Federico Reyes Heroles
Lying is as old as humanity itself. A History of Lying, by J.J. Muñoz Rengel, (Alianza Editorial). Family members, friends, political parties, governments, the media, churches, etc., all lie. However, lying in public life is much riskier. Citizens observe their leaders; they don’t keep a logbook—that’s the job of journalists and researchers. It’s all we have left. But can systematic lying bring down a government?
Simply put, there are two schools of thought. The optimists believe that the truth takes time, but it always comes out. However, what happens when official lies, in the Goebbels formula, are repeated not a thousand times, but tens of thousands of times? Once they become truths, they become entrenched. The awakening—if it happens—can be delayed. Ad infinitum, no. The longer the delay, the worse the fall, as in the case of the USSR. The Goebbels formula affects public perception and, as Berkeley said, “perceptions are facts, as long as people believe in them.”
When does a population rise against lies? There is no formula, but confrontation with reality is central. If the supply of medicines is resolved, why can’t they be obtained? For optimists, there is a book by Hannah Arendt, a painful yet brilliant work: On Lying and Politics. In it, she talks about the elasticity of those limits. Arendt builds her thesis on the so-called “Pentagon Papers,” which compiled thousands of secret documents on U.S. involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967. The New York Times began publishing them in 1971. Lyndon B. Johnson lied systematically, not only to the public but also to Congress itself. For almost a quarter of a century, public opinion had been swayed by implausible stories. Arendt’s second dilemma is whether the government of that country had fallen into self-deception.
Let’s return to Mexico. Does our government really believe that the economy is growing? Gross fixed investment is at levels last seen two decades ago. Does it believe another significant increase in wages is possible? Do they not read the trends in formal employment and the gallop of informal jobs? Do they seriously think that we are maintaining fiscal balance when oil revenues have disappeared and debt is growing like a bubble? This deception, for which we will pay dearly, lies in cutting investment (9% in 2009; 2.5% in 2025 (C. Murayama, Public Finances: The Spurious Fiscal Balance, El Financiero, 09/24/2025). This cancels out the possibilities for future growth. Did they think that the rating agencies were going to buy into the government’s million-dollar support for Pemex without putting the investment grade at risk? Food self-sufficiency, with almost 17 million tons of corn imported?
Increasing private investment in a country that destroyed its judiciary? Ask them about investments associated with foreign companies, such as those involved in litigation abroad or the notable growth of arbitration in Mexico. The cascade of unbridled optimism may deceive and maintain a favorable perception of the president. Still, her government is failing: 75% rate it poorly or very poorly on corruption, and the same percentage on organized crime, according to El Financiero (September 29, 2025). Approximately 40% of a family’s income is spent on health. They are trying to deceive, of course. Or, worse still, have they fallen into self-deception?
Continuity is suffocating Sheinbaum: the aggression towards the media, the offensive against journalists such as Loret and others, the hostility described by Ciro Gómez Leyva in No me pudiste matar (You couldn’t kill me), there lies the breeding ground. Add to that the Amparo Law initiative, the so-called “spy law,” open censorship in Campeche, the boundless cynicism of Adán Augusto, the fiscal huachicol—the biggest fraud in our history—or the blackouts, and these are reality checks.
Hope for a change of course is fading.
Continuity appears every day at seven o’clock in the Palace.
Further Reading: