The reinvention of the State in the face of civil society in Mexico

 The reinvention of the State in the face of civil society in Mexico

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

During the Salinas administration, the State was dismantled in the name of quality, efficiency and North American integration. The neoliberal era continued to cross time under those flags. After almost forty years, the results were terrible

As the change of government approaches in our country, the opposition to the Fourth Transformation structures the risks of the reforms promoted by López Obrador as a legacy of his political and social commitments.

The disappearance of autonomous organizations at the local and national level seems imminent; if the reform of the Judicial Branch is enough to shake the structures of the neoliberal oligarchy, with the disappearance of the civil spaces that structured the transition via competitive elections, the State shakes off foreign bodies that took away its power and sovereignty.

The changes generate uncertainty, tremendous expectations and doubts regarding the historical stature of some characters; It is true that profound changes do not depend only on those elected but on ordinary people who can cause alarm in critics.

During the Salinas administration, the State was dismantled in the name of quality, efficiency and North American integration. The neoliberal era continued to cross time under those flags. After almost forty years, the results were terrible.

With the arrival of López Obrador, the intention was to restructure state power and return to the interventionist and corrective dimension that corresponds to political society par excellence.

Is the Mexican State recovering and strengthening? It is still early to say so.

After the unjust North American intervention, it is clear that public institutions lack respect abroad and national strength is not considered under any formal criteria by the powerful neighbor to the north.

However, the union of the groups and parties that make up the Fourth Transformation intend to remedy, in some way, the neoliberal counter-reforms promoted during almost six six-year terms.

The architecture of the historical rupture that is intended seems titanic, it is not a return to the past but a liberation of the State from the future; it could also be Mexico's Armageddon.

The Morena reforms have to be so that the ideas of its political proposal are carried out, if the fourth transformation does not intend to be a banal populism but the Mexican resurgence, the opportunity has its doors open.

As always, History will point out who was at the level of the demands and circumstances.

The theory of the State at the end of neoliberalism

 The theory of the State at the end of neoliberalism

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

Are the autonomous bodies and intermediate bodies part of the State? In a strict sense the answer is affirmative, but it is also important to consider the subordinate position in this regard. Suddenly it becomes urgent to review the theory of the State because in the new defensive doctrine of autonomous and independent organizations, everything is being confused in a malicious way.

What is the obsessive sense of pointing out that autonomous, independent, decentralized or public bodies are more State than government? In the past, it was an administrative matter to change the names of organizations of this type, their disappearance or creation. A truly serious thing would be the disappearance of the government, since the autonomous organisms would not have the capacity to generate governability or order, authority, legitimacy and control. These organisms are not important to unite the country or to contribute to the political system.

The discussion is important to establish because there is serious malice on the part of constitutionalists and political scientists attached to the PRIANRD and increasingly distant from scientific analysis. Cesar Cansino was not wrong when he wrote about the death of political science. In recent times, the theory of the neoliberal state will end up considering that the nation is also imaginary.

The false civilist, autonomist, pseudo-democratic and unfortunately anti-Mexican discourse; hides an authoritarian, reactionary, conservative and pro-Nazi streak. There is no liberal or anarchist thought in them, they are old and new conservatives. Reason why his real interest is to destroy the Mexican State.

The new architects of the public space are constructing paths of anti-state rhetoric that they pass off, paradoxically, as statists. During the prolonged neoliberal night, it was maintained with authoritarian dogmatism that there was no more important issue than diminishing the State, cornering it and making it transparent by all possible means. Made. Was it useful for something? Do you remember Enrique Peña Nieto? The results are plain to see, neoliberalism dismantled the Mexican state and created a welfare state for oligarchic businessmen, brought Mexican society to its knees in the face of the powers that be, and established a golden bureaucracy expert in collusion and political concertation. All of the above was carried out based on the argument of the Lilliputian dwarfism of the Mexicans and the benign civilizing work of the market. His methodology only allowed the return of the PRI. And they keep talking about the PRI State as the best.

The Peñanietista six-year term was the concrete result of that neoliberal dogma, for this reason the society decided to change the political economic model in 2018. The society chose to rebuild the State of the Mexican revolution and limit the power of the hegemonic blocks, mafias, businessmen and groups of interest.

The autonomous organizations were constituted as facades of an invisible power that dedicated itself to looting and corrupting all the structures of the Mexican State. The first people responsible for the mud on democracy and the terrible populism were the neoliberals. Instead of continuing to defend the islands of corruption and looting that autonomous organizations represent, the best thing to do would be to propose a new State model, a post-neoliberal State.

The perspective of autonomous and decentralized organizations in the 4T

 The perspective of autonomous and decentralized organizations in the 4T

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

The history of the neoliberal era in Mexico could have a prologue that states: "Once upon a time there was a State...,". As much as liberal democrat political scientists raise the issue of transparency, civil society, public sphere and human rights, etc.; as a conquest of the neoliberalist stage, the truth is that the indicators and the popular conscience do not allow them to lie anymore. The international organizations that measure the quality of democracy, governance and human development have been there for more than a decade. The destruction of the State in Mexico corresponds to neoliberalism. David Collier, Menno Vellinga and Guillermo O'Donnell each built compilations during these decades to talk about the paradigm shift that the state conception of the neoliberals meant.

When President Vicente Fox pointed out that the country could be managed like a company, this reflected the managerial and economic vision that was adopted to build public policies from the vantage points of the new public administration (for example: Ramón Muñoz Gutiérrez, Eduardo Sojo and Ernesto Derbez). The managerial perspective, like the technocratic one, was a resounding failure. The Mexican State cannot be rebuilt if the intention is to destroy it.

In accordance with the basic notes of constitutional law and political science, the government headed by Morena and the Fourth Transformation are rebuilding the State, although due to the historical gap this is a setback for some clueless people, or else, the consolidation of Bolivarian Chavismo.

The State is the legal, political, economic and even ideological configuration; that a society chooses to coexist and govern itself. Autonomous organizations and civil society do not appear anywhere in the classical theory of the state. The islands that the neoliberals developed to maintain an influence do not protect society at all, they only constitute a distinctive element of the Welfare State for the oligarchy that the members of the red circle and organic intellectuals of the business and religious right yearn for.

The social doctrine of the Catholic Church must be put into dialogue with Carl Schmitt, who they love. Is that the State that PRIANRD wants?

The Mexican State has faced its enemies since the Constitution of 1857 and, mainly, the Constitution of 1917. Neither the INE nor the INAI are indispensable for the Mexican State. Defending the juarista and revolutionary spirit of the positivist constructs that give us homeland and freedom, is the task that deserves to be highlighted.