Friday, June 19, 2009

Iran and Lebanon versus Mexico




Shanghai June 19, 2009.- The past elections in Lebanon (June 7th) and Iran (June 12th) would be for me two more important international events with no further interest if the Mexican elections were not scheduled to be held on next July. These Mexican mid term elections, on the other hand, would not spark additional interest for me if the outcomes of the Lebanese and Iranian were not as they were. My mind is connecting Mexico and these two countries of the Middle East because the contrasting images of what happened in Lebanon and Iran over the past weeks and what is taking place right now in Mexico: a sharp contrast between the high participation and the passion of Lebanese and Iranian voters against the social ongoing campaign in Mexico to override the vote on the coming July elections.

As in other instances, Mexicans have come to believe that while our economy can experience a mediocre development our democracy is superior to the political situation in other countries, as Lebanon and Iran could be. And this established belief is again to be questioned, at least from a social perspective.

I’m not going dwell on the profound differences between Mexico and Iran and Lebanon. Likewise I’m also aware to the fact that these Mexican elections are mid-term elections (which traditionally call much less interest from voters in Mexico than the Presidential elections) and that low participation is a widely extended democratic malaise. Notwithstanding that, the high participation in the part elections of Iran and Lebanon and the lack of interest of Mexican people in taking part in these elections makes me think about the political reality of Mexico.

I can synthesize my reflection saying that what happened in Lebanon and Iran (a victory of the Pro Western alliance in Lebanon and a strong opposition to the Mullahs that rule Iran) shows the miracles that democratic participation can operate in countries where the political system are flawed or oppressive, as is the case in Lebanon and Iran, whereas in Mexico the widespread skepticism of electors show how the word “democracy” can be employed to put in place a system that is distrusted by society. In Lebanon and Iran, the democratic passion of society erupted and took by surprise the system. In Mexico its “democratic system” in its current form seems to be against society.

I have never been to Lebanon and Iran and I what I know of both countries is very limited. Perhaps these are systems marked by countless flaws and weaknesses (irregularities and foreign interference in Lebanon; supreme authority of Ayatollah Khamenei in Iran) but what the high participation in both countries show is that people there had some hope in their vote, some confidence in the system. At least, it seems, Lebanese and Iranian electors flocked the polls because they saw some choice among the contenders, some real options and people believed that with their vote they can contribute to the transformation of the system. Lebanese and Iranians saw options and they had hope in their vote. They believed they can change things, voting.

To me, this is a miracle. A miracle of what the democratic passion can achieve in imperfect systems.

But in Mexico the people is on the other side, campaigning to blanking the vote, voting no or voting for fictional characters.

In contrast to the authoritarianism of the Islamic Republic, in Mexico on the surface there are choices, strong institutions and the ballots are respected. On the surface, in Mexico it would be enough for a citizen to go to the polls and cast a ballot. But what is happening is that citizens don’t believe that anymore. What Mexican citizens are showing is that they don’t believe that this system they have is giving them the tools or the options to transform reality. Reality is beyond the system, not only because reality is complex but because they know that this system, as it was designed, is unable to do something to transform the Mexican reality. What is worse, what Mexican society exhibits with this attitude is their underlying belief that this system is probably the reason the Mexican reality is so bad.

And Mexican people is not on the other side because apathy or lack of interest in politics. Mexican electors are skeptical of the system because they are fed up with the daily soap opera the Mexican democracy has become. From being a public spectacle to watch on TV and enjoy (like a reality show) it has come to be a miserable, distasteful show anybody wants to participate. In Mexico participating in the system is no longer seen as patriotic or civic. Participating in the system has become irrelevant at best and self deluding at worst. What this pre elections in Mexico show is that there are a lot of people so disenfranchised with the system, so disconnected from the system, that the number of people refusing to participate or be part of the system is growing.

If Lebanon and Iran remind us of the transformational and miraculous power of the democratic passion, Mexico shows how democracy can become a label that betrays authentic democratic sentiments. In Iran the ruling class is attempting to prevail over a large portion of Iranian electors. In Mexico is like if the “democratic system” is imposing over the aspirations of society. In Mexico the democratic system is gradually coming to be against society. This is tragic. What gives me hope, is that Mexican people are noticing it and as a consequence, if reforms that authorizes independent candidates or ways of limiting the power of the political parties are not passed in the short term, the legitimacy of this democratic system is going to erode.

A “democratic” Mexico like this reminds me more of places like pre revolutionary Vietnam or Cuba or democracies as such as the Egypt of President Mubarak, all of them defined by their lack of legitimacy.

No comments:

Post a Comment