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

March 01, 2017
Sharmini Peries - Michael Hudson
The Fictitious Economy: Hiding How the Economy Really Works
Joseph Natoli
The Fourth Estate vs. the Trump Regime
Kim C. Domenico
A Deconstruction of Whiteness: Unsafe Among My Own Kind
Yoav Litvin
American Dystopia – A Future of Racists, Snitches and Outcasts
Dan Glazebrook
From Kissinger’s Playbook: Flynn is Gone, His Russia Policy Lives On
Peter Mayo
Storming “Fortress Europe” in Search of a Social World
Sam Gordon
The Audacity of Sacrilege
Arnold August
Fidel, Political Power and the New Culture of Communication
Linn Washington Jr.
Black History in Cyberspace: British 3D App Game Features Forgotten Facts
Norman Pollack
Trump’s Neo-Fascist Discourse: CPAC Revisited
Nyla Ali Khan
Women in Conflict Zones: Escaping Masculine Socialization and Generating a Transformative Vision
Sam Husseini
Questioning Pelosi and Schumer
Jesse Jackson
Private Prisons Slam the Door on Justice
February 28, 2017
Behrooz Ghamari Tabrizi
A Paradigm Shift in the Middle East: Iran as the Solution, Not the Problem
Paul Street
Big Brother Capitalism Strikes Back
Stephen Cooper
Trump’s Pusillanimous Immigration Policy Imperils the Public and the Police
Vincent Emanuele
The Madness of U.S. Empire
Michael Sainato and Chelsea Skojec
We Need the Endangered Species Act Now More Than Ever
David Underhill
Oops, They Did It Again: Crowd Bowls Over Rep in Beery Alley
John Eskow
Jimmy Kimmel is a Total Dick and Other Reflections on the Oscars
Steve Horn
Trump’s Top Energy Aide, Mike Catanzaro Peddled Climate Change Denial
Jack Random
The Trump Diaries: Week Five
Robert Fisk
The Education of Marine Le Pen
Pauline Murphy
Felicia Browne’s Fight Against Fascism
Mary Lynn Cramer
Fearing the Trump Impeachment
Mel Gurtov
While Our Attention is Elsewhere, Climate Change Worsens
Dan Bacher
Extinction 2017: California Edition
Abel Cohen
The Trojan President: America Never Saw It Coming
February 27, 2017
Anthony DiMaggio
Media Ban! Making Sense of the War Between Trump and the Press
Dave Lindorff
Resume Inflation at the NSC: Lt. General McMaster’s Silver Star Was Essentially Earned for Target Practice
Conn Hallinan
Is Trump Moderating US Foreign Policy? Hardly
Norman Pollack
Political Castration of State: Militarization of Government
Kenneth Surin
Inside Dharavi, a Mumbai Slum
Lawrence Davidson
Truth vs. Trump
Binoy Kampmark
The Extradition Saga of Kim Dotcom
Robert Fisk
Why a Victory Over ISIS in Mosul Might Spell Defeat in Deir Ezzor
David Swanson
Open Guantanamo!
Ted Rall
The Republicans May Impeach Trump
Lawrence Wittner
Why Should Trump―or Anyone―Be Able to Launch a Nuclear War?
Andrew Stewart
Down with Obamacare, Up with Single Payer!
Colin Todhunter
Message to John Beddington and the Oxford Martin Commission
David Macaray
UFOs: The Myth That Won’t Die?
Weekend Edition
February 24, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Exxon’s End Game Theory
Pierre M. Sprey - Franklin “Chuck” Spinney
Sleepwalking Into a Nuclear Arms Race with Russia
Paul Street
Liberal Hypocrisy, “Late-Shaming,” and Russia-Blaming in the Age of Trump
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail