Incorporating Histories: How Social Movements in Mexico City Avoid Solidarity
Abstract as pdf
Corresponding Author:
Lachlan Summers
University of California Santa Cruz United States of America
lrsummer@ucsc.edu
Author(s):
Though Mexico is affected by numerous forms of natural disaster, it is also commonly seen as a nation of solidarity. This was particularly true in the aftermath of Mexico City’s 1985 earthquake, where the civil recovery efforts are often connected to the social movements that led to Mexico’s “democratisation” in 2000, in which the PRI party that had governed since 1930 finally lost power. In the first few months and years after the 1985 earthquake, “solidaridad” [solidarity] was understood as a counter hegemonic force, one that promised a new beginning for the country. But, as the PRI party struggled to regain its legitimacy, it shaped and used the memory of the 1985 disaster: now, Mexico City is littered with plazas and monuments to solidarity; President Carlos Salinas’ [1988-1994] social welfare program was called “Solidaridad”; and in 1993, Mexico launched its first satellite, named, unsurprisingly, “Solidaridad I”. Alongside these performances, the Mexican state institutionalised the informal networks of civil responders as part of the state apparatus - at once demobilising those social movements and improving its own credibility. The civil solidarity that emerged after the earthquake was converted from counter-hegemonic force into national fraternity, while the casualties of the earthquake were transformed from victims of state mismanagement to martyrs for Mexican democracy. In 2017, a bizarrely similar earthquake struck the city, and, once again, civil society filled the gap of the absent state and have continued working to make the city safer from earthquakes. This time, however, the informal response networks have kept their distance from the state. Drawing upon 20 months of ethnographic research with the networks of informal responders and victim advocates that emerged after the 2017 earthquake, I ask: how do community responders refuse the state? How do social movements make change without agitating? How can a megacity manage seismic uncertainty outside the state?
Community response to crises and disasters: From preparedness to practices