Beyond the zócalo and the INE: we are talking about power

1.- From the simple question of what Machiavelli would do, columnist Stanley Bing answers simply: “I would play to win.”

two.- The ethical critique of the operational capacity of the government in presidential power to organize a march that responded to the INE “No se toca” march would have value in a moral court, but we are talking about the dispute for power.

3.- The formal fight for the presidency of the Republic in 2024 did not begin with the uncovering of the three corcholatas in June 2021 or with the disappointing participation of José Woldenberg as anticlimactic speaker in the march on November 13, but rather began formally and inevitable as a single agenda on Sunday, November 27.

4.- The President of the Republic surely did not want to demonstrate his ability to convoke with the assistance of his followers, but rather put the apparatus and electoral structure of his party into motion to start now the articulation of his followers.

5.- The muscle of the 4th-T is territorial and was based on the territorial structure of the 23 Morenista governors –20 in office, Oaxaca with governor-elect from Morena, 1 from the Green and one from the PES–, a structure exactly the same as the that the PRI put into operation throughout its 71 years in presidential power.

6.- Without a strict class differentiation, the INE march was attended by currents of the middle classes –from medium to upper–, while the lopezobradorista march was attended by popular classes that benefited from social programs and sympathizers of the presidential leadership.

7.- The derogatory indication of the march of those carried ignores the methods of carrying used for the march of the INE and the mechanisms that have been put into practice even now by the experienced organizers of meetings of the PAN, the PRI and the PDLCh (Partido de los Chuchos, exPRD).

8.- The mechanism of the organization of the masses for public events was not invented by López Obrador or Morena, but rather the copyright belongs to the PRI as a party of the masses -first– and a party of hauled -after–.

9.- The deconfiguration of the militant bases of the parties has to do with the fascist model of the corporate party that President Lázaro Cárdenas gave to the Party of the Mexican Revolution when building the militant base by productive sectors: peasants, workers, middle classes and the military. This model of party structure was liquidated by Carlos Salinas de Gortari and Luis Donaldo Colosio in 1992 when they terminated the PRI’s cycle as the Party of the Mexican Revolution and the neoliberal party of social liberalism was born.

10.- The structuring of the parties via productive classes was a political contribution of Mexico to the history of the Mexican parties. Morena’s proposal did not want to rebuild the corporate class model of Cardenismo and proposed itself as a party of social movements articulated to the beneficiaries of welfare programs, a kind of Mexican lumpenproletariat. It should be noted that after Cardenismo the PRI sectors stopped representing the productive classes and became malleable masses at the service of power.

eleven.- The contemptuous criticism of the march on Sunday the 27th under the characterization of the march of the carried only reflected a classist concept of contempt, without understanding that the model of the carry is a territorial organizational structure that gives mass strength to the parties. The PAN never ceased to be the party of the wealthy middle class, the PRI was left without bases or classes and the PDLCh was reduced to the minimum expression of two militants who are bases and leaders: Jesús Ortega Martínez and Jesús Zambrano, the famous Chuchos that destroyed the PRD as a Progressive Party and turned it into a party at the service of the neoliberalism of the conservative Coparmex-Claudio X. González coalition.