the poorer classes, el campesinado. Some chemotherapy ? I mean propaganda ? should?ve been applied in case some of the cancerous cells were still alive as they could spread. If this was done, THEN maybe we would?ve had closure. But the time (Cold War) wasn?t right. The cancerous cells, with Balaguer as their leader, remained alive, and indeed, they spread. Today we see members of ALL political parties claiming, and even fighting for a piece of his memory.
I think that if you ask Dominicans for a word to describe Balaguer, it would be ?intelligent?. I don?t get it. Is this why he is admired? How can you isolate this trait, his biggest political tool ?intelligence?, from what he used it for (despotism)?
Don?t give me the ?he was a great writer/intellectual?. How many intellectuals were eliminated for this one great writer?
Essentially clearing Balaguer from everything he did.
Balaguer was ?stained?, not only for his participation in the Trujillo regime (he was THE puppet President) but for his own regime, known for political repression. As long as we have our politicians admiring what this man represent we won?t have true unity under true democracy. This is disgusting.
Am I the only person who thinks that closure is necessary?
Are there any Balagueristas out there who can explain what I?m missing?
I don?t see any justification.
When I got older, my father explained his hatred towards Balaguer. Many here know how much damage this man has done to our country. No matter what people say, Balaguer was a continuation of Trujillo. The corruption, fraud and oppression of his 12 years (known as neotrujillismo) prove this. The style of corruption we see today (which is eating us up) is a result of Balaguer. He introduced many of the bad habits among politician which hinder our development. Despite my father?s hatred for Balaguer, at the same time there was a certain sense of admiration for the man. This love/hate view of Balaguer is shared by many Dominicans, which contribute to the lack of closure expressed by many recently.
It is no surprise that the same happens with his mentor. Trujillo is considered a horrible dictator, yet many he is admired by many Dominicans. Many see the Trujillo Era as a ?Golden Age? of stability and order unlike today. His propaganda machine?s effects (mass media, the church, etc.) still linger in DR today. A significant portion of the population call for the return of some sort of Trujillismo. An ironfisted government that will make Dominicans proud. The ambiguity of Trujillo?s legacy (the ?what should be admired or not?) has distorted our view of democracy.
Closure is the key here?
We didn?t have closure from Trujillo. Trujillismo should?ve been isolated and cut off from our society like the cancer that it was (and still is today). The images of many crying after his death shows how far Trujillismo had gotten in the poorer classes, el campesinado. Some chemotherapy ? I mean propaganda ? should?ve been applied in case some of the cancerous cells were still alive as they could spread. If this was done, THEN maybe we would?ve had closure. But the time (Cold War) wasn?t right. The cancerous cells, with Balaguer as their leader, remained alive, and indeed, they spread. Today we see members of ALL political parties claiming, and even fighting for a piece of his memory.
I think that if you ask Dominicans for a word to describe Balaguer, it would be ?intelligent?. I don?t get it. Is this why he is admired? How can you isolate this trait, his biggest political tool ?intelligence?, from what he used it for (despotism)?
Don?t give me the ?he was a great writer/intellectual?. How many intellectuals were eliminated for this one great writer?
? ?Es entender la historia entre lo blanco y lo negro, sin entender los matices de la historia, es como creer que todo lo que est? y participa de una dictadura est? manchado, y hoy sabemos que no es as?.
Hoy no podemos condenar al rey Juan Carlos de Espa?a porque se form? durante el per?odo franquista, como no podemos condenar a Balaguer porque se form? baj? el r?gimen de Trujillo?
? Leonel in the recent homage to Balaguer
Hoy no podemos condenar al rey Juan Carlos de Espa?a porque se form? durante el per?odo franquista, como no podemos condenar a Balaguer porque se form? baj? el r?gimen de Trujillo?
? Leonel in the recent homage to Balaguer
Essentially clearing Balaguer from everything he did.
Balaguer was ?stained?, not only for his participation in the Trujillo regime (he was THE puppet President) but for his own regime, known for political repression. As long as we have our politicians admiring what this man represent we won?t have true unity under true democracy. This is disgusting.
Am I the only person who thinks that closure is necessary?
Are there any Balagueristas out there who can explain what I?m missing?
I don?t see any justification.