Deep State vs. Sánchezism (Teodoro León Gross in El ABC)

The current government appears to be constructing a narrative about a "Deep State" pursuing it, mimicking nationalist tactics to generate victimhood and justify its difficulties.

The **Government** of **Pedro Sánchez** seems to be building a new narrative to explain its difficulties, pointing to the existence of a "Deep State" that is harassing it. According to analysis, this strategy recalls nationalist tactics, seeking to generate a feeling of victimhood and unify its electoral base against an external enemy. The idea of a "Deep State" —a hidden network of power comprising bureaucrats, economic elites, security forces, judges, and military personnel— is presented as the latest fiction of the machinery of the **Moncloa**.

## The internal enemy: the "Deep State"

The narrative being circulated suggests that the **Government** is besieged by sectors of the **Supreme Court**, the **CNI** (National Intelligence Centre), the **Police**, and **Civil Guard**, among other powers, which are allegedly acting outside legality to precipitate its fall. This construction of a phantom adversary has been amplified through sympathetic media, painting a picture of constant siege. The term "Deep State" is not new; it has been historically used to describe conspiracies and hidden power networks that influence political decisions without being democratically elected.

**Sánchezism**, by closely associating with **nationalism**, appears to have adopted some of its discursive strategies. One such strategy is opportunistic victimhood, which manifests in attributing one's own problems to external persecution. This pattern has been observed previously when justifying corruption cases or criticizing judicial decisions, presenting them as part of an orchestrated "lawfare." The tactic is to delegitimize institutions or critical actors, presenting them as part of a conspiracy against the **Government**.

## The strategy of victimhood and delegitimization

The strategy of creating a common enemy, such as the supposed "Deep State," seeks to mobilize sympathizers and justify measures or decisions that would otherwise be difficult to explain. It is a "factory of narratives" operating without restraint, crossing what is considered the boundaries of institutional decay. The narrative centers on a supposed "right side of history," from which those who do not share its vision are discredited.

Even figures within the **Government** have gone so far as to describe judges as "wild saviors of the homeland," a comparison that, for some observers, is extreme and delegitimizes the judiciary. The criticism extends to how cases are investigated, even questioning the impartiality of magistrates due to their past political affiliations. This way of acting, it is argued, seeks to discredit those who investigate or oversee the executive power, sowing doubt regarding their independence and motivations.

## Mistrust in institutions

The distrust toward institutions also extends to intelligence services, such as the **CNI**, which have been criticized and accused of partisan action. The dissemination of sensitive information, such as in the **Pegasus** case, has eroded the image of these agencies. Furthermore, attempts have been made to involve **the Crown** in these debates, seeking to erode the neutrality of the Head of State.

The **Supreme Court** has also been a target of attacks. The criticism focuses on decisions affecting the right to vote, presenting what are, in the logic of the narrative, attempts to strip citizens of their rights as irregularities.
The effectiveness of these narratives lies in their ability to convince a segment of the citizenry, regardless of their veracity, thereby maintaining support among the electoral base.