Why Mexico?
Algunas ideas que nos motivaron a elegir México y su capital, Ciudad de México, como sede son:
- The northern border of Mexico is one of the most complex, contrasting and violent in the world (along with those of Palestine and Western Sahara), which determines its current role in migration (mainly Central American, but also Caribbean), from of the tense and unequal relations with the United States. This has worsened in recent years, due to the increase in migratory flows and, as a consequence, the increase in repressive measures that seek to inhibit them; which in turn have had an effect of expanding the border area towards the Mexican southeast. Such a situation has led us to develop in a more present and conscious way a reflective thought about bodies in transit and mobile-territories, and that, for the same reason, leads us to question transnational-transterritorial limits.
- The country is affected by extractivist models that are not exclusive to Mexico, but to all of Latin America, through the consolidation of regional connectivity infrastructure within the framework of large programs, such as the IIRSA (Initiative for the Integration of South American Regional Infrastructure ), and the Mesoamerican Project. These promote energy, productive, agro-industrial, conservationist, mass tourism megaprojects, among others, that cross the economy of Latin America, exploiting natural resources from the commodification of nature and life, generating irreversible social and environmental impacts in the territories. This situation has brought as a consequence, more pressure and dispossession of natural resources, deforestation, pollution and health problems in the population, which deepens the food and energy crisis.
- As Mexico is a mega-diverse territory due to its biocultural wealth, like many other Latin American countries, it has become the scene of socio-environmental/territorial injustices, in which environmental defenders are discredited and constantly suffer persecution, and are even killed.
- Inequality is becoming more acute in mountain, rural and peasant areas, where agricultural yields are low, prices are too low for marketing and production is unable to cover a self-sufficient diet. The reasons are climate change, government policies with neoliberal approaches, which for so many years promoted the use of agrochemicals, which has led to wear, pollution and depletion of land, water and forests. This situation intensifies the conditions of poverty and environmental crisis that are experienced in these territories.
- The geopolitical context of Mexico and the violence linked to megaprojects and drug trafficking have led to endless social organizations to articulate for the defense of their territories, in different ways; from the self-defense groups, and organizations in search of disappeared persons, to those who propose counter-hegemonic bets, such as the neo-Zapatista movement, the indigenous territorial autonomy projects and the popular movements against the megaprojects, among others.
The proposal to organize the next congress in Mexico, from a context that does not reflect the most favorable conditions for the welfare of a society, is based on approaching and understanding the complexity of the Latin American region.
From this context, various Mexican actors, groups, organizations, researchers, researchers, professors, activists, artists, academics and scholars have given importance, within our fields of work and action, to the critical approach on :
- Migration, emigration, forced displacement and construction of borders.
- Movements in defense of the territory and autonomy projects.
- Indigenous communities that preserve their own worldviews, languages and territories beyond the configuration of the Mexican State.
- Femicide violence (10 femicides per day in the country), and in turn the response given from the feminist movements in Mexico and Latin America, hand in hand with a process of feminization of Latin American politics.
- State violence under the discourse of “development” through megaprojects (for example the Mayan Train) and new treaties, such as the TPP.
- Forced disappearance and human rights violations have generated, as a social response, family search networks and movements for peace.
- Other territorialities and ways of inhabiting the body, the territories and the world.
We raise all these points under the questioning of the current federal government, being the one with the “greatest legitimacy” in recent years; with an apparent left-wing discourse, which has created expectations regarding the possible
Above all, the issue of the “flagship projects” of the federal government, all of them mega-infrastructure, has strong territorial impacts at different scales, where a critical geography would have a lot to say, at least to understand them, but also to make visible their multiple consequences, denounce and create new proposals. As for feminist demands and struggles, far from what some sectors expected, the current government has endeavored to minimize the demands, maintain impunity in femicides, criminalize social protest, postpone priority issues (such as the decriminalization of abortion ), among other actions that represent at least a contempt for these movements.
Finally, regarding the migratory issue, the current Mexican government has shown, at times, to have a “contestant” discourse; however, in the background, their practices continue to be servile to the United States, responding to the same guidelines of the anti-immigrant model regardless of the Republican or Democratic side. This position has brought multiple consequences, both for the population in transit and for the territories transited, many of which have become “waiting zones”, while the border extends more and more throughout the Mexican territory.
Given this scenario, from the critical perspective of the Organizing Committee we ask ourselves: What challenges does this reality mean for social movements? What are the new mechanisms for co-opting and neutralizing the opposition? What are they appealing to, what tools do the different resistance movements have? And how can we think about all this in a spatial-territorial key? What can critical geography contribute to these geopolitical realities? Although they are not new, they are becoming more acute and tense according to the different political moments, and even more so now under the pretext of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. And, finally, how can we understand them in their different scales, in a trans and multiscale framework considering the body in its global articulation? What can we make visible and transform from the different territories?