Can our weak institutions lead by peaceful and constructive a growing social grievance?
Chances are ... we do not know
The question has been asked ad nauseam: Will there be a new social upheaval in Mexico in 2010 to coincide with the bicentennial and the centennial of the start of two major rebellions? Of course there is no way of knowing. The prediction capabilities of social sciences are minimal. However, it is worth asking the question and attempt to delve into themes of our reality.
In the special issue of British magazine The Economist entitled "The World in 2010," Laza Kekic, the Economist Intelligence Unit that weekly (EIU), try to shape a global view centered on the potential or risk levels of bursts social impacts resulting from the global economic crisis and its impact on employment levels. With relief, Kekic notes that today is not the fears have materialized in early 2009 by the director of U.S. National Intelligence, Admiral Dennis Blair, in the sense that the global economic downturn could lead to an unstable world general policy and that it could become a major security problem for Washington in the short term.
However, the futurist of The Economist notes that the relative political stability that has kept all members of the global system may well be the calm before the storm, as large parts of the world increasing unemployment, food prices, poverty, social inequality and the weakening of the middle classes. And just at that difficult juncture, we can no longer continue with the relaxation of fiscal policy that occurred in many countries to bolster their economies, something which, incidentally, was not in Mexico, and therefore, future austerity public expenditure will be a factor of social discontent.
Historical experience, Kekic says, shows the frequent gap between economic crisis and its social and political effects. These effects take time to manifest, particularly since the beginning of the recovery in GDP does not automatically follow that of employment. Moreover, even if other economic indicators improve, unemployment may increase. In politics often come up with something similar: the discontent generated by the deterioration of the material conditions of life may not immediately result in street protests, coups or triumph of the opposition, but over time society tends to spend dissatisfaction policy bill.
The EIU forecasts of four categories of countries according to indicators of "risk of social discontent": very high, high, medium and low. In our continent, the United States, Canada, Brazil, Cuba, Uruguay and Costa Rica are the only ones where the odds of that scenario are social problems as a result of the global economic crisis are slim. Chile, Colombia and Paraguay are classified as medium risk countries, in contrast, Bolivia and Ecuador are designated high-risk countries "social fuel." Mexico and the rest of the region fall into the category of countries with high risk of social unrest, that is, they can still maintain stability than losing. Go around to commemorate centenary and bicentenary!
Another point that
In a classic analysis of revolutions, appeared more than 70 years (The Anatomy of Revolution, [New York: Norton, 1938]), developed a hypothesis Clarence Brinton which remains very suggestive: in the toughest times of depression, the most affected, the majority, have no more energy to fight for survival, not to protest. To occur, outbreaks of rebellion against the established order comes later, when the worst is over. That kind of generalization fits well with the explanation of revolutions like the French or Cuban or even with the two rebellions that are commemorated today in Mexico: 1810 and 1910, although not so much with the Bolshevik revolution. Anyway, Brinton analysis shows that, for now, the bulk of Mexican citizens will be more concerned about weather the storm that set accounts with their leaders. In all cases, at the juncture of a future recovery when it is easier to materialize the accumulated discontent. Therefore, if the 2012 elections and some local that come before are conducted in a manner and in an environment like that of 2006, it would be playing with fire.
moral element
far we have emphasized material elements, relatively objective, but also social protest enters the moral component, or more specifically, that which EP Thompson called "moral economy" in his classic study, "The Inglés Moral Economy of the Crowd in the Eighteenth Century "(Customs in Common, New York: The New York Press, 1991). It is this "idea based on a popular community consensus on what practices are legitimate and which illegitimate" in the relationship among the poorer classes and their precarious livelihoods. From this perspective, the sense of injustice caused by sharp variations in the prices of popular consumer goods, by the famine or the worsening of working conditions is central to the explanation of riots or other forms of social discontent, which Barrington Moore and explored in the case of German workers in Injustice: The Social Bases of Obedience and Revolt (White Plains, NY: ME Sharpe, 1978).
An American historian specializing in Mexican themes, John Tutino, has studied the peasant uprisings that have taken place in Mexico since the beginning of the independence movement until the years of Cardenas. His conclusion is that between 1810 and 1930 agrarian insurrections became so common in our country that its existence and development had a decisive influence in the shaping of modern Mexico (In the insurrection to revolution in Mexico. The social bases of agrarian violence , 1750-1940 [Mexico: Era, 1990], p. 9). However, a central component of these bursts peasants was the existence of a sense of injustice that resulted in Moore called a "moral outrage politically effectively. "
Before 1810 it was rare for the subordinate classes interpret their condition as a result of human actions and assign blame to institutions or individuals with names and rebelled against them. Until then, the majority part of society explained their miserable situation as part of an order predetermined by forces beyond the human, by the will of God. However, in 1810 the call to the masses of a Creole-cure a man of God and "the powers that "- backed by the military to deal with the natives" bad governance "was crucial for a good number of Indians and mestizos of El Bajio-thriving agricultural and mining region and its changing-stop passivity and be filled with a "politically effective moral outrage."
1910, Mexico already had a century of protest movements, rebellions and civil wars. In this circumstance was more understandable that some of the middle classes and accept the proposal to the Antire responsible for the precarious condition of those who had been a number of years monopolized the positions of authority and privilege, political leaders, governors, Secretaries of State and, finally, the President himself, Porfirio Diaz. The most miserable grievance against the splendid life of the oligarchy Diaz was relatively easy to formulate, but transformed into political action and insurrection required the gaps between the elites and that Madero, a wealthy member of the group, acted as the catalyst that inspired popular leaders-Pascual Orozco and Francisco Villa, and his followers to take risks to stand up the dictatorship. Today
In Mexico today, one can detect the existence of a pervasive sense of grievance against the political and economic leaders. Those responsible for the economic catastrophe, social and ultimately moral of the country have a face, name and surname. The question to be resolved is whether an institutional framework so weak and corrupt as ours, is have the ability to drive through peaceful and constructive that injury, that sense of injustice, especially when the worst of the economic downturn has actually happened. That's our big question.
0 comments:
Post a Comment