In many cases, deficiencies are concealed in the name of sovereignty. Demagogy takes refuge in the little of the word and falls into the traps we want hacer.Hace a few years, a political leader pointed out that the greenhouses that were to be built in Valdegovia for hydroponic production were an interesting contribution to the path of food sovereignty. In this way, instead of bringing Almeria or Morocco, we would have the country’s tomato all year round.

In the concept of right-wing sovereignty, he rejects the impact of the project on the region. He has been forgotten that it is an initiative of the multinational Hispalus, in which he takes the name of Araba Crops, although there are local investors – Eroski... – but that money does not stay in the valley. Passing, mention the energy consumption – gas and electricity – necessary for the operation of these greenhouses and the chemicals needed for the landless cultivation of these plants. The project is supported by Neiker and Hazi.

It's been two months in an interview on the lap of wind power plants since a candidate from Gipuzkoa told a farmer that the problem is that we all like to eat ham, but that nobody wants a macrofarm near home.

The one on the left recognizes that if it's going to be ham, it's going to be a fattened pig in a meat factory and the animal won't know the sun and will be bound to fattening faster. He internalizes that the pollution of this snack is natural and that everything the pig has eaten throughout its life has entered either the port of Bilbao or the highway. Because everything has a price, damage is part of the game.

One from right to left, the two are doing traps on their own, both dependent. Because reality is stubborn, and if you want to produce off-season, landless tomatoes, some may decide to raise prices for electricity, gas and water, and the local authority unnecessarily named the medium-voltage power line of public interest. Look, those that were 15 hectares are left in the bucket, and the tomatoes it was willing to sell last September have not yet arrived.

Those who used the ham argument to defend the wind power plant have not realised that we do not want meat or milk factories in Euskal Herria or anywhere else; that there are baserritars growing freely and with respect for pigs; that their party does not like the industrial production model, which has also publicly spoken against that right-driven tomato factory.

The first hides the concept used by the Left and supports an unemancipated project in all its institutions. The second, for the same reason as the right, has cast anyone who will have the wind power plant next to his house in the mountain of town. If you're in Almeria or in Mauritania, we don't want you here, it's a fight.

Both have been forgotten that being sovereign necessarily means deciding whether or not to do so, and controlling processes, from the beginning to the end, so that the return on investment in it, not only economic, stays there. This is true in all areas of life, including food and energy.

In the name of sovereignty it is not worth everything, and if we do not look at the model, we will be dependent, even if we make traps on our own. I believe that there is only one opportunity in this path of emancipation, and we should focus any decision, including that relating to energy, to the ecological, to the nearby, to projects tailored to people, to the social and solidarity economy.

Will it be ecological if the countryside and the mountains are filled with wind power plants or solar panels? Where is biodiversity, respect for those living in it? How does the mountain protect us if we do not protect it?

How close is energy consumed to produce in the same place, whether it's home or any other building? What better than doing the least wiring and installation?

Who are these major wind turbines, the multinationals or the people below? Who will be in debt? Is the green bubble really out of the logic of capital? Do you really believe that multinationals have come to meet people's needs?

In fact, the political landscape is disappointing. Many citizens feel orphans: those who govern and those who are opposed do not dare to say that this crazy capitalist life is over. They prefer to continue feeding the party, the apparatus, rather than responding to their responsibility towards the citizens.

How can society and the economy adapt to a significant reduction in energy consumption? What kind of organization will we have when oil and many other raw materials don't come here, or at least for most? Has anyone realistically thought about what kind of industry we need – need – to live well? How do we adapt them to people's real needs to make the most of resources? When will the law change to allow each person to be independent in their home, company or community at the energy level? Is there work around feeding to ensure healthy food for the population? What role will the primary sector play, what role will the rural environment play and how to protect people? What strategy is there for people to come to the villages, realistically – again – without hyper-technology? There is only a lack of political will to start a new life.

We must change course sooner rather than later. Steps must be taken to dismantle the monster we have created in the name of development. And that task certainly falls to the political leaders in governments. It is up to the left to imagine a project for people who start from realism and work with citizens, outside the logics of war and capital, where nature will go from being exploitable to being a travel companion.

You cannot hide behind words. Do not keep cheating on your own.