Title:
|
Democratic reform and deliberative politics in Mexico
|
The present dissertation is a study of the quality of democracy in Mexico. Its central
argument is that Habermas' idea of deliberative democracy and Mansbridge's related
idea of deliberative neo-pluralism provide benchmarks which enable us to define the
quality and identify the potential of democracy in Mexico. They provide ideal and
practical points of reference which make it possible to identify some fledgling elements
of genuinely deliberative democracy within the political institutional system, electoral
system and media of Mexico. Secondly, they make it possible to identify the structural,
institutional and cultural conditions that stand in the way of essential political values
(such as accountability and citizen autonomy) that are indispensable for the realisation
of greater deliberative quality. Thirdly, they make it possible to identify the changes
needed not only to ensure the survival of democracy in Mexico, but to improve its
quality. The main challenges to democracy (the prevalence of patronage politics and
impunity before the law) that these structural conditions cause are systemic, because
they shape not only the political system, but also the social and economic systems.
The first substantive chapter explores relations between the executive and
legislature since 2000, and finds some evidence of institutional reform and (limited)
attitudinal change. The second examines the elections of 2006, and finds that despite
some improvement in electoral justice and opposition access to the media, the political
culture was hostile to citizen participation and to public deliberation. The extent to
which the leading political parties are open in their internal processes to practices and
forms of behaviour conducive to deliberation is then explored, and the conclusion
reached is that for all three, for varying reasons, deliberative commitments are little in
evidence. The fourth substantive chapter looks at local-level politics, and concludes
again that a lack of transparency and accountability, combined with voting systems that
limit the need for negotiation and compromise, render the area unpromising for the
development of deliberative practice. As regards the media, the finding is that Mexico is
far from having an ideal informational environment capable of improving the quality of
public opinion, encouraging citizenship in civil society and developing a public sphere
conducive to a democratic form of government.
The balance-sheet drawn up at the end is largely negative. But it is concluded
that the adoption of deliberative democracy and democratic deliberation as normative
points of reference in relation to Mexico's politics, culture and society is justified as it
reveals with clarity both the overall profile of the quality of Mexican democracy, and
some real if limited evidence of potential for deliberative development.
|