In this chapter, we discuss how representation is contested both theoretically and in political life. In particular, we aim to show how the idea of ‘essential contestability’ of representation both underpins the constructivist view of political representation – and the ‘representative claim’ approach especially – and informs our interpretation of modern and contemporary Mexican politics.

We begin by identifying problems in the field's contemporary literature that led us to the view that representation is an essentially contestable concept, as characterized initially by Gallie (1956). In this light, we ponder Pitkin's (1967) classic contribution and consider recent and notably different proposals by Pettit (2009) and Saward (2010).

One core idea is this: academic uncertainty reflects political disputes over who is to represent. The two domains are intertwined with (explicit or tacit) conceptual controversies about the meaning of representation. This fact prompts and informs the turn to Saward's notion of representative claims, central to this and other chapters in the book.

We illustrate our main points with brief analyses of some electoral contests that have had significant consequences for the dynamics of Mexico's democracy. They also allow us to derive a complementary proposal: making a representative claim carries a commitment to its validity and, therefore, it has to be situated, contextualized and framed.

Problematic lexis

Over the past two decades, academic definitions of political representation have been subjected to major critiques and revisions, in answer to both theoretical puzzles and empirical challenges (Mansbridge 2011; Rehfeld 2006, 2018). On the one hand, scholars have attempted to explain why representation is sometimes thought to be a prerequisite and, on other occasions, an outcome of democracy. Even more demandingly, some have aimed to account for the (oft-noted) possibility that representation can be at odds with democracy, including Hanna Pitkin (2004). The drive towards this difficult conjunction of conceptualizations is reflected, for instance, by Shapiro and colleagues, in the introduction of a book that has become a standard reference work: ‘Our goal is … to understand the tensions between [representation and democracy], and to help work toward an understanding of representation that is both satisfying in its own right and comfortable with democratic understanding of political legitimacy’ (2009: 1).