The more that I think about it, the more I like the term "de-privatize". It explicitly lays out that it's a return to what should have been the normal state of affairs.
They were never private. They are run by their respective trade unions, wich in practice work more like medieval guilds, were positions in the company can be inherited, sold, etc.
Sometimes the companies subcontract stuff, and those are awarded to the families of other guild members.
There are also a lot of benefits for high ranking members like I limited free electricity for life. On the other hand if I exceed my allowed use I get fined into space.
There were some reforms made by the libs to make the companies more competitive, by bringing some accountability, but they were mostly half assed. And never did anything. Except annoy the most reactionary sectors in Mexican society, who all support amlo.
This reform doesn't do anything except give them a guarantee that things will stay as they are. Rigthnow Mexico has oil for 15 years or so. And the government invests more money in pemex than it gets out, so it basically is subsidizing the high living standards of high ranking guildsmen.
Not necessarily. It seems like a very strong guarantee. Any change as to how they are run, or movement towards privatisation would be almost imposible now, wich is both good and bad.
ah ok so it's not so much a swing to the left as it is a prevention of a future swing to the right, if i'm understanding correctly. i guess that's something to celebrate? i really just can't figure out why mexico -- its leaders but especially its people -- aren't more left-wing, given how much they suffer due to yankkkee imperialism, so i'm kind of at a loss as to why they aren't more based
Yhea exactly, it however also benefits some very reactionary local interests, so it balances out.
I think the yanks just have too much influence.
Besides that, Mexico has a propensity for fascism, it's one of those countries were the modern state developed alongside a warlord class instead of a capitalist class, so the state was modernity and the middle classes were beourocrats. So there wasn't the progressive force of new production arrangements, and similar to turkey this resulted in the warlords just assimilating into the resources of the modern state.
As of now I think our biggest problem is organized crime, wich is backed by
And ignored by the Mexican government. Mostly due to collusion.
what's the difference between "de-privatize" and "nationalize"? is this some weasel word bullshit or did something substantial actually happen here?
Death to America
The more that I think about it, the more I like the term "de-privatize". It explicitly lays out that it's a return to what should have been the normal state of affairs.
Also remember that "privatization" was coined to describe what the Euro fascists did in their economy. So "deprivatize" is essentially "antifa"
I think it is because they were nationalized in the past, so it is undoing the later privatization.
They were never private. They are run by their respective trade unions, wich in practice work more like medieval guilds, were positions in the company can be inherited, sold, etc.
Sometimes the companies subcontract stuff, and those are awarded to the families of other guild members.
There are also a lot of benefits for high ranking members like I limited free electricity for life. On the other hand if I exceed my allowed use I get fined into space.
There were some reforms made by the libs to make the companies more competitive, by bringing some accountability, but they were mostly half assed. And never did anything. Except annoy the most reactionary sectors in Mexican society, who all support amlo.
This reform doesn't do anything except give them a guarantee that things will stay as they are. Rigthnow Mexico has oil for 15 years or so. And the government invests more money in pemex than it gets out, so it basically is subsidizing the high living standards of high ranking guildsmen.
Death to america, of course
so this is indeed a bullshit headline.
Death to America
Not necessarily. It seems like a very strong guarantee. Any change as to how they are run, or movement towards privatisation would be almost imposible now, wich is both good and bad.
Death to america of course.
ah ok so it's not so much a swing to the left as it is a prevention of a future swing to the right, if i'm understanding correctly. i guess that's something to celebrate? i really just can't figure out why mexico -- its leaders but especially its people -- aren't more left-wing, given how much they suffer due to yankkkee imperialism, so i'm kind of at a loss as to why they aren't more based
Death to America
Yhea exactly, it however also benefits some very reactionary local interests, so it balances out.
I think the yanks just have too much influence.
Besides that, Mexico has a propensity for fascism, it's one of those countries were the modern state developed alongside a warlord class instead of a capitalist class, so the state was modernity and the middle classes were beourocrats. So there wasn't the progressive force of new production arrangements, and similar to turkey this resulted in the warlords just assimilating into the resources of the modern state.
As of now I think our biggest problem is organized crime, wich is backed by
And ignored by the Mexican government. Mostly due to collusion.
Death to america of course