The New Mister Danger
By Diego Velazquez
http://quoruminformativo.com.mx/index.php/2016/11/29/el-nuevo-senor-peligro/
One of the most serious scenarios that was predicted for our country was finally fulfilled. The present is one of the most controversial times to Mexico. Donald Trump's racist and conflicting condition toward Mexico must raise social awareness in the face of the Republican triumph in the last US election. It is essential to understand, once and for all, the true pragmatic strategy that America has always had with respect to Mexico and Latin America. It is enough to read any of the chapters that the historian James D. Cockcroft has developed in his work to evidence that the Mister Dangers: Donald Trump, Theodore Roosevelt, Henry Kissinger, William Walker, etc., have always existed.
The history of the relationship between our country and North America is already well known. The United States is a democracy -internally-; but outwardly, vis-a-vis other nations, it constitutes an imperialist power, arrogant like any other superpower. The relationship between Latin America and the United States has continually been asymmetrical, abusive, imperialist. Even the bible of Latin American idiots, The Open Veins of Latin America, confirms this gospel (What will Plinio Apuleius, Carlos Montaner and Álvaro Vargas Llosa think of this scenario? Will they now write the Guide for the Naive Neo-liberal Pendejo?).
Although the main leaders of the current economic model recommend to inhibit the manifestations of nationalism, something that can be done with the effect Donald Trump is to resume the process of construction of the Nation State in Mexico. The idea of the failed state, in short, has just been recognized by the WASP Republican triumph and some US-miamicubano neo-conservatism theorists: Samuel Huntington, George Friedman, Andrés Oppenheimer. Mexico can regenerate itself and form a new country after North American rejection.
Where to start? While the government and the political class are only speculating how much more they can steal as the end comes, civil society and some affected thinkers try to start building strategies. The principle has been to return to the origin, to discover Mexico as if it were the first time - there are Mexico and the Mexicans, said Manuel Gómez Morín -, and there is Mexico Excepcional described by César Cansino, Rodolfo Stavenhagen, Guillermo Bonfil Batalla and Samuel Schmidt. Mexico that has a baroque time, is traditional, sacred and populist because it wants a conservative modernity, harmonized between urban and rural. The Mexico that was gone, says Juan Gabriel. It is wrong? Is it your fault, the social identity schizophrenia that lives? What, perhaps, are no more responsible than those who have insisted, even barbarism, in a savage modernity that we simply can not live? Are we going to continue in this search for the neoliberal success that has only resulted in a republic of crime and the consequent putrefaction of society?
The Progressive Dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz and Neoliberalism generated a social dementia that put to the limit the cohesion of the country through the dogmatism of a false liberal and political science. They upset everything, positivism, liberalism, science and even the humanism of an imbecile hispany unable to admit the Indians, blacks, Jews, mestizos and Arabs. There is something very serious with the neoliberal and political dogma in Latin America. César Cansino had predicted the death of political science. The academic work he presented showed the lack of honesty and interpretive seriousness in many approaches. As the old sage had pointed out (Sartori, 2004), political science is a white elephant with feet of clay that sinks and only says nothing. Like many other disciplines, he is urged by politics to be filled with meaning, value, and philosophy. The lack of forecasts regarding the end of the Cold War was not a minor error; Probably the way in which the triumph of liberal capitalist democracy was consolidated, diminished the weight of responsibility because the scenario was encouraging for humanity. However, the mistakes regarding the North American succession in 2016 have been infamous. Worst of all is the persistent obsession of political scientists and economists in defending the neoliberal ethos.
The paraphernalia of marketing, demoscopia and communication sciences, showed that political science serves more to power than truth. The error has nothing to do with the method but with the values. The state of political science is now catastrophic. Almost none of his analyzes can be objective and considered prudent. It has been shown his bias, his attachment to the theology of prosperity and interest he wanted to pass as systematized knowledge beliefs. The alignment of political science with democratic liberalism, although in some situations with neoliberalism, was not able and honest to admit the passage of a fascist right that can provoke the resurgence of nationalism and warlike conflicts for humanity. Most political scientists, neoliberal economists and commentators wanted to inhibit Donald Trump's triumph and the nightmare became true. The reality is there. Donald Trump has won and the dreary future that everyone took as a joke becomes a government for 2017. This is a consequence of turning neoliberal principles into dogmas. At what point did political science forget about method, history, and philosophy?
It is impossible for the United States to endure the course of the Mexican political class, the institutions, and an ever greater part of Mexican society. Mexico has to evaluate, correct, stop mocking the law and democracy. Impunity can not be the main axis of Mexico, it is unbearable that, with all the irrefutable evidence of corruption, abuse, lies, conspiracy and bribery, corrupt characters live better. We need to gain credibility in the institutions and the way this is done has enough limits so that we can talk about the consolidation of Mexican democracy.
Mexico's road is to strengthen its sovereignty to become an average power and to reduce its dependence on the United States of America. The country's project needs to be new and foster inclusion. We will have to return to developmentalism and structuralism. Gradualist modernization is necessarily the route for countries whose historical speed has not allowed the spontaneous generation of liberal values.
By Diego Velazquez
http://quoruminformativo.com.mx/index.php/2016/11/29/el-nuevo-senor-peligro/
One of the most serious scenarios that was predicted for our country was finally fulfilled. The present is one of the most controversial times to Mexico. Donald Trump's racist and conflicting condition toward Mexico must raise social awareness in the face of the Republican triumph in the last US election. It is essential to understand, once and for all, the true pragmatic strategy that America has always had with respect to Mexico and Latin America. It is enough to read any of the chapters that the historian James D. Cockcroft has developed in his work to evidence that the Mister Dangers: Donald Trump, Theodore Roosevelt, Henry Kissinger, William Walker, etc., have always existed.
The history of the relationship between our country and North America is already well known. The United States is a democracy -internally-; but outwardly, vis-a-vis other nations, it constitutes an imperialist power, arrogant like any other superpower. The relationship between Latin America and the United States has continually been asymmetrical, abusive, imperialist. Even the bible of Latin American idiots, The Open Veins of Latin America, confirms this gospel (What will Plinio Apuleius, Carlos Montaner and Álvaro Vargas Llosa think of this scenario? Will they now write the Guide for the Naive Neo-liberal Pendejo?).
Although the main leaders of the current economic model recommend to inhibit the manifestations of nationalism, something that can be done with the effect Donald Trump is to resume the process of construction of the Nation State in Mexico. The idea of the failed state, in short, has just been recognized by the WASP Republican triumph and some US-miamicubano neo-conservatism theorists: Samuel Huntington, George Friedman, Andrés Oppenheimer. Mexico can regenerate itself and form a new country after North American rejection.
Where to start? While the government and the political class are only speculating how much more they can steal as the end comes, civil society and some affected thinkers try to start building strategies. The principle has been to return to the origin, to discover Mexico as if it were the first time - there are Mexico and the Mexicans, said Manuel Gómez Morín -, and there is Mexico Excepcional described by César Cansino, Rodolfo Stavenhagen, Guillermo Bonfil Batalla and Samuel Schmidt. Mexico that has a baroque time, is traditional, sacred and populist because it wants a conservative modernity, harmonized between urban and rural. The Mexico that was gone, says Juan Gabriel. It is wrong? Is it your fault, the social identity schizophrenia that lives? What, perhaps, are no more responsible than those who have insisted, even barbarism, in a savage modernity that we simply can not live? Are we going to continue in this search for the neoliberal success that has only resulted in a republic of crime and the consequent putrefaction of society?
The Progressive Dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz and Neoliberalism generated a social dementia that put to the limit the cohesion of the country through the dogmatism of a false liberal and political science. They upset everything, positivism, liberalism, science and even the humanism of an imbecile hispany unable to admit the Indians, blacks, Jews, mestizos and Arabs. There is something very serious with the neoliberal and political dogma in Latin America. César Cansino had predicted the death of political science. The academic work he presented showed the lack of honesty and interpretive seriousness in many approaches. As the old sage had pointed out (Sartori, 2004), political science is a white elephant with feet of clay that sinks and only says nothing. Like many other disciplines, he is urged by politics to be filled with meaning, value, and philosophy. The lack of forecasts regarding the end of the Cold War was not a minor error; Probably the way in which the triumph of liberal capitalist democracy was consolidated, diminished the weight of responsibility because the scenario was encouraging for humanity. However, the mistakes regarding the North American succession in 2016 have been infamous. Worst of all is the persistent obsession of political scientists and economists in defending the neoliberal ethos.
The paraphernalia of marketing, demoscopia and communication sciences, showed that political science serves more to power than truth. The error has nothing to do with the method but with the values. The state of political science is now catastrophic. Almost none of his analyzes can be objective and considered prudent. It has been shown his bias, his attachment to the theology of prosperity and interest he wanted to pass as systematized knowledge beliefs. The alignment of political science with democratic liberalism, although in some situations with neoliberalism, was not able and honest to admit the passage of a fascist right that can provoke the resurgence of nationalism and warlike conflicts for humanity. Most political scientists, neoliberal economists and commentators wanted to inhibit Donald Trump's triumph and the nightmare became true. The reality is there. Donald Trump has won and the dreary future that everyone took as a joke becomes a government for 2017. This is a consequence of turning neoliberal principles into dogmas. At what point did political science forget about method, history, and philosophy?
It is impossible for the United States to endure the course of the Mexican political class, the institutions, and an ever greater part of Mexican society. Mexico has to evaluate, correct, stop mocking the law and democracy. Impunity can not be the main axis of Mexico, it is unbearable that, with all the irrefutable evidence of corruption, abuse, lies, conspiracy and bribery, corrupt characters live better. We need to gain credibility in the institutions and the way this is done has enough limits so that we can talk about the consolidation of Mexican democracy.
Mexico's road is to strengthen its sovereignty to become an average power and to reduce its dependence on the United States of America. The country's project needs to be new and foster inclusion. We will have to return to developmentalism and structuralism. Gradualist modernization is necessarily the route for countries whose historical speed has not allowed the spontaneous generation of liberal values.