On Wednesday we said that the problem we face is the weakness of the State. This does not seem to be understood within it. The State is a political construction that accumulates and exercises power through laws, bureaucratic structures, and professional armed forces. Power has three sources: violence, legitimacy, and resources.
The political system of the twentieth century concentrated force through a very long process. Only in 1946 did the military return to the barracks, removed from power in exchange for moderate business opportunities. They were used again in the seventies against political uprisings, and shortly thereafter against organized crime. Finally, in recent years, they have been distracted with lucrative business ventures, through which partisan loyalty is purchased.
Bureaucratic structures were never fully developed. There was no desire to fully apply the law, so they functioned more as spaces for negotiation than for rule enforcement, and for that reason they were never institutionalized. Since 1965, the economic resources available to the State were insufficient to finance all the obligations it had undertaken. The combination of these two shortcomings—institutional and financial—gradually eroded public administration, which in the past seven years has reached levels of destitution.
Without a monopoly on force and facing a resource deficit, the State confronts the greatest threat in a century. On one side, local groups with their own force, legitimacy, and resources that have expanded into a genuine threat of replacing the State; on the other, the most dangerous global environment in a century, led by the neighboring country, which concentrates much of its aggressiveness against Mexico.
Under such conditions, jeopardizing what little legitimacy the State still has strikes me as supreme stupidity. Yet that is what is happening. The judicial reform destroyed the legitimacy of that branch, eliminating human capital and replacing it with voracious ignoramuses. The Supreme Court of Justice is putting the very enforcement of the law at risk. Its decisions run counter to rights such as property rights or access to a fair trial. If the State itself breaks the rules, it will be difficult to prevent individuals from deciding to act on their own.
Even more serious is President Sheinbaum’s attempt to change the rules for access to power—namely, to push through an electoral reform that has not been discussed with anyone. It is understood that they know they cannot secure victory in 2027 because they do not have the 4 trillion pesos that López Obrador used for the 2024 election. To avoid losing, they want to be the ones who count the votes.
But the movement that supports the president, even if it remains united, does not command more than 40% support, according to every poll I have seen heading into that election. Changing the rules to prevent the will of 60% of Mexicans from being reflected at the ballot box would be the final nail in the coffin of legitimacy.
As Cipolla argues in The Basic Laws of Human Stupidity, a stupid person is more dangerous than a villain, because in harming others he is willing to harm himself. In order to prevent others from reaching power, they blow up what little they have left, unable to believe that the brick on which they stand can crumble overnight. That is how the Spanish Crown disintegrated and New Spain collapsed; that is how half the territory was lost; that is how we sank into 25 years of civil wars. The Mexican State is extremely fragile. Once the collapse begins, there will be no turning back.
Certero como siempre, doctor. Tristemente, a estos ineptos nadie vino a imponerlos; la mayoría de los mexicanos les entregaron el país. Con labia, mentiras sin pudor y unas dádivas fue suficiente. Cuando los votantes ignorantes son veletas fácilmente manipulables tocando los resortes apropiados, no hay defensa posible.