When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.


President AMLO Gets A History Lesson From Mexico's Pandemic

COVID-19 has barely distracted Mexico’s leftist government from its political and electoral priorities. It may be forgetting the price earlier governments paid for ignoring the plight of millions of Mexicans.

Mexican President Andreas Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO)
Mexican President Andreas Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO)
Luis Rubio

MEXICO CITY - There is nothing like a crisis to show us who we really are, to help see the best and worst in people, governments and countries.

I recall the climate of solidarity after the 1985 earthquake, which had the harshest of political repercussions and became a crucial agent of democratization in the years that followed. That was in part due to the government's evident incompetence in reacting to the tragedy, but especially showed society's ability to organize itself and decisively contribute to stabilizing the country. The late diplomat Adolfo Aguilar Zínser recalled it well in hi book Still It Trembles (Aún Tiembla), written a year after the quake.

If an earthquake could change so much, I wonder how much will change with weeks and months of confinement, a severe recession and political leadership that has been absent.

The most notable thing for me these weeks has been the people's solidarity, though even this was split as befits a polarized society. There is a rift in this country, which President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) is fueling and exacerbating. People have moved closer to each other but only in their own political camp, with very little sympathy for all those who have lost their jobs and earnings. Certainly, employers and workers collaborated to safeguard jobs, finding compromises to avoid a social catastrophe. Unfortunately, given the composition of the labor market — which offers some formal jobs. but mostly informal work — these efforts have helped hundreds of families, but not the millions of people suddenly left hanging by a thread. More importantly, generalized solidarity is difficult without a government that is willing to explain and unite.

The 1985 earthquake in Mexico — Photo: Mario Ruiz/ZUMA

This was a moment that begged for great leadership. It was a unique opportunity to forge a new country based on calls to help each other and even advance toward AMLO's much-vaunted Transformation, a series of reforms he promised during his electoral campaign, including curbing corruption and privileges for high government officials, reducing poverty and violence and growing the economy. But it hasn't happened. The president understands solidarity to mean loyalty to his government, as shown by recent declarations about the pandemic's "lessons." By the time the virus arrived the government had already dismantled the health sector, depriving it of critical supplies and drugs, as evidenced in the appalling situation of children with cancer.

After much hesitation, the Mexican government finally adopted a strategy for dealing with the health crisis. The obstacle had been the president's fear of a recession, which led to measures that experts have decried as inadequate. Meanwhile, you could discern the return of the absolutist government of our traditions: never believing it had to explain anything nor even give out correct death and contagion figures.

In stark contrast with our rulers, our doctors and nurses have been giving their all, often risking their lives in the process. Nothing like the country's leaders whose motivations are, as ever, their basest passions.

One could see a range of behaviors in society: from shoppers hoarding toilet paper and cleaning products to firms and individuals seeking solutions, not excuses. A new production line was set up as soon as MIT university had designed a cheap and effective ventilator model. Hotels opened their doors to house milder coronavirus patients or relatives of those in intensive care.

The president is showing disdain for those sectors that largely voted for him.

At all levels, there have been notable displays of skillfulness, readiness and dedication. Working from home, many devised platforms to boost productivity, while others have shown their adaptability and discipline. The worst of it is the dismal state of our public services, which shows what a low priority they have been for a succession of governments. This was a test, and the government has failed it.

Its priorities doggedly remain political and electoral. It has no time for the dramas families have lived through in the pandemic. The president insists there will be no overspending — which comes from a legitimate concern — but he is also showing disdain for those sectors that largely voted for him. Crises may reveal societies, but they also strip governments bare. As in 1985, Mexico must start anew.

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.


"In Pain You Shall Bring Forth Children" — The Business Behind Suffering In Childbirth

Certain female doctors, extremist midwives, online consultants extol the benefits of painful labor, blame mothers who resort to C-sections and convince them to refuse anesthesia. From Italy, an expose on who they are and why they preach a return to the ancestral nature of motherhood.

Photo of a home birth

Home birth

Francesca Bubba

ROME — “I was told that enduring the pain of childbirth would be the first test as a mother..."

Ginevra Massiletti, 32, went into labor with her first child last year in the southern Italian city of Cosenza, convinced that childbirth should be a fully natural experience.

"I was in too much pain, but I didn't want to give in to analgesia," she said. "In the end, however, I couldn't take it; I asked for an epidural to feel less pain, but in the meantime I was crying and apologizing to my baby, feeling that I had betrayed him because of my weakness and need for relief.”

Ginevra says she's now over the shock, but “for months, I believed I was not up to my motherhood.”

During her pregnancy, reading various blogs and social pages, she had internalized a belief: that childbirth accompanied by anesthesia to relieve the mother's pain was a second-class birth, and especially that in doing so she would selfishly put herself before the baby.

Ginevra’s is not an isolated case. Indeed, online, in some newspapers, and even in certain health circles, a narrative of motherhood that ostracizes any medical-pharmacological support for childbirth, not to mention the use of C-section, is raging in the name of an ancestral vision according to which the mother's body must do everything on its own. Any “little help” offered by science will have negative effects on the unborn child.

Behind this, there is often also a real business, with courses and consultations, strictly on a for-profit basis.

Keep reading...Show less

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

The latest