In Oaxaca these days, AMLO declared that Mexico's ills of insecurity are a product of "the rotten fruit of a 27-year policy of predatory and speculative capitalism." Why 1983 was chosen as a cut-off year is not clear. Yes, that's when the first major neoliberal reforms under Miguel de Madrid started kicking in, but clearly Mexico's capitalist system had some deep structural flaws before then. Does AMLO really want to return to the era of extremely corrupt, overprotected, and bloated companies - whether they were private monopolies, as many of them were, or parastatal companies - of the preceding era? Is this what we might expect for economic program, should he win in 2012? State or private, Mexican industry was heavily overprotected through tariffs and import barriers yet consumers paid the cost, and corrupt and PRI unions delivered much of the votes to the governing party, in return for fat handouts to the privileged with a PRI-approved union card. This is not forward looking, but extremely backward looking and hence, conservative.
Hard to resist touching upon a minor yet noteworthy tidbit: AMLO's new book has seemingly gotten a reading from none else than Fidel Castro, who praised it and its author: "[AMLO] will be the person with most political and moral authority in Mexico when the system collapses, and with it the Empire." Castro deemed the book "a valiant and irrefutable denunciation."
This is hardly the endorsement AMLO needs if he is to break away from his hardcore base.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Espino kicked out of PAN?
I've been pondering for a while who might be kicked out/renounce from their respective parties first: Andrés Manuel López Obrador of the PRD, or Manuel Espino of the PAN. Now it seems Espino might beat AMLO to the task, as an internal committee of the national PAN leadership is meeting next week to discuss whether Espino should be kicked out.
The timing is hardly opportune, from a personal angle: Espino's nephew was just murdered in Ciudad Juárez.
Yet the decision to go ahead with the process that might very well result in Espino's expulsion is noteworthy for a range of reasons:
- Like AMLO, he is a former national president of the PAN
- In comparison with AMLO - who, for instance, in 2009 actively campaigned against his own party - Espino's transgression appear to me far from warranting expulsion, principally criticizing the PAN alliances and their candidates in the recent elections. What he has been doing, however, is to be quite vocal in his criticism of president Calderón, and herein lies the key: There is much bad blood between the president and Espino for a range of reasons, yet their feuds have very little to do with ideology, even though Espino belongs to the hard catholic right of PAN, yet about power, and vengeance. Espino, it should be noted, considers himself a serious contender for the PAN candidacy for president in 2012. It is a rather absurd situation: The man who might represent PAN as its standard bearer in 2012 (his chances are hardly stellar), yet hardly a new one in Mexico: AMLO was PRD party president 96-99 and presidential candidate, yet will most likely bow out if Ebrard gets PRD's nomination for 2112. And in 2008, Ricardo Monreal sought the PRD presidency, yet barely a year later ditched PRD (as he had earlier ditched PRI) for the PT.
Take-home point: If Espino is kicked out, PAN will remain highly divided, and very unlikely to win in 2012. The fights are not chiefly of ideology, but personal vendettas, and of anger from the party organs for Calderón's blatant imposition of candidates the past three years over the heads of national and state party organizations, resorting to the dedazos he criticized so much when in opposition. Stay tuned for next week's decision.
The timing is hardly opportune, from a personal angle: Espino's nephew was just murdered in Ciudad Juárez.
Yet the decision to go ahead with the process that might very well result in Espino's expulsion is noteworthy for a range of reasons:
- Like AMLO, he is a former national president of the PAN
- In comparison with AMLO - who, for instance, in 2009 actively campaigned against his own party - Espino's transgression appear to me far from warranting expulsion, principally criticizing the PAN alliances and their candidates in the recent elections. What he has been doing, however, is to be quite vocal in his criticism of president Calderón, and herein lies the key: There is much bad blood between the president and Espino for a range of reasons, yet their feuds have very little to do with ideology, even though Espino belongs to the hard catholic right of PAN, yet about power, and vengeance. Espino, it should be noted, considers himself a serious contender for the PAN candidacy for president in 2012. It is a rather absurd situation: The man who might represent PAN as its standard bearer in 2012 (his chances are hardly stellar), yet hardly a new one in Mexico: AMLO was PRD party president 96-99 and presidential candidate, yet will most likely bow out if Ebrard gets PRD's nomination for 2112. And in 2008, Ricardo Monreal sought the PRD presidency, yet barely a year later ditched PRD (as he had earlier ditched PRI) for the PT.
Take-home point: If Espino is kicked out, PAN will remain highly divided, and very unlikely to win in 2012. The fights are not chiefly of ideology, but personal vendettas, and of anger from the party organs for Calderón's blatant imposition of candidates the past three years over the heads of national and state party organizations, resorting to the dedazos he criticized so much when in opposition. Stay tuned for next week's decision.
PRD: "The Great enemy of the Church"
Hugo Valdemar is one of the most sinister characters in the Mexican catholic church, which on its own should say quite a lot. Valdemar is the official spokesperson for the Archdiocese of Mexico, and usually takes the role as Cardinal Rivera's particularity mean attack dog.
PRD's response to Rivera's outrageous statements that questioned the decision of the Mexican Supreme Court in my eyes were highly measured: PRD's Ortega, to recall, kept his usual cool and noted that one "should be careful with words because deeming a constitutional right as deviant is serious."
PRD's response to Rivera's outrageous statements that questioned the decision of the Mexican Supreme Court in my eyes were highly measured: PRD's Ortega, to recall, kept his usual cool and noted that one "should be careful with words because deeming a constitutional right as deviant is serious."
What is the church's answer to this?
Reverend Valdeman: "It is clear to me, and clearer than ever, that the national PRD is the great enemy of the Church and a danger to the family."
What is one to make of this? How can one enter into a dialogue with the church, when the extremists have hijacked it, bent on unraveling any progressive move within the last 3-4 decades? How dare the church, which has been on the wrong side of history on almost every conceivable issue - from schooling for girls to suffrage for women to reproductive health classes in the classroom, to name but the tip of the iceberg - accuse the PRD of a "danger" to the family?
The statements made by Valdemar are worth a read. They are truly Palinesque in their twisting of reality, let alone their internally contradictory and twisted logic.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)