Due to press time, I have to write this contribution before the debate, so I think it is appropriate to offer you a context to understand the five weeks we have left before the election.
Democracy (liberal, the one we know) is a political system that has two great virtues. The first is that it allows succession without violence. The moment of succession is the most dangerous in all types of regimes. To somewhat reduce this risk, dynasties were used, and even then violence upon the death of the king was not uncommon. In democracy, those who compete do so with the understanding that the result must be accepted. That is why when one of the participants refuses to do so, democracy enters into serious difficulties. Whether López Obrador, Trump or Bolsonaro, the bad loser is a risk to democracy, or more clearly, he is a promoter of violence.
The second great virtue of democracy is that it allows public discussion, so that natural differences between people and groups can be processed, facilitating negotiations and agreements, and avoiding open conflict. In an authoritarian system, pressures build until they explode. Sometimes the State is strong enough to silence them, but it does so at the cost of “legitimate” violence.
These two great virtues are what are at risk in Mexico. I don’t think I should expand on the first, López Obrador’s inability to accept results that do not favor him is known, and now everyone has also realized that he does not even accept opinions that he does not like. And this is what puts the second virtue at risk. At this moment, we do not have a space for public discussion in Mexico, because the government refuses to do so. Although dozens of opinion leaders have shown their opposition to the Afores reform, although hundreds of legislators have voted against it, although thousands complain on social networks, the government does not listen and, therefore, does not respond. There is no discussion.
The Afores example is arbitrary, the same happens with the protection or amnesty, which are the last three attacks on the Constitution. And the same thing happened before with the electoral reform, the electricity reform or the National Guard. If they were discarded, it was not because of a government that listened, but because of a Judiciary that did its job, and because of millions who supported it.
In addition to the use of public resources in favor of the official candidate (Servants of the Nation, media coverage, deployment, etc.), in addition to the direct intervention of the President in favor of her, in addition to the weakening of the referees of the contest, who are all threats against democracy, what we face is deeper. López Obrador has already annulled the two great democratic virtues. He doesn’t want to argue and won’t accept losing.
But, as we saw, these virtues of democracy are because they avoid violence. If there is no acceptance of the rules of the contest, if the result of the polls is not accepted, the space for violence grows. If there is no way to publicly discuss the problems, which will be enormous starting June 3, the space for violence grows. Deciding what to do with Pemex, how to reasonably finance the government, what kind of social programs really help, how to rebuild the health system, what education is relevant right now, are issues where there are important differences between groups and people. Even more important: what to do with organized crime and how to recover the territory. What happens to the Armed Forces?
Without a space for public discussion, without democratically legitimized rulers, what remains is violence. March on May 19, election on June 2. Last call.
