The "move together" Everyone has happened: the post you know you HAVE to write but not out, who refuses to be put into characters and words. In this case, I think the reason is obvious: beyond lack of time, write about an issue or project that can be taken to joke, play, bullshit, the same can generate support idealists who are mentally hurtful insults complicated. Yes, sometimes gives a bit of fear, shame, I do not know, this "exposure" in the public arena with a theme "serious" when the spirit of virtual time is dominated by the trivial, the trolling and ad hominem criticism .
But I could not wait any longer. The symbolic day of the "uprising" has passed (August 23) and deep down I know I want to give a brief explanation to those nine people with whom I met almost every Saturday for more than three months and nearly 60 friends, acquaintances and strangers with whom I spoke, who welcomed me and gave me their opinions. By the way, tell the contact could not, who did not know at the time, or still do not know, what was this project and thus reflect on why I did not, what we lacked. I think this writing is a way to remember (me) that the disappointments are more common than we like, defeats a constant variable in life, but why do not you stop believing, or at least should not stop believing in achieving "change something" (for good) is possible. As the extent of this writing is a bit long, I decided to divide it into several sections. The idea. Interviews. The team. The plan. Obstacles. Let us go then.
1. The idea.
will sound
stupid, but it did: the January 7, 2010, in the morning, read the memoirs of Lawrence of Arabia. Talking about the Ottoman Turks [who had subjugated the various Arab peoples for centuries], Lawrence said
"Turkish leaders taught the Arabs that the sectarian interests were more important than the patriotic, that small interests were higher than national interest. "
[Oh, yes, the travails of Lawrence are very instructive]
In reading this sentence could not help but think of Mexico. Throughout its history of setbacks and embezzlement, of betrayal, heroes who become villains, politicians who have forgotten or never sought the "national interest" and social leaders who succumbed to the power, complacency and selfishness. I felt a great shame.
The thought was more or less obvious: in Mexico, our leaders have taught us by their actions, that interest group, the insults and personal egos are more important than finding the common ground, key matches that could help chart a common path in the medium and long term benefit to the country as a whole.
But not everything can be blamed on political elites. While such political acts and become usual, society, citizenship, us, we have not done much to change things. We are more accustomed to shouting, demanding resignations, spread insults mother, who to promote, propose, enforce agreements between all these different actors, in theory, work for us and for the good of Mexico.
Maybe, why not, it was time to change the mental paradigms. Instead of blaming the delays on the country to another, understand their approaches. Instead of debating ad nauseam who has the best proposals and highlight the differences, find the space to take forward the points in common. What if from the society, instead of requiring that one leader, one party, a politician's resignation, we encouraged that MANY yield in their particular areas of influence, well defined lines, thinking about the good of the country, its economic recovery, etc.? And understanding that they would not do so out of kindness or benevolence, but by a clear political reason: the country is of a bitch and if we continue like we will get absolutely nowhere.
Here need a break. Of course I hate to certain politicians, businessmen, union leaders and religious. But let's face it: we drop it or not, hate or not, the whales, AMLOs, Elba Esthers, Beltrones, Ebrards, Azcarraga, Esparza, etc., Are our "raw politics" are the ones (and if not They were quickly reach others with similar characteristics), and are those that can, where appropriate, make decisions that impact positively or negatively to the country. Democrats can not invent nothing, or clone or Mandelas Lech Walesa and bring them to work in our institutions. This is what we have and something should be done with them.
Well, thought concluded: on top, this year all the politicians, without distinction of party or ideology, fill your mouth with fine speeches saying ad nauseam that "Mexico is a country that knows how to get ahead when united, "" we are stronger than our problems, "the Mexican people know how to fight for what you want," "our similarities are greater than our differences" and more blah, blah, blah, blah, blah revolutionary bicentennial .
Yes, even here there is nothing new under the sun. But my mind kept thinking and suddenly came as a series of questions, the most important
How to take advantage, then, the political momentum, and force a settlement, a national pact between political actors and citizens TPTB where agrees to continue administering inertia will get us nowhere?, how can define a shared agenda whose ultimate goal is to get out of this impasse in which there is a good part of the Mexican public life?, how to identify and request not only problems, not diagnoses, but possible solutions to medium and long term? and-most importantly-how get them to work on them no matter if Ebrard wins in 2012, Peña Nieto, AMLO, Creel, or whoever? My answer came botepronto.
2. The plan. Part.
The approach outlined above, needless to say, is not very original, very naive, and without specific operational mechanisms. It's like saying "change the world, we achieve world peace." Uh, how? Moved by a wide variety of spirits and energies [from social desire "to do something", the historical account of "do not let this moment", to clumsy need not miss] began to meet with several individuals, they would expose the sketch or draft of the strategy that had happened to me. The "action plan" was basically the following:
a) Make a list plural in ideological and partisan "by renowned specialists and officials in education and public health, economy and combat poverty.
b) Request specialists to answer a few questions (listed below).
c) identify commonalities that may exist
d) convince a good number of journalists, academics, researchers, columnists, bloggers and twitterers of all states in the country to participate in a "coordinated movement."
e) Set a day X for the "uprising", which was basically spread by various means and methods one requirement: "There is nothing to celebrate, get to work for the country" and at the same time launch a symbolic idea: "Look, all these people agree on these points, take out the political will and act."
[Yes, the "plan" had its revolutionary conspiratorial vein, but not killed or shot.]
3. Interviews.
As I said, for a month I met and talked to a few dozen people on these ideas. My hope was to find those who would like to contribute, and land join the strategic part of all this, it is less clear what he had. It is difficult to mention all of the talk, but they were extremely useful. Of course, everyone had almost the same doubts and reservations "is bastard, nobody is going to strip, how can we do ", but in the end, almost always heard this phrase:" though it sounds difficult, it's worse to do nothing, count on me. "
Of all the interviews, the strangest, undoubtedly, was the one I had with Miguel Carbonell, here at the Institute for Legal Research of UNAM. The first few minutes were very nice, until I mentioned that, in my view, much of the reluctance that Mexico was living in political, economic and social, had to do with a lack of political will of the actors who could make important decisions. Then I interrupted and told me it was not a question of voluntarism, but of changing the regime, not away from the branches and to enter the bull by the horns and finished, "You have to do is to propose a reform of the State (!)" . "But there are many proposals, several pretty good," he said. "Who cares if I do another, the trick is to take advantage of these times, the inertia of 2010, followed. And then gave me a litany of "the first thing you do in enclaustrarte two months with all the books on government reform and then you can get to raise your choice, and enter the debate and I did and so do you MUST" . Discuss five minutes on items found and, suddenly, I realized the conversation was over. I fired a little dry but magnanimous smile who is known above. I think about it the following: talking with Carbonell was a challenge, a learning experience. Above all, I did see a clear difference between lawyers and political scientists. The former believe that good laws can solve almost everything. The latter, some tend to believe that it is first necessary act of will, political negotiation, which allows 1) the creation of such laws and 2) its full and proper operation of otherwise useless.
The second talk I will mention was virtual and went with
Chilangelina . I must confess that he had never "talked" to her before, even when we were in that strange party [in their honor!] That took place in a roof garden of the Narvaez. Yes, you know it, good Chila is relentless, the questions can be acidic, but their comments are always sensible. Talk to her and answer their questions helped me realize many aspects that had simply forgotten. For example, the importance of political timing. It is not the same to a scandal in March than in August when Congress is in recess and policy notes are more scarce. But most important was this: "Jordy, we're up to the mother of enunciation, politicians hear a claim and do nothing, why? because they are not accountable to anyone. Such an initiative will only succeed if it provides form and substance, short and long term. The answer lies in the people, we need to know that we can "demand a clear accounting, overseeing the work of political conscience by voting to change things."
That phrase, I think, is that until today continues to haunt me. While all or almost all meaning we may share your answer to the question and how? is extremely complicated. A few weeks ago talked something similar with Kyuutz
by Twitter: how to broaden the channels of debate, how to politicize never been interested in politics, how to show the "power" we have as citizens? To this day I still have a clear answer. For the plan, I wanted to have street plays, short films, performances in public squares, etc., Exploiting these ideas and trying to answer these questions, but we'll see what obstacles there. I know there are various efforts of people like Maite
Azuela, Alberto Serdán
, friends and other activists whose aim is to "empower", "activate" the citizens, but the process is always hazy. Even worse when we pause a moment and think 'are we really willing to walk chasing our politicians? Given the breadth of problems that exist in Mexico, I find it understandable that ordinary people lose their breath, preferring to remain impassive. Inaction is more costly in the long term, but less stressful.
4. The team.
Finally, after dozens of virtual chats and in person (Many of you will remember), I realized I needed to have different perspectives on the issues he wanted addressed and I decided to create a small working group. Yes, I know, the selection was very arbitrary, but taking into account such obvious issues as 1) availability to attend a meeting once a week, 2) enthusiasm, 3) academic and professional training, the alleged group was composed by nine people. Among us were social anthropologists, educators, politicians, journalists, government officials, federal and local people left, right and center.
[Never There was a picture of the ten together, sometimes missing, sometimes trickled]
5. The plan. Part II.
For a little over three months we met about nine times, with the idea of \u200b\u200boperating a sketch of the "plan."
first thing we did was to define four areas of national interest where we thought, should concentrate the efforts of the various political, economic and social of the country: a) public health, b) education, c) match poverty, d) economic growth.
Similarly, we define four sectors or groups that play an important role when the day X: 1) diverse group of experts in the issues mentioned above. 2) Red Circle, comprising 30 analysts, columnists, journalists nationwide, more than 62 journalists, analysts and local columnists, 2 for each state in the republic. 3) Green circle: civil society groups, workshops, architecture, theater groups, bloggers, twitterers, ordinary citizens. 4) International journalists.
Broadly our idea was:
Make a list of specialists (which was quite chingona) and point out that answer the following questions:
"If you had a comprehensive decision-making power [specified area], we would like to answer the following questions from an objective, realistic and feasible, taking into account current scope and limits of political and economic life:
• What, in his view, the main problems and weaknesses of the [specified area] in Mexico?
• What actions should be possible to take, or what would must be restored, maintained or strengthened to address this area in the medium (2012) and long term (2020)?
• What specific actors, playing what role, and what resources would have to intervene to carry out the actions proposed in this area? "
is important to note that the third fundamental question was . We wanted it to be brought directly what characters, groups, actors had to intervene and doing what specifically to improve the area. All known approaches and proposals that aim to improve, say, education in Mexico but generally speaking the air, in the abstract, without saying who the front part of the problem and how they can be part of the solution.
Finally, once the responses of specialists, we would generate a kind of document to be distributed to the "red circle" who would know in advance what it was all over this plan. In addition, several class actions would prepare the "green circle" with the idea that from day X [it would be in August, preferably 23], across the country have both columnists, radio journalists, and other political analysts as theater groups, bloggers, twitterers, etc., emphasizing the need-and possibly reach a national compact in the defined areas and now is the time to try [right after the July elections and before we come over the 2012 electoral process ]. Finally, some journalist friends from abroad also try to generate some kind of media attention on this "coordinated movement." This would be done not only through newspaper columns and radio programs, but also showing images of signs and banners that supposedly were to be placed at strategic sites in these other countries. The reality has opened our eyes very quickly.
6. Obstacles.
As everyone can imagine, things did not go as expected. First it was Luis Urquieta, a law student and my best friend who could no longer join the meetings. Then two more fell in the middle of the road. The group proceeded without a clear path, we met with Andrew
Lajous and realized that beyond the famous day X, we had no clear mechanism to make proposals or statements of experts are back agreements, written agreements, and other laws. What would we do? Forums " discussion? "Round tables? A new "Pact of Chapultepec like the one called Slim few years ago and ended up being nothing?
Obviously, that was one of our biggest problems, he never defined the" mechanism ". It's time we had to decide to arrive a day X and would let things take the course that would mean: that we now had no elements to clearly define the formal process had to follow. blunder. By not taking this course, ourselves we began to realize how extremely difficult it is to try to steer, motivate, coordinate forces for some intangible goal. Yes, yes, everybody wants the country to do better, but again ... How?
The second problem: the real or perceived lack of time. Having defined our list and our questions, the next step was to go directly to make a sort of interview each of our selected specialists. And there never was able to assemble a group to go and do it in an orderly and methodical. We started to delay, defer until the impulse was to us all.
The third major obstacle: our "thematic areas" were too big. The public health issue, for example, could be from a myriad of perspectives. "Reproductive Health? "Young and addictions? "Obesity in children? "Universal social security? While at the end decided to limit only the social security issue, the issue we started to slip. While all had some knowledge of the most obvious problems, lack of clear and concise data led us to lose valuable time.
Another little problem that seems minor but it is not the fight of egos between "specialists." When on occasion I had to meet with a "gentleman scholar" and excited that I wondered who else had thought of this plan, my answers made him change his mind. "But how can you ask so-and-such to participate, if it has sufficient merit ... and what about Somebody's niece ... if it is a right unbearable. "Changing our politicians to stop their grids also involves going through all of our other sectors of national life. What may seem absurd and heavy, but it is real.
Finally, I think the lack of resources such as "time", "computer", "money", "networking" also eventually demoralize us. It was a company as big, strange and complex that all we realized how difficult it would be for people the likes of Juan Ramon de la Fuente, Santiago Levy, René Drucker, Ricardo Raphael, ETC. want to commit to participate in something as nebulous.
In early April, the group finally disintegrated and lost all the channel plan. For a few weeks playing with the idea of \u200b\u200bpull it off alone, form another group, whatever, but I felt I also needed time for reflection. My main moral support had been away a bit from me and I was not the strength to face this alone. As a good man, cowardly and timid, let the "coordinated movement" will remain an attractive three-month experiment and little else. The idea of \u200b\u200bdoing this on a large scale, at some later time, it mantiente in my head, but without the idyllic and romantic "make the revolution of conscience." All in good time, they say. When will our own, then?
---
If I may, I'd make a list of people I could talk about this. But better ask, lest the bad. By DM or Facebook send me a message if you prefer not to appear on the list that I will tomorrow.
