(Expansion) – Federal and local concurrent election campaigns ended. A reflection of what is at stake on the election day this Sunday, June 6, is timely, beyond the midterm legislative elections and the renewal of practically half of the country’s governorships.
With the exception of the presidency of the Republic and the Senate, the largest renewal of political personnel of the legislative and executive branches of our federal system in history will take place. And not only this: the profile of our political regime is also – or mainly, it could be said – being tested, which could have a decisive impact not only in the immediate future, but for future generations.
Context and consequences beyond results
There are some unfortunate realities that occur more frequently in elections around the world in terms of the type of offers to voters. If citizens are lucky, they can choose between a populism (either “right-wing” or “left-wing”), on the one hand, and a liberal democratic pole, on the other (social democrat, moderate conservative, or an alliance between the two); Or, in the worst case scenario, he has to decide between two populist options (there are as flagship examples the last second presidential round in Brazil and the one to be held this Sunday in Peru).
Against this background, we must add the growing loss of prestige of the parties as effective instruments of political representation. The emergence of the great populist wave is fundamentally explained from this loss of prestige. But what characterizes the populist currents of the 21st century and what explains their success?
The criteria used by the very famous article in the prestigious magazine The Economist , recently published (May 27), to categorize contemporary populist leaders are not wasted:
1) It assumes that it represents the “will of the people”, and therefore whoever opposes it, opposes the people themselves;
2) He insults his opponents in a frequent, ostentatious and particularly acid way, polarizing and dividing public opinion more and more;
3) Undermines institutions (for example, sends them “to hell”);
4) It does not care about the rule of law, and even incurs legal violations without any embarrassment;
5) Ignores or goes against science and “expert” knowledge; Y
6) Expresses hate speech against ethnic or religious minorities. Not necessarily all have each and every one of these characteristics, but they certainly draw a pattern that we can all identify with the names of various current or recent presidents or prime ministers in a multiplicity of countries.
Similar criteria are used by Levitsky and Ziblatt in their editorial success How Democracies Die (Ariel, Barcelona, 2018):
1) rejection or weak acceptance of the democratic rules of the game (such as those who only recognize the electoral results when they win and ignore them whenever they lose);
2) denial of the political legitimacy of the adversaries (all, except him, are corrupt, or subversive, or criminals, or allies of foreign governments);
3) tolerance or promotion of violence (from the alliance with armed gangs or paramilitaries to excessive tolerance towards organized crime, not condemning violent or illegal acts carried out by their supporters); Y
4) predisposition to restrict the freedoms and rights of the opposition, including the media.
The keys to the election
The core of the choice is the impact of the options to choose. Although there are 10 national political parties, the alternatives for a valid vote are reduced to voting for the coalition of the party in government and its legislative allies (Morena + Verde + PT), or for the opposition coalition of the parties that led the transition to democracy in Mexico (PAN-PRI-PRD), or by a party that defines itself as opposition but that decided to go without alliances (Movimiento Ciudadano). Finally, the recently created parties, which by law must compete alone, but which, if they keep the record, there is a clear idea that they could probably channel their political inclination towards the ruling bloc).
There are also some independent candidacies and local parties in various states. For obvious and obvious reasons to the view of any observer of national politics, the interest is concentrated in the results that the two great coalitions can obtain.
Hence it follows that what is in the hands of the voters this June 6, given the current political situation, is of the greatest importance: the decision to continue advancing in a project with a single vision of the country, or to accommodate political plurality, institutional checks and balances, and accountability for public responsibilities.
Editor’s note: Horacio Vives Segl has a degree in Political Science from the Autonomous Technological Institute of Mexico (ITAM) and a doctorate in Political Science from the University of Belgrano (Argentina). Follow him on. The opinions expressed in this column are the responsibility of the author.
