Choices

This Sunday, June 29, Chile will experience a new electoral episode that, although formally a primary for the ruling bloc Unity for Chile, represents much more: it is an opportunity for the sector to define its progressive leadership ahead of the presidential elections in November; it is also a measurement of its ability to mobilize citizens and a crucial test for the viability of the transformative proposal it promises, in a country straining between the apathy of vast social sectors and the overwhelming advance of conservative voting that is predicted.

In my opinion, one of the attributes of democratic systems is that electoral participation is not only an expression of political will, but also a mechanism for recognizing leadership. By exercising the right to vote, citizens not only choose our representatives; we also position ourselves in the public scene as active subjects, as part of a social collective that can influence the direction of a common project. This logic takes on special meaning in contexts where the legitimacy of the political system has undergone a long and continuous erosion process, as is the case today in Chile, after years of scandals, institutional stagnation, and unfulfilled promises.

In this framework, the primaries this Sunday are an opportunity for progressivism not only to choose its candidate but also to reaffirm its existence as a living and articulated force. The election is not just about names: Carolina Tohá, Jeannette Jara, Gonzalo Winter, and Jaime Mulet represent different sensitivities within a broad and constantly tense coalition. But what is at stake transcends each of them, as this Sunday will determine whether progressivism has the ability to mobilize its social base, project unity, and demonstrate that it remains competitive against a steadily advancing right.

The success or failure of the primary election will be primarily analyzed based on the sector’s ability to mobilize its electoral base: any number near or exceeding the 1,752,922 votes from the ruling primary in 2021 should be seen as a sign of strength, indicating that it has been able to “hold the line”; whereas a result below or close to the 1,340,472 votes obtained in the opposition primary of 2021 will be interpreted as a sign of weakness. In a presidential election that, for the first time since the return to democracy, will be held with mandatory voting, the capacity to articulate and mobilize a convinced electorate will be crucial, as recent history shows that the winner of primary elections with high participation has a greater chance of winning the contest. But it is also true that there has never been a presidential election faced with so much uncertainty as this one, at least since the first round between Ricardo Lagos and Joaquín Lavín in 1999 when the difference was just 31,140 votes.

On the other hand, the current political scenario does not favor the left. Evelyn Matthei and José Antonio Kast, representatives of different sensitivities on the right, lead the polls, making it plausible that both could reach the second round, especially if progressivism fails to define a candidacy with broad and transversal support that is competitive. Therefore, it is not irrelevant for the government who wins this Sunday: a more institutional candidacy, like Tohá’s, could have a greater ability to contest the center; a more transformative one, like Jara’s or Winter’s, could galvanize the base but may face greater difficulties in attracting a highly volatile electorate, especially receptive to populist offerings.

Beyond the candidacies, progressivism faces a greater challenge, an ambient feeling that spans the country from north to south: overcoming citizen disaffection. Low electoral participation in previous processes, the growing distance between representatives and represented, and the widespread perception that “politics do not matter” are symptoms of a crisis of confidence that will not be resolved solely with speeches; thus, voting this Sunday is, in part, a way to challenge this diagnosis. But it is also a demand: those elected must prove they are up to the moment, capable of effectively and ethically representing the interests of a diverse majority.

Finally, we cannot overlook the institutional context, as Congress has made progress on a reform of the political system that introduces a 5% threshold for parties to access Parliament, which will force progressive forces to compete in unified lists or risk losing representation; thus, the primary, in that sense, is also a laboratory of unity. If a leadership capable of uniting rather than dividing is not articulated from now on, progressivism risks arriving in November weakened, fragmented, and without a real chance to seriously contest power. In conclusion, this Sunday, June 29, we are not just voting for a candidacy. We are voting for the place of progressivism in the Chile to come; we are voting to exist, to contest, to transform. Not participating in this voluntary primary election is to let others decide for everyone; and that, at this moment in our history, is a risk we cannot afford to take.