Donald Trump and the New World Order
July 9, 2020
Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero
The coronavirus has generated a crisis situation in all areas. The scenario may have been provoked or spontaneous, but the consequences will deeply affect the present generations. The isolation that humanity lives contained a series of conflicts and social demands that marginalized and youth groups, all over the world, were beginning to shape. In North America, social mobilizations are on the brink of total conflict.
The current scenario is similar to the beginning of the 20th century. Technology, westernization and markets maintained a buoyant position, however, all these advances caused a century of wars and geopolitical repositioning. The 21st century seemed the end of history, once again there was talk of western and technological triumphs that made all human beings equal, however, this situation - and the conflicts of the last century - have not been able to solve the problems of poverty and generational dynamically increasing. The XX and XXI centuries have in common the rebellion of the masses (José Ortega y Gasset). Some consider that the 1968 virus has consolidated. For others, there is an alienation of which we are not yet aware but which will lead to social decomposition. Thus, a more dynamic and unstable generational change is observed. The generation of 1968 criticized the social order and the slowness that the gerontocracy of the time represented. It was an important call of the "crisis of modernity", a phenomenon that has not stopped and that increases over time.
In the past, the order was concentrated in several periods and remained a good number of years. Now, changes, thanks to technology and the free flow of information, are faster and displaces forms, they are just beginning to be structured. The media and social networks transmit a series of information and values that break the paradigms of social control, it has always been so. The fashions are opposite to the status quo and come from elements that are always the crumbs of the elites.
There is a deep rebellion of the masses, the problem lies in understanding if it will be of the magnitude of the early twentieth century. The rebellion of the masses in this environment caused communism and, in reaction to it, the European fascisms. Both phenomena generated the totalitarianisms that made that period a prolonged period of violence. The rebellion of the masses ended the civilization project of European liberalism and allowed the consolidation of North American imperialism, perhaps now the experience is repeated, will it continue as the superpower of the United States? The world problem continues to be the distribution of wealth, the formation of a minimal welfare state and a broad middle class that legitimizes the authoritative instructions of the political system. If the State disappears, society disappears. Measures to generate mixed economies and a large world middle class can no longer be prolonged.
The humanitarian crisis caused by COVID19 constitutes an advanced euthanasia that raises a series of problems that run down the path of technology and generational change. What types of human beings are going to stay? What environment awaits the next generations? Will humanity survive? Answering these questions is difficult. Inertia, the laboratory of history, tells us that - sooner or later - the elements of violent human nature tend to prevail, the demon of all times prays: man will always be the same and again he will destroy himself because he all he knows how to do is fight.
In this context, the link between Mexico and the United States implies coordination of survival in the face of scenarios such as COVID19 and, surely, more serious and worse, of continuing with the neoliberal economic model promoted by the New World Order.
One of the issues to link Trump to Mexico is immigration. That is where the importance of the United States to Mexico can be understood. You have to realize how many compatriots send their remittances to rural communities so that they survive. Governments are concentrated in the cities and forget about the places where migrants are expelled, that is, those communities in which the difficult social, economic and even political situation forces them to leave and remain outside their community for several years (Puebla is one of the most representative states for the removal of immigrants to the United States. In all governments, with the exception of Melquiades Morales and Mario Marín, attention to the future of migrants has been minimal, if not null).
It should be understood that the vulnerable situation of a country like Mexico is an indication that it cannot be negotiated with great advantage, that is, it is expected that the issues of migration, drug trafficking, economy and security are beneficial for Mexicans; But, as the saying goes, the United States has interests, not friends, and that is why Donald Trump's relationship with López Obrador is convenient for the Republican Party and nothing else.
Even though our nation has managed to emancipate itself for two hundred years, the truth is that it has not been able to construct a socio-political scheme to inhibit falling under the tutelage of Anglo-Saxon imperialism. It is true that, as historically defined spaces, the comparative advantages were favorable for Ibero-America compared to what is currently known as the United States of America. What was the difference of the routes? The utility and presentation of the modern project. The modern vision of the Nation-State allowed North America to build an expansionist society and perspective from the beginning of its independence. The secular religion of North America was imperialism.
Iberoamerica, on the contrary, always had - and has - an anti-modern vision, its trajectory and context, inhibited any other option other than Catholic nationalism.
Mexico, in particular, was the laboratory for American expansionism and, once American empowerment began, the position of the United States became unattainable. Mexico has had to add to the traditional Hispanic-Catholic dominance, the colonialism imposed by North America. Mexico has not had, nor does it have, the possibility of making geopolitical alliances with Asian, European, African countries or any international organization; On the contrary, the geopolitical processes of the 20th century consolidated the United States as a superpower and Mexico as a fundamental part of its National Security structure.
That Mexico does better when Republicans govern the United States, there is no doubt. The situation of control and national security that characterizes them, causes attention to be paid, much attention, in our country. On the other hand, the ambiguous ideas of the Democrats provoke a neglect that increases the national problem. Donald Trump and AMLO agree on the rejection of the New World Order, the model that the United States implemented in the wake of the Cold War and which has now come to an end. The concept of "Brexit" is a sign that globalization is no longer in control and there are irresponsible people who are going to lead society to disaster, humanity to extinction.
Drunkenness was neoliberalism and Samuel Huntington warned it in his works, Zbigniew Brzezinski's geopolitical model has caused many social problems and, really, the United States has to wonder what is worth more to them, the collapse of the Berlin Wall or the collapse of the Twin Towers of the WTC. Brzezinski posed the dilemma between controlling the world as a superpolice or exercising moral leadership, US imperialism will have to choose because both are impossible. North America became the murderer of an invisible, economic, and trans-territorial power that mixes the world's main economic elites and the organized crime of the most extreme anarchism. Liberalism is twinned with anarchism and, therefore, causes conflicts as serious as those that characterized the 20th century. Totalitarianisms were the consequence of uncontrolled economic liberalism that overcame the political values of government institutions. Hence, the conflict situations that are lived now, present this situation of chaos and disorder. Transgression must be evolutionary, but economic liberalism is involuntary, even if it tries to observe methodological rationalism, what it does is expose the legitimacy of the most violent principles of mankind.
The health contingency is deepening the gap between generations, technology, knowledge and values. The situation has generated a profound change derived from technology and, now, it is confirmed that this is imminent. It is not a question of expressing that the new generations are better in the handling of technologies, this is a truth of Perogrullo, but that the technological availability will pigeonhole the future progenies in the devices and social networks because the world problems require a parenthesis and suspension of the economy, perhaps we are in the presence of the definitive transition from neoliberalism to neo-extractivism. The combative and bourgeois attitude of the new generations comes from a demand to increase the power of the market, but reality does not allow this to be constituted, all generations have had to learn from reality and these will not be the exception: the environment and the existence of people is in deep trouble.
Hence, even when new social movements have that capacity to be divergent, reality has no regard for anyone. The prospects for some is that technology is not always friendly and has consequences.
Education, paideia, as before and always, seeks to change this human nature and, despite all the negative judgments towards teaching and school, it is necessary to find models that achieve that generous change in humanity. Rifkin and Marina, constitute a way of understanding the poles in the role of the school facing this situation: the debate between strong and weak thinking. What is strong thinking and weak thinking? Strong thinking is represented by ethics, responsibility, even conservative vision. Weak thinking is anarchist, existential nihilist. Strong thinking involves goals, competitiveness, and resilience. The fort is related to realism and the physical, material and geographical conditions of life. The second is based on idealism, utopias and alternative forms. On the other hand, there are also those who believe that something can still be changed and that, although this is a qualified form of weak thinking, it is values, leadership, and feelings that will always help us get ahead. The secret is to unite these perspectives and avoid the pessimism and idealism that can be generated from one or the other.
Technology allows new generations to access information more quickly. With this, the structures are broken immediately and tribes and social roles that were not contemplated appear. Empathy will be that tool that will allow them to face that reality that is unknown.
