The Mexican State and the Political Implications of Economic Restructuring

In recent years, both mainstream and neo-Marxist scholarship has emphasized the importance of the state in leading political and economic change (Almond, 1988: 900-901). Much of the literature on the Latin American state has been inspired by the neo-Marxist structuralist perspective: Although the limitations imposed on public policy by capitalist structures, both domestic and foreign, are recognized, the state is also seen as playing a central role in the political and economic restructuring necessary for the continuation of economic growth (for surveys of the literature, see Fortin, 1985; Fitzgerald, Floto, and Lehmen, 1976). Whereas the structuralist argument concerning the constraints imposed on policy by the capitalist context, particularly by international economic pressures, is convincing, any presumption about the purpose and long-term implications of state action remains problematic. State policy may well aggravate social and political tensions and therefore be counterproductive to continued capitalist growth. Indeed, as a consequence of the constraints imposed by the operation of the world economy, state managers may be compelled to pursue policies not of their own choosing, and such policies may have unforeseen and undesired results over which they have little or no control. This scenario characterized the economic restructuring program initiated and implemented by the administration of President Miguel de la Madrid between 1983 and 1988. Although, as suggested by structuralist theory, international capitalist pressure forced increased economic liberalization, the state's attempt to exercise relative autonomy in controlling the consequent political fallout produced results neither intended nor foreseen and ultimately spawned increased state repression. The argument presented here is that the