Politics in Mexico throughout the course of history has been hostile, to say the least. Like many previously authoritarian regimes, Mexico’s transition into democracy was hard fought. Still today, Mexico’s political system is characterized by political corruption as seen through the influence of the drug cartels and their corporatism and electoral fraud. It is these characteristics that make Mexico a valuable study for comparative politics. While studying Mexico one sees a country that has grown relatively little (due to the aforementioned characteristics of its political system) and is hardly a democracy. The influence of Mexican drug cartels is widespread throughout Mexico. This influence is evident on a continuing basis. Many top officials within Mexican agencies are periodically headlining global news stories when they are exposed for being under the guidance of a drug trafficking operation/cartel. Stephen D. Morris, professor at Middle Tennessee State University, authored an article titled “Corruption, Drug Trafficking, and Violence in Mexico” which illustrates the severity of...
Nevertheless, the movie undoubtedly mirrors many of the current socio-political time in which the film was made. The title itself refers to a famous quotation from the Nobel Prize-winning author Mario Vargas Llosa, who once referred to Mexico's ruling party, the PRI, as a "camouflaged dictatorship," thereby making it "the perfect dictatorship." In this way, the movie is directly acknowledging its relevance to modern Mexico and its politics and is clearly very self-aware. The plot itself was based on the real life perceived Televisa controversy during the 2012 Mexican presidential election, in which Mexican citizens believe that the media was unfairly showing a preference for the PRI candidate, Enrique Peña Nieto. While it could be argued that the movie takes this idea of favoring one candidate over another to extreme lengths (although perhaps it isn’t showing anything unduly unrealistic – there’s no real way to know) and hyperbolizes the effect of the media in Mexican politics, there is clearly a strong element of truth and reality there. The movie would not have had nearly the same effect if it was not at least somewhat grounded in reality. And I think that, while the media does not have absolute and final control over politics, they do to a very large and important extent and this extends far beyond the movie alone, especially in today’s age of fake
Mexican Lives is a rare piece of literature that accounts for the human struggle of an underdeveloped nation, which is kept impoverished in order to create wealth for that of another nation, the United States. The reader is shown that the act of globalization and inclusion in the world’s economies, more directly the United States, is not always beneficial to all parties involved. The data and interviews, which Hellman has put forth for her readers, contain some aspect of negativity that has impacted their lives by their nation’s choice to intertwine their economy with that of the United States. Therefore it can only be concluded that the entering into world markets, that of Mexico into the United States, does not always bring on positive outcomes. Thus, one sees that Mexico has become this wasteland of economic excrement; as a result it has become inherently reliant on the United States.
The United States has no more important foreign relation ship than that of which it enjoys with Mexico, and vice versa. These two countries share interwoven societies and economies. Although there have been disagreements and turbulence between the two countries, which partnership is without these? The Strength of each country’s democracy is fundamental to the other’s. This relationship that the two countries share directly affects that lives of millions of Mexican and United States citizens everyday. Recently these two countries have become even more unified than ever before. Tackling issues such as Border Control, Countering Narcotics, Dealing with multiple Law enforcement agencies, Human Rights laws, trade and development, etc. There are many issues that they are mutually interested in and must deal with. Yet, there are some vast differences in which these two countries are run. There are also many similarities, which we must take into account. Both Democratic Governments have similar structures, containing a legislative, judicial, and executive branch. Yet, these structures are very different internally, containing specific duties that the other country’s branch may not have.
For the 71 years that the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) was in power, Mexico saw great political, social and economic upheaval. This can be seen in the evolution of the PRI party, whose reign over Mexican society came at the expense of true democracy. “A party designed for power, the PRI's mechanisms for success involved a combination of repressive measures. The party professed no specific ideology, enabling it to adapt to changing social, economic and political forces over time. It attached itself virtually all aspects of civil society, and in this way, it become the political extension and tool of the government.” In 2000, however, the PRI’s loss of its monopoly on political power and institutional corruption gave rise to inter-cartel violence that was created in the political void left after the PAN won the national presidential election. These conditions gave rise to the Zetas: a new type of cartel that changed the operational structure of previous drug cartels. The Zetas operate in a new militant structure associated with a higher brand of violence, which has led it to branch out beyond a traditional drug smuggling enterprise common under the PRI government. Simply put, the electoral defeat of the PRI in 2000 was supposed to usher in a more democratic era in Mexican politics. Instead, the PRI party’s defeat created a state of chaos that gave rise to inter-cartel violence and the birth of the Zetas cartel.
...nuel Antonio, Newman, Edward. Democracy in Latin America: (Re)Constructing Political Society. The United Nations University Press, 2001. New York, N.Y.
During this time, Mexico’s political elite began to divide into two opposing factions: conservatives and liberals. The conservatives favored a highly centralized government and wanted to maintain the Catholic Church’s power and control of educational facilities.
Serrano, M. (1998). Governing mexico: Political parties. London: The Institute of latin American Studies University of London.
The Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI), Partido Revolucionario Institucional, was known as the ‘official’ party of Mexico. The PRI ruled the government, with little to no opposition from 1929 to the new millennium. The party held a power almost equal to the actual President of Mexico, who naturally came from the PRI party. The PRI was founded by Plutarco Elías Calles [1] in 1929, originally named the National Revolutionary Party (PNR or Partido Nacional Revolucionario), then Partido de la Revolucion Mexicana (PRM or Party of the Mexican Revolution) by Lázaro Cárdenas in 1938[2]. The current name PRI was given to the group by Manuel Ávila Camacho in 1946. The party was mixed with involvement from some small political and military influences along with several local labor unions and peasant groups, the party served as a group that organized and contained political competition among the leaders of the various revolutionary groups. PRI’s role was to stop the power struggles that were occurring during the Mexican Revolution, if the issues of power were all solved within the party the negative effects of possible armed rebellions and congressional gridlock would not happen in Mexico.
Mexico has a long history of cartels the deaths, drugs and weapon trafficking is in all time high increasing year by year. “Mexico's gangs have flourished since the late 19th century, mostly in the north due to their proximity to towns along the U.S.-Mexico border. But it was the American appetite for cocaine in the 1970s that gave Mexican drug cartels immense power to manufacture and transport drugs across the border. Early Mexican gangs were primarily situated in border towns where prostitution, drug use, bootlegging and extortion flourished” (Wagner). They keep themselves armed and ready with gun supplies shipped from the U.S, taking control of the drug trades. The violence is spilling so out of control that they overthrew the Mexican government.
Over the last several decades, violence has consumed and transformed Mexico. Since the rise of dozens of Mexican cartels, the Mexican government has constantly been fighting an ongoing war with these criminal organizations. The cartel organizations have a primary purpose of managing and controlling illegal drug trafficking operations in Central America and South America to the United States. Violence on a massive and brutal scale has emerged due to the nature of the illegal drug trade. Because the drug trade is vastly widespread, cartels are often fighting one another and competing in business. Mexican authorities count at least 12 major cartels, but also talk of an untold numbers of smaller splinter groups. (Taipei Times). Five cartels from Mexico have risen to become the extremely powerful amongst all the drug organizations operating in Mexico. The Guadalajara Cartel, the Sinaloa Cartel, the Tijuana Cartel, the Juarez Cartel, and the Gulf Cartel. These organizations, along with other distinguished Mexican cartels, have plagued Mexico with violence, terror, and fear due to the essence and nature of illegal drug trafficking.
For thirty-four years Mexico existed under the dictatorship of Porfirio Diaz. During this time Mexico’s industries flourished however the Mexican people remained deep in poverty with little to no opportunities for educational growth. The Mexican revolution was the result of Diaz’s fall from leadership, the peons need for independence, and resulted in a new beginning for Mexico. The Mexican Revolution began due to Porfirio Diaz not allowing anyone to have a voice or say in whatever it is they must do. The people of Mexico were upset because everyone was in poverty because only a select few people actually had money because Porfirio Diaz allowed them to those select few where also the ones in power behind Porfirio. Due to all of the poverty and the poor not having a say in anything they do or have to do it caused an uprising of the peasants led by Emeliano Zapata and Pancho Villa which are greatly known for their effort against the corruption and poverty in Mexico. Although Porfirio Diaz had brought some great things to help Mexico flourish in the industrial form and economical form but for the normal working class citizens that aren’t good friends with Diaz or know him on a personal level are left broke and are left with no way to get away from their financial problems because Diaz doesn’t allow them to make enough money to prosper in anything they do. Diaz’s way of ruling Mexico was so bad that it didn’t even allow the majority of the people of Mexico to get an education because they couldn’t afford it. The only people to benefit from the new rail road systems and factories were the rich hacienda land owners. The rich hacienda owners were also the people who were basically in control over the peons they had control over them as ...
Mexico is a country that is led by a federation government which is democratic, representative, and republican based on presidential system since Constitution of 1917. The constitution has government in three levels: federal Union, state, and municipal governments. Officials at three levels are elected by voters. Mexico is fifth largest country in Americas and most populous country in world that speaks Spanish. Mexico is currently in a transformation to help the country grow both economically and politically with the current president taking extreme steps to move ahead.
Beith, Malcolm. (2013, September 24). The current state of Mexico's many drug cartels. CTC Sentinal
The history of political instability in Mexico and its need for revolution is very complex and dates back to the colonization of Mexico by the Spaniards in the 1500s. However, many aspects of the social situation of Mexico when the Revolution broke out can be attributed to the thirty-year dictatorship of President Porfrio Diaz, prior to 1911. The Revolution began in November of 1910 in an effort to overthrow the Diaz dictatorship. Under the Diaz presidency, a small minority of people, primarily relatives and friends, were in ...
The PRI party that had run Mexico for 71 years by using an unfair system of corruption was defeated, but the remnants they left behind are creating more challenges for democratic consolidation. In 2000, af...