Before describing what a "right wing caviar" is, it is important to understand the origin of the term "caviar," which has been used in recent decades in Peruvian political slang to refer to certain members of the left, like the limousine liberals in the 70´s U.S.

So, first, we ask ourselves, what is "caviar"? Well, caviar is an exquisite and very expensive delicacy (it is the roe of the sturgeon fish), being a symbol of luxury and refinement. Therefore, in a mocking tone, those who have a socialist discourse, but love luxuries and pleasures are called "caviar".

Knowing the political meaning of this term initially, many believed that "caviar" was a Peruvianism. However, after reviewing various sources of information, it is not the case. An article by Alberto Vergara Paniagua published on August 1st, 2010, in the magazine "Poder," mentions that someone in Peru started using the term "los cívicos" (the civics) at the beginning of 2000s to refer to left-wing people coming from non-governmental organizations (NGOs) who entered government work during the administrations of Valentín Paniagua and Alejandro Toledo. It also mentions that someone discovered that in France there was a term called "gauche caviar," and subsequently (especially since 2004), this same group of people came to be identified as the "caviar left." It points out that this expression has equivalents in several parts of the world (in Switzerland they are called "toscana-zosi," in England they are known as "champagne socialists," and Tom Wolfe baptized them as "radical chic" in the United States).

It wasn't until July 21st, 2004, that journalist Herbert Mujica Rojas popularized the term "caviar left" when he wrote an article entitled "Rebuzna la izquierda caviar" ("The caviar left brays"). In this article, he states: "The Peruvian caviar left, like the French one accused by Benoits, has enriched itself with public positions. Therefore, it is budget-eating. Its desire is not revolutionary, on the contrary, it only wishes to preserve the pittance and the alms that are given to them, for merits they do not have, by a government discredited by their own mediocrity." After this article, several journalists, politicians, and citizens in general began using this expression to refer to the bourgeois left, those who linguist Martha Hildebrandt defined as "those who know how to live like aristocrats but take advantage of a supposed social commitment."

Anyhow, the term "caviar" in Peru has come to symbolize individuals who fashion themselves in possession of the absolute truth and moral station of their others. However, this is contradictory since it has only been a discourse and they have never been seen advocating for the people they claim to defend.

Knowing the origin of the word "caviar" for Peru and the world, which is commonly used to denote certain part of the left, it is necessary to indicate that this word has evolved, giving rise to what we will call the “caviar right".

So, who are the "caviar right"? In summary, they are the offspring of the well-to-do who allegedly defend democracy, spit anger against the left for being anti-business people, but are incapable of running one themselves. They have good names and family contacts, hate the Donald, Balsonaro, Vox or any one unapologetically rightist, use inclusive language, and encourage the social policies of progressivism. They resent traditional conservatives and downplay their privileged origins for fear of being politically disqualified as "snobs".

So why call them the “right wing caviar"? Because they believe in holding absolute truths, that their intelligence is superior to everyone else's and that they should run the regulatory state and big corporations, championing woke policies and giving up all cultural battles with the left (like the PP in Spain).

They are not committed to what they preach, and their power has led many of them, even to maintain sympathies with the "caviar left" that they call the "moderate left". They are immersed in the media, politics, entrepreneurship, education, institutions, holding high positions, but are always accentuating their hatreds, with a severe lack of morals.

The "caviar right" is very similar to the "caviar left" with many of them wrongly classified as the latter group, they live confused by personal interests, are close to progressivism, and are participants and specialists in organizing loud and/or unsubstantiated marches and protests, which politicize and create more injustices and instability, like the "caviar left". By considering themselves "right" they believe that everything they do is correct, but they fail to realize that their resentment and hatred towards the politically incorrect, generates more social gaps and also strengthens the jurassic and radical left.

Many people, unsure of how to categorize them, have given them various definitions; confused with the "caviar left," they have lumped them in with the “los dignos”(the difnified), “los cojudignos” (foolishly dignified), the "right without testosterone", among many other definitions, but in reality, and at the end, they are simply "caviar right".

The "caviar right" think that by defending the free market, freedom of the press (only with progressive thoughts), democracy (if it is not a "conservative right") and for having a privileged social and economic situation, they have the right to be the sole opinion-makers and those who are going to eradicate injustices in Peru.

I believe that proximity to progressivism is what has weakened the values of the "caviar right", for despite having many professionals, intellectuals, businessmen, politicians, and citizens in general of great value among them, their ideological confusions have resulted in more polarization and hatred.

I personally believe that everyone who defends freedom and democracy, regardless of political color, must be united with the aim of achieving greater development and preventing communist and terrorist-sympathizing scum from advancing further.

The right in general is forgetting that its doctrine is "freedom," the one that respects the other's life project, so the cardinal point for which we must fight now and always, is for freedom, united, with decency and patriotism.

Finally, Peru, despite its problems and mediocre recent governments, has succeeded in making Peruvians feel proud of our country and that, when we speak of our homeland, we do it like Diego de la Torre says: "20 years ago, the Peruvians used to say, 'I am successful despite being Peruvian,' today 'I am successful because I am Peruvian'". Let's not lose our Peru, let's unite and fight against the usurpers who now govern us.