Morena, the young party that in 10 years conquered the vast majority

Borges wrote a satire about a map the size of a country, a reference to the fragments that aspire to encompass the whole. The image can be transferred to Mexico and to what has now become the main political force, Morena, the party founded by Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the popular president who will leave the reins of the country in September. The party, which this year celebrates its first decade, has won the presidency for the second time in its short life, with the triumph of Claudia Sheinbaum in Sunday’s elections. He also achieved a qualified majority in the Chamber of Deputies, a goal that not even López Obrador himself, with his enormous charisma and popular influence, managed to score six years ago. As if that were not enough, Morena won more governorships and now heads the Executive in 24 of the 32 States of Mexico. Analysts point out that this citizen endorsement of the Obrador project has modified the party system and has given rise to a new formation with enormous representation and an opposition reduced to historic lows. “Morena does aspire to dominance of the Mexican political spectrum, as any party would do. The issue is that their agenda has been successful enough for that aspiration to become a reality, and this election is proof of that,” says academic Viri Ríos.

The founding date of Morena may be unclear. Officially, it obtained party registration with the National Electoral Institute (INE) in 2014. However, the founders trace the origins of the formation years ago. Some place it in the civil struggles led by López Obrador in 2005, when he was head of the capital’s government and was defending himself from the barrage launched against him by President Vicente Fox (PAN), who wanted to imprison him to prevent him from reaching the presidency. ballot the following year. Others see the origin in the demonstrations against the alleged fraud in the 2006 elections, in which López Obrador lost against Felipe Calderón (PAN). Some others think that the birth of the formation occurred in the Obradorist movements against the privatization of oil in 2007. In all cases, the leading role has been played by López Obrador, around whose powerful figure a social movement was structured that later decided to become a party, in order to participate in elections and contest power through democratic institutions.

Sunday’s election was a feat by Obradorism’s own standards. For the first time in two decades, the leader did not appear on the ballot, and yet there was unprecedented citizen participation and Sheinbaum obtained more votes than López Obrador himself six years ago. The political movement has managed to get rid of the figure of the president and founder. “This victory gives Morena reconfirmation of the popularity of his agenda,” says Ríos. “This movement is becoming something much more ideological, which has its own agenda, which is ideologically strange, which has left-wing features, such as its labor and social policies, but also has some very controversial aspects, such as militarization or the lack of tax reform,” he adds. Ríos warns of a metamorphosis in the Mexican ideological spectrum. “He stopped understanding himself in the left-right spectrum and began to understand himself in the Obadorismo-antiobradorism mirror,” he defines.

The academic refers to Morena’s triumph over the opposition at the level of political discourse. He points out that, while the PAN, PRI and PRD accused Mexico of going in a bad direction and compared it to Venezuela, citizens saw improvements in their purchasing power, thanks to the economic policies implemented by the López Obrador Government based on the statutory book. morenista “Morena filled a void, because the party system had not represented the working class,” she observes. “Mexico had only had pro-business parties since 2000 and had profoundly neglected the electorate of the working classes and the most vulnerable classes. An electorate of such magnitude, in a political orphanhood, becomes very fertile ground,” adds Ríos. “I think Mexico did well, because the alternative would have been a leader. And no, what happened is that a party was created that lives in the Mexican party system, that is creating its own political class, its own ideology, and all these factors contribute to the consolidation of Mexican democracy,” she adds.

Both Ríos and political scientist Javier Rosiles point out that Morena’s dominance cannot be equated with the hegemony attributed to the long-lived PRI during the 20th century, during the times of the single party. “At this moment, although there is very little opposition, that opposition has not been promoted from power,” observes Rosiles. “In times of the hegemonic party system, new political options, satellite parties, were encouraged from power to simulate a democracy. Right now that is not happening. There are opposition parties, their problem is that the citizens are not giving them their support or trust. That difference is substantial,” he considers. The academic affirms that Sunday’s election not only confirmed the majority will to continue the Obrador project, but also the overwhelming rejection of the old parties of the last century, such as the PRI, the PAN and the PRD (in fact, the latter is at the verge of its disappearance at the national level). “What happened was a disaster for the opposition,” he summarizes.

Ríos points out that another difference with the hegemonic party regime is that currently there are better democratic practices that make electoral fraud, which was very routine in the past, impossible. “After this election, Morena is a dominant party, but it is not hegemonic, because it is not the only player in the Mexican political spectrum or the only one with the ability to win,” he says. “PRI hegemony was achieved through electoral fraud and having a very low temperature democracy. Morenoist dominance is achieved from a democracy with very high participation and with a citizen who goes to the polls to support a project legitimately,” he adds.

Rosiles recognizes the strength of democracy in Mexico, but warns of the risk that insecurity and violence represent for the institutions themselves. “Morena’s overwhelming victory should not make us forget that there were more than 30 candidates murdered and there are territories where elections could not be held,” he warns. The specialist affirms that a part of the balance of insecurity must be attributed to the governments of the ruling party at the federal level and in the States where it has control. “Morena’s great challenge continues to be the exercise of government. Morena is a very good machine for accessing power, but he is not so good for exercising government. There are some results that have not been so positive,” he maintains.

Faced with the consolidation of the new dominant party, the opposition is faced with a dilemma: follow the rhetoric that Mexico is going in the wrong direction and that democracy is at risk, or reform. Rosiles assesses that the PAN, the PRI and the PRD would have to “disappear or change their name,” or invent a new way to participate in the dispute for power. “The opposition has to come from different places, we could talk about civil administrations, it is a possibility, or that in the business sector leaderships are forged that begin to confront the official party. For now, the partisan route is not seen as an option, and we will have to
see if new movements emerge that promote new leaders,” he says.

Subscribe to the EL PAÍS Mexico newsletter and to the channel electoral WhatsApp and receive all the key information on current events in this country.

_