About the 80 th anniversary of the PRI, Full job posting here I did in 2000, some months after the triumph of Vicente Fox in presidential elections. Sounds like a good opportunity to publish and as a reflection on the time that both President Fox, as political parties and legislators in the Congress let them pass. Review magazines Nexos and interesting articles published this month on the PRI.
Seven decades 1929-2000 Mexican [1]
By: Geraldine Gonzalez de la Vega (copyright)
Mexico from issuing the Constitution of 17, has lived a number of changes in democracy. The principle democratic [2] is provided in our Constitution in Article 40 that the Mexican State is a federal democratic representative republic, guaranteeing fundamental rights through the first articles of the Constitution, separation of powers provided for in Article 49 and recognizing the sovereignty of the people in Articles 39 and 41.
In the year since the enactment of the Constitution, were creating political parties and by the issuance of various electoral laws governing their participation in the political process.
During the Cardenas regime, the Mexican political system gained strength and consolidated an authoritarian regime based primarily on corporatism. The PRI, founded in 1929, acquired during the government of General Cardenas in 1938, a new structure, incorporating their bases organizations such as the CTM, CNC, CNOP, among others, in order to reconcile the various factions in post-revolutionary policies. During this period the party changed to the National Revolutionary Party Partido de la Revolución Mexicana. By incorporating the group acquired a corporatist party and therefore the regime was consolidated to change its name to Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) in 1946.
The PRI regime between 1940 and 1970 articulated an inclusive corporatist system, subordinate to a policy intervention. The institutional project was based on a national-popular project on a corporate basis and active participation of the State. This project promoted economic growth and enjoyed wide legitimacy from the political legacy of the Revolution. Presidentialism, connected with the characteristics of the Mexican state administrative cohesion and legitimacy granted to the Executive.
During these years there was a pretext depoliticization of economic growth and especially the risk of destabilizing the regime. The party system in Mexico was actually stunted, but in fact their existence was tied to the existence of a legal opposition to the regime because there was a huge contradiction between rules and reality. This period marked
JF Escobedo what has been called the "Foundation and Consolidation of the regime" as the hegemonic party maintained internal cohesion despite the heterogeneity of its members and the diversity of interests that had, coupled with impressive sustained economic growth, achieved reconciled with the participation of business, thanks to state intervention. This period marked the close relations between the union bureaucracy and the regime, due to policy processes including the party workers.
Until 1968, political tensions in the mainly occurred due to disagreements of the elite, although this will result in an internal crisis.
The student movement of 1968 marked what is called the instability of the regime, it is presented as a social movement is challenging the government's capacity, the existing weak opposition party's hegemony emphasizes social mobilization and causes opposition to the government.
The scheme makes use of the disproportionate repression, led to an overreaction to stress the system's inability to receive and display the social demands coercivity as a method to ensure sustainability and suppress opposition voices. The exhaustion of the economic model (Development Stabilizer) predicted a crisis, which affected the system of regulating society disagreements and deal with questions. The company began to exacerbate until he found an outlet through the movement of '68, it came to confirm the regime's inability to deal with and process claims and demands of a discontented society. The movement came to question the lack of space for expression and participation and generated a significant destabilization of the regime.
mid-sixties saw the first rift in the party, iniciada por Carlos Madrazo, quien no estaba de acuerdo con los procesos impositivos de elección de candidatos. La primera ruptura interna de la coalición y el primer movimiento social vienen a marcar el primer momento de desestabilización del régimen priísta.
El periodo de 1968 a 1977 fue un periodo caracterizado por diversos movimientos sociales e indígenas, guerrillas, luchas de colonos y tomas de presidencias municipales y de palacios de gobierno. Junto con los movimientos sociales se desató una crisis económica en 1971 que avivó los movimientos y el descontento social. Con todo ello, el régimen logró conservarse e inhibir cualquier expresión crítica. El movimiento y los subsecuentes enfrentamientos sociales prompted the end of the period of consolidation and stability of the regime but not its end.
The crackdown on the movement of '68 very expensive cost for the scheme, as it came to establishing its hegemony and coercive, as the loss of autonomy from the government would present a very high cost. The door left open the '68 movement was used by various social actors to oppose the regime until during the Echeverria administration achieved a controlled opening process and the shift to a populist model of government.
The 1970 elections gave new legitimacy to the regime, although it aroused opposition movements to citizenship, not encouraged quite a contender in the political arena.
During the Echeverria government step in developing an economic model of shared development stabilizer, populist and social traits were not expected, since the strategy was to respond to popular demands and requirements.
During this government, given the above policies, the crisis between the business sector, the political elite and the union bureaucracy was becoming more severe. The government devised a strategy to give legitimacy to the regime with populist rhetoric, based on the ideas of the revolution and social justice. The movement of 1968 prompted the society in political participation through social movements, including their entry into the political arena, which in some ways increased the existence of political parties. Basically the new parties were inclined to the left ideology, while the PAN remained in a narrow opposition.
The growing participation of the opposition led to the creation of the position of party deputies, by a law passed in 1963 that minorities be allowed representation in Congress. The government from 1976 to 1982 of Jose Lopez Portillo left Echeverría policies but failed the crisis and led to a deep rift between the political elite and the business sector. During those years, reached a severe economic crisis due to low oil prices that came to increasing inflation, destabilizing the exchange rate, added to the exhaustion of time limits for payment of interest on the debt.
The crisis spurred protest and social movement that shook the elite and led to a gradual and controlled opening of pluralism in Mexico.
In Mexico, the liberalization process began five years ago, after the 1977 reforms [3] , controlled opening process began, supported by the government through the issuance of an electoral law promoted by Reyes Heroles in the replacement Figure of party members by proportional representation. In 1986 he issued a new electoral law that the opposition dismissed as "Counter" started opening in 1977, the Federal Electoral Act extending the proportional representation was first introduced an appeal before the Supreme Court.
For the parliamentary elections of 1991, issued by the Federal Code of Electoral Institutions and Procedures which emerges through consensus among parliamentary factions, and especially the unusual relationship between the National Action Party and the Government through a document supports the same party called "Commitment National Legitimacy and Democracy " [4] in which recognizes the legitimacy of the triumph of Salinas in 1988 and enters into a new relationship with the regime. The new law establishes rules for financing political parties, media times, the citizenship of the electoral authorities and the reform of electoral crimes, among others.
Electoral Law The first constitutional stage of 17, was issued in 1918, it was replaced by one in 46; modifications for minority representation with party deputies in 64, a new in 73, another at 77, together with the constitutional reforms progress in the representation proportional in the House of Representatives and expands the rights and prerogatives of the political parties which starts with political reform in 87 reforming the Constitution and issued a Code with an electoral system that encourages pluralism and extends the proportional representation in 89 is amended by the Constitution again and issued a Code to expand the fairness and reliability of the polls [5] , and further reforms in 91, 93 and 96, this being the current one code [6] . It was not until the 2000 elections, when some of the goals of democracy was reached and the longed rotation was achieved by the opposition.
Transition Mexican democracy can be viewed from different angles, a way of considering the advancement of pluralism, open competition and alternation, may be from the levels of government, that is, we believe that Mexican liberalism began from the liberal-opening if However, the PRI government-controlled since 1977 and beginning to appreciate the losses from the official party in the municipalities since 1983.
Liberalization in Mexico occurred in a centripetal, ranging from the municipal level, up to local or state level, Congress, the Federal District and culminating with the Federal Government. This process of openness can be seen from different points of view there is a lot of factors that led to strong opposition, alternation and the fracture of the ruling coalition. A decisive factor was the lack of cohesion in the ruling party, several reasons led to its dismantling, but certainly a major was the recalcitrant attitude of the traditional groups to amend their statutes and to allow liberal openness.
A change in the party in a democratizing effect would have been the other way, may not ensure six years, but perhaps to ensure their permanence in the political arena. The internal dispute led to the fracture of the party that now seems to take it to their own destruction. The economic crisis controlled during the Salinas administration, as well as political and social crisis brought the country to increasingly denying conformity with the regime. Social movements like the Zapatista uprising, the claims of the opposition, popular dissatisfaction with the presidency of Salinas and resumed economic crisis were factors that demolished the legitimacy of the regime achieved in previous years.
Another important factor was the recognition of the ability of other parties to govern by the citizens, "testing" from their community settings, to their state governments and legislatures, and the Federal Law of the jurisdiction of the opposition to meet their needs and rule, giving then the vote to the opposition the Federal Government, it was combined liberalization that was displacing the PRI from the bottom up. " The economic, political and social pluralism were charged to a growing and increasingly hegemonic party increasingly entrenched and fractured, which together with the popular fatigue failure led to his election.
Since the economic crisis of the early eighties, the PRI regime suffered a great instability, economic problems, political and social seemed uncontrollable and a little charismatic president seemed that the Mexican authoritarian regime suffered a weakening process that would eventually take him to the fracture, the disputes of the elite and the leaders were ever greater, including a large group moved toward the opposition disagreed with the methods of appointment of the successors and persistence in old ideas of the Revolution, which formed a well-articulated opposition, made up of several smaller parties and leaders that while they had belonged to the party in power, now formed one of the most important competitions of the regime.
The National Democratic Front won a huge amount of votes in the elections of '88, about 30% - but even with that, the PRI won the majority-about 50% - hardly won by the PAN and the NDF is one of the most competitive elections of the post-revolutionary era and the lowest percentage of votes won by the PRI since its integration. Much was discussed about the legitimacy of the elections, but the fact is that the government of Salinas de Gortari was able to legitimate themselves through the next five years, which by the way, the regime's authoritarianism increased and gained new strength.
The government had a strategy to restore legitimacy and control of political power. All political actions were subordinated to economic policy objectives. The effectiveness generated economic complacency and acceptance, to keep it there to overuse the traditional and authoritarian mechanisms of negotiation between economic, social and governance and control of social demand for corporate plot. [7]
until 1993 with the signing of NAFTA in North America, the crisis of legitimacy and economic management issues apparently are exceeded: the economy grows, inflation subsides, it is possible the social contention the public deficit is under control, there are public funds, there is promise in the strategy to mitigate the problems of poverty and in 1994 Mexico is accepted OECD [8] . The Salinas administration responded to political, economic and social legacy and is loaded from the early eighties, same programs through administrative and economic modernization were only contained by the previous regime, but finally, and maneuver through the Salinas opened the horizon and allowed to deploy the authoritarian regime and prolong its existence for a further six years, avoiding some bloody events in 1994, the PRI get a comfortable victory to their candidate Ernesto Zedillo, who came to power due to homicide Luis Donaldo Colosio. 50% above the 26% obtained by the PAN, with the candidate Diego Fernandez de Cevallos, and 17% obtained by the candidate Cuauhtemoc Cardenas of the PRD (before NDF).
The electoral results of 1994 had many springs, the economic stabilization achieved in the Salinas regime, martyrdom colosista, Cardenas left dogmatism and the disappearance of the candidate's political scene Fernandez de Cevallos, who, indeed, public opinion it foreshadowed as the winner after the televised debate that held the three main candidates, and finally too much lip service to the "vote of fear." Mexico had no outside influence in terms of liberalization or democratic transit until elections in 1997, in 1988 the candidate of the FDN had a chance to succeed, but the leftist ideology of the party and the candidate C. Cardenas led to justify support for the PRI by the neighbor to the north, it was the only way to continue economic liberalization.
The truth is that during the PRI regime was strengthened salinsta in 1991 parliamentary elections, won the most seats and the same on the 1994, once secured the presidency and the legislative majority, Zedillo proposed a modernization of the PRI which set via a route that would reform the party by the consensus of the members, the reform would in a total revision of the statutes with the purpose of changing the internal and external rules to act in a competitive and transparent democracy, reform that would cut short by the killing of party leader and driver of this transformation and internal democratization, José Francisco Ruíz Massieu.
The 1994 elections legitimized back to the PRI regime, the transition was postponed because the regime was resumed and took back a stability that had been hurt by the events of 1994, a standing vote was loose and reaffirming the ambiguity of the liberalization process achieved in recent years, as opposed stood in the middle of the road. While the democratic opening, especially in electoral matters in recent years of the eighties and early nineties, led to an active and somewhat controlled pluralism, the path followed by the opposition was interrupted by the deployment of the PRI apparatus. President Zedillo
not be characterized as a charismatic leader, not to achieve a speed and a dynamic political, economic inherited an unprecedented crisis, which came to return to Mexico to social and economic reality, the "December mistake" blamed Salinas was one of the causes of breakdown and disrepute to the game, coupled with the discrediting spread to the Salinas family and other PRI, the political party began its descent. Even with the failed pact Los Pinos in 1996, took out a political reform that was not entirely welcomed by the opposition but that led to the first transparent and credible elections in 1997.
were held in 1997 parliamentary and local elections for the Chief of the Federal District Government, the latter, made for the first time since the constitutional reforms of 1994 - on them, the PRI lost its majority in the Chamber of Deputies, but retained in the Senate and lost to an overwhelming majority the Head of Government against the Federal District PRD (47.11% from 25.08% of PRI), the elections showed a society unhappy with the regime and opposition strengthened. The PRI was being displaced in various cities and states and gradually the opposition was demonstrating its ability and effectiveness. The strength achieved by the opposition parties, their bargaining power and his victory in local elections, taken to collect an important place in the political arena.
electoral reforms, the need to legitimize the regime through democratic advances and new opportunities in the political arena led to parties like PAN and the PRD to make important government positions around the Republic, and finally to the presidency and federal legislative majority.
Alternation, seen as an essential democratic element is the height reached by the Mexican democracy, the problem is: if Mexico can be said as a democratic country, it requires an urgent constitutional review process and consensus among groups politicians to reach an institutional arrangement and consolidation of democracy. The ruling coalition's defeat was the victory of the opposition, the conquest of many from outside the political elites longed for a new government, an alternation in power as a condition for Mexico to live in democracy and to ensure it.
Indeed, thanks to the participation of various political groups, the moment came and it can not be ignored, their collaboration led to the liberalization of the Mexican State and the opening towards democracy. The results of the elections in 2000 carried a baggage of several years of struggle and cooperation that culminated in what many dreamed of was the highest aspiration to achieve. Mexico to have an ambiguous name for his regime, has also undergone a process of democratic transition ambiguous, because as Cansino is called, "A transition sui generis sui generis" democratic transition Mexican but had different nuances, because it is a regime change in semi-democratic or authoritarian semi goes through a process in which the opening is controlled as in an authoritarian regime, but never use authoritarian procedures for doing so.
The Mexican regime was based on a well-institutionalized party with defined structures that were unbalanced and lose legitimacy and cohesion. Przeworski shows that more than the levels of legitimacy of a particular political regime, what is the basis for political change or permanence of a regime is the presence or absence of preferred options. Accordingly, we conclude that political change starts from the company realizes that it has more options than the dominant party, which begins the mobilization and thus, new options, while, on the other hand, internally in the coalition interest begins to be diverse and disruptions arise, initially able to be corrected, but eventually end up split.
This crisis is marked by the breakdown of consensus among stakeholders that control or support policy decisions. The breakdown is linked to the emergence of contradictions among conservatives or "hard" and the reformist or "soft." The emergence of these conflicts resulting from a change in calculations and strategies of a number of actors, which, at any given time to judge whether their interests are best preserved while maintaining the authoritarian regime or a democracy. [9]
The crisis is an unstable regime, evidenced by the lack of balance: political demands, supports, decision-making processes and outputs or responses regarding the level of community structures of authority policy. The balance between these factors is broken when the multiple fractures in the civil society and transferred to the political structures through various actors, they can not be reconciled within the ruling coalition and founding of the regime, leading to its fracture. [10]
When there is a fracture of the ruling coalition that breaks the relative balance, we are facing a crisis of regime, this threatens the persistence of the system because it no longer stable. The outcome of the crisis may be delayed indefinitely or even reversed depending on the degree of institutionalization of the regime. From the movement of 68, social mobilization begins and with it the internal split in the coalition, the party requires cohesion and legitimacy, for it uses the same opening beginning of political liberalization regime.
In the past 30 years, instrumental in the opening pluralistic Mexico, found that Mexico experienced a democratic transition but long walk to democracy, a fact not necessarily happen in all cases. Mexican democracy began with the first election results in 1997 and after 2000, but still can not secure a building, because the current regime still lacks a consensus among political actors to reach a democratic agreement, necessary for consolidation.
Moreover, it is necessary to restructure or reform the state, since a regime that seeks to get rid of authoritarian dyes or semi, requires modernization and modification of governance structures.
The Mexican transition started from the controlled opening of 1977 was a long process through the institutionalization of political structures of the PRI, which still remained unbalanced in power and allowed a slow transition. The Mexican transition should be seen from the point of view of balance and adaptability, as well as continuity and change. The Mexican regime suffered several imbalances, but managed to adapt to circumstances and to consolidate the regime in changes were several, but continued his journey until the internal disagreements and tiredness people took over.
According to the different modes of transition, we conclude that the Mexican transition was accomplished until this 2000, through a process of gradual and controlled liberalization, which had the following characteristics:
1. According to the dynamics or causes, the Mexican transition was, as the flame Huntington, the prevailing solution, as they perceived the common response to different challenges or problems within the country (economic crisis, social and political).
2. In accordance with its terms, the Mexican transition was straightforward, because the authoritarian regime was stable and he failed to meet the needs social, economic and political, we chose a democratic regime.
3. According to its kind, was due to the crisis of the political regime, given the internal and external crisis that presented the hegemonic party.
4. The Mexican transition characteristics were to a greater degree of political tension or conflict, especially in recent years, where the opposition adopted a frankly anti-role and opposed to most government decisions and opted for various forms of social mobilization, although can not say that the most violent movements were recorded, with the exception of the EZLN, mobilization social policy and pushed in different ways. It was a discontinuous transition, because the regime suffered several "ups and downs" always managed to finally legitimize and continue in power. The transition took shape over a long period of political struggle.
5. According to the dynamics and timing, the Mexican transition can be viewed from two perspectives: one that was deferred, because during the 1988 elections, the rotation could have been achieved and much discussed at an election, the party won maintain power and legitimacy then, too, can be seen as a transition with cadence or rhythm, it also may think that the speed was appropriate to get one hand greater instability of the regime and the other, a major force in the opposition.
6. His conclusion can not be even discussed, because while Mexico got an alternate party, the new regime has not yet reached a consensus with the various political actors, nor the necessary restructuring of the Mexican state, via a constitutional amendment. The first clean and transparent elections held in Mexico took place in 1997, so according to the theory can be said that Mexico began to be a democratic country.
has been much discussion about the crisis of legitimacy the scheme during the Zedillo administration, and therefore had to respect the electoral results that year, but the reality is that after the electoral reform of 1996, even though most did not comply with the agreements reached with the opposition, institutions gave rise to reliable and fair and transparent elections that seemed to show respect for the will of the people and an imminent shift in the hegemonic coalition.
Zedillo's government and could not hide the growing multiparty social demands, the discrediting of the regime and the break, along with the external pressure, U.S. and European-led mainly to democratization evolve from mere rhetoric to a pressing reality that Mexico needed and should be respected.
openness to public debate and participation rights were widely respected, the participation of opposition parties each day was increased and culminated with a change in the 2000 elections, yet, they can not speak of a consolidated democracy as in last three years of government have not made the changes that the Mexican State requires to be able to call a true democracy. It is urgent to review the Mexican constitution and redefine the Mexican state.
support only on a new, truly democratic and twenty-first century Mexico be able to consolidate and sustain democracy under the rule of law. Otherwise, Mexico will continue even without the PRI, the perfect dictatorship.
[1] Everything about socioeconomic and political history of Mexico, was visited upon the works of César Cansino, The Mexican Transition 1977-2000, Center for the Study of Comparative Politics, Mexico, 2000. and Juan Francisco Escobedo.; resonances of authoritarian Mexico, Mexico, 2000.
[2] We just mention some of the principles contained in our Basic Law.
[3] was in the so-called political reform in 1977 which was introduced in Article 6 of the Constitution, the right to information and to have been part of important electoral reforms passed almost unnoticed.
[4] Juan Fco Escobedo, Mexico resonances of Authoritarian, Mexico, 2000. Page 189.
[5] JF Ruiz Massieu, Constitutional Law Issues (Mexico-Spain), UNAM, Mexico, 1994. Pages 208-213.
[6] Cesar Cansino, op. Page 297.
[7] Juan Francisco Escobedo.; Resonances of authoritarian Mexico, Mexico, 2000, page 187
[8] See page 189.
[9] Cesar Cansino, op. Page 34.
[10] Leonardo Morlino, op. Page 34.
By: Geraldine Gonzalez de la Vega (copyright)
Written in Mexico, October 2000.
Please Do not forget to cite source and author!
