Opinion Archive

What to Make of Protests in a Fledgling Democracy

June 4, 2008

Protesters are back in Oaxaca, choking the city and laying waste to the progress that had been made since the last mass protests destroyed the lives of thousands of hard-working oaxacans and made tourists flee. It is true that the vandalism of the “teachers” of Oaxaca make the historic city an especially obvious victim of this anti-social behavior. But recent data shows that Mexico City’s tourism, for example, has yet to recover from the taking of Reforma following the election in 2006. Yet, in all cases, Mexicans are too permissive of people who blackmail society for personal and political gain. When the constitutional right to protest butts up against the consitutional right to free transit, the former invariably wins to the detriment of all.

Why are so many Mexicans so heartily inclined to mess with their fellow citizens? Because it gets results. The more damage you inflict on society (via demonstrations, blockades and mass vandalism), the more privileges you can ask for. We reward anti-social behavior. After a menacing-enough protest, wages are raised, kleptocratic union leaders confirmed and demands too often met.

But street protests are part of the old style of politics. The politics of manipulation and blackmail. Of bad men and women using deluded and angry poor and lower-middle class people to shift the balance of power in their favor.

So why do we stand for it? Partly, it has to do with the ghost of 1968, when, in an act that is reminiscent of China today, a quasi-dictatorial regime violently repressed protesters on the eve of hosting the Olympics. Despite the tremendous changes in Mexican society and the mass democratization of the political system, street protests are still sacrosanct in the minds of many who vowed not to repeat the mistakes of 1968.

Another reason Mexicans put up with so much anti-social behavior is that there is a constant, nagging questioning of the legitimacy of government. This has little to do with close elections, or the annoying insistence of López Obrador and his “legitimate” parallel presidency. It is more insidious and more long-standing than that. Mexicans always feel that someone is “putting one over on them”; that they are being tricked. This extends to all levels of government and it is one of the reasons for Mexico’s underdevelopment. A country that is constantly second-guessing itself cannot help but move more slowly.

In a democracy, protests that hurt others are illegitimate. The voting booth permits people to give vent to their disapproval directly and in an orderly fashion. And even when there are questions regarding the process, Mexico’s multi-billion dollar federal and state electoral bodies provide more than enough forums for voicing grievances. It is also safe to say that there is enough diversity and competition in Mexico’s party system for any cause to find a willing institutional sponsor, making civil disobedience unnecessary.

Of course, it is the justice system that should be the main forum for conflict resolution and it is there that our society needs to do more to build better institutions and achieve more legitimacy. In the meantime, however, all of Mexico’s hard-working silent majority needs to ensure that anti-social behavior is less tolerated and never rewarded.

Senator Patrick Leahy

Last week this column called Senator Patrick Leahy to task for adding controversial provisions onto the Mérida Initiative related to human rights and corruption. Specifically, it highlighted the fact that these conditions will very probably be rejected by the Mexican government because they will be seen by many in Mexico to be interventionist.

On Saturday, Senator Leahy took the unusual, but very laudable, step of reaching out to the Mexican public and explaining the changes he made to the Initiative. He published an editorial in Mexico’s largest-circulation daily, Reforma, where he recognized the noxious role the US plays in the drug wars by providing both the market for the drug traffickers and the guns with which our police and military are being slaughtered. He also explains why it would be wrong for Congress to write a “blank check” when money has so often been misused in the past.

I still believe that, if the Senator is serious about helping Mexico in human rights and corruption, there are far better, less publicly controversial, ways to achieve these ends. Nevertheless, the Senator’s effort to communicate directly with Mexicans is to be applauded. His translated text shows that he “gets it” more than this column gave him credit for. His words are especially visionary in asking for much more comprehensive cooperation between our two countries, in recognition of what is the most intense relationship between two nations anywhere in the world.

For the latest thought-provoking article by Agustin Barrios Gomez please go to our Opinion Column page

Return to top