Sliding Scale Contentment
As I think I’ve mentioned before, Karen was the first blogger I met in person. (Last night I was to meet a group of webloggers here in Monterrey, but sadly the bar we were going to meet at had been closed down for a month.) You would never guess it from her weblog which is minimalist and restrained, but meeting Karen is like walking into an atom bomb. She has an opinion about everything: design, programming, politics, literature, culture, media, religion, psychology, art, nueroscience, knitting, photography, you name it. She’s like an audible encyclopedia without a mute button. Which, depending on your point of view, is either a good or bad thing.
I was delighted and only wished I was able to absorb more of what she said. A few nuggets of wisdom persist though and one is what she had to say about wealth.
“Our financial contentment,” she started, “is based on a sliding scale. No matter how much money you make, it’ll never be enough because you start comparing yourself to those who have more.”
I thought that was pretty smart. And it reminds me of a comment Peter left a few posts ago saying we could easily live a comfortable life – according to the standard and comforts of a century ago – by just working 3 – 4 hours each day. So seriously, why don’t we?
Pinche Populismo
This is all on my mind because last night we had our first “employee fiesta” at my new job. Most of the other teachers are in their late 20’s, early 30’s, well traveled, and well read. When the conversation turned to politics, I was surprised by how conservative every single person was. HP woulda had an ear to ear grin.
A Venezuelan – English teacher by day, self-described rock star at night – explained that he left Venezuela because Chavez had made life unbearable there. He went on to describe how he risked his life in an anti-Chavez march while hundreds of people were gunned down by government soldiers and hired assassins. He said the government then covered up many of the homicides.
I have no reason to doubt what he says, but what really surprised me was the immediate reaction of everyone in the room: “It’s exactly what’s happening here in Mexico with this damned Lopez Obredor and his damned populism.”
Mexican Politics in One Paragraph
Since the Mexican Revolution wrestled power away from the authoritative dictator, Porfirio Diaz in the 1920’s, it has been ruled by one party – the PRI – in a pseudo-democratic system saturated with corruption and fraudulent elections. In 2000, after 80 years of the same bullshit and five years of a combined indigenous revolt and economic recession, Mexicans were sufficiently disillusioned to vote into office the current president, Vincente Fox of the conservative party, PAN. The whole country was abuzz with optimism at the beginning of the term, but for a tome of reasons, that optimism is now gone and much most of Mexico has lost faith in Fox and the party he represents. Which brings us to today’s political muscling in anticipation of next year’s presidential elections.
Te Presento “El Peje“
With a loss of faith in Fox and a lingering distrust of the “old guard” of the PRI, the leftist mayor of Mexico City, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, was (until yesterday) the obvious favorite in next year’s upcoming presidential election. But, reminiscent of Santiago, Chile in 1970, the Mexican business community started shitting its pants over the prospect of a populist candidate.
And so it did some scheming:
In a 3-1 vote, the panel said López Obrador should stand trial for ignoring a court order to halt building a road. The move hands the final decision, and the mayor’s political future, to Congress, which is expected to vote next week. A “yes” vote takes López Obrador out of the 2006 presidential elections, as the Constitution bans candidates from running if they have been prosecuted for a crime in the previous two years, even if they were found not guilty.1
Now talk about some silly rules. Remember that old MTV program where running captions would list all the various state and federal laws broken throughout the music video? This is worse. The idea that you can prevent a candidate from running just by bringing a charge against her/him regardless of their guilt is ridiculous. This is obviously pure politics … and dirty politics.
“This is the worst case of electoral fraud since 1988,” said storeowner Graciela Vegas, 43, referring to the presidential elections where the PRD founder Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas lead the vote count until the computer system crashed to be rebooted with a PRI victory and Carlos Salinas as president. “But this time we didn’t even get a chance to vote they stopped our champion before he’d even registered as a candidate.”
So many people are plotting against Obrador for the same reason he has gathered so much support:
His opponents call López Obrador’s social programs that give food vouchers to the elderly and single mothers “populist,” pointing out that he has increased the capital’s debt to fund them. The mayor’s policies, combined with his hard talk about what he will do, make investors nervous. Merrill Lynch researcher Carlos Peyrelongue wrote in a report: “Concerns by Mexican investors have been increasing in the last few months as a result of (López Obrador’s) rhetoric confronting the interests of the poor versus those of the rich, and due to the uncertainty as to what economic program and cabinet he would choose if elected president.”
Obrador still believes in the New Deal idea of a government caring for its citizens. And not just some of its citizens, but all of them. This goes against the central tenet of foreign investors and everyone who depends on foreign investment to write their paychecks (such as the entire city of Monterrey)
Back to the Work Party
So I probably shouldn’t have been surprised at the work party when everyone insisted that Obrador would ruin the country and send it back 30 years. Even my girlfriend is against Obrador – she says his support of the unions is too strong and that workers will become lazy and keep demanding more and more.
I wasn’t in the mood to jump into the foray, but I did ask my co-workers one simple question when they kept referring to populism as if it made their crotch itch. I simply asked what populism was and they fought to reply – without hesitation – that populism was government by the majority and that in Mexico the majority had no idea what was good for them; that they were backward people who needed to be educated first in how free markets work and how they would be benefited.
I mention this because, though as of late the Latin American left seems to be making a comeback, there is a strong and young constituency that is absolutely against social spending and the calls for equality. Development to them means opening markets, not providing health care and social security.
I started this post off mentioning Karen’s idea of sliding scale financial contentment because that’s exactly what is at the foundation of the thinking of everyone at my work party last night. These are well traveled people and well informed people and their idea of success is to elevate Mexico to the same standard of living (freeways, malls, cars, clothes) as they’ve come across in their travels throughout the United States and Mexico. That is happening here in Monterrey and there are several neighborhoods, shopping areas, and commercial malls that are just as extravagant as anything you’d find in San Diego, Seattle, or New York. But it’s coming at the cost of leaving millions of rural and southern Mexicans in poverty without offering programs that enable social mobility or access to education and improving livelihood.
One small example of this is that the import tax on corn syrup (known as the soda tax) will expire in 2008 and send thousands of sugar farmers in Vera Cruz and Yucatan into bankruptcy. (Mexican sodas are still made with sugar while American sodas are made with corn syrup) Agriculture is one of the unfortunate victims of free trade, but these sugar farmers (who have been cultivating the same crop for generations) need to be trained in a new crop (such as bamboo) or a new skill or else they will be bought out by foreign investors who will bring in Maquilas and former proud land-owning farmers will be forced to work 8 – 10 hour days making uniforms or auto parts.
Obrador would come up with a government program to help train those sugar farmers where as the PAN and PRI would toss it aside as collateral damage in exchange for a continued inflow of foreign investment.
Lopez Obrador’s fate still hangs in the hands of congress, but if votes are along party lines – which they almost always are here – it looks like he’ll be forced out of the 2006 election.
Wow, thx for the info. I don’t know much about Obrador, but now I can’t wait to read more. I’ll ask my cousins in Monterrey what they think of him. I think they consider themselves pretty progressive, so it’ll be interesting to see what they think.
What bar was closed? Did you meet any of the regio bloggers? Just curious… As a ‘populist’ I can tell you that I support Lopez Obrador, and if not him, there will surely be another leftist in the future of Mexico that will bring about this change that’s sweeping all across Latinamerica. The only thing that concerns is that we’ll end up with more displaced Latinamerican RIQUILLOS over here in the States, and it’s starting to stink. If I could only tell you the stories about our burgeoning anti-Chavista Venezuelan community here in Dallas, they make me want to fly to Venezuela and go kiss Chavez’ hand. I don’t care much about politics, but I do beleive it’s time for these ‘ignorant’ masses to decide for themselves and kick some ass.
Oops, I forgot to add that Celtics was the bar that closed down last month and that it looks like we’re gonna start meeting at Nueva Luna (k fresa no?) – I still haven’t met any regio bloggers. In fact, I still haven’t met any Regios at all other than co-workers, my students, and my girlfriend’s friends.
I first heard about Obrador when I was in DF in August. I was intrigued and wanted to know if he was going to be allowed to run. But, by the time I got back and got into the swing of things with school I forgot all about Obrador. Thanks for the update, this makes me think a lot about a conversation Alfonso and I had recently about “progress” and what happens to the most vulnerable in the new economies.
I read this post and re-read it and then decided to wait a while before commenting. I still feel as that I cannot begin to express the emotion I am having. I expect some people to not support unions fully but Laura?! It could be that I don’t think unions (true democraticly lead unions) can be bad. Unions don’t make people lazy, good unions make people politically active.
Mendigo oso! Así se hacen los chismes! Espero que elenamary si entienda lo que quise decir ya que mi novio no! Jajajaja Estoy de acuerdo contigo acerca que, las buenas uniones son un beneficio para todos los trabajadores:
La filosofía es hermosa y tiene un fin excelente, pero los usos y
costumbres de esto cuales son en la actualidad? Bueno, son utilizados por
sus líderes como instrumento de sus aspiraciones políticas y personales,
olvidándose de los derechos y conquistas laborales de los trabajadores,
los sindicatos en México son hoy vistos como un obstáculo que impide la
solución de graves problemas que aquejan a instituciones fundamentales del país.
La corrupción, el control gremial, clientelismo partidista,
corporativismo, uso patrimonial de los recursos y cuotas sindicales
distinguen a la mayor parte de las dirigencias gremiales que han hecho de
la antidemocracia sindical y el control caciquil de los trabajadores el
principal activo de poder, lo que les permite fundarse en representantes
de un sindicalismo que se pudre la mierda de la demagogia y el manejo
político.
El costo social ha sido la parálisis productiva que se vive en el país, El
asunto de las pensiones que enfrentan el IMSS y el ISSSTE es otro grave
problema que pasa por las relaciones de esas instituciones con sus
sindicatos. En el IMSS, los trabajadores se resisten a reformar el sistema
de jubilaciones y pensiones , en el cual prevé el aumento de la edad para
el retiro y una mayor aportación de cuotas, a pesar de que la propia
existencia del Instituto esté en riesgo por la carga del pago de pensiones
que absorbe más de 40% de sus recursos.
Por lo tanto estoy de acuerdo en que son organizaciones formadas para la
defensa de los derechos laborales, económicos y políticos de sus
integrantes, la existencia de los sindicatos no está en duda, pues siguen
siendo un actor fundamental en los pactos sociales y productivos del país.
La ruptura en los años ochentas de la alianza establecida después de la
Segunda Guerra Mundial con los gobiernos del PRI, esto por el cambio de
una economía proteccionista a una neoliberal, debilitó al sector obrero
oficial y lo obligó a un replanteamiento de estrategia en la lucha
sindical.
Sin embargo, y a pesar del cambio en las relaciones
obrero-gobierno-patrones, los grandes sindicatos oficiales, los
paraestatales (petroleros, ferrocarrilero, electricistas) se convierten en
elementos fundamentales de una nueva relación social en beneficio del
país, sin detrimento de las conquistas laborales de sus agremiados, el
manejo patrimonial y de poder que hacen de ellos sus dirigentes los
convierten en instrumentos de sus ambiciones políticas y personales.
El mejor ejemplo no los da Elba Esther Gordillo, presidenta del Sindicato
Nacional de Trabajadores de la Educación, “centraliza el poder del
sindicato” para protegerse políticamente y tener capacidad para tomar
decisiones con o sin el apoyo del presidente de la república, además de
que consolida el poder que ya había conseguido y margina a las corrientes.
Aun con las sospechas de marginación de que es responsable de actos
violentos y represión contra la CNTE entre 1981 y 1994, que derivaron en
172 supuestos asesinatos y desapariciones, y de los que ya fue exonerada
por autoridades judiciales, Elba Esther Gordillo gozará de recursos
extraordinarios económicos producto de cuotas sindicales.
Ahora, la situación que hablaba con el oso, que es la situación que mas me
encabrona es lo que ocurre la Comisión Federal de Electricidad, su
sindicato ha encabezado la principal oposición a que haya más inversión
privada en el sector eléctrico, pero ellos mismos han sido un freno para
lograr mayor eficiencia de la misma, debido a que cuentan con un contrato
colectivo con prestaciones superiores a las que reconoce la Ley Federal
del Trabajo. Esa situación ha propiciado también las críticas del sector
patronal, en tanto que los contratos colectivos de trabajo son un
obstáculo para una mayor productividad en un mundo de alta competencia
internacional. Desde los gobiernos del PRI el contrato colectivo es visto
como rígido y caro, y se le ha atribuido la responsabilidad de las crisis
financieras que enfrenta la comisión desde entonces, por los altos
salarios a los trabajadores electricistas y sus jubilados, lo que ha sido
rechazado por la dirigencia del sindicato, que a su vez atribuye esa
situación a la incapacidad y mala administración de la empresa.
Add ex-USSR to that list. My boss is not the first I’ve heard proclaim that free markets (of the sans regulation type) and zero social spending will fix everything and give you icecream at the same time.
Good to know what is happening in the south, thanks for the post.