A Historic Battle: Achieving the Common Good

Originally published in Spanish here

 24/06/2025

Keywords: Power and Citizenship

By the Editorial Board of Plaza Pública

"The welfare of the people shall be the supreme law." — Cicero

Throughout our history, the project of consolidating in Guatemala the ideal of a democratic republic has failed because the elites—both economic and political—have never allowed it. On the contrary, from colonial times to the present, a homeland has taken shape that serves to satisfy interests, preserve privileges, and guarantee impunity for a small minority.

In democratic regimes, citizenship is a right, equal for all and guaranteed by the State. In Guatemala, it is an empty declaration, since the elites always find a way to maintain a “controlled democracy” that only admits what they are willing to allow. When the exercise of citizenship becomes uncomfortable, defense mechanisms are activated to regain control.

It is enough to recall what happened with the investigations of the International Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG), which brought cases against powerful business leaders for tax evasion and illicit electoral financing. Or the more recent election of Bernardo Arévalo, a candidate who slipped through their grasp. The response, in both cases, was the activation of the “Pact of the Corrupt,” a well-structured mechanism of mafia networks embedded in key centers of power, capable of blocking any progress toward the long-desired establishment of a democratic republic and its corollary, the common good.

This ossified power structure does not allow real change. The constant interference of corporate and patrimonial networks means that the State does not represent its citizens. Those who occupy government positions are not public officials but operators. The political parties competing in elections are not ideological entities but machines for looting the treasury, devoid of vision, that take over public functions. The most capable do not rise, only those best suited to carry out the work required: to serve the interests of the groups that control them.

This patrimonial corporatism implies private control of state resources, using institutional façades to consolidate power and limit the participation of other sectors. One example of this disproportionate influence is the inclusion of business chambers in the design of public policies. In this regard, Plaza Pública analyzed at least 58 state bodies in which business leaders have both voice and vote. And that only refers to institutional influence. There are also non-institutional mechanisms that allow economic elites to exert pressure and keep the State “under control.”

The same pattern has extended to other power groups granted disproportionate influence by law, such as the Bar Association or the University of San Carlos. The overall logic by which the State is run has managed to co-opt these institutions as well, ensuring corruption in the selection of justice system officials—an essential piece for maintaining the privilege of impunity.

Following the same logic, elections for mayors and members of Congress are tainted by clientelism that blocks the advancement of any public policy and, in recent years, has produced blatant abuses. It is enough to analyze how legislators only attend to matters when personal gain is at stake, with no legislative agenda, while earning salaries that are an insult. Mayors fail to resolve any of their municipalities’ problems and even go so far as to undermine efforts to implement the most reasonable measures, such as waste management, land regulation, or water preservation. All of these officials act in favor of personal or private interests and never in pursuit of the common good.

Patrimonial corporatism has turned the State into an inefficient, fragmented entity, riddled with structural corruption and with no aim other than to benefit those who destroy it from within, while guaranteeing the economic elites a free hand and impunity. For this reason, in the twenty-first century, Guatemala remains open to the most savage plundering of its resources and exploitation of its people, who often find only one viable path: migration.

Faced with this reality, citizens feel powerless and disoriented. They are in urgent need of political leadership capable of breaking through the massive wall of history and winning a battle that has existed from the very beginning: achieving a State devoted to the common good.

But what is the common good?

To begin with, it is the rational exercise of political power, dedicated to designing and implementing public policies that solve citizens’ problems, with integrity and sound use of public funds. The city of Guatemala is a clear example of the absence of public policies and misrule. Instead of addressing the critical problems that afflict us, municipal authorities dedicate themselves to propping up real estate businesses, indifferent to the daily chaos suffered by millions of city residents.

Beyond solving immediate problems, there must also be planning for sustainable, human-centered development. This means quality public services (health, education, transportation); land management and protection of natural resources (sustainability and food security). Above all, it means regulating capital and private property. Neither capital nor private property can be placed above the common good and the rational use of natural resources. To claim otherwise is to guarantee the eventual destruction of life and the unviability of the country.

Achieving the common good also requires access to the benefits of democracy: justice, guarantees of citizen rights, respect for human rights, and public security.

This brief enumeration is the bare minimum we should demand from public officials. And we should measure each one of them against this standard. But the common good does not end there. Nor can it remain static. It requires active, participatory citizenship. It requires that we begin to value what is public and collective interests. It requires dismantling the notion that the right of the strongest must prevail, and discrediting corporatist and clientelist logics. In other words, it requires an effort to change the culture itself, because democracy cannot exist without citizens convinced of the superiority of the common good.

Society must debate what the common good means in each situation and what measures will lead us to it at every stage. Although its pursuit is the duty of the public officials we elect and of political leadership, it is also collective work, since it is a matter that must remain under permanent debate and subject to social oversight.

We must therefore educate ourselves to demand the common good. We must open spaces for dialogue, build the capacity to influence, and forge alliances. We must protest, oppose abuses, and above all demand from the State’s institutions mechanisms of participatory democracy: transparency, open town halls, community consultations, the use of citizen initiatives in Congress, and the promotion of consensus around a national agenda.

In such complex times, we must turn hope into actions that can restore power to the people. Grounding in reality a concept that until now has remained blurry—such as the common good—may be the key to guiding us in the historic battle to recover the country for the benefit of the majority.