Trump has won in the United States. Rajoy’s victory in Spain has been the highest in history. In Colombia, the agreement for the peace process has been rejected. The PNV has won the regional elections in the Basque Country and Navarre, according to EiTB. In Britain, Brexit has been the great dominator of the country's history. We can have been the first force of the CAV in the Basque regional elections next Sunday.

The Oxford dictionary has used post-truth or post-truth as words for 2016, thinking that it can give an explanation to some of these events. Not everyone, apparently. These are, above all, Brexit, the victory of Trump and the non-victory of Colombia, which are some examples. The subtraction of truth, it is said, is to structure public opinion based on emotional messages and individual predictions, rather than on objective data or proven facts. They have presented us as a novel phenomenon, although one of the main propaganda mechanisms has always been to manipulate emotions and feed society's beliefs and then connect with them.

If it is not the same as propaganda, then what is post-truth? What are the characteristics that characterize an event as post-truth? In the rest of the political decisions is deep reasoning what guides the decisions? What comes the new word to? When we are told what has overcome the truth, we are implicitly told what is the truth or the truth itself. The conclusion I draw is that decisions that run counter to the attitude advocated by the mainstream media and the traditional power structures are considered post-truths. That was, apparently, the “truth of the past,” the truth of the political and media elite. To take the term for granted would therefore be to believe in the full objectivity of the media, to swallow that until now information has been outside the purse of propaganda. Ha! It's as if misinformation isn't standard practice.

Reading this, someone might think that I am saying mass media has lost power, that the influence of public opinion has decreased. However, I will confirm otherwise. The beliefs the media disseminates are the lunch of what has been called post-truth. They use great words such as integration and equality, but they are far from that everyday practice. Every passing day they stress that it is the provenance or provenance of a criminal or immigrant person. Day after day, they publish news loaded with gender stereotypes, underestimating women and placing them in the background. Day after day, patriotism is stimulated as an anesthetic for many other diseases. And so you could make a long list.

Neo-fascism has adopted these latent tendencies in society and has endowed itself with the traditional rhetorical structure of propaganda. After making a diagnosis that coincides with the critical situation of people, they present as antidotes the prejudices integrated in the most elemental thought. And that is where many people have found hope that the situation will turn. That is what we should be concerned about. Along with the Post-Egia there is another euphemism at the time, alt-right or the alternative right, which is used to justify this fascist mutation.

Well, in the meantime, the truth will continue to be raw and will present us cautious as the post-truth to explain the reality that lives in us, while removing critical thinking and reflection on the construction of truth, philosophy. And those who put reality showa to us instead of programming topical issues of general interest are the ones who tell us what it is to take away the truth and trust what is true. Then it will be useless to start with pedagogy.