What can be done with a polarised Mexico after the elections?
Volunteer Grecia Ricart (front) raises her fist signaling silence during survivor rescue work in a collapsed building after an earthquake at Mexico City, on Sept. 22, 2017. Picture: [e]David de la Paz/Xinhua /PA Images. All rights reserved
This article forms part of the special “Mexico Elections 2018: depolarisation and disinformation” produced in partnership with Revista Nueva Sociedad in the framework of our project #EleccionesAbiertas2018
The political parties of Mexico seem to have endorsed the triumph of the divide
et impera (divide and rule) political strategy ahead of citizens taking to the polls on the 1st
of July.
Polarisation in the political and civil sphere in Mexico increases on
a daily basis, only days from elections that will determine a new president,
new governors, 628 legislators and more that 17,000 local politicians.
On social media, arguments and disagreements
between friends and family are played out in the public eye. The reason for such disputes? The election of
a presidential candidate.
Selecting a governor, especially if that individual is to rule the country as president for the next six years, is a
crucial decision. But has this bad blood, and these broken ties, been of any benefit to Mexico
throughout this campaign?
We’re all acting as if the country will come to an
end on the 1st of July, but we’re conveniently forgetting that
afterwards, what will remain is a country that we must keep building the
following day.
Polarisation doesn’t just poison the workplace, but also friendships and family relationships. It undermines democracy not just in the context of the elections but also out with them.
There are many legitimate reasons as to why
polarisation exists: it is through the very process of distinguishing ourselves
from "the other" that we create an identity, and that is why we attack whoever
calls that identity into question.
But who does this benefit? Ultimately, the
parties and the candidates. It benefits them because we put on their t-shirts,
we defend them, we distance ourselves from those we think differently and from
critical voices that question their actions. We shut ourselves off in an echo-chamber
with others who think like ourselves.
Polarisation doesn’t just poison the
workplace, but also friendships and family relationships. It undermines
democracy not just in the context of the elections but also out with them. It
makes us forget that election day is just a small fragment of the huge
democratic exercise. Everyday political participation is what really gives
citizens the power to own our space, and this is true democracy (demos =
people, cracia = power).
It is for these reasons that Mexicans
exceeded the authorities on the 19th of September when an earthquake
that measured 7.1 on the Richter scale ravaged Mexico City and Puebla. That
day, Mexicans didn’t think in political colours, but about the neighbour down
the road who was trapped under blocks of cement and rubble.
Fists rose to the air and silence reigned.
There were no words, just silence that sharpened our ears and ignited hope. A
fist in the air meant hope, it was a sign that the rescue workers had found a survivor underneath the rubble.
People reacted before politicians (for whom
we’re currently tearing each other apart in order to defend or attack them),
before the army, and before the Red Cross. The ground was still moving when we
realised we had to get out there and lift-up the rubble. The death toll was not
yet public when anyone who could offer their help to ensure the toll stopped
rising did so.
The owner of the tool shop on Calle Sonora took out his entire
inventory to the streets (from hammers to wheelbarrows) to assist the rescue
efforts. Or the street food vendor who gave his food away to the volunteers so
that they didn’t collapse out of exhaustion. There were even mariachi bands who
took to the streets with their music, to ignite the tired hopes of those
battling against the clock to help as many as they could.
There were even mariachi bands who took to the streets with their music, to ignite the tired hopes of those battling against the clock to help as many as they could.
On that very day, when 400 people took to the
streets of Mexico City, there was more democracy than there has been throughout
this electoral campaign. From now up until election day, will we be conscious of
this? Will we remember the calls made for people to stay inside because there
were already too many in the streets?
The 19th of September was a lesson
in democracy, when the collective will overcame that of the individual. It was
nine months ago, but throughout this electoral race, it has seemed more like
nine years.
Polarisation, on the contrary, is completely
antidemocratic, as it is based on the invalidation of the opinions, the
feelings and aspirations of “the other” in order to privilege one’s own.
Mexico, a different story
The Mexican history books tell us that we
became independent from Spain in the year 1821 (after 11 years of war) and that
we were freed from our last dictator at the beginning of the 20th
century.
However, whoever has the opportunity to dig deeper into Mexican
history will see that the National Revolutionary Party (PRI) arrived to power
in 1929 and the “perfect dictatorship” as coined by Mario Vargas Llosa was
established.
The PRI dominated Mexican politics until
2000, when political alternation finally arrived in Mexico after seven decades
of one-party hegemony. Although Mexico in technical terms constituted a
democratic republic almost two centuries ago, for many that saw the situation
from up-close, democracy is a novelty that is less than 20 years young.
In Mexico, there are areas where the levels of development are similar to Norway or New Zealand (Mexico City and Monterrey) and others where the levels of development are closer to Djibouti or the Democratic Republic of Congo (Guerrero, Chihuahua).
In other words, being sceptical, doubting the
power of the voter, is not a mere tale from another dimension. There are
reasons for the mistrust. However, there are no reasons to live in a state of
doubt.
One way to maintain polarisation is to vote
thinking of the candidate that strives to maintain the status quo, while 60 million Mexicans
live below the poverty line (without access to adequate food, housing or an
education), while 25 thousand Mexicans are murdered every year and 99% of these
homicides are unpunished, while the inequality gap negotiates between two very
different worlds only united by their birth certificates and the national flag.
Polarisation doesn’t just exist because it
represents two or more visions, but because there is more than a country within
Mexico. In Mexico, there are areas where the levels of development are similar
to Norway or New Zealand (Mexico City and Monterrey) and others where the
levels of development are closer to Djibouti or the Democratic Republic of
Congo (Guerrero, Chihuahua) according to the UN Human Development Index.
One of the reasons for this polarisation is
that there are two different Mexicos, but accentuating this with violent
communications during the electoral period doesn’t solve anything, on the
contrary, it only increases the gaps.
In order for the distances not to distance
themselves so much, we can’t expect “the other” to change their position. If we
really want to reduce polarisation, it’s important to recognise the value of
the opinions of others, the significance of divergence of thought, the
enrichment of diversity in all its shapes and forms.
What’s more, it’s important to not just
validate the opinion of “the other” but to value it (would this be so much to
ask?), to not face the ballot thinking of proposals that offer the biggest
personal benefit but those which can further the collective good. Only through
furthering the collective good can nations develop themselves.
It is the terrible inequalities, ingrained in our society for centuries, that strengthens the idea that “the other” is a dehumanised being, unable to understand their own needs.
“If the rights I have are not available to all then they are not rights but privileges” says Mexican political scientist José Merino.
And it’s true. It is the terrible inequalities, ingrained in our society for
centuries, that strengthens the idea that “the other” is a dehumanised being,
unable to understand their own needs. Is it not the case though that this only
brings to light an inability to walk in another’s shoes?
Polarisation: a breeding ground for fake news
Fake news has been around since the beginning
of time, but what has turned them into a danger for society has been their
speedy virilisation over social media.
In the past, a fake news story about a
candidate (regarding electoral terrain) could take days, months or perhaps even
years to read a wide audience. Now, we see rumours elevated to the same level
as absolute truths in a matter of minutes thanks to sharing functions on social media.
Polarisation and fake news work as a team. One
feeds the other so that they can continue to grow. Many who share fake news
stories are conscious of their lack of informational reliability or are at
least unsure if they’re true or not, however this doesn’t stop them from
sharing as doing so reaffirms their own beliefs.
Like never before, these up and coming elections have seen the creation of online portals and Facebook pages dedicated solely to spreading fake news.
Fake news lives on thanks to polarisation,
and polarisation is reaffirmed through the rumours that spread like wildfire
through social networks, weaving between both a bridge that increases the
distances between members of society.
Like never before, these up and coming
elections have seen the creation of online portals and Facebook pages dedicated
solely to spreading fake news.
The initiative Verificado 2018, the biggest fact checking
initiative in Mexico with around 90 members (among which are media outlets and
civil organisations) have given themselves the task of disproving fake news on
social media, so that they can avoid the scenario where fake news plays a
significant role in the elections by inclining the result towards a particular
candidate.
The day after
Our democratic right won’t be exercised on
the 1st of July as though it’s the product of one day of work.
Democracy is in a permanent state of construction and it will continue in that
state even after the elections have passed.
On the 2nd of July, when
all Mexicans wake up without a reason to fight each other because political
differences will have been left at the polls, we’ll awaken with a hangover of
hatred, of otherness, from which we should be able to wake up but it would be
much easier if the reconciliation started from now.
With this idea in mind, a group of Mexican
public figures, among them actors, journalists, academics and cinematographers,
have called for national reconciliation through the project “El día después”.
Some of the individuals included are Diego Luna, Gael García Bernal, Guillermo
del Toro, Lydia Cacho, Julieta Venegas, Alejandro González Iñárritu, Valeria
Luiselli, and many more.
The initiative invites Mexicans to join the
movement and champion the following 12 points:
- Peace and tolerance are not a dream: they
should be our reality. - No to racism and classism. No to a country
that excludes those with disabilities. We are all equal and we should thus be
treated equally. The “other” is not your enemy, the “other” is your companion. - I exercise
a critical attitude towards those who govern us, regardless of my political
affiliation and of theirs. - Corruption kills, ravishes and divides. I do
not tolerate it and I report those who engage with it. - Poverty is a form of violence. I commit to
helping combat inequality in all its shapes and forms. - I should listen to indigenous communities and
make sure that their decisions and their right to autonomy are respected. - Gender equality is a vital foundation for a
fair society. I fight for social and economic equality for women. I oppose any
kind of violence directed towards them. - I respect the gender identity and sexual
orientation of every individual. We should all have access to the same rights. - I show solidarity with undocumented migrants.
I defend the rights of my fellow countrymen/women on the other side of the
border, in the same way that I defend and welcome those who migrate to Mexico
or though Mexican territory. - I support education, culture, science and art
as the fundamental pillars upon which a country can be built. - Respecting the environment is respecting
myself. - I defend freedom of expression in all its
forms. Freedom is a right that I construct and demand.
In just a few days, more than 30 thousand
people signed the petition to commit to the points above through the page: http://eldiadespues.mx/
This mini-documentary of less than 12 minutes
speaks of what the majority of Mexicans really want, although at times we forget: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U9f0k_8W8wM