The Guardian’s Fairy Tale of a “Left Wing” Mexico: A Marxist Refutation of Rachel Nolan’s Long Read

Rachel Nolan’s Guardian Long Read about Claudia Sheinbaum and the so-called “world’s most popular left-wing leader” exemplifies bourgeois mystification. Beneath the sentimental narrative, a political reality that the Guardian avoids emerges: Morena is not genuinely leftist but a bourgeois nationalist movement. It has intensified Mexico’s integration into U.S. imperialism, militarised the state, and maintained oligarchic wealth. Its popularity signifies not socialism but the lack of a revolutionary alternative.[1]

A Headline That Conceals More Than It Reveals

The Guardian’s headline — “How did Mexico’s president become the world’s most popular leftwing leader?” — sets an ideological tone even before reading the article. It assumes Claudia Sheinbaum is “left-wing,” that Morena is progressive, and that their popularity is a political mystery worth exploring. However, Sheinbaum is not a left-wing leader, nor is Morena a socialist party. The framing is deliberate, not a mistake; it serves as a political action to reinforce illusions in reformism at a time when such illusions are collapsing among workers across the Americas. The real question is not why Sheinbaum is popular but why the Guardian continues to label her as left-wing.

The detailed article on Claudia Sheinbaum is more ideological spectacle than genuine journalism. It recycles worn-out liberal sentimentalist notions to depict a bourgeois nationalist government as a beacon of “left-wing” hope. This critique shows that Nolan’s story has a political agenda: to conceal Morena’s class background, to hide its connections to U.S. imperialism, and to prevent workers in Mexico and the U.S. from recognising its revolutionary potential.

The Guardian’s premise is misleading. Nolan starts with a question implying its answer: How did Mexico’s president become the world’s most popular leftist leader? The answer is simply that Sheinbaum is called ‘left-wing,’ and the article takes this as a fact, not as an ideological label. However, this doesn’t match reality. Claudia Sheinbaum isn’t truly a leftist, and Morena isn’t a socialist party. The article relies on concealing this truth, depicting a bourgeois manager as a progressive icon because admitting the limits of reformism would be politically unthinkable.

Nolan’s Method: Sentimentality as Analysis

The Long Read employs a common liberal tactic: personalising politics. Sheinbaum’s background, scientific expertise, and calm demeanour act as proxies for class analysis. Nolan’s writing shows admiration for her “pragmatism,” “discipline,” and “connectivity with ordinary people.” However, this isn’t genuine analysis; it’s branding. The Guardian’s approach shifts from examining social forces to highlighting personalities. The result is a narrative where political issues diminish, replaced by a positive story about a caring leader. This perfectly aligns with your document’s point: “This type of journalism substitutes class analysis with feel-good stories about benevolent rulers.”

What Nolan Omits: Militarisation, Repression, and Subordination to Washington

Nolan’s article intentionally omits certain details, a politically motivated omission. Specifically, she does not mention the significant 150% rise in the military budget, the military’s control over ports, customs, and infrastructure, or the establishment of the National Guard to detain migrants in the U.S. Additionally, she overlooks the constitutional recognition of the armed forces as “the pillar of the Mexican state’ and the deployment of tens of thousands of troops to the U.S. border for ‘migrant containment’ operations. These actions demonstrate that this is not simply left-wing governance but the strengthening of a militarised capitalist state.

The near‑shoring agenda

Nolan praises Mexico’s economic “boom” but fails to mention its true source: U.S. imperialism’s efforts to reshape supply chains to confront China. Sheinbaum’s plan explicitly supports this, which states it aims for Mexico to “replace imports mainly from Asia with regional production”—a clear reflection of Washington’s strategy. Nolan overlooks Sheinbaum’s commitments, such as no tax hikes, corporate incentives, “Republican austerity,” and bi-national security cooperation with the U.S. This approach essentially represents neoliberalism with a nationalist twist.

Popularity Is Not Proof of Left Politics

Nolan interprets Morena’s popularity as evidence of its progressive stance, but this is a category mistake. The support for Morena primarily stems from dislike of the PRI-PAN era, a demand for increased social programs, a lack of revolutionary options, and temporary relief from cash transfers. While Nolan considers this support impressive, it actually reflects genuine public sentiment. Nonetheless, Morena has channelled this popular backing into a dead-end. Popularity alone does not define socialism; it is a sociological fact that can be exploited for either reactionary or reformist ends.

5. The Oligarchy’s Endorsement: The Most Damning Evidence

Nolan’s storyline completely unravels when considering the class that has gained the most from Morena: the Mexican bourgeoisie. According to Oxfam Mexico, the top 1% earn 35% of the country’s income and hold 40% of private wealth, with Carlos Slim’s wealth increasing by 66% since 2020. Slim himself has praised AMLO, stating: “There is social peace, there is no confrontation.” This is the highest compliment the bourgeoisie can give, implying that the working class has been effectively contained. Any truly left-leaning government would not receive such praise.

6. The Guardian’s Political Function

Why does Nolan not include this? Why does the Guardian not publish it? Because the Guardian isn’t a neutral observer, it functions as an ideological tool of the liberal bourgeoisie. Its role is to promote illusions about reformist leaders, prevent workers from seeing social democracy’s limits, redirect discontent into safe, nationalist, pro-capitalist channels, and prevent a revolutionary perspective from emerging. The Guardian’s purpose is to ensure that this conclusion is never reached.

Nolan’s Long Read is not just incorrect; it poses a political risk. It fosters the idea that workers should rely on a bourgeois nationalist agenda, which is already embedded in U.S. imperialism’s economic and military plans. A truly left-wing movement in Mexico will not be built from Morena.

Morena and the Pink Tide: A Familiar Cycle of Populist Containment

Nolan’s narrative portrays Morena as a new phenomenon. In fact, it is a late-stage example of the “pink tide” governments that swept Latin America in the early 2000s. These regimes — from Chávez to Lula to Correa — combined limited social spending with support for capitalist property relations and pragmatic cooperation with U.S. imperialism.

The pattern remains consistent: rhetorical anti-imperialism paired with material subordination to imperialist interests. Morena exemplifies this pattern precisely: cash-transfer programs that reduce extreme poverty without changing class structures; nationalist rhetoric that appeals to popular sentiment while avoiding conflict with capital; collaboration with Washington on security, migration, and nearshoring; and the preservation of oligarchic wealth despite increasing inequality. The Guardian’s sentimental narrative obscures this continuity.

The Militarisation of the Mexican State

A key aspect of Morena’s leadership, not mentioned by Nolan, is the substantial militarisation of Mexican society. Under AMLO, the military budget increased by 150%, and the armed forces took control of ports, customs, and major infrastructure projects. A new National Guard was created, mainly tasked with mass migrant detention following Washington’s orders. The military was legally reinforced as “the pillar of the Mexican state,” deploying tens of thousands of soldiers to the U.S. border to oversee “migrant containment.” AMLO entrusted ports, customs, and infrastructure to the armed forces and stationed numerous troops at the US border. This pattern doesn’t indicate left-wing governance but reflects the rise of a militarised bourgeois state.

Sheinbaum’s Program: Near‑Shoring and Austerity

The Guardian describes Sheinbaum as a scientist-technocrat with a social conscience. Yet, her government’s plan openly aligns Mexico with U.S. strategic interests. It aims to help Mexico “capitalise on the economic situation to replace imported goods—primarily from Asia—with regional production,” supporting Washington’s near-shoring strategy against China. Sheinbaum guarantees no tax increases, corporate incentives, “Republican austerity,” and bi-national security collaboration with the U.S. This rhetoric resembles that of a bourgeois manager rather than a socialist.

Popularity Is Not Socialism

The Guardian interprets Morena’s popularity as evidence of its leftist positioning. However, popularity is a sociological fact that requires explanation rather than being a political characteristic. “The popularity Nolan admires truly reflects a reality: large numbers of Mexican workers and youth genuinely detest the right-wing legacy of austerity, corruption, repression, and subservience to US imperialism.” Morena’s support is rooted in the rejection of the PRI-PAN era, a desire for more social programs, the absence of a revolutionary alternative, and short-term gains from cash transfers. However, this support has reached a dead end. As the document notes, Morena “has handed the Mexican working class — as a source of cheap labour —” directly into the hands of US imperialism’s war efforts.”

The Necessary Conclusion

The Mexican working class doesn’t require a “popular left-wing leader” to manage capitalism more gently. Instead, it needs revolutionary leadership that rejects Morena’s nationalist illusions and pursues socialist unification across the Americas. The goal is to ‘discard the Mexican bourgeoisie and its Morena representatives into the trash bin of history and unite with their class allies in the United States and throughout the Americas to eliminate imperialism and capitalism.”


[1] How did Mexico’s president become the world’s most popular left-wing leader? http://www.theguardian.com

Leave a comment