Social networks or hate speech? The debate after the attack in Teotihuacán
President Claudia Sheinbaum has a theory about what prompted the attack on the archaeological site. And it is not the one that his critics are using.
In the midst of the presentation of his National Mental Health Strategy, Sheinbaum connected the case of young Julio César Jasso with emotional problems aggravated by the networks. “Consumerism, social networks themselves lead to promoting a lot of material values,” he said during his conference.
Regarding the specific attack, she was clear: “It does not necessarily have to do with a social issue.” A statement that seems aimed directly at his detractors.
“We have to discuss in the classrooms, with young people, what it means to be glued to TikTok eight hours a day.”
Meanwhile, the opposition is blaming the government. Felipe Calderón did not bite his tongue online: he accused the administration of sowing division and hatred.
“There is no doubt: the speech of hate and polarization (…) was sown every day by this regime,” wrote the former PAN president.
Calderón went further and talked about responsibilities. According to him, the governments of the Fourth Transformation must assume the consequences for having even fostered a climate of racial hatred.
Here the shock is total. On the one hand, an official diagnosis that points to mental health and excessive screen use. On the other, a political accusation that directly indicates the tone of public discourse in recent years.
The investigation continues. But the debate about the causes is already over—and divided along partisan lines.
