FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

The Fraud in Mexico

Today, the political situation in the country pivots around the question of whether or not there fraud was committed in the electoral process. Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador is convinced that fraud which impeded his being the legitimate president of this country was committed. Of course, those who back the PAN candidate deny this, and seek every means of assuring that the civil resistance movement will wear itself out and be discredited. The arguments they like best are that there exist no proofs of fraud and that Lopez Obrador has become crazed, because he doesn’t know how to lose, not to mention other “arguments” which in fact are insults. We all know that if arguments are riddled with insults it is because they lack arguments.

The problem before us, and which the electoral court ought to take into account is how fraud is to be defined. the dictionary has two definitions of fraud, one which is: “crime commited by the person in charge of overseeing the carrying out of something,” and the second, which says: “deception undertaken in order to obtain an advantage.”

Those who argue that there was no fraud want a fotograph of the moment or the act in which the crime was commited by the person in charge of overseeing (in this case, the IFE). If this conclusive proof does not exist, then for them there has been no fraud and, therefore, the election was fair, even though there may have been “some irregularities.” What they will never admit, of course, is the deceit of the entire State apparatus which allowed them to obtain an obvious advantage. Then fraud, then, lies in the electoral process. The dictionary points out that the word process signifies “a method followed in order to reach an end.” In this case, the method followed in order to impose the PAN candidate was lengthy (it lasted more than two years) and not only had the backing of Los Pinos and its budget, but also that of the communications media and, in the final analysis, of the IFE itself, which did not do what it was supposed to do by law, when it failed to annul the campaigns of hatred and disqualification which appeared over the length and breadth of the land. Fraud, therefore, was in the method utilized in order to accomplish the end of preventing Lopez Obrador from reaching the presidency. Of this there exist innumerable evidences.

In general, any illegal or inadequate act has generally negative consequences for those who commit them, and it then affects others. Fraud, to be sure, has consequences, and now whe are living them. The first and most serious one is that Mexican society is now more divided than ever. Secondly, a social crisis of enormous dimensions is being created, and along with this a political crisis the scope of which we are as yet unaware. All this came about thanks to the enormous and lacerating incompetence of Vicente Fox and his cabinet. Not content with having increased the indices of poverty, of having affected public education, science, technology, and culture to a worrisome degree, of having caused Mexico to descend to its lowest historical levels, of competitivity, and of having caused the Mexican economy to depend increasingly on the inflows of money from workers who immigrated owing to lack of work, of having promoted the worst foreign policies in memory, always bowed before the United States, he utilized the State apparatus in order to embroil himself in the electoral process, the outcome of which is that one of the gravest political crises in the recent history of this country will be generated. Of course fraud took place, even if there is no photograph of the precise instant in which it occured.

This process, this method that was used to reach the goal of no allowing Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador reach the presidency, is the cause of the civil resistance. The insults, the demonstrations, and the media manipulation which have been unchained against the coalition candidate andof those who day by day are in the resistance, do no more than aggravate the conflict among Mexicans. The most sensible thing would be to reason, to try to understand the causes generating the civil resistance, instead of pointing out that the movement “doesn’t affect me,” or that “I don’t like it,” or that it “doesn’t look good,” and worse yet, using derogatory adjectives against those who defend a cause. The question to be asked is: “What is worse, a few weeks of discomforts or six years of an illegitimate government?” A government which, if it comes to be, will be the legacy given us by the most incompetent President in Mexico’s history.

This article originally appeared in La Journada.

Translated by Jorge Dominguez.

 

 

More articles by:

Weekend Edition
December 14, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Andrew Levine
A Tale of Two Cities
Peter Linebaugh
The Significance of The Common Wind
Bruce E. Levine
The Ketamine Chorus: NYT Trumpets New Anti-Suicide Drug
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Fathers and Sons, Bushes and Bin Ladens
Kathy Deacon
Coffee, Social Stratification and the Retail Sector in a Small Maritime Village
Nick Pemberton
Praise For America’s Second Leading Intellectual
Robert Hunziker
The Yellow Vest Insurgency – What’s Next?
Patrick Cockburn
The Yemeni Dead: Six Times Higher Than Previously Reported
Nick Alexandrov
George H. W. Bush: Another Eulogy
Brian Cloughley
Principles and Morality Versus Cash and Profit? No Contest
Michael F. Duggan
Climate Change and the Limits of Reason
Victor Grossman
Sighs of Relief in Germany
Ron Jacobs
A Propagandist of Privatization
Robert Fantina
What Does Beto Have Against the Palestinians?
Richard Falk – Daniel Falcone
Sartre, Said, Chomsky and the Meaning of the Public Intellectual
Andrew Glikson
Crimes Against the Earth
Robert Fisk
The Parasitic Relationship Between Power and the American Media
Stephen Cooper
When Will Journalism Grapple With the Ethics of Interviewing Mentally Ill Arrestees?
Jill Richardson
A War on Science, Morals and Law
Ron Jacobs
A Propagandist of Privatization
Evaggelos Vallianatos
It’s Not Easy Being Greek
Nomi Prins 
The Inequality Gap on a Planet Growing More Extreme
John W. Whitehead
Know Your Rights or You Will Lose Them
David Swanson
The Abolition of War Requires New Thoughts, Words, and Actions
J.P. Linstroth
Primates Are Us
Bill Willers
The War Against Cash
Jonah Raskin
Doris Lessing: What’s There to Celebrate?
Ralph Nader
Are the New Congressional Progressives Real? Use These Yardsticks to Find Out
Binoy Kampmark
William Blum: Anti-Imperial Advocate
Medea Benjamin – Alice Slater
Green New Deal Advocates Should Address Militarism
John Feffer
Review: Season 2 of Trump Presidency
Rich Whitney
General Motors’ Factories Should Not Be Closed. They Should Be Turned Over to the Workers
Christopher Brauchli
Deported for Christmas
Kerri Kennedy
This Holiday Season, I’m Standing With Migrants
Mel Gurtov
Weaponizing Humanitarian Aid
Thomas Knapp
Lame Duck Shutdown Theater Time: Pride Goeth Before a Wall?
George Wuerthner
The Thrill Bike Threat to the Elkhorn Mountains
Nyla Ali Khan
A Woman’s Selfhood and Her Ability to Act in the Public Domain: Resilience of Nadia Murad
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
On the Killing of an Ash Tree
Graham Peebles
Britain’s Homeless Crisis
Louis Proyect
America: a Breeding Ground for Maladjustment
Steve Carlson
A Hell of a Time
Dan Corjescu
America and The Last Ship
Jeffrey St. Clair
Booked Up: the 25 Best Books of 2018
David Yearsley
Bikini by Rita, Voice by Anita
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail