Each Country Decides: A Critique of Mexican Presidential Statements

The article criticizes the pronouncements of Mexican presidents, suggesting that their words, whether spoken or written, should be taken with a grain of salt. It posits that leaders often express "disparates" that are rarely meant to be taken seriously, though occasionally they reveal a glimpse of their true thinking through their excesses.

Claudia Sheinbaum is presented as less cynical and more transparent than her predecessor, López Obrador. However, when questioned about Daniel Ortega's decision to indefinitely suspend elections in Nicaragua, her initial response was a common, albeit uninformed, statement about self-determination. The author points out that the concept of self-determination originates from international law and decolonization movements, not a country's internal governance.

When pressed further, Sheinbaum's response became entangled. She stated, "Each country decides, each people decides. We are in favor of democracy, but each country has its self-determination and decides how it organizes itself. There are other presidents who have reelected themselves and who want to reelect themselves more times… Well, each country decides."

The author argues that Sheinbaum appears uninterested in *how* a country decides, pointing to Nicaragua where the decision was clearly made by Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo, not the populace. The piece suggests Sheinbaum sees a perpetual "democratic" continuity stemming from revolutions, implying that subsequent issues are inconsequential against this pure origin. This perspective, the author implies, overlooks the realities of how power is consolidated and maintained.

“

Each country decides, each people decides. We are in favor of democracy, but each country has its self-determination and decides how it organizes itself. There are other presidents who have reelected themselves and who want to reelect themselves more times… Well, each country decides.