Do you believe Mexico is so corrupt and lawless that it could not be Americanized with a little stewardship?
Yes.
"Do you believe Mexico is so corrupt and lawless that it could not be Americanized with a little stewardship?"
I believe that, YES!
Iraq has seen the terrors of toltolitarianism, they are much more likely to embrace democracy that Mexico.
Bribery is rampant, and it circumvents every aspect of effective government. Mexico is a culture that expects and rewards bribery.
Its the PEOPLE that need a change, not the government! And buying out the government does nothing to change the people.
There going to have to reap what they have sown and fix things themselves. Thats tough love.
In the mean time...BUILD THE FENCE!
What kind of stewardship?
Oh boy, talking about Mexican politics. I have all sorts of theories regarding the political culture of Mexico. Let me put it this way: if it was going to be done....well, then it probably should have been done during the time of Winfield Scott. Back then, under those different conditions we could have had far more latitude to do what would have been necessary successfully integrate the two societies. It would need an all powerful American "Viceroy" similar to what MacArthur was in Japan immediately following WWII. But even there I don't know because Japan was already a modernized, fairly successful, literate, industrialized society. Something like 65% of all Mexican adults only have at best an eighth to ninth grade education level. In the 21st century, that is just not going to cut it.
One of the things that facilitated the PRI's seven decade stranglehold on power was that the PRI never really had a human face the way other despotic regimes in Latin America do. Even Presidents were essentially seen as little more than "caretakers", a glorified bureaucrat who did what was minimally required to keep the country running till his successor took over. This stemmed for the Mexico's strict one term only rule for Presidents. Part of the reason the instituted the one term rule was so that it would make any and all would be insurgents and revolutionaries less inclined to "take out the top guy". If they could just wait just a few years then the guy at the top would be out of office anyway, -never to return. In other Latin American despotic regimes everyone knows exactly who is personally in charge and responsible for everything. People can personally direct all of their anger, frustration, and focus on a single individual and makes galvanizing and unifying political opposition so much easier and effective. Think of the Perons in Argentina, Somoza & Ortega in Nicaragua, Chavez in Venezuela, Noriega in Panama and of course, Castro in Cuba. The PRI by contrast really lacked this kind of giant, colorful, larger than life character. The true power behind the PRI was never really revealed yet its existence and influence was all encompassing and felt everywhere. Psychologically it had a strange neutralizing effect on opposition efforts in Mexican politics. Most people in Mexico simply consigned themselves to basically living with the PRI as a fact of Mexican life. Prior to 2000, the vast majority of Mexicans had never experienced real democracy. For decades, if Mexicans wanted have a change politically speaking, the only real option was to migrate to the U.S. because they knew that they weren't going to get it at the ballot box.