Third lap the podcast with Alejandro Gaviria and Ricardo Silva Romero, a podcast of the locutorio arroba el locutorio dese you have ever felt that I sancho, Santo, No, no, no. I' ve felt yes. Yes, I mean, conversations that sound strange sometimes if sometimes the cell phone starts to acquire this life of its own. Yes, and especially in recent years I have felt that all conversations can be recorded. I haven' t come to the point of greeting the chusador, at the beginning of the ad saying bad
words, bad words, let' s say hello. Kindly. It hasn ' t gotten that far. Yes, hello, Ricardo, hello, Alejandro, we meet again. Yes again. I want to talk about the situation again, but perhaps from a broader point of view, with more context. Yeah, to talk a little bit of agreement that it' s called in
Colombia the churadas the churadas. True, there has always been that shadow in Colombian politics and day to day, and it is not recent, but there is, therefore, history of the follow- up to opponents and those who do not agree with certain causes long ago, since I, I believe seventy years of one being able to trace that. A first dimension of this rich subject is how power, the enforcement of power in almost all spheres, including
democratic ones, leads to this kind of totalitarian attempts. Yes, the churadas are the protagonists of Orwell' s novel, one thousand nine hundred and eighty - four, which is the year forty- nine, which has something of or, picks up some of the Stalinist purges that were already beginning to be known in much of Europe. And that' s this idea of controlling all spheres of life, including everyone' s private life, to try to exercise
power. Yes, it is that illusion or that ambition of control of lives and that paranoia that is doubled in power is always surprising. As you said, it is impressive that, even with democratic projects, everything ended up drifting there. Finish people who were popularly elected, entrenching themselves and feeling that they have to do it that is not that in their case it is justified.
It may be a mythology, but I remember having a conversation several years ago, a decade already with someone who had worked in I think there was still no presidential palace as it exists today. Before that where I am the Chancellery, that of San Carlos, the Teatro Colón. Yes, the Palace of San Carlos, and that there was some kind of booth similar to this one
where we' re recording. And in that booth there was a shelf and that shelf was full of magnetic tapes where there were probably recordings very focused on the political world. So, yeah, there, there' s a whole
timeline you could do. I was thinking of even the National Front and an uncle of mine, brother and my mother, who was always watched because he was from a very radical left, that is, he had spent times in the Palace of Mao had come, because, to bring us this sense, absolutely guarded and in his office on the phone it was clear for that group of people of that time. Those, then, were the sixties and seventy who listened to them and watched over them. That' s, that'
s been common for a long time. Here I mean, you imagine a president at what point. It won' t be at the end of the afternoon, but at the beginning of the morning, with your pajamas you may still be having a coffee that, as part of your job is it' s good to get the presidents in pajamas. I think it' s hard, you have to make one sound or you get an executive summary. Yes,
and today I think it' s going to be more distressing. I always imagined myself to educate in pajamas, getting up very early to look at the cell phone, no longer asking for information, but he alone on Twitter, seeing who is talking who. It' s not very easy today to be paranoid and looking out for everything. Today, as there is so much information, there are so many comments and social networks have so much and you can know so much about the opinions about the world. Probably a lot of
presidents spend time there, not much who we have an exercise. I think he likes his cell phone, too. He' s fascinated by his cell
phone. And besides, there is something that I found fascinating this week to talk a little bit about the conjuncture, as we promised, which is the case of friendly fire, the case of both the First Lady and the head of the House of Nariño, talking about the possibility that within the government itself there are people making them a case to entangle them and I find it interesting that everything is leaking, that is, spies today are not so necessary.
I get the impression that everything comes out very soon and I never remember a pulse within such a public government, I mean, I guess all governments have groups, people who disagree, people who sabotage each other, but one. The citizenry doesn' t get it. Now, this comes and a half as if an investigation, sources, leaks that were what we were used to in the governments of the last fifty years were not really necessary, or whatever,
and the leaks are tweeted by the protagonists themselves. So it' s a new world where everyone is a spy, everyone filters and I' m worried about that profession, let' s say they are. I think there is inside the petro government or some kind of complicated, impressive internal civil war. Probably all governments had factions. I remember the government of Juan Manuel Santos at the beginning that spoke of a team of rivals, that there were political
rivals interested in power later, yes, but I was aware. Everything wasn ' t conscious. It was part of a strategy of a kind like weights and counterweights inside. Yes, this decentralization of power, but here there are two factions, well identified, of actions in a very complex way. When I was in the government, there was already some paranoid mentality and the word has a story of a famous article over there about paranoid mentality in published American
politics. I think that in the late 1960s by a gringo sociologist, when the Council of Ministers was about to begin, there was a lady from the police with a box and we all had to put her cell phone off so that no meeting was going to be recorded or something strange was going to happen. There was only one person who did not deliver the cell phone, besides President Petro, of course it was Laura Sarabia. Yes, yes, she was the only one with a cellular right, but there was a difficult time,
even that happened before the Council of Minister began. If some of my this delivered on his cell phone recently because they were still there answering messages from whatsapro, which is like forty percent of what a minister does. But there is a very complex topic inside, very complex inside. It is a division that when leaked to the media and reflected is this government fight, it interprets as attacks, but the bottom, what is being seen, is a reflection
of what is happening internally. Sure, it' s crazy somehow, not crazy. I do not really remember this in any Government that the Government itself denounces the same Government and seeks sympathy from viewers as if one says yes poor those of the Government, because these others of the Government are its enemies.
It' s a crazy thing that I wouldn' t even give for satire, because it wouldn' t be funny to say yes, it would only reveal a very particular behavior, not of this society, but of that group of people who are in power. The exercise of power, in addition to
having these misdeeds from the blunders, always has an involuntary mood. I don ' t know if it was for Sátira Ricardo, but this topic of what good happens all this, this begins to be reflected in the media and the President gave a social network in a more or less obsessive, permanent way and continues to say it' s all about a Nazi strategy. Yeah, and then he said it' s kind of a mosat journalism Yeah. Then there
is a paranoid interpretation also with these appeals a little strange. I was thinking that we' ve already used it as a trigger or strategy in Rip Bab van Winkle' s story, the story of the man who falls asleep and dawns decades later and tells him how the country is and he can' t
believe it. Sometimes I think about what someone who fell asleep in the year would say I don' t know ninety- two and suddenly wakes up today and they tell him that this is the government, that the president tweets all day, that the First Lady says that the government is not after her and
that, well, it would also be terrified. If he slept in the ninety- two, he would be buried that Andrés Pastella had not been President, for example, who was the presenter of theory as far as there was a person from the ninety- two, that is, there would be a lot. Well, I hadn' t been mayor before. It was more possible then. But yes, it seems to me that one cannot stop losing the perspective of the absurd, of the crazy thing that is happening, as
if he had fallen asleep fifty years ago. We have to contribute like this. It' s not a government, this isn' t serious. That ' s not how the officials behave and I' m not talking about presidents, ministers or anything. An official has to be decent and he has to write well and he has to answer for what he does. Anyway, this unscrupulous and responsible thing. It' s unusual and we can' t get used to it like you get used to the President calling a journalist a mosat
journalism. So, it happens in Venezuela, it happens in Russia, it happens in places that are unbound and that have already given up on democracy. I usually walk here in the parrio where we recorded and remembered this week a conversation I had with a neighbor who was even Minister of Finance, also a
cult type. He likes to read at the time of the dauz. I was a minister there, yes, no. He had been Minister in the eighties, in the eighties, and it was the time of the Chussatldas and he told me a story that I later wrote in the column about a subject of Ricardo that has been at the center of the discussion these days, which is when the President vehemently and quite assertively petro saying we noch used and what he is saying is I have never given the clear order, of course and
the story that this gentleman told me was the next one. You don' t have to give the order. Power uses more subtle ways of conveying such problematic issues. And the talk of a historic dispute between Henry II and Thomas Beckett in the year one hundred and sixty- four and I wrote the following. The King of England. Henry II then attempted to limit the independence of the Church. The King then found a very open and stubborn resistance, Father
Thomas Beckett. The artshui was can Burry, the clash of powers then reached epic dimensions. Henry II accused Becket of opposing the Royal Authority. See that he threatened the king with excommunication. Pope Alexander III tried to calm his spirits, but his concord efforts proved unsuccessful. Henry II has agreed to hand over the expropriated goods to the Church and be never accepted by the Royal Authority on
divine affairs. Henry II then uttered an ominous phrase that would have deadly consequences. He said the next one There won' t be anyone capable of freeing me from that turbulent priest. In the opinion of many historians, Henry Indo was not giving a peremptory order or inviting the gentlemen of the Court to take matters into their own hands, but they were willing to do everything in order
to congratulate themselves with the master of tremendous power. Yeah, I mean, you don' t have to give the order, you don' t have to give the time. You just have to insinuate. There will always be courtiers willing to go a little further. And when we talk about that almost bloody struggle within the Government, we are talking about a struggle also at the
heart of the President. Maybe I did and I kept thinking about the office, about bringing reasons to the President, about bringing versions and suspicions to the President who, returning to Scenic two years later, was very common this guy was about to die under three Caligula emperors. I' m not bad, man. They ordered him to be executed because they were given the reason he
did not respect them. And it made that common both the entrenchment, the paranoia and the office of spying on those who are not totally committed to the cause. And what is disheartening is that the cause is never, for example, social justice or, for example, democracy. The cause is the president, the president, the emperor or the power, and the cause is the loyalty that is there. They are being far away and, as there is this moral panic already among everyone. Yeah, well, they' re that
one in that mentality. It' s quite possible that someone would squeal to show the President that those on the other side are effectively betraying him. I mean, you can come in. It' s always happened. If an explicit order is not needed, a large centralized strategy is not needed, there
is no need for the President to direct that small room. Today we have a much more effective and insidious technology to make these things more delivered and everything is easy Not very good devices that can be connected to the one who knows you have ever felt wide, Santo Nuno. That' s right. Yeah, I mean, conversations that sound strange sometimes if sometimes the cell phone starts to take on a certain life of its own. Yes, and especially in
recent years I have felt that all conversations may be being recorded. I didn ' t get to the point where I greeted the pimp at the beginning of the call to say bad words and bad words. Let' s go say hi. Kindly, it didn' t come as much as it did. Well turns he remembers a joke from our friend like a Daniel San Pedro Spina who said that those who had the ungrateful at the end of chusar a bartalocity were ramently working now extras. It wasn' t a very fair job.
Yeah, yeah, I try to be brief because, I mean, I have respect for who they' re doing. I was thinking about the work the cell phone has a very serious problem and it is that one really is spying, that is, when it belongs to social networks, that it is not spying so many companies, that is, one speaks something and appears the advertising of what it spoke to the two minutes completely. It' s a time of spies, in addition to constant scams you got messages, they call
it phones. It' s just a time to hide from technology. It is interesting because it is not only power that is spying on us. Vendors of all kinds of candy stores know each other any little part of us and that is now being seen as knowing our data. Well, this has become more complicated. But Ricardo knows that I say it as a joke, but since I am relatively aware that I can be heard. Yeah, normal and yes, I was talking to my brother. He doesn' t always talk
to the brothers. Yeah, it wouldn' t be any kind of imagination. But then, I think he said sea will now publish this. This rudeness. This is me Whatsapp, because of course one with friends, even humor is blacker than normal. Yeah, yeah, I mean, I did more barbarity, it' s more politically incorrect. Where someone will grab one ' s whatsapp is death. I think it' s and then it'
s his turn to get out of context. Yeah, he was telling me extra this was private and already when I didn' t or they took me out of context because everything already hated me. I don' t know that ' s the measure of that phrase. She' s the oldest. There are not the last two triumphs in their destiny totally behaved. Yeah, that ' s how it is It' s very common to be powerful I'
ll be insecure. That has always surprised me that the arrival in a Presidency of the Republic not of relief to a personality does not make him feel already cured of frights, as it is said, but that it makes him obsessive, so the others think that no longer that it is not what the office of such an important position, does not free him from living aware that they
are saying each other. That' s always impressed me. I' ve seen it in people who are also very famous, because I' ve known how they don' t care about fame, but the critic who says they
' re terrible. How there is a point, a heel of achilles in power and fame, which is so impressive and is what explains now we talked about before we started the film of the lives of others, which explains why those Presidencies are so obsessed with seeing what critics are saying, how he gets to hear them, saying this guy is gross or this guy is corrupt.
I find that obsession impressive. I think it' s very interesting. What Ricardo says had not thought so much about it, but although I think it is an idea that is also in fiction, It is everywhere and would be expected by a President with the tasks that he has that he exercised was like a total statesman. At the end of the day, each decision has a lot to do with the general well- being and that those greater responsibilities would
keep him away from the small human heart that we all have. The human heart has a vulgar side, of course, but it seems to be quite the opposite. Yeah, he, uh, pushes him more into that and pushes him more into those microdes. That attention of the phrase said there. I see this is very sensitive, for example, to sarcastic criticism, to
the c bothers, to the mockery, to the joke. And this book is that it' s about that not how the joke interferes with his power and he replies many times saying they mocked, but they mocked, but if it always starts that way it' s very impressive in someone like him, who comes where he gets and gets it many people and applauds him and admires him and thanks him that with what he stays in the world is with someone in a little window, in a country of fifty million people that says this
guy doesn' t know how to write that it should hurt more deeply, because I think he has a lot of faith in his intellect, but I think he said over there that it' s more oral than written to and already recognized. It is yes, recognized here and has persisted in the coma between subject and preached. Yeah, he' s famous. As apretrists, he has identified by our common friend, also Carolina Song, he has insisted totally Yes, there, yes. You can' t back off the Petrina
committee. No, and the good thing. This week, the tweet to magistrate Ibáñez who, to return to the subject of the blunders, feels that he is being hacked, as hep has also said all the courts do feel that there is something there. Okay. This message that the President sends to the magistrate of Ibáñez first calls him naive, half- foolish, because he feels one who is telling him. He' s saying that he gave the order, that is, that it' s impossible for him to pass the
chusadas thing. But it' s also written in such a confusing way. Whatsapp becomes Whartsapp, which I think is a typo error. I don'
t think petro thinks that' s what that' s called. But it also ends in those slips that seem to me to have everything to do with the ignorance that it is to call Nazis those who may be churning, that is, how one goes out there and how, besides, in his imagination as a young left- wing, as a young left- wing 70- year- old, the only ones who can churn are the Nazis, that is, a fascist right, and not, for example, and we already
talked about it, those who purge are talin the lives of others. The film is about the GDR, because Cuba, in the background, is its police dictate. Yeah, I don' t suppose that from that head, that wouldn' t be called pimping, but preventing or something like that when you' re already into that story. I was thinking now, Richard, that even when you' re a civil servant, you' ve touched me. There are some meetings once a week, twice a week where they present
you to a social media report. You know what it' s called, you don' t hear God listen then and that' s already normalized. Be part of a report that is surely for all public officials at all levels, where there is a more or less comprehensive analysis of what is being said, what is being said. And there is first a general average issue, but then there are certain influential personalities called today or they can be opinion leaders
or whatever it was and opinions appear. Complicated, not complicated. I believe that forty years ago, fifty years before this observer we put him to sleep in the year ninety- two. We are awakening him now so that with his new eyes, he will tell us some of the strangeness of this world that we live now and that we have normalized at that time, because there was a letter to the editor of time, there were columns, there was
an editorial and that was listening. He was very much associated with that, not with what one could read in two or three newspapers and with circulating letters. There was an opinion out of everything. It' s not true of robe in the clearing, but it wasn' t this. It wasn' t upsetting. It is that today, even when you write columns or novels or whatever, you have too much awareness of what people think about what you did. Me. That' s why I avoid reading column forums, because
it' s what I can do with what people think? Not much, and that was thinking of someone who rules, that is, whether the opinion is against it or if he listens to it. Network' s weekly report tells one that they' re not getting it or that they don' t agree with one. One changes or how it serves one' s purpose. I used to read them to you when I wasn' t much. When I wrote columns, they' d only be for one thing, for brand.
One' s love is going to mark one' s life, because first there' s an adverse selection, of course, or there' s some very barrack lizards or there' s some critics who probably didn' t give them Columbia. They went on to insult quickly and the truth is that it damages communication. It is one knows that there are some people who are saying that you are an idiot and you find them later, because that communication is no longer going to be given. I' ve been reading about what
I find interesting about that topic. Nonviolent communication, that' s a whole gringo study. At this moment I miss the name, but the guy also called it compassionate communication, which is a communication that should be necessary, for
example, in politics. And so what the type of communication proposes is a communication that is quite the opposite of what I see, for example, in the Government, which is a communication that does not depart from punishment, that is not to dominate, that is, that it is not against others, that does not start against others, that does not seem revenge, that is willing to listen to a number of things that just make communication possible, because
if you start telling people, they mocked. But that' s the end of communication, because it starts by assaulting, by ignoring, by beginning on guard. And a communication that starts on guard is no longer going to be given yficile practice. I have to say if the interaction of social networks and so on. But thinking rich in this conversation, as we started and as it has gone spontaneously speaking and returning to this image of the President in pajamo
going the cassettes, there are ones that do not put on pajamas. To say it and they have said it, gives me the impression that this image is an image not only of power. Today, everyone, yes, everyone, can find opinions from others. We can' t fall into that chuzar ' s psychology. Very easily, not all the challenge to obsess over everything that is being said here and there and to have our own little bodegies and our own bubbles that we have to corner. We can be a small government
with its own means. Everyone can become that. Becoming like a new swarm is that great little brother, little brother who notices that child. He did say I' m not half- day type. This other one doesn' t know that that' s like the conclusion that came out of this conversation. Yeah, yeah, she' s hot. We' re all great little brothers in this world. We' re at least days, brother. I understand that way. The same could be said for third- round listeners. Hug everyone. Thank you, Ricardo, a hug. It' s
not clear that we can all write. It is clear that we can all, with luck and vocation, devote ourselves to the profession of writing. But lately I think we can' t just write, we should write. Writing is the best therapy we have at hand. Welcome to a fictional audio course on how and why to write. Take the audiocourse of fictional writing in the locutorio com slash fictionario with Ricardo Silva Romero. Always pick a good time.
Always choose a good conversation. Third lap podcast. Subscribe now and listen to it every week on your favorite platform a podcast produced by the speaker. The newsroom follows us as it throws the newsroom ds on social networks