Open AccessPolarizing Mexico
Author(s) -
Joseph Heinzman,
Tamara F. Darnell
Publication year - 2011
Publication title -
the international business and economic research journal/the international business and economics research journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2157-9393
pISSN - 1535-0754
DOI - 10.19030/iber.v6i10.3417
Subject(s) - panacea (medicine) , mexico city , free trade , international trade , politics , free trade agreement , political science , developing country , development economics , economics , economic history , economy , economic growth , law , sociology , ethnology , medicine , alternative medicine , pathology
Mexico has been a third-world country for centuries. Through its historical path of turbulent governments, Mexico was continuously left in a worse economic condition than where it was in each previous regime. (Suchlicki, 1996) When NAFTA was signed, the hopes were to unite and increase trade between Canada, the United States and Mexico. It was also believed that NAFTA would solve all of Mexicos social, political and economic problems, demonstrating how free trade could aid in developing a nation such as Mexico. (Smith & Lindlad, 2003) However, not all of Mexico was accepting NAFTA with open-arms. After the signing, there were hostile movements in Mexico (Suchlicki, 1996), attempted renegotiations of NAFTA ("Mexico Rejects," 2004) and a requirement for a delay in lifting some agricultural import barriers (Hall, Schwarf, and Root, 2006). While NAFTA is not a panacea for all of Mexicos economic woes, it is the path to a stronger Mexico in the future. The greatest obstacle to free trade lies within Mexicos divided culture and internal derision.