Mexico has had a conservative populist government since 2018. So what is your point?
To be clear, Morena's "fellow travelers" are not a problem for the party, because nobody knows about them (outside of their own narrow social circles). If anything, for AMLO feminsim was a right-wing bourgeouis perversion - politically, within the Mexican context, he was not wrong. Things might change under Sheinbaum - but, so far, she's kept to her predecessors public conservatism. Anti-Spanish outbursts in a country like Mexico ARE conservative - that's your run-of-the-mill patriotic nationalism. I mean, AMLO thought of himself as a "leftist" - but that was never true in any sense most gringos would recognize. He does believe in redistribution, that we know - but of the sort that is more likely to be approved by a Milton Friedman than any of the more "leftish" development types (direct cash transfers, no - non-political - strings attached, reduce state services to the bare bones, since they are corruption almost by definition, etc.). Of course, for him oil has always been "the best business" and all those "renewables" some sort of bourgeous plot against Pemex. In terms of "social issues" he personally tends to be as narrow-minded as any rural Alabama dixiecrat of old. If anything, he's given strong hints of being an evangelical protestant - whether that is true or not, local evangelicals are convinced that he is. While there was some liberalisation under him on certain issues (due to those urban fellow travellers, who did, on occasion, managed to get some impact), he himself never pushed for it: at best, he did not care.
What Sheinbaum really believes in is anyone's guess: but in terms of domestic policy she has certainly not flaunted her urban left bona fides. This might change - but what certainly cannot change is that Mexico HAS HAD a period of conservative populist rule (whcih, for the moment, shows no signs of lapsing).
Mexico has had a conservative populist government since 2018. So what is your point?
To be clear, Morena's "fellow travelers" are not a problem for the party, because nobody knows about them (outside of their own narrow social circles). If anything, for AMLO feminsim was a right-wing bourgeouis perversion - politically, within the Mexican context, he was not wrong. Things might change under Sheinbaum - but, so far, she's kept to her predecessors public conservatism. Anti-Spanish outbursts in a country like Mexico ARE conservative - that's your run-of-the-mill patriotic nationalism. I mean, AMLO thought of himself as a "leftist" - but that was never true in any sense most gringos would recognize. He does believe in redistribution, that we know - but of the sort that is more likely to be approved by a Milton Friedman than any of the more "leftish" development types (direct cash transfers, no - non-political - strings attached, reduce state services to the bare bones, since they are corruption almost by definition, etc.). Of course, for him oil has always been "the best business" and all those "renewables" some sort of bourgeous plot against Pemex. In terms of "social issues" he personally tends to be as narrow-minded as any rural Alabama dixiecrat of old. If anything, he's given strong hints of being an evangelical protestant - whether that is true or not, local evangelicals are convinced that he is. While there was some liberalisation under him on certain issues (due to those urban fellow travellers, who did, on occasion, managed to get some impact), he himself never pushed for it: at best, he did not care.
What Sheinbaum really believes in is anyone's guess: but in terms of domestic policy she has certainly not flaunted her urban left bona fides. This might change - but what certainly cannot change is that Mexico HAS HAD a period of conservative populist rule (whcih, for the moment, shows no signs of lapsing).