Introduction
In the insightful and thought-provoking book “Why Nations Fail” by Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson, the authors ponder why a city like Nogales in the United States boasts significantly higher living standards compared to its Mexican counterpart, Nogales, Sonora. Despite similar population sizes, geography, climate, and a shared determination to succeed on both sides of the border, disparities are evident in education, healthcare, housing, credit access, and security. What accounts for this stark contrast?
The Role of Institutions
The answer, though simple, is complex: institutions. As explained by Nobel laureate Douglas North, institutions are not buildings or individuals but the rules governing how issues are resolved. For instance, INFONAVIT isn’t merely its building or bureaucracy; it’s an organization enforcing the law that created it, providing credit and housing to hardworking employees who collectively address this problem.
Throughout history, entire civilizations have vanished due to adherence to ideological, religious, or political principles without practical benefit. Their rules and institutions failed to address reality effectively. Examples include the Maya, Incas, and inhabitants of Easter Island. In the name of unyielding convictions and unwavering maxims, societies lost their splendor and fractured internally. Those opposing the official creed were disregarded or eliminated, while others persisted in their folly because they held power.
Over centuries, particularly in the West, societies recognized that a viable society requires power distribution rather than concentration in one leader or person. Thus, the division of powers is not a neoliberal whim but a civilized method to process social conflict and strive for optimal solutions to societal complexities, political, economic, and social.
Mexico’s Institutional Challenges
Mexico’s Fourth Transformation (4T), its legislators, and president exemplify misguided and ineffective rules to tackle conflict and national issues. They’ve decided to overhaul everything, albeit without logic or reason behind their decisions. There’s no diagnosis, evaluation, or consideration of consequences—just impulsive actions driven by resentment and animosity towards the past.
Power dynamics illustrate this issue: when the opposition wins an election, documents their victory, yet remains powerless because those in charge refuse to relinquish control. This scenario mirrors Venezuela, where the opposition triumphs in elections but is denied power. Similarly, Mexico’s opposition faces disarray and overwhelming pressure from Morena, leading to worsening solutions and rules—essentially, ineffective institutions.
A Proposed Judge’s Capricious Decision
The incoming Supreme Court president, before assuming office and presenting change proposals, imposed a capricious decision: not wearing a judicial robe. This wasn’t about respecting the law or independence; it was a personal ideological preference, disregarding tradition.
This exemplifies the 4T’s capricious nature, driven by childlike whims rather than substantive change. Such behavior stems from having power without accountability or foresight.
Key Questions and Answers
- What are institutions according to Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson? Institutions are the rules governing how issues are resolved, not buildings or individuals.
- Why did certain civilizations vanish? They adhered to principles without practical benefit, causing their institutions to fail in addressing reality.
- What is the significance of power distribution in societies? Power distribution, rather than concentration, enables a viable and adaptable society.
- How do Mexico’s institutions fare under the Fourth Transformation? The 4T’s legislators, president, and decisions reflect misguided and ineffective rules to address conflict and national issues.
- What does the incoming Supreme Court president’s decision signify? It represents capricious behavior driven by personal preference rather than respect for law or tradition.
