The injection of energy and vitality into the Mexican presidential campaign by the student movement #YoSoy132, with elecion day on 1 July, raises a number of questions about where recent events may be headed. The central pillar of this diverse and, at times, inchoate mobilisation remains the campaign against media corruption allied with concern over electoral fraud linked to the Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI) and its candidate Enrique Peña Nieto supported by Televisa, as detailed in my previous blog post on the struggle for democracy in Mexico.
For the movement itself, a protest outside Televisa Chapultepec in Mexico City unfolded on June 13, which crowns a series of demonstrations including the prominent march along Paseo de la Reforma to El Ángel de la Independencia, pictured. This recent protest, following assemblies at key public universities including the Universidad Nacional Autonóma de México (UNAM), was packed with important symbolism.
The ghosts of the past haunting the present that have been called forth by #YoSoy132 include the massacre of some 500 students by the Mexican state on 2 October 1968 at Tlatelolco; the Corpus Christi Massacre on 10 June 1971 at the hands of a state-financed paramilitary group known as Los Halcones; the repression of the San Salvador Atenco mobilisation, known as the ‘Popular Front in Defence of the Land’, in 2006; and the greatest electoral fraud in the history of the country in the form of the 1988 election of Carlos Salinas de Gortari.
This week, at the Televisa Chapultepec meeting, some of the constituent elements of #YoSoy132 affirmed the move toward a wider ‘citizens project’ against media corruption. The aim is to ‘Turn off the TV and turn on the truth’ as part of a collective mobilisation throughout society. As reported in La Jornada (14 June 2012), the meeting ended with the chants of ‘We are 132; we are all 132’.
YoSoy132 by Yoyis
For intellectuals such as Enrique Semo, the aim has been to highlight the national dimensions of #YoSoy132. Writing for Proceso in a succinct essay entitled, ‘Momento crucial’ (10 June 2012), he highlights his anticipation of the student movement as an independent subject rallying against the “limits of neoliberalism”. Once again, Mexican students are embedded in the deep roots of national conditions but with clear global parallels including this time the indignados in Spain, student protests in Britain and Quebec, Occupy Wall Street, and the Arab Spring as symbolised by the transition in Egypt and the taking of Tahrir Square. The ‘cage of fear’ in Mexico has been broken by its students. According to Semo,
the process has opened new possibilities for social movement that inevitably coincide with the discourse but, above all, with the practical position and integrity of the candidate of the Progressive Movement, Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO).
But more caution is cast by Patrick Cuninghame, a professor at the Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana – Xochimilco in Mexico City, in his first interview on recent events. Truly energised by #YoSoy132 and fully aware that there are open horizons as to its future development and trajectory, he is nevertheless cautious of AMLO and the challenges ahead. As Cuninghame recognises, ‘there are major social and political divides within the movement that the forces of reaction are going to work hard on to divide in these upcoming weeks . . . So, let’s hope that the movement holds together from the attacks of the forces of reaction from both the right and the institutional left’.
Without abandoning the resources of hope necessary for political action, it remains to be seen whether this really is the commencement of a ‘Mexican Spring’ in challenging neoliberalism and what longevity, or form, it may take in the near future. The challenge remains one of strengthening anti-capitalist struggle against neoliberalism and envisioning whether the movement of #YoSoy132 can mobilise its own right to the city and democracy as a political class-based demand.
I think from the interview with Cuninghame, it is possible to see unfortunately the EZLN and the Other Campaign -like in 2006- have no capacity to articulate any meaningful political programme whatsoever and now trying to resist to not to get very enthusiastic about the student movement YoSoy132. I argue;
Firstly, as we can read from the interview, the anti-AMLO left is unable to formulate any concrete reason (apart from saying he chased the street vendors off from the Zocalo while he was mayor) why they are even ‘cautiously’ not discussing to support the candidacy of the left. Enrique Semo has a brilliant article on why they actually should support the candidate of the left (not Lopez Obrador himself but the alliance that he represents) and make an alliance with the parliamentary left (which he wrote in 2006 before AMLO lost the elections with the fraud).
Secondly, this political ineptitude has two immediate results for the Other Campaign. Firstly, the Other Campaign and EZLN (addition to not being able to give an explanation why the left should not support AMLO) are aware of the real threat posed by the presidency of the EPN (or in other words the reelection of Salinas Gortari) and I think they are feeling the danger of repeating the same mistake which they have committed in 2006. Secondly, left who is not sympathetic with AMLO and who does not trust him now inevitably finding itself supporting or at least sympathetic with the youth movement.
Thirdly, I think we should be clear about the fact that the political agenda of the student movement (who are very careful about not associating themselves with any candidate but at the same time vocally against to the PRI-PAN that leaves one candidate behind which is surely not Quadri) and AMLO is overlapping. AMLO, as he clearly stated in the second presidential debate that he does not have a Lula type programme, see the neoliberalism as the source of all Mexico’s problems and plus committed to end the neoliberal ideological hegemony through the media monopolies. The reaction of the big business to the fact that his campaign is getting momentum, the Televisa and TV Azteca covering of the movement, the CCE sponsored ‘AMLO is violent’ PANist TV spots, are the evidence of the seriousness of the challenge that has been posed against this hegemony.
Lastly, I think there is a further danger of embarrassment for EZLN, the Other Campaign and other radical non-parliamentary left if AMLO will not win the election in July. First of all, we should all be sure that the presidency of FCH will not be able to reach the success of the EPN-Salinas presidency in oppressing and paralysing the remaining left in Mexico (If the elimination of the street vendors in Zocalo can be an evidence for the neoliberal position of AMLO as Cuninghame argues, then the Atenco can tell us how will look like the conduct of EPN). This means that there is a huge possibility of EZLN being one of the direct victims if the oppressive regime of PRI returns. Secondly, they will be repeating the same mistake that they did in 2006, and thereby once again they will be a by-stander of a historical moment rather than a meaningful player of it.
Very briefly, I don’t think the EZLN or other anti-parliamentary left groups will be very relevant during this electoral process. The EZLN’s popularity declined dramatically after its stand in the 2006 elections. The question is whether they will change in any significant way from that experience, but the anti-parliamentary ideology is very hard to shake off. Ertan’s analysis of what could happen to that left with a PRI government is right: they would be much worse off than with an AMLO government.
Some very brief points.
1. Does anyone know the origins of the now ubiquitous term ‘spring’ to add to any kind of progressive political movement? I presume (although am not sure) if it is connected to the Prague Spring of 1968 – thus not a terribly good historical referent given what occurred, although perhaps all too accurate given the current situation in Egypt.
2. I think actually the EZLN have good reason to be suspicious of the PRD given the history of that party within Chiapas. Furthermore, I would not be dismissive of the role of anti-parliamentary/anti-statist tactics of political transformation.
3. Interesting symbolism about the movement congregating under the Estela de Luz – demonstrates the importance of Henri Lefebvre’s notion of ‘lived space’ and links well to your earlier discussions about the Monument to the Revolution and the potential for historical re-appropriation.
Chris, 1848 revolutions are often referred to as the Springtime of the Peoples, or the Spring of Nations; I believe that’s where the historical roots of the concept lie.