Tuesday, August 30, 2022

Narcopolitics in the mexican presidential succession

Narcopolitics in the presidential succession

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero



Around 1994, the power of criminal groups was glimpsed when one of the most considered hypotheses indicated that the death of Luis Donaldo Colosio corresponded to a drug-trafficking mafia embedded in the government. The successive assassinations put the country on its face, criminality was willing to generate all kinds of ungovernability. The country was on the verge of chaos, as Andrés Oppenheimer pointed out and continues to say. The situation of violence unleashed was the script for new novels and video games from the perspective of Tom Clancy.


In 1994, drug trafficking made a surprising presence to show that it was no longer anyone's violent force but rather a protagonist in the configuration of the Mexican political system. The situation in the country shows that various cartels have generalized the behavior of being endorsers of power. The mafias dedicated to the transfer and production of narcotics are at the level of the United States and the Catholic Church for what interventionism means against the different levels of public administration and the making of public policies.


It seems that these representative actors of different interest groups were synchronized to finish off Mexico. The regularization of growth, development, security, education and, at least, the goods that Abraham Maslow's configuration considers as minimum for the human being, cannot be structured without the informal consideration of these factual powers. The Mexican government is going through a war against powerful enemies, the State is besieged by a criminal imperialism that has canceled, forever, the possibility of Mexico consolidating itself.


The SEDENA and SEMAR, also infiltrated, barely carry out a significant job so that the country does not end up exploding.


The objective of imperialism is to influence the designation of the different presidential candidates and, if possible, to configure the elections to affect the party that is in possession of the federal public administration.


The United States and the Catholic Church will never grant a respectable place to Mexico, the Darwinism of international relations motivates our country to remain an island of domination. Hence the need for MORENA to rethink foreign policy with North America and digest imperialism that is geographically absolute. Nationalism is not only recovering the traditional and populist styles of the political form that Mexico has, but promoting intelligent measures to change the destiny that the powers that be intend to determine.

Sunday, August 14, 2022

In the shadow of the Failed State

 In the shadow of the Failed State

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero



Although the hypothesis is not completely original since Soledad Loaeza has previously exposed her ideas on US imperialism -as well as other authors-, the important thing is that an academic voice authorized by the red circle of the national status quo allows us to recognize -with all crudeness- the geopolitical situation of Mexico against the United States (Loaeza, S. (2022) In the shadow of the superpower. Colmex). The totalizing Yankee imperialism in Mexico is beginning to be a platitude not only for the traditions of the left or right, but also for the neoliberals and democrats. Understanding the narrow margin of action that the Mexican political system has had against the overwhelming and hegemonic United States, constitutes a significant advance.

Mexico has gone from being a Spanish colony to an American colony. The regime of the revolution could not be consolidated without the approval of North America, rather, no Mexican government can last without the approval of the empire. The El Paso meeting or Henry Lane Wilson (not forgetting the unscrupulous Poinsett) are just traces of an interventionism that is absolute and does not diminish with the passage of time.

It is true that the president of Mexico is not the all-powerful Tlatoani of the myth, nor Viceroy, most of the time he only becomes a CIA agent. The omnipotent is North America, at least for what has to do with our governability.

The colonial socioeconomic structure was subordinated to the United States and the medieval hierarchy constitutes the state of affairs that informally subsidizes the Yankee war economy.

During World War II and, above all, during the Cold War, the Mexican government was neutralized under the anti-communist interests of the United States. The power of the North American military complex was an irrefutable reason for revolutionary nationalism to move from a sovereignist attempt to a submissive behavior towards the Capitalist Superpower. The anti-communist capitalist Nazi-fascist alignment was imposed on the PRI and subsequent governments, to the satisfaction of the local right-wings and the submission or extermination of the multiple left-wings.

And although the tacit warning of Dr. Soledad's recent academic work seems to have the performance of President López Obrador as its objective, although it seems like a contradiction, why not think that the course of things in the current government is allowed by North America? Didn't that happen in Cardenismo? Didn't the United States seek to buy time to impose successive conservative governments in which the socioeconomic structure of Mexico was balanced? The shameful economic remittances resulting from emigration and drug trafficking, aren't they also informal subsidies for the inoperative national economy?

The behavior of Ambassador Ken Salazar and the current Democratic administration also face a lack of time when it comes to the Mexican question. It is essential to stabilize the economy of our country, reduce the inequality that is causing an insurgent and anarchic culture that develops the Failed State and can put the Yankee hegemony in its own territory at risk.

There is nothing Mexico can do in the face of the military power of the United States. Indeed, as Loaeza points out, the Yankee invasions in Latin America and the coups promoted by the White House constitute a reminder of the Sword of Damocles that hangs over our rulers. For this reason, and for that reason alone, Andrés Manuel López Obrador remains in power.

The rebellious violence that is generating inequality in the country forces us to reconsider the New Deal policies that Mexico requires. I wish that AMLO had the capacity of General Lázaro Cárdenas, but they are not very similar because he has only copied the negative of socialist pragmatism. However, even Cárdenas supported his government with pins in the face of frank messages of an American invasion of our country.

George Friedmann imagines a war between Mexico and the United States in the year 2080, probably the environmental and human crisis that is being experienced have ended up catalyzing trends. Although Friedmann is wrong in his geopolitical perspective, the war will not be won by Mexico but by a mortar, a muégano of multiple castes and particularisms that will end up fragmenting the American Union to its anthropological limits in the Northwest. To inhibit such projection, modernity and social change in Mexico must be redirected.

Militarism and the transfer of drugs in Mexico are designed from the United States, it is the only way that has been found to correct a Hispanic colonial structure that is worse than neoliberalism. The disgust that the Spanish monarch showed in front of the Sword of General Simón Bolívar is proof that this colonialist viceroyalty structure does not yield in the face of historical change. Iberophony and Hispanidad will never save Latin America.

Mexico and the United States need time to postpone 2080. Neoliberalism and conservatism are not enough for our country to develop and competitively integrate into the American dynamic. If things continue as they are, if the optimum of our bilateral relationship is to identify ourselves as the North American Sicily, this will also end up dangerously hurting the United States. The problem is not populism or trying to build programs that benefit the precarious, the obstacle to development in Mexico is due to a cacique, corrupt, medieval and bandit economy, which is going to destroy us -sooner or later- and will lead to the grave as well to North America.

Since the colonial era, the political, economic and social institutions designed by the Spanish Empire have not worked. The mechanics of community order in our country is a corrupt synergy resulting from a balance between particularisms and mutual mistrust. It is the factual powers who become hegemonic, precisely the cacique and Creole institutions are established to provide the greatest order of things.

The curialization and national integration of the different communities is generated through urbanization and proximity to metropolitan centers, as long as the cities incorporate supply and economic development measures. Cities that maintain high levels of poverty reproduce social ruptures and pathologies with less impact, but are problematic for local governments. A brief review of the municipalities immediately highlights the cacicazgos and the total absence of basic services. The drug violence that comes from rural and dispersed areas that feed chiefdoms, organized crime groups and the informal economy, now also has the social order of our country in check.

During the Cristero War and until the Cardenismo, even during the Delahuertista revolt, one of the strategies used by the Mexican government was the bombing of rural areas: generating ultimatums for the populations to move to the cities and neutralize the resistant communities. This warmongering has been maintained in the Mexican Bajío and is reproduced as an example in various parts of the country.

Although this seems like an authoritarian measure, in the past it has been effective in reducing the violence that plagues different parts of Mexico. Different literature, specifically cristero from the Bajío, bitterly recounts this type of action that devastated towns and put an end to the agricultural wealth of the towns (eg Acámbaro in Guanajuato). Even the high hierarchy of the Catholic Church accepted these terms because there was no other way to reduce the confrontational mood that continued in rural communities. Even the development of the water system of dams during the regime of the revolution buried -literally- some of the towns that were distinguished by their governmental opposition.

Most of Mexican society rejects modernization, the culture of poverty does not want to pay the cost that it implies, it does not want to become Westernized or establish itself as a strategic partner of the United States. The country has failed in its modernization and there is no coincidence between the elites and the popular classes. The negative expectations of the Mexican economy no longer make the association with the United States viable, the country is not competitive nor does it have the infrastructure that even keeps pace with North America in the cybernetic, digital and artificial intelligence era that has arrived.

Loaeza considers that there is a margin of creativity and institutionalization of the Mexican rulers to contribute to the development and sovereignty of the country. However, it has been the ungovernability of factual groups that defends sovereignty, but at the cost of disorder and instability.

But things are reaching the limit and the decomposition of the social fabric in Mexico is reaching such a degree that a benign order can no longer be sustained in any way. The drug violence that is being provoked in Mexico is authorized by the United States. The ability of the United States to take advantage of what is happening in Mexico is imminent, but the supposed benefit of the narco-economy is no longer optimal for anyone. If communism implied the risk of civilization for North American governments, don't you consider that drug trafficking is a worse social engineering? Do you remember what England did to China? Are we approaching an imminent conflict with the United States? have we won lost with the mafia narco-republic? Remittances and profits from crime and illegality are tripled by the development of our country. The same logic applies to the United States. How much has Latin American immigration cost you from the perspective of Huntington, Brzezinski, Kissinger and Friedmann?

Soledad Loaeza's work aims to highlight the institutions and formalization that the different Mexican governments have developed; however, the Mexican political class has always been at the service of the exterior and, in recent times, exclusively at the service of the United States; therefore, it is hardly credible that any of its members are nationalists. What is evident from her study is the statement regarding the absolute totality exercised by the United States over Mexico. For this reason, the criticisms towards the alleged authoritarianism and militarism of López Obrador that the author implicitly makes are surprising. Would the Americans allow an autocrat like Hugo Chavez or Fidel Castro in Mexico? Wouldn't they have eliminated him immediately? Loeza's own narrative destroys the indications of the excessive power that AMLO concentrates. The absolute power in Mexico is held by the United States.

After understanding that Mexican presidents have always been threatened by US missiles, which is why many decided to become CIA agents (Litempos), why would López Obrador escape this continuity? And if he has escaped, why have the Americans let him continue?

After the 1914 invasion, General Francisco Villa's attacks on Columbus and other consequences of the revolutionary process in our country, North America has realized that it can approach a total victory over Mexico, but even the defeat of the country is not Synonym of control. It has happened in Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq; and it will happen in Mexico. Few Mexicans will defend the territory, the mob will penetrate - to a greater extent - the American South.

Nazism deployed one of the largest military offensives to break the 3,500-kilometer Soviet barrier and reach the Ural Mountains, the failure was resounding with everything and Western support. Why does the IV Reich of the United States think that it could achieve in Mexico what the Nazis could not achieve in Russia?

Mexico does not have Commander Winter on its side, however, it does have Commander Relajo (Portilla) who has already positioned himself in the South and East of the United States, he has reached the Ural Gringos. The emigration of Mexicans (approx. 50,000,000 inhabitants), with all the schizophrenia that it implies, has established cells and beach missiles in almost 80% of the US territory. Who controls who?

The historical Mexican ungovernability has been a riddle for North American imperialism, they made the double mistake of manipulating it and believing in the ineffective Mexican rulers (which always distinguishes their limited capacity despite Soledad Loaeza's arguments), which is why they have the State Failed before your eyes (just look at the governments of Texas, California and Florida).

The geopolitical relations of North America are overwhelming against Mexico. In this sense, the militarization and centralism that the country is experiencing, the false democratization and the cacique feudalism that has taken violence to the extreme must be understood.

Soledad Loaeza's findings must be validated for the reality that Mexico is experiencing in the era of the Fourth Transformation. The fearsome Yankee sword is over our country and it is important to find new optimal forms of relationship between such different countries. The economic divorce from the T-MEC will not be so serious if the border is still there, however, if we continue with the path of fury and criminal violence that the daily path of our country maintains, only the strong performance of a military authority will be able to regulate the uncontrolled violence exercised by rural groups devoted to the transfer of narcotics. And the war of the streets in Mexican cities will spread to American cities.

Monday, August 08, 2022

End of Catholic Hispanism

 End of Catholic Hispanism

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero




Dr. Elio Masferrer Kan has established that Mario Bergoglio is renewing the Catholic Church and, as far as possible, contributes significantly to achieving the values ​​of the Second Vatican Council as well as a hierarchical diversification corresponding to social progressivism. Bergoglio's strategy is a response to the exacerbated nationalism that can fracture the hegemony of Catholicism in the world. But it is also a necessary action in the face of the abuses of the ecclesial bureaucracy and spiritual imperialisms like the Spanish that hurt, and continue to hurt so much, millions of people. The consequences of the adverse measure against Opus Dei are so varied that a message of an exhortation to the Spanish colonies for integration with their communities, for the construction of a universal society, is even transparent. Bergoglio's recent visit to Canada has symbolic elements of his religious message to Opus Dei.

Opus Dei is forced to contemplate its gap in the face of social reality, above all, to understand how anti-Catholic the combination of religious traditionalism with the Spanish counter-reformist casticism is. The organization is encouraged to change due to its excessive traditionalism, economic attachment and classism. The message of the Catholic religious authority is addressed, above all, to the intransigent Spanish Catholic nationalism twinned with the pro-Nazi regime of Francisco Franco. Catholic Nazifascism is increasing all the time, even now the United States is proposed as the starting point of the IV Reich for the future Holy Roman Empire.

Catholic Hispanism has been fundamental for the socioeconomic structuring of Ibero-America, but its virtues are overshadowed by a series of elements that block modernization: classism, traditionalism, colonialism, racism and dispossession. Geopolitically, the degradation of Opus Dei implies that in the Ibero-American world there are possibilities to bring the religious institutions of Catholicism closer to the people. Bergoglio has coordinated a renewal of the baroque vision of Catholic colonialism: the mentality of the excellent and oligarchic minorities. The deposition of Opus Dei promotes various Latin American theologies: Liberation, Indigenous, Feminist, Migrant, Labor, Homosexual. Plural, as Ibero-America has always been.

The intransigent integral Catholicism has been lost during most of the 20th century, the imperialist and Nazi-philosophical vision that was imposed on the Spanish Republic and contributed to the conservatism of the totalitarian madness, is forced to denazify itself to get involved with society, "ALL" the society, from a human and less institutional perspective. The papacy of Francisco, Mario Bergoglio, has made correspondence in the Catholic community a priority. Religious authorities must be more neutral, democratic, fair, inclusive. Social work is undoubtedly complicated and arduous. It is probably the last chance to maintain the universality of Catholicism.

If organizations like Opus Dei do not understand the importance of the link with the masses and, above all, with unprotected groups, the demands for sovereignty will end up building National Churches that are capable of doing something for their faithful believers, especially for the groups of the precarious Camels and needles, as León Felipe pointed out, are more Catholic than the Theology of Prosperity. Catholicism is universal, not just Spanish, not just traditionalist. The successful advance of Pentecostal and Charismatic Christianity in Latin America is proof that Opus Dei and its extensions do not rescue anything, well, only the smell of gold and incense.

There cannot be a universal Catholicism with visions as exclusive and racist as those of Opus Dei. Since the arrival of Pope Francis, his role has been attacked and questioned by Catholic traditionalism and he is identified as an enemy of the Church. The option for these religious groups has been schism. The formation of Guerrillas Blancas is not Catholic now, nor crusaders, nor crusaders, nor messianisms.

In Mexico, Opus Dei is distinguished by its attachment to the business economic elites and the Spanish Colony. One of its most representative characters is Miguel Alemán Velasco, as well as a host of politicians, businessmen, intellectuals and conservative groups - members of various far-right facades - whose common denominator is Iberian casticism and oligarchic conservative modernity.

I hope that the measure imposed by Pope Francis on Opus Dei and Spanish Catholic nationalism is understood. Despite the optimism that it implies, the invisible power of uncompromising integralism has been the enormous obstacle to the renewal of Catholicism since the Second Vatican Council. The resignation of Benedict XVI, which shook the Catholic Church to generate changes in the attitude of Catholic nationalists such as Opus Dei and various Secret Societies, was useless. The Catholic Church is on the verge of extinction due to aspects such as the philo-Nazism of intransigent integral Catholicism, not due to Bergoglio or due to different groups that are awaiting and guiding a natural and contemplative spirituality; but they do not have white skin nor do they have many economic resources.

In Latin America these measures contrary to Opus Dei, and implicitly towards the Secret and Reserved Societies of the Far Right, would imply a change of the oligarchies in the control of the socioeconomic structure that has generated so much poverty and underdevelopment. In the first place, the Catholic schools -public and private- where the social doctrine of the church has been a resounding failure, one only has to look at its results, the hegemony of Catholicism in education is responsible for aporophobia, classism, racism and poverty that distinguishes our countries. Second, the lay Catholic leadership that traps political systems in authoritarianism, chiefdom, opacity, and violence. Alois Hudal or Jesus Christ? For the sociology of religions and psychology, the Lucifer effect of alienation caused by blind obedience, which offers so much evidence on traditionalist Catholic pedagogy, remains.

The political turn in Chile and the degradation of Opus Dei are proof of the defeat experienced by intransigent integral Catholicism, but also of the necessary renewal and reunion towards the Second Vatican Council. Latin America needs to get out of the Middle Ages, millions of human beings must be assisted by Catholic corporations to resist the world crisis, the indolence of the powerful can no longer hide behind Catholic membership. The true political transition is just beginning in Chile. The change inflicted on Opus Dei can have invaluable changes in Peru, Argentina, Mexico and all of Latin America where history is common.

Pope Francis, like the renewed Jesuitism of the sixties of the last century, speaks to the hearts of Catholics with his proposals and actions, his measures are endorsed by religious authority but depend on the people, on the popular flock, on the true church. The international crisis of the Catholic Church is also significant and the degradation of Opus Dei implies the withdrawal of Spanish Catholic nationalism so that the new Catholicisms begin to renew the representation of a universal church.