| Abstract: | Conclusion The interplay between political and economic reform in Mexico has atken a path not fully predicted by neomodernization theorists or their critics. The Mexican events during these last few years demostrate that economic growth and market reform are not necessarily correlated neatly with the advance of democratic practices, During the Salinas and Zadillo administartions, political opening was not the “ultimate consequence of economic opening” as two analysts of Mexican economics and politics argued several years ago.56 It was not the case that an expansion of individual initiative and greater economic choice accompanying market opening led to the accelaration of democratic reforms in Mexico. Rather, limited democratic reforms were offered as the price of public asquiescence to the economic pain associated with Mexico’s recent cycle of economic crisis and reform. The gradual expansion of democracy in Mexico was not the consequence of market reforms but instead was the mechanism enabled the implementation of these reforms. Earlier versions of this paper were presented at Southern Methodist University conference on the Economic and Political Challenges of Market Reform in Latin America, Dallas, TX, October 1997 and the XXI International Congress of the Latin American Studies Association, Chicago, IL, 24–26 September 1998. The author would like to thank the participants of the SMU conference and Philip Oxhom for their comments. |
