All in favor of corruption, say “Aye”

From “La Opinion” (Los Angeles (my humble translation)

Wanting to destroy, attack or challenge the public opinion of the president of Mexico, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, The Economist , one of the most prestigious and historic English neoliberal defenders, says in an article published last week that the The Mexican president is honest, but it doesn’t matter, he must be opposed or removed.

“He is not personally corrupt,” says the article in the first paragraph; but immediately stressed that the president is a “danger” to Mexican democracy. In other words, the president of Mexico is a danger to the people because he is not corrupt; therefore, no one should vote for him. What a paradox.

Unfortunately for the magazine, López Obrador’s strength lies in honesty. That is why people follow him. The people know that there is much to do and correct, but they also know that the first step has been taken with him and, therefore, they continue supporting him. To a large extent, his honesty and his decades-long struggle for honest government is what brought him to power, something not understood by his critics. The Economist article emphasizes that the president speaks for the have-nots and and the disadvantaged. He is not homophobic or discriminatory. And, as the magazine admits, he has done good things, like increasing pensions, subsidizing youth educational and training programs, keeping debt under control, and maintaining the country’s strong credit rating. The magazine even suggests to the opposition learn from AMLO, since the governments of the past did a terrible job with the families that were left behind economically since the 1980s.

In its eagerness not to be so biased against the López Obrador administration, the article criticizes the country’s ruling class and calls it corrupt; but apparently it doesn’t matter, because the editorials calls on those who are corrupt to do whatever it takes to stop the President.

The importance of the June 6 elections is that the entire Chamber of Deputies, the body that controls the budget, is at stake. Currently the [Lopéz Obrador’s party (Morena)] has a simple majority, but with the allied parties it enjoys an absolute majority. The Economist and the opposition in Mexico want is for López Obrador to lose that majority to block any type of legislation that violates the economic interests of multinationals with advantageous contracts.

Three years into AMLO’s mandate, thousands of corporations have been paying taxes that they’d evaded before, unequal conract with the state have been modified, and the minimum wage has risen by 50%. There has also been changes to the laws on subcontracting, which has literally elmited workers’ rights.

The article, far from painting AMLO as , “The false messiah” claims he is a “danger” for democracy in the country. Rather, López Obrador is a danger for some corrupt corporations that evade taxes and exploit Mexico’s resources and workers. The only thing that the current administration is doing is insist businesses and individuals comply with the law. You can still make a profit, but you ca’t go looting.

Recently Mexico managed to be among the best 10 countries in the world for direct capital investors, and AMLO was classified as one of the first two leaders in the world with most support from his own people. Unfortunately, the main objective of this magazine, in conjunction with corporations and corrupt ruling classes, is to call for Mexico to return to the era of past six years, when these classes could take over natural resources, ignoring and impoverishing the people themselves. Needless to say, the looting of the past was done with the complicity of the political class of what is now known as “PRIAN” (Institutional Revolutionary Party-National Action Party).

On September 27, 1913, The Ecoomist published an article favorable to the coup against the democratically elected President Francisco I. Madero that brought the dictator, Victoriano Huerta, to power. On that occasion, it stressed that Madero was “a problem for Mexico.” In the same way, The Economist last week stated in its cover article that the Mexican president, also over-whelmingly elected in 2018 by democratic means, is a “danger to democracy”; the danger, according to the Economist being that he is not corrupt.