In the past, it was common to give the same name to several children of the same family. Naturally, they were then able to distinguish them, for example, by the two sons of the same name: Call John the little one and John the big one and finish! So individuals and particular issues were not as important as they are today.

Today, it is unthinkable that something like this should happen. In our society, individualism has become very important and we have placed it – too high – in the situation of individuals in social practice.

Democracy is a way of deciding on the affairs of all, in which it is said that the opinion of all is taken into account equally – as defined in the Basque Wikipedia –. Even if in theory so, at present in the representative democracies of our environment, our influence is limited to the regular election of our representatives by the general public when deciding on the affairs of all. As individuals, we are very important, but the strength we have in collective issues is not as great as we should be.

In recent years, demands and impulses have multiplied to increase the participation of citizens (referendums and other participatory processes), which is good for overcoming the barrier of participation in the four-year elections. There is no doubt that this direction is best suited to dealing with the phenomena that flood democracy, as is the case with the pressures of the economic lobbies.

But I think that is not enough for us.

When a citizen receives a post in an institution, we congratulate him. I don't know if it's the best. There is no doubt that good luck in his work is desirable, but happiness may indicate that he has won a prize, a meritorious prize that was owed to him and that the takeover makes his recipient bigger.

And a public office – always a designation or an administrative career – is not a prize, but a job (work) serving the citizens. And because it is a post of service, it bears with it a responsibility, a responsibility to provide the best service to the citizens, and that is why I find it more appropriate, when someone takes office, to thank that person – not to exaggerate his ego, but to realize that what he has done is responsibility, and not reward! – that he has assumed that responsibility – in the republic – in what is public, in what is the past of everything – that there is normal.

If this mindset were to take root in us, it would be more difficult, for example, for corruption itself to happen and, above all, for the intention to accept corruption. Democracy would be deeper, more mature, more comprehensive.