AP Comp Gov - Mexico's Long March to Democracy Questions

Mexico’s Long March to Democracy

1. What are the reasons that allowed the PRI to maintain power so long? How did they orchestrate such a broad constituency?

The PRI, though hated in the end, stayed in power largely due to their achievements while in power. PRI leaders pacified and united the country after the 1910 revolution, putting together a national identity and controlling the armed forces. They established universal primary education, subsidized public universities, promoted industrialization, urbanization, and a strong middle class. By promising political stability, health care, land reform, temporary rural employment programs, and programs to help the poor, the PRI won support from the suffering peasant, indigenous, and urban poor classes.

2. Why did the political legitimacy of the PRI begin to fade?

According to the article, the 1968 massacre of 300 protesting students in Mexico City was the watershed event that exposed the brutality of the PRI regime. The PAN party’s inception in 1980 drew supporters away from the PRI, made up at first of alienated ranchers and industrialists. Continued voting irregularities further decreased faith in the PRI, especially in the case of Cárdenas, who, following his failure to democratize the PRI, ended up as the candidate of a four-party coalition that is believed by many to have won the election. Additionally, the economy did horribly essentially from 1976 to 1994, with an increase in international debt, devaluation of the peso, government cutbacks, discouraged investment (which sunk most small and medium-sized businesses), and the obliteration of gains in income and welfare for the population. Colosio’s assassination, the 1994 devaluation and subsequent depression, government scandals, and Zendillos resignation from the party led the PRI to become lost and widely disliked. In 1997, the PRI lost control of the Chamber of Deputies, and abandoned its constituency of small farmers, migrant workers, and self-employed vendors and shopkeepers to economic disgrace.

3. What are the pros and cons of Fox's "Revolution of Hope"? What changes has Fox been able to make? What parts of the plan will take much longer to achieve?

Fox’s “revolution of hope” aimed to bring the government and citizens to work together to work to secure progress for Mexico. He wanted Mexico to be multiethnic, pluralistic, tolerant, and respectful to political opposition and a free press. Additionally, he wanted to look after the indigenous, handicapped, migrant workers in the US, microentrepreneurs, and working mothers. Fox wanted Mexico to have economic growth high enough to maintain full employment, to reduce inflation, to stabilize the economy, and to establish a common market with the US and Canada that includes a shared currency and labor mobility. Fox planned to address the great disparities afflicting the poor, reduce Latin America’s social and economic dualism, expand education and health services, fund microcredit and industrial programs to link the poor to the national and global export economies, and promote democratic political participation.

Many people, especially leftists, see his plans as “Mexico, Inc.” They are suspicious of his background as a very successful businessman and cabinet appointments. The cabinet appointments in particular were controversial due to potential conflicts of interest—the ministers of communications and finance had worked as executives in companies linked to the telephone monopoly and the banking establishment. There are also fears over an oil monopoly and potential erosion of nationalistic and welfare orientations of the Mexican state.

Fox has was able to pass a budget that included revenue-sharing and an increase in federal antipoverty funds for the states. He has also combated corruption, created a climate of trust for renewing dialogue with the Zapatista guerrillas in Chiapas state, made bold appointments to the National Security Council, and appointed a presidential coordinator of the Citizen Alliance.

His goals to stimulate economic growth in Mexico enough to maintain full employment, reduce inflation, stabilize the economy, and establish a common market with the US and Canada will take much longer. Additionally, his wish to increase the real income of Mexico’s 40 million poor by 50%, reduce the number of those living in poverty from 40 million to 28 million and cut those living in extreme poverty from 18 million to 8 million will also take a significant amount of time to accomplish. His overall goals for the “Revolution of Hope” will collectively take a lot of time, resources, and effort to make reality.

4. How has Mexico become more democratic over the last several decades? Do you think this trend will continue?

Beginning with the PRI, though it was not altogether democratic itself, democratization has been a theme throughout the last several decades. The PRI launched political reforms legalizing marginal opposition parties and opening the Congress to opposition representation, which was a major step in democratization at the time. Additionally, Cárdenas attempted to democratize the PRI and end the dedazo (though he ultimately ended up splitting from the party). Cárdenas’s near election showed a large move towards democratization. The largest movement was obviously the shifting of power from the PRI party to the democratic PAN party. I do think this trend will continue, especially if Mexico continues to make reforms as it has been and parties such as the PAN continue to hold power through fair elections.