Does Trump strengthen Sheinbaum within Morena?

 Does Trump strengthen Sheinbaum within Morena?

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

It doesn't seem that way; on the contrary. Although appearances suggest that President Claudia Sheinbaum has been strengthened by the ninety days of grace granted by Donald Trump, in reality, she faces a significant challenge in her relationship with the governors and internal groups within Morena. Despite her strengthened position, these actors are likely to continue to ignore her due to a pact of impunity and corruption in Mexico, where simulation has become institutionalized.

The trans-sexennial influence of López Obrador's administration and the notable absence of Claudia Sheinbaum indicate that power dynamics in Mexico are dominated by the "caciquil federalism" of local and de facto powers (Andrew Paxman). Governors have a considerable degree of autonomy and can resist or pretend to obey the directives of central power. The Morena governors and cliques play a game of "a thousand masks" with Donald Trump and the United States. Sheinbaum and the Morena governors interact in a game of mixed signals.

The relationship between Sheinbaum and the Morena power groups represents a scenario of "silent disobedience." The governors publicly abide by Sheinbaum's directives, but in practice, they continue their traditional governing practices. They act pragmatically based on their own interests and power groups, using the Morena party as a front for their agendas. Corruption is a reward system that allows elites to maintain the loyalty of their groups. The factions compete, but they do so within a framework of corruption that benefits all. Corruption is not seen as a weakness to be eradicated, but as a tool for governability and personal enrichment.

The president uses financial resources to obtain the loyalty and support of the governors. In return, the governors pretend to abide by federal directives. However, the economic crisis and rampant corruption reveal the message that has prevailed since Vicente Fox's presidency: it is necessary to unite the years of Hidalgo and Carranza. Political cliques in Mexico have turned political defection into religious fundamentalism because it is necessary to abandon ship without warning.

Mexican presidentialism cannot be reconstituted without the formal support of the United States, as in 1924, 1929, 1945, 1988, and 1994. The United States must take charge of its own backyard and abandon the idea of corrupt homeostasis. Federalism has turned Mexico into a failed state that will soon infect the United States and that, whether Donald Trump likes it or not, will have to subsidize with greater resources later; better to pay now than double or triple later; even the American public will have to consider Friedman's exponential 2080 in those payments.

North America should have understood that Mexico is its historical stepson, its disobedient son; But if he doesn't control it now, like Nero's mother and guardians, he will end up consumed by his irresponsible actions.

Elon Musk and the Breakdown of the American Two-Party System

 Elon Musk and the Breakdown of the American Two-Party System

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

It is undeniable that the political history of the United States has been characterized by the two-party hegemony of Republicans and Democrats. However, the possibility of a significant break looms on the horizon, driven by atypical figures such as the techno-feudal entrepreneur Elon Musk. Just as Ross Perot once did, Musk could seriously challenge this established dominance, opening a new chapter in American political dynamics and becoming a third rather than a leading actor in the United States.

The United States political system, although one of the oldest and most democratic in the world, shows growing signs of disenchantment and a progressive loss of its appeal in the evolution of contemporary liberal culture. North America has managed to develop a functional presidential system, perhaps the only one of its kind, despite an electoral model that many consider unfair and plutocratic. For some scholars, this particular characteristic is precisely what has allowed for the complex mechanics of checks and balances, equilibrium, and equilibrium, a uniqueness rarely observed in other forms of presidential government outside of their territory. In contrast, for example, the Latin American reality offers a mirror to the dysfunctionality of presidentialism. In this region, coexistence with multi-party systems often results in authoritarian schemes. Despite various electoral and political reforms, the proliferation of parties generates governmental paralysis that leads to inefficiency and, unfortunately, to recurrent authoritarian attempts. Therefore, the indirect, aristocratic, and savagely liberal system of the United States only allows the survival of two partisan institutions, although there is an enormous associative, philanthropic, participatory, union, and militant tradition in North America.

Therefore, the potential emergence of a third party in the United States takes on particular relevance. A party that seriously competes for power would not only revitalize the political sphere but could also return greater sovereignty to civil society. Ross Perot's precedent was extraordinary, emerging at a time of notable participatory crisis in the country. Today, the relevance of a similar movement is accentuated by the excessive polarization that permeates the political environment, a context that could benefit the "Party of America" ​​initiative that Elon Musk seeks to build.

The visionary owner of Tesla, SpaceX, and other powerful industries possesses not only the financial resources, but also the technological and media resources, to develop substantial competitiveness and reach a broad audience. His vast technological empire has the potential to contribute significantly to the well-being of American society, even to the point of conceiving futuristic projects such as Elyseum, Tecnato, Modelo Downsizing, or Project Venus. Musk, with his disruptive approach, could spell the apocalypse of conventional politics, understood as a purely instinctive activity, by introducing artificial intelligence and post-technocracy as a fundamental pillar of governance and decision-making.

This South African-American entrepreneur will undoubtedly put forward a series of innovative proposals with which a large portion of the American population could identify. The technological populism embodied by Musk represents a considerable challenge for the

Democratic and Republican parties, which seem to have run out of answers in the face of China's rapid evolution and the growing global disenchantment with liberal democracy. Will the traditional American parties be up to the task of this new political era? Musk could be the Robert Redford of the film United States of Amnesia.

Eduardo Verástegui and Trumpist Christian Nationalism

 Eduardo Verástegui and Trumpist Christian Nationalism

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

The meeting between Eduardo Verástegui and U.S. Ambassador Ronald Johnson has generated interest due to Verástegui's closeness to President Donald Trump and his MAGA movement. Verástegui represents a faction of the Mexican right that seeks to consolidate a political bloc aligned with Trump's interests in Mexico.

Verástegui has established ties with international right-wing leaders, especially Trump, and has participated in Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) events in the United States. His goal is to found a political party in Mexico similar to Trump's Republican Party, promoting a political-religious agenda that combines neoliberalism, Christian nationalism, and Catholicism.

The Mexican right is currently dispersed and lacks a coherent discourse, divided into several factions. Verástegui seeks to attract disenchanted conservative sectors and PAN members with an agenda aligned with the principles of the American right. Their movement, "Viva México," could open a new space for the right in the country.

The Mexican right is dispersed, divided, and lacking a strategic logic, much less a coherent discourse. The Mexican right has become tribalized by economic factionalism. On the one hand, conservative and traditionalist Catholic nationalism is unsure whether to remain in the PAN, found a new political party, or even join Morena at the express invitation of Ricardo Monreal. The neoliberal right remains tied to technocratic essentialism, but lacks the capacity to explain and justify itself to society, which it continues to view as a six-thousand-dollar group. The libertarian right has become an anti-populist and anti-Mexican club. The civil and liberal right is dispersed in the pink tide, recreating the nostalgia for decent PANism.

The adoption of Trumpism by Verástegui and other participants at CPAC Mexico could intensify political polarization and legitimize radical discourses. The presence of international figures with classist and racist discourse could deepen social divisions and erode Mexican democracy.

The closeness between Verástegui and Ambassador Johnson is significant, as Johnson called Verástegui "his brother" during a private dinner in his honor. This meeting reflects the interest of a faction of the Mexican right in strengthening its ties with Trumpism, which carries significant risks for Mexico's political and social stability.

With Verástegui, Mexico could become like Costa Rica, Panama, Ecuador, Puerto Rico, or the Dominican Republic. Perhaps this is not a bad invitation to the right-wing parties in our country, who lack the strength to transform Mexico into a conservative modernity like Spain, Chile, or Argentina. It is not just a traditional patriarchy that lies behind Eduardo Verástegui; there is a Mexican national project that integrates, in some ways, with Donald Trump's MAGA perspective. The power network surrounding Verástegui connects North American politicians seeking to replicate Miami in Latin America, but there are also Latin American and Hispanic collaborators.

Verástegui's national project conditions Mexico's annexation to North America and, above all, ecumenism with Protestant Christians. Although the anti-Castro influence of Hispanic North American politicians seems evident, there is also a hidden Catholic right wing that is on the verge of religious schism due to its lack of influence in the Catholic Church, mainly due to recent changes.

Mexico's Transactions with the United States

 Mexico's Transactions with the United States

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Some analysts continue to find it surprising that Mexico is reacting slowly to threats from the United States. Although it is stressed that the country should organize itself as Ukraine did with regard to Russia, the truth is that the interdependence of Mexico and the United States has so many elements that integration is more evident than fracture; a North American military intervention can even fragment convergences and values ​​understood in certain aspects. The manifest governmental apathy seems to indicate that Mexico lives in relation to the United States under a prolonged Indentured Servant, that is, the labor servitude that has been so important for the subsidy of the North American economy during the centuries of its existence and that, whatever happens, Mexican slavery will end up mitigating the economic crisis in North America.

The indentured servant has been a condition of several nationalities that seek to integrate into North America. It is the racial cover that in some cases, such as African Americans, has lasted almost as long as that of Hispanics. It is true that this figure has disappeared from legal consideration in the admission of American nationality and citizenship; however, this is the only way to understand that the pressure on our country has taken on elevated tones, regular incrementalist actions on the part of North America, and passive national resistance from Mexican society.

Of course, Mexicans in the United States are more than important for the economy of the powerful northern neighbor; however, Mexico cannot implement the measures that the Trumpist government intends to solve the American problems of drugs and employment. The historical speed between our countries has marked differences.

The lack of synchronicity between Mexico and the United States can cause one of the most important humanitarian crises in the region, the government of Claudia Sheinbaum is obliged to exercise important leadership. That is, it is not only about demanding recognition of the importance of migrants, it is also essential to change the regional context of the country. If insecurity, caciques, the strength of the de facto powers, etc. were to decrease in Mexico; also the entry of foreign remittances would have a better impact and migration would decrease; Emigration is similar to the escape from narco-societies and terrible spaces full of anomies. Attention to internal problems also counts for the perception of Mexican emigration to change. The Mexican universe is saturated with traumas caused by poverty, violence and drug trafficking.

The president of Mexico should not side with coyotes, chieftains, criminals and polleros who have taken advantage of migration for so long, turning it into trafficking and exploitation. The elaboration of PAN public policies during the Fox period that sought to involve Mexican migrants in the community development of their localities and civic participation in them can be questioned; it is true, they worked poorly and little. However, Morena has nothing and does not consult specialists and scholars of the subject to take better advantage of the material and cultural importance of remittances. The latest research on the avocado and lemon trade has significant contributions to understanding the migratory phenomenon in our country. Government innovation must also consult and improve the actions of the administrative past.

Johnson. Hawk or Dove?

 Johnson. Hawk or Dove?

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Although the presence of an ambassador as the future Trumpist envoy has generated alarm among the analysts of the inner circle and some specialists, the truth is that -with all that risk-, there are also probabilities that Mexico will maintain its sovereignty and capacity to govern to a minimum. The North American military interventions have been multiple, although, with the exception of the loss of half of the national territory in the 19th century; afterwards, there have not been conflicts in the same proportion. It is true that many conservative groups would be delighted with a military intervention by the United States in Mexico; however, this would be unthinkable in the immediate scenarios because, it has been pointed out in the perspective of authors as ambivalent as Pablo González Casanova, George Friedman and Samuel Huntington, the most probable thing is that North America will lose a war against the many Mexicos.

The problem of a conflict between Mexico and the United States poses for the Americans a guerrilla war similar to Vietnam, the fight of an eagle against flocks of turkeys or chickens; surely it will capture some, but it will not be able to take them all. Therefore, the reasons for a total armed intervention and even war are not rational from the American point of view; at least, this is not indicated by the presence of Ronald Johnson.

Although Vietnam constitutes a shameful example of the war history of the United States, in essence, it is its main object of development. The Cold War represented for North America the speculation of war in a permanent and gradualist way; military victory is important, but less than economic victory.

Since the six-year term of Luis Echeverría Álvarez, the United States wants control of Mexico more than military domination and, in fact, there have been American ambassadors more willing to state coups and nothing has happened even though the country is on the border of chaos. Military gradualism serves to develop the US war industry and financial system. The US intervention in Colombia is an example of the significance of the drug trafficking issue; officials like Oliver North are more important than Chris Kyle. US militarism remains trapped in the logic of lions for lambs.

The Qanon Right

The Qanon Right

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

A conservative movement is taking place in North America that escapes the structures of social control that the Republican right represents. It has happened in the past, businessman Ross Perot managed to accumulate broad sympathies from Americans who observed the decomposition of the public apparatus and represents one of the outsiders who advanced the furthest in the political system. Now, Donald Trump, who has been successful in reaching the White House and overcoming the Republican Party, is trying a second part in the history of American civilism.

For a long time, American public opinion has seen the difference between Republicans and Democrats as the same as that between Pepsi and Cocacola. The group that supports Donald Trump is diverse but focuses on questioning and rejecting the hegemony of a public apparatus that is limiting freedoms, security and order in North America. Trump is above the Republicans and some of them have decided to support Kamala Harris and the status quo of the ruling elites.

Despite everything, the semi-sovereign people of North America react. Polls come and go, no advantage is clearly defined and no one has a decisive scenario. Why is Donald Trump recovering in the polls and overcoming the minimum advantage? The Qanon Movement, studied as a phenomenon of North American conservatism among the extreme and alternative right, represents not only the silent WASP majorities but also social criticism of the bureaucracy of the federal government and the corruption of the White House; even the longing for peace in the face of the geopolitical deterioration that the administration of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris have caused.

The Qanon narrative involves questioning various issues of political manipulation that distinguish the US government at home and beyond its borders. The Internet and various media have brought together social groups of the most diverse nature in Qanon. It is not only the unity against the de-wasapization that the Democrats represent but also the criticism against the failure of neoliberal and globalizing democratic politics. Qanon is a social revolution that transcends traditional media and government institutions of social control.

If there is a silent majority waging a synthetic war against the nodes of classical American political power, it is on the side of Donald Trump and is represented by Qanon. An amalgam of various right-wing and conservatisms, aristocracies and nativisms, identities and nationalisms, Christianities and singular devotions, scientists, doctors and social leaders who reject the costs of American imperialism. The American election also represents a consultation on the state of the world.

It is true that Qanon may be influenced by some American plutocracy harmed by the globalizing process; however, the global conservative wave has focused on questioning the damage that neoliberal globalization executes against humanity; democracy cannot be cohesive with neoliberalism in a dogmatic and uncritical way. The crisis of liberal democracy and the mental loss of political leaders who submit to the globalist plutocracy generate collective actions such as Qanon that have unforeseen effects.

Emmanuel Todd exposes the bewilderment of liberal democracy, Europeanism and globalization in the face of geopolitical chaos; they do not understand that they do not understand. The Biden administration missed the opportunity to reconcile the United States and the world; on the contrary, it blindly justified the sociopolitical path that causes so much damage to the various civilizations. Therefore, Trump and Qanon advance, the silent majority that seeks American regeneration prepares itself against the rebellion of the elites.

Amlo: The Next Santa Anna?

 Amlo: The Next Santa Anna?

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Compared to the United States, most Mexican presidents have been surrenderists. It could not be otherwise, nuclear diplomacy and internal factionalism establish a scenario where tribal survival is the highest priority. As a tributary state of North America, Mexico must pay its quota or floor right and sacrifice what is necessary. Each Mexican president establishes a governance agreement where he accepts the balance between American demands and the internal demands of interest groups. Some Heads of State in the country have preferred to hand over remote control to the United States, others try to do a little with the little power that the Yankee empire allows. The idea of ​​the powerful president who can do almost anything is just a myth given the Mexican neighborhood.

According to the perspective generated by Fernando Escalante Gonzalbo and Roger Bartra, the post-pandemic and economic recovery processes are generating severe crisis scenarios for North America where emigration, organized crime and social problems make the insecurity of the United States polysemic and only the invasion remains. to Mexico to inhibit the gigantic accumulation of immigration from Latin America and particularly from our country. According to the rhetoric of the Republican Party - and the Mexican red circle - the issue of emigration and social conflicts in Latin America attack the neighborhood with the United States, mass emigrations seem to be proposing a replacement of the Anglo-Saxon population. Where is Mexican and Latin American emigration headed? To take North America. And the externalities that this situation causes can cause the disintegration of the American Union. The idea of ​​open doors that American society had had to emigration seems to be running out in the event that electoral support is directed to Donald Trump. For this reason, an invasion of Mexico is taking shape and, apparently, the government of the Fourth Transformation seems to be identifying with this situation because it is incompetent to remedy the problem.

The scenario of the War against Drug Trafficking deeply weakens the Mexican State and its Army. The blurring of national sovereignty in the face of organized crime leaves the free will of the United States to establish a cordon sanitaire to protect them. And, according to the rhetoric of American Republicans, the decision – although reckless – will not take long to be carried out.

From this point of view, the development that López Obrador is proposing in the South of Mexico has no other objective than to hand over the North of the country to the United States. The national security crisis that Mexico has in the face of drug trafficking determines that the United States takes control of the civilizational limits that José Vasconcelos proposed for the Mexican Republic. The territorial points that are contemplated to be co-opted by North America are strategic for the Maquiladora Industry, Assembly Plants and Development Zones where immigration can be stopped and the fight against drug trafficking can operate. The Mexican south is changing in its infrastructure and metropolitan area; But, now, the evils that influenced Mexican misgovernance are also migrating to this region, particularly drug trafficking, as well as the patrimonial bureaucracy and neo-extractivism that represents capitalism by distinctive dispossession of the Latin American oligarchies. Chiapas is a serious example, although other entities such as Puebla are not far behind.

Apparently, as in 1847, the president of Mexico has been a collaborator of the geopolitical strategy of the American Union. General Santa Anna shared significant information regarding access routes for the invasion, collateral damage, weak points, fortifications to take and all the information necessary so that, in a short period, the Americans could settle in the republic for almost a year. Even Santa Anna carried out a purchase and sale transaction. It should be noted that the Catholic Church also proposed the annexation of Mexico to the Yankee Empire.

For the red circle that seeks to deepen North American intervention, Mexico will be split if the Fourth Transformation continues for more than two periods. Nearshoring and the uncontrolled dynamics that the interaction between Mexico and North America has taken will lead to the North and West of our country being grafted to the American Union; However, in 2024 the vote for Morena was the majority in most of the northern states.

The perceived threat of Mexican ungovernability calls for AMLO to collaborate with the United States to avoid major problems. The United States manifests the true dynamic of protectionism towards Mexico, but the limits have reached the extreme.

The Pact for Mexico, one more Santanista act, ended up developing the harmful effects of neoliberalism, nor was the country modernized and the policies to close the economic and social gap were not implemented. Now, everything has become complicated. Drug trafficking is the most radical, savage and totalitarian de facto power; Mexico can no longer face it without dragging the United States into disaster.

North America faces the scenario of managing the situation of its imperial decline and economic crisis in the best possible way. She needs Mexican slavery and has the capacity to militarize the territories that her industry requires more than effectively. The border states in northern Mexico have left their nationalism as an increasingly distant echo; the economic and social reality represents a de facto integration.

Mexican nationalism is dependent on the United States, therefore, the degree of colonialism is not only reflected in the historical flirtation of the elites but also of society. Mexican emigration to the American Union has been more than a diaspora in the second half of the 20th century; However, even with a population greater than a whopping 50 million compatriots in Anglo-Saxon land, Mexico could not take over the United States; the opposite is logical. The Mexican economic dependence on North America signed since the Treaties of Guadalupe Hidalgo and reaffirmed with the Treaties of Bucareli, NAFTA and TMEC, which imply not opposing any resistance to North American interventionism.

The economic policies of the fourth transformation do not make progress in closing the difference between Mexico and the United States. The Huntington and Fukuyama gap extends, like the McLane-Ocampo Treaties, to the City of Palaces.

Investment in North American lobbying

 Investment in North American lobbying

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Now that the heat of the US campaigns for the presidency of the American Union begins, Mexico will be a constant in the attacks launched by the candidates of the main political parties. Jorge Shabat held the idea that, since Calderonism, the Mexican government has forgotten the important role played by the mediators and intermediaries of the US political system and the effects on the image of a country in the eyes of North American public opinion. The war against drugs, the deep level of corruption and progressive populism are not the best letters of introduction in the face of a gringo electoral climate that demands Mexican blood to atone for the errors of its geopolitics. Mexico becomes the ugly mirror of Chinese, Russian and terrorist power.

A few days ago, during an academic event that invited the participation of Guadalupe Correa and Osvaldo Zavala, the analysis of drug trafficking in Mexico also exposed the consequences on North American public opinion and, above all, on political campaigns. The enormous symbolic power of Mexican folklore and gastronomy is being dangerously contaminated by drug trafficking, as has happened with music, religion and television dramas, to generate absolute stereotypes that harm the Mexican image in the eyes of the common North American citizen. In electoral periods, this translates into the selection of politicians who protect North American society from the danger of Mexican drug trafficking through whatever means are necessary. Although it is proven in Mexico that fentanyl is not produced and that drug cartels do not exist, the North American social perception is different and the Mexican government does little to defend itself there.

Due to the dynamics of national presidential centralism, the role of the legislative branch in the presidentialism of the United States is forgotten. Beyond the fact that Joe Biden or Donald Trump are increasingly similar, the risk lies in the fact that hundreds of anti-Mexican legislators can achieve seats through any party. For this reason, lobbying in the Congress of the American Union and local legislative powers is essential. Some studies in this regard demonstrate that the greater the investment in American lobbyists, the positive effects on investment, image and foreign policy multiply. Even in governments like those of Salinas and Fox, the beneficial effects of lobbying go so far as to propose policies that openly promote North American integration for Mexico. Unlike other governments and companies, it has been the Mexican rulers and the national political class who have abandoned the alternative.

Changing the perception of the American citizen regarding what is happening in Mexico is essential for our country that depends on North America. The masses to prevent Donald Trump from winning are useless in this sense, as are the speeches of social justice and the presumption of qualified majorities that, in truth, have the opposite effect. The little Russian boats don't help much either.

North America and the Mexican succession

 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.

The Embassy of Treason

 The Embassy of Treason

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Someone who does not know the reality of the United States Embassy in Mexico is something worse than naïve. Information about drug trafficking in Mexico is provided there all the time, anonymously or indirectly through testimonials. Thousands of complaints in a few months can be observed, thousands of data regarding different criminals who operate in our country and move to the United States. Hundreds of facts about businesses, characters, secret activities. What is the North American embassy doing with so much data? Nothing. Although the US government is aware of the links between the Mexican political class and different traffickers – national and international – the US government does nothing to protect its population. From the outside he betrays them. Drug traffickers and their relatives are the first to receive visas. As with terrorism, the closest familiar figures of international fanaticism can enter the United States without much problem. An example? The attacks of September 11, 2001.

How long will Mexican drug trafficking continue to be the lesser evil of United States geopolitics? The US government's attempts to tarnish the image of Mexican rulers are ridiculous. Since the time of General Plutarco Elías Calles, characters like Abelardo Rodríguez were functional to the informal economy of North America. Does anyone remember the strange relationship between Maximino Ávila Camacho and William Jenkins? From the United States Embassy only memoranda come out to assassinate presidents like Francisco I. Madero, Colosio?, Torrijos?, Gaytán, Galán, Villavicencio? If the United States is concerned about the issue of drug trafficking, why doesn't it put an end to drug traffickers inside and outside its country?

Manola Álvarez Sepúlveda's book on the Green Plan shows us the traditional role of the United States in Mexico; In addition to marijuana and all natural resources, they want the soul and essence of Mexicans. Noam Chomsky, Manuel Buendía and Friederich Katz have told us this.

Who is more deluded? The one who considers the cryptic messages from the United States against AMLO to be true or the one who assumes every action by North America against Mexico is imperialism? The United States has always threatened the Mexican rulers with links to drug trafficking and all this only serves to make Carlos Loret de Mola's father write his pornopolitical novels. Everything negative about Mexico is functional for the North American informal economy.

One thing is certain about democratic theory, if Mexico were a democracy, at least like Canada's, the North American Embassy would not be dedicated to sabotaging the governance of our country for the benefit of the United States. But the Yankee Empire is the one that has been most interested in Mexican democracy failing, now and they have always promoted the enemies of society: the technocrats, the INE, the extreme right, the mercenaries, the paramilitaries, the civil society of Miami-Gilmore , a part of the business oligarchy, etc. Why would the United States need another Japan down the Rio Grande, thought Zbigniew Brzezinsky, and Carlos Salinas wanted to make Mexico that Japan!

The attacks on the president of Mexico only confirm the interventionist imperialism and terrorist cynicism of the Yankee Narco-Empire. The United States can end the drug trafficking whenever it wants, the problem - for Mexico - is that it does not want to, that the United States needs all the drugs in the world to maintain the hysterical materialism of its geopolitical economy. Even the United States could advance George Friedman's scenarios to avoid the triumph of Mexican-American narcopolitics within itself; But, he doesn't want it either. Before going to the Moon, Mars or going to the bottom of the earth or sea, the Nazi WASP elite in the United States still requires neo-extractivism to finish accumulating the financial resources for its final survival. Only in a world full of chaos, disasters and shortages, can Mexican-American narcopolitics imagine having geopolitical control. Mexico is the training ground for the final destiny of humanity that the United States has designed.

Only a profound ignorance of the Yankee Empire or enormous mercenary commitments require the defense of its media. History is the field of experimentation of social sciences and it is only known that if divine justice and hell existed, North America would have to be there forever; However, God is PRI and Pro-Yankee. There is no hell where the United States fits. No way. Humanity will have to wait for other deities to appeal to historical justice and final judgment on the United States. Meanwhile, let your embassy and your media continue to betray the American population and violate foreign countries.

The War on Drug Trafficking as a long duration

 The War on Drug Trafficking as a long duration

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

The extensive combat against groups dedicated to drug trafficking in Latin America seems to become the new hegemonic strategy of the United States. What happened in Ecuador and the response of the authorities to a problem of such magnitude show the way in which capitalism devastates the State. The idea that narco-societies can only be combated through the use of the armed forces and an increase in the security budget is not so wrong from certain perspectives. The problem arises when we talk about longer wars and the development of prison complexes and security technologies where criminals will live much better than the people. The joke of school and prison has been overcome by the Ecuadorian president, in a state of war he thinks about building Elysium for drug traffickers.

The president of Ecuador attempted to respond like Felipe Calderón Hinojosa to a situation of terrorist drug trafficking; However, he went ahead to show off the corruption, patrimonialism and social precariousness that Plan Colombia or Mérida means. The War on Drug Trafficking has failed because it went on longer than it should have and because the armed forces are sent to fight with their hands tied while the political class is dedicated to looting and colluding with the mafias.

The war on drug trafficking has been a far-reaching policy that the United States promotes; However, according to the advertising that the Ecuadorian government has established, it can be seen that those who benefit are the North American construction companies and arms industries; that is, pentagonism. Mexico and Colombia can give clear examples of the failure of this policy; more than two decades in combat have left such a number of deaths and violence that the results are genocide and Failed States. The war against drug trafficking is the new counterinsurgency strategy of the United States against Latin America. Committing Latin American governments to these failed wars implies encouraging the abandonment of social issues and the promotion of underdevelopment. Although some businessmen consider that war is the right time for business, in the long term everyone loses, just look at how many have to pay property rights and must abandon their businesses for the washing machines of drug trafficking.

We must remember the degree of perversion of the Mérida Initiative, Plan Colombia and narcoterrorism. Drug trafficking is followed by money laundering, drug exploitation, neo-extractivism and all types of criminal activities. Who benefits from putting a country at war? While the president of Ecuador, like Calderón Hinojosa, think of militarization as the acquisition of toys and prisons as science fiction architectural designs, the people must think about migrating to the United States or prepare for an unimaginable escalation of violence; of which Ecuador has given signs.

The American narco-empire and mafia states are what make the ideal combination for Latin American colonialism: forced displacement, poverty, migration, neo-extractivism and corrupting patrimonialism; They constitute a social cycle that makes the narcoeconomy functional for the United States. North America has the capacity to destroy drug traffickers if it really wanted to end the problem; The point is that the main Drug Cartel is the Americans.

The more drug power advances, the more inefficient the State becomes. Federico Campbell talks about the Sicilianization of society and the necrosis of the State in Mexico, it is more than regrettable to glimpse this future for all of Latin America. No government finds a way to save its country from this fate and American drug addiction seems endless.

Only the full and courageous legalization of drugs will allow Latin America to escape this spiral of violence and poverty. If the United States wants to put an end to drug trafficking, let them come to fight drug traffickers or establish health measures for their population. The war on drugs is lost from the beginning and the one who loses the most is society.

The North American succession in Mexico

 The North American succession in Mexico

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Mexico is the piñata of political rhetoric in North American presidential campaigns, only with a probable victory for Donald Trump it is more certain that they will increase aggressiveness against Mexicans

According to the latest demographic data, the polls for the presidential election in the United States favor the Republican party and, particularly, Donald Trump.

The impacts of a Trump presidency on our country have been more vociferous than negative, although anti-Mexican campaigns are beginning to structure an American electorate that demands objective measures to inhibit the contagion of a Failed State.

Mexico is the piñata of political rhetoric in North American presidential campaigns, only with a probable victory for Donald Trump it is more certain that some White House policies will increase the traditional aggressiveness against Mexicans.

Mexico is a tributary state of North America, that is, although it is true that there is a colonialism that has been transformed into a symbiotic relationship, we must ask ourselves how much things can change when a presidential administration is developed in the hands of the Republican party and, fundamentally, of the Trumpists.

Due to its satellite status, the Mexican State functions in a logic of subordination to the core that holds it.

If Trump wins, the proposals he has made regarding the Mexican neighborhood should be moderately developed.

The regulation of drug trafficking, emigration and the strategic location of manufacturing seem to be the main points in the American electorate.

Mexico represents a significant point in the transfer and production of narcotics consumed by American society. The Mexican cartels have caused a disaster that forces the United States to remove them from the country and relocate them to ours.

There is extreme regulation of drug trafficking in North America and the increase in violence in the war on drugs for Mexico.

Emigration is similar to drug trafficking, although they are common issues in many cases and, therefore, the demand is for their reduction.

Deportation is a fact, so, in addition to the country being configured as a receptacle government for Latin American emigration, labor and economic measures will also have to be considered aimed at improving the upcoming social situation.

Subsidies from the United States will be essential to address the migrant phenomenon and the creation of a labor policy independent of the Private Initiative. The Welfare State will continue in Mexico.

Manufacturing has left aside other aspects of colonialism, it may even replace the neo-extractivism that violates many regions of the country.

Neoliberal and progressive economic analysts consider it to be an exceptional opportunity for Mexico in the context of a Sino-American Cold War.

But manufacturing requires increasing the educational level of Mexican society and mobilizing conglomerates of professionals to the northern border or urbanizing the Mexican south.

The Fourth Transformation has not been able to modify Mexico's dependent condition towards the United States; In reality it is impossible.

Although Morena is consolidating a more or less stable transmission of power in several regions; It remains in doubt whether the political cadres he recruits will understand the Mexican-American dynamics and the federal administration's ability to control them.

Political stability is essential to develop the colonialism that our country is experiencing in the best possible way.

The PRI developed a non-competitive authoritarianism that, despite everything, allowed an understanding with the US empire; Neoliberalism put an end to all of this.

The inhibition of a PRI model in Morena is a trigger for factionalism that harms relations with North America.

The social crisis caused by neoliberalism has Mexico on the brink of invasion by the United States.

The non-competitive authoritarianism of the PRI was –contravening the myths- with respect to the militant political class, something that MORENA has as a risk and its capacity for development is not foreseen.

The narco-empire

 The narco-empire

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

North America handles the most extreme pragmatism in its international relations and, in the case of Mexico, the dose applied is always higher. The main drug trafficker on the American continent is the United States, this is a truism that only intellectuals and journalists under the control of the CIA do not dare to recognize with the greatest amount of evidence, studies and consequences.

Drug trafficking and human trafficking constitute the informal economy of the main totalitarian democracy: the United States.

From the cultural, academic and journalistic sphere supported by pentagonism, Mexico is accused of receiving all the money in the world derived from drug businesses. The narrative of George Friedman, Dolia Estévez, Andrés Oppenheimer, Leonardo Curzio and the bipolar red circle is wrong, it turns out to be completely false when trying to answer when confronted with a single question: where is the money?

The myth of Mexican drug trafficking is as false as the myth of the Jewish Masonic Communist conspiracy. Both have served to enrich the American power elite to the maximum.

Money cannot be hidden, it is like love; Then, Mexico would live like Holland or, at least, like any autarkic middle power if a little of those stratospheric economic resources remained in our country. This is not the case, poverty and ungovernability continue to be the characteristic note of the majority of Mexican communities, poverty triggers a war that suddenly takes on a hint of being civil.

Drug addiction is not a priority concern of American public policies, nor is the possession and trade of weapons. The savage North American liberalism is nourished by drugs and weapons, because they constitute the basis of the power of the plutocracy that governs said nation.

It is more likely that the Yankee oligarchy will impose a drug trafficker as president of the semi-sovereign American people than that they will contribute to the healthy development of his youth.

Mexico fights a hybrid war against the US drug empire. Drug traffickers are worth more to the United States than Augusto Pinochet himself.

The Red Circle of Ignorance will continue its work of denying the sacrifice of anonymous heroes in the fight against the drug empire. The hybrid war and humanitarian crisis caused by fentanyl will continue because the United States is not interested in the issue of its youth.

The relentless drug war

 The relentless drug war

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

Although the Morenista government has been cornered for breaking the campaign promise to return the army to the barracks, the advance and strength of criminal groups in various entities is an indication that, outside the federation, there is no local government capable of protect the citizenry. Insecurity is a constant in local governments, more than in the federal administration.

The lack of clarity and transparency in the resources executed by local governments, mainly in state and municipal governments ravaged by the war between groups dedicated to the transfer of narcotic and psychotropic drugs, especially in the regions governed by the opposition, manifests the need to greater centralization in security policies and the disappearance of powers in those entities where governments should simply resign – or have done so – due to their impotence in the face of the force of crime.

The increasing progress of the protagonists in the drug war shows the need to increase budgets to develop security policies and strengthen the national bodies in charge of operating legitimate violence. Social readaptation centers and rural municipalities are structured on the basis of crime and require radical measures to be amended. State governments are more than permissive with local crime, feuderalism has been verified on several occasions and several state executives have been directly related to the mafias.

By 2024, regardless of the party that wins, the new six-year term must recognize the perpetuity of the state of exception that Mexico is experiencing and consider measures to strengthen the federal government and reduce the incompetence of local governments. Feuderalism was the true face of corrupting neoliberalism that was creating unpunished and criminal oligarchies, as well as exposing society to impressive levels of insecurity.

The reengineering of security in Mexico implies recognizing where the budgets must be exercised and the accounts that governments must render. Beyond the criminal ties and mafia sponsorships that officials in charge of civil order have, security indicators must also be considered for the revocation of mandate. The Sicilianization of Mexico is imminent and without serious proposals for public order, the reality of the Failed State also leaves our borders.

The exploits of the groups that fight in the drug war prevent any public policy from working. Local governments are ineffective, corrupt and incompetent, it is up to the federal government to be an accomplice or censor of these events.

The colonized space

 the colonized space

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

In these moments of global geopolitical change it seems that traditional hegemonies are crumbling, it is even being affirmed -abruptly- that everything has become the third world. This situation requires a new look at imperialism, particularly the North American from the perspective of our country. The need for a bloc economy and the concentration of powerful states in their areas of influence has long been affirmed.

The United States has exhausted itself and can no longer exercise that world hegemony that led to the victory of the Cold War. Capitalist liberal democracy, neoliberalism and rule based on mercantile justice have failed. The great American power cannot control its former regional enemies, but; Above all, it does not recognize its economic elites who have gone mad: Freadmanian anarchist liberalism is generating the end of the planet.

Mexico became an American Sicily for following Hayek's neoliberal model. It has become a narco-state that breaks the governability of the dominated, but can also destroy the Empire. It is critical that America recognize the insignificance of neoliberal discourse and the inability of corporate managers to take back the world, Atlas Shrugged must be brought down because humanity and America are going extinct. The end of England is in sight.

Keynes's political-economic model recovers guarantee at this time, the Welfare State cannot be for an oligarchy that subsidizes its racist affluence; if the capitalist groups want money, let them convince people with excellent products and become human with humans. Beyond the reptilian and illuminati subterfuges with which some refer to their power, they should rather be meant as psychopaths equivalent to any selfish mobster.

The United States must rebuild Latin America in a new vision of the Marshall Plan that closes the cycle of political modernization and institutionalization. A market that keeps societies in the Middle Ages or feudalism is not a market. It generates poverty and all kinds of pathologies that the United States has in the south of its territory. The State is first!

The global conflict forces us to look intelligently at the crisis of liberal democracies and, particularly, of capitalism. It is essential to find the way out that corresponds to the historical speed of each people and the alternative modernity that corresponds to it. The gatopardismo proposed by the imperialists of the market only heats up the environmental damage of the planet and the atomic destruction.

SALINAS, GORBACHEV AND THE MEXICO-AMERICAN RELATIONSHIP

 SALINAS, GORBACHEV AND THE MEXICO-AMERICAN RELATIONSHIP

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

The electoral campaigns have moved forward in Mexico and the United States, perhaps for this reason the political climate is so intense that nothing can go unnoticed, for example: the death of Mikhail Gorbachev and the consequences of the frustrated modernity that Russia is experiencing, particularly reflected in the Russian-Ukrainian military conflict. The last president of the USSR is a benchmark of the change of era that affected the world and now, as well as at the time of the disappearance of the USSR, his absence invites us to reflect on the Western liberal-democratic globalizing failure.

Carlos Salinas de Gortari wrote one of the best diagnoses regarding the torn modernity of our country's political system: Mexico: a difficult step towards modernity. And even when the technocratic group is accused of implanting a counter-model to the structural characteristics of the Mexican Republic, the truth is that it was also intended to generate a nationalist modernization that would be synchronized, at least ideologically, with the United States. Mexican liberalism is nothing more than the path of social transformation to abandon the humanistic medieval Hispanism that gave rise to Mexico, but which was not useful in containing North American imperialism. However, this Mexican liberalism also has a terrible dimension identified with the ugly aspect of Mexicanness: violent factionalism.

The Mexican people may be as liberal and Darwinian as anyone else, but incapable of accepting political modernity and inclined to live in an eternal collectivist cycle of violence and structural poverty to protect their particularisms, whatever the cost. Mexico has a primitive and barbaric liberal root that manifests itself in uncontrollable cacicazgos, anarchist social movements and civil disobedience.

The sterile comparison made between Carlos Salinas and Gorbachev is controversial, especially because it is produced motu proprio from the former president. However, Salinas is not only comparable to Gorbachev but also to Mustafa Kemal Ataturk and other modernizing leaders, as the late political scientist Samuel Huntington stated; but, above all, with General Plutarco Elías Calles. Mexico, Russia and Turkey are representatives of cyclical, failed and cumulative schizophrenic modernizations.

Our country, like the Tsarist Empire and the core of the Turkish Ottoman Empire, are hinge nations between antagonistic civilizations and breaking points for civilizational expansion or defeat. The Anglo-Saxon axis that determined neoliberal globalization was not able to share the complete recipe for successful modernities: the construction of the State. On the contrary, the interpretation of the Minimum State was confused -conveniently- with the Famished State, mainly that of limited governability -or ungovernability- at the service of the de facto powers, the groups of organized violence and, especially, imperialism. . More neoliberal than Salinas were the dinosaurs of the Revolutionary Family, the cassocks of the religious extreme right and the criminal caciquism disguised as drug trafficking, social movements and rurality. These dark forces, historical enemies of the Mexican State, found the dismantling of the National State and its subsequent liberalization more than useful to continue limiting the Mexican Prince.

Unlike Mexico, in Russia an elite emerged from the military forces that knew how to recognize the flower-scented poison that neoliberalism implied and, despite significant costs, set fire to Western modernization to rebuild the Russian state and resist the imperialist demands of the West that forgot the democratic, political and social compromises with the Baltic Slavic civilization. The United States is afraid of Russia and that is why it has always sought to destroy it, the Russo-Ukrainian war cannot be written without such a script.

Mexico and the United States are already at war. The fight against drug trafficking is but another version of the Mexican-American conflagration that took place throughout the 19th century and with some significant intrusions in the 20th century. Mexico and the United States have always coexisted under the scenario of low intensity warfare. Yankee interventionism has no measure and, in addition to forcing national governments to submit to its war economy, it invests in different drug trafficking groups and factual powers to destabilize the country. Who is who in this new patriotic war that we are going to experience? Who is the main interested in that the Mexican State does not finish consolidating? Manuel Camacho Solís pointed out the historical knots that the armed forces must destroy to consolidate the Mexican State, in addition to the criminal groups.

Organized crime, the ruling powers and the invisible power have established their realities in the United States, but what is the reason that in this space they are not risky? The political and institutional capacity of the North American government to regulate, control and take advantage of the socioeconomic interests of said entities. In Mexico, the State is increasingly limited and a pact of healthy coexistence cannot be generated with the hindrances of the old regime, although they disguise themselves as modern conservatives, they continue to be an obstacle for any government. The powers that be in Mexico have ended up devouring the State and López Obrador has had to recognize the failure of the Fourth Transformation because it is becoming more and more notorious that the powers that be order, not the president.

Salinas and Calderón reflect the dilemma of imposing laws and authority on Mexicans, as well as the failure of authority. Samuel Huntington analyzed the furious Mexican 1994 from the perspective of a conservative people that refused to modernize and a president that was unable to consolidate the armed forces to use legitimate violence. López Obrador faces this situation: without the honest awareness that the Mexican Army is going -again- to war with drug trafficking, the national State will not be consolidated and the Yankee Empire, as it has always done, will find the incentives and interests to come to an understanding with the powers that be: there will always be exploitation for the emigrant lumpenproletariat, possibilities of money laundering for all those interested in not paying taxes to the Mexican State and, mainly, an exalted market for the vice of addictions.

The Mexican Army has never stopped protecting the political system, the 20th century of our country cannot be explained without the strength of the Official Party, which was nothing other than the extension of military officers to regularize the political dispute, and it worked. There was a limited democracy, but also governability.

State public institutions are in a state of decomposition similar to that of the Santanista era. The Failed State is a plague that forms in our country and also infects the powerful neighbor to the north, however, mutual destruction cannot be the optimum of our futures.

The climate of opinion that develops around the relationship between Mexico and the United States forgets that they are completely different civilizations and countries. Particularly our country conflicts when it has to assume Hispanism, indigenism and Catholicism in the face of an Anglo-Saxon culture that determines everything from a rational liberal perspective. It is not easy to live next to North America.

For an economy like the Mexican, the institutional agreements with the United States have been of little use, the best understanding has been that of the informal economy. The FTA-TMEC has only benefited North American companies, while Mexican society receives income from emigration and, above all, drug trafficking; the rest of the population must endure public or private underemployment.

Mikhail Gorbachev's naivety explains the current circumstances in Russia, while Mexico's innocence and ambition regarding the good intentions of the United States also puts us on the verge of formal war.

Echeverría and the Nomenklatura

 Echeverría and the Nomenklatura

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

After the death of Luis Donaldo Colosio and the failure of his project of social liberalism, Carlos Salinas de Gortari blamed the nomenklatura and, specifically, the faction of Luis Echeverría Álvarez for sabotaging the modernization of Mexico. Over time, Vicente Fox's political impotence was also pointed out by his collaborators as activated by the Echeverría Álvarez device. In reality, more than Echeverrism, Salinas – and other analysts involved in modernization – proposed this political clique as a scapegoat to justify the enormous difficulties involved in transforming our country. Problems that even the LEA itself faced and that it resolved with an authoritarianism similar to that of the CSG; though both failed.

Mexican despotism is explained by a colonialist structure that unites, in the form of muégano, patrimonialism, corporatism, cacicazgo and corruption. The Latin American anti-liberal regimes must face the enormous challenge of forming Nation States in order to modernize; on the authoritarian, liberal or socialist path.

Echeverría and Salinas were more similar than dissimilar, only that the first was the socialist path implemented by the North Americans and the second, the neoliberal path implemented by the Americans. As well as the joke that the Nazi scientists that the gringos had were better than the Nazi scientists that the Soviets had.

Latin American anti-liberalism, populist or capitalist, left or right, liberal technocrat or socialist technocrat, reflects the colonial model of Spanish colonialism where the different castes remain united in a dynamic space, but without consciousness of fusion. The castes in Latin America are united, but not concentrated; and therefore there are no nations. The rulers and the people only understand each other in the conservative-authoritarian key that inhibits any attempt at social change.

Echeverrismo is a window that allows us to understand the colonialism of Mexico with respect to the United States. In addition to this political clique, other social conglomerates, nations and characters; They also benefit from ruling the social control of the country.

Most Mexican presidents have had to behave like Luis Echeverría, including resorting to violent, authoritarian and public control measures to control some groups for the benefit of others. Sometimes it is thought that this is the least cost, compared to a military intervention by the Superpower, as has occurred in other Latin American latitudes.

In the end, Salinismo turns into Echeverrismo, mortar bogeymen who, more than individuals or cliques, represent a culture, the anti-liberal one, but which always ends up linked to North American imperialism to guarantee social control and modernization; for a moment.

The common denominator of these authoritarian, psychopathic and violent trajectories is represented by anticommunism and the national security of the United States, elements that social analysts and alternative groups in the country must begin to understand better.

The destiny of Mexico is ineluctably connected to the United States and, because of them, various social groups have benefited from characterizing weak or marginalized groups -sometimes more Mexican than others- as evil, ungovernable, communist, narco-satanic, indigenous, etc.; causing the authorization of the Yankee Empire for the exercise of violence and budget spending.

To avoid the Echeverrías and Salinas, relations between Mexico and the United States – as Robert Pastor rightly says – have to change, be more original and authentic. The Mexican oligarchy continues to offer itself as "Polkos" who can order the Comanche territory, but they make things worse every time; until the Union Army and Ulysses S. Grant come along. Güeritocracia supremacy has residence in Madrid or Rome.

Should the United States invade Mexico? (Aggregate)

Should the United States invade México? (Aggregate)

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

The controversy in the media generated by the statements of former President Donald Trump regarding the harsh treatment in diplomatic relations between his government and our country, as well as the possibilities to invade Mexico that constitute the center of his renewed political campaign, is an example of the ignorance and the inability to turn around to see the painful issue of Mexican emigration to the United States. It weighs a lot on Mexico to see inside itself. We don't know each other and the different social groups try to impose their vision of the country in a radical and violent way, but never honestly.

Mexico does not have a country project, we are a permanent dialectic of castes where anyone takes advantage of the spirits in dispute to add fuel to the fire. The serious thing is that the fire is already burning the United States and Donald Trump is not kidding when he talks about imitating Vladimir Putin to bring order to a Narco-state that only produces violence and emigration. North America is responsible for the state of things, it never understood the consequences of sending weapons and money to social groups that have so much resentment and hatred.

The ignorance regarding the number of Mexicans who have emigrated and reside in the United States causes shame. Officials and communicators, politicians and academics. It is rare that no one makes a mistake when accounting for remittances.

The conundrum in the migratory relationship between Mexico and the United States has caused notable American intellectuals such as Samuel Huntington, George Friedman and Joel Garreau -to mention the most sensible ones- to define that Hispanity is the greatest challenge of Anglo-Saxon culture, and of Mexico.

The post-covid world poses a dispute between globalists and nationalists that is limited to the global powers. The United States will have to focus on Latin America to maintain its status and, therefore, its role lies in correcting the failed states and the economic surrealism that so many emigrants have arranged around it. A few weeks ago, the debate regarding the electricity reform divided legislators between pro-Hispanists and nationalists. What is the reason for continuing to sneak in corrupt Spanish companies if Mexico must rethink its relationship with the United States? If Mexico receives so many millions of dollars in remittances and more than 90% of its economy depends on North America, why is more than half of the population poor and almost a million people -annually- try to emigrate to the United States? Ramón Eduardo Ruíz would say that the Spanish colonial social structure is responsible. And he is not wrong.

Hispanic Catholic casticism is the slope through which the fraternal hatred of Mexico flows, it remains undeterred since Hernán Cortés and Malinche. Lies, slavery, patrimonialism, castes and caciques. Right of blood that forges a multinational state, but not a nation. The caste system is what determines aporophobia, racism, classism, intolerance. If weapons, dollars and drugs are added to this, the scenario is set, where is national unity?

America has used a similar strategy in the conquest of the West, to make firm its expansionism it sent the Army after the pioneers and cowboys; and he did it several times until the only monopoly of violence was the State. And she will do it again as many times as it is. It is what is lost sight of when one does not want to understand that Mexico is a colony of the United States and not of Spain. And that this condition tends to increase as the post-covid world approaches.

The fire of the failed state that is burning the south of the United States, the one that the neoliberal Hispanic Catholic guerócrats do not want to see and for which they were responsible, is Donald Trump's excuse to be the North American Vladmir Putin, the Batman of Gotham City.

Mexico has the challenge of abandoning Hispanic values ​​-Catholicism, caciquismo, latifundismo, casticismo, etc.,- and recognizing the geopolitical order from which it cannot escape. Characters like Donald Trump will be more and more common, and pretending -everywhere- regarding the true relationship between Mexico and the United States only aggravates things. A liberal superpower is not going to allow its neighbor's illiberalism to extinguish it. Neither Spain nor the Vatican will provide support to the Mexican Ukraine.

Bear Empire

 Bear Empire

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

Although Russia does not agree that its nation is classified as a bear for the reason of strength and aggressiveness that distinguishes the ursids, North America is also a territory of this type of mammal. The former United States ambassador to Mexico Jeffrey Davidow developed a textual work where his nation was signified as a bear and Mexico as a porcupine. That is to say, while the Russians do not like being considered bears, the Americans recognize themselves as such.

How can the United States and Russia be the same? Probably in imperialist expansionism. In the use of force to unilaterally impose their criteria with their neighbors. Davidow considers that Mexico is wrong in the way it looks at the United States, Mexican nationalism is reactionary, hence the figure of the porcupine, but can a bear really be friends with a porcupine?

The perspective of neutrality that Mexico has tried to maintain in the face of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict has not pleased anyone. The grizzly bear has demanded, as always, that others come forward in the conflict to weaken his enemies even if the situation constitutes suicide.

The United States does not want to lose its hegemony or world control, but its decline faces the most critical point in the Russian-Ukrainian situation. The post-covid world represents a perspective where economic and political liberalism cannot advance any further, Samuel Huntington returns to tell America that it is necessary to return to its origin since he has lost the project of modernity and reason. Humanity is not satisfied with a Western identity that represents the United States, metastases everywhere, sclerosis disguised as consumerism and equivocal freedoms. American expansionism is also responsible for democratic decline.

The consecration of the Catholic Church to Russia signifies a point of agreement in global conservative tendencies. Non-Western societies have chosen to embrace certain aspects of modernity and reject others, especially those that entail high economic costs and social disorder. Although several countries have joined the economic sanctions that the United States and the global financial organizations under its control have imposed on Russia; the representative core states of non-Western peoples agree with Vladimir Putin in an anti-American obsession the likes of which had not been seen before, not even in the era of the Cold War or the Middle East invasions.

England's departure from the European Union shows the true face of Anglo-Saxon culture: pragmatism. Liberalism cannot be a civilizing culture if it does not fulfill an evangelizing task, it has been presented everywhere as a methodology of looting and abuse. The North American empire has come to an end because it is putting the human race on the verge of extinction, as well as all life on the planet. If the terrestrial cataclysm presented itself, the North Americans - like the Anglo-Saxons - would go out to live on Mars or the Moon.

Should the porcupine trust the bear? No. Is Ukraine the porcupine of Russia? We don't know, but it should be porcupine against the United States. What will happen to so many porcupine?

In the case of volatile geopolitical alliances, other bears engage in behaviors that redefine their allegiances.

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.