El Mostrador, as soon as they learned of the ACEs inato of Camilo Catrillanca, said that there were two confirmed dead in La Araucanía: “the mapuche community and the candidacy of Alfredo Moreno”.
But who knew the media and analysts is that the murder of the mapuche community member not only was an issue of the conflict in the troubled area, or affected only the aspirations of the Minister of Social development, that, too, he was paid a dispute form , as always brutal, for the presidential nomination in right and where one character more involved: Andrés Chadwick.
Just on Sunday, November 18, the Vice-President of the Republic deviates from the official version and unveils what all presuponíamos: that Catrillanca had been murdered in the back, giving a lethal blow to Moreno.
Burns the currency, and the media reiterated the dissonance between the Chief of staff – then Vice President – and the Minister of Social development.
Turns on the controversy, but nobody focuses on the obvious: the death of Catrillanca and the police siege in La Araucanía, behind a presidential dispute between Chief of staff and the dog of entrepreneurship.
UDI election since the new Government took was common in the region of O’Higgins complaints and claims advisors RN on the role of the new Minister of the interior of Pinera: “in the region named to the Porter of the Administration” said, without a hint of being present in discomfort.
The reason that was put forward was that Chadwick to its intimate surroundings had stated that he wanted to be presidential, or failing that, to become Senator for the region.
That is why when Javier Macaya presented its candidacy in Rancagua, a couple of months ago was responsible for clarifying that “he had the support of Chadwick” despite the opposition of the local Senator and the Rancagua Mayor Eduardo Soto, a case of pedophilia-ridden.
And it is that, in the case of both, know that the regional capital is managed at will by Álvaro Lavín with great influence both the municipality and the Municipal Corporation of Rancagua (Cormun) and Gonzalo Cornejo, leader of the candidacy of Senator by Biobío , and close friend of the Mayor of Rancagua, who, as it is known, was taken literally from the visibility of the presidential campaign of Sebastián Piñera in its last stretch and who did not support the Deputy Macaya.
On that occasion, in the Tomacho, various national leaders, were commissioned to express the support of the Minister Javier Macaya, and more than any, confidence, said words of support from Chadwick to the nomination. The own Lavin, in the month of October in an interview on CNN said that “he supported the candidacy of Macaya”.
But the election UDI was analyzing, and supports powerful initials was shelling the corn to the point of that on Friday the same Macaya pointed out that “there were 5 points of difference in its favour in relation to the Coca – Van Rysselberghe”-, which sincerely was nearly a statistical error. Proof of the complex scenario is that, again declaring Joaquín Lavín, “in reflection”, before the stalemate between the two last Thursday and, curiously, at midday Sunday suspending the UDI choice by “technical failures in the electronic voting system “.”
In 2013, said that Longueira was suspending his presidential aspiration by a depression, but behind the scenes, it was noted that it was by trouble of skirts. We will perhaps never know the truth, in the case of a significant party and he has the support of most of the media.
What Macaya in right?
Not long ago in Santa Cruz, the trade representative had pointed out that it felt “more comfortable in his home”, but that the aspiration of Van Ryssselbeghe, was a strong decline in what has been achieved by unionism until today and that “it speaks more of the past than of the present and future of the UD I”. On occasion, the trade legislator premiered their novice aspirants to the Chair of several communes of the region, although none of the regional capital, thereby giving a strong signal of local decentralization.
At that time, indicated that part felt rather of the “present and future of the UDI rather than the past”, giving a powerful message of trade policy renewal in relationship to the UDI imagery of dictatorship. This earned him that Senator García-Huidobro disseminate social networks a Macaya video with phrases theirs who were moving away from the dictatorship of Pinochet, and that questioning trade candidate.
Just yesterday, a next morning, El Mercurio published what we already knew that four former Presidents UDI – Juan Antonio Coloma (Chairman between 2008 and 2012), Julio Dittborn (1990-1992), Patricio Melero (2012-2014) and Ernesto Silva (2014-2015) – invited to vote by the Head of bed.
And is that the dispute was not less: past, present and future of unionism.
It is no coincidence that 20 of the UDI members who support Macaya – 7 support Van Rysselberghe – sean young and replacement figures such as Jaime Bellolio, María José Hoffmann, Issa Kort or Juan Antonio Coloma, and that no Senator gave his explicit support to the candidacy of the dispute do by Rancagua and surroundings.
On the other hand, in the upper House, the issue is reverse, 6 Senators gave their formal support to the Senator by the Bío-Bío and none to the native member of Colchagua.
Macaya is characterized by interviews various media, or in the same presentation of the book El Mostrador in Rancagua, where said that to him “you interested the media B in political journalism jargon and approaching them,” etc. – in which deviates from the ideology t raditional UDI and its close link with the dictatorship, which has taken advantage of Alejandro García-Huidobro with your video socialized among militants – giving a heading of closeness with digital media and new democracy.
The choice of UDI, has been suspended and therefore a possible candidacy of Andrés Chadwick. Recently on 16 December will know the end of the plot.
Of course, unless I got a list of consensus, and where viewers we learn new things, in the UDI, remain, as always.
The content in this colum na’s opinion is the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial line nor the counter position.
