Democratization, A Case Study In Mexico

Democratization in Mexico is incredibly relevant to the topic of New Social Movements today because it is such a prominent feature of the current global agenda. The United States, Latin America’s geographically and politically massive neighbor to the North has been such an eager proponent of instituting democracy that pressure has been placed on the Mexican government to move past the threshold it seems to have found itself unable to pass. New Social Movements within Mexico are also calling upon the government for reform and the complete adherence to democratic policies throughout all areas of socio-political interactions.

To thoroughly investigate the processes of democratization in The United Mexican States it is important to first explore a brief, recent history of democracy in the country. Mexico is by definition, a federal republic, which is traditionally comprised of three branches of government and consists of democratically elected officials.1 The primary political party, who held a monopoly over the Presidency and house majority for 70 years until 2000, is the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI.) The opposition who defeated the party in government and who is currently a rising major political entity in Mexico is the National Action Party (PAN.) The last two presidential elections have yielded successes for PAN with the election of Vincent Fox in 2000 and his successor, Felipe Calderon in 2006.2

Although cosmetically Mexico is a functioning federal republic, it has many underlying corruptions and instabilities that continue to lend to the inequalities and deprivation of its people. Many of these factors indicate an ongoing process of democratization to overcome enduring points of contention. Issues that the government still needs to rectify include the reconfiguration and redistribution of power to create a more balanced relationship between the three branches, establishing a compromise between PAN and PRI for a more permanent electoral reform, the decentralization of government, and increasing electoral competition. These faults can best be exemplified when relating them back to how they effect individual groups of people such as the Tsobol Antzetik (Women United) and Mujeres Marginadas (Marginalized Women) which are indigenous women’s collectives in the San Pedro Chenalho, Chiapas of Mexico, the point of Zapatista origin.3

What qualifies Women United and Marginalized Women as New Social Movements is the way in which indigenous women have formed collectives in order to establish themselves as equal citizens under the government, a role they have never even plausibly had access to until recently. Such civil action has allowed for the opening of spaces from the bottom to allow these women to push for greater autonomy. The Women United is a bakery cooperative and the Marginalized Women are a weaving cooperative, both creating spaces as economically involved as well as politically active citizens. According to Christine Eber, these women are symbols of change in the Chiapas particularly within the context of the democracy movement that has been in full swing since 1994.4 As a New Social Movement, these indigenous women are integrating gender into their analyses of oppression.

Beginnings for both of these groups really began in the 1980’s with the rise of domestic violence as well as retaliation against women’s political participation. Both points of contention incited these indigenous women to seek a venue through which they could find commonalities, comfort, and a point from which to create change for themselves. It was from here that these women’s organizations were founded.

Reasons for this include their increasing determination in acquiring both communal and personal autonomy in combating seclusion from the state and domestic violence. Other causes they have pioneered include the search for greater political participation which can only be achieved with the establishment of functioning electoral reform. One aspect of participation that women seek is positions of leadership outside of their traditional roles inside their communities and hamlets.5 Something unique to women’s initiatives is their push for these rights specifically in the interests of their children’s future and opportunities.6

The problems within the Mexican government, as discussed previously, prevent these democratic women movements from progressing in more than minutely incremental steps. One of the issues that needed to be addressed was the adjustment of the power distribution within the government. The three branches of government are modeled after the system in the U.S.; consisting of a legislative, executive, and judicial branch. The functions and proficiencies of those instituted in Mexico vary drastically from their northern counterpart. In Mexico the executive branch, which consists of the President and his cabinet members, holds exorbitant amounts of control, which Caroline Beer refers to as “Mexico’s hyperpresidentialism,” in her study “Assessing the Consequences of Electoral Democracy.”7 The President has absolute authority to dictate policy, he and his cabinet are unaccountable to either of the other branches or unto the law, and have absolute control over the dispensability of the military. The legislative branch is rendered into more of an emblematic entity than a functioning institution. The tragedy of devaluation is the dismissive nature in which the most essentially democratic body of the government is being perceived.

In order to reconstitute the division of power in a more democratic fashion, Caroline Beer recommends increased electoral competition which leads into the next point of contention. Electoral competition is difficult from the women in the Chiapas who see the division and conflicts caused by 70 years of PRI dominance. It is hard to unite behind democratic forces that are ushered in with the emergence of new parties such as PRD when it is dividing their small communities. Divisions are even being experienced by these women within their tightly knit kin networks. Loyalties are being called upon and with the fear of consequences that coercion from the PRI, making the difficult choices is becoming more and more of a predicament.8

Electoral reform as the last point of contention, as argued by Stephen Fidler in “Mexico: What Kind of Transition,” would be a catalyst for increased electoral competition.9 If the power of the dominant party to coerce “clients” was diminished long enough for other parties to appropriate significant power, it would force parties to become more responsible to their constituents. The reasoning behind this process is that members of the legislature and the executive branch need to feel as if their actions will be weighed by the citizens of the state and that their positions of power will and can be threatened. In order to encourage this responsibility, Caroline Beer makes the argument that the Mexican government needs to throw out the law that only allows legislators to serve one term.10 This will make the legislator more effective and act in the interests of the people in order to be reelected.

The struggle for these new social movements will be to open up space for autonomy from the bottom. It will be the restructuring and reevaluation of old models. For these women of the collectives, it will be breaking away from traditional roles and fighting to maintain an individual voice amidst the forceful cries from the Zapatistas. It will be an important role that these women partake in to continue Mexico’s transition into true democratization.

Notes:
1. Mexico. Background: Central Intelligence Agency World Factbook. 23 April 2009
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/mx.html

2. Fidler, Stephen. 1996. “Mexico: What Kind of Transition?” International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944), Vol. 72, No. 4, The Americas: European Security. Pp. 713-725. Blackwell Publishing. P. 725

3. Eber, Christine. Indigenous Women’s Power and Autonomy San Pedro Chenalho, Chiapas. Latin American Perspectives, Vol. 26, No. 3, Women in Latin America, Part 3 Identities and Localities: Social Analyses on Gendered Terrain. Sage Publication, Inc. 1999 Pg. 1

4. Eber, Christine. Indigenous Women’s Power and Autonomy San Pedro Chenalho, Chiapas. P. 14

5. Eber, Christine. Indigenous Women’s Power and Autonomy San Pedro Chenalho, Chiapas. P. 25

6. Eber, Christine. Indigenous Women’s Power and Autonomy San Pedro Chenalho, Chiapas. P. 14

7. Beer, Caroline. 2001. “Assessing Consequences of Electoral Democracy: Subnational Legislative Change in Mexico.” Comparative Politics, Vol. 33, No. 4. pp. 421-440. Ph.D. Program in Political Science of the City University of New York. P. 25

8. Beer, Caroline. 2001. “Assessing Consequences of Electoral Democracy: Subnational Legislative Change in Mexico.” P. 27

9. Fidler, Stephen. 1996. “Mexico: What Kind of Transition?” International Affairs (Royal Institute of International Affairs 1944), Vol. 72, No. 4, The Americas: European Security. Pp. 713-725. Blackwell Publishing. : full source reference

10. Beer, Caroline. 2001. “Assessing Consequences of Electoral Democracy: Subnational Legislative Change in Mexico.” Comparative Politics, Vol. 33, No. 4. pp. 421-440

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License