The Eternal Mexican Dark Ages

 The Eternal Mexican Dark Ages

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

When reflecting on the history and political reality of Mexico, one cannot help but feel that the nation, in its quest to consolidate itself as a political community, remains trapped in a kind of perpetual Dark Ages.

The comparison with historical examples such as Attila, Genghis Khan, or the Confederates of the southern United States in the 19th century is illustrative: all of them were defeated by the centralized force of a state, a monarchy, or a strong government that managed to impose order, control, and unity.

In the Mexican case, however, this confrontation has never effectively materialized.

Here, the local strongmen and the Catholic Church, with its clericalized vision of the Motherland, tenaciously oppose the idea of ​​a modern nation, a political community based on rights, equality, and popular sovereignty.

In Latin America, and in Mexico in particular, the tendency to fragment the political community into regional micronationalisms, cultural tribes, and outdated power relations hinders the construction of a cohesive nation.

The local strongmen, with their local power and territorial control, wield an authority that does not seek integration into a common project, but rather the perpetuation of their homeland, their lineage, and their particular interests.

Catholicism, both institutional and social, in its feudal, curialized vision, reinforces this fragmentation by promoting a community of the faithful who obey and obey, instead of citizens who participate in and build a collective destiny. This scenario is reminiscent of ancient societies where feudal power reigned, where loyalty was not directed toward a political community, but toward a local lord, a family tradition, or a religious authority; loyalty was servitude and vassalage.

The modern nation, on the other hand, requires a common narrative, a shared identity founded on citizenship, rights, and popular sovereignty.

But in Mexico, this narrative has yet to take hold, and instead, fragmented stories persist, fueling micronationalism, loyalty to region, family, or the church, to the detriment of a national project.

This conflict of identities and loyalties is evident in the persistence of historical privileges, castes, special legal statuses, economic agreements, and old power structures that, instead of facilitating integration, further fragment the State.

The history of viceroyalties, regional privileges, and pacts of convenience shows how local elites prefer to maintain their homeland, their ancestral power, rather than join the nation that requires a project of unity and progress.

Examples like Genghis Khan, Attila, or the Confederates of the American South teach us that empires and strong states managed to impose their order through centralization and force, defeating the old fragmented structures.

In Mexico, however, this confrontation has not yet occurred.

The reason is that the local strongmen and the Church, with their narratives of the Motherland and their clericalized vision, have managed to maintain their power in a latent state, resisting any attempt at confrontation with the national state. In this perpetual Mexican Dark Age, no one wants to challenge these power structures.

The region, in its eagerness to maintain its privileges, resists the construction of a sovereign, modern, and civic nation.

The consequence is a kind of stagnation, a fragmented community living on ancient myths and loyalties, incapable of moving toward true integration.

As in feudal societies, loyalty is directed toward lords, lineages, or institutions that, in reality, hinder the creation of a strong and unified state.

Mexican history and politics seem condemned to an endless struggle between the forces that seek centralization and unity, and those that want to preserve their particular Motherland.

The defeat of the Confederates and their warlords in the past was achieved thanks to the strength of the centralized state.

Mexico needs, now more than ever, that confrontation that will break the cycle of the Middle Ages and build a modern nation, where the political community is a space of rights, equality, and popular sovereignty.

From the Sierra Morena, descending like Fidel Castro and Manuel Fraga

 From the Sierra Morena, descending like Fidel Castro and Manuel Fraga

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

The manifest rupture of the dominant coalition in the Fourth Transformation and the departure of López Obradorism to the Old World, particularly Spain, resonates with an echo that is neither of the Revolution, nor of the indigenous peoples, nor of Juárez's liberalism. It is the echo of the "homeland of the Creole," which Severo Martínez captured in ink and which today, with crushing irony, seems to be the true roadmap of the progressive national left. Martínez taught us that the homeland was not forged by the mestizo, nor by the indigenous, but by the Creole minority who, clinging to their Spanish heritage and colonial privileges, built a nation for themselves, on the backs of those below.

The relationship between Fidel Castro and Manuel Fraga at the end of the Cold War is a case of "realpolitik" and, at the same time, of the Hispanic Creole connection. Fraga and Castro, despite being on opposite sides of the political spectrum (post-Franco Spanish conservatism and Cuban communism), shared

a defense of Hispanic heritage. Despite being a communist leader, Fidel Castro was a fervent defender of the Spanish legacy in Latin America. For him, Cuban identity was a "wonderful mix of Spaniards, Indians, and Africans." Unlike the indigenist current of other leftist movements in the region, Castro viewed mestizaje and the Spanish legacy as central elements of national identity, a heritage to be defended. This stance, which remained firm even during the height of the "Day of Indigenous Resistance," directly connected him to the Hispanist vision of the Spanish right, which also defended Spain's legacy and culture throughout the world.

Loris Zanatta, in his work "Fidel Castro, the Last Catholic King," establishes him as a leader who defended morality and tradition, a "king" who legitimizes himself through Catholic tradition and morality, seen as a manifestation of the persistence of the colonial legacy in contemporary politics.

Marcos Roitman criticizes the lack of an authentic ideological identity in Latin America. The region's political and cultural elite have become "cipayos" of their own identity, prioritizing their connection to the Spanish "motherland" over the construction of a genuinely Latin American political project.

The presence of Beatriz Gutiérrez Mueller in the Motherland, legitimized by the intellectual and academic circles that now don't know where to place their radicalism, triggers a lack of clarity about one's own identity and a tendency to take refuge in the former Ibero-American metropolis.

In the end, Lopezobradorism and the Fourth Transformation did not seek a Marxist utopia, but rather the reaffirmation of a Hispanic, autocratic, and paternalistic worldview, where the caudillo stands as the defender of morality and tradition, a "king" who guards the "mother country" against the evils of the world.

Lopezobradorism is committing the same capitulation that Roitman criticized: Hispanic criollismo, exemplified by Fraga and Castro, the Morena elite is behaving like a "sepoy" of its own identity, a "criollo" who, unable to build a truly Mexican project, prefers to surrender to the Spanish lordly life. The true "flight to Spain" is not political exile, but ideological. It is that of the officials and intellectuals of the 4T who, unable to generate their own model, are forced into internal colonialism by their populist incompetence.

The rupture of Lopezobradorism and pragmatic defection go beyond the Fourth Transformation. In the end, the gachupines that Roitman denounces are not those who come from outside, but those who have taken root in the thinking of those who, in their supposed struggle, have been unable to escape the "homeland of the Creole" or the scepter of their own "Catholic king."

Would Vladimir Putin support Eduardo Verástegui?

 Would Vladimir Putin support Eduardo Verástegui?

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

During the electoral process that allowed Donald Trump to reach the presidency of the United States, the intervention of Russia in favor of the candidate of the Republican party has been demonstrated. Now that Trumpism and republicanism are rising again, with great strength, in the US electoral process for 2024, the concern regarding Vladimir Putin appears again; and even more so because of the war that NATO is waging with Russia.

In Mexico, the figure of Eduardo Verástegui has grown, there is a disproportionate correspondence between his cause and Trumpist republicanism. But, in addition to sticking to the most extreme Yankee conservatism, Verástegui also accompanies a religious traditionalism that is proving fundamental in the political configuration of the post-covid world. In other words, in the face of the crisis of liberal capitalist democracy represented in neo-extractivist neoliberalism, nationalisms and populisms in various forms make their appearance: leftist, rightist, progressive, ethnic and religious. Samuel Huntington had established that the great protagonist of the clash of civilizations was indigenism, or nativism as the politically correct social scientists want to call it.

Vladimir Putin is the icon of a civilizing resistance against globalist democracy. Beyond justifying or understanding his reasons, the truth is that Putin is the protagonist of the neoliberal American decline. Day by day a struggle takes place where the Russian advance is interpreted as a retreat from the imperialist Western hegemony.

That is why American liberalism is concerned about the growth and leadership of Donald Trump. The Republicans have assumed the historical criticism of North American society towards voracious transnational capitalism, the imperialist farce and social decline. With everything and the racist, aporophobic, quasi-fascist excesses of Trumpism; What is certain is that the accusations and criticisms of the state of affairs in the American Union cannot be ignored. The United States has neglected its own people, as Samuel Huntington and many critical American sociologists once considered progressive have said.

Some consider that Trumpism seeks to meet again with Putinism to end a useless war that brings the end of Western culture closer. As at the time other Republicans interacted with China to balance the Cold War, now it is up to Russia to help –seriously- to balance the geopolitical power of the sleeping Asian giant.

And if all this worries Trumpism in North America, what would happen to Eduardo Verástegui, who is the most Trumpist candidate in Mexico? Will there be in Verástegui's team Russian spies and financial support from the famous Moscow gold? Would there be an understanding between Hispanic Catholic nationalism and orthodox Christian nationalism? Would Verástegui, Vox and Trump be more in line with a Putinist government in their respective regions than with a neoliberal lifestyle? Would Verástegui support a Mexit as proposed by Donald Trump for the health of both nations?

An extremist of Mexican conservatism, a member of the PAN, stated that the Mexican government should contract the Wagner Group to combat drug trafficking in the country since neither SEDENA nor the US intelligence apparatus can do anything. In this argument it can be represented that the Mexican right has stopped demonizing Russia, the same Vox Español recognizes the merit of the policies of internal capitalism that Vladimir Putin generates. Even the Catholic Church has made Russia sacred during the pandemic.

The "friendly" Russia for the Mexican far-right -through Trumpism- constitutes one of the most interesting episodes of the geopolitical secret war that Mexico has always lived through, as analyzed by Friederich Katz. There are several elements to glimpse a competitive strengthening of Eduardo Verástegui towards the 2024 elections.

The exhaustion of the party system and a sterile polarization inasmuch as it has to do with the lack of political proposals of the Broad Front and the absence of an ideological narrative in the Fourth Transformation given the legislative and judicial blockade, open the door to an independent and pro-American candidate. like Eduardo Verastegui. Even his political project can be compared to the case of Emmanuel Macron.

The rise of Donald Trump in US politics could benefit Eduardo Verástegui and bring about a third party in contention for next year's interesting electoral process.

Mexico-Poland: a far-right party Hector Alejandro Quintanar

Mexico-Poland: a far-right party

Hector Alejandro Quintanar

The World Cup in Qatar is approaching and, as Bertrand Russell recommended about soccer, it is time to think about humans and their political disputes. Within this framework, on November 22, Mexico will face Poland in the debut of both teams in the fair. Time to remember ideological links in both countries.

As he did in recent days to invite the march in defense of the INE, on July 2, 2005 Vicente Fox also invited the right-wing –both the assumed and the shameful– to take over the Angel of Independence to celebrate the day of democracy Disguised as a remembrance of the alternation in 2000, the act was an attempt to show strength in the streets, since the obradorismo had recently overwhelmed them against the authoritarianism of lawlessness, and the 2006 election was approaching. Fox's act had as a star guest the former Polish president Lech Walesa, stamp of Catholicism turned into a political project, whose presence sought to shine a stage dominated by figures from the Mexican ultra-right, such as Luis Luege or Velasco Arzac.

More than anecdotal, the event was a reminder. Researchers and journalists such as Samuel Schmidt, Diego Velázquez, Patricia Campos or Maciek Wisniewski have pointed out a crucial fact. At the beginning of the 20th century, Intermarium was a Central European geopolitical project that sought to unite countries between the Baltic and the Black Sea, with centrality in Poland, to form an ideological wall against the Russian revolution, based on one element: geopolitical anti-communism with Catholic roots. , which since the 19th century has been obsessed with an alleged Jewish-communist conspiracy to dominate the world, an obsession that masked an anti-secular and anti-enlightenment crusade.

Just 100 years ago, Pius XI (formerly nuncio to Poland) was elected Pope, an emissary of an intransigent conservatism and an admirer of the theses of the Polish Intermarium, which were also an inspiration for Mexican far-right organizations such as Los Tecos and El Yunque. Thus, Central European Catholicism – afraid that the Jews would found their State there – and the Mexican post-Cristero veins, opposed to constitutional secularism, had communicating vessels, both united by fear of the Jewish-communist conspiracy. The connections are not trivial: already in the cold war, the Vatican took up the theses of Intermarium promoting reserved groups in Latin America, which led to this intolerant inertia having a place in Mexico –as was the case in Puebla– and later found space in bread. From Warsaw to Cholula, the threat was one: the Judeo-Freemasons-Communists.

One hundred years after the accession of Pius XI; 100 years after the rise of the Intermarium, 100 years after the USSR was consolidated (and then dissolved), today in Mexico a conclave is coming: a forum in Mexico City on November 18 and 19 organized by the Political Conference de Acción Conservadora (CPAC), with exhibitions, among others, by Pinochetista Antonio Kast or Mr. Javier Milei, a madman who represents that sector of people who, unable to socialize healthily with others, disguise their antipathy as an ideology of exacerbated individualism. The axis of that forum is predictable: the reactionary counterculture against reproductive and sexual minority rights; mix anti-communism and anti-populism, and regurgitate geopolitical conspiracies, perhaps Cuban, Venezuelan or even Russian again.

Who will complete the conclave? Lech Walesa, who today, like 17 years ago, will once again be in Mexico to wash the face of reactionary groups with the prestige of his Nobel Prize, just as Vargas Llosa does, flattering Díaz Ayuso in Madrid or urging them to vote for Bolsonaro. With Walesa will be Eduardo Verástegui, a Mexican actor who became an ideologue of this post-Cold War right, in a touch of entertainment reminiscent of when Alicia Villarreal, singing, gave a better and more profound speech than Fox's in that meeting at the Angel in July from 2005.

The traces of intransigent Polish and Mexican conservatism have been connected. While in Poland that expression governs, in Mexico it lies in an opposition that is supposedly diverse but that is less and less afraid of being articulated with each other, headed by unpresentables (as was the cocktail of liberals marching with electoral delinquents to save the INE), while the right dura becomes visible as it is, as in the CPAC forum.

In 100 years much of the world has changed, but in the global party of reaction, whether Polish or Mexican, its right wingers remain anchored in the 18th century, while those who believe they are centers or brilliant forwards do not realize that they share the field with retrogrades more than they wanted. I wish the field that is being talked about here was not political, but soccer.

Taken from: 

Periódico La Jornada. 16 de Noviembre de 2022

Semanario El Reto. 17 de Noviembre de 2022 

MORENA. Cultural conservatism in México

Morena. Cultural conservatism in Mexico
Movimiento de Regeneración Nacional

March 1, 2018
https://www.semanarioelreto.com/single-post/2018/03/01/Morena-El-conservadurismo-cultural-en-M%C3%A9xico

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

A few days ago on TVunam, Argentine political scientist Flavia Freindenberg used a conceptual category to explain electoral political processes in Latin America. Elections in Chile, Costa Rica, Venezuela, Colombia, Brazil and Mexico are shaping scenarios where economic, political and social circumstances have activated the mechanisms of preservation and social self-defense. This reaction-cultural conservatism-obeys to the simplest characteristics of protection that human groups establish. The groups of these countries are considering serious risks derived from an irresponsible economic globalization. There are social indicators to show the deep damage that the neoliberal model establishes in education, health, gender, human rights and democracy.

The danger of the situation has reached such an extreme that the mechanisms of human protection have been activated, as happens when there is a cataclysm or tragedy. Hence, it is understood that the winning political options are outlined in a repertoire of anti-establishment candidates and representatives of a populist nationalism.

It is true that this context also constitutes the starting point for authoritarian regimes. Several dictators have gained power through democratic elections. However, social structures in Latin America are in a severe process of decomposition and society demands an urgent change. The PRIANRD has made the country a Failed State and, little by little, this reality has become conscious in a large part of the population. The corruption and cynicism of the contemporary political class has overcome the worst epochs in history.

There is no institution that works in present Mexico, it is enough to observe the profile of the national flag on its last anniversary. And the ruling class does not get anything positive. Deception, corruption as well as permanent factionalism generate an aberrant partycracy. Because of the same situation, the Army, the Catholic Church and the universities travel.

Characters representing Protestant Christianity, nationalists, outsiders, non-political trajectories, etc., have begun to generate sympathy and participation of citizens. It is an opportunity and a remarkable risk; but, perhaps, it is a need according to the time that is lived.

The PRIANRD is a danger for Mexico, they are exterminating what is left of the country. Hence, people opt for regime change and rejection of a continuity full of corruption, violence and parasitism.

Anti-systemic, nationalist, conservative and populist coalitions are marking the dynamics of political change in Latin America. Mexico represented the last link of a colonial neoliberalism that became impotent even to maintain order. The political forces are migrating to Morena's coalition not only because of a conservation superlative, the social order has been lost and nobody knows how to restore it. Morena is the name of the Bardo Monster that can redeem or annihilate Mexico.

Spain and Poland needed prudent leaders to promote amnesties, consensus and pacts. The change without rupture that Manuel Camacho Solis maintained from always and that, now, retakes an importance without comparison. The Catholic neoliberal right, like Polish communism and traditionalist Francoism, wafts everywhere. They are not right in anything. They are an example of the worst. By health they must leave and, at the same time, seek regeneration. With everything and the anthropological characteristics of Mexican culture, the political class and its powers have become alien, different, dangerous.

Is Andrés Manuel López Obrador a Revolutionary Conservator? At first it seems that way. It depends on the society that is not transformed into a Francisco I. Madero or Plutarco Elías Calles. It is up to Mexicans to value the republic, secularism, education and institutions that have inherited the blood of virtuous Mexicans. Globalization, Catholicism, the West and neoliberal order, present a historical crisis, each society is leading to safeguard their lives. Cultural conservatism is the ghost that travels the world, an opportunity and a tremendous risk

Rusophobia, anti-Semitism and Mexico

Rusophobia, anti-Semitism and Mexico

http://quoruminformativo.com.mx/index.php/2018/02/05/rusofobia-antisemitismo-y-mexico/

By Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

What is the reason that the Mexican extreme right seeks to resuscitate the spirit of Canoa and 1968 in the current elections? By accusing Russia of supporting Andrés Manuel López Obrador, are they trying to revive anti-communism, Judeophobia and violence against public universities?

Communism, Jews and the Russian Orthodox Church are elements that provoke conflict for Catholics. The Jewish-Illustrated conspiracy is emphasized, which acquires force when the Pontifical States are lost in 1870, and the Catholic Church blames the enemies Freemasons, enlightened, Jews, communists, liberals, secularizers and scientists. In the great conspiracy against the Church, all the enemies of Catholicism fit and are confused. The fundamentalism and Catholic fundamentalism would then be justified to reconfigure the greatness of the Church. The Holy See built the attacks on Russia from the moment when that country was a space for the survival of Bundism - a socialist Jewish movement - the affirmation of Orthodox Christianity, communism and Islam. One of the geopolitical projects for the protection of the Vatican State was the "Intemarium". The Intermarium was, and is, an anti-Jewish, Russophobic and ultraconservative Catholic project. When the Russian Revolution emerged, this strategy was implemented so that the intransigent integral Catholicism infiltrated governments, universities, civil society, etc., with the purpose of rooting Catholic secret organizations and controlling the status quo.

The animosity of Poland to Russia has infected the Ibero-American countries; nevertheless, the true rejection of Russia is not from Poland but from the Holy See that observes in Russia one of its main historical enemies. The Mexican far right has enunciated its historical attachment to the geopolitical project called Intermarium that coordinated the arrival of Karol Wojtyla as Bishop of Rome.

A few days ago, Poland enacted a law that sanctions the interpretation or indication that can be made between that nation and Nazi collaborationism. The fact constitutes a useless legislature with respect to historical evidences and facts. However; Beyond the Polish responsibility in the Holocaust, the interesting thing is to highlight the way in which anti-Semitism is used as a justification for Russophobia.

Recently, Russia has begun to take a leading role in the definition of global and European geopolitics. Since Vladimir Putin came to power there has been a synchronization between Russia's internal and external policy that seeks to affirm its vital space and zone of influence. The long period of the political group of Vladimir Putin has solved the crises of the USSR, the conflicts with the border areas and has maintained a zone of influence in Eastern Europe and the Middle East. Does Russia intend to constitute the Central State of the Baltic Slavic civilization? in the XXI century? How is Vladimir Putin's leadership to lead an elite that coordinates a semi-authoritarian democracy? Is Russia's development a risk for the West? Are there areas of influence for Russia in other civilizations? What is the reason for the emergence of Baltic Slavic identity in the post-communist era? What role does Russia play in the current multipolar scenario? Has it become a democratic, capitalist and liberal nation? Can it return to socialism to promote a new hegemony? What kind of power is Russia now?

Samuel Huntington gives Russia the treatment of a country whose modernity is frustrated or torn; at least, at the end of the 20th century, that's what it seemed. Russia has a Russian modernity, Baltic Slavic, which with greater certainty is attached and which, each time, has a resounding success. Russia supported, a little over a decade, the capitalist democratic neoliberal model; however, he abandoned it and has found himself again with an autochthonous experience of growth and development. This was the world of the future to which Huntington's hypotheses referred: 1) civilizations will develop internally in a radical process of differentiation with the West and 2) the West has to redefine its civilizing values ​​to stop its own decline in a global context where there are more and more actors and competitors.

Although the concept of clash of civilizations has a serious and bizarre impression, the most important thing that the hypotheses of the North American geopolitical singular have is the approach of the challenge that the culture or western civilization presents once the world of the cold war is over. While it is true that cultural differences have always been there, the exhaustion of the bipolar scheme generated many civilizations and central states of the same, emerge with greater strength and sense of geopolitical territoriality.

This is the case of Russia, only with attachment to its cultural identity and nationalism has managed to be reborn after almost collapsing with the end of the USSR. Russia has a global role that competes with the United States and the West in particular, its recovery has defeated the image of a poor, authoritarian and weak country. At the turn of the 21st century, Russia rejected Westernization and returned to the path of its own identity. The stage has followed, partially, the picture that appeared Huntington. Russia can not be omitted from international politics in Eastern Europe, Asia and the Middle East. It can not be said that he has regained the power that the USSR had; but it is not a minor actor in current geopolitics either. Its foreign policy coincides more and more with its national interest and is prepared militarily and professionally.

The recent leadership of Russia, China and India have robbed the United States of importance in global control. However, they do not seek the total armed conflict and, much less, the conquest of the world. The multipolar equilibrium generates a cold war where more actors intervene that, certainly, adopt the cautious and latent patterns of contention. Armed conflicts are represented in areas where diplomacy is concluded and the interests of the powers determine the use of force.

Modernizing globalization is no longer the heritage of Western culture. The West is in crisis for a blind neoliberalism represented in the Culture of Davos and the cultural metastasis that generates its consumerism. The abandonment of the United States to Mexico implies the opportunity for identity recovery and social reengineering. The Mexican neoliberals, the extreme right and the national bourgeoisie are condemned by the old capitalist superpower; they are ineffective, corrupt, murderous, retrograde and cretinous.

Should Mexico continue under the tutelage of the Holy See and projects such as the Intermarium? Should Mexico fear Russia? Of course not.

A large part of the macro-projects and strategic policies that our country has lost, owe their failure to the belief that you can only work with the allies of Catholic Christendom. There are the results: impunity, corruption, poverty and underdevelopment. Russia, and the world, are opportunities that globalization and modernity offer to our environment. It is a pity that El Yunque continues believing that Mexicans are programmed in code "Canoa 1968". The neoliberal Hispanic Catholic oligarchy can no longer hide its parasitism, the attacks on Russia are proof of its lamentable intellectual and moral capacity: the Americans no longer want them or of servitude. The closure of the North American president to our country, must be the impulse to look for new allies, technologies, infrastructure, markets, exchanges; in short, the world.

Mexico must fear the consecration of the Anvil that the Holy See promotes in the PRIANRD and, unfortunately, also in MORENA.

Yunque (Anvil): the priista and nazi Smurf

Yunque (Anvil): the priista and nazi Smurf
http://quoruminformativo.com.mx/index.php/2018/01/26/yunque-el-pitufo-priista-y-nazi/

By Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

A few days ago, Mario Alberto Mejía exposed in his columns the particularity of the political analysis that distinguishes the members of the Anvil. While it is true that certain prospects of the subjects in question cause hilarity, it is also true that these arguments must be taken seriously and intelligently despite the alleged errors they contain.
It is strange that reptilian, illuminati, gay or zombie conspiracies are taken seriously; but do not observe - in truth - the power exerted by a terrorist organization - similar in capacity to the Islamic State - as is the Yunque (Anvil) whose power extends in Latin America and other latitudes.
The Anvil (El Yunque) is in the antechamber of power in Mexico, it has always been. Since the end of the Second World War, the United States and the Holy See established a fascist consensus that aimed to destroy the Soviet Union. Even though America came to possess the most powerful weapons and army in the world, the Vatican State developed the millimeter structure to inhibit any progressive, social, liberal or democratic thinking that would put American hegemony at risk. The prostitute of Babylon received her service well. The governments where catholicity prevailed were infiltrated and Mexico is a singular case. Concordats and patronages generalize poverty to maintain the pageantry of the ecclesiastical hierarchy and their children. Thus Ibero-America was the safeguard of thousands of Nazis. In Mexico and, particularly in Puebla, Nazism runs without reserve.
The old revolutionary guard quietly observed the administration of Manuel Ávila Camacho, with regret he understood that the Army, the intelligence apparatuses and the public administration should be shared with the elites of uncompromising integral Catholicism, until they were absorbed by the papists. The moment of splendor is constituted by the government of Gustavo Díaz Ordaz -avilacamachista as well-, where white guards, death squads and fascist radicals flourish. Because of their anti-communism, they assassinate with impunity peasants, students, workers, women and even religious . The dirty war and the infiltration of the extreme right into the intelligence of the Mexican State is a fundamental chapter that is needed to explain the authoritarianism in our political system.
The integration of the Anvil (Yunque) and the Morenovallismo constitutes a legitimation to the previous state of things. In Puebla there was neither Reformation, nor Revolution, nor Cardenismo, nor Alternation. The old clerical Porfirian regime remains buoyant and the Lombardo Toledano or Henriquez Ureña, must flee hidden under penalty that the members of Yunque, like Testimony and Hope (or another of the thousands of organizations of the Anvil) try to kill. Avilacamachismo Poblano only reedited the old oligarchic structures that can not live without Hernán Cortés. Puebla indebted, prey of the huachicoleros, full of femicides, kidnapped by insecurity, poor and informal, is a product of the union between Moreno Valle and Yunque.
There is nothing to laugh at the political analysts of the Anvil, its candidates or members. The political class, in general, does not have the courage to confront them. The geopolitical condition is imposed: while North America fears socialism, the Catholic extreme right will have legitimacy to handle the States. Hence the capacity for violence, disorder, instability and crime that generates clerofascism to obtain inclusion in governments. What is important to say to the United States, as well as to Mexican society, is that, as long as the extreme right remains in power, social pathologies will continue and the cost increases each period. Morelos, Guanajuato, Puebla, Tamaulipas and Veracruz constitute a small sample.
If Moreno Valle is so powerful, what is the need for El Yunque? if the morenovallismo has to contribute to the vote of the PRIist-panista Meade Kuribreña, is also the Yunque a guest to fulfill the mission or the official candidate of the PRIANRD is Ricardo Anaya? Even Morena has had to lobby the extreme right through the black Jesuitism of social Catholicism. There are no reasons to laugh. Mexico is a tragedy, a sick despair of Hispanic catholicity.

Siete llaves al sepulcro del Cid

http://quoruminformativo.com.mx/index.php/2017/10/29/siete-llaves-al-sepulcro-del-cid/

Siete llaves al sepulcro del Cid

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

La emancipación de Cataluña podría ser uno de los eventos políticos trascendentales de la historia política española en los últimos tiempos. Catalizará, seguramente, el nuevo régimen político. La evolución hacia una tercera república en España, constituiría un ejemplo sin precedentes para la situación latinoamericana.

La lucha por la independencia de Cataluña debe tornarse en una cruzada antifascista. La hispanidad, como ideología, no es otra cosa que falangismo vergonzante. Ni es española, ni es democrática, ni es cristiana. La hispanidad es el mito de los bandidos. La hispanidad trata de evidenciar que Latinoamérica y España tienen varios elementos en común; sin embargo, para los sectores más radicales del conservadurismo, dicho elemento cultural debe transformarse en hispanismo castizo y catolicidad intransigente.

Solange Alberro señala circunstancias gastronómicas, sexuales, económicas, lúdicas, culturales y de supervivencia en general, donde los españoles convivían pacíficamente con indígenas, negros, judíos y musulmanes, olvidando su condición natural, origen e identidad. Sin embargo, allí donde la integración entre los españoles y las castas tomaba tintes cotidianos, la burocracia eclesiástica era la más incisiva en fomentar las divisiones y segregaciones, haciendo llamados al orden, la cristiandad y la hispanidad. Desde entonces se pueden encontrar los elementos del pensamiento conservador que más tarde caracterizarán a un sector de la  población en Hispanoamérica. Aun cuando la autora afirma que las castas indígenas, mestizas y afroamericanas adoptaban también un comportamiento españolizante, lo cierto es que, históricamente, existe una diferencia bien marcada entre los caracteres latinoamericanos y españoles. Con todo, el texto de Solange Alberro genera un indicador de la exclusión que guarda el sentido de la hispanidad castiza y católica. 

Aunque Alberro procura exculpar de su racismo a los españoles, finalmente, no lo consigue. Las prácticas castizas y puristas españolas siempre conciertan en exaltarse y menospreciar otros hábitos locales; pero, hispánicos también. El cosmopolitismo es aún bien distante de los hispanistas; en retórica, prácticas, creencias y usos.

En el México actual la segregación de grupos por razón de color de piel, de origen y grado de mestizaje sigue dando cuenta de la estratificación social ¿Es el hispanismo una idea que fomenta el racismo? No necesariamente; pero ha servido como eje para la exclusión y el posicionamiento de ciertos personajes. En el caso mexicano no ha acelerado la multiculturalidad, es excluyente y concede una situación de privilegio a los criollos y peninsulares, como en la época colonial. Hasta hoy puede apreciarse en México como uno de los peores exclusivismos usado por la clase dominante.

La derecha en América Latina trata de emular lo más puro español. La pasión castiza del mundo ibérico legitimó el conservadurismo de las múltiples derechas latinoamericanas. Retóricas como el nacionalismo católico, la preponderancia del Norte Ibérico, la distinción entre la “España de los Toros” y la “España de los Leones”, la “España de Abajo” y la “España de Arriba”; el fundamentalismo de las sociedades jerárquicas y orgánicas, el corporativismo, cooperativismo y mutualismo; la familia; y la subordinación de lo político a lo religioso, constituyeron una antropología de lo español. Una hispanidad castiza que sobredimensiona el siglo XVI ibérico, así como el pensamiento escolástico, humanista, personalista y tradicionalista. Una España católica que persiste en crear la alternativa Contrarreformista que cancele varias conquistas de la modernidad (socialismo, liberalismo, capitalismo y democracia).

El conservadurismo catalán, paradójicamente, fue uno de los que más asistió al mito de la hispanidad. Personajes como Félix Sarda y Salvany contribuyeron a desarrollar uno de los pensamientos políticos que tanto lastimaron y malinterpretaron la realidad hispanoamericana. La Cataluña que reniega de España es una prueba de que el nacionalismo católico ha caducado, que el catolicismo integral intransigente constituye una amenaza para la evolución de los pueblos.

El excelso pensador Joaquín Costa hacía énfasis en la necesidad de la secularización y la reforma social para que terminará el caciquismo y la oligarquía en Iberoamérica. Ahora, como entonces, es necesario el mismo remedio. Para salir de la Edad Media en Iberoamérica hay que sepultar la hispanidad.

El mundo occidental debe reconocer la independencia de Cataluña. La Iberoamérica liberal y republicana tendría que hacer lo mismo; empero, se ha tornado famélica su influencia política. En comparación con 1898, el contexto ha retrocedido a un clerofascismo sin  precedentes. Los Estados latinoamericanos son eunucos controlados por la Santa Sede y sus mafias levíticas.

Marcos Roitman se pregunta por el futuro del impulso emancipador y la forma en que puede ser aprovechado por la ultraderecha iberoamericana. Su análisis no se equivoca. Dudar y contenerse frente a la independencia catalana sería la gran oportunidad perdida de la historia. Como en el caso de Cuba, Puerto Rico y Filipinas, en su momento, hay que apoyar este separatismo que constituye un desarrollo del liberalismo iberoamericano, la ciudadanía y la secularización. 

Si la hispanidad dejara de ser pensada como una hipoteca por los grupos casticistas y conservadores, podría emplearse como un regalo de riqueza compartida, suficiente y generosa. Entonces sí, imborrable. Lo grave de no reconocer esta condición implica el que ciertas actitudes fundamentalistas e intolerantes se vayan desarrollando y se consideren legítimas, liberales e incluso democráticas.

La hispanidad no es el casticismo pero, los casticistas pretenden apropiarse de la hispanidad. Américo Castro  afirmaba que España era judía, musulmana, cristiana y, también, indígena. El mérito de España fue crear las condiciones para que estos elementos convergieran. La hispanidad castiza debe dejar de ser la característica de una condición retrógrada, reaccionaria y conservadora. Esta es una gran prioridad por atender. Hay muchas maneras de ejercer la hispanidad. En el sur de los Estados Unidos se está desarrollando una comunidad hispánica a la que se debe poner mucha atención no sólo por el temor que provoca a Samuel Huntington y Donald Trump, sino por la comunidad de vida, idioma y convencionalismos que están desarrollando. Mexamérica puede ser el futuro de Iberoamérica.