AMLO Vs. la prensa, ¿podía saberse?

In the perpetual plexus between the critics and the president, it is possible to explain the fact that more people have to explain the conflicting relationship. Entre quienes votaron por AMLO está el sector de incondicionales que en todo le da la razon y le cree. However, there is also an important sector that voted for PRIAN, and did not broadcast AMLO an inconditional vote. Le dieron el beneficio de la duda y quizá han descubierto cosas en AMLO que no creyeron posibles. Son los que se le han ido alejando poco a poco (y metidos en el saco comun de golpistas). The sector that voted for him was a possible populist governor, demagogue and very democratic, and visualized a relationship with the press and with the critics of aggression, durability, conflict, as in effect. It is said that you have the elements to detect this type of personality, but not all the captive captains. A group of civil organizations with distinctive themes that are voted for AMLO, the explicit que yo yo lo lo haria porque tarde o temprano, se iría contra ellos. Yo así lo señalé en el libro 2018: ¿AMLO President? (2017) and recognizes different reviews of other authors.

For example, the analyst Ezra Shabot writes about the talent of AMLO: “The caudillo interpreted as a custodian of the opposition, but as the dynamics of the property of a democratically inclined to oppose positions and discredit the adversary. For the authoritarian leader, he intends to demonstrate a mistake or disability that is an act of illegitimacy that is objectively part of a conspiracy destined for the sake of imposing an impeachment ”(Jul. 2017).

For your part, Denise Dresser apuntaba: “The characteristic of AMLO (if you have a lot of good ones) is to think that the critique is not constructive, it is to think that the critics are the only ones”. (May, 2017). Y Federico Berrueto alertaba: “López Obrador lo azedian los fantasmas que el mismo crea, y confunde el escrutinio publico, al que todo personaje publico está obligado, con una conspiracy en su contra”. (May, 2017). And without commenting specifically on AMLO, but talking about the prototype of the populist, Juan Ramón de la Fuente wrote in the tone of his adversion: surjan en su seno actitudes hostiles que puedan llegar al odio. Desarrollan una intolerance hacia los otros… Los líderes populists, always with a peculiar charisma that polarizes… are by definition, intolerant of criticism ”(Jul. 2017). In effect, as it is, in general.

I would like to know that the level of tolerance of AMLO is critical of this era; ya lo había mostrado con grupos y movimientos que por alguna razón no se le plegaban. Ya había dicho quien no estaba con el movimiento estaba en su contra, con todo lo que eso implica (enemigo de los pobres, beneficiarios de la corrupción, desinterés por la Patria, etc). From there, AMLO has the right to reply to mentions, sessions, manipulated information. A veces lo hace, pero casi simper lo niega sin mostrar pruebas. I also respond with infusions and columns to many of his critical criticisms, corrected. Muchos aún expresan esperanzas de que en algún momento AMLO cambiará a una actitud de mayor apertura, dialog, y conciliación. Ojalá fuera el caso, pero no se ve sencillo. El pleito está en su naturaleza (como el scorpión de Asopo).

Analyst.
@ JACrespo1

.

Leave a Comment