Fighting poverty, a priority of the national effort, it was proposed For nearly two centuries. What matters now is how Discovery
Felipe Calderon last week said that in the "long three years" that still remain in front of the executive branch under the circumstances that three years is a huge time-the "first priority, "it said his government will" correct the course social "and" eradicate poverty ", a task that is not only feasible but also an ethical obligation. And it might be added that is also essential to prevent social breakdown is accelerated.
The idea of \u200b\u200bcompromising the bulk of energy on tackling the causes and mitigate the effects of poverty is laudable. However, when considering the context in which it is released, the proposal is not as positive and clear. First, because the offer comes from who now heads the Mexican right politically and for centuries have been exactly the right behavior of the causes behind the persistence of widespread and severe poverty in Mexico.
Second, because in the three years that Calderon leads the executive head of its agenda has had other priorities and is only now, when the original agenda has failed, that "Los Pinos" discover something that has been there forever as one of the obstacles, perhaps the most important and obvious-to Mexico to turn, finally, society created as a colony of exploitation in the early sixteenth century, where its essence was an exercise of power that would allow the systematic exploitation of the many by the few-a true modern nation where social solidarity is expressed objectively policies to eliminate marginalization and its harsh effects.
'For the good of all, the poor first'
The fight against poverty as a "first priority" and he had proposed in his election campaign Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO). However, that proposal, the center of the political platform on the left, AMLO was described by the right as "tropical messiah" as "a danger to Mexico "and treated accordingly: prevent becoming president" at any cost. "That proposal, as sensible as possible and useful even to the interests of the bourgeoisie, one of the reasons for the success of President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and his country, Brazil, is the priority has been given to effectively combat poverty, "all right Mexican AMLO launched to crush, even if that meant destroying the credibility of what was just being born: the reliance on electoral institutions.
By preventing the passage of a moderate left-closer to that which now rules the same in Brazil than in El Salvador and Uruguay and far removed from the one in Venezuela-who supported Calderón in 2006 refused to travel down that road already well proven beneficial. In Spain, for example, strong political democracy took root right through to Franco and the military agreed to hand over power in 1977, because voters decided it a democratic right, led by Adolfo Suarez, and this right, after weathering successful military coup of 1981, it refused to hand him over to the socialist Felipe Gonzalez to these, in turn, after years it will return to the right of José María Aznar, from the choice 2004, was forced to return to the Socialist José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero. During all these changes nothing happened to the big bourgeoisie.
No doubt, at the end of the twentieth century, the English right overcame his instincts and acted wisely and today is a country with problems but viable. Mexican right, however, acted opposite hand and now has what we all have: a failure.
The first 'first priority'
After assuming power via the "haiga been like haiga been," Calderon proposed to acquire an image that fit with the conservative political vision: the Executive of a hard, no nonsense type. Hence his decision to (mis) be the uniform of five-star general and proceed to mobilize the military in a war against drug traffickers. However, as the drug market is outside of our borders and their nature remains unchanged for half a century, maintains that illegal activity resources. The numbers of those executed in the struggle against drug and continue unabated, this year has already exceeded 5 000 207 deaths last year (Reform, "ejecutómetro" 2009) - and the possibility of success in this administration in this area is so low that has been declared impossible (see the analysis of Ruben Aguilar and Jorge G. Castaneda on the drug: the failed war [Punto de Lectura, 2009]).
The failure in the fight against cartels drug should add that between 2006 and 2008 the number of Mexicans who suffer from food poverty rose from 14.4 to 19.5 million, and of those in poverty, equity rose from 44.7 to 50.6 million. Under such conditions it is not surprising that today the government wants to change the nature of their agenda even if it means adopting his opponent. Now the big question is how will you do to create jobs and rapidly improve the quality of education that the poor need to escape permanently from poverty? The Oportunidades program requires more resources, but in any case only serves to mitigate the effects of poverty, not to eliminate it.
Story
aged
is possible, though doubtful, that time reading the book of Julieta Campos What about the poor? The repeated complaint of the nation (Aguilar, 1995) would have helped Calderón and his men to put the fight against poverty as "first priority" from the beginning. In addition to knowledge needed sensitivity and willingness to attack a major problem.
A problem as old as the country
If someone follows the sad story for three decades and 688 pages Julieta Campos told, you will notice that in 1813 Morelos proposed that Congress enact laws "to moderate affluence and poverty "in practice meant something already said, that "the justices handed peoples land for cultivation." The defeat of Morelos frustrated that first national project of redistributing wealth.
Some prominent liberals wondered, as did Ignacio Ramirez in October 1875, "What about the poor". One answer came from Ponciano Arriaga in his separate opinion on Article 27 of the Constitution: to implement the suggestion of Morelos, for "While few individuals are in possession of vast and uncultivated land ... a great people ... groan in the direst poverty, with no property, no home, no industry, no job ...".
After the outbreak of the Revolution Mexicana, the farm bill drafted by the Zapatistas Manuel Palafox in October 1915, said: "The nation recognizes the absolute right to attend all Mexicans to possess and cultivate a tract of land", hence the right to expropriate all land in the country. " The following steps were the Article 27 of the Constitution of 1917 and the massive land reforms that began in his term Lázaro Cárdenas (1934-1940). Back to start
century and a quarter after making his proposal agricultural Morelos, Cardenas would implement, but it was too late. Just then Mexico began to industrialize, to urbanize and land-farming and livestock-ceased to be the engine of the economy. The Revolution had favored the unions, but neither then nor now these corporations harbored the majority of workers. The new concentration of wealth had little to do as much with landowners and with industrialists, bankers, traders, speculators, urban, and so on. The "labor aristocracy" more or less maintained their gains but the bulk of the Mexican left unprotected, especially when it disappeared on "stabilizing development", came the wave of globalization, which minimized the ability-and willingness-of the state to redistribute income and protect the majority. The result we see it now: the lucky 20% of Mexicans have the income 59.1% while the 20% most unfortunate have to cope with 3.1% (The Economist Intelligence Unit).
In conclusion
The greater the number of marginal lower the essence of Mexico as a national community and the greater the danger of living in a society failed. First the poor should and must be the reason for our political efforts.
0 comments:
Post a Comment