Conveniently Socialist

While I recognize that modern times demand reforms, revisions, and constant adaptation of what we inherited from the past, I continue to understand that socialism is a matrix of social justice, equality, and solidarity. But believing in ideals is one thing; believing in the practices of those who should represent them is quite another.

I submitted my resignation from the Socialist Party for several reasons, but one in particular truly intrigued me: the way representatives of socialist structures, particularly the Socialist Youth, lend their support to independent movements while continuing to use the weight of their positions to steer young activists toward other political campaigns. I'm specifically referring to Vizela.

This isn't a minor issue, nor a mere strategic detail. It's a glaring inconsistency: how can someone who presents themselves as a socialist leader put their resources and influence at the service of projects that, in practice, compete against the party to which they maintain their affiliation? The answer is simple: convenience. Because being a socialist, it seems, is no longer so much an act of conscience as it is a tool of the moment, used when convenient and discarded when it becomes inconvenient.

The problem lies not only in the contradiction itself, but in what it reveals. When leaders become mere managers of circumstances, the party loses its soul. When ideological loyalty is exchanged for loyalty to local or personal interests, a dangerous vacuum emerges, where membership ceases to be a space for debate and becomes a field for maneuvering. It is in this void that opportunism thrives, and it is in this void that the confidence of those who still believe that politics can be done seriously is shattered.

There are those who argue that politics is the art of the possible. I accept that definition. But the possible cannot be confused with the expedient. Politics, to be

A dignified life must be linked to values ​​that resist the conveniences of the moment. Socialism, in particular, only makes sense as a project of conscience, a conscience committed to social justice, even when it's difficult, and that doesn't bow to the easy shortcuts of incoherence.

Leaving the party didn't mean renouncing these values. Quite the opposite. It meant not being willing to be complicit in practices that contradict what socialism should stand for. I refuse to allow the ideal to be exploited by those who prefer the shadow of convenience to the light of coherence.

In Vizela, and in so many other places, it's time for political parties to realize that youth cannot be treated as shock troops for other people's projects, nor as pawns for personal careers. Youth should be a space for education, debate, and engagement, not a cog in a game of convenience.

As long as socialism is reduced to a mere frill, it will continue to lose its transformative power. Being a socialist isn't convenient; it's demanding. And only when this demand is once again at the center of activism will socialism cease to be just a banner for a few and become a cause for all.