Background on the 4T Movement and its Political Philosophy
The current government and the 4T movement have an inherent desire to establish clientelism. They do not comprehend politics within the framework of liberal democratic policy, instead favoring a more simplistic, utilitarian, and authoritarian approach: give the people what they want – a lottery, which we distribute, and they vote for us.
This mindset is not new; it has roots in the encomienda system during the conquest era and was reinforced throughout the 20th century with PRI practices. The brief period of democratic and liberal conquests from the 1990s to 2018 was an unsustainable parenthesis for those excluded and not benefiting from modernity, who recognized in Morena’s childish practices something familiar, desirable, and convenient to vote for.
The Decline of Institutions and the Rise of Clientelism
While the 20th and early 21st centuries saw the establishment of useful institutions addressing health, housing, and education issues beyond immediate handouts, the previous and current governments have issued checks against resources that, without growth and infrastructure, will eventually run out, making 4T’s clientelism unsustainable.
A recent example is the awarding of housing to squatters by INFONAVIT. The institute has built houses and granted credits for housing acquisition (over 12 million in total) throughout the Fox, Calderón, and Peña Nieto administrations. However, land scarcity and associated costs led construction companies to build away from population centers or industrial zones.
This combination resulted in hundreds or thousands of occupied and then abandoned houses due to lack of infrastructure and services, or simply because the houses were not sold or occupied. Although no single entity owns all INFONAVIT departments and houses, there are owners – constructors or the INFONAVIT itself as the financier, or credit applicants.
INFONAVIT’s Role in the 4T’s Clientelism Strategy
During my time at INFONAVIT, there was a significant number of information requests about abandoned housing locations. The access to information and transparency department was prohibited from providing this information due to repetitive requesters’ names and the ongoing thousands of squatter cases, which cost INFONAVIT annually or individual rightful owners.
There is a trade and political use by specific leaders to generate clientelism through this illegal occupation.
The 4T’s Plan for Cheap Housing Distribution
Facing this issue, the 4T proposes giving squatters discounted housing. They will not sell at market prices but set a price determined by bureaucracy, funded by the institute’s fund. This will essentially take money from workers who contribute to financing the millions of housing credits, giving it to squatters.
Regardless of whether the rightful homeowner wants to sell, the 4T will have created a new clientelism grateful for the gift. In return, squatters will only need to vote for them and attend their rallies.
