Agenda for Mobilization: The Agrarian Question and Popular Mobilization in Contemporary Mexico (original) (raw)

Democracy and social movements in Mexico

Mexico has a proud tradition of mobilization, yet it has largely failed to ensure that demands are properly met or that the country's politics, institutions and legal system are transformed.

Continuity and Change in Mexican Politics: The Legacies of the Mexican Revolution*

The Latin Americanist, 2010

The Revolution set Mexican politics on a unique course. After years of internecine struggle, the Revolution eventually gave rise to one of history's longest surviving and most durable one-party, authoritarian regimes. Steeped in contradiction, the sui generis post-Revolutionary system combined conflict with stability, authoritarianism with a democratic constitution, repression with inclusiveness, uninterrupted elections with oneparty hegemony, corporatism with pluralism, centralized control within a federalist framework, almost unlimited presidential power coupled with periodic peaceful successions, and even institutionalized revolution. Bolstered by decades of strong, state-managed economic growth known as the Mexican miracle this novel system proved amazingly capable at managing the changes necessary to stay in power up until the end of the century. Owing to these extraordinary features or starting point, Mexican politics also followed a unique path of change. In striking contrast to the numerous cases of democratization during the last quarter of the 20 th century-the so called third wave-the Mexican transition was gradual, protracted, and piecemeal, in some ways almost unrecognizable. 1 There was no dramatic military march back to the barracks, a celebrated negotiated pact among the ruling elite, the purging of a brutal dictator, a foreign invasion, or mass protests demanding change. Instead, the system eroded gradually, over time, becoming less and less effective at surmounting the challenges of a modernizing society, and slipping ever so gently from the PRI's grip. 2 Indeed, the unique nature of the transition makes it difficult not only to date its beginning with precision, but its culmination as well. 3 Following the economic crisis of the 1980s and the imposition of austerity measures and neoliberal reforms, the state's and the PRI's already declining legitimacy eroded further, the government's ability to parlay the system's spoils into political support or acquiescence-what Alan Knight (1996, 223) once referred to as "chequebook peacekeeping"-slowly dried up, and opposition parties began to attract even more voters to the polls and/or to the streets to demand change. Though reformist efforts contained and channeled these demands for a while, by the mid-1990s the * I wish to dedicate this essay to the loving memory of Rafaela (Fita) Nájera de Díaz, my wife's grandmother, who on more than one occasion shared with me her recollections and eye witness accounts of the Revolution and its impact in Mexico City.

Mexican Popular Movements, Clientelism, and the Process of Democratization

Latin American Perspectives, 1994

The study of new social movements in Latin America has proven irresistibly attractive to many scholars. Examining these movements allows us to explore the formation of new identities, the emergence of new political and social actors, the creation of new political space, and the overall expansion of civil society. While all or any of these phenomena seem sufficiently intriguing to claim our attention in their own right, the most common rationale offered for the study of new movements is their apparent link to the democratization process. Through the last decade, in books, articles, and, above all, doctoral dissertations produced around the globe, scholars have justified their interest in new social movements in terms of the presumed importance of these organizations in the consolidation of democratic institutions. Most theorists writing in this field would agree with Alvarez and Escobar (1991) that these movements have "a democratizing impact on political culture and daily life" and "contribute to the democratization process." The problem for most analysts is that we do not know enough about how this takes place, that is, the way in which "grassroots democratic practices [are] transferred into the realm of political institutions and the state." When I look at the gap between the broader theoretical discussions of the question and the specific Mexican reality, I am tempted to attribute the faith in the democratizing powers of new movements displayed by other analysts to the fact that they are, perhaps, generalizing on the basis of South American cases. And yet, it turns out that it is not only students of the transition process in the Southern Cone or Brazil who are claiming that new social movements have this potential. On the contrary, a number of contributors to the most important recent collection on social movements in Mexico (Foweraker and Craig, 1990) depart-albeit with a bit more caution-from the very same premise: that the growth of asocial movement sector is part and parcel of the march toward democracy. In his contribution to this volume Munck (1990: 29), for example, argues that "the demands of social movement. .. necessarily spill over into the political arena, because access to power, or at least influence on-power, given economic conditions, is needed to satisfy their demand for tangible benefits .... From here springs the great potential that the actions of social movements can form a part of a wider democratic project." And in the introduction to the book, Foweraker (1990: 3) writes, "the breadth and impetus of these movements have come to present a strong challenge to the existing system of political representation and control; recent events (and especially the elections of July 1988) have suggested that popular movements might be the wedge that will force an authentically democratic opening within the political system overall." What, precisely, is this "wider democratic project?" What would a "democratic opening

Civil Society and Political Representation in Mexico

Civil Society and Political Representation in Latin America (2010-2015), 2017

Since the mid-2000s, Latin America has been the stage for a multitude of social protests of different types, based around both 'classic' (targeted public policies, support for/rejection of a government) and 'post-materialist' social demands (Inglehart 1997). The latter includes topics such as gay marriage, abortion and the protection of the environment. These phenomena are the most visible symptom of the establishment of the processes of democratic consolidation, stabilization and routinization initiated since the 1980s, occurring almost concurrently with a decline in the frequency of episodes of democratic instability (Alcántara 2004; Alcantara and Tagina 2013; Mainwaring and Pérez Liñán 2015, amongst others). Furthermore, the occurrence and sheer scale of these movements, protests and pickets empirically contradict the literature in vogue in the 1990s which, based on the observation of generalized disenchantment in the region, diagnosed the emergence of a state of political apathy or depoliticization in