Recently in Chile, a self-styled movement “Amarillos por Chile” (Yellows for Chile) has emerged that expresses its concern toward the proposal of a constitutional text, which is the result of the work of the 155 conventionalists elected by a universal vote in May 2021 to draft a new constitution.

Such conventionalists represent the broad spectrum of Chilean society, against what the intellectual, political, and business bourgeois elites would have wanted, accustomed to being the ones who dictate the laws and maintain hegemonic power, whether they are from the right, center, or even supposed to be "leftist".

The self-proclaimed "yellows" describe themselves as a "silent majority" (although in reality, they are a minority, being all people of the upper and upper-middle-class). They are figures of public renown who have exercised their right of declaring their opinion. Among them are academics, journalists, politicians, legislators, economists, writers, and even lobbyists who are currently holding or had held high government positions in the past. 
 
These self-named “Amarillos por Chile” predict the danger of "institutional explosion" and warn that the spirit of the convention must be through dialogue, the center-right should not be ignored, and that they will question the Convention if it goes astray and, therefore, sound the alarms.

The alarms are in the event of an "unpresentable constitutional text". They call on all free and democratic spirits to join their initiative. Now, I reflect on whether these people live in reality or lock themselves in their own worlds of privileges that they are not willing to lose.

"Yellows for Chile" forget that we came to the convention through a broad and unanimous national parliamentarian agreement in which several of them took part and that the conventional ones were democratically elected in the same way as those in the legislative power, according to the enacted laws in the country.

They also forget that the members of the constitutional convention have faithfully respected the mandate given to them by the citizenry, and a two-thirds majority of its members is needed to pass laws, which include mechanisms for discussion, review, reconsideration, and drafting before having an end text.

The citizens, through a plebiscite, will submit that final text for approval or rejection. In other words, the great majority at that moment will democratically approve or reject the proposed constitutional text. This is a unique demonstration in the history of the exercise of popular sovereignty, a process that the rest of the countries around the world have been closely following.

The members of "Yellows for Chile", who have historically appealed to the rule of law that they would eventually break at the risk of weakening their supremacy, achieved between explicit or implicit pacts and privileged use of state institutions and class interests.

The emergence of this "yellow" movement and its statements through its first public statement represents a serious threat to the democratic stability of the country and reflects a subversive spirit, as well as inciting disobedience towards the institutions with very serious consequences.

With their first public statement, the “yellows” are unaware of the current institutional framework and the representative feature of the Constitutional Convention, since it represents the wide range of thought and structure of the Chilean society. The government authority must seriously consider the danger of this insurgency.

The danger of a possible institutional breakdown appears when the “yellows” foresee that we will have a new, more representative, fairer and inclusive Chile with rules that guarantee equal rights to all, breaking with the inequities, inequality, exclusions, and unequal distribution of power that this subversive group does not want to lose.