For democracy to work effectively it requires that the winners of an election do not punish the losers or politically repress them. It also requires that the loser of an election accept their defeat. This is not happening in Mexico with Obrador claiming he will setup a parallel government.

The list of claims against the election by Obrador were pretty weak, they included grievances such as negative campaigning - a staple of most democratic races. Mexico's top electoral court dismissed the charges in a statement which re-affirmed the strength of the country's institutions and commitment to democracy.

Like the American 2000 Presidential election, the tallied vote difference between the two candidates in the Mexican Presidential election was less than the inherent noise in the system by the choice of technology and logistics.

This makes it dissappointing for Obrador supporters, but the outcome no less valid.

There has been a gas pipeblast in Mexico which local rebels have claimed responsibility for. These are examples of John Robb's global guerillas. Because the cost of warfare has decreased so much, the heavily centralised political, urban and economic structures are unnecessarily exposed to shock and delivery failure. Energy is one of those susceptible systems.

Australia is uniquely situated to decentralise two very susceptible systems; water and energy. Because Australia periodically goes through water failure where the big central systems such as dams cannot meet demand; then there needs to be a decentralised approach. Rain tanks and conservation being the obvious.

This decentralisation has obvious advantages; one it reduces the cost of local government as water becomes primarily a household responsibility, two, conservation becomes one of personal responsibility, and three, it isolates the water supply from a centralised disruption such as drought, salination, poisoning, terrorism, etc.

Energy is another where Australia is well situated. The sun is a massive producer of energy we just have not worked out to harvest it efficiently and cost effectively yet. However, if we start seeing centralised failure of energy delivery systems, it will become cost effect quickly. There will be the same advantages from a decentralised (and networked) approach to energy as there is to communications and water.

The same goes for our political structures. Australia unfortunately has moved to a heavily centralised federal government. It dominates taxation, policy and revenue. This is a structural weakness in the current environment. Like water and energy, decentralised political structures protect against shocks and central failure.

Australian politics need to decentralise and remove power from the national government in order to increase the health and robustness of the Australian political system.

I was recently at a resort in Mexico. There was a curious relationship between the merchants on the beach and the resorts themselves. The resorts had private security and were rigourous in enforcing that only people staying at the resort could be in the common areas. However the beach was public land, yet the merchants stayed a respectful twenty yards from the resort edge.

I am not sure if it was because of the resorts enforcing some boundary, or owning some of the beach, but there was a definite artificial boundary. The merchants were respectful when given a "no thanks" as well. Not bothering the tourists once no interest was shown.

It is interesting to see the lack of a working government in those places. Roads, road lighting, even signs with directions which are taken for granted in the US exist sporadically in Mexico. Roads will quickly go from paved to sand to dirt. I found this unusual given the importance of American tourism to the local area.