North America and the Mexican succession
Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero
Although it is an open secret, some historians such as Joseph Schlarman or Friederich Katz agree that the United States contributed to the fall of the dictator Porfirio Díaz for reasons of geopolitical and economic competition.
The formation of a national bourgeoisie, the growth of infrastructure, the consolidation of a national market and the intervention in Central America were elements of greater importance than inequality and injustice in Mexico, for North America to sponsor opposition and anti-reelectionist groups against Porfirio Díaz. ; Also the Yankee support for Pancho Villa and Francisco I. Madero was more than noticeable.
In the end, the United States decided to assassinate the Apostle of Democracy to continue guaranteeing its economic hegemony and insert Mexicans into a maelstrom of violence for almost twenty years. The United States has always feared the development of “Japan below the Rio Grande.”
Yankee interventionism in Mexico's political processes has occurred since moments prior to national independence.
From there we have to read the attack on the Mexican Embassy in Ecuador that the puppet government of Daniel Noboa carried out. The message is forceful: something is happening in Mexico that aggravates the United States.
Is it the economic recovery? Is it the advantage of Donald Trump? Is it the development of infrastructure? Is it the permanence of populist progressivism in the government? Is it the end of neoliberalism? Or is it everything at the same time? time? The relationship between Mexico and the United States is one of the most schizophrenic.
Although the final destination is integration, we do not see everything that has to happen for this objective to be met.
It is considered a process of cultural and civilizational disintegration before the expanded formation of the United States of America.
Among the closest scenarios is the one proposed by George Friedman, derived from the narcopolitics shared by the informal economy of both nations.
It seems that the Democratic administration of Joe Biden wants to advance it a little; although a virtual invasion of the United States to Mexico would be detrimental, in no way, to the American Union.
Drugs, cheap labor, emigration and natural resources; They constitute the main lines of a complicated relationship between the US and Mexico. What is missing, or what is left over? Given membership in the impossible triangle, Mexican diplomacy cannot make a meaningful decision.
The argument of international law – the weapon of the poor and weak – continues to be the route where a weakened Mexican sovereignty attempts to defend itself.
However, Daniel Noboa's offensive against Mexico should not confuse us as to the sender; the aggression - as always - comes from the United States.
The historical agents of phil-Nazi anti-communism, such as Ricardo Salinas and Lilly Téllez, did not miss the opportunity to identify with the anti-Castro right in Miami.
The Mexican-American fusion will not be peaceful or benevolent in the short term; On the contrary, many contrasts and conflicts show that the lack of assimilation of Mexicanness to Anglo-Saxon culture triggers the isolation of our country.
Assimilation or Subordination? What does America want? The official candidate's agenda should not waste more time thinking about it.