MORENA/PRIANRD: No escape from the black circle

 MORENA/PRIANRD: No escape from the black circle

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

Although the specter of governability begins to be represented as a threat to the Fourth Transformation, over time it can be seen that the anomias and pathologies that the country accumulates have been determined by the United States of America. Since the fateful years of López Mateos, social issues and national stability have been complicated, with the passing of the six-year terms, the border of chaos has been reached. It is impossible for the current six-year term to effectively slow down a process that has been accumulating for decades; but it cannot be said that he has not done anything.

If Mexico falls, the Yankee empire too. This is a truism that is evident in the Pentagon, the CIA, the DEA and other agencies that oversee US power. The point is that the Mexican political class also knows it and, for better or for worse, they have jointly decided that the country, the Mexican Republic, should be established as the backyard of the North Americans. It is true that Mexico is dangerously close to the condition of a failed state thanks to neoliberalism, but it is that it is convenient for imperialism; Have we forgotten who canceled the possibility of having a Japan below the Rio Grande? How many million tons of drugs does the US need to be in harmony? The economic superpower has all the technology at its disposal, but why does it need fifty million Mexican “wet slaves” for its fertile economy, plus those who crossed today?

America is not going to change; no matter how much the neoliberal and conservative right refer to themselves, to their style of governing, as more Swedish, Dutch, Spanish; In the end, they end up the same as always, paying the flat fee to the global super cop for running the club and nothing more.

Manuel Camacho Solís, Antonio Velasco Piña and Pablo González Casanova have a singular coincidence: political power and governability in Mexico reside in the military, in no one else. What is the difference between an authoritarian nationalist regime (populism/pricomunist Guadalupano) and another technocratic-bureaucratic-military regime (neoliberalism)? The victim is society. Perhaps the government of the 4T has done something for the most needy in the country; however, neoliberals only want a welfare state for the rich. In general, the country is at the disposal of the United States; the administrators are changed, but the armed forces take care of the establishment. Even a civil war in Mexico is bearable for North America, but the invasion of the United States towards our country would constitute a defeat like Vietnam; the guerrilla war would be inexhaustible for the American Union, as well as the constant migration of temporary groups.

Mexico, in contemporary times, has always lived on the brink of chaos, no matter how ungovernable the Lopezobrador government is blamed, the neoliberals did not have the country any better and things will never improve.

When we focus on Mexican ungovernability, one wonders who manages it best for the US. No matter how ungovernable you want to manifest in Mexico, it goes as far as North America supports. Even if the extreme right longs for it with all its humanist soul, Mexico will not reach the levels of Peru, where the criollos can go around killing indigenous people left and right. Ungovernability in Mexico can reach the levels of the Mexican Revolution or the Cristero War; something else would mean a guerrilla war that could infect the southern United States and could trigger an American civil war, a flank for the real enemies of the United States: Islam, Russia or China, even Europe.

Has the Guadalupan pri communism of the 4T for the US ceased to be useful? No. On the contrary. Given the balances of ungovernability, authoritarian nationalism is better than military bureaucratic technocracy; unless the United States wants to make Mexico a real hell worse than Ukraine. Can the PRIANRD bring us to the level of the Ukraine? Yes, and they are capable of worse. Denmark or Sweden represent the sick beliefs of the aspirationists, it is not a utopia but a madness; they point to the populists as crazy, but to make the Anti-liberal Spains liberal is true marijuana.

Mexico is Mexico, and as long as you have the United States as your neighbor, you will always be far from God. Even if the PRIANRD triumphs in the next elections of 2024, the Mexican Army is the only link in Mexican governance, the neoliberals will continue to militarize the country, as much or more as AMLO has done. And, like good hypocrites, they are going to shed more blood as they did in Calderonism.

Anarchy is the limit for the absolute domination of the United States in Mexico. Meanwhile, only hell is the option of the false right and left.

AMLO and the Black Circle

AMLO and the Black Circle

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero 

Pablo González Casanova stated that populism constituted a double-edged weapon of protection for Mexico. On the one hand, it is a force that feeds the acritical attitude of most of the social movements and caciquile regions of the country to the point of almost bursting the fragile order. On the other hand, populism also constitutes an auxiliary factor for the armed forces in national defense against a probable foreign invasion, particularly from the United States.

The militarization of the country confirms that the National Army, a product of the Mexican Revolution, is the true force of governance in Mexico. The complaints about the facade that democracy guards in our presidentialism represent the modernizing liberal frustration that Western evangelical scholars have to experience as a permanent martyrology. Antonio Machado, Denisse Dresser, Jorge Portilla and Juan Linz confirm what Huntington establishes, Latin America is light years away from being Western. With few events in Latin America, it is immediately verified that presidentialism does not work outside the United States, well, almost in no country. Mexican authoritarian presidentialism will never be like US presidentialism. This does not imply a lack of attention in the operation, handling and security of the system. Outside the United States, presidentialism almost always ends in coups.

Mexico sheltered itself from the Latin American presidential dynamics thanks to an Official Party - understood by the concept of military corporatist capacity - that coerced the different political forces to solve the problem of presidential succession and public administration. It was not easy, the Army of the Mexican Revolution faced the imperialism of the Catholic Church and the United States. It did not win, but it did obtain a Pareto balance that provided meager national stability.

In a fictionalized way, Velasco Piña exposes the Mexicanism of the armed forces that develops into a populist and confused revolutionary nationalism, but with an authoritarian clarity that was executed many times to obtain the PRI pax.

The imperial presidency wants to return, although the Official Party no longer exists. Will the Black Circle be able to contain and coerce the PRI cliques that are dispersed in different political parties? Will the Black Circle be able to institutionalize, once again, an Official Party?

That militarism is an inevitable variable in the governance of extra-western countries is an axiom of political science. What militarism is talked about in Mexico regarding the Black Circle? During the PRIATO, the armed forces constituted a defensive bloc against imperialism that obtained a moderate colonialism. There are many coincidences between the Spanish Francoism and the revolutionary nationalism, but also great differences. With its flats, the colonialist pact of the Mexican Army gained greater independence than many cases in the Iberosphere.

The alternation elections caused a decrease in military power. President Felipe Calderón promoted a militarization of the country that ran aground in US geopolitics. Militarization during neoliberalism made Mexico like Colombia. In both cases, the war on drug trafficking has been lost, to the benefit of North America. Both countries are militarized, the Colombian army is more like a US occupation force; what should not happen in Mexico.

Revolutionary nationalism, the strange doctrine that justified the Army of the Mexican Revolution as the backbone of PRIATO, failed to consolidate after World War II. Over time, the centrality of the armed forces, caciquil corporatist populism, and the pragmatism of the ruling class, deteriorated Mexican nationalism, which with the political transition gave up even more. If Mexico is to be an authoritarian democracy, a justification for revolutionary nationalism is indispensable, so that the black circle preserves the legitimacy of organized violence.

AMLO confirms that the center of the Mexican political system is the Army, although it is also important to reflect under what circumstances. The positioning of the Army is done with the tutelage of the United States, it no longer seems the domain of an independent army.

Still, the United States is in total global decline. Mexico is in a position similar to that of the early nineteenth century when the Spanish empire imploded, orphanhood offered the possibility of autonomy and freedom, but the opportunity was wasted for lack of responsibility and cohesion, for lack of a national objective.

Perhaps it is true that the strengthening of the Mexican army is a necessity, the prince must take care of his weapons before his clothing. However, that the strengthening of the armed forces implies the strengthening of the people and not the occupation of the United States informally as occurs in Colombia.