THIS ARTICLE was published in the South, January 19, 2011
The process that goes from 1977 to 1997 combines two types of transformations. On the one hand the political transition through successive electoral reforms especially. On the other hand the transformation of an economy with relatively large government interventions and based on a strategy of import substitution to one that would be based on deregulation, privatization and trade liberalization. But confronted with the leading group at different critical moments, with the dilemma of continuing the economic policy and the new style of development or open political system, chose the latter with the idea that divided oppositions could lead a transition bounded. The sum of these changes in electoral rules however generates profound changes in the correlation of forces: divided government down, alternating in some state governments and finally in 2000 the alternation in government as a result of attempted nacional.Se reactive transition to a growing inability to govern the plurality and fails to resolve a central issue: how to replace the authoritarian axis which is also the hub of governance in the former regime, "presidential supremacy over most dominant party in the informal rules - by another type of institutional arrangement that would ensure good governance in the country.The central argument I have proposed in my last two articles is as follows. As discussed in numerous trials, the old authoritarian regime axis was constituted by the combination of hyper-presidentialism over a hegemonic party more interaction between formal rules established in the Constitution and secondary laws, and a wide range of informal rules and authoritarian powers metaconstitucionales.Este axis as the decade progressed gradually weakened electoral competition was also the axis of the governance of the former regime and was dismantled without giving rise to a new arrangement governance. In this regard I refer to a transition from abortada.Lo that followed 1997 was a continuation of arrangements under the leadership of another party. What has happened has been a consistent decline where disentangling the political center leading to a gradual emancipation and discontinuous both the states as sections of society while operating colonization fringe of the state apparatus or territory for the powers that be. Former players in the heat of this dislocation is rework and play a new role but with the old costume. I think in some union corporations in the new political role of the governors, the unchecked dominance of electronic media and certainly in organized crime. All this is not continuity but a new regime. The decomposition of the old regime expressed in social fragmentation, jibarización state entities and privatization of public spaces created a kind of authoritarian metastases and the emergence of a special-for specific and transient-I call the Ottoman regime, referring to the phenomenon that the British historian Timothy Garton Ash described referring to communist societies in Eastern Europe: "By this I mean in a flexible analogy with the decline of the Ottoman Empire a long and slow process of decay in the course of which observe an unplanned emancipation, gradual and discontinuous both constituent states of the empire of their own societies for their states. (The uses of adversity, 1990: 253). The Ottoman regime is typical of the administration of the decadence that is an oligarchy of political management. This management does not seek broad participation of citizens. On the contrary encourages absenteeism, cynicism and behavior through selective targeting of political messages to different niches citizens. The distinctive emblem of the Ottoman regime is the lack of space leading to binding agreements, alliances, coaliciones.Estamos as in the presence of a strategic requirement. How to operate a new transition from this special scheme to a political system that guarantees security for its citizens, participation in decisions and material and cultural progress for all Mexicans? Rolando Cordera in an article published in 1988 argued that "to achieve a democratic not appear to be feasible, but by a political crisis to dissolve the knots authoritarian and, at the same time, supportive of an amalgamation and an accelerated maturation of 'democratizing actors' whose weakness is now evident .... " Precisely the weakness of pro-democracy actors and especially from the uneven development of various corporate authoritarian nuclei would lead to a second prediction: "Then the scene of political crisis, democratization should be modified with an intermediate station between points other quadrant: it would rather play a 'second' political crisis, this time reinforced authoritarianism (emphasis in original), most likely would be installed as the first political crisis resulting from the original. " (The claim democratic, 1988, Editorial Siglo XXI) From left field to advance the double question in this second transition is how to create spaces and logical links between different social issues with initiatives to reinforce the different profiles of the Mexican left . It is a double question because without unlocking the entire political class is impossible to achieve any progress in the same profile of the left. The policy of quietism, wait until the 2012 elections by creating their own bases of electoral support without any agreement with other forces, is political suicide. To continue on this path will only widen the stagnation, inequality and social tension. Can you set a left pole articulating social struggles, appeal to the middle class and attract important sectors of the business without losing its call center to the classes? Yes, but only from a profound cultural transformation of the left. You need another way to perceive politics. Another way to link the fight parliamentary electoral exercise and social demands. Another form of government with a central purpose: to reduce inequality from the full exercise of democracy. It would involve constructed from left-wing values \u200b\u200bsuch as justice, freedom, tolerance, secularism. Autonomy as a core value as free citizens can only make the fight against inequality a struggle against all forms of discrimination by setting the indispensable bridge between equality and freedom. To put it another way, a form of politics that embodies new ways of relating to people with established powers and among themselves. Left consider the importance of being honest with himself and with citizens
0 comments:
Post a Comment