The Mexican Hispanic Right is Strengthening

 The Mexican Hispanic Right  is Strengthening

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Geopolitics is increasing its degree of uncertainty and there are various events that support the perspective of such estrangement. However, it is worth reflecting on the strategies of the Mexican right regarding the economic division of blocks that is coming. Although the meetings in Argentina and Spain may promote different right-wing approaches, in reality, geopolitics marks that the pro-American right and the Hispanic right are separating or, at least, have different strategies. For example, it is worth highlighting that the European Union and Mercosur have made an economic agreement that deepens their relations. This should also be interpreted as the tacit recognition of the exclusion of Europeans in North America as Donald Trump has maintained. CPAC and Neos pose severe differences with Anglo-Saxon culture and liberalism.

The pro-Yankee right is stagnating in the political processes of our country, Eduardo Verástegui does not get any support from the actors who should find in his proposal, the logical path to their economic benefits. Salinas Pliego's biographical background and his business circumstances push him towards the Hispanic right, no matter how much libertarianism he sponsors.

The Mexican right is betting on Hispanicism, which only blocks integration with North America and allows the reproduction of elements that Anglo-Saxon culture rejects. If President Donald Trump seems to follow the script of the "Hispanic Challenge" developed by Samuel Huntington to the letter, who would think of deepening relations with Spain to the point of mimesis as Calderonism proposes? If for Hispanic and libertarian conservatives, the Fourth Transformation lacks a compass in the rough sea of ​​Trumpism, where is the Mexican Hispanic right going?

Mexico represents a society that can change its culture, initiate hybridization processes until it fuses with North American elements. A bold strategy like the one implemented by the Philippines fifty years ago, allows us to see that this country is in better conditions than others in Latin America. Apparently, forgetting the Spanish language and approaching the English language, as well as the civilizational change, has good results. Alain Rouquie and Samuel Huntington believe that Mexico could be integrated into North America, at least, in three hundred years; however, the Hispanicists – mainly the abusive Spanish colony – want the process to extend a millennium.

The colonial caste system: blood rights, racism and pigmentocracy; represent the first element of the Hispanic Mexican right that does not want to change. On the contrary, this force represents the real and identity-based power of its perspectives. However, reality disposes of other things; despite Trumpism and Calderonism, Mexican society is mostly integrated into North America and, sooner or later, it will have to assimilate into Anglo-Saxon culture. Mexican migration to North America is translated as American expansionism and will soon be confirmed with returns and deportations.

Calderón and National Action, as occurred with Luis Calderón Vega, Salvador Abascal and Salvador Borrego, the tecos and yunques; They are lost in the competition to find the Spanish grandfather and the racism of purifying Jewish blood. Hispanidad is a useless and dead faith; hopefully one day, Mexicans will be able to abandon the tribulations that only prolong the agony of the Habsburg Model and the minimum payment on the Spanish mortgage.

Salinas, a difficult step to modernity

 Salinas, a difficult step to modernity

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

The Spanish nationalization of Carlos Salinas de Gortari is a sign of severe conflicts in the ideological vision of the former president of Mexico, although it is true that some time ago he had pointed out the detachment from the strict neoliberal model, by adopting the Iberian nationality of the Mother Country, to the fret with an important cluster of ideas regarding Mexican modernization. As ruler, Salinas generated one of the prominent philosophies to catalyze the development of Mexico and bring it closer to the United States of America, as a former president and person, the option for Spanish naturalization ends up demonstrating that Mexican modernization, like the Spanish, is simply impossible .

The first question generated by the adoption of the new nationality of Salinas, was why Spain? In a strict sense, Hispanidad denies neoliberalism. Carlos Salinas, like Mario Vargas Llosa, aspire to liberalism in a utopian sense, since the concrete decisions that represent them end up accommodating the anti-liberal European Middle Ages. If Salinas, like Lorenzo Zavala, had adopted North American nationality; Despite also being described as a traitor to Mexico, at least he would have been consistent with the political economic thinking that he defended throughout his six-year term. The technocratic thought of Salinism was forged at Harvard, not on the Camino de Santiago; but anyway.

Salinas's decision to trace his Spanish ancestry and promote the adoption of the Iberian identity makes him very similar to José López Portillo. By the way, one of the administrations where he participated and the project of the Group of the Programming and Budget Secretariat was taking shape; And if Jolopo, being the most cultured president the country has ever had, ended up being one of the craziest administrations in the history of the Mexican political system, will CSG end up being a numerary Francoist technocrat of Opus Dei? Being Spanish is synonymous with failure, and perhaps for this reason neither the most nationalistic president nor the most prepared were of any use.

The adoption of Spanishness by Salinas de Gortari mistakenly baptizes the neoliberal project, recognizes that Mexican modernization is impossible and endorses the ideas of Samuel Huntington regarding the useless Mexican assimilation to Western culture. Salinas recognizes the inertia and power of the Spanish camorra to belong to the oligarchic impunity.

Spain, like Latin America, is essentially illiberal. That then the facade that was neoliberalism can be evidenced. The great Mexican tragedy has been the inability to build an intermediate route between Spain and the United States, the two development references that have historically been offered. Mexico will never be like the United States, but it is a gross mistake to follow the path of Spanish failure.

Caciques or Neoliberals? The tragedy of Mexico

Caciques or Neoliberals? The tragedy of Mexico

Diego Martin Velázquez Caballero

The persecution that neoliberals experience today is similar to the deception that, for much of the 20th century, Mexican society contemplated during the anti-communist campaigns. It is true that significant violence was unleashed against the communists; what has not happened with the neoliberals. In the end, both acts are entelechies that are justified to legitimize a regime that tends to increase authoritarianism.

Mexico never ran the risk of becoming a communist country, nor has it been - and will not be - a neoliberal country. And the reasons are the same.

Joaquín Costa, a regenerationist, interpreted the chiefdom in Spain as an Asian remora that had been imported from the New World and, as a pandemic coronavirus, generated severe conflicts between the institutions of the Old and New Regimes. Caciquismo finds itself in the middle of many worlds and adapts to the political institutions of modernity.

The cacique is a form of authority that the European world found in the American world and, in the case of the Spanish empire, it was imported as an element that would promote counter-reformist anti-modernity. The purpose was achieved, but the chiefdom stopped time forever in Latin America. Even the Asian world has achieved a successful modernization combining totalitarianism, technology, industrialization, religious syncretism, capitalism and communism. In all the routes they have done well, for the Latin American case something like this cannot be affirmed, even in Spain itself

The pain that Joaquín Costa exhibits with Spain is that, thanks to the caciquismo, it is understood that the King does not have greater representation. Spain, like Latin America, is a Comala where the chief appeases everything, takes everything, commands everything and destroys everything.

The chiefdom is the most challenging riddle for Western modernity. It is not terrorist like the Arab leadership, nor is it tribal like the African rule. It is the Hispanic Catholic malinchismo that has Latin America in the strangest of the Middle Ages: the Catholic colonialist.

Joaquín Costa tries to explain the way in which the indigenous chiefdom perverted Spain. He manages to make a description of each of the elements, but he forgets that the cacique was a form of leadership invented by the Catholic Church. The chiefdom ceased to be solely indigenous and spread to all castes, social classes, genders and contexts of the Ibero-American world.

In Asia, the primitive leadership did not detach from its civilizing identity and this has allowed them to evade and take advantage of modernity in the best way. In Ibero-America, attachment to the Catholic Church destroyed civilizing and national identities, invertebrate nations, and suspended modernity. Asia, with all its chiefdoms, has a more successful modernity than Latin America.

The problem with caciquil rule is that the homeland, the nation, vanishes. They cannot emerge. Following Costa, the caciques have various benefits from the country's political networks, a society is produced kidnapped by families and lineages of caciques. Empires like the United States and the Catholic Church promote and defend them. There is no explanation for so much power, for so much political control, but it is a reality that cannot be hidden. The inheritance of the chiefdom is pure rancor, pain, shame and corruption.

Destroying neoliberalism is one of the idle exercises of Q4. In Mexico, as in Latin America, the true transformation will occur when the chiefdoms end and the institutions can be consolidated.

Morena faces the Ibero-American decadence that broke out in Spain in the Civil War of 1936. Chasing corruption is not chasing neoliberals. Neoliberalism ended when Ernesto Zedillo was kidnapped by the Atlacomulco Group, which has led the socio-political processes ever since. Why isn't AMLO going after the Atlacomulco Group? What is the use of displacing designated neoliberal factions to replace them with others that have also been neoliberals, and only a capacity for rapture towards the president distinguishes them? When Gral. Lázaro Cárdenas expropriated farms, he gave them to the people; he did not give them to other landowners. What is observed in Mexico is a replacement of caciques rather than a change of regime. This has been happening since 2000 when it was discovered that we are governed by PRIs of all political parties.

Neoliberalism is a category that is not even properly understood in Mexico. It is becoming a social persecution that will soon drown the ruling party and the president.

Mister Danger killed Don Quixote de la Mancha

 Mister Danger killed Don Quixote de la Mancha

Diego Martin Velázquez Caballero

Understanding the meaning of Francoism in the cold war constitutes a surrealist approach that can generate severe labyrinths such as those caused by the visit of the Spanish Santiago Abascal to Mexico. Francisco Franco's Spain was a fascist dictatorship that survived thanks to the economic determinism of the Western world. Falangism was an important legitimator of Catholic nationalism, but especially of the United States.

The Iberian Peninsula became a space where different types of anti-communism converged and strategies were designed to influence Eastern Europe and Latin America. Francoism was a protagonist in the Cold War compared to its meager role during World War II. From Spain paramilitary, ideological, religious and partisan strategies were formed that were carried out by nationalist Catholics in the ecclesial and educational communities. In exchange for cooperating with the strategies of the Vatican and the United States to sustain US hegemony, Spain received the necessary financial support to confront the entrenched social crisis.

In Latin America things were a bit different. In addition to the Franco-Spanish influence, the conservative and de facto governments were persuaded and supported by North America. The experience of the Dirty War exemplifies them in a compelling way. The oppressors of the victims of the conflict are those who were part of the regional government, in the case of Mexico the Federal Security Directorate is affirmed.

What is the meaning of the transnational party structuring that VOX intends? The union of national rights is not a novelty in the history of the 19th century and particularly of the 20th, but in the scenario of the post-covid world and the Davos Forum's Agenda 2030, this fact shows that the West is not prepared to limit the hegemony of States. United or for social, racial, religious, economic and political ecumenism.

North America wants reasons to activate its war economy and Latin America is emerging as the new Iraq or Vietnam. Mexico was already the sparring partner of the United States throughout the 19th century, but when the civil war in the United States threatened the extinction of the American colossus, Lincoln turned to Mexico. Benito Juárez and Abraham Lincoln constitute the Pareto referent of the relations between the two countries.

Mexico needs a popular consultation to analyze the type of relationship it wants with North America. Topics such as the automated world, digital capitalism, emigration, health, artificial intelligence, birth control, aeronautics, etc .; they are the true uncertainty of the future. The Davos Forum has set out a series of goals that can shape a world without North American hegemony and that will slow down globalization. Following the game of the Hispanic or pro-Yankee anti-communist spy ends badly and the left always ends up being the platanito commander.

The drug war that Felipe Calderón unleashed was sponsored by the United States, which has never stopped intervening in conflicts in Latin America. The epidemic of failed states is the result of the conservative pact between the extreme right and false revolutionary nationalism, bad governance always causes colonialism. The United States wants to wage war, it is its business, the closer our region approaches ungovernability, the more the United States assures interventionism.

VOX came to challenge the Mexican constitution, the visit remains for the anecdote. Faced with historical memory, the event represents that for the Motherland Don Quixote de la Mancha no longer speaks, the dollar speaks. What can Don Alonso Quijano do against the empire? Give up. Die. It was not the fatal clash with reality that killed him, but the Anglo-Saxon economic dominance. VOX is the usual subsidized Franco regime. Although AMLO is betting that this fascist radicalization will split the opposition, the complicated thing is the local collaborators who are now doing what they had to do for Donald Trump to win. To defeat AMLO, the Mexican right - civil and religious - always subordinates itself to the United States, but with moderate groups that do not always support the radical conservatism of the Republicans.

The Mexican political class is stagnant in the aftermath of the cold war. The United States too. Latin America cannot follow medieval and anti-communist channels because they are fallacies that always end up delaying growth and development. Europe has the social force necessary to ignore Spain and Eastern Europe. The post-covid world poses a future where neither capitalism nor communism are protagonists.

The Mexican right in the twentieth century. Agony, transformation and survival

The Mexican right in the twentieth century. Agony, transformation and survival

Downloadable Book

48. The Mexican Right in the Twentieth Century Agony, Transformation and Survival.

Xóchitl Patricia Campos López, Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero (coordinators)

BUAP

PROFMEX

Montiel & Soriano Editors

257 p.

ISBN 978-607-7512-77-6

Year 2017

The political ideologies are distinguished by displaying nuances that, although they let us know their relativism, allow us to understand the extension and intensity of the categories. The ideological orientation known as the right approaches conservative, religious, order, reactionary, aristocratic, xenophobic, excluding, etc. criteria. But what is the future of the right? How do you think the right? How does it speak? What is its relationship with economic groups? Has it established geopolitical links? What have been its historical manifestations? contemporary ?, Who can be considered right?

The historical speed of a country determines the meaning of its social structure, which makes the Mexican right singular; but necessary reconsideration. Globalization, modernity and the political transition have generated events that force us to reinterpret the right-wing pendulum. The world economic order folds to the right, then, has the Mexican reaction been synchronized or desynchronized? Observing how much the Mexican right has changed will make it possible to formulate a map appropriate to the circumstances.

The text that you, friendly reader, has in your hands, is the product of reflections emerged from the Academic Body "Multidisciplinary Studies of Politics and Law" (BUAPCA-281), and that found echo in academics from different institutions. The objective of the work is to inform, appropriately, of the historical change, the construction of networks and to formulate new indicators to understand the impact and validity of the right.

script async src="//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js">

http://www.profmex.org/ciclosytendencias/vinculos/La_Derecha_Mexicana_en_el_Siglo_XX.pdf