Eduardo Verástegui and Trumpist Christian Nationalism

 Eduardo Verástegui and Trumpist Christian Nationalism

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

The meeting between Eduardo Verástegui and U.S. Ambassador Ronald Johnson has generated interest due to Verástegui's closeness to President Donald Trump and his MAGA movement. Verástegui represents a faction of the Mexican right that seeks to consolidate a political bloc aligned with Trump's interests in Mexico.

Verástegui has established ties with international right-wing leaders, especially Trump, and has participated in Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) events in the United States. His goal is to found a political party in Mexico similar to Trump's Republican Party, promoting a political-religious agenda that combines neoliberalism, Christian nationalism, and Catholicism.

The Mexican right is currently dispersed and lacks a coherent discourse, divided into several factions. Verástegui seeks to attract disenchanted conservative sectors and PAN members with an agenda aligned with the principles of the American right. Their movement, "Viva México," could open a new space for the right in the country.

The Mexican right is dispersed, divided, and lacking a strategic logic, much less a coherent discourse. The Mexican right has become tribalized by economic factionalism. On the one hand, conservative and traditionalist Catholic nationalism is unsure whether to remain in the PAN, found a new political party, or even join Morena at the express invitation of Ricardo Monreal. The neoliberal right remains tied to technocratic essentialism, but lacks the capacity to explain and justify itself to society, which it continues to view as a six-thousand-dollar group. The libertarian right has become an anti-populist and anti-Mexican club. The civil and liberal right is dispersed in the pink tide, recreating the nostalgia for decent PANism.

The adoption of Trumpism by Verástegui and other participants at CPAC Mexico could intensify political polarization and legitimize radical discourses. The presence of international figures with classist and racist discourse could deepen social divisions and erode Mexican democracy.

The closeness between Verástegui and Ambassador Johnson is significant, as Johnson called Verástegui "his brother" during a private dinner in his honor. This meeting reflects the interest of a faction of the Mexican right in strengthening its ties with Trumpism, which carries significant risks for Mexico's political and social stability.

With Verástegui, Mexico could become like Costa Rica, Panama, Ecuador, Puerto Rico, or the Dominican Republic. Perhaps this is not a bad invitation to the right-wing parties in our country, who lack the strength to transform Mexico into a conservative modernity like Spain, Chile, or Argentina. It is not just a traditional patriarchy that lies behind Eduardo Verástegui; there is a Mexican national project that integrates, in some ways, with Donald Trump's MAGA perspective. The power network surrounding Verástegui connects North American politicians seeking to replicate Miami in Latin America, but there are also Latin American and Hispanic collaborators.

Verástegui's national project conditions Mexico's annexation to North America and, above all, ecumenism with Protestant Christians. Although the anti-Castro influence of Hispanic North American politicians seems evident, there is also a hidden Catholic right wing that is on the verge of religious schism due to its lack of influence in the Catholic Church, mainly due to recent changes.

Gray or Failed State: Mexico and the United States Facing Drug Trafficking

 Gray or Failed State: Mexico and the United States Facing Drug Trafficking

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

The narrative of the fight against drug trafficking has been a recurring theme in the relationship between Mexico and the United States. However, reality suggests that both countries have failed to address the problem effectively. US intervention in Mexico has focused on regulating the drug phenomenon, but not on limiting it or reducing the flow of psychotropic drugs into the country. Meanwhile, Mexican cartels have continued to operate with impunity, and violence in the country has reached unprecedented levels. The recent departure of drug trafficking leaders to the United States to negotiate with the White House is an indication that the balance of power between the cartels has spiraled out of control.

Some analysts suggest that the US government's intention is to weaken the cartels and impose its hegemony in the region. However, this hypothesis is difficult to understand in a context where violence in Mexico continues to increase. The flight of major drug trafficking groups to the United States is not unprecedented, and one might wonder whether the use of intelligence by the Americans will protect them from possible acts of defense or violence on U.S. soil. Rafael Loret de Mola's novels had already presented scenarios in which the Americans intervened in Mexico to capture the political class linked to crime, but the reality is more complex. What would happen if the war between the cartels also spread to the United States? This has happened with mafias in other countries and even with fights between fundamentalist or terrorist groups.

The relationship between Mexico and the United States has become a vicious cycle, in which drug trafficking and violence feed off each other. Canceling visas and confiscating capital and materials have not been effective in other Latin American countries, and they likely won't be in Mexico. The question is, what can be done to break this cycle of violence and corruption? The response of some intellectuals, such as Sabina Berman and Juan Carlos Monedero, has been to question whether US intervention has been effective in other countries. However, the experience of Panama, Colombia, Costa Rica, and Honduras after the US intervention suggests that these intrusions have been positive.

In this context, it is important to analyze the relationship between Mexico and the United States from a critical perspective. The official narrative regarding the fight against drug trafficking obscures the true intentions of both countries. The United States seeks to maintain its hegemony in the region, while Mexico is incapable of addressing the structural problems underlying drug trafficking. Cooperation between the two countries is an illusion, and the reality is that both are trapped in a labyrinth of violence and corruption. The reality is that both Mexico and the United States are failed states and gray areas in their own right, incapable of addressing the structural problems underlying drug trafficking. However, the nearly fifty million Mexicans living illegally in the United States should be asked whether they would like Mexico to be a protectorate or the 52nd state of the American Union. Berman and Monedero skew their interpretation and overlook this dynamic between Mexico and North America, which, fortunately, beyond politicians, intellectuals, and international organizations, presents an independent path.

Zedillo: The Technicians and Specialists Speak Out

 Zedillo: The Technicians and Specialists Speak Out

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

According to Miguel Basáñez, the public sector in our country is made up of three significant groups: politicians, technicians, and specialists. Recently, given the decomposition of the Mexican State and the threats of invasion from the Yankees, it can be said—with complete certainty—that we have an unhealthy political class. The generation of Juárez liberals faced foreign invasion due to insufficient payments on the foreign debt and geopolitical reasons; now, Mexico is on the verge of being taken over by corrupt, corrupt, and criminal thugs. One reason for the current state of affairs is that the technical and specialized sectors of the government have been tied up, blocked, and silenced in the name of absolute loyalty to abject ignorance.

Political hegemocracy, as Basáñez defines it, did not begin entirely with Morena. The balance of power has benefited politicians since the Vicente Fox administration and has reached total dominance during the Fourth Transformation. Lopez Obrador's administration pledged to rebuild the Mexican state through one of the most effective expert sectors: the Army; but something went wrong along the way. The traditional patrimonialism and pragmatism of Mexican job creation prevailed in the political landscape. The macro-networks of bosses, corporatism, and clientelism boosted Morena's electoral strength, and now there's no turning back. Paying bills and political favors blocks economic growth and development.

Zedillo has raised the debate on the country's economic projects in the public sphere. Even from an extreme Machiavellian position, the results are what they are, and the reality facing the Sheinbaum administration and the progressive populist national revolutionary project cannot be called a success. If Zedillo were wrong in his remarks, Claudia Sheinbaum's letter to Morena would not have been sent, much less would it have triggered the moral code for the Morena politician. Why insist on the good conduct of the Morena politician if the 4T is pure, untainted, and God-fearing? The dominance of Morena politicians is affecting the Mexican state, as many make immorality their main virtue; especially the defectors, whose political entrepreneurship becomes savage, barbaric, and overwhelming.

Beyond neoliberalism, technical skills and specialists must balance willful and pragmatic political action. Mexican empiricism has brought us to the brink of chaos, and it is necessary to recognize that technology has no ideology nor does it belong to the domain of a class or caste. Mexico's capacity to govern is on the brink of ineffectiveness. The government must engage the appropriate technicians and specialists to restore the lost consistency between the formulation and results of public policies.

Mobilizing National Populism in Latin America

 Mobilizing National Populism in Latin America

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

According to Menno Vellinga, the Latin American state had one of its most accurate projects for change and diagnoses when the letters of intent and the Washington Consensus established the economic, political, and social measures to carry out modernization and institutionalization processes. However, the technocratic vision was disrupted by a political class that sabotaged the processes of change and decided to regain patrimonialist inertia. Like Guillermo O'Donnell, he pointed out that the best model for Latin America was represented by Technocratic-Military Bureaucracy linked to Delegative Democracies, a weak situation for the consolidation of democracy in Latin America and economic growth; however, it was a starting point of no return for the establishment of a state from a Weberian and Constitutionalist perspective. It is true that this implied open-heart surgery without anesthesia; However, this is the prescription for a social order where the State does not have hegemony but rather relative autonomy from various groups and de facto powers.

However, for Vellinga, as well as for the Argentine scholar, historical inertia and cultural variables are stronger than state capacity, and therefore, Weak, Failed, or Facade States controlled by strong, motley, multi-cultural, authoritarian societies characteristic of the Habsburg Model prevail. The fact is that clientelist, populist, and social movement phenomena pose situations of ungovernability for the State, which ends up being held hostage by the bourgeoisie, oligarchies, or the ruling elites of social movements.

What is not fully understood in Latin America is that for the emergence of the State, it is essential to end the Habsburg Model as a social order. This configuration was a clientelist and corporatist arrangement developed since the colonial era with the preeminence of the Catholic Church, but it implies vulnerability to the processes of globalization and geopolitical competition, such as what is currently being experienced.

Under progressive governments, the state's presence is also not consolidated; activist and militant bureaucracy reveals the extreme weakness of the institutional order. The left in government promotes social mobilization as a spontaneous input for public policies, even though this means naively betting on an imaginary effective capacity. Social mobilization will not stop Donald Trump or the economic agenda imposed by the White House on our country.

The North American relationship with Mexico has taken a roller coaster course that demands a functioning state in our country. The lack of cohesion within Morena and, above all, respect for the directives of the Presidency of the Republic will end up undermining governability in the country and inciting Trumpism to develop more interventionist actions. The enormous gap between the activism of Morena officials and their concrete results demonstrates how important it is to take the task of governing seriously.

Public Education in Mexico: Business, Skills, and Health

 Public Education in Mexico: Business, Skills, and Health

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

The actions of the Secretary of Public Education, Mario Delgado, have generated controversy between the conservatives and reformers of the Fourth Transformation. This could be seen as a healthy debate between subordinate groups and the pragmatic alliances of the current government, or as a clear sign of how López Obrador's administration continues to set the pace for Claudia Sheinbaum.

Public education in Mexico undoubtedly has an enormous task when it comes to nutrition; however, there are also other discussions that are equally important. The educational reform of the Fourth Transformation has not been implemented or materialized in a minimal way; there are only basic ways to understand what type of education and culture Morena seeks to promote among Mexicans.

Although dialogue between the Secretary of Public Education and the business sector can be considered a basic form of negotiation in democracies, the truth is that the Fourth Transformation, like any government, diminishes the mechanism of collective participation for decision-making. It is true that participatory democracy has its drawbacks; bureaucratic specialists must make decisions immediately; however, Mario Delgado's haste and his particular management style demonstrate that negotiations go beyond lobbying. Beyond the setups, debates, and generating public opinion, some suspicious individuals observe the construction of Mario Delgado's presidential candidacy with the patronage of outside sectors, as has occurred in various spheres where he participates.

Crony capitalism continues in full swing in Mexico, and this appears to be Mario Delgado's strategy. Public space is rented to the highest bidder, and academic content is of little importance. Faced with the challenges of the immediate future—China and the United States—this indicates that public officials are thinking about many things, except how to organize a problem and respond effectively to society.

Welfare scholarships have been important in supporting a large portion of Mexican students; however, they benefit the traditional business sector as the last link. Couldn't the Mexican government be more concerned with providing a public education that guarantees the increase in skills and competencies to face the dystopian world being posed by Donald Trump?

The López Obrador left is calling for strikes and mobilizations to demand compliance with the elimination of junk food in public schools; the importance of this issue is undeniable, but the development of technical and scientific skills for the future is more important. International indicators indicate that there are many academic problems in Mexico's public schools, and this is part of a debate that must one day be taken seriously. Mexico cannot continue to ignore the implementation of a homogeneous and functional educational reform, democratically and consciously constructed. When politics is removed from the educational issue, it will make an enormous contribution to Mexico's problems.

Trump. Weird American, the real Mister Danger

Trump. An weird american, the real Mister Danger

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

In recent days, a serious contradiction has begun to emerge in United States foreign policy regarding economic issues.

At times, President Trump seeks to isolate China from all countries and then offers a free trade agreement with the Asian giant. These ambiguities and zigzags put countries like Mexico and Latin America as a whole in a tremendous bind because they fail to understand how Trump intends to resolve the economic crisis in the United States.

The situation also demonstrates the terrible vulnerability of Mexico's productive structures and the lack of efficient strategies on the part of the ruling groups in the long run.

On the one hand, there isn't even a way to protect the domestic market; on the other hand, there is no will to create a regional economic bloc to jointly resist the crisis in the countries severely affected by Donald Trump's whims.

In Mexico, this translates into economic madness, radical expectations, confusion, and terrible fears.

What certainties remain for Mexico? First, it must address the issue of its migrants and secure the country's exports to North America.

It seems ridiculous, but it is a reality that the price of tomatoes, tortillas, and avocados depend on the presence of Asian products and immigrants considered enemies by the Trumpist Republicans; although this could change tomorrow.

Some of the measures taken by the Fourth Transformation in favor of Castro-Chavista Bolivarianism are surprisingly also included in the fentanyl and illegal immigration package. The incorporation of Caribbean and South American professionals, even with philanthropic and social purposes, ends up being a decision contrary to North American geopolitics.

There are no alternatives to avoid Mexico's economic dependence on the US, nor is there an economically powerful nation willing to rescue our country. On the contrary, we see that Mexican orphanhood is multiplying compared to other US geopolitical centers.

If Mexico survives, once again, it will be time to consider an economic model that begins soon; at least as an auxiliary option against scenarios like Trump's. Emergency economies at the local level, observed in rural and indigenous communities, can be survival mechanisms in these times. Barter and tequio should be viewed more as economic proposals and less as electoral populism.

The social system inherited from the 20th century culminated in Mexico's absolute dependence on the United States; but also in its complete rejection.

Somehow, the problem must be solved in the short term. A third Trump administration will be more than fatal for Mexico. National reconstruction is a more than indispensable measure.

Counterculture in Mexican Regional Music

Counterculture in Mexican Regional Music

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

The debate surrounding the control of popular music in Mexico sometimes seems to misunderstand the country's situation. The US military intervention is presented right under the eyes of the republic as representing, for them, a narco-society, and on the nationalist side, the proliferation of musical messages is hailed as freedom of expression. The world is upside down.

It is strange that government intervention is rejected in areas that are necessary for social well-being. Beyond demanding that President Claudia Sheinbaum respect the symbolic devices of drug trafficking, one might wonder if these cultural controversies would convince Donald Trump to withdraw his battleships, destroyers, and aircraft carriers from the country's maritime borders.

If the Radio and Television Law in Mexico were enforced, like the rule of law, for example, the country's configuration would surely be different; However, the problem is institutional weakness, the government's limited capacity to enforce the law. It is unfair to compare cultural freedom in the Western world with what is happening in Mexico. Certainly, in the United States, unlimited freedom exists, but it is also true that state surveillance of the counterculture has managed to ward off the negative and terrorist impact that some national and foreign elements seek to generate with certain actions. In the experience of Germany and France, Islamic culture and fascism are regulated by historical memory and the national security circumstances they imply; establishing almost authoritarian but legitimate forms that force democracies to defend themselves and bring debate and knowledge of the issue into the public sphere.

The counterculture can represent the entry of anti-values ​​that disrupt a given social order. The weakness of the Mexican state vis-à-vis the powers that be makes the counterculture discourse the true hegemonic one, and that is how things are going for us. During the war waged by the Mexican state against drug trafficking, the symbolic production of drugs was negatively stigmatized, but this too has served little purpose. What would be the opinion of the searching mothers and victims of the narco-war regarding the unregulated production of the music that accompanies this context?

The legalization of drugs and narco-culture can set the tone for strengthening the state, because they allow for the establishment of a legal framework and even the generation of taxes and revenues; however, state intervention and public debate are important. As long as state weakness persists, the de facto and hegemonic powers will eventually crush us all until a monster like Yankee Imperialism crushes them, including all of Mexican society. Freedom is conditioned by the capacity that the social contract grants to the leader and the social awareness of the importance of public morality. President Claudia Sheinbaum is forced to resume the Calderónist war and rethink the strength of the state to avoid another material and symbolic defeat.