It was predictable that the criticisms of the excessive pragmatism of the PAN leadership turned into, sooner or later, a direct reproach of the president's political strategy. But what we have seen in recent days reveals that the most important censure that is emerging is from within the ranks of the party itself, because its own members are seeking to judge the moral authority for their leader. The dispute that we are experiencing is not only between opponents and adversaries, but of people in the family.I'm not sure if the problem is pragmatism per se, although I do agree with Merino that there is a problem. Following the PRI victories in 2009, Calderón's final stretch was bound to be difficult, but rather than responding by making certain concessions and seeking a series of small victories like Bill Clinton in the final six years of his term, Calderón's alliance strategy seems like a misguided Hail Mary attempt to recover ground irredeemably lost, at least for the time being. This isn't so much pragmatism as delusion and schizophrenia.
This tends to happen to the Machiavellis: once the means stop mattering to them, the ends are also lost. And in the case the damage could be far greater, because a successful sexenio for all of Mexico and not just the politics of the PAN must be among those goals. But as far as we can tell, the pragmatism that appears to be guiding the decisions of Los Pinos and the panista leadership could make both objectives more difficult. On one side, because it would be adding new motives of bitterness and bad faith to the contest in 2012, and on the other, because any loss after the monstrous alliances will be read, by the panistas themselves, as proof of a horrible negotiation.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Mauricio Merino doesn't think much of the pragmatism guiding Felipe Calderón in recent days: