Description of State
Mexico is currently undergoing changes in its political institutions. Ever since 1929, the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) has been the dominating political party in Mexican politics. Only until recently in the late 1990s has opposition parties start gaining influence and challenging PRI.
Mexico has relatively weak capacity due to its rampant drug wars. Some towns and regions have virtually no government control due to power snatched away by cartels. In addition, Mexico’s Congress has recently been permeated by different political parties, each with their own interests, as well as factions within the ruling PRI. As such, it has been increasingly difficult for the president and the PRI to pass legislation after having held the monopoly over Mexican politics for decades.
Mexico also has a relatively low autonomy, mainly due to economic dependence on foreign countries, especially the United States. For example, the North American Free Trade Agreement signed between Canada, the US, and Mexico in 1994 created an open market between the three countries. While Mexico’s economy has greatly improved as a result of the treaty, Mexico is becoming more dependent on US markets and businesses. Another instance is Mexico’s reliance on the US armed forces to help combat drug cartels. As Mexico is quite overshadowed by the US, its autonomy is therefore relatively low.
The formation of the PRI in 1929 gave the government its legitimacy. For decades to come, the PRI would ensure political stability for the first time after many years of revolution. Citizens accepted the party’s authority, and in return the PRI greatly improved Mexico’s economy and society. Currently, one of the greatest threats to the Mexican government’s legitimacy is the ongoing drug war. The sheer influence that the cartels have been allowed to get is definitely worrisome and questions the government’s efficiency in dealing with domestic conflict. However, at the same time, should the government be able to defeat the cartels, it would give reassurance to its citizens.
As the country is going through various political and economic changes, it is hard to pinpoint exactly where power comes from in Mexico. Traditionally, the PRI’s one-party dominance allowed its presidents to rule as de facto dictators. Power from the state has therefore been derived from the PRI. However, recent challenges to the PRI by opposition parties and divisions within the party itself have allowed power to dissipate. For example, the main opposition party Partido Accion Nacional’s (PAN) victory over the governorship of Baja California in 1989 signaled an end to centralized political power by the PRI. Now, Mexico is an asymmetric federalism country. This phenomenon has made the central government weaker at making and enforcing decisions, but a step closer towards democratization. In short, Mexico can currently be classified as a weak state, but this status may change in the near future.
Mexico is currently undergoing changes in its political institutions. Ever since 1929, the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) has been the dominating political party in Mexican politics. Only until recently in the late 1990s has opposition parties start gaining influence and challenging PRI.
Mexico has relatively weak capacity due to its rampant drug wars. Some towns and regions have virtually no government control due to power snatched away by cartels. In addition, Mexico’s Congress has recently been permeated by different political parties, each with their own interests, as well as factions within the ruling PRI. As such, it has been increasingly difficult for the president and the PRI to pass legislation after having held the monopoly over Mexican politics for decades.
Mexico also has a relatively low autonomy, mainly due to economic dependence on foreign countries, especially the United States. For example, the North American Free Trade Agreement signed between Canada, the US, and Mexico in 1994 created an open market between the three countries. While Mexico’s economy has greatly improved as a result of the treaty, Mexico is becoming more dependent on US markets and businesses. Another instance is Mexico’s reliance on the US armed forces to help combat drug cartels. As Mexico is quite overshadowed by the US, its autonomy is therefore relatively low.
The formation of the PRI in 1929 gave the government its legitimacy. For decades to come, the PRI would ensure political stability for the first time after many years of revolution. Citizens accepted the party’s authority, and in return the PRI greatly improved Mexico’s economy and society. Currently, one of the greatest threats to the Mexican government’s legitimacy is the ongoing drug war. The sheer influence that the cartels have been allowed to get is definitely worrisome and questions the government’s efficiency in dealing with domestic conflict. However, at the same time, should the government be able to defeat the cartels, it would give reassurance to its citizens.
As the country is going through various political and economic changes, it is hard to pinpoint exactly where power comes from in Mexico. Traditionally, the PRI’s one-party dominance allowed its presidents to rule as de facto dictators. Power from the state has therefore been derived from the PRI. However, recent challenges to the PRI by opposition parties and divisions within the party itself have allowed power to dissipate. For example, the main opposition party Partido Accion Nacional’s (PAN) victory over the governorship of Baja California in 1989 signaled an end to centralized political power by the PRI. Now, Mexico is an asymmetric federalism country. This phenomenon has made the central government weaker at making and enforcing decisions, but a step closer towards democratization. In short, Mexico can currently be classified as a weak state, but this status may change in the near future.
Political Culture
The political culture of Mexico is relatively weak. Most of its citizens lack respect and faith in the government and the laws. It has been a global consensus that the corruption is the major obstacle for the democratization in Mexico. In the 2005 survey of Mexico’s political culture, 61% of its citizens believe their government used the laws to defend their own its own interests and power. Carlos Elizondo Mayer-Serra contends that most people believe that the law, rather promoting public order, it only serves as a political tool to combat their enemies for whoever those are in power. Also, show in National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), most people follows the law only to avoid punishments and believe that not getting caught by the officials is more of an issue than breaking the laws. Thus, coercion is more prevalent than consensus. Historically, all the states in Mexico are granted with full autonomy. In 1824, the Federal District (which comprises Mexico City and other municipalities) was created as the capital of the federation. However, even though these municipalities were autonomous, they have very limited power. In 1924, these municipalities were abolished and then transformed into non-autonomous boroughs and a Central Department, which was later then renamed to Mexico City. In 1970, this central department was then again divided into four new boroughs. In the 1980s, the people of the Mexico started to demand home rule, devolution for autonomy in order to directly elect their head of the government; however, the devolution of the executive power was not granted until 1997 when the first head government was elected by popular vote. In 2000, the residents within the boroughs can finally elect their own head government when the power was devolve to the boroughs. |
Government Legitimacy
Mexico’s government is legitimate. Its citizens have accepted its legitimacy ever since 1929, where the establishment of the PRI led to decades of strong growth and stability. This is reflected through voter turnout rates of presidential elections in the late 20th century, where the number has stayed at around 65%. Even though Mexico is going through political change now, voter turnout rates are still high (around 60%), albeit lower. Mexico practices compulsory voting, but high voter turnout rates often indicate the people’s strong belief that they can influence the government. Additionally, controversial reforms such as educational reforms have been met with strong resistance from the populace, as seen through recent protests. Despite education reform bills being passed, the populace still feels that they could change this bill, indicating a high expectation that they can influence government decisions.
Even so, there is still a veil of ignorance that the government places over its citizens. One of the key issues in Mexico now is about energy reform. Some feel that the state-owned Pemex oil company needs to open up to foreign investment, while others feel that Pemex, as a symbol of pride for Mexico, should remain under government control. Yet, in a poll conducted in 2013, only 51% of the population heard of this debate. This shows that the government tries to keep controversial issues such as energy reform away from the general population.
Furthermore, Mexico's government seems rather unaccountable, being divided into small factions working for their own benefit. Undergoing several swiping changes, Mexico initially proposed a tax on the middle class, showing a good example of an illegitimate government. Of course, such proposal was disproved by many, as it seemed to demonstrate the power-hogging method of the upper class. Recently, however, according to Reuters, President Pena Nieto claimed that the government is willing to revise the taxation that is hitting the middle class hard. Instead of limiting the middle class, the president wants to "unlock Mexico's economic potential by raising taxes for higher earners and imposing a levy on stock market gains" said Reuters. Hence, Mexico's government is quite accountable to the public's dissatisfaction and desires, which makes it a legitimate government.
Again, as the country is going through vast amount of changes, Mexico's source of legitimacy is not easily detected. Being a weak state, Mexico might only have one of the three legitimacy, or some parts of all three. While PRI is traditionally the only power ruling, and therefore holds a traditional legitimacy, recent division within the party and the disparity between the public's ideas and the representatives' ideas seem to mitigate the legitimacy. Also, while President Pena Nieto is a charismatic leader, he is not as followed and supported to provide enough legitimacy for the government. Lastly, the Mexican government is quite off-track with rational-legal legitimacy, as most of the decisions made by the government seem to be falling apart due to the discord in the PRI itself. All in all, while the sources of the legitimacy seems to be dubious, the government is legitimate, as the high political efficacy and increasing accountability shows.
Mexico’s government is legitimate. Its citizens have accepted its legitimacy ever since 1929, where the establishment of the PRI led to decades of strong growth and stability. This is reflected through voter turnout rates of presidential elections in the late 20th century, where the number has stayed at around 65%. Even though Mexico is going through political change now, voter turnout rates are still high (around 60%), albeit lower. Mexico practices compulsory voting, but high voter turnout rates often indicate the people’s strong belief that they can influence the government. Additionally, controversial reforms such as educational reforms have been met with strong resistance from the populace, as seen through recent protests. Despite education reform bills being passed, the populace still feels that they could change this bill, indicating a high expectation that they can influence government decisions.
Even so, there is still a veil of ignorance that the government places over its citizens. One of the key issues in Mexico now is about energy reform. Some feel that the state-owned Pemex oil company needs to open up to foreign investment, while others feel that Pemex, as a symbol of pride for Mexico, should remain under government control. Yet, in a poll conducted in 2013, only 51% of the population heard of this debate. This shows that the government tries to keep controversial issues such as energy reform away from the general population.
Furthermore, Mexico's government seems rather unaccountable, being divided into small factions working for their own benefit. Undergoing several swiping changes, Mexico initially proposed a tax on the middle class, showing a good example of an illegitimate government. Of course, such proposal was disproved by many, as it seemed to demonstrate the power-hogging method of the upper class. Recently, however, according to Reuters, President Pena Nieto claimed that the government is willing to revise the taxation that is hitting the middle class hard. Instead of limiting the middle class, the president wants to "unlock Mexico's economic potential by raising taxes for higher earners and imposing a levy on stock market gains" said Reuters. Hence, Mexico's government is quite accountable to the public's dissatisfaction and desires, which makes it a legitimate government.
Again, as the country is going through vast amount of changes, Mexico's source of legitimacy is not easily detected. Being a weak state, Mexico might only have one of the three legitimacy, or some parts of all three. While PRI is traditionally the only power ruling, and therefore holds a traditional legitimacy, recent division within the party and the disparity between the public's ideas and the representatives' ideas seem to mitigate the legitimacy. Also, while President Pena Nieto is a charismatic leader, he is not as followed and supported to provide enough legitimacy for the government. Lastly, the Mexican government is quite off-track with rational-legal legitimacy, as most of the decisions made by the government seem to be falling apart due to the discord in the PRI itself. All in all, while the sources of the legitimacy seems to be dubious, the government is legitimate, as the high political efficacy and increasing accountability shows.
Useful Sources
http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21568729-plans-improve-security-and-schools-coming-out-swinging
http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/repository/ap05_comp_govpol_mexi_42254.pdf
http://phs.prs.k12.nj.us/ewood/Mexico/legitimacy.htm
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/09/24/uk-mexico-reforms-idUKBRE98N01O20130924
http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?CountryCode=MX
http://www.mtsu.edu/politicalscience/faculty/documents/crptn_and_political_culture.pdfhttp://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/09/10/mexi-s10.html
http://www.ojs.unam.mx/index.php/mlr/article/viewFile/24988/23424
http://www.economist.com/news/americas/21568729-plans-improve-security-and-schools-coming-out-swinging
http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/repository/ap05_comp_govpol_mexi_42254.pdf
http://phs.prs.k12.nj.us/ewood/Mexico/legitimacy.htm
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/09/24/uk-mexico-reforms-idUKBRE98N01O20130924
http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?CountryCode=MX
http://www.mtsu.edu/politicalscience/faculty/documents/crptn_and_political_culture.pdfhttp://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2013/09/10/mexi-s10.html
http://www.ojs.unam.mx/index.php/mlr/article/viewFile/24988/23424