An unbiased view of Mexican politics is difficult to find. What is important to some Mexicans is not how the political system is evolving but how they can maintain their distinctive Mexican political identity vis a vis their northern neighbors (Bartra 1989). Others are caught up in the aura of the economic reforms started by President de la Madrid and continued by Salinas. These economic reforms exude the promise of reforming the political system (Rubio 1990) which, unfortunately so far, has proven to be immune to their effects. One can seriously question Salinas' desire to change the Mexican political system (Gil 1992). Because politics as usual are the weeds in which the bottom of the Mexican economic ship is ensnared, North Americans need to know more about it.
As an anthropologist I have spent much time studying average Mexicans. It is my impression that the people of Canada and the U.S. know little about Mexicans and vice versa. Mexicans know of the United States and its people. Canada to most Mexicans is a vague entity not clearly separated from the United States. Canadians in Mexico sometimes try to avoid the label "gringo" by saying that they came from "La Canada" instead of "Los Estados Unidos." It produces bewilderment but little change in attitude. These barriers to cultural understanding are understandable. Mexican culture originated in an Indian civilization that was unknown north of the Rio Grande. It had a colonial history entirely different from that of Canada and the United States. It has experienced a modern revolution and now suffers from a conflict of classes whose proportions and problems are very different from those of its northern neighbors.
One way to understand the Mexican political system today is to divide it into three parts, (1) a government of light, (2) a government of darkness, and (3) a government of agency.
The government of light is run by elected leaders who say nice things, such as, how the economic problems of the country will be solved by government action, how free trade will liberate the economy, how rural development will be supported, how the poor will be cared for, and how the sick will be healed. The officials of the government of light seem beyond reproach and are particularly observed by the international press.
The government of darkness is run by the appointees of the government of light. The government of darkness takes care of settling claims between citizens and the government and manages the important patronage relationships of the party in power. Its officials stay away from scrutiny by the press. It finances everything that isn't financed by agencies, and each official of the government of darkness takes a share of the money that passes through his hands. The government of darkness consists of the hierarchy of officials that take government funds, use government property for personal use, and receive bribes. The government of darkness threatens to become a Mafia devoted solely to enriching itself, and the major political problem in Mexico is that, over the last twenty years, it is has become more and more intolerable.
The government of agencies consists of agencies, institutes, and businesses owned by the federal government that provide services such as roads, health care, electric power, telephones, statistics, maps, rural development, education, cultural conservation, social welfare, etc. I refer to all these organizations from hospitals to businesses as agencies. The Mexican agencies have a socialistic orientation and a tendency toward bureaucratic inefficiency encouraged by a lack of competition. The monopolistic oil company, PEMEX, the biggest business owned by the government, is an interesting example. Recent advertisements on Mexican TV proclaimed that the mission of this oil company was to provide "security" for the people of the nation. No mention was made of petroleum products. The explosion in Guadalajara in 1992, caused by PEMEX mismanagement, was a serious blow to its utopian socialist image.
The agencies have permanent staffs and are controlled by the executive branch of the federal government, so every six years when a new federal president is elected, they are given new missions. A common North American belief is that Mexico can solve all its problems by privatizing the services provided by the federal agencies. Unfortunately this would not eliminate the serious problems caused by the government of darkness. Mexican citizens are most concerned with the abuses of the government of darkness and less with the inefficiencies of the agencies. Another factor not understood by North Americans is the success of some of the agencies. The health care system combining government and union-based health-care delivery has evolved into one that is socially responsible and more successful in delivering cost-effective care than private systems in the United States. Many of the agencies are providing a reasonable quality service for a reasonable price, and not all need to be dismantled.
Still the economic health of the country depends on cutting back on government spending. However, economic reform will be mere window dressing unless the basic political problems of the country are dealt with. The economic crisis of the country has been exacerbated by a political patronage system that needs to be reformed before real economic progress can occur. This situation is not unique in the modern world. Mexico resembles other socialistic countries such as pre-reform Poland in which a corrupt government led to economic stagnation. Before these countries can achieve economic progress they need political reform.
Constitutionally Mexico is organized at three territorial levels, that of the nation, the state, and the municipio. [1] Most of the funding for the patronage system comes from the national government. High state officials receive funds from national officials, and high municipal officials receive funds from state officials. This system is maintained by an downward flow of funds from the national purse, to the state purse, and then to the municipal.
There are no income taxes. Probably no one would pay them if there were. There are hundreds of little fees for various sorts of permissions justified by an over expanded bureaucracy. For example an owner of a tiny one-room taco stand has to pay sizable amounts for a permit from the tax bureau of the national government three times a year, a similar permit from the municipal government once a year, and a certificate of health from the national department of health once a year.
The fee income, most of which goes into the national bureaucracy, is not enough to pay for the outflow of patronage. Education is national, so teachers have to be paid, schools have to be built. Officials of a state government expect to receive funds from the national government. Municipal governments receive funds from the state. It goes down to the smallest pueblo, which may have supported the candidate in power, and which then expects to receive its share of benefits, perhaps a school or a new water supply.
Tax income not being sufficient to support the patronage system, the government must rely on the income from the businesses that it owns. When oil prices were high, the national oil company, PEMEX, alone financed the government. [2] However, when it is all added up nowadays there isn't enough to keep the system going and to pay off the foreign debt that the government ran up when it thought it would have plenty of oil income. So inflation has been taking over as the hidden tax on the public. Now that the debt has been partially reduced, inflation is slowing, but the politics creating the problem still remains.
Some of the government run agencies become havens for inefficiency. Unfortunately the admirable good will and hard work of other government workers cannot compensate for the people who see government jobs as an easy way to get their share of patronage. The difficult-to-calculate use of public funds by officials and workers is an enormous economic drain.
In Mexico, people receive benefits from the government not according to their rights as citizens, but according to their party membership. For example in the state of Hidalgo in 1990, PRI amplified the welfare program. However, not every needy family received support. People who supported a rival party didn't even apply for welfare, knowing that it would not be forthcoming. Other supporters received more than they deserved. Thus, people expect to receive benefits from the government according to their allegiance to the party or the person directly in power over them.
People who receive patronage positions in the government are able to siphon off sizable personal gains from the funds which they manage. This has to be done in moderation, otherwise the person will get into trouble; however some cynical citizens put the amount as high as 2/3 of all the funds managed. There is no built-in system of vigilance or standards to control the drain. Furthermore the PRI thrives on its payoffs to supporters at the lower level.
In spite of all this, the political system has some democratic potentials. Other parties besides PRI are allowed to participate in elections at all levels. However, by controlling the biggest payoffs, PRI makes it difficult for other parties to elect their candidates. If another party competes in an election and fails, their supporters are shut out of the patronage benefits. PRI even taxes its candidates. Those who are elected on the PRI ballot are expected to contribute part of their income to the party coffers. Although it may be large, the contribution is still small in proportion to the moneys of which the officials can avail themselves.
Consensus power, the power of the people, is opposed to patronage power. In Mexico there is more violence than in Canada and the U.S., and violent political protests don't seem extreme to the public. For example, most Mexicans to whom I have talked believe that Lyndon Johnson ordered the assassination of John F. Kennedy, a perfectly logical and natural act according to them. When political opponents take to the streets in Mexico they play a game with the people in power. They try to cause enough disruption to get attention but not enough to give the government an opportunity to accuse them of armed insurrection. PRI successfully suppresses all the news of the violent and seem-violent protests that go on all the time in Mexico.
For example, when I went shopping in a small city in Hidalgo in August 1989, I found several streets mysteriously blocked by busses. When I arrived at the city market place, it was closed. People said that all the entrances to the city had been blocked and that a general strike was in progress. A large group had gathered and was being addressed by leaders of the protest. A spokesman said that merchants, bus and taxi drivers, and others were supporting a general strike in a protest against the municipal president who had stolen municipal funds, failed to build schools, and corrupted the police department which was now robbing people faster than the robbers. They wanted the president out, and this was their democratic way of stating it. It was a typical consensus reaction against the patronage politics. The police were noticeably absent from the gathering and otherwise acting very sheepish. As another example, In August of 1990 I had to take to back roads around the same city to go northward to the border. A peasant mob of thousands blocked the main highway for two days while marching on Mexico City. It was rumored that they were being fed and cared for by welcoming crowds everywhere.
I will offer another personal example of typical Mexican politics. It will seem strange and complicated to Americans and Canadians, but it is typical of everyday occurrences in Mexico. In 1987 in the rural municipio, PRI nominated its hand-picked candidate, a politician who had been in power for 18 years. As usual PRI won the elections with typical election fraud involving pre-marked ballots and the impromptu closing of poling places. The "victory" was intolerable to many of the citizens, who felt that the politician managing the fraudulent "election," a local coffee baron, had controlled things for too long. Other people were due their share. Angry peasants occupied the municipal capital building for months. Protesters marched on the state capital. When the time for the "elected" PRI president to take office arrived, he was ejected from his office by the protesters.
The Director of the state Department of Government (Secretaría de Gobernación) arrived and concocted a trumped-up case forcing the "elected" president to resign. The Director installed the opposing candidate from another party, PARM (Partido Auténtico de la Revolución Mexicana), as municipal president. The election results, fraudulent in the first place, were totally ignored. Part of the deal was that the newly installed president would leave PARM and join PRI. Thus, PRI was left in power even though its opponent from another party was given the position without being elected. Note that this bit of political magic was performed by the Department of Government, a very powerful agency which has been set up at both state and federal levels to manage the patronage system and much of the government of darkness.
Later the supporters of the original "elected" president, now rejected by the Department of Government, in turn attempted to occupy the municipal offices by force. Shots were fired. Three people were wounded, and the Department of Government ordered the state police to intervene on the side of the PRI-installed president. Supporters of the original "elected" president were jailed and had to bribe their way out of state prison. The original "elected" president himself successfully appealed to the federal Department of Government to issue an order canceling an arrest order issued by the state Department of Government and, thus, escaped incarceration.
The new president, now converted to PRI, remained in power. However, because he changed parties, and because he didn't reward his original supporters in PARM with enough patronage, they abandoned him. One of the rules of the political game is that PRI people cannot reward PARM people. The patronage money that was normally given by the governor of the state to the municipal president then disappeared. One rumor says that the Director of the state Department of Government pocketed most of it. Other rumors say that the new president stole it. The original PARM supporters shifted their allegiance to a third party, PRD (Partido de la Revolución Democrática), and then to back to PRI, but on now on the side of the coffee baron who now opposed the Director of the state Department of Government within PRI. Thus, those who had originally risen in opposition to the coffee baron eventually found themselves making a deal with him against others who had seized power. So goes Mexican politics, which can be understood as an effort to balance consensus power with patronage power. This is a typical example of how Mexican politics works at the local level. Undoubtedly it will seem quite strange and complicated to Canadians and Americans.
Every year in the country of Mexico, many municipal presidents are assassinated or run out of office by citizens using consensus power to overrule abusive patronage power. It has been reported that at least twenty-two municipal buildings were occupied by angry citizens in the state of Michoacán in 1990 in the month after the elections (Gil 1992:82). The ruling party often tries to intimidate the rebels by accusing them of sedition; however, it usually has little effect. People understand that consensus politics provides democratic breathing space in a system that tries to operate on pure patronage. Throughout Mexico, consensual groups have successfully ridded their areas of local bosses who have gained economic and political power by playing the patronage system.
The Mexican system of justice is based on French law and is quite different from North American systems based on English law. In Mexico a person taken by the police is presumed guilty until proven innocent. However, there is justice in the Mexican system. People go to jail more easily, but also get out more easily too. The system also allows the police to be more intimidating, an advantage in a country with much higher incidences of poverty, unemployment, and violence than in Canada or the United States.
The problem with Mexican justice is that the system of patronage has been extended to the judicial branch of government where corruption is rampant. Party-appointed judges consider it their right to accept bribes in cases where the evidence is dubious. It is their due for supporting the party. Honest citizens are incensed at these practices, which are hurting greatly the image of PRI. I will offer another example of how the system works in the following translation of a actual letter sent by a young man in prison to the wife of a state governor. In it we see the actions of a particularly hated category of police, the "judicial" police, who are jokingly called the "prejudicial police" in most areas. The job of the "judicial" police is to apprehend anyone whom a judge wants put in jail.
My name is ______. I am a soldier whose regiment is stationed in Mexico City. I hope that you will listen to what I have to say. On February 13th I was returning from a leave granted to me by my regiment. When the bus on which I was riding passed through the local municipal capital, it was boarded by officers of the judicial police who threatened me with their guns. I was thrown into jail and was not given the opportunity to contact my regiment to tell them what had happened. I was left to rot for five days after which I was taken out to make a declaration to the public prosecutor. I was accused of a murder of which I have no knowledge. I did not have, and have never have had, any argument with the victim, nor was I there when the crime took place. At the time the murder took place, I was with my regiment and answered roll call at six a.m. I have presented proof and witnesses to this effect, but the judge will not let me go because I have not paid him off.
I have been five months in jail here without having committed any crime. I have asked for the help of the court appointed attorney, but he wants nine million pesos (3,600.00 U.S. dollars) in order to settle the matter. I am poor enough that I cannot pay this amount. I am only 18 years old. My mother is alive, but she is old and unable to walk. My father was murdered 15 years ago. I have no one to help me.
I appeal to you, wife of the governor, to help me and to see that justice is done. In this jail the guilty are not punished, only the poor are punished. We want to see justice done and to see the corrupt officials whose slippery deals sully the reputation of the government also punished.
These abuses of basic human rights might be corrected if they were brought to the attention of the public, both within and without Mexico. However, the press in Mexico is more corrupt than North Americans realize. Reporters often take payoffs to write good things, and, if they don't get their kick-backs, they write bad things. Television news is superficial. Most of the government propaganda appears on television where it has the most impact. Coverage of controversial political affairs can be quite detailed in some newspapers. However, editorial summations and interpretations of political events are limited. Few people or newspapers have the courage to speak out directly. In other words, you have to draw your own conclusions from the details, and this is very difficult for North Americans unfamiliar with the radically different culture.
The government realizes that it cannot operate many of its businesses efficiently and is selling off the ones that it can't handle. Agency funding is being cut back by inflation and otherwise. However, PRI is still bellowing out its propaganda; and the public is becoming increasingly disillusioned and aware of its failures. The PRI imagination seems to be limited. Many people are hoping for reform within PRI. There are signs that it is happening, but very slowly? Hopefully, the political opposition will pressure it in that direction.
The state governments are not handling the problem of the government
of darkness. In fact, they thrive on it. However the people are dealing
with it by forming new parties and demanding fair elections. Fair elections
seem to me to be a key that can unlock the wheels of progress. One of the
most important checks on malfeasance is the ballot. The PRD, PAN (Partido
de Acción), and other opposition parties have focused on this solution.
So perhaps Mexico will struggle toward greater democracy and a political
system with more checks on corruption and inefficiency. Once the government
starts to serve the country instead of itself, many of the economic problems
of development can be solved. If a responsible government is not set up,
real economic progress that involves a rise in the standard of living will
be sluggish despite hundreds of reforms, that may be announced by the power
holders.
[2] In 1989 Pemex alone accounted for close to 40 percent of Mexico's total exports. See "Pemex, CFE to stay within public sector," The News, Friday, Sept. 8, 1989, p. 30.
Gil, Carlos B. (1992}. Hope and Frustration: Interviews with Leaders of Mexico's Political Opposition. Wilmington, Delaware: Scholarly Resources Inc.
Rubio, Luís. (1990). Mexico in Perspective: An Essay on Mexico's Economic Reform and the Political Consequences. Houston Journal of International Law 12(2):235-242.