Thread by @maudussauge

Just finished reading Kathleen Bruhn’s “To hell with your corrupt institutions!”, thanks to @CasMudde’s recommendation. It talks about Andrés Manuel López Obrador’s populist features (2000-2006). See the chapter in Mudde and Rovira’s book: books.google.com.mx/books?id=cRy2H…

Some thoughts:

@CasMudde It is impressive how little AMLO’s thinking, strategies, and governing tricks have changed since then: his populist rhetoric, Manichean views, and criticisms towards “a corrupt elite”; his approach to public salary cuts and use of direct transfers to social groups chosen by him…

@CasMudde the way he bypasses institutions (legislature, bureaucratic procedures, electoral timeframes), as well as his view of justice as a higher value than the rule of law; and how when in government he is much less “leftist” than said. So AMLO 2018-19 is very similar to AMLO 2000-06...

@CasMudde There are however some changes: AMLO allegedly campaigned against environmental damages caused by PEMEX, but is now trying to save PEMEX even if that ruins public finances. He cared about politicians/ media showing him in bad light, but now says the opposition is “morally ruined”

@CasMudde Also, there are some striking contradictions. AMLO says economic power and political power have been separated, but Bruhn says one of his key policies in Mx city was only posible thanks to Carlos Slim (the same person just personally thanked in AMLO’s state of the union speech)…

@CasMudde Then and now AMLO complained about a “corrupt elite”, saying he governs with the people. Yet his cabinet and his political coalition are filled with members of Mexico’s elite, including very rich ministers and long-time politicians (some of them even suspected of corruption)…

@CasMudde Bruhn in general is critical of AMLO, but also asserts he “did little damage to the institutions of Mexico City”. Well this is contentious. Public sector salary cuts may have been good for the city’s finance, but have been probably terrible for the government’s overall capacity…

@CasMudde Direct transfers may have been possible because of these “efficiencies”, but it is unclear whether they achieved their anti-poverty objectives. Also, we simply ignore their opportunity costs vs. building better longer-term public services provision infrastructure for the poor…

@CasMudde Similarly, the construction of the freeway (“segundo piso”) may have been beneficial for the middle-classes in the short-term. But its design and financial management were rather poor, and the city’s longer-term transport and mobility problems were not really addressed by it…

@CasMudde The former is relevant now that AMLO is implementing a variety of direct transfer programmes which not only lack proper methodological/evidence basis, but are also draining resources from federal bureaucracies, thus further damaging the govt.'s already limited admin. capacity…

@CasMudde They are also important to consider in the face of AMLO's huge infrastructure projects, such as the oil refinery in Dos Bocas and the airport in Santa Lucía, which may not be taking into account their full environmental and opportunity costs, nor its longer-term usefulness…

@CasMudde Bruhn finally argues that, “when a populist leader enjoys broad popular support, occupies a position with significant legal authority (such as a president), and controls a political party that lacks the ability to limit his/her excesses,…

@CasMudde the political system is particularly vulnerable to a final factor: the personality of the populist leader”. That may be just happening now in Mexico: an unconsolidated democratic system being tested by a leader who still seems to be OK with throwing “institutions to hell”. Thanks

@CasMudde PS. How could AMLO win the presidency 12 years later, without substantially changing his political agenda/discourse? How did he manage to sustain his permanent political campaign for so long? Why is it that his supporters do not see his contradictions and distance from the left?