The objective of the present was to establish the axes of discussion around the Theory of Sustainable Governance (TSG). For such intention four allusive theories to the viable development and their effects in the cognition are reviewed. One considers that the Theory of Social Representation (TSR), the Elaboration Likelihood Theory (ELT), the Agenda Setting Theory (AST) and the Theory of Social Justice (TSJ) explain three dimensions regarding the viable development: shortage of resources, styles of life and governance. However, the four theories turn out insufficient to explain the foundations of the viable development: anthropocentrism and ecocentrism. For this reason, it is necessary to set out the content of the TGS to explain the relationship between the foundations and the dimensions of sustainable hydric.

The analysis of democracy in relation to sustainable development can be carried out from its systems of proselytism, contention, election, representation and presidential, parliamentary and semi-presidential governance. Establishing the relationship between democracy and sustainability would explain the concentration and responsibility of decision-making power, veto and initiative around the presidential or ministerial figure.

In the face of economic, political and social crises, democracies have valued sustainability very little. The inequitable distribution of resources, mainly energy and water resources, seems to follow a path different from that of justice and equity, the main moral objectives of public policies.

However, economic crises seem to converge with ungovernability. The concessions and administration of natural resources designated at the discretion of the president or prime minister imply the limits of their powers. Initiatives and laws, once exclusive to the executive and legislative, now protect those who obtain the rights to explore, exploit, transform, redistribute and commercialize natural resources, affecting the communities that by right are the heirs of their administration. Such a context justifies the review of the powers of presidential, ministerial or parliamentary power to discuss its scope and limits regarding Sustainable Development. While it is true that nations committed to climate change are responsible for the problems of biomass scarcity and its effects on the population, democracies are closer to transparency compared to other regimes. Even the People's Republic of China aims to reduce its polluting emissions. In this sense, democracy and sustainability travel the same path. However, the political and business classes, unable to contain their crises, have lost the legitimacy of their functions in the eyes of intellectual citizens who have constantly drawn attention to the environmental problems that will prevent nations from developing sustainably.Citizens, prey to advertising and consumerism, in the face of obvious changes in temperature and climate, demand the offer of ecological products at a low cost. Green consumer power means excessive freedom in choosing, purchasing and using products and services (Friedman and Friedman, 1992).

However, the media, as producers of images, control the consumption options of citizens. Only by assuming the role of citizen, militant or adherent does the individual escape media power and fall into the res publica (Luhman, 1986).

Precisely, this process from citizen to activist would interest politics and its leaders. If the individual manages to orient his expectations and consumption towards environmentalism, the governance of his representatives must travel a path beyond public administration, sociopolitical participation, clientelism or social representation.

Sustainability is beyond individual consumption, needs and expectations. It consists of a new way of life, new values and beliefs, it is a new style of subsistence in the face of crises and economic austerity, a propensity for the future.

The objective of this essay is to compare coercive political systems with persuasive political systems. For this purpose, the differences between authoritarianism, totalitarianism, presidentialism and parliamentarianism are contrasted. Once an evolutionary line of political systems has been established that goes from coercion to persuasion, this essay proposes a new persuasive political system anchored to the foundations of presidentialism. This is the Sustainable Presidential Political System (SPPS) which would have its defining process in the contest, debate and election of representatives. Unlike other democracies, the SPPS would have regulatory power over the differences between the executive, the legislative and the judicial. In this sense, political platforms and proselytism would be determined by the environmental problems that impede sustainable development. The SPPS will open the discussion related to the public agenda, ecological problems and the relationship between academia and the political class.

The analysis of knowledge networks around sustainability and their forms of academic governance can be carried out based on the Theory of Sustainable Democracy. In principle, the nature-humanity relationship has been widely studied by scientific communities that, in an effort to highlight the errors of public policies, have used research reports based on specialized theories belonging to the knowledge network, but within the academy the representativeness would be far from being sustainable.

Since each scientific community is guided by at least one knowledge paradigm, the corresponding symbols and meanings denote beliefs regarding the choice and re-election of discretionary knowledge and representation protocols. Precisely, the objective of this essay is to question the protocol of representativeness of knowledge to explain the complexity of communication within an academic body, area of knowledge or academy.

A system shows the communicative complexity between groups and knowledge networks. As a system, the human community is immersed in a symbolic world in which hierarchies or structures do not matter, only relationships found and give value to entities.

If decision and election systems are supported by civic-political networks, then academic communities would have in their research bodies the civic-political information necessary to obtain the proposed goals. A system is complex due to the multiplicity and diversification of its information and communication structures. In the case of academic and scientific unions, communication is vertical when organizing events or completing financing.

However, the complexity of a system is, according to Moran, its recursiveness. Since the research process is conditioned by the amount of investment, the objectives of an academic body adjust to the variation in the instruments required to develop the project.

In this sense, democracy and sustainability are part of the same system: intergenerational representative complexity. This essay proposes that if representativeness is not governance, then democracy would be determined by the ecological balance.

The history of the modern State shows that the majority imposes its decision on minorities. That is to say, environmental problems are a preamble for such imposition. Furthermore, if representativeness is the result of equidistant power relations between social sectors, then the Democratic Political System (SPD) included asymmetrical contests, debates and elections in its projections.

The scarcity of resources will impose austerity as an economic strategy and frugality as a social value. In the pyramid of social hierarchies, problems will obtain a privileged place in the stratification of public policies.

Even though the distribution of resources is equitable, society will build forms of coexistence and action anchored to consumption expectations.

Sociopolitical Systems

The term system was coined by Bertalanffy to differentiate living beings from animated objects based on the exchange of energy, openness and closure. He called living beings open systems because they were processes of energy exchange in which homeostasis (equilibrium) could necessarily transition to entropy (imbalance) and then to negentropy or syntropy (rebalance or reduction of entropy). In this sense, a sociopolitical system refers to the balance of power relations between the State and the reduction of its conflicts through instruments or mechanisms of coercion and persuasion as a response of the State to the demands and expectations of its governed.

The first sociopolitical system was tribalism in which a leader or chieftain stood as the ultimate decision-maker in matters of the tribe and that concern their security, vindication or emancipation in the face of the onslaught of other tribes. It is a center of power that emanates from attributive legitimacy since the leader or leader is perceived to have special qualities for combat and victory in the battles in which he or she is involved. In this system there were sympathizers of the regime who collected resources to encourage combatants. In effect, it was a preliminary tax management to the imposition of taxes characteristic of the Middle Ages, despotic regimes and absolutist monarchies.

Once the claim or emancipation has been consummated, the State moves towards totalitarianism and authoritarianism. In the first case, it is a regime in which sympathizers and dissidents are identified by a loyal group which is in charge of redistributing resources based on a tribute. Because the distances between the kingdoms are short and the population scarce, censuses could be carried out in a short period of time at the same time that future Praetorian members were recruited. Under these two forms of State, the subjects are condemned to remain and die in the same place where they were born since the relationship between the kingdoms is limited and nullified.

Once the population increased, feudalism gave way to mercantile and commercial relations, the main embryo of modern capitalism. It is a transitional socio-political system in which each governed is already considered a citizen to whom guarantees must be provided so that he or she can organize and compete for political power. Citizen participation is a symptom of a new regime with a new economic model. Capitalism required freedom of movement and labor choice to guarantee a plethora of workers willing to sell their labor power for their subsistence. In this sociopolitical system, democracy underlies as an ideal system for the expansionist purposes of the market. In both, social work ceases to be a work of charity and altruism and becomes a profession at the service of census, research and resource management. Through images more than speeches, the modern State transmutes into a kind of persuasive system in which simulation is its main currency. That is to say, the State seems to collude with the media to define the political contest around the election, competition, debate, elections and governance of a political class that seeks to legitimize itself in the preferences and voting intentions more than in the resolution of the imbalance between availability and distribution of resources.

If the persuasive State relies on the dissemination of images for its elective legitimation, then two predominant sociopolitical systems are expected in the future: anthropocentrism and ecocentrism. In the first case, public policies are aimed at resolving the gap between available resources and consumption expectations by encouraging employment, increasing purchasing power and competition for said resources. Full employment is raised as an objective, although most of these are insufficient even to acquire a resource or derived product. The governance of common resources follows a law of distribution based on their purchasing power .

In summary, the forms of State and government regimes determine the relationship between the State and social work. In this sense, the main function of social work is to promote forms of power that are inexorable to public policies and the problems of availability and distribution of resources.

Within the framework of sociopolitical propaganda and the exercise of power, the relationship between the State and the governed is mediated by social work. Such a process reconceptualizes the intervention of social work and positions it in a place of power very close to the base of the pyramid, but essential since it requires disseminators of power to transmit messages; symbols and meanings to achieve sustainable development

However, social work has predominantly been intervention and management of resources that in a state assistance scheme and as an intermediary only aspires to disseminate public policies. An alternative to the historical sociopolitical function of social work can be deduced from the sociopolitical approach related to the complexity of the State.

The State that has reached a phase of sustainable development will have an impact on the practice and conceptualization of social work. To do this, some sub-facets enunciated by political sociology must be met.

John Rawls's thinking about the distributive justice of resources and therefore the approach to sustainable development is fundamental to the outline of a State of persuasive complexity proposed by Niklas Luhmann. In the Rawlsonian conception, the power of decision and distribution must be maximized while particular interests are minimized for the benefit of social well-being. In such a process, moral development is sought by the State to achieve distributive justice. The greater citizen participation, the greater the allocation of resources by the State. The purpose of the Rawlsonian approach is to achieve a balance between participation, merits and consumption to avoid acts of injustice such as granting resources to those who are not even involved in their transformation and distribution.

However, the Rawlsonian proposal seems to depend on a moral development that citizens will not be able to reach since the power relations between the State and citizens are conditioned by pragmatic mechanisms. For this reason, Niklas Luhmann is committed to dismembering the mechanisms of control and dependency between the State and citizens. From the Luhmannian perspective, the State evolves based on scientific and technological advances. If the despotic absolutist State did not use persuasive mechanisms, it is because the instruments were not sufficiently developed to homogenize the opinion of the masses. Precisely, as information and communication technology advanced, the State incorporated phrases, images and discourses of power that had sufficient resonance among the governed.

A solid State, according to Bauman, symbolized and meant security. On the other hand, a soft State distorted social well-being and fostered sociopolitical insecurity when confronting or correcting conflicts of interest within society itself. The economic, political and social actors seemed to be led by an omnipresent State, but any retrospective or prospective failure was inevitably attributed to the incompetence and incompetence of the State. Therefore, the Luhmannian perspective is very similar to the Baumanian position: the State is the axis of economic growth and social development. As a center of power, the State had to have loyal forces that combated the usurpation of other States and internal conspiracy.

Both the Baumanian solid state and the Rawlsian state of justice are considered an antecedent of the Luhmannian persuasive state. In this sociopolitical scheme, the State is conceived as an entity of interests in which endogenous and exogenous positions converge around the sociopolitical system. To the extent that the State uses information and communication technologies to make its relationship with citizens more complex, it assumes risks that lead it to rethink its role as guarantor of society. Unlike the coercive State in which legitimacy is granted by its occupied territories, the persuasive State acquires its legitimacy in the breadth of freedoms. A restriction on freedom, mainly that of choice, carries a high cost that translates into insecurity and uncertainty.

However, the purpose of both the coercive State and the persuasive State is the control and manipulation of public and private perception, opinion and decision. The difference is only that the coercive state is a simple phase of legitimation and the persuasive state is a complex phase. Simplicity means an asymmetrical power relationship between the State and the governed. Complexity is understood as a symmetrical relationship between the State, institutions, citizens and the media.

Coercitive Political Systems

Coercive political systems are characterized by maximizing power based on a praetorian and bureaucratic structure around which unilateral decisions are carried out unanimously. The State is made up of a military leader or junta that has usurped power from a legitimate government.

According to Weber (1991/1986), the State is the reflection of asymmetrical power relations between individuals and human groups. In this sense, the State must attack all its force against those dissidents who question its legitimacy. Coercive political systems took place once the increase in population in the fiefdoms made their economy unsustainable. A political force was required to influence the multitudes to achieve the objective of expansion. Once a territory was conquered, its imperial supervision and payment was required, the coercive State had its justification and even legitimacy during the growth of the empire.

However, every group in power, whether closed or open, implies a not always fair competition for power and its inheritance; persuasive mechanisms emerge to incite the people to change their political structure, their rulers and representatives. Information, propaganda and communication subsystems in general were then required that could carry out wars on the level of speculation rather than confrontation. Once societies achieved an educational and economic status, the modern state was transformed into a complex system of communicative rationalities: persuasive state forms and regimes of government.

Persuasive Political Systems

Often, democracies limit themselves to a formula: spot + debate * contest + voting intention = vote. In this equation, symbols play a seminal role around the elections (García and D'adamo, 2006).

During elections, democracies, mainly presidential ones, presume to include majorities in their dynamics of contrasting ideologies, platforms and political campaigns (Becerra, Salazar and Woldenberg, 2000). Although democracies, according to Tocqueville, are the tyranny of the majority, their elections tend to expose two similar positions regarding the intervention of the State in the economy, but differentiable in their relationship with the agricultural and industrial sectors. It is about neoliberalism vs welfarism (Jarquín and Allamaná, 2005).

Although in some democracies, parties tend to be configured as center-left or center-right, the dynamics of the debates reflect a struggle for power although it is increasingly consensual and alternating (Navarro, 2000).

The democracy equation includes other electoral and post-electoral factors. The image of a candidate is built throughout the election process, mainly in the final stretch of the process. In debates, a politician can directly influence voting intentions.

However, understanding political discourse, no matter how simple it may seem, is not accessible to the majority of the population characterized by low educational levels and negligible monthly economic income. The reason why political speeches are reduced to images, phrases, gestures and gestures is that the candidate least favored by the polls tries to balance the order of preference by criticizing the candidate with the greatest support from the electorate.

According to publicists, the image and speech of a candidate revolves more around him and is constrained not only by the media, but also by leaders within the electorate. Precisely, this is the foundation of presidentialism, especially that which could be considered sustainable.

In effect, just as the presidential political system, in reference to the parliamentary political system, concentrates decisions; initiatives and vetoes in the figure of the executive, within the groups that make up the electorate there is a leader around whom the decisions that will mark the path of the group are concentrated (Gómez, 1996). Combined with the low level of education and monthly economic income, the majority of the electorate bases their subsistence on their divergent perceptions of their personal and group situation. Such a degree of creativity is made up of images, sounds and gestures that these people learn during the first years of their childhood. By adopting these forms of coexistence, the marginalized electorate and excluded from the university and a better quality of life, builds a spiral of insecurity and violence.

The presidential political system, in its phase of debate of ideas, would have the opportunity to activate those symbols that govern human behavior. This scenario could modify the voting intention of the electorate and the results of the votes.

However, the symbolic reality of the electorate, in the face of the inefficiency, ineffectiveness, ineffectiveness and insensitivity of the political class, has dropped to levels of detriment to the civic-political culture. These are ambiguous, confusing and spurious symbols around which the electorate would have to make a decision: vote or abstain. Far from this scenario affecting the confrontation of political ideas, it feeds back into the symbolic universe of adherents, sympathizers or dissidents in the face of a democratic regime. If the variables of insecurity, impunity and corruption are added, the electorate finds itself, during the elections, in a scenario fertile to the influence of civic-political symbols other than the political right, left and center options. That is, those who compete for the preferences and votes of citizens, increasingly during elections, use persuasive strategies. The political class, with increasing evidence, nominates candidates detached from political activity and resorts to the popularity of celebrities, intellectuals or businessmen to influence the preferences of the electorate and create in their divergent perception the idea of change and stability: hope of happiness.

Furthermore, the influence of a debate would not only consist of new candidates, new platforms, new messages and new spots, but also in new symbols of speeches, phrases and words close to the electorate. Every time a debater appeals to the behaviors, phrases and words of his or her authorship, they are reinforcing the perception of the audiences and publics regarding the perception of the presidential system.

During the contest, once the electorate has been informed of the candidates' opinions on the critical issues on the public agenda, the contest moves from a symbolic phase to a significant phase. In light of the presidential political system, conflict is the driving force of the contest. If the conflict implies a change, the conflict an alternation.

For this reason, candidate’s peripheral to electoral preferences seek to advance by minimizing the image and distorting the speech of the candidate preferred by the polls. At the same time, the peripheral options sought to maximize their speeches and messages by stimulating the divergent perception of the electorate.

In this sense, the contest is a scenario of decisions about who will lead the future of a nation and will concentrate the initiatives and vetoes to direct the social sectors.

However, the contest shows the paths of civic and political order alternative to political liberalism and state welfares (Requejo, 2000). An asymmetric contest in which one candidate leads the citizen preference is closer to the tyranny of the majorities by ignoring divergent thinking. Political dissidence, in the electoral contest phase, disappears as if the unilateralism surrounding the election of a candidate canceled other forms of political proselytism. The consequence of such political unilaterality is related to election day, the elections and post-election speeches.

During elections, citizens vote for or against a political option. Meanwhile, the divergent perception is at a maximum point since the interruption of spots and the pre-electoral recess period have caused a divergent perception oriented towards the vote, even if it is null or blank.

The elective day can activate other mechanisms of divergent electoral perception through incidents and fraud during and after the elections. These are elective mechanisms that seek to impact decisions at the time of voting.

However, the elections are more than just effective votes or electoral fraud, they are, above all, symbols and meanings around presidential political power. Every time citizens evoke such symbols, they reconstruct them to give them a new meaning even though the images, speeches, phrases, gestures and gestures are recycled. Elections are rituals of propensity for the future anchored in the deepest past of the electorate. Elections are a situation of prospective decisions based on precedents of opinion. Election day is a symbolic process in which the meanings corroborate the perceptions and voting intentions reported in the surveys (Valdés, 1991).

In an environment in which the problems of resource scarcity seem to determine political processes, forms of State and government regimes, the power of decision and veto has sustainability before it.

Sustainable Presidentialist Political System

The SPPS, unlike other democracies, is determined by the environmental situation, climate change, the availability of resources and the needs of current and future generations. In essence, it is an economic system in which the decisions of initiatives and vetoes are not discretionary, but rather find their basis in the nature-humanity balance not from the exploitation, transformation and consumption of resources, but rather in its optimization, reuse and recycling of waste. In this sense, sustainable presidentialism would be led by scientists who are experts in the relationship between resources and needs.

The new political system would have contests, debates and elections on a green agenda around which any party, platform, proselytism, ideology, propaganda and advertising would aim for greater optimization of resources from biodegradable technologies, reuse of products, austerity-frugality plans and strategies in a market of knowledge and information related to reproductive processes and the social consumption of waste.

Sustainable presidentialism would be fed back by civic-political values around caring for the environment as an intermediary or scenario for social happiness. If societies aspire to sustainability, this should be based on the optimization of resources rather than their accumulation and hoarding. However, sustainable presidentialism would share the same limits as other democracies. Such is the case of the Tyranny of the Majority announced by Tocqueville. Since a collective decision that elects a representative is essentially a majority, sustainable presidentialism could not abandon this criterion or adopt any other in the face of the urgency of climate change.

The new presidential system would maintain its representative structure; legislative, executive and judicial, but unlike other democracies, those who would have a say would be those scientists with interdisciplinary training in science, technology and politics. Advised by researchers from all areas, the new scientific-political class would rely on a green code.

Unlike other political systems, sustainable presidentialism would establish a comprehensive system to train future generations and provide them with basic knowledge that facilitates their participation in congresses, forums, symposiums, workshops, meetings or seminars around which the SPPS is questioned, new ways and alternatives are proposed to achieve happiness. In these events, the most intelligent, creative and enthusiastic young people will be selected who could be candidates for the presidency.

During the political contest, the candidates would demonstrate their competencies in solving contemporary environmental problems. In the opinion of a committee of experts, the most feasible solution will have the honor of debating in front of other presidents, former presidents or candidates the relevance of new product optimization, reuse and recycling systems.

The scientific-technological-political feedback would lead us to a concertation of ideas from which the electorate would cast its vote in favor of a new candidate, in favor of re-election or the annulment of the elections due to scientific, technological, economic or politics in the resolution of environmental problems.

Theory of Social Representation

The Social Representation Theory (SRT) explains the common sense of individuals in relation to other individuals and groups. These are beliefs that promote the communication of scientific or common thoughts based on a core of learning and knowledge known as objectification and anchoring.

Objectification, naturalization and anchoring are processes of social representation that transform information related to resource scarcity into sustainable development. It is a gradual transformation of nature considered as a matriarch in which communities were twinned with other species and with the now considered energy and water resources.

That is, scientific information about climate change, global warming, desertification, droughts, the greenhouse effect and gas emissions and the ozone layer is selected by the media and is minimized-maximized by audiences. . Once these social representations are established, the political classes will build another representation of nature from the sustainability of resources. When represented as an environment, nature is considered a space in which resources, mainly energy and water, are scarce and on the verge of extinction. Therefore, the preservation and conservation of nature is considered, from social representation, as an axis of Sustainable Development.

In the case of democracy, it is not perceptible to the naked eye and will have to be inferred from the propaganda around a candidate or party. That is, democracy, like authoritarianism and totalitarianism, cannot be observed other than from symbols constructed by propaganda and advertising messages. Such a process assumes that voters pay attention to those symbols or images mostly disseminated by the media. The images and phrases disseminated by the media affect the perception, decision and political action of the electorate.

Given that propaganda is a symbolic universe, it is necessary to state that human perception refers to an order and reordering of said images and content, the criteria for remembering such stimuli are established by the media. Once the mass media have reduced the message to mere information, agenda context, individuals adopt phrases, images and language styles that they naturalize, introducing these images and meanings into their personal agenda and conceptual repertoire.

When people interact in their reference group, they introduce naturalized symbols and meanings into the group's agenda. If it is only images, the electorate will include these symbols in their personal agenda unconsciously, if they are phrases or words, the citizen will reflect and accommodate such concepts in their speech. Images and emotions seem to be linked to spontaneous behavior. In contrast, speeches or phrases are related to deliberate, planned and systematic actions. If both symbols, rational and emotional, are disseminated by the media, then objectification, naturalization and anchoring will have to be oriented towards a social representation sustainable by contexts and framing of political messages in which images are their main content. relation to the sentences.

Probability Theory of Elaboration

If individuals reduce scientific knowledge to mere common sense information, if people make their own interpretation of facts based on the degree of information they possess or wish to understand, if perceptions and beliefs related to a science have been transformed for comfort cognitive, if scientific discourses to be understood are translated into images, then the facts-cognition relationship is mediated by the degree of information and the degree of knowledge (Petty and Cacioppo, 1986a; 1986b)

Elaboration Probability Theory (EPT) is distinguished from SRT in that information is processed from images or phrases rather than from abstract symbols. TPE maintains that symbols must be transformed into persuasive images or discourses in order to process them emotionally or rationally (Cacioppo and Petty, 1989). A message whose content includes more images than speeches will be processed peripherally to be transformed into emotions. A message with discursive content will involve a central processing of the information and will be transformed into arguments to dissuade or persuade a certain position (Cacioppo, Petty, Feng and Rodríguez, 1986).

Once the social representation of democracy is inserted into human cognition, the media are considered by audiences as producers of persuasion in which democracies broadcast their forms of state and government regimes. Presidential democracy, unlike parliamentary democracy, broadcasts through the mass media the idea of freedom and equity for sustainability that yesterday was considered growth.

In the productive sectors, presidential democracy makes it clear that the problems, those that prevent the countryside and industry from developing sustainably, only have a solution attributed to the competencies of a candidate.

The synergy in these sectors will result in a pact between the executive and the productive sectors. In the service sectors, presidentialism sends messages about the allocation of resources for education, science and technology. Within the research bodies, the social representation of excellence is generated in the face of the possibility of achieving the research objectives. Scientists and technologists organize forums, conferences or symposiums to justify budget allocation. This is a biased objectification, a naturalization of freedom and competition, an objectification of merits based on budget allocations.

If images are transformed by feelings and discourses into reasons, then the elaboration of symbols and meanings will disrupt the productive and scientific structure, reproducing the social representation related to effort and merits as sufficient criteria to belong to the guild.

However, if the democratic State influences the electorate through the persuasive mediatization of environmental problems, if the presidential State is the evolution of authoritarianism and totalitarianism, if democracy emits affective and rational symbols to objectify, naturalize and anchor its values of freedom and equity, if the social representation of democracy is produced and guided by the media, then we are witnessing a situation that shows the social structure of political complexity as a dimension of power in which societies are immersed and individuals driven by images rather than reasoning.

Agenda Setting Theory

If facts are reduced to representations and emotions, if people process scientific information through symbols and images rather than arguments, then it is essential to analyze the context of information, communication and mediatization of facts to clarify why nature is understood and understood. from multiple labels in relation to their extraction, transformation, distribution, consumption and recycling.

Agenda Setting Theory explains the representational and emotional process proposed by TRS and TPE. Both symbols and images are, as stipulated by the TEA, the result of an improvised and heuristic process in which perceptions, beliefs, attitudes, decisions and behaviors are determined by the mediatization of an event. The TEA suggests that mass media are governed by a market logic and, by minimizing costs to maximize benefits, they bias information and transform it into news. They reduce facts to simple reports, spots, interviews, columns, opinions or slogans.

The study of audiences and the media can be carried out from the establishment of the agenda as a result of media power rather than political power. The impact of the contextualization, framing and intensification of news on public opinion is fostered by the information bias of the media. To the extent that news is selected, the representation and processing of information tend to be objectified in emotions (McCombs, 1972). Once a piece of news is contextualized and framed, a persuasion process begins marked by the need to listen to the details of the news; the electorate has objectified and naturalized the content of said messages to protect their meaning in a representational anchor.

The media are represented as guides to values, speeches, decisions and behaviors by citizens. Yesterday, biased messages defined the meaning of a political representation, today the mediated symbols are affects or emotions and as such, they introduce information processing expectations. Precisely, this is the foundation of mediatization, as persuasive symbols, biased messages determine their reception. The framing of an event in a news story affects the affective representation of images. This is an objectification and naturalization of a symbol known to public opinion thanks to intensive dissemination. Since symbols are incommensurable, responses are also unpredictable.

As the coverage of a political event is contextualized, the mediatization of democracy is framed more in images related to the contest, the debate and the elections. During the electoral process, news biases are a function of the level of audience and expectation.

In the case of environmental problems, they are contextualized around climate change, global warming and its greenhouse effect, framed under the notion of uncertainty and risk as well as intensified by their incommensurability and unpredictability. In short, nature has been mediated as an environment.

Theory of Social Justice

If the media bias the facts and transform them into news, if people construct their own interpretation of the facts based on such news, if they objectify, naturalize and anchor the representation of symbols related to the mediated events, if the images influence emotionally in the hearings, then we find ourselves in a context in which justice depends on media bias and manipulation, images and emotions around the achievement of individual objectives or the failure of personal goals.

The Theory of Social Justice (SJT), unlike SRT, TPE and TEA, explains the events subsequent to the process of representation, elaboration and personal agenda. The TJS assumes the news, its representation and emotional elaboration as facts.

The TJS warns that those who suffer from a shortage of energy, water and food resources have only been concerned about their availability and scarcity, failing to diversify them. Alternative energies, according to the TJS, are an attempt to diversify the availability, distribution, consumption and recycling of energy resources. Yesterday, the economy grew from the hydrocarbon subsidy, today the economy depends on creativity and innovation around knowledge for the design of new forms of energy, supply and consumption, preferably those that have been consumed and whose waste has increased. to a greater extent than energy and water reserves.

Sustainable societies have not only fostered the conservationist ethics and trust required for the management of energy resources. As common and externalities, energy shortages are an anthropocentric reference. The distribution of resources implies their equity, which until recently was considered an effect of their availability, human needs and community governance.

Once nations or communities have signed agreements and treaties in which commutability of resources is accepted. Equity takes on special relevance with this fact. Associated with community governance it implies a system of representation and legitimacy. In sustainable societies, equity is a situation rather than a structure for managing common resources. If resources are assumed as externalities, anthropocentric societies channel their minimal preservation and ecocentric societies accelerate their redistribution.

In this sense, redistributive justice in excluded, marginalized or vulnerable sectors. Equity and justice would be governance indicators based on values of trust, responsibility and austerity.

Although the TJS proposes, in the first instance, a redistribution of resources and secondly, a reengineering of the extractive, transformative, logistical, distributive and consumerist processes, it is necessary to consider knowledge management, project financing and the training of researchers to form a new sustainable democracy.

Theory Of Sustainable Governance

The Sustainable Governance Theory (SGT) includes three elements for discussion; 1) the values, beliefs and perceptions that underpin the resource-community relationship allude to ecocentric dimensions compared to the anthropocentrism of the market that considers nature as a comparative rather than competitive advantage; 2) community participation is determined by perceptions of equity around the common distribution of resources; 3) the media, by biasing the relationship between resources and communities, influences anthropocentric rather than ecocentric public policies.

However, the scarcity of resources has revealed their common nature. If several communities depend on an aquifer, civil wars and legal disputes may arise over the rights of the resource; the scarcity and eventual extinction of water will determine its conservation by those involved. Furthermore, an ecocentric collaboration dynamic will develop with anthropocentric foundations: water belongs to whoever conserves it for the benefit of future generations. With the agreement between the communities on the conservation of the aquifer, the extinction of water would be delayed, the reduction of water consumption would be far from austerity and frugality since the diversification of consumption is a preservation strategy that minimizes the future of extemporaneous generations 

Yesterday, communities respected nature because they considered it a matriarch, now the environment will be conserved because it is considered a common, scarce and endangered resource. To the extent that the communities reach an agreement, they will sign the management of their environment, carry out actions to protect the species and raise awareness among their children about the importance of sharing to conserve resources.

However, the affinity of the communities towards nature meant a sustainable relationship that is increasingly becoming extinct as well as resources. The implicit connections with nature were decisive for communities that considered other species as sisters and nature as the origin of this relationship. It is true that the environment was sometimes considered unsafe and even the forests represented darkness, but humanity intervened in nature to convert it into resources with the desire to conserve its species, its generations and development without realizing that its scarcity compromises the system. nature-humanity.

Criticisms of sustainable development also refer to TGS and consist of highlighting its economic foundations above political, social, cultural, environmental or psychological postulates.

In principle, sustainable development is considered as a device from which the idea has been built that resources can be conserved by diversifying their consumption among those who can acquire more than what would be allocated to them if they were sufficiently equitably distributed. It is a criticism of post-materialist values that imply an overcoming of basic needs and the arrival of more spiritual needs that would make people more conscious of conserving their environment for the enjoyment of their descendants. However, postmaterialism, as an indicator of sustainable development, emerged in groups that had not achieved an essential minimum economic comfort as well as disappeared in groups that achieved their supply goals and now practice hoarding them.

The economic dimension of sustainable development has also been widely criticized since the market cannot be the cause, the effect and the solution from which sustainable development can be financially viable.

In political terms, sustainable development has also been criticized for being proposed by business politicians or politicians linked to the productive sector that has most contaminated the environment. In this sense, it is noted that the green parties obey the dictates of business and financial corporations that would promote laws as long as they benefit them and harm their competition. These are companies mostly from developed economies that would seek to control the market by eliminating companies from emerging countries.

Finally, at the cultural level, sustainable development, according to critics, is the result of protest actions by academic, anarchist and countercultural groups that do not represent the interests of other social sectors that wish to enjoy natural resources equally. what the preceding generations did and the successor generations who can pay for their consumption and even their waste will do it.

Despite these criticisms, sustainable development and more properly, sustainable democracy seems to be the last opportunity for anthropocentric societies, groups and individuals who are accustomed to excessive consumption of natural resources, mainly energy and water resources. That is to say, those who have anthropocentric ideas are beginning to suffer the ravages of resource scarcity regardless of how much they can or are willing to pay for their consumption. In this sense, a system of election, legislation and governance is required that guarantees equitable redistribution and austere consumption of resources.

Sustainable governance will depend not on anthropocentrists, but on ecocentrists. Those who consider that resources are for the exclusive use of those who can pay for their consumption, those who think that resources should be consumed by current and future animal and plant species, those who do not even know that they are part of nature, those who avoid the future and insist on the present, those who minimize costs and maximize benefits, those who are altruistic, those who are selfish, sustainable governance should not exclude them, but should include them, should not force them, but should motivate them, should not hide them but should exhibit them, recovering and using the media, sustainable governance will be the counterweight to information biased by news and images that show resources and species in extinction for a nature preserved for current generations and protected for the benefit of future generations.

Design. A correlational and cross-sectional study with a sample of students at a public university.

Sample. 132 students were interviewed; 72 women and 60 men. 51 are between 18 and 20 years old, 59 are over 20 years old and under 24 years old and 22 are over 24 years old. 70 belong to the area of Social Sciences, 20 to the area of Basic Sciences and 22 to the area of Biological Sciences and 20 to the area of Arts. 80 profess the Catholic religion, 30 declared they did not profess any religion and 22 declared a religion other than Catholic. 90 are single (40 of them with a partner), 20 are married and 12 are in a free union.

Instruments. The Scale of Beliefs, Perceptions, Attitudes, Norms and Intentions of Local Sustainable Governance was used. The beliefs subscale included statements regarding information on consensual voting, anti-corruption, and induced voting. Each item was measured by two response options: “false” and “true.” The perceptions subscale included statements regarding expectations of consensual voting, anti-corruption, and induced voting. The wording of the reagents was in the future tense since they are about control expectations in the face of unprecedented political and environmental situations. The evaluation of the perceptual items included four opinions ranging from “very unlikely” to “very likely.” The attitudes subscale included statements about associations between evaluations of voting behaviors and the surrounding information to carry them out. Each item was evaluated using a Likert-type scale ranging from “totally disagree” to “totally agree.” The norms subscale included items regarding principles that guide voting behavior. It included seven response options ranging from “it doesn't look like my situation” to “it looks a lot like my situation.” Finally, the intentions subscale included items that measure the probabilities of carrying out a specific action in a specific situation. It was evaluated based on four response options ranging from “very unlikely” to “very likely.” Each and every one of the subscales obtained a normal distribution established by a multivariate kurtosis value of less than three, a reliability greater than .60 and a construct validity greater than .300, which is the minimum required to assume internal consistency between the items.

Procedure. The operationalization of the variables was carried out based on the conceptual definition of Manjarrez et. al., (2005). Seven items were constructed for each variable. Each of the items was evaluated by experts. Once the reagents were selected, they were applied in the classrooms of a public university in the State of Mexico. The sample selection was non-probabilistic because the university is recently created and the first generation was 144 students. Before applying the subscales, students were instructed to answer honestly since the results of the survey would not have a negative or positive impact on their academic situation. They were informed that they would have a maximum of 20 minutes to respond and in those cases in which the response was systematically repeated or absent, they could write their reasons on the back of the survey. Once they were collected, they were thanked for their participation and were offered access to the information once the investigation was completed. The questionnaires were processed in the statistical package SPSS and Amos versions 10 and 5.0 respectively. The negative values of the reactants were multiplied by a constant to establish their absolute value and be able to estimate their normal distribution. In cases where the reliability values did not reach the minimum value of .60, the item that caused low internal consistency was eliminated. Regarding the selection of items for construct interpretation, the inclusion criterion was a value greater than .5 in the Kayser-Meyer-Olkin adequacy parameter and a significance level less than .05 in the Bartlett sphericity statistic. Multicollinearity was considered from covariances greater than .900 and the relationship was considered spurious if the correlations approached zero. The contrast of the hypotheses was carried out by observing a value close to unity for the adjustment indices and close to zero for the residual indices.

Normality. The normal distribution was estimated from the multivariate kurtosis parameter in which values less than five were considered evidence of normality. The significance of the parameter was calculated with the bootstrap statistic whose value was close to zero (see table 1).

Reliability. The estimation of internal consistency was carried out from the correlations between item and subscale. Crombach's alpha parameter with values greater than .60 was considered evidence of internal consistency. Table 1 shows values higher than required for beliefs, perceptions, attitudes, norms and intentions.

Table 1: Normal distribution parameters, internal consistency and construct validity

Kayser-Meyer-Olkin = .567; Bartlett test (X 2 = 12.46; 14df; p = .000); Multivariable Kurtosis = 4.632; Bootstrap = .000; Factor 1 = Consensual Sex; Factor 2 = Contraception; Factor 3 = Pregnancy Termination

Validity. An exploratory factor analysis of principal components was performed with varimax rotation and tests of both sphericity and adequacy 

with the Bartlett and Kayser-Meyer-Olkin parameters. Factor weights greater than .300 were considered as evidence of correlation between items and factors (see table 1).

Table 2 shows the predictions of the differences between men's perceptions and women's perceptions.

Table 2: Perceptual differences between men and women

(298 degrees of freedom for each Student “t” parameter and significance less than .001).

Using Levene's homoscedasticity test, its systematic significance of error was established. The factors obtained the homoscedasticity required to interpret the differences between men and women.

This essay has described the relationship between economic crises and sociopolitical values as effects of neoliberal policies; financial deregulation, labor flexibility and regulatory discontinuity.

Regarding economic crises, the State has established a pragmatic relationship with the economic and social sectors. Based on flexible public policy, the State has ignored the financial organization and has submitted to the opinions and policies of international financial organizations. In this sense, the decapitalization of economies stands as a main consequence of financial deregulation in key sectors of the economy and the exchange financial market such as; banks, brokerage houses and stock exchanges. Economic decapitalization, as an indicator of the informational economy, accelerates the productive and consumption processes of societies administered by Neoliberal States.

An increase in productivity without controls by the State increases unemployment and labor flexibility, contributing to the loss of purchasing power in the face of inflation.

Regarding consumption, financial globalization fosters a growth effect or fallacy that contributes to the expansion of the economy through credit and interest payments. Debt, by itself, would not represent a danger to the economic dynamics, but by not being able to cover the debts incurred, the debtors unknowingly increase the economic bubble and with it the subsequent economic recession, a prelude to the local crisis with repercussions. regional and in the case of recessions in developed economies, with a global impact.

Precisely, the Latin American crises had their origin in the US recession. Coupled with the North American economic slowdown, Mexico's anti-crisis policies have led to greater indebtedness and with it, greater exclusion, vulnerability, marginality and poverty. The economic crises in developed countries affect the financial, exchange and economic stability of emerging countries. The diversity of impacts seems to be attributed to the political decisions of the State rather than to the dynamics of the market.

Particularly relevant are the anti-crisis measures that consist of renegotiations and re-indebtedness external to the oppressed economy and internal to said economic system. As decision systems for public well-being, the State oscillates between deregulation and flexibility of its policies, which seem to affect only its productive sectors, public finances, social programs and central bank.

Social-economic studies of financial globalization, neoliberal policy and its social consequences seem not to integrate the principle related to social justice as derived from economic equity. As a world-system, financial globalization and its corresponding effects allow us to explain the increase in redistributive injustice of wealth and the inefficiency of the instruments and mechanisms of economic inclusion, political democracy and social equity. As a local consequence of financial globalization, freedom of choice seems to fade in the face of frenetic market production and consumption.

In this context, the State seems to have the opportunity to regain control of financial regulation to ensure employment and the corresponding social benefits that encouraged the moderate consumption of natural resources.

As long as individuals receive social security, they can plan their consumption without turning it into a lifestyle in the face of crises, but rather as an opportunity to convince a welfare state rather than the gendarme of the market.

This essay has also established the exclusion of elements or factors considered exogenous to the political system, its complexity, agenda and governance. If the endogenous elements of the system interact with exogenous factors, then it is possible to think that it is an open system whose complexity consists in differentiating the boundaries between democratic legitimacy and the spectacle of governance. In this context, political decisions would be the result of consensus and discrepancies around the critical issues of the problems that, at a given moment, would prevent the system from reproducing.

Although citizens are fragmented and radicalized in movements that, due to their diversity, could destabilize the system, its complexity allows its inclusion or exclusion synchronized with the decisions of the executive who may not know of its existence or relevance, but that will definitely impact its configuration, legitimizing its demands, absorbing its proposals and with the help of the media, transforming its essence into images of mass consumption.

Precisely, social movements that move from exogenous to endogenous exemplify the process of mediatization of reality in which the media are the instrument par excellence of the state around the construction of diagnoses, initiatives and laws that justify authoritarianism and in some cases, executive totalitarianism in presidential political systems.

It has also exposed the relationship between presidential, parliamentary and semi-presidential systems considering the mediatization of their functions and attributes of responsibility as well as their effects on perceptions and mobilizations in public or cybernetic avenues. In this work, agents, politicians, media and citizens have been considered as the essential effects of the interaction between political systems, media frames and citizen mobilizations. In each of the political systems, media powers disrupt public policy decisions, providing a parameter of citizen discontent and anxiety. As media, media systems construct critical issues from images and specialized discourses to encourage legislative proposals and in some cases, citizen mobilizations.

Finally, a new political system has been proposed around which sustainability takes on special relevance. Since Sustainable Development is related to the making of executive decisions such as initiatives and vetoes, it is necessary to anticipate responses to imminent environmental changes that will impede the self-determination capabilities of future generations (Díaz, 2004).=

By constraining democratic options, sustainable presidentialism will determine the optimization of resources with or without the support of upper and lower houses. If the power of veto is used to pave the way for initiatives such as those outlined in the essay, then we will be faced with a representativeness that is opposed to Plato's democracy in which the wisest had to govern firmly based on rational dictates, ignoring the symbolic dimensions of political civility that makes governance more likely. Since the scarcity of resources determines every decision and every political action, it is possible to think of political sustainability as a global project of humanity regarding the equitable redistribution of resources.

It is worth mentioning that sustainability and presidentialism are part of a project in accordance with the problems of scarcity and hoarding of resources. However, the presidential system, being a consensus protocol, would have its political justification of redistributive justice in the scarcity of resources.

If a political system is one that tends to balance social inequalities through counterweights between the executive, legislative and judicial powers, then the SPPS, by incorporating contests, debates and elections, will generate a fourth power in charge of wielding the consequences of the confrontation of ideas, platforms and visions of State.

The SPPS assigns responsibilities more than other democracies since scientific diagnosis is the basis for public policies. Before being bound by the same limits of other political systems, the SPPS will become any other government regime or form of State.