Like the United States and many other countries, Mexico is politically polarized.
On one hand, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) has maintained high approval ratings throughout his six-year term, and over 33 million Mexicans voted for Claudia Sheinbaum, delivering a landslide victory to the ruling party candidate who has pledged to build on the “transformation” of Mexico initiated by her political mentor. The president has legions of devotees, colloquially known as AMLOvers.
On the other hand, millions of Mexicans loathe AMLO and believe that he — and the president-elect — pose a threat to Mexico and its democratic institutions, in part due to the constitutional reform proposals the president submitted to Congress earlier this year and which Sheinbaum supports. The presidential candidate most of those people supported on Sunday was Xóchitl Gálvez representing the PAN-PRI-PRD coalition, who received more than 15.5 million votes.
One manifestation of the political polarization in Mexico is that “friends and relatives no longer talk politics for fear of worsening unbridgeable divides,” the Associated Press said in a recent article.
On Sunday, while analyzing and discussing the election results during a Televisa broadcast, well-known journalist Denise Maerker weighed in on polarization in Mexico. Her remarks “resonated widely,” El Universal reported, and in this day and age that means they went viral on social media.
During a discussion with other high profile journalists, including Ciro Gómez Leyva and Jorge Ramos, Maerker was asked whether polarization is good, bad or “inevitable,” and whether there could be some kind of “national reconciliation” after the elections.
🚨 ESTO PASÓ
Denise Maerker 🧑🏻, productora y conductora de N+ 📺, se hace viral por su reflexión y conclusiones en mesa de análisis respecto a la jornada electoral 🗳️. pic.twitter.com/v6PSkpTMX0
— Radio Contexto (@tenemoscontexto) June 2, 2024
This clip of journalist Denise Maerker speaking about polarization in Mexico has 1.8 million views.
She began by speaking about the vast economic gulf between Mexico’s poorest people and the middle and upper classes. AMLO’s political base is mostly the former cohort — who have benefited from expanded social programs during the current administration — while more well-off Mexicans are more likely to be critical of the president.
“There is a polarization that is structural and it has to do with a deeply unequal society,” Maerker said.
“What does this polarization mean? The [different] social groups can’t think alike nor can they have common interests or views of the world,” she said, adding that in some cases they are incapable of understanding each other.
“The division between social classes and the immense inequality is a polarization in itself,” Maerker said.
The journalist asserted that López Obrador has exacerbated that polarization — and made the divide a more deeply political one — with his rhetoric, in which he often pits ordinary Mexican people, el pueblo, against “greedy” elites. He once derided the middle class as “aspirational” and “without moral scruples.”
“What López Obrador did,” Maerker said “was to bring this existing polarization out into the light and throw loads of gasoline on it.”
She asserted that political polarization can be reduced “very quickly” if the “gasoline the president throws every morning” at his press conferences, or mañaneras, is no longer thrown.
“I believe there is a polarization [in Mexico] that is deeply fueled [by López Obrador],” Maerker said, referring to political polarization rather than “structural,” economic polarization.
“I believe that [political polarization] is going to diminish” when López Obrador leaves office, she said.
However, structural polarization won’t diminish until Mexican society becomes “more even,” Maerker added.
“It’s obviously structural [polarization] that gives rise … to tremendous differences [between classes],” she said, noting that many Mexicans find it impossible to understand why their fellow citizens voted for Sheinbaum, or why they voted for Gálvez, as the case may be.
“This lack of understanding is because there are places in society that are profoundly different,” Maerker said.
Her explanation of polarization in Mexico was “widely praised” on social media, El Universal said, highlighting comments such as “I completely agree with Denise Maerker” and “while people with money continue living in their bubble and don’t see the reality of the country, this will continue happening.”
One comment beneath a clip of Maerker’s remarks that has been watched 1.8 million times simply said: “Very true.”
It remains to be seen whether Sheinbaum — who has said she wants to unite Mexican society — will be able to reduce polarization with less divisive rhetoric, but one thing that is clear is that combating political division will be one of the key challenges for the incoming president, along with things such as reducing violence, growing the economy, managing the relationship with the United States and lifting even more Mexicans out of poverty.
Mexico News Daily
In most of the article (except of course for names and percentages) one could replace the word “Mexico” for “USA” or the name of every other country for that matter, and it will read the same.
I think it’s more ideological in the US. Lots of wealth on both sides.
Yes, it is a different situation in the U.S.
I’m actually surprised at the lack of polarization in Mexico, as someone from the US. The wealthy will always complain if they’re not being 100% catered to, but AMLO’s 80% approval rating and Sheinbaum’s landslide win suggest a country that’s already fairly united and politically astute
My question for Mexico and The USA. Why so hellbent on decimating the middle class? Why-because we don’t need a handout. Elitism vs poor. Two classes- this is the goal for both countries and their current administration. Keep them oppressed and you stay in office.
When I read ages ago in the Gringo Gazette that the average policeman in the City of La Paz makes $700 dollars per month I really began to grasp the astonishing gap in income that plays out each day for millions of Mexicans here and throughout the mainland. A San Francisco policeman makes $135 grand per year.
Then I looked out at the Marina and the yachts that fetch three million bucks and more. And I agree with Mr Perez in that this income inequality situation does not only exist in Mexico, but throughout the world. And I am pleased to observe that at least in the City of La Paz I have seen wages clearly increase, slowly but surely. Hooray for AMLO!
Senor Magoo
135 grand is middle class-barely in SF.
According to other sources, 80% of Mexican families fall somewhere in the middle class — meaning, I guess, that they are not without some resources or some hope near the bottom of this group, nor beyond some challenge at the top.
The bitterness of the polarizaation in the US is based, in part, on disputes about racial and gender power. Compounded with the real fears of many that the US is becoming anti-religious and anti-family, this is a toxic mix. Aided and abetted by right wing wealthy who want to protect their absolute overwhelming advantage in riches and authority, this conflict has reached a near explosive situation.
I see very little of that here. I see more young people with career hopes that are realistic, even though their families are poor. And families will always live through their children. I experience graciousness from the well-off, I see good humor and gentility from those with far less. The calm yet firm delivery by Ms Maerker (I’ve always thought no woman can be truly beautiful before age 30!) just seems to encapsulate. We will not miss the excesses of AMLO; we will bless his efforts to rein in the well positioned and his government’s generosity to the poor.
AMLO seems to enjoy denigrating and aggravating his opposition or perceived opponents. He exhibits a low tolerance for criticism, even legitimate criticism. Thus his mañaneras have proven more divisive than necessary while at the same time being a refreshing forum for government transparency. Given President-Elect Sheinbaum’s less flamboyant and more circumspect personality, I would suspect she will handle her press encounters much less divisively. At the same time, I think she would be wise to continue AMLO’s precedent of holding frequent press conferences in the spirit of maintaining government openness.
Denise Maerker’s commentary on political polarization in Mexico highlights significant social and economic divides, attributing much of the current political tension to President Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s (AMLO) rhetoric. While her analysis is insightful, it’s important to place polarization in Mexico within a broader historical and socio-economic context to understand that AMLO alone is not responsible for the country’s deep divisions.Historical Context of Polarization in MexicoPolitical and social polarization in Mexico has deep roots:Historical Inequality: Mexico has long struggled with vast income inequality and uneven economic development. The disparities between the urban and rural populations, and between the north and south of the country, have historically fueled social tensions.Political Turmoil: The political landscape in Mexico has been marked by periods of intense turmoil, including the Mexican Revolution (1910-1920) and subsequent decades of single-party dominance by the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI). The transition to a multiparty system in the late 20th century led to significant political fragmentation.Economic Crises: Economic crises, such as the peso crisis in 1994, exacerbated social divisions and led to widespread disillusionment with the political establishment. This paved the way for populist and anti-establishment figures to gain traction.Role of the Informal EconomyThe informal economy is a significant factor in understanding Mexico’s social dynamics:Economic Dependence: A substantial portion of Mexico’s workforce operates in the informal economy, lacking social security and stable income. This sector’s vulnerability makes it a critical constituency for politicians like AMLO, who promise social programs and economic support.Social Programs: AMLO’s administration has expanded social welfare programs, which have been well-received by those in the informal economy. However, these programs also create divisions, as wealthier and more formally employed Mexicans often view them as economically unsustainable.Influence of Organized Crime Organized crime is another critical aspect:Drug Cartels: The presence of powerful drug cartels and organized crime syndicates has had a profound impact on Mexican society. These groups not only contribute to violence and insecurity but also have significant economic and political influence.Political Corruption: Corruption linked to organized crime further polarizes society. Allegations of collusion between politicians and criminal organizations erode trust in the government and exacerbate divisions between those who feel protected by or victimized by such relationships.AMLO’s Contribution to PolarizationWhile AMLO’s rhetoric and policies have certainly highlighted and, in some cases, exacerbated existing divides, attributing Mexico’s polarization solely to his influence is an oversimplification:Highlighting Inequities: AMLO has brought attention to longstanding social and economic inequities, framing his administration as a fight for the disenfranchised against entrenched elites. This has increased political mobilization among his base but also intensified opposition among those who feel threatened by his policies.Rhetorical Strategies: His frequent critiques of the media, business elites, and political opponents have fueled political polarization. However, these strategies are not unique to AMLO and are common among populist leaders globally.ConclusionPolarization in Mexico is a complex phenomenon with deep historical roots, influenced by economic inequality, the informal economy, and the pervasive impact of organized crime. While AMLO’s rhetoric and policies have certainly played a role in the current political climate, they are part of a broader pattern of social and economic divides that have long existed in Mexico. Understanding this context is crucial for addressing the underlying causes of polarization and working towards a more united society.