Panama, an American strategy model in Mexico?
By Diego Velázquez
http://quoruminformativo.com.mx/index.php/2017/02/14/quien-sera-el-guillermo-endara-de-mexico/
The ambivalent government of Donald Trump has again directed his attention against Mexico. Enrique Peña Nieto is in a cul-de-sac. While it is true that the geopolitical and commercial relationship with the United States has been one of permanent subordination, the latest Mexican governance scenarios are worrisome even from the foreign look that does not coincide ideologically with Donald Trump.
Mexico has not been able to find a way to successfully assimilate Western culture. The main obstacle has been a social structure inherited from the colonial era that always finds a way to not fulfill the tasks that modernity has. The result is a society with different levels of autonomy and modernization that fails to develop the homogeneity necessary to persist the State and the Law. Looking at Mexico from the perspective of the indicators of democratic quality, the diagnosis points to a Minimal institutionalization and, therefore, programs that lead to poor governance. This situation has been the breeding ground to generate the Failed State that becomes one of the most worrisome elements for the 21st century.
Failed states, beyond representing imperfect or anomalous democracies, reproduce voids of power and social conflicts that allow the emergence of factual powers and severe social conflicts whose extension and problematic can be extended to other countries; Of course, to consolidated democracies and developed states. Some of the problems that stand out are poverty, migration, violence, informal economy, corruption, drug trafficking, famine, illiteracy, epidemics, authoritarianism, etc. A large number of these situations can be attributed to Mexico. The Mexican Failed State distinguishes it Narcotrafico, Corruption, High Criminality, etc. There is a direct responsibility of the business political class in this regard.
Globalization and neoliberalism implied the mechanisms of openness for societies around the world to develop, in their own way, the particular route to liberalism, the market and democracy. Unfortunately, the categorical imperatives of the political elites were not taken into account, it was the case that the representatives failed to play the necessary role of governing, they acted to the market as an instrument for public management and only permitted the irresponsibility and corruption that they threw out with the shreds of the good public. These are the consequences. It can be said that the market has materially modernized societies; But not to the governing groups. When the country speaks of a Narco-government and a pseudocapitalist oligarchy, only the way in which the elites have misinterpreted globalization for their own benefit is described. As Yehezkel Dror points out, the Mexican political class forgot the public ethics, the reason of state, the task of governing. The objective of the policy is to maintain order, peace and generate economic growth.
In recent times, the balance required by the Republican leader regarding the control of corruption and drug trafficking warns, according to some analysts like Raymundo Rivapalacio, that the country may be intervened perhaps militarily or, perhaps, more radically because of the irresponsibility, incapacity and corruption that distinguishes the business political class where the peñista group is one of the main representatives. The PRIAN regime today looks more like the government of General Antonio Noriega in Panama. The invasion of that country through Operation Just Cause involved an attack of at least fifteen days as an experiment for Operation Desert Storm in Iraq. Is it likely that a Fair Cause operation will be implemented in Mexico to attack Iran? In one form or another, a legal order was restored that corrected the absolute corruption of Noriega.
The peñanietista government, as in the moment the Panamanian military regime, faces a delicate situation. What will the Right say now that we move from Venezuela Chavista to Panama Noriega, without that López Obrador will govern? In this scenario there is no situation worth excusing, Carlos Salinas de Gortari can blame the dinosaurs, indigenous, intellectuals and the marginalized class of the country, to say that Mexico has a difficult step towards modernity. However, the problem is the corruption of the ruling class which, despite studying in the best technocratic and managerial schools of the Western world, are corrupt and incorrigible authoritarian. They have been baptized as Mirreyes (Raphael, 2015) and, according to the Mexican case, are more dangerous than the populists of the left. The Consortium and the Golden Boys well represent this genotype.
Mexico is an entelechy, a proteus, has not yet finished as a Nation State. Our nationalism is reduced, dixit Carlos Ramirez, to tweets, emojis and memes. Few Mexicans would defend their homeland militarily. However, it is a conservative country that had always thought of any order to its absence as preferable. An expression attributable to Puebla society is memorable at a time when governors fell like guayabas given the unbearable corruption even for Mexican presidentialism: order, even if it came from the center (Reynoso: 1997). Can we say now: order, even if it comes from the United States?
Sunday, February 12, 2017
Tuesday, February 07, 2017
Javier Lozano hará prevalecer opacidad en el gobierno: ONG y académicos
http://www.lajornadadeoriente.com.mx/2017/02/07/lozano-opacidad/
Javier Lozano hará prevalecer opacidad en el gobierno: ONG y académicos
07/02/2017 04:00 
NOTAS RELACIONADAS:
ONG, académicos, diputados y políticos reprueban inclusión de Lozano en Transparencia Barbosa propone reducir gastos en el Senado; Lozano dice que se pondría a robar Puebla será el primer estado que le dispute Generadora Fénix a la CFE En Puebla no vendemos combustible robado, responde GUEPT a Lozano Javier Lozano, obligado a pagar 10 mdp a Manuel Bartlett: Meza
Organizaciones especializadas en transparencia, acceso a la información, rendición de cuentas, el estudio de la comunicación pública, académicos, diputados federales y dirigentes de corrientes partidistas, reprobaron el nombramiento de Javier Lozano Alarcón como presidente de la Junta de Gobierno de la Coordinación General de Transparencia de la administración encabezada por, José Antonio Gali Fayad.
Cuauhtémoc Cruz Isidoro, secretario del Capítulo Puebla de la Asociación Mexicana de Derecho a la Información (Amedi Puebla), advirtió que la designación de Lozano Alarcón, podría atar de manos al nuevo organismo y propiciar la opacidad.
“El que la junta sea la responsable de establecer las medidas para el cumplimiento de acuerdos, como se ha señalado, podría abrir la puerta para que se controle la difusión o reserva de temas comprometedores para la administración estatal”, señaló.
Asimismo, indicó que otras medidas de control pueden darse a través de la facultad de asignar el presupuesto, de realizar los nombramientos del titular de la coordinación y sobre todo de la creación del reglamento interno.
Ante la designación del exsenador como presidente de la junta, Cruz Isidoro señaló que resulta preocupante pues ha sido un personaje que no se ha caracterizado por ser transparente. “¿Qué podemos esperar de alguien que no quiso transparentar sus bienes y conflictos de interés ante una iniciativa ciudadana?”, indicó al recordar que el panista no hizo pública su declaración 3de3.
“Cuando el gobernador anunció que Maricarmen Leyva iba asumir la coordinación nos pareció una muy buena señal pues el trabajo que realizó en el ayuntamiento fue muy bueno y hubo apertura en la información; sin embargo, las nuevas medidas podrían limitar su trabajo”, comentó el también coordinador del Observatorio de Transparencia de la Universidad Iberoamericana Puebla.
En cuanto a la participación de los secretarios de finanzas y administración y de infraestructura y transportes como vocales de la Junta de Gobierno, Cruz Isidoro advirtió que no pueden ser juez y parte sobre todo cuando se resuelvan temas polémicos vinculuados con la administración anterior como pueden ser el Fideicomiso del Impuesto sobre la Nómina, los Proyectos de Prestación de Servicios, así como con las obras públicas.
Finalmente lamentó que la participación ciudadana se limite a ser observadora “pues no contará con voto y eso convierte a la participación en mera simulación. Se requiere una participación real si se desea un organismo transparente”.
Siempre se ha opuesto a la transparencia
Por su parte, Brenda López Suárez, del Centro de Investigaciones sobre Propaganda y Opinión Pública (CIPOP), advirtió: “El senador con licencia Javier Lozano, no parece ser el mejor para ocupar un cargo en materia de transparencia y rendición de cuentas, pues ni siquiera ha rendido su declaración 3 de 3 sobe su patrimonio y además ha tenido declaraciones desafortunadas como esa de que estaría dispuesto a delinquir si su salario no le alcanzara”.
Por su parte, el diputado federal del Partido Movimiento de Regeneración Nacional (Morena), Rodrigo Abdala Dartigues, criticó “espero no tener que hablar con Javier Lozano, en realidad somos diametralmente distintos, los políticos ellos, y los ciudadanos como nosotros que estamos ávidos de un cambio. ¡Imagínate Lozano!, ¿será una decisión (su designación) en realidad de Tony Gali, o Lozano o es una imposición de alguien más?”.
Por su parte, Jesús Encinas, militante del Morena y quien fue impulsor de la primera legislación en materia de transparencia y acceso a al información de Puebla, como diputado local del PAN, advirtió que Lozano Alarcón tiene antecedentes que le impiden ser autoridad en esas materias:
“Yo voy a comentar una anécdota que viví y es absolutamente cierta: Yo era diputado en la quincuagésima quinta legislatura en el periodo de Melquiades Morales Flores y estábamos impulsando la Ley de Acceso a la Información, esta ley iba a pisar muchos cayos y entonces me concede una cita Luis Banck, ahora el administrador de la ciudad de Puebla, con Javier Lozano Alarcón, que era el contacto del gobierno de Rafael Moreno Valle ante las autoridades federales”, dijo.
“La comida fue en Mi Ciudad, en la avenida Juárez, para ver si me desmienten Javier Lozano y Luis Banck. Estábamos de tratando de ma Ley de Acceso a la Información y Javier Lozano me dijo que no era posible emitir una ley, que lo que quería el gobierno del estado hacer era, pues un panfletito, un reglamentado por ahí, pero hablar de algo tan grande como una ley, no era del interés del gobernador Melquiades Morales Flores”, abundó.
Encinas remató: “Esto nos puede dar una idea del desempeño que tendrá como presidente de la Comisión de Acceso a la Información, será completamente opaco y que me desmientan Javier Lozano”.
Lozano, conflictivo y autoritario: Velázquez
Por su parte, Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero, catedrático e investigador de la Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Sociales de la Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, advirtió que “Javier Lozano Alarcón representará al burócrata más conflictivo y autoritario en la nueva administración del gobierno poblano. Para quienes consideran que no hay posibilidades de maximato en la entidad, este funcionario constituye la evidencia del estilo gerencialista, maquiavélico e imperativo que distingue al morenovallismo perpetuo”.
Agregó que “la experiencia de Lozano confirma la idea de que la gestión de Gali solo constituye una fachada del proyecto transgeneracional neoavilacamachista. No obstante que algunas medidas del grupo político libanes, invitado de la clase política poblana, han tratado de generar simpatía para con la sociedad; se evidencia su naturaleza al incluir políticos relacionados con los cacicazgos más violentos y corruptos de la historia local. El transfuguismo priista al PAN, así como la empatía y satisfacción de dicho instituto político con los recién llegados, deja ver el radicalismo de derecha prianista que, cada vez más, caracteriza a los militantes de uno y otro partido. Acierta quien propone, de una vez, la fusión Prian (sic) como una alianza patriótica oligárquica.
El académico indicó que “los conflictos de Lozano Alarcón con los jóvenes, periodistas, deportistas, trabajadores, indígenas, mujeres, estudiantes, empresarios, movimientos sociales, partidos políticos y un largo etcétera, columbran la relación del gobierno galicista con los poblanos. En poco tiempo se acabará la sonrisa y estilo cancionero del ogro filantrópicopseudolopezmateista. Puebla es la mina que financia el proyecto político de una facción cambista y arrogante que no va a detenerse para disputar la presidencia de la república. Cueste lo que cueste. Sacrificando lo que haya que sacrificar. ¿Podrá Tony Gali, en el corto tiempo, desplazar a los grupos que pueden pasar por encima de su gobierno si su objetivo se arriesga? Hubo un tiempo en el que un gobernador poblano limitó al avilacamachismo, quizá avergonzado, por la serie de tropelías y daños cometidos a la sociedad. ¿Puede Gali atemperar al Morenovallismo? Esta ruptura histórica, en Puebla, podría ser el legado más benévolo y justo”.
Añadió que “la derecha radical de México está dispuesta al expolio incluso de la vida. Puebla es una versión mediana del duartismo veracruzano; empero, mientras en Veracruz esto ha llegado a su fin; aquí, cabe bien preguntarse cuántos sexenios faltan para que éste prebostazgo termine, o de qué modo aumentará. La tarea de los movimientos sociales, los ciudadanos, la academia y los pocos políticos honestos que aún quedan, será evidenciar la falacia modernizadora de estos operadores crematísticos insertados en el gobierno. La hora oscura del autoritarismo se alarga y habrá que converger en la resistencia contra un fundamentalismo cuya modernidad es destruir al otro, agandallar el dinero público, usurpar la patria, falsear la calidad democrática y establecer como dogma su teología mediocre de la prosperidad”.
Monday, January 23, 2017
The Rights of Donald Trump
The Rights of Donald Trump
By Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero
Although left and right schemas are obsolete for the current development of political theory, their old ways still can help those looking for a compass in these times of catastrophic reality. It is necessary to observe the specter of ideologies to understand phenomena such as Donald Trump, who suddenly appear disconcerting in the future of Mexico with everything and the clarity of the messages that he has sent.
What is Trump? Various characters of the news and political media have insisted, until the satiety, to identify it with the populist root of Andres Manuel López Obrador; However, populism in Latin America is close to left-wing Justicialism. Trump can be linked to a type of populism, but the proper name is Fascism and is Right. The United States of America has always been a plutocracy; But, this time, the monster lost the friendly side.
What type of Right represents Donald Trump? It is still early to distinguish it. The political coalition that brought it to power integrates an amalgam of rights that will try to be cohesive according to time and circumstances. For theorists like Roger Eatwell and Noel O'Sullivan (1989) there are multiple rights. They maintain a core of common values; but also nuances that make significant differences. Rights are classified - at least - in the categories of reactionary, moderate, radical, ultra and new. Nor to say of the plurality of rights that offers us the Francoist sociology of Alonso de Miguel (1975). Donald Trump includes different rights to varying degrees. Perhaps, this is due to the slowness and expectation in the true impacts of their decisions.
One element should be highlighted in the new governing group of the United States: the significant influence of Israel and the Jewish community in Donald Trump. Will this situation involve a decrease in xenophobia and discrimination that the WASP are radiating in a bizarre way? The global evolution of Islamic fundamentalism requires a new geopolitical design, which explains the Russian American alliances, which the rights do not completely understand. The scenario provoked by the neoliberal globalization runaway can not end in the regime of the black sun. In contexts of survival, the rapprochement between right-wing groups and members of the Jewish community is not strange. For the most part, however, this approach becomes unfortunate. It has happened in the Italy of Mussolinni, Argentina in the military dictatorship and contemporary France.
Immigration and its consequences are an effect of globalization and the development of savage capitalism. Globalization, runaway capitalism, is one of the greatest challenges in the social sciences. This phenomenon shows that even the technocrats of the hegemonic countries do not know what to do. Islamic fundamentalism is an externality that was misunderstood by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The Democratic Party is responsible for the development that has taken Islamic terrorism and the empowerment of the central states that are part of this civilization. The same can not be said of Mexican emigration. President Barack Obama is the American who expelled more Mexicans in all bilateral history. The latest measures against Cuban immigrants are also inexplicable. Without saying or pretending, Obama wanted to be more WASP than Trump.
While it is true that Mexico became the WASP's favorite scapegoat, one of the elements to be highlighted in the opening speech of the new US president is the frontal confrontation with Islam. The historical clock was returned to the nineties, not to the forties of the twentieth century.
Donald Trump can re-edit the Bush administration more than FD Roosvelt. In the first case, Donald Trump is more like Vicente Fox Quezada. It even has a similar liking for ambiguity in decisions. The hopes and longings that kept the right reactionary and ultra, were fulfilled half. They gave in front of the PRI and, as a result, lost the PAN candidacy to the presidency of the republic in front of the moderate and neoliberal right where the PRI also had good seats. Vicente Fox knows, in a broad sense, the concept of impotence as far as the art of governing is concerned. Perhaps, based on that experience, it is possible to predict what will happen in the government of Donald Trump. In the early hours, the trumpista freight train is no longer so scary to the Mexican political class. The trumpista railway includes wagons representing different rights. It makes a terrifying sound and seems to crush us; however, major threats are being suspended.
When Jose Lopez Portillo met Jimmy Carter thought things would be simple, considered advantages given the human condition of the character. It was not like that, things were just the opposite. If the political elite of the country thinks like Jose Lopez Portillo, the situation of Mexico will be complicated. The ties of Luis Videgaray are generating these expectations in the Mexican government that thinks in tempering the situation. The problem is not Donald Trump, the fault corresponds to the corruption, incoherence, irresponsibility and delinquency of our politicians and entrepreneurs. Mexico has to do the things that are its obligation. The Mexican government and the political business class in our country, have to give a rudder to the course of their behavior. If the Mexican political class does not understand, it does not inspire, it does not strengthen the welfare state everywhere, then populist people, right and left, will continue to appear. Or is controlled wild capitalism or populists of all ideologies will become an epidemic.
By Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero
Although left and right schemas are obsolete for the current development of political theory, their old ways still can help those looking for a compass in these times of catastrophic reality. It is necessary to observe the specter of ideologies to understand phenomena such as Donald Trump, who suddenly appear disconcerting in the future of Mexico with everything and the clarity of the messages that he has sent.
What is Trump? Various characters of the news and political media have insisted, until the satiety, to identify it with the populist root of Andres Manuel López Obrador; However, populism in Latin America is close to left-wing Justicialism. Trump can be linked to a type of populism, but the proper name is Fascism and is Right. The United States of America has always been a plutocracy; But, this time, the monster lost the friendly side.
What type of Right represents Donald Trump? It is still early to distinguish it. The political coalition that brought it to power integrates an amalgam of rights that will try to be cohesive according to time and circumstances. For theorists like Roger Eatwell and Noel O'Sullivan (1989) there are multiple rights. They maintain a core of common values; but also nuances that make significant differences. Rights are classified - at least - in the categories of reactionary, moderate, radical, ultra and new. Nor to say of the plurality of rights that offers us the Francoist sociology of Alonso de Miguel (1975). Donald Trump includes different rights to varying degrees. Perhaps, this is due to the slowness and expectation in the true impacts of their decisions.
One element should be highlighted in the new governing group of the United States: the significant influence of Israel and the Jewish community in Donald Trump. Will this situation involve a decrease in xenophobia and discrimination that the WASP are radiating in a bizarre way? The global evolution of Islamic fundamentalism requires a new geopolitical design, which explains the Russian American alliances, which the rights do not completely understand. The scenario provoked by the neoliberal globalization runaway can not end in the regime of the black sun. In contexts of survival, the rapprochement between right-wing groups and members of the Jewish community is not strange. For the most part, however, this approach becomes unfortunate. It has happened in the Italy of Mussolinni, Argentina in the military dictatorship and contemporary France.
Immigration and its consequences are an effect of globalization and the development of savage capitalism. Globalization, runaway capitalism, is one of the greatest challenges in the social sciences. This phenomenon shows that even the technocrats of the hegemonic countries do not know what to do. Islamic fundamentalism is an externality that was misunderstood by Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. The Democratic Party is responsible for the development that has taken Islamic terrorism and the empowerment of the central states that are part of this civilization. The same can not be said of Mexican emigration. President Barack Obama is the American who expelled more Mexicans in all bilateral history. The latest measures against Cuban immigrants are also inexplicable. Without saying or pretending, Obama wanted to be more WASP than Trump.
While it is true that Mexico became the WASP's favorite scapegoat, one of the elements to be highlighted in the opening speech of the new US president is the frontal confrontation with Islam. The historical clock was returned to the nineties, not to the forties of the twentieth century.
Donald Trump can re-edit the Bush administration more than FD Roosvelt. In the first case, Donald Trump is more like Vicente Fox Quezada. It even has a similar liking for ambiguity in decisions. The hopes and longings that kept the right reactionary and ultra, were fulfilled half. They gave in front of the PRI and, as a result, lost the PAN candidacy to the presidency of the republic in front of the moderate and neoliberal right where the PRI also had good seats. Vicente Fox knows, in a broad sense, the concept of impotence as far as the art of governing is concerned. Perhaps, based on that experience, it is possible to predict what will happen in the government of Donald Trump. In the early hours, the trumpista freight train is no longer so scary to the Mexican political class. The trumpista railway includes wagons representing different rights. It makes a terrifying sound and seems to crush us; however, major threats are being suspended.
When Jose Lopez Portillo met Jimmy Carter thought things would be simple, considered advantages given the human condition of the character. It was not like that, things were just the opposite. If the political elite of the country thinks like Jose Lopez Portillo, the situation of Mexico will be complicated. The ties of Luis Videgaray are generating these expectations in the Mexican government that thinks in tempering the situation. The problem is not Donald Trump, the fault corresponds to the corruption, incoherence, irresponsibility and delinquency of our politicians and entrepreneurs. Mexico has to do the things that are its obligation. The Mexican government and the political business class in our country, have to give a rudder to the course of their behavior. If the Mexican political class does not understand, it does not inspire, it does not strengthen the welfare state everywhere, then populist people, right and left, will continue to appear. Or is controlled wild capitalism or populists of all ideologies will become an epidemic.
Monday, January 16, 2017
El gobierno tiene miedo a la movilización social, coinciden expertos
El gobierno tiene miedo a la movilización social, coinciden expertos
“Políticas del miedo” del gobierno federal tienen fines político-electorales y tintes autoritarios; la oposición política, incapaz de estructurar una propuesta frente a este clima, aseguran politólogos de Ibero y BUAP
Aranzazú Ayala Martínez
El gobierno tiene miedo de que la gente se manifieste en la calle genuinamente, tal como ocurrió el sábado 7 de enero en muchas ciudades del país de manera simultánea, concluye el politólogo Juan Luis Hernández Avendaño, Director del Departamento de Ciencias Sociales de la Ibero Puebla, tras un fin de semana de reacciones por el incremento a la gasolina.
La víspera del Día de Reyes se alzó una ola de rumores sobre posibles saqueos, junto con una serie de denuncias sobre agentes policiacos que no sólo permitían que la gente se llevara juguetes y electrodomésticos de las tiendas, sino que ellos mismos incitaban al saqueo vestidos de civiles.
“La violencia y la psicosis social que envolvieron a Puebla y el resto del país la primera semana de 2017 convienen a los gobiernos autoritarios”, dijo en entrevista para Lado B. En este sentido, el académico alcanza a apreciar lo que llama “políticas del miedo” para inhibir la movilización y la protesta social, clara estrategia de un gobierno federal “que no ha alcanzado a levantar mínimos de confianza o credibilidad social”.
“La violencia y la psicosis social que envolvieron a Puebla y el resto del país la primera semana de 2017 convienen a los gobiernos autoritarios”
De acuerdo con el politólogo e investigador de la BUAP, Diego Velázquez Caballero, el gobierno optó por tácticas clásicas que en su momento aplicaron presidentes como Gustavo Díaz Ordaz, como el empleo de grupos infiltrados para sembrar terror y desalentar las críticas de la sociedad. “Me parece pues algo muy deshonesto por parte de la clase política (…), es obvio que se usaron grupos de choque, grupos infiltrados, gente violenta que es contratada por el Estado”.
Para Juan Luis Hernández la fórmula de crear psicosis en redes sociales y, por otro lado, financiar a grupos violentos se ha visto prácticamente desde el 1° de diciembre de 2012. “Desgraciadamente vemos un gobierno que es muy malo para crear políticas de bienestar pero muy bueno para crear políticas de miedo. Lo estamos viendo frente a un temor real de enfrentar una movilización social genuina y auténtica.”
Velázquez coincidió con el académico de la Ibero en que tales “políticas del miedo” y desinformación están dirigidas a que los ciudadanos dejen vacía la arena pública: “es obvio que la violencia la usa el Estado para aminorar la crítica. [Aún así] La gente salió a las calles, salió a protestar de manera pacífica.”
En todos los lugares donde está ocurriendo esto esa parece ser la lógica, según el académico de la Ibero: “que los ciudadanos no tomemos la calle, no tomemos la iniciativa del control público. En términos generales este es el mensaje, se busca regresar al ciudadano a su casa, que la gente decida mejor no salir.”
Asimismo, Hernández destacó el hecho de que la oposición política no ha alcanzado a estructurar una propuesta frente al desastre del gobierno federal, por lo que es la sociedad civil quien ha tomado la iniciativa. Y aunque hay una parte que cada vez está más informada, continuó, circula también mucha información falsa que detiene las movilizaciones sociales: “la política del miedo se basa en la desinformación”.
¿Y qué pasa en Puebla?
Con la violencia por el gasolinazo, Moreno Valle “es un actor que se beneficia y sobre todo en esta necesidad de autoritarismo”
A nivel local la situación se enmarca en los preparativos electorales de 2017. Hernández Avendaño hizo énfasis en que buena parte de los actos de vandalismo tuvieron lugar en el Estado de México, donde habrá elecciones este año, y en Puebla, “donde Morena tiene un crecimiento muy alto”. De acuerdo con el académico, el gobierno ha tratado de vincular la violencia con Morena y Andrés Manuel López Obrador, lo cual “no les ha funcionado del todo, pero ha sembrado esta suerte de idea porque no cabe duda de que es un tema político”.
“Creo que en los territorios en donde hay una presencia significativa de Morena y el Estado de México, donde se va a jugar la gubernatura, lo están ligando a un clima preelectoral, donde siempre ayuda mucho que la gente se quede en casa y se juegue el proceso electoral con las clientelas controlables”, dijo el politólogo.
Por su parte, Diego Velázquez cree que la situación fue la misma en todas partes, pero que indiscutiblemente el gobierno del estado de Puebla, al ser aliado del grupo de la presidencia de la República, provocó un comportamiento semejante al del Estado de México. Desde su análisis, la situación del gasolinazo cambiará el escenario sobre todo para el gobernador Rafael Moreno Valle, aspirante a la candidatura presidencial del PAN.
“Por supuesto que él es un actor que se beneficia y sobre todo en esta necesidad de autoritarismo de la clase política, pues él se perfila como un personaje ideal para este tipo de eventos.”
Wednesday, January 11, 2017
January: Beginning of Mexican Spring?
January: Beginning of Mexican Spring?
By Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero
http://quoruminformativo.com.mx/index.php/2017/01/10/enero-inicio-de-la-primavera-mexicana/
What dignity can have a political class that compels the people of their country to sing the National Anthem on their knees? What respect does a government bureaucracy that has taken patrimonialism and corruption due to public ethics deserve? Is a government that irresponsibly indebts its people and sacrifices social welfare considered legitimate? Must be obeyed a regime that betrays identity, history and hope? Should you support a government that purposely misjudges all its decisions and does not defend the country at any time?
The Mexican people have decided to express their rejection of the government and have taken to the streets to express their pain. This situation represents a unique opportunity, in the contemporary era, to try to redirect the national destiny. In all the cities of the nation a protest reaction has been generated, to send the message of indignation and nonconformity to the authorities of all levels. The regime remains indifferent to the request of the Mexicans, the answer has been wrong and evidence the incapacity. Politicians have decided to employ groups of bandits, porros, assassins, thieves and beaters who are generally their political operators to distort the demands of social movements. Demonstrations of social discontent have accompanied looting, violence and destruction that have been provoked by those who should govern and seek order; It is a paradox, or stupidity, to make use of ungovernability to try to maintain governance. However, society continues the demonstrations against gasolinazo and aggression against citizens. The people have not been intimidated by the dirty war practices that, at this point, evidence the unhealthy folly of government leaders.
The dirty war was a strategy designed to combat communism in Latin America. The US government provided resources, strategies and supervision to Latin American leaders to repudiate the influence of peasant, labor and university movements. Why does not the dirty war strategy work now? Why can not the government collapse the national civic movement calling for its dismissal? Because, even North America, it no longer bears the stench of corruption that distills Mexico's business-political class. Donald Trump has hatred and resentment towards México, he will not respect any law or order that seeks benefits to mexican people. The failure of the Free Trade Agreement is the responsibility of a corrupt, cheating, ineffective and rude political class whose mirrey behavior finance the dollars of emigrants and US citizens. The commercial relationship with the United States has come to an end, as well as other political, economic and social processes thanks to the miserable attitude of the Mexican regime.
The marches and demonstrations of the population against the gasolinazo, as well as other policies and behaviors of the Mexican elite, will continue. The government should be more concerned about the people's request for resignation and leave the attempts to deface a spontaneous, legitimate and socially aware movement. Unemployment, poverty, violence and insecurity are also being provoked by the decisions of the future US president, and this will be aggravated when geopolitical interests show their departures. The demands of the people who ask for the abandonment of power by the Executive Branch, will soon be extended to all institutional levels of the country.
The Mexican political class must renounce its privileges and understand the demands of the non-conforming movements protesting at this moment. The insistence on affecting and depleting the population will only cause the movements to be radical. The government must seriously consider abandoning power.
By Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero
http://quoruminformativo.com.mx/index.php/2017/01/10/enero-inicio-de-la-primavera-mexicana/
What dignity can have a political class that compels the people of their country to sing the National Anthem on their knees? What respect does a government bureaucracy that has taken patrimonialism and corruption due to public ethics deserve? Is a government that irresponsibly indebts its people and sacrifices social welfare considered legitimate? Must be obeyed a regime that betrays identity, history and hope? Should you support a government that purposely misjudges all its decisions and does not defend the country at any time?
The Mexican people have decided to express their rejection of the government and have taken to the streets to express their pain. This situation represents a unique opportunity, in the contemporary era, to try to redirect the national destiny. In all the cities of the nation a protest reaction has been generated, to send the message of indignation and nonconformity to the authorities of all levels. The regime remains indifferent to the request of the Mexicans, the answer has been wrong and evidence the incapacity. Politicians have decided to employ groups of bandits, porros, assassins, thieves and beaters who are generally their political operators to distort the demands of social movements. Demonstrations of social discontent have accompanied looting, violence and destruction that have been provoked by those who should govern and seek order; It is a paradox, or stupidity, to make use of ungovernability to try to maintain governance. However, society continues the demonstrations against gasolinazo and aggression against citizens. The people have not been intimidated by the dirty war practices that, at this point, evidence the unhealthy folly of government leaders.
The dirty war was a strategy designed to combat communism in Latin America. The US government provided resources, strategies and supervision to Latin American leaders to repudiate the influence of peasant, labor and university movements. Why does not the dirty war strategy work now? Why can not the government collapse the national civic movement calling for its dismissal? Because, even North America, it no longer bears the stench of corruption that distills Mexico's business-political class. Donald Trump has hatred and resentment towards México, he will not respect any law or order that seeks benefits to mexican people. The failure of the Free Trade Agreement is the responsibility of a corrupt, cheating, ineffective and rude political class whose mirrey behavior finance the dollars of emigrants and US citizens. The commercial relationship with the United States has come to an end, as well as other political, economic and social processes thanks to the miserable attitude of the Mexican regime.
The marches and demonstrations of the population against the gasolinazo, as well as other policies and behaviors of the Mexican elite, will continue. The government should be more concerned about the people's request for resignation and leave the attempts to deface a spontaneous, legitimate and socially aware movement. Unemployment, poverty, violence and insecurity are also being provoked by the decisions of the future US president, and this will be aggravated when geopolitical interests show their departures. The demands of the people who ask for the abandonment of power by the Executive Branch, will soon be extended to all institutional levels of the country.
The Mexican political class must renounce its privileges and understand the demands of the non-conforming movements protesting at this moment. The insistence on affecting and depleting the population will only cause the movements to be radical. The government must seriously consider abandoning power.
Tuesday, December 20, 2016
Soldiers of God or Soldiers of Mexico?
Soldiers of God or Soldiers of Mexico?
By Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero
In these last dates has discussed the balance of the war against drug trafficking implemented by President Felipe Calderón and its consequences for the country during these years. The results are daunting. Not only has the power of organized crime groups increased, but also the institutions of the Mexican State have reached the limit of their operation. The Failed State is normality in the new times. For this reason, the Secretary of Defense has considered it appropriate to take a contemptuous look at human rights and negotiate the role of the Armed Forces in order to reduce the scarce guarantees and resources that the population of our country has. Denisse Dresser, the best politician in the country, calls this circumstance a coup d'état.
Traditionally, the Army has had minimal respect for the rights that the Mexican Constitution dictates. It is true that the war has been complicated for the Armed Forces and that narcoterrorism reaches levels that, rather, require the presence of blue helmets and international forces. However, the Defense Minister forgets that this war is due to structural causes and the need for public policies that the country's government has failed to meet several years ago.
The military view on the problem of drug trafficking in Mexico eludes several elements. First, it is important to say that the power and economic capacity of criminal groups obey the demand and negotiation that the government of the United States of America makes to regulate the flow of drugs that it consumes. In this corruption plays a preponderant role the Mexican political class. Second, it is necessary to highlight the fact that, the level of violence that reaches society in our territory, corresponds to the level of poverty. Drug trafficking and organized crime are the most important employers facing a situation of marginality and scarcity for which political representatives of all parties are directly responsible. Finally, it should be pointed out the old Latin American custom that the security and military apparatus have to violate human rights.
The problem with the affirmations that are made from SEDENA, as well as the approval of the political-business class with them, is that we want to revive the Dirty War of the 60s and 70s of the last century. With such a decision, the scarce institutionality of Mexican democracy is completely shattered and the vision of a Failed State that the conservative sectors want is consolidated. The arguments of General Salvador Cienfuegos are paralleled by the ideas of Gustavo Díaz Ordaz, Fernando Gutiérrez Barrios and Miguel Nazar Haro: the use of extreme violence to save the country from an imaginary enemy. By the way, these are the favorite ideas of the Mexican ultra-right to justify all kinds of barbarism that save their dominions.
The Ministry of Defense loses sight of the geopolitical vision that at the moment affects the country. Mexico is on the verge of serious conflict with the United States of America. If the general remembers some historical facts: the loss of Texas, the invasion of 1847, 1914 and 1916 - among others - he should understand that, against Donald Trump, the armed forces should be recruiting soldiers and preparing the structures to support a situation delicate.
If we want to reduce the level of violence caused by drug trafficking and organized crime, what is necessary is to legalize narcotics, transfer them and demand compliance with social policies to reduce poverty, as well as the enormous corruption of the public apparatus. What reason is more significant in the situation that causes the death of soldiers: drug trafficking or corruption of a political-business oligarchy willing to mortgage everything in the country to continue the business of the moches?
The Mexican ultra-right thinks that, as in 1941, the government of the United States will allow a fascist alliance for the development of capitalism and the destruction of social movements. False. There is no trend that marks the need to create Anti-Communist Federations or White Brigades. The Dirty War would not be implemented against drug trafficking groups - ultimately led by the Mexican and American political classes - but as a measure of control over social, university, indigenous, workers, peasants, women and alternative movements.
The Dirty War serves to deny atrocities in the name of order. Any order. Nazism, Communism, Francoism, Pinochet, etc., used the dirty war to exalt their order. Thus the Mexican ultra-right denies on October 2, 1968, the massacres of guerrillas and peasants at the throughout the country. And all for what? Does the Ministry of Defense forget the dark link of the political security apparatus with the transfer of drugs and contraband precisely in those years? What was not the far right the most benefit of this scenario? Once the country is destroyed, it is given to North America to recompose things. As Francisco Franco did before Eisenhower. Grant the territory for the United States to play its War games, for example, the Merida Initiative. However, the scenario has changed. The Mexican ultra-right does not understand that it does not understand. There is neither, nor was there a world order. Only in their historical negationism do they imagine constructors of a liberal democratic capitalist globalization. The Holy See is more responsible for global warming than for the disarticulation of communism. What there is is a deep chaos provoked by the acceleration of a senseless modernity. The United States, as a representative of Western culture, finds itself in a moment of incoherence and loss of meaning. That is why they can react in any way. That is why it is important to retire. The Arianic decisions that guide Donald Trump will be deadly for the future. The Mexican Army must remove the burden of partisan interests to truly safeguard national sovereignty. The demand must be to purify the public ministries, police, judges and prisons. The corrupt ambition of the business political class is the one that has allowed the death of thousands of Mexicans in uniform and without uniform. The country needs an authentic justice system and not one that subjects the crimes to the supply and the demand. In few occasions they have coincided in Mexico the military and popular spirit. Only in the cardenismo the army were placed together to the people. If the Armed Forces understand the historical moment in the world they will be able to bet on the democratization of our country. On the contrary, summoning the ghost of the Dirty War is like obeying Santa Anna in San Jacinto.
Tuesday, November 29, 2016
The New Mister Danger
The New Mister Danger
By Diego Velazquez
http://quoruminformativo.com.mx/index.php/2016/11/29/el-nuevo-senor-peligro/
One of the most serious scenarios that was predicted for our country was finally fulfilled. The present is one of the most controversial times to Mexico. Donald Trump's racist and conflicting condition toward Mexico must raise social awareness in the face of the Republican triumph in the last US election. It is essential to understand, once and for all, the true pragmatic strategy that America has always had with respect to Mexico and Latin America. It is enough to read any of the chapters that the historian James D. Cockcroft has developed in his work to evidence that the Mister Dangers: Donald Trump, Theodore Roosevelt, Henry Kissinger, William Walker, etc., have always existed.
The history of the relationship between our country and North America is already well known. The United States is a democracy -internally-; but outwardly, vis-a-vis other nations, it constitutes an imperialist power, arrogant like any other superpower. The relationship between Latin America and the United States has continually been asymmetrical, abusive, imperialist. Even the bible of Latin American idiots, The Open Veins of Latin America, confirms this gospel (What will Plinio Apuleius, Carlos Montaner and Álvaro Vargas Llosa think of this scenario? Will they now write the Guide for the Naive Neo-liberal Pendejo?).
Although the main leaders of the current economic model recommend to inhibit the manifestations of nationalism, something that can be done with the effect Donald Trump is to resume the process of construction of the Nation State in Mexico. The idea of the failed state, in short, has just been recognized by the WASP Republican triumph and some US-miamicubano neo-conservatism theorists: Samuel Huntington, George Friedman, Andrés Oppenheimer. Mexico can regenerate itself and form a new country after North American rejection.
Where to start? While the government and the political class are only speculating how much more they can steal as the end comes, civil society and some affected thinkers try to start building strategies. The principle has been to return to the origin, to discover Mexico as if it were the first time - there are Mexico and the Mexicans, said Manuel Gómez Morín -, and there is Mexico Excepcional described by César Cansino, Rodolfo Stavenhagen, Guillermo Bonfil Batalla and Samuel Schmidt. Mexico that has a baroque time, is traditional, sacred and populist because it wants a conservative modernity, harmonized between urban and rural. The Mexico that was gone, says Juan Gabriel. It is wrong? Is it your fault, the social identity schizophrenia that lives? What, perhaps, are no more responsible than those who have insisted, even barbarism, in a savage modernity that we simply can not live? Are we going to continue in this search for the neoliberal success that has only resulted in a republic of crime and the consequent putrefaction of society?
The Progressive Dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz and Neoliberalism generated a social dementia that put to the limit the cohesion of the country through the dogmatism of a false liberal and political science. They upset everything, positivism, liberalism, science and even the humanism of an imbecile hispany unable to admit the Indians, blacks, Jews, mestizos and Arabs. There is something very serious with the neoliberal and political dogma in Latin America. César Cansino had predicted the death of political science. The academic work he presented showed the lack of honesty and interpretive seriousness in many approaches. As the old sage had pointed out (Sartori, 2004), political science is a white elephant with feet of clay that sinks and only says nothing. Like many other disciplines, he is urged by politics to be filled with meaning, value, and philosophy. The lack of forecasts regarding the end of the Cold War was not a minor error; Probably the way in which the triumph of liberal capitalist democracy was consolidated, diminished the weight of responsibility because the scenario was encouraging for humanity. However, the mistakes regarding the North American succession in 2016 have been infamous. Worst of all is the persistent obsession of political scientists and economists in defending the neoliberal ethos.
The paraphernalia of marketing, demoscopia and communication sciences, showed that political science serves more to power than truth. The error has nothing to do with the method but with the values. The state of political science is now catastrophic. Almost none of his analyzes can be objective and considered prudent. It has been shown his bias, his attachment to the theology of prosperity and interest he wanted to pass as systematized knowledge beliefs. The alignment of political science with democratic liberalism, although in some situations with neoliberalism, was not able and honest to admit the passage of a fascist right that can provoke the resurgence of nationalism and warlike conflicts for humanity. Most political scientists, neoliberal economists and commentators wanted to inhibit Donald Trump's triumph and the nightmare became true. The reality is there. Donald Trump has won and the dreary future that everyone took as a joke becomes a government for 2017. This is a consequence of turning neoliberal principles into dogmas. At what point did political science forget about method, history, and philosophy?
It is impossible for the United States to endure the course of the Mexican political class, the institutions, and an ever greater part of Mexican society. Mexico has to evaluate, correct, stop mocking the law and democracy. Impunity can not be the main axis of Mexico, it is unbearable that, with all the irrefutable evidence of corruption, abuse, lies, conspiracy and bribery, corrupt characters live better. We need to gain credibility in the institutions and the way this is done has enough limits so that we can talk about the consolidation of Mexican democracy.
Mexico's road is to strengthen its sovereignty to become an average power and to reduce its dependence on the United States of America. The country's project needs to be new and foster inclusion. We will have to return to developmentalism and structuralism. Gradualist modernization is necessarily the route for countries whose historical speed has not allowed the spontaneous generation of liberal values.
By Diego Velazquez
http://quoruminformativo.com.mx/index.php/2016/11/29/el-nuevo-senor-peligro/
One of the most serious scenarios that was predicted for our country was finally fulfilled. The present is one of the most controversial times to Mexico. Donald Trump's racist and conflicting condition toward Mexico must raise social awareness in the face of the Republican triumph in the last US election. It is essential to understand, once and for all, the true pragmatic strategy that America has always had with respect to Mexico and Latin America. It is enough to read any of the chapters that the historian James D. Cockcroft has developed in his work to evidence that the Mister Dangers: Donald Trump, Theodore Roosevelt, Henry Kissinger, William Walker, etc., have always existed.
The history of the relationship between our country and North America is already well known. The United States is a democracy -internally-; but outwardly, vis-a-vis other nations, it constitutes an imperialist power, arrogant like any other superpower. The relationship between Latin America and the United States has continually been asymmetrical, abusive, imperialist. Even the bible of Latin American idiots, The Open Veins of Latin America, confirms this gospel (What will Plinio Apuleius, Carlos Montaner and Álvaro Vargas Llosa think of this scenario? Will they now write the Guide for the Naive Neo-liberal Pendejo?).
Although the main leaders of the current economic model recommend to inhibit the manifestations of nationalism, something that can be done with the effect Donald Trump is to resume the process of construction of the Nation State in Mexico. The idea of the failed state, in short, has just been recognized by the WASP Republican triumph and some US-miamicubano neo-conservatism theorists: Samuel Huntington, George Friedman, Andrés Oppenheimer. Mexico can regenerate itself and form a new country after North American rejection.
Where to start? While the government and the political class are only speculating how much more they can steal as the end comes, civil society and some affected thinkers try to start building strategies. The principle has been to return to the origin, to discover Mexico as if it were the first time - there are Mexico and the Mexicans, said Manuel Gómez Morín -, and there is Mexico Excepcional described by César Cansino, Rodolfo Stavenhagen, Guillermo Bonfil Batalla and Samuel Schmidt. Mexico that has a baroque time, is traditional, sacred and populist because it wants a conservative modernity, harmonized between urban and rural. The Mexico that was gone, says Juan Gabriel. It is wrong? Is it your fault, the social identity schizophrenia that lives? What, perhaps, are no more responsible than those who have insisted, even barbarism, in a savage modernity that we simply can not live? Are we going to continue in this search for the neoliberal success that has only resulted in a republic of crime and the consequent putrefaction of society?
The Progressive Dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz and Neoliberalism generated a social dementia that put to the limit the cohesion of the country through the dogmatism of a false liberal and political science. They upset everything, positivism, liberalism, science and even the humanism of an imbecile hispany unable to admit the Indians, blacks, Jews, mestizos and Arabs. There is something very serious with the neoliberal and political dogma in Latin America. César Cansino had predicted the death of political science. The academic work he presented showed the lack of honesty and interpretive seriousness in many approaches. As the old sage had pointed out (Sartori, 2004), political science is a white elephant with feet of clay that sinks and only says nothing. Like many other disciplines, he is urged by politics to be filled with meaning, value, and philosophy. The lack of forecasts regarding the end of the Cold War was not a minor error; Probably the way in which the triumph of liberal capitalist democracy was consolidated, diminished the weight of responsibility because the scenario was encouraging for humanity. However, the mistakes regarding the North American succession in 2016 have been infamous. Worst of all is the persistent obsession of political scientists and economists in defending the neoliberal ethos.
The paraphernalia of marketing, demoscopia and communication sciences, showed that political science serves more to power than truth. The error has nothing to do with the method but with the values. The state of political science is now catastrophic. Almost none of his analyzes can be objective and considered prudent. It has been shown his bias, his attachment to the theology of prosperity and interest he wanted to pass as systematized knowledge beliefs. The alignment of political science with democratic liberalism, although in some situations with neoliberalism, was not able and honest to admit the passage of a fascist right that can provoke the resurgence of nationalism and warlike conflicts for humanity. Most political scientists, neoliberal economists and commentators wanted to inhibit Donald Trump's triumph and the nightmare became true. The reality is there. Donald Trump has won and the dreary future that everyone took as a joke becomes a government for 2017. This is a consequence of turning neoliberal principles into dogmas. At what point did political science forget about method, history, and philosophy?
It is impossible for the United States to endure the course of the Mexican political class, the institutions, and an ever greater part of Mexican society. Mexico has to evaluate, correct, stop mocking the law and democracy. Impunity can not be the main axis of Mexico, it is unbearable that, with all the irrefutable evidence of corruption, abuse, lies, conspiracy and bribery, corrupt characters live better. We need to gain credibility in the institutions and the way this is done has enough limits so that we can talk about the consolidation of Mexican democracy.
Mexico's road is to strengthen its sovereignty to become an average power and to reduce its dependence on the United States of America. The country's project needs to be new and foster inclusion. We will have to return to developmentalism and structuralism. Gradualist modernization is necessarily the route for countries whose historical speed has not allowed the spontaneous generation of liberal values.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
El Dr. Carmen Hernández fue mi compañero en el doctorado en historia y estudios regionales de la UV, por supuesto que creo en su inocencia p...
-
Internal Party Discipline Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero Morena's internal dynamics close the year with a clear struggle between its ... -
Quetzalcoatl its a Chinese Dragon https://www.semanarioelreto.com/single-post/2017/04/08/Quetzalc%C3%B3atl-es-un-drag%C3%B3n-chino ...