Echeverría, AMLO and Gelatine Populism
September 22, 2020
Diego Martin Velázquez Caballero
https://www.semanarioelreto.com/single-post/2020/09/22/Echeverr%C3%ADa-AMLO-y-el-Populismo-Gelatina
Why is the clique of President Luis Echeverría Álvarez still so important in the Mexican political system? Since the neoliberal modernization of our country began, the members of the Echeverrismo have manifested themselves as an independent political project that has been present, for and against, from the delamadridista administration to the current government. Carlos Salinas de Gortari pointed to Echeverrismo as the most reluctant and gloomy part of the transformation of the Mexican political system: the Nomenklatura.
Echeverrismo perfectly represents the diarchy between the Revolutionary Family and the Far Right in the Mexican political system. Although Carlos Fuentes affirmed that support for Luis Echeverría Álvarez was preferable instead of Fascism, this nomenklatura has the most violent methods of political control, the LEA's six-year term shows the high murderous training that a North American intelligence agent can have. the presidency of the republic.
The end of 1968 was an important time for the presidential succession of the 1964-1970 six-year term, within the Revolutionary Family there was a relentless struggle to occupy positions of power, Díaz Ordaz contemplated a communist operation in the country where the large intelligence centers of Russia and the United States, as well as old political cells of Latin American socialists. During his time at the Ministry of the Interior, before being President, Díaz Ordaz was characterized by being a hard-line boss, his objective was always to comply with the system, with the State; perhaps, these antecedents made him feel an exaggerated dangerousness of the youth demonstrations.
There are different versions of what happened on October 2, 1968 from the different positions of intellectuals and protagonists. Most point to the overt authoritarianism of Díaz Ordaz as the main cause, the few point to the students as the perpetrators, but another also points out that the student movement may have been manipulated to obtain benefits in the presidential succession.
For this tendency, it is the Secretary of the Interior who makes rigid decisions at critical moments of the conflict, which did not clarify the panorama of the President, on the contrary, they deplored him. Díaz Ordaz learned, shortly before the sad events in Tlatelolco, much of the truth and found in the crossing of the information that he himself made, clear signs of the mediatization of the movement in the merciless fight for the presidency.
It is Echeverría's loyalty to the black circle of the system that surprises the Revolutionary Family, demonstrating that he was capable of anything and thus being chosen as his successor. Echeverría knew how to use the controls, the confidence of the PRI structure and reached the luminosity of power. Echeverría was considered the only and fully responsible for the student massacre, since it fostered all that social and political environment to be favored politically and publicly during the presidential succession.
Echeverrismo is not an economic model but a style of government: gelatin populism. This ability to adapt, to take any form to remain in power, is due not only to the survival of this clique but even to reproduction. Porfirio Muñoz Ledo and Emilio Gamboa Patron are examples of this political pragmatism, the situation is more terrifying when the military, academic, religious and social side of the group is observed: MURO, Halcones, Compañera Esther, Emilio Uranga, Paramilitaries, Progressive Jesuits, Battalion Olympia, CIA. Sons of bitches.
The Technocracy, the business sector, the Left and the PAN, tried to make pacts with this clique to guarantee, they do, an economic model to start the transformation and the awakening of modernity in the country. Echeverrismo was with everyone and they betrayed everyone. In recent assassinations, the CIA-Ultra-Right-Nomenklatura triangle is useful to explain everything.
The 4T every day is more echeverista and less competent. Economic growth, modernization, political liberalism, and democracy are stifling. Even though it is possible to agree that the welfare state in Mexico is necessary, to dress the prince in his attire, it is also true that no economic strategy supports the politics of perversion. The decade of zero growth is more a product of a political style than an economic policy.
Although the LEA had some successes in the economic empowerment of the State, the subordination to the Revolutionary Patrimonial Family, is what generated the permanent economic crisis and the contagion of failure to the following models. Echeverrismo is the Santanismo of the nineteenth century. Even when Roderic Ai Camp speaks of a renewal of the power elites in Mexico, this has not happened, the Revolutionary Axis-UNAM-ITESM remains the same. No rupture has been generated that allows the replacement of the Revolutionary Patrimonial Family.
No historical breakouts in 4T. As in the case of Porfirio Muñoz Ledo, it only continues to be rhetoric. Liberalism, Democratic Consolidation, Development, Secular State, Social Welfare, Sovereignty, etc., are only words of the Seducer of the Homeland.