(Opinion) In a democratic society, the popular will is the quintessence of political power.
However, the case of Dina Boluarte in Peru is a classic example of how power can be wielded by someone who has failed to command widespread approval.
The question begs, why does she remain in power despite her low approval ratings?
It’s essential to note that approval ratings are just one aspect of a much broader, more complex political landscape.
While popular approval is important in direct elections, it is not the only factor determining who comes into power or retains it.
Boluarte’s rise to power can be attributed to a multitude of factors, ranging from the dynamics of the Peruvian political system to the widespread political instability that the nation has witnessed over the years.
Firstly, it is important to look at Peru’s fragmented political landscape.
The Congress, which is characterized by its diversity of parties, often harbors disagreements and tensions that lead to recurrent political crises.
In this context, Boluarte, as a seasoned political operator, has managed to maintain a delicate balance among these opposing forces.
Her capacity to navigate this fractious political landscape has been key to her retaining power, despite her lack of popularity among the general populace.
Moreover, Boluarte’s political ascendency occurred amidst an era of profound political instability in Peru, marked by corruption scandals, impeachment motions, and institutional distrust.
In such an unstable context, it’s not surprising that a less popular figure could ascend to the top. Often, during such turbulent times, stability is prioritized over popularity.
Despite her low approval ratings, Boluarte also has the backing of certain sectors of society and political allies who appreciate her toughness and commitment to cleaning up corruption in Peru’s government, a problem that has long plagued the country.
This powerful support network, although not widespread, is significant enough to bolster her position.
However, while these factors may explain Boluarte’s rise and continuance in power, they don’t mitigate the clear disconnect between her leadership and the will of the majority of Peruvians.
Her unpopularity signifies the people’s dissatisfaction and disillusionment with the political status quo.
Therefore, to bridge this gap, it’s crucial that Boluarte engages in dialogue with the people and takes into account their grievances and aspirations.
By fostering transparency, enacting structural reforms, and demonstrating tangible improvements, she may be able to turn the tide of public opinion and establish the popular mandate that she currently lacks.
In conclusion, Boluarte’s case demonstrates that approval ratings are not always a determinant of political power.
Her continued leadership serves as a testament to the complexities and idiosyncrasies of Peru’s political dynamics.
Nevertheless, it is incumbent on her to listen and respond to the needs and desires of the Peruvian people.
Only then can she hope to align her leadership with the spirit of democracy: serving the people, for the people, and by the people.