The Mexican Model

Dissent magazine has a lengthy discussion, with fully-formed rebuttals, of why Mexico's left-wing progressive "Morena" party has done well while right-wing parties have been on the rise globally. The basic argument is simple enough: 

Morena has delivered for its base. The transformation in the lives of working-class Mexicans under its rule is undeniable. Since taking power in late 2018, average labor income has risen 30 percent above inflation, lifting more than 13 million people out of poverty. Inequality, measured by the income share of the top 1 percent, has seen its steepest and fastest drop in almost a century, matching in four years what had previously taken nearly two decades to accomplish.

These changes are the result of Morena’s efforts, which have included dismantling a set of labor policies that condemned nearly half of Mexican workers to poverty wages. Under Morena, the minimum wage has tripled at the border and more than doubled nationwide, vacation days have doubled, employer retirement contributions have tripled, outsourcing has been curbed, and secret-ballot union elections are now mandatory. This package of reforms is a historic achievement that has improved millions of lives in ways the left has long only imagined.

As a result, a renewed sense of hope has taken root in Mexico. Trust in government has more than doubled, satisfaction with democracy has surged, and belief that the state governs for the people has reached a historic high.

That was a model that worked here for the Democratic Party back when it was a pro-union party. During the Clinton years, the party began the transition to a party that serves the internationalist elite, from major tech companies like Microsoft to the NAFTA/TPP international trade crowd. 

I'm not going to float an opinion on tariffs. In the 90s I found the libertarian arguments convincing, i.e. that free trade benefitted all; in fact, it seems to have functioned to empower international mega-corporations rather than enriching the people in the various countries. Mexico had NAFTA in the 1990s, and still the people worked for starvation wages -- but not starvation enough that China couldn't out-compete them with even greater poverty among the workers, nor that southeast Asia couldn't out-compete China. During this time the corporations that leveraged all this got fantastically wealthy; shipping firms grew gigantic, as we mined minerals in Africa and sent them to Asia to be turned into products that were shipped to the US and Europe for sale. The worker didn't get a fairer shake, though they were often glad to get even those jobs given the alternative was actual starvation. 

Trump and Morena are both offering alternatives to that in their own way; it amuses me that they don't see themselves as in a sense aligned, given that they are both rejecting that vision in favor of one that is better for the people. One calls it populism and nationalism, the other progress, but both are trying to claw back power, wealth, and control for the people instead of these mega-corporate powers. 

Anyway, if you want to engage with and think about a thoughtful discussion from the other side, here is one to consider.