Luis Rubio
Two deeply rooted misconceptions are holding Mexico back. They distort public debate, misdirect government priorities, and prevent the country from capitalizing on its opportunities while tackling the obstacles that keep it stuck. One is a limited understanding of the central importance of economic growth. The other is the enduring myth of globalization. In reality, these are two sides of the same coin: when combined with a realistic policy vision, globalization can transform Mexico — economically and politically.
Economist Benjamin M. Friedman has argued that sustained economic growth — growth that raises living standards for most citizens — tends to foster opportunity, tolerance, social mobility, fairness, and democratic commitment. Prosperity matters not only because it increases income, but because it reshapes society. Crucially, Friedman emphasizes that what counts is not statistical indicators like per-capita GDP, but robust, sustained, uninterrupted growth. Without it, demagoguery flourishes and anti-progress narratives gain traction.
Mexico rarely debates whether growth matters; instead, political discussion focuses on narrower goals — higher tax revenue, more jobs, redistributive programs — rather than growth itself. What the country needs is a systematic national commitment to expansion, beginning with dismantling the barriers that have suppressed it for decades.
One such barrier is ideological hostility toward globalization. Rather than examining how global integration could benefit Mexico, political rhetoric often seeks to discredit it. Yet exports — the clearest expression of globalization — sustain millions of Mexican livelihoods. The real question is not whether globalization works, but why more companies, regions, and workers are not integrated into it and are not benefiting from its opportunities beyond trade alone.
A second obstacle is distrust of private investment. The government often behaves as if investors’ motives were incompatible with national development, when in fact they are aligned: both seek growth. When authorities attempt to subordinate private investment to political priorities, the predictable result is what Mexico faces today — weak investment and stagnant growth. Investors respond rationally to uncertainty and hostility. A government that politicizes regulation, undermines institutions, and signals legal risk should not be surprised when capital retreats.
The third barrier is the absence of a serious strategy to incorporate the poorest Mexicans into modern economic life. Infrastructure, education, and health systems — the foundations of social mobility — have not received the coordinated attention required, particularly in the country’s south and southeast. Large symbolic -and costly (and useless)- projects, like the Maya train, have taken precedence over practical investments that could dismantle entrenched poverty and local power structures. A government that claims to represent people experiencing poverty should prioritize giving them tools to escape poverty, not incentives to remain dependent.
Mexico’s stagnation is not accidental. It is the result of policy choices that discourage growth and the absence of strategies to overcome structural constraints. The country’s potential is evident. What remains is the political will to seize it.
@lrubiof
The original Spanish version of this article can be found at www.luisrubio.mx
Further Reading: