In the last century, the sixties meant a decade of change, but above all, they were a historical juncture in which humanity began a change of era: the transition from modernity to – what we now call – postmodernity.

Two world wars, the failure of political and economic systems to eradicate inequality, social injustice and poverty; systems that – on the altar of ideologies – sacrificed human freedom and equality, in addition to the technical-scientific failure to solve the most important human and social problems, provoked a feeling of history without a future and frustrated hope in progress. All of which produced a lack of motivation in the effort and work of the human being, a predominance of the fast and easy, apathy towards the common good and a search for refuge in everything individual and personal, with the consequent rejection of everything hierarchical and institutional.

With this, institutional and absolute truths disappear and each person creates and lives according to the menu of his or her own “truths,” amidst uncertainty, moral relativism, subjectivism and an overload of information in which nothing is important or everything is worth the same.

What matters – for the postmodern man – is to enjoy. The hedonistic search for pleasure for pleasure’s sake directs human existence and to achieve it – at any cost – one must have. Now, aesthetics predominate over ethics, having over being, the tangible and material over the transcendent.

The result of all these new traits of postmodernity is a “culture” of the light, the ethereal, the easy, the disposable, the superficial and the lacking in commitment, together with the search for a lifestyle of luxury, comfort and waste, indifferent to the needs of the great masses of the population.

From now on, these traits, characteristic of postmodernity, affect, explain, influence and are evident in all human life and behavior and in its social dimension: in citizen coexistence and in the way of doing politics. Understanding here by “politics”, according to the original Greek concept, not only the office of governing, but, above all, the participation of all citizens in the search for the common good of the “polis”, of the city.

No one ignores that today the office and exercise of politics – being the most important of all in the task of leadership and social construction – is, also, the most discredited of all. Especially because politicians have dedicated themselves to the search for personal and particular goods and have forgotten the search for the common good.

This discredit produces, at the same time, a crisis in “democracy”, as a system of government that guarantees respect for the rights of citizens and the greatest participation of all in the construction of the best collective aspirations.

There are many factors that explain the discredit of the exercise of politics and of politicians and that – therefore – undermine democracy and confidence in its institutions. Among others, the most notable are corruption in public and private administration, with the resulting frustration and discontent; social inequality, with the resulting resentment it generates; the weakening of institutions that should ensure compliance with the law and respect for the rights of all, as a cause and effect of this crisis; and the political apathy and indifference that all this produces, as a breeding ground for the emergence of anti-democratic agents and movements.

Due to the brevity that this writing demands of me, I will limit myself to highlighting two fundamental aspects of this crisis: post-truth and populism.

Hannah Arendt, the great philosopher and historian, in her discourse on “Truth and Politics” laments that “truth and politics never got along well” and that “no one ever placed truthfulness among the political virtues.” Thus, in the absence of institutions (political or religious) that – as in modernity – dictate an objective and universally valid truth and in the midst of the chaos and nonsense that living without certainties means, postmodern man lives constructing “his” truths, half-truths or absolute lies that justify his lifestyle, his interests, his behavior, his being and his existence in the world. Thus, the exercise of politics becomes politicking and demagoguery.

We are witnessing – bewildered and terrified – the preaching and propagation of lies as if they were truths, the justification of arbitrary decisions, violence, repression and even wars through lies and fallacies repeated to make them seem true, the imposition of post-truths as if they were the truth. We live overwhelmed by the overload of misinformation or false political information to manipulate public opinion, in order to achieve reprehensible objectives, purposes that never benefit the common good or are in accordance with common sense and feeling or with the best human values ​​and desires.

The “truth” of postmodernity or “post-truth”, as it is called today, so privileged and used today by professionals in politicking in electoral campaigns and in government decisions, gives greater value and weight to emotions and collective hysteria than to reason or facts and evidence; It selectively distorts reality in order to support self-serving narratives and to confuse the human task of differentiating truth from lies.

Since we are not allowed to know the truth from the facts and there are repeated and unscrupulous lies, if we stick to Abraham Lincoln’s maxim: “Let the people know the facts (the truth) and the country will be safe,” we live today – thanks to the farce and hypocrisy as a lifestyle and profession of our politicians and rulers on duty – in a national and international situation of insecurity, defenselessness, instability, distrust, lack of protection, uncertainty and perplexity.

Populism is a false and harmful way of exercising politics under the guise of politics. There is populism and populists in all areas of life in society: among right-wing, center or left-wing politicians, among religious leaders, among leaders, businessmen, teachers and parents, etc. Many societies in the world are already being led by populists and dishonest people, afraid of discovering and announcing the truth, very prone to flattery, complicity, complacency and hypocrisy, to double standards that are incoherent between words and deeds, between what is believed and what is lived, between what is preached and what is practiced.

Populism is led by charismatic “leaders”, capable of connecting with the emotions, prejudices, resentments and anti-values ​​of some groups; with speeches that appeal to polarization, to social division and never to union, to hatred and never to peaceful coexistence, to quick and easy analysis and solutions to complex and serious social problems, to nationalism, to distrust in institutions, to messianism and authoritarianism and never to consensus.

The populist divides to conquer, confronts, blames the past and others for his inefficiency, full of fears he turns his fears into repression, he does not govern for everyone but for those who – for convenience or fear – applaud and flatter him. Thus, he builds around himself the kingdom of power for power’s sake, not for service, a kingdom of mediocrity, of ineptitude, of deceitful rhetoric, of censorship, etc.

“Today’s populists emerge in democracies and, once in power, they erode them until they transform the regime into authoritarianism. Such a transformation… depends on the institutional strength that surrounds them” (De la Torre and Peruzzotti quoted by Eduardo Posada Carbó – El Tiempo.cm – January 16 – 2025) and Cayetana Álvarez de Toledo, Spanish MP, for her part, in a speech to the students of the University of Liberty in Mexico, says that today, like water or electricity, “the truth is a basic necessity”. To face everything that threatens the best of our social coexistence, to face lies, post-truth and politicking, to face all forms of populism, it is up to all of us – against indifference and apathy – to act and participate in all possible and available spaces of social and political life. Voting is not enough, since there are many anti-democratic government regimes in which, also and very frequently, people vote.

It is up to all of us to seek political leadership from the most capable and intelligent, the most honest and those who seek the defence, commitment and respect of human, social and democratic values.

It is up to all of us to choose between truth or lies, between modesty or show, between altruism or egolatry, between authority or authoritarianism, between civility or despotism, between unity or polarisation, between freedom or servility, between critical spirit or censorship, between social order or chaos and anarchy, between social construction or moral degradation, between the good of all or the benefit and exploitation of a few, between good sense, reason, common sense or insanity and madness.