Mexico: Agreed Succession, death of politics?

Abstract

This article is part of the electoral process of the mexican state for the renewal of the Powers of the Union, where the traditional bipartisanship ceased to exist and gave way to a new party with just four years of foundation. The phenomenon of Andrés Manuel López Obrador, president elect, three times candidate for the Presidency of the Republic, whose origin of political participation was the Institutional Revolutionary Party, later in the Party of the Democratic Revolution, with a left profile, showed the face of a country through the polls weary of corruption, impunity, violence, simulation, complicity and other vices that exacerbate social inequality and palpable evident marginalization and extreme poverty. 

It is noteworthy that, in a nation with high rates of cultural backwardness, where the population is not addicted to reading, where poverty translates into a deficient and even elitist education, the electoral day called as “civic party”, where the 56% of an electoral roll of more than eighty million, have voted for him. 

The last measurement of the Inegi (Indigo Report, 2017. How Much, How and What Mexicans Read) conducted in February, shows that 45 percent of mexicans read at least one book a year, while the another 55 percent do not read any literary material.

Mexican women read more books than men, since the last Reading Module indicates that 46 percent of the female population read at least one book during the last year, against 43 percent of the males.

Throughout this participation, the spirit underlying a covenant succession is raised, where the general conditions were created, either by social networks, by defamation of candidates or by any means of electoral strategy to achieve this result.

The power granted to this effect generates the totalitarian temptation that emerges from a populist policy, aimed at a non-thinking population and surrounded by suitable legislative instances so that the new expression of republican monarchy is consumed, under the tints of populism in Latin America.

In that order of ideas and before a scenario of this nature the epitaph of political science is clear and evident. Remember that politics was considered as the art of good government and philosophers, the most capable, the wisest, were in charge of governing; times change and in terms of Machiavelli (1974, p.364) “the good of today will be the bad of tomorrow and the bad of tomorrow will be the good of today”. Therefore, the transformation of public activity into the hands of emerging groups, devoid of a culture, of love for wisdom, of an exercise prior to the affairs of the state; a Congress in many of the cases of improvisation and only belonging to an acronym derived from its opportunism, in addition to many other questions, lead us to the conclusion that the death of politics is more than a reality in Mexico to make way for pragmatism and the capriciousness of the already anachronistic caudillismo.