Showing posts with label Manuel Camacho Solís. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Manuel Camacho Solís. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 09, 2024

The Fourth Transformation moves to the Center

The Fourth Transformation moves to the Center

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero



The transfuguism and involvement of different personalities with Morena, although alien to the left-wing ecofeminist progressivism that distinguishes the pure and original networks, has become the main characteristic heading into the 2024 elections.


The situation has been questioned by the media and different analysts, not to mention the former Morena militants themselves who have been harmed by these circumstances.


Zepeda Patterson argues that the climate of polarization is partially causal for this process.


The 4T is not a class struggle, although the liberation of the subaltern sectors – at least in the discourse – was a purpose.

The Mexican State must oscillate between well-being and capitalist liberalism, as the interests of North Americans dictate.


It is unthinkable and impossible for Mexico to oppose the Yankee Empire.


The Mexican Prince resumes his robes, but cannot break the domination of the American Caesar.


Maintain the unity of the country, manage differences; Although the desired national reconciliation does not exist, it is the purpose of a good government.


Despite its contradictions, Morena has achieved it and, to avoid greater interventionism from the United States, the inclusion of moderate actors - even strangers, outsiders or new ones - as well as the formulation of inclusive policies for the Initiative is vital in its political perspective. Private.


Some of the public policies that Morena, and especially AMLO, promoted, will surely remain for another six-year term.


The time necessary for the United States to be able to propose a geopolitics that allows them to better address drug trafficking and emigration.


Not only President López Obrador is responsible for the polarization.


A nation with the history of Mexico is only held on pins and needles and a true process of nationalism would be more detrimental to millions of people.


The hatred and resentment in Mexico are not about social classes but about classes, races, regions and circumstances.


Reconciliation is a longing, but deep down it is impossible. Hence, Morenoist pragmatism has this logic and paradox.


The search for the center is nothing other than the change without rupture of Manuel Camacho Solís, the ad eternum renewal of the pact of domination, the mooring of the anarchist Mexican muégano that for better or worse – according to Escalante Gonzalbo – keeps this country cohesive.

Monday, January 16, 2023

MORENA/PRIANRD: No escape from the black circle

 MORENA/PRIANRD: No escape from the black circle

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tuesday, August 18, 2020

Transfuguism and Plot. The characteristics of the transition via elections

Transfuguism and Plot. The characteristics of the transition via elections

August 17, 2020
Diego Martin Velázquez Caballero



https://www.semanarioelreto.com/single-post/2020/08/17/Transfuguismo-y-Contubernio-Las-caracter%C3%ADsticas-de-la-transici%C3%B3n-v%C3%ADa-elecciones


Why does Mexico continue under the electoral route scheme to build its democracy? Although political scientists called the model of the Mexican transition “Via Competitive Elections”, the data on corruption, fraud, vote buying and corporatism leave much to be desired about the importance of the Mexican electoral system. Rather, the electoral system becomes the judicial political arena where political factions resolve their differences. The Mexican transition should be called: Political transition via judicialized elections. And if it is remembered that the Mexican political system and the foundations of the Nation State were built by lawyers, perhaps this characterization is understood. Lately, the Mexican judicial system created mediation structures and houses of justice precisely to demonstrate the importance of reaching agreements due to the prolonged and rugged condition that judicializing things implies. The Mexican judicial system is corrupt, incompetent and incapable of providing justice. The judicial processes in Mexico are dark, onerous and long - if not infinite - that few decide and endure to maintain. Hence, “mediation” has been implemented as a cultural and economic way to accommodate reparation, but not justice, in litigation.

However, the creation of the Mexican electoral system generated a special section of the contentious sphere in electoral processes, few countries in democratic consolidation have special courts for electoral matters and political rights trials. In reality, these ways constitute spaces for collusion and a pact - not always honest or definitive - that tempers the radicalization of the actors.

Justice is unattainable and, therefore, perhaps these forms are the best possible in cultures such as Mexico. The electoral system of our country has not been able to combat the vices that characterize the political tradition, although citizenship allows us to recover evidence of improper acts or contradictions to inform public opinion in the way that the electoral course had, this is not a guarantee of a fair electoral process, power groups negotiate and the results can be convenient or immoral to society. In the end, it is the correlation of forces that determines the product of the negotiation. Democracy, then, becomes the marketing of the popular will.

Although this was proposed as an innovator in the creation of the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE), now INE (National Electoral Institute), in reality it happened within the Institutional Revolutionary Party and only with the sectors that made up the revolutionary coalition. The priistologists wondered about the mode of distribution of the candidacies in the PRI and the presidential succession, thanks to hermeneutic studies (Garrido, Ai Camp, Crespo), mathematical (Gil / Schmidt) and fictional (Castañeda and Álvarez Mosqueda), we found a negotiating table where the cliques made agreements and had radical measures to enforce them. The president of the republic was a “primus inter pares”, the great hegemonic elector; but, a mortal god. Every political succession involved this form of negotiations. The model was transferred to the Mexican electoral system in its judicial dimension and, now, instead of negotiating the PRI cliques, they negotiate the oligarchies of the parties - where, by the way, many PRI members were transferred.

Manuel Camacho Solís always held the idea of ​​a change without rupture, which is why, perhaps, in the form of inertia, that has come to mean the Mexican electoral system. A romantic table of national reconciliation will hardly occur where a form of stony and eternal political order is defined. Spain, Chile, Greece, Portugal and the countries of the ex-communist bloc, built a form of political negotiation that consolidated democracy in a dynamic way unlike our country. The unfortunate thing about the Mexican case is that the judicialization-negotiation does not imply electoral justice or true democracy, but basic agreements to overcome political competition and where, as in the Mexican legal system, those who have more money to buy the judges and do the best show, they are what they manage to impose. The recent scandal of the oil company Odebrecht and its derivations reveal the way in which corrupt lobbying influences elections and the shaping of economic interests. Why haven't the political registration of the PRI and PAN been taken away?

Manuel Camacho Solís, one of the main political strategists of salinism and lopezobradorism, proposed the idea of ​​"change without rupture" for the Mexican political system, since doing so would generate ruptures, breaks, fragmentations, could lead the country to catastrophic scenarios of ungovernability and dissolution. Like Jesús Reyes Heroles, time and reality have come to prove them right. Mexico still lives in the old regime and the more it tries to get out of that space, the more it ends up sinking and tying the historical knots of the Mexican political system.

The political transition consists of a historical break, a change of regime from the theoretical perspective that you want to propose. This phenomenon has not occurred in Mexico, the political alternations move under the protocol of the old regime.

With Morena and AMLO, the phenomenon of political participation occurred, which generated a massive vote to avoid fraud and electoral bureaucratic tricks. However, the pragmatic alliances of the National Regeneration Movement fill Q4 with contradictions and make López Obrador's campaign promises unfeasible. Despite the fact that President Andrés Manuel enjoys a broad electoral base, he has had to coexist with prianism and, even, admit radical ultra-right cadres into the public administration. In the integration process to reach state and federal governments, Morena included eminent politicians from Acción Nacional as well as Catholic nationalist groups and humanist businessmen, who had not found candidates in the PAN or were excluded. AMLO received, uncritically, a considerable number of intransigent integral Catholics linked, or not, to the reserved societies and who occupy important positions in the public administration at the federal and state levels.

The right is experiencing a process of disintegration of the party that traditionally brought them together. The PAN presidential candidacy and the 2018 electoral process generated a civil war of the right-wing factions that culminated in the departure of several cadres and contingents of the PAN to independent movements and the National Regeneration Movement.

Jean Meyer wonders how a government would have had from the synarchist perspective. By 2000, and twelve years later, Mexico could not to establish the government that the Cristeros imagined, nor that that the Christian democratic intellectuals proposed.

Neoliberalism was an economic regime that subordinated politics to its interests without contempt for who governs. Thus, then, rather than building a “Mary Help of Christians” throughout the country, what happened was the establishment of a series of pacts with various powers of the matter –particularly drug trafficking– to maintain governance. National Action could not make a regime change, a historical break; on the contrary, the electoral arena is the negotiating table, the Moncloa Pact, where the actors negotiate the interests of the citizens.

The PAN was characterized by taking the teaching corporatism and caciquil power to correct political alternations and, at least, know the public administration at the federal and state levels. Suddenly, they appeared as respectable PAN members, former members of the Revolutionary Family and the neo-PRI generations. During the government of Enrique Peña Nieto, a PRI administration of the country can be seen in the formulation of public policies such as "The Pact for Mexico" and the electoral negotiation-agreement.

In contrast to the Catholic nationalist politicians who went to MORENA, some more decided to integrate front groups such as FRENA (Frente Nacional Anti-Amlo) and, in an ambiguous way, radicalize their positions so that the yunquistas and Tecos, who are in the administration public of Morena, obtain better positions and charges; Or, to form a political position that - now - is concentrated in the Citizen Movement or in local political institutes that aspire to build citizen candidacies away from the progressivism that 4T represents and according to the development of the political crisis as a result of COVID and its effects . Also, abandoned from the PAN, is a religious right that opts for an apocalyptic discourse and points out the importance of Donald Trump being re-elected to contrast the war waged against Western culture by Asian countries - particularly China - and Islam - fundamentally the one developed in Europe. For this last trend, what is important is that a West is formed around the United States and that the Catholic Church is in charge of purifying Christianity based on the geopolitical model of Eastern Europe. The members of the apocalyptic right, even delegitimize the papal authority of Mario Bergoglio and opt for a Tridentine tendency close to Ratzinger.

The element that will define the behavior of religious rights is constituted by the North American elections. At the geopolitical level they will have to decide whether to support Biden or Trump, according to the hegemony of Russia and China to develop. The advance of Chinese civilization is more dangerous for uncompromising integral Catholicism since the current government is not distinguished by religious tolerance and respect for human rights that Catholicism has found in other societies, likewise, because within China, the Catholic Church is insignificant.

Hence, while Catholic nationalists within the Morenoite government advance and remain silent, radical Catholic groups in FRENA and Movimiento Ciudadano, rebuild the anti-communist rhetoric (Although they do not directly attack China) and seek to promote a crusade for Western civilization that approximates Donald Trump as the contemporary Saint George or Ronald Reagan.

AMLO has fallen into the vicious circle of Mexican-style negotiations. Catholic nationalism operates as it has always been doing. In a long-term perspective, the Empire of the Holy See seizes every opportunity. Morena is in detention and unable to fulfill her campaign promises. This is a point in favor of the groups that do not have the same flags as Morena and many points against those who voted for Morena and expected great transformations. Morena will deliver little of what he promised in the campaign and runs the risk of being a great disappointment.