FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Democracy’s Future

by LAURA CARLSEN

Three years ago Mexico’s one-party system was finally cracked open by the election of Vicente Fox. Since then Mexico has rushed from euphoria to apathy in record time. The change from over seventy years of Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) rule to a presidency led by a member of the National Action party (PAN) was heralded as the revitalization of the political party system and of government itself. Many leaders of grassroots organizations and citizen movements looked forward to a new era of participation, openness, and transition. Now the speed with which those hopes were dashed is commensurate to the snail’s pace of real change.

Latin American countries have long been encouraged to emulate U.S. representative democracy, channeling ebullient social movements into party-building and electoral processes. Since the 70s, most opposition movements have taken the plunge into party politics–with varying degrees of success.

Now, throughout the hemisphere, the relationship between grassroots mobilization and electoral participation has come under the lens of political analysts and activists alike. In Brazil, a government born out of an opposition movement walks a tightrope between its grassroots constituency and its obligations to maintain stability and appease the international finance system. In Bolivia, coca-leader Evo Morales’ close bid for the presidency has strengthened the resolve of the movement to continue participating in local and national elections.

On the other hand, the members of the powerful Ecuadorian social movement that brought Lucio Gutierrez to power–led by the CONAIE–have called the president to task for what they consider a betrayal of the popular mandate and have begun to question their participation in party politics and government. Mexico appears to have been so successful in creating a <U.S.-style> tweedle-dee, tweedle-dum party system that the electorate has lost interest in the multimillion-dollar midterm campaigns. A recent study by the Federal Electoral Institute concludes that recent high abstention rates reflect discontent with political parties and a sense that, according to a quote from a citizen survey, “the vote doesn’t contribute at all to changing things.”

U.S. society is also reevaluating the role of elections in democracy, but in strangely contradictory ways. The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) recently launched an attack on nongovernmental organizations, warning of the “growing power of the unelected few.” By attacking citizen groups that seek to inform policymaking as “unelected,” the implicit assertion is that voting is no longer a form of democratic participation, but the sole legitimate exercise of democracy. The second implication–that NGOs have no valid role to play in policymaking or governance–is, as many have pointed out, ironic since the AEI is an NGO and plays an unprecedented role within the Bush administration. As if that weren’t enough, the Bush administration itself holds office in violation of the popular vote that the AEI now claims is the be-all and end-all of political action.

While criticizing these views, progressive organizations have also begun to look seriously at returning to the electoral arena. This week, <MoveOn.org–the> million-and-a-half member internet group that catalyzed anti-war actions across the country–is sponsoring a political primary, a year and a half before the presidential elections. Other grassroots organizations that have avoided electoral politics like the plague are suddenly talking about participating due to what they perceive as the urgency of unseating the conservative coup. This infusion of activism in electoral politics could reduce the traditionally high abstention rates in U.S. elections, which in itself would be a triumph for the democratic system. What remains to be seen is whether the doddering Democratic Party will respond to pressure from a revitalized base or continue to cater to entrenched interest groups.

What all these experiences go to show is that in equations for social change, going to the polls is just one variable. Real democracy depends on a keen interplay between electoral participation and grassroots movements. High abstention in Mexico’s July 6th elections would be a wake-up call not only for that country’s major political parties, but also for parties throughout the hemisphere. If political parties–in the United States and Latin America–insist on distilling complex demands for change into a media-centered battle for the vote, they may soon be writing their own epitaphs.

LAURA CARLSEN directs the Americas Program of the Interhemispheric Resource Center. She can be contacted at mailto:laura@irc-online.org.

Laura Carlsen is the director of the Americas Program in Mexico City and advisor to Just Associates (JASS) .

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
April 28, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Slandering Populism: a Chilling Media Habit
Andrew Levine
Why I Fear and Loathe Trump Even More Now Than On Election Day
Jeffrey St. Clair
Mountain of Tears: the Vanishing Glaciers of the Pacific Northwest
Philippe Marlière
The Neoliberal or the Fascist? What Should French Progressives Do?
Conn Hallinan
America’s New Nuclear Missile Endangers the World
Peter Linebaugh
Omnia Sunt Communia: May Day 2017
Vijay Prashad
Reckless in the White House
Brian Cloughley
Who Benefits From Prolonged Warfare?
Kathy Kelly
The Shame of Killing Innocent People
Ron Jacobs
Hate Speech as Free Speech: How Does That Work, Exactly?
Andre Vltchek
Middle Eastern Surgeon Speaks About “Ecology of War”
Matt Rubenstein
Which Witch Hunt? Liberal Disanalogies
Sami Awad - Yoav Litvin - Rabbi Lynn Gottlieb
Never Give Up: Nonviolent Civilian Resistance, Healing and Active Hope in the Holyland
Pete Dolack
Tribunal Finds Monsanto an Abuser of Human Rights and Environment
Christopher Ketcham
The Coyote Hunt
Mike Whitney
Putin’s New World Order
Ramzy Baroud
Palestinian, Jewish Voices Must Jointly Challenge Israel’s Past
Ralph Nader
Trump’s 100 Days of Rage and Rapacity
Harvey Wasserman
Marine Le Pen Is a Fascist—Not a ‘Right-Wing Populist,’ Which Is a Contradiction in Terms
William Hawes
World War Whatever
John Stanton
War With North Korea: No Joke
Jim Goodman
NAFTA Needs to be Replaced, Not Renegotiated
Murray Dobbin
What is the Antidote to Trumpism?
Louis Proyect
Left Power in an Age of Capitalist Decay
Medea Benjamin
Women Beware: Saudi Arabia Charged with Shaping Global Standards for Women’s Equality
Rev. William Alberts
Selling Spiritual Care
Peter Lee
Invasion of the Pretty People, Kamala Harris Edition
Cal Winslow
A Special Obscenity: “Guernica” Today
Binoy Kampmark
Turkey’s Kurdish Agenda
Guillermo R. Gil
The Senator Visits Río Piedras
Jeff Mackler
Mumia Abu-Jamal Fights for a New Trial and Freedom 
Cesar Chelala
The Responsibility of Rich Countries in Yemen’s Crisis
Leslie Watson Malachi
Women’s Health is on the Chopping Block, Again
Basav Sen
The Coal Industry is a Job Killer
Judith Bello
Rojava, a Popular Imperial Project
Robert Koehler
A Public Plan for Peace
Sam Pizzigati
The Insider Who Blew the Whistle on Corporate Greed
Nyla Ali Khan
There Has to be a Way Out of the Labyrinth
Michael J. Sainato
Trump Scales Back Antiquities Act, Which Helped to Create National Parks
Stu Harrison
Under Duterte, Filipino Youth Struggle for Real Change
Martin Billheimer
Balm for Goat’s Milk
Stephen Martin
Spooky Cookies and Algorithmic Steps Dystopian
Michael Doliner
Thank You Note
Charles R. Larson
Review: Gregor Hens’ “Nicotine”
David Yearsley
Handel’s Executioner
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail