(Expansion) – There is no set phrase that generates more unease than that of “disenchantment with democracy.” We may be unhappy with the democratic process, furious with its results, but democracy as a fait accompli is implicit in all these attitudes.
Disenchantment supposes abandonment, resignation. Democracy finds its main existential threat in indifference. That is why it is crucial that we all vote this Sunday, June 6.
We must overcome the discomfort caused by our political situation and which, in my opinion, has its origin in the combination of a global trend with a local circumstance.
The world trend is the emergence of populist leaderships. For what is this? The causes are complex, but José Ignacio Torreblanca proposes an interesting hypothesis: the populist waves coincide with technological changes that generate information disruptions – radio as a resource for fascist regimes in Europe in the 1930s, for example.
Under this logic, the decentralization of information and opinion generated by the internet and social networks implies a “disintermediation” of the traditional institutions of democracy – political parties, news media – thus offering the autocrat’s dream: to communicate directly with “the town”. In the virtual republic, the caudillo has at his disposal a disjointed mass of opinions, ready to be bewitched by fake news ; democracies today are susceptible to “hacking.”
In Mexico, the disintermediation of democracy through the internet and social networks comes as a “glove” to AMLO. It is paradoxical that such an old-fashioned politician should benefit from something so recent. It is perhaps explained by the extraordinary talent of AMLO to exploit a peculiarity of our democracy: failure is not punished.
There are plenty of examples: a politician who loses one election and appears in another, perhaps recycled by another party; the disappearance of the latter for not obtaining enough votes to preserve their registration, followed by a miraculous resurrection (the PT for example) or reincarnation under another name (the PES or RSP). It could even be argued that many of the reforms to our electoral laws are animated for this purpose. Our democracy is expensive and AMLO never tires of remembering it; but it largely reflects the cost of the mistrust sown by those who never admit that they lose.
The best way to defend what, with imperfections, we have achieved to give ourselves government is to go out and vote.
In cyberspace, we must eventually form institutions that offer the right balance in terms of freedoms and responsibilities. The Spanish political scientist points out that 82% of Europeans surveyed by Eurobarometer in 2018 consider that fake news and disinformation constitute a problem for democracy. It is worrying but it is also a good sign that we are aware of our collective responsibilities. That said and so far, the only way to influence our reality is by voting, everything else is accessory.
In Mexico and with the vote already cast, perhaps it is convenient to think in different terms about the electoral results. We must not ignore the tremendous advance that meant accepting that whoever has the most votes wins. Perhaps the next big step is to insist that everyone else lose, without consolation prizes or supporting documents. We vote for who we want to win, but by doing so, we also indicate who we want to kick out of political competition.
Editor’s note: Sergio Luna studied Economics at UNAM and the University of London. He was an economist at Banco Nacional de México for 33 years and continues in that profession, now independently. Follow him on and / or on. The opinions published in this column belong exclusively to the author.
