Mexico's Lopez Obrador: Already Over? (Or, Why The Left Isn't Always Right, But Why We Should Listen Anyway)

Last weekend, Mexico's losing leftist presidential candidate Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador held a protest in Mexico City's main square at which he declared himself president elect of an alternate government. He had hoped that one million of his supporters would show up, the same ones which had been paralyzing the city in permanent protest on Mexico City's main avenue for almost two months. When I read that only about a fourth of those showed up, and that the tent city protest had been dismantled, I delighted in hoping that everything would go back to normal in my birth city; that Lopez Obrador would finally fade away.

Lopez Obrador's claims and protests against a fraudulent election have only added anger to the already divided society in Mexico, and his ability to deliver impassioned rhetoric--not anything else--have gone far enough. Yes, it's become quite clear that he won't be backing down anytime soon, since his declarations of never admitting defeat and even creating a new constitution are a daily part of Mexican news. Yes, his tactics of intimidation have destabilized the city and several political processes, like his recent mobilization that stopped President Vicente Fox's attempt to give his last State of the Union address. But when the news report of that event showed up on this very blog, multitudes of commenters praised the leftist party for their actions, and as much as we might have the tendency to blindly support any type of liberal agenda, the most important part of this debate is the depth of the issue beyond political ideologies.

It could also not be clearer that Mexico's poor need to be incorporated into the national mindset of progress, and the tables are set for national policies to shift in this direction. I think this is undeniable, yet everything else remains muddled, and ignored by the American media. What the debate should be focused on is understanding that the genuine role of Lopez Obrador within his own movement is not one of a hero nor a promising leader, but one of an extremist who is leading his followers down the wrong path of divisiveness. What he stands for is essential for a new Mexico, it just shouldn't be him standing before the crowds.

As a Mexican-born college student living in New York, I've struggled with understanding this paradox for months now, since I started questioning the "common knowledge" I had about Lopez Obrador and the widely negative effect he would have on Mexico. It's been hard trying to balance my radically compassionate side (the one that made me secretly hope that Lopez Obrador would win, something I was afraid of even telling my parents) and my rational, logical side (the one that looked beyond the promises and worried about Mexico's future).

Basically, I registered to vote just so that I could place my vote for Felipe Calderon, Obrador's opponent and current President-elect. I, like my family and everyone else we knew in Mexico, was sure that Lopez Obrador was a corrupt liar who had no means of keeping his promises of free money and higher employment, as his horrible term as Mexico City's mayor had proven. I shared the belief that he would lead to a halting of the recent national progress which was so evident, and so promising.

Then the doubts kicked in, and I went through that momentary phase of secretly wanting to have that hope in him, that he would actually help solve the divide and bring economic and social justice to all those who needed it most. If what he stands for is crucial for Mexico, why shouldn't he win? If he's promising the people who most need help to be the one who listens, and the one who will bring change, how could there be anything wrong with that? Since it's never that easy, I felt good believing that he was not the right man for this revolution--that he wouldn't deliver. The more he complicated the situation in Mexico, the more I was sure of this.

But after months of raging whenever he made another ridiculous statement, or compared himself to Gandhi in a New York Times editorial, I've decided to accept him as a large benefactor to my country. Let me explain.

I fully recognize that up to today, he's been sort of a blessing. He's stirred and mobilized and been obnoxiously self-righteous, but for that, I think Mexico will eventually thank him, since he's managed to get everyone to listen and to hopefully recognize the need for the movement he's embodying. I hope history remembers him as the man who led Mexico into an era of increased consciousness and the institutionalization of a way to bridge the profound gap between the elites and everyone else--and that's where he should stay. As a memory. Not a hero, nor another Martin Luther King (as he has called himself). As much as Mexico's history is made up of insurrections and revolutions, now is not the time to throw off national improvement with more conflict, but to use different modes of incorporating his supporters into a new national identity and ideology of unified progress.

The days of debating the election and the recount are done--to continue doing so, placing blame and anger or disappointment to either side, is exhaustive and will keep clouding the minds of everyone who needs to focus on what comes next. The way that Lopez Obrador is constantly refueling the anger of his supporters towards everyone else and, in turn, making everyone else despise him and his movement, is leading the movement further and further into a stalemate. Lopez Obrador is truly the poor's worst enemy: he's keeping them away, shrouded in anger, stirring annoyance instead of compassion from the rest of the nation. Here we have a country that is truly split down the middle (could there be a more obvious indicator than the .6 percent difference in the two presidential candidates' vote tallies?), a new president who will arrive shortly, and an extremist man who claims to fight for democracy and progress by trying to form his own system of government and pushing his supporters to protest permanently on the main streets of the capital city. What will happen next?

Hopefully, Felipe Calderon will perk up and utilize this momentum positively. There now exists not only an overwhelming demand for political reforms that focus on the poor, but a strong Mexico that can sustain these while it keeps growing. The portion of the population that has been either bothered or angered or frustrated by the circus of the past months has to now hold the government accountable for these reforms by realizing how much they are needed. Meanwhile, Lopez Obrador's supporters will continue to hope and will maintain that anger until something is done--and Lopez Obrador won't be the man who they will have to hold accountable. He's not even a presidential candidate anymore, not for six years at least. He should retreat, and let Mexico go back to normal. Or just back to being on the right track towards a far more equal, fair normal.