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 Mexican Hispanic Right is Strengthening

 The Mexican Hispanic Right  is Strengthening

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

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

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

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

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

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

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

Trump and the reconstruction of the multipolar balance

 Trump and the reconstruction of the multipolar balance

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

The appearance of the Russian weapon Oreshnik represents the recognition of the importance of weapons of mass destruction for geopolitical control. The balance that developed during the Cold War can be reestablished by Donald Trump if the coexistence of multiple civilizations is implemented in a mandatory manner. The failure of liberal capitalist democracy and modernity implies that, outside the United States, the values ​​of Western culture do not find fertile ground. There are different and multiple modernities, even evidence that modernity will fail in certain societies. Therefore, globalization must be slowed down, adjusted to the historical speeds of each society.

Oreshnik resurrects the fear of nuclear cataclysm, that is, the extermination of large proportions of humanity. Not only does fear correspond to the type of weapons that Russia can produce but also to the response of its adversaries. In its way, the world of the Cold War represented an unstable balance; With the fall of the Soviet Union, modernity went out of control and neoliberal elites lost their sense of humanity. They are as responsible as Oreshnik for the destruction of human beings.

Liberalism is a path to civilization, but it is frequently lost. Russia has the right to exist and the Western world must recognize its defeat by Vladimir Putin. The future depends on personalities like Donald Trump and a plutocratic environment that rescinds the globalization of the market, technology and democracy.

Apparently, the division of Ukraine and the subjection of other Eastern European countries to Russia represent the step to gain coexistence. It is paradoxical that the French government maintains the perspective of confrontation and suppression of Russia; the change of government in North America can contribute to containing the suicidal attempts of neoliberal aristocracies.

Vladimir Putin represents a conservative government that has autocratically gained political legitimacy in Russia. It is difficult to point out that he sought to recover Russian greatness and generate expansionism when he takes power after Boris Yeltsin. It was the responsibility of the West to create the situation of confronting Russia and the response came: the Oreshnik Monster is there to remind us of human fragility.

Donald Trump's Political Class

 Donald Trump's Political Class

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Cowboys, engineers and warriors are considered the paradigms of American empiricism according to George Friedman; this is how the characters that Donald Trump has called to integrate into his presidential administration can be classified. Of course, it is difficult to describe the approximately twenty thousand subjects that Trumpism is including to mobilize the governmental elephant; in addition, it is also important to consider the groups of Christian nationalism that play a preponderant role in resuming the MAGA-Heritage agenda in 2028 and being the replacement of the silent WASP majority that has positioned itself as the compass of the Republican electorate.

Just as in Mexico the technocratic-neoliberal group has been displaced by the popular nationalist current, in the United States Trumpism has been identified with the nationalist and hegemonic perspectives that seek the regeneration of American ideals in the face of woke cosmopolitan positions. A precedent must be considered in order to determine the new Trumpism. Unlike the PAN government of Vicente Fox, where the first-rate bureaucratic group was recruited by the Head Hunters under the business imaginary, the success of the North American plutocrats who sit next to Trumpism is based on the evident and unquestionable productive dynamics of their companies inside and outside the United States.

The conservative populism of the Republican Messiah cannot bear the American Union only with the legitimacy of the WASPs; it will soon have to turn to new and different leaderships that enrich the MAGA project outside of race and religion. Trumpism is a manifestation of the North American identity; it represents the necessary balance and internal control in the face of a modernity and globalization that were fracturing the United States. The American imperial decline is undeniable; although, it is also true that the continuity of the Democrats in the government would have contributed to the acceleration of the fall.

Donald Trump is portrayed as the new Ronald Reagan; Of course, with greater deviations and risks. However, the Trumpist elite confronts the woke cosmopolitan circle of the Democratic Party, thus persisting in the social fracture of the United States that does not close and, even, may end up expanding and generating a problem of ungovernability. The ghost of secession and the nine or eleven internal North American nations appear as terror and not just a problem.

The search for solutions by Trumpism; for now, only moves in the idea of ​​exclusion and the closing of the North American borders. Added to the above, it also seems that the Trumpists are forcing the neoliberal Democratic elites into exile. Donald Trump has triumphed with the nationalist topic; but, now, he also needs a reconciliation strategy like the one that Joe Biden could not implement.

Republicanism is represented as a force that tries to control the centrifugal tendencies of the liberal Democrats. Attempts to unite North America and attack the risks that endanger Americans involve decapitating the neoliberal and globalizing ideal as well as strengthening the ideal of North American security, making nationalism a banner that calls upon the majority of society.

Latinos for Donald Trump

 Latinos for Donald Trump

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Some of the aspects that have been established in the electoral analysis after Donald Trump's victory are manifested in the hypothetical Latino vote for the Republicans. Some critics consider that the preferences of various Hispanic American groups living in the United States for Trumpism imply errors of consideration similar to self-sabotage or suicide. However, it is also true that there is an old Hispanic tendency for the Republicans since Nixon and Reagan that, because of its shame, in some cases, is not wanted to be noticed and much less studied. The anti-Castroites of Miami have their reasons for preferring the Republicans; but there are other causes and thoughts.

Beyond the idea of ​​closing the door or removing the ladder, authors such as Samuel Huntington expose data and situations that allow us to notice changes in Hispanic American culture as well as a bumpy process of assimilation to the United States by Latinos. The Harvard pentagonist pointed out in his last academic works, for example, that a considerable part of the Hispanic population was in favor of education through the English language, the rejection of bilingual school models based on racial considerations, and the implementation of labor rights that prevented adequate training and competence in different sectors. That is to say, for Huntington there is a large portion of the Hispanic population, including illegal immigrants, that develops the integration processes experienced by the Irish, Italians, Japanese, Germans, and Poles, as well as some African-American communities, to contribute to the essence and substance of the North American identity.

The problem, from this perspective, is represented by the democratic multiculturalist model that not only multiplies problems and conflicts, but also impoverishes recent immigrant communities. Many Hispanic migrants leave their countries because of the ungovernability and chaos that precedes them, seeking to insert themselves in the United States for economic improvement and order. They do not want to repeat the experiences of the world they have abandoned and consciously assume the sacrifice that assimilation to the WASP culture implies.

It is important to take into consideration these statements by Samuel Huntington because Hispanic American emigration in the United States has incorrect generalizations. The author of the “Clash of Civilizations” states that multiculturalism was an opportunistic proposal by Democratic lawyers, now woke technocrats, who ended up harming and problematizing the migratory phenomenon in the United States. It would even be worth considering under this argument the persistence and extension of criminal networks such as in the case of the Mara Salvatrucha and Mexican drug trafficking.

Now that the south of the United States and a significant part of the East Coast are more similar to Mexico and Latin America, it is understandable that the Hispanic community voted for Donald Trump. In addition, Samuel Huntington points out, many emigrants consider that Republican governments positively influence Latin America more than Democratic ones. Hispanic American culture is assimilated to WASP values ​​if it has the right incentives and rules, multiculturalism has ended up perverting the approach of liberal democracy and the victory of Donald Trump shows the failure of his various policies.

The successful assimilation of some Hispanic communities that seek to be functional in North America has been demonstrated since the government of Barack Obama; however, the multicultural model has not been the correct one in the face of a radical difference between civilizations.

Eduardo Verástegui and the Maga in México

 Eduardo Verástegui and the MAGA in Mexico

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero

Christian nationalism in our country is related to the pro-Yankee right. The latter is represented by Eduardo Verástegui and the project of Republican Mexico, both ideas rose with few followers and a weak electoral effect in the last electoral process. The efforts could not reach the legal threshold at the national and local level. However, Christian nationalism and republican identification are persistent.

There is a possibility that Eduardo Verástegui will become a channel of intermediation with Donald Trump; however, for the Mexican right to remain close to this element, it is important to identify the goals of Trumpism and if there are still conditions for the scheme proposed by the pro-Yankee right in the last elections in our country.

Republican Mexico and Verástegui supposed a strategy of incorporation into the United States that linked the dollarization of the country, the fight against drug trafficking and Mexican annexation. These ideas involve political actions of enormous weight that most of Mexican society rejects.

Donald Trump proposes an economic model that benefits only the United States; that is, no more importance or concessions from Mexico to Spain, Europe or Asia. The Mexican oligarchy has surely understood this and will shift, in bold and expeditious ways, their economic interests as defined by Trumpism. Medium-sized business sectors and, particularly, small businesses must interpret MAGA as a local version of economic growth.

What will happen to Mexico depends on the forms that the Trumpist government imposes. Unquestionably, Verástegui has a hand in the friendly ties that can be established with Christian nationalists. He is a reference that the right should consider, as well as the Morena supporters.

Although the explanations for the Republican victory are being measured in economic ranges, the religious aspect of Christian nationalism and Anglo-Saxon liberalism are a central part of the second Trumpist presidency.

Morena and political liberalization

Morena and political liberalization 

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero 

Although there is talk of a change of regime in our country, the transfuguism or migration of PRI and PAN members to Morena predominates, and with it, the survival of the old regime.

José Antonio Crespo proposed in his analyses during the PAN presidential alternation that the Mexican transition was characterized mainly by political liberalization rather than by a deepening of democracy and consolidation.

Liberalization was controlled by the revolutionary coalition and, given the facts of the judicial reform, it can be said that the hypothesis proposed by Crespo is valid.

It seems that revolutionary nationalism never lost control of the political and economic changes in the country and, even now, it regains power to return the legal framework to the meager rules prior to perestroika and glasnot that neoliberalism meant.

The supreme power in the country is represented by Morena; or whatever that means. It is not expressed, for the moment, in the presidency of the republic, the political party with hegemonic neo-corporatist pretensions, but in the legislative majority and the personalist factions that comprise it.

Morena is a Bronx of isms that has not yet been translated into a tandem with all the energy that it means.

Legislative Morenism is the factotum, accelerator and brake, of the changes in Mexico.

The point is that the mole has several cooks and, suddenly, it becomes soup.

It can be thought that even this phenomenon is part of the Morena political control.

The helm of the deputies and senators for Morena is nowhere to be seen.

The risk lies in the fact that, in any case, this represents the feared congressional government that Vicente Fox baptized.

Parliamentary control is an indispensable and urgent need like the control of the judicial power.

The historical irresponsibility of the Legislative Powers in Latin America has resulted in the waste of the greatest opportunities.

Political liberalization is managed by revolutionary nationalism: blindly, foolishly and madly.

It is clear that the capitalist liberal democracy that had so many failures in the path of corrupting neoliberalism has reached its exhaustion.

However, the model of social and participatory democracy of the Fourth Transformation is becoming disfigured.

The protagonism of the legislative power is not healthy for Mexican governability; the 19th century and the Maderist experience have several data in this regard.

The reconstruction of the Mexican State and the Second Floor of the 4T require that the command go ahead and govern the parliamentary fractions of Morena.