Nolte, Bartra, the bloodthirsty Atlanticist Eurocentrism…,

 Nolte, Bartra, the bloodthirsty Atlanticist Eurocentrism…,

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero 

The conflict in Ukraine has made it possible to visualize the white racial hegemony of Eastern European countries and the empathy of different wasp and Nazi oligarchies in imperialist nations such as the United States, England, France and Germany. The attacks of various Ukrainian, Euro-Eastern and Whitexican actors against those who doubt or evade disapproving of Russia in the face of NATO, are an example of the discrimination and oligarchy that these sectors promote for their empowerment against mestizo, indigenous, Afro-American and Latin Americans. even Hispanics. The racism of characters with Eastern European ancestry or foreigners against Mexicans was forceful. In Latin America it is enough to be white to achieve almost everything. It is measured by INEGI.

Confuse Russia with the USSR, the empires of Catherine the Great, Ivan the Terrible or the Romanovs; it is a fallacy full of terror that demonstrates the necessary denazification of the West and the consolidated democracies.

The national show business, conservative groups and pro-business legislative caucuses; they have been launched against Russia in the reactionary way that Ernst Nolte describes and justifies in his work on the European civil war. The pro-Anglo-Saxon religious, racist and neoliberal paranoia was already developed in the ideas of Alfred Rosenberg. The hatred of Russia only shows the xenophobia and aporophobia of the white and privileged West of which the White Mexican Creole oligarchy considers itself a part. They annul from their vision, because they do not want to compromise, the most serious situations that our country is experiencing: in a few weeks the death toll of the Ukrainian-Russian war is reached and exceeded, structural poverty and systematic violence develop an anomic society with no possibility of survival , we have lived through a low-intensity war and human displacement that finances the United States anonymously. Although it is talked about in a bizarre way, the Whitexicans, Ukrainians, foreigners living in the country, hear little about it and care little.

Russia has applied to join NATO and the European Union jointly. It has not been granted; on the contrary, it is harassed militarily and its racial groups are exterminated in some regions. An illustrious professor who wanted to study the region, made a paragon of the Hutu and Tutsi confrontation. It is not the first time that European Anglo-Saxon Nazism has exterminated other Europeans. Vivianne Forrester describes the Shoah as an open wound in Western civilization that urgently needs re-education. Europe is the most violent civilization of humanity.

Unlike other peoples who can only resignedly humiliate themselves to the conqueror, Russia confronts NATO because it has developed the means to protect itself as a National State. Few nations, after being devastated, are able to reconstitute themselves as hegemonic. Israel is an exceptional case. And Russia too. For every blow dealt to Israel returns a thousand, Russia can say the same. By way of liberal modernization and authoritarian modernization, both nations have legitimately earned their right to exist.

Russia has not been treated equally by the pro-American white oligarchy, but Russia can defend itself. This is the reason that the peoples of Eastern Europe dominated by Yankee Nazi-fascism cannot stand.

In 2006, Roger Bartra described the possibility that Mexico would reach a civil war -similar to the Mexican revolution- derived from the oligarchic Hispanic Creole voracity. The trauma of the Spanish conquest is an open wound that requires a process of re-education, nothing to continue promoting a pure Hispanic identity that is basically pro-Anglo-Saxon. But Bartra could not contain the aporophobia or escape from the hegemonic whiteness. Now it turns out that the victims are to blame for being victims.

Spontaneous liberal modernization is a goal that cannot be achieved through colonialism and Anglo-Saxon hegemony. The gap and underdevelopment experienced by marginalized nations requires distance and the absence of empires to overcome and balance their development. Poverty is structural and dependent on imperialism. If the empires do not pretend to help their colonies, they can at least leave them in the autonomy that constitutes a singular benefit.

How not to support Russia when liberal democracy only produces pigmentocracy and violence?

Why fail to understand Russia when the United States is violent, aggressive and dirty against the Latin American flower garden?

How to stop supporting anti-Nazism in Russia when the United States has been a partner of the Nazis who founded the Fourth Reich in America?

Why fail to recognize the capacity, value and need of nations that can defend themselves?

The Mexican gueritocracy, is it Mexican?

Mexico. The Ukraine of a bizarre world

 Mexico. The Ukraine of a bizarre world

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

The former Polish ambassador to Mexico and an American journalist sparked an interesting debate on social networks as a result of the Russo-Ukrainian conflict in Eastern Europe. Broadly speaking, the line of the arguments criticized Russia's sympathy for confronting Yankee imperialism; Several Mexican Internet users were warned that a similar aggression was the robbery of Texas and the Californias in one of the best-known Anglo-Saxon looting. Updating the geography and time, he wondered what Mexicans would feel if the American Union took Chihuahua or Baja California by force. Although it is true that the war of 1836 and 1847 continues to be a painful trauma in national history; Times have changed and Mexico is resigned to a solitude where -as well as or worse than Ukraine- no one supports it in the civil conflagration that it is experiencing due to drug trafficking.

If the United States will take the north of the country militarily, it is most likely that other states will ask to be integrated, it happened in the 19th century and it is also likely that other Latin American nations will ask to be incorporated as US protectorates. It happens at the OEA. Mexico is only missing Mickey Mouse ears.

The United States has behaved worse with respect to Latin America than that of Russia with respect to Eastern Europe. Neither the former ambassador of Poland, nor the journalist specialized in Mexican-American relations, question the pentagonism that feeds weapons and dollars to the drug trafficking groups that are tearing the country apart. Nor do they question the new slavery that Mexican emigration means and that the real Mexican economy makes alms of its avocados.

Just as a large part of the Ukrainian population historically identifies with Russia and, in part, conceives a hegemony over Eurasia. Many Mexicans emigrate to the United States and a large part of the Latin American population would prefer to live in North America. Mexico, like several Eastern European countries, is a puppet of the Western powers that plays the role of suicidal internal colonialism. Some interesting point of the cybernetic debate pointed out, what would the Anglo-Saxons feel if Russia set up military bases and nuclear missiles in Baja California, Chihuahua, Nuevo León, Sonora and Tamaulipas? And the Guns and Roses fell silent remembering the taste of free Cuba.

Eastern Europe is described as being the "Trojan Donkey" of the Holy See, Germany and the United States. Mexico is the asshole of Hispanidad. Just as Eastern Europe has been sacrificed several times to frighten Russia, Mexico cultivates an internal colonialism that does not help it at all and only constitutes a Spanish mortgage that structures the pigmentocracy of poverty. Vox, the Franco regime subsidized with dollars, a few days ago, questioned and declared war on Latin American drug trafficking by discriminating against it in all forms and, in addition, adding the label of communist. Does the Spanish Colony really have the courage to oppose the drug cartels on the continent with all its might? Will the Franco regime question the socioeconomic structure that reproduces poverty and crime that Hispanic heritage inherited? Is the Spanish Colony going to confront the Narco-empire that is the United States? Well no.

Samuel Huntington suggested isolationism and abandonment of the Brzezinski model of world control to the United States. Mexico and North America can build Spanglishdad. There was always the fear of Francoism so that Mexico would replace Spain as the axis of Hispanidad, all the forces of the dictator were concentrated on burying the Second Spanish Republic in Mexico and burying our country. And it was successful. But the natural tendencies indicate that Hispanic people have died in Mexico and their discourses and identities remain hollow in the face of reality. The Mexican lumpenproletariat that shames and discriminates against Hispanics is building Mexamerica. Just as millions of Ukrainians run into the arms of Russia and millions of Mexicans run into the arms of the US, empires must recognize the hegemonic nature of geography.

WEST VERSUS RUSIA

West versus Russia

Diego Martin Velazquez Caballero

The situation in Ukraine appears important in recent weeks as it shows the decline of the United States and NATO in Eastern Europe. The confrontation between the American and Russian intelligence apparatuses has generated the possibility of an armed conflict that delimits the borders of the Western world. The United States and the values ​​it represents have to accept a setback in the post-covid world.

Even when it is intended to make Russia, China and the Middle East look like barbarian civilizations; The truth is that Yankee Imperialism cannot sustain the fallacies with which it has achieved economic hegemony since the end of World War II. Liberalism, democracy and human rights are not the elements that distinguish Western culture; On the contrary, they are the reasons for the anti-American obsession that, justifiably, the peoples have the right to reject at this fundamental moment in the history of humanity. The departure of the United States from Afghanistan indicates that the alleged universalization of modernity and Western values ​​is not true, the United States maintains geographical pivots and fragile geopolitical balances to remain firm in the voracious capitalism that passes over the peoples.

Ukraine and Eastern Europe have not constituted modernizing democratic transitions but the consolidation of a military wall that aims to destroy Russia, this society has the right to defend itself and protect its vital space. The United States has failed to include Russia in the Western world in a peaceful and pluralistic way, it has sought the humiliating subordination of the region to subsidize the hidden economy of Western imperialism. It is not human beings but the power of the dollar that interests the North American democratic simulation.

Historically, an infinite anti-Russian civilization predominates in Europe as a civilizing project that has sought the disappearance of Russia from the Catholic and Protestant Christian vision, this element has lasted for more than a century and is an example of the political use that is given to religion for the imperialist geopolitical ends. The West has failed and Russia will extend its regional influence because it is the right thing to do against a Europe and the United States that have been unfair to the Baltic Slavic civilization and to the rest of humanity.

The way in which Russia has been transformed in recent decades is an indication of the actions that political leaders will take against states in the future to get ahead. If the triumph of Russia is generated in Eastern Europe, a liberalization of the regions is proposed where Latin America, and Mexico in particular, can draw lessons to reduce a historical colonialism that has become a pathological symbiosis that is resulting in the promotion of Failed state.

García Luna, Bartlett and tough times

 García Luna, Bartlett and tough times

Diego Martin Velázquez Caballero

Although several journalists and intellectuals speak of the decline of Mario Vargas Llosa, it is enough to read some of his novels and articles to understand the importance that he has - and will have - as one of the main Latin American thinkers. Perhaps for this reason, Juan Carlos Monedero urgently requests the socialization of his works. Vargas Llosa's literature continues to be the best political science to understand us.

The author's recent novel that makes reference to the coup d'état articulated by the United States in Guatemala against General Jacobo Arbenz gives rise to a perspective on imperialist interventionism on the Ibero-American left and right. Each governmental period, whether or not it has partisan alternations, the question always lies in synchronizing with North American capitalist interests. The Hispanic-Latino government that does not subjugate itself to the oligarchic machinery of Yankee imperialism will be harassed - in the most brutal way possible - until it complies with the demands of the United Fruit Company or is overthrown. With everything and that a fact does little to confirm theories, the idea of ​​US imperialist geopolitics repeated in all times and places in Latin America is absolute.

The American conspiracy against Guatemalan democracy always occurs where there is a United States embassy. Therefore, there should be no surprise about the García Luna case and the war against drug trafficking in our country, the same questions that are asked of former presidents -particularly Calderón Hinojosa- can be asked in different periods of national history, past and present. present. Is there a difference between the tasks that García Luna and Manuel Bartlett performed under the national security scheme in the service of the United States? Is there a difference between the counterinsurgent forces and the drug cartels used in Yankee geopolitics? Has the CIA changed your view of Latin America? The governments employed by North American imperialism are always going to wage wars against their people, even a government like the one in Q4 that has not known how to detach itself - and has no possibility whatsoever - of North American tutelage. Why were there and are there characters like García Luna and Manuel Bartlett in Mexico? Because that is the way the United States wants it and there is little that can be done to prevent it. Be it the Cold War, the Dirty War, the War against Drug Trafficking, it is always a war against the people so that, despite the deficit of the North American economy, the situation allows them to continue being a superpower.

George Friedman envisions a war between Mexico and the United States in 2080 due to drug trafficking, but North America's secret war against our country has always existed and if the conflict increases, it will not be for the geopolitical reasons that said author supposes. If remittances and drug trafficking served to strengthen the economic and military sector of the country, society, at least, would have left the marginality so wide that distinguishes it a long time ago. The narco-empire is the United States, there are the stratospheric profits from criminal activities, we only put the dead. It has always been like this. The conflict will occur because the mafia cartels and millions of immigrants are in the United States and have been empowered enough to prevent being drawn out of the imperialist economic dynamics. That conflict has originated the disruptive policy of Donald Trump that talks about invading Mexico or putting up Walls, over time he will discover that the 250 thousand soldiers or the walls must be implanted in California, Texas, Nevada, New Mexico, Arizona or Florida. The United States has caught the Failed State that it has implemented so much everywhere.

Unfortunately, the decline of the United States has not served to leave the script of hard times. The media terrorism, the gringo financing for all the political forces and organized crime groups, the lack of national unity, the inconsistency of a political and governmental project, are indicative that we were, are and will be, the North American Sicily that will provide the millions of deaths that are necessary to continue thanking remittances.

America's irrational capitalism and racism is not going to change. They are the postmodern Nazis that the world must intelligently face to solve the dilemma of coexistence. Either we understand how right Ernesto Guevara was when he demanded missiles in revolutionary Cuba or we promote the North American civil war so that a new socio-political liberalism may emerge. With Monedero I say, well, you have to read more Mario Vargas Llosa.

Caciques or Neoliberals? The tragedy of Mexico

Caciques or Neoliberals? The tragedy of Mexico

Diego Martin Velázquez Caballero

The persecution that neoliberals experience today is similar to the deception that, for much of the 20th century, Mexican society contemplated during the anti-communist campaigns. It is true that significant violence was unleashed against the communists; what has not happened with the neoliberals. In the end, both acts are entelechies that are justified to legitimize a regime that tends to increase authoritarianism.

Mexico never ran the risk of becoming a communist country, nor has it been - and will not be - a neoliberal country. And the reasons are the same.

Joaquín Costa, a regenerationist, interpreted the chiefdom in Spain as an Asian remora that had been imported from the New World and, as a pandemic coronavirus, generated severe conflicts between the institutions of the Old and New Regimes. Caciquismo finds itself in the middle of many worlds and adapts to the political institutions of modernity.

The cacique is a form of authority that the European world found in the American world and, in the case of the Spanish empire, it was imported as an element that would promote counter-reformist anti-modernity. The purpose was achieved, but the chiefdom stopped time forever in Latin America. Even the Asian world has achieved a successful modernization combining totalitarianism, technology, industrialization, religious syncretism, capitalism and communism. In all the routes they have done well, for the Latin American case something like this cannot be affirmed, even in Spain itself

The pain that Joaquín Costa exhibits with Spain is that, thanks to the caciquismo, it is understood that the King does not have greater representation. Spain, like Latin America, is a Comala where the chief appeases everything, takes everything, commands everything and destroys everything.

The chiefdom is the most challenging riddle for Western modernity. It is not terrorist like the Arab leadership, nor is it tribal like the African rule. It is the Hispanic Catholic malinchismo that has Latin America in the strangest of the Middle Ages: the Catholic colonialist.

Joaquín Costa tries to explain the way in which the indigenous chiefdom perverted Spain. He manages to make a description of each of the elements, but he forgets that the cacique was a form of leadership invented by the Catholic Church. The chiefdom ceased to be solely indigenous and spread to all castes, social classes, genders and contexts of the Ibero-American world.

In Asia, the primitive leadership did not detach from its civilizing identity and this has allowed them to evade and take advantage of modernity in the best way. In Ibero-America, attachment to the Catholic Church destroyed civilizing and national identities, invertebrate nations, and suspended modernity. Asia, with all its chiefdoms, has a more successful modernity than Latin America.

The problem with caciquil rule is that the homeland, the nation, vanishes. They cannot emerge. Following Costa, the caciques have various benefits from the country's political networks, a society is produced kidnapped by families and lineages of caciques. Empires like the United States and the Catholic Church promote and defend them. There is no explanation for so much power, for so much political control, but it is a reality that cannot be hidden. The inheritance of the chiefdom is pure rancor, pain, shame and corruption.

Destroying neoliberalism is one of the idle exercises of Q4. In Mexico, as in Latin America, the true transformation will occur when the chiefdoms end and the institutions can be consolidated.

Morena faces the Ibero-American decadence that broke out in Spain in the Civil War of 1936. Chasing corruption is not chasing neoliberals. Neoliberalism ended when Ernesto Zedillo was kidnapped by the Atlacomulco Group, which has led the socio-political processes ever since. Why isn't AMLO going after the Atlacomulco Group? What is the use of displacing designated neoliberal factions to replace them with others that have also been neoliberals, and only a capacity for rapture towards the president distinguishes them? When Gral. Lázaro Cárdenas expropriated farms, he gave them to the people; he did not give them to other landowners. What is observed in Mexico is a replacement of caciques rather than a change of regime. This has been happening since 2000 when it was discovered that we are governed by PRIs of all political parties.

Neoliberalism is a category that is not even properly understood in Mexico. It is becoming a social persecution that will soon drown the ruling party and the president.

AMLO and the Black Circle

AMLO and the Black Circle

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero 

Pablo González Casanova stated that populism constituted a double-edged weapon of protection for Mexico. On the one hand, it is a force that feeds the acritical attitude of most of the social movements and caciquile regions of the country to the point of almost bursting the fragile order. On the other hand, populism also constitutes an auxiliary factor for the armed forces in national defense against a probable foreign invasion, particularly from the United States.

The militarization of the country confirms that the National Army, a product of the Mexican Revolution, is the true force of governance in Mexico. The complaints about the facade that democracy guards in our presidentialism represent the modernizing liberal frustration that Western evangelical scholars have to experience as a permanent martyrology. Antonio Machado, Denisse Dresser, Jorge Portilla and Juan Linz confirm what Huntington establishes, Latin America is light years away from being Western. With few events in Latin America, it is immediately verified that presidentialism does not work outside the United States, well, almost in no country. Mexican authoritarian presidentialism will never be like US presidentialism. This does not imply a lack of attention in the operation, handling and security of the system. Outside the United States, presidentialism almost always ends in coups.

Mexico sheltered itself from the Latin American presidential dynamics thanks to an Official Party - understood by the concept of military corporatist capacity - that coerced the different political forces to solve the problem of presidential succession and public administration. It was not easy, the Army of the Mexican Revolution faced the imperialism of the Catholic Church and the United States. It did not win, but it did obtain a Pareto balance that provided meager national stability.

In a fictionalized way, Velasco Piña exposes the Mexicanism of the armed forces that develops into a populist and confused revolutionary nationalism, but with an authoritarian clarity that was executed many times to obtain the PRI pax.

The imperial presidency wants to return, although the Official Party no longer exists. Will the Black Circle be able to contain and coerce the PRI cliques that are dispersed in different political parties? Will the Black Circle be able to institutionalize, once again, an Official Party?

That militarism is an inevitable variable in the governance of extra-western countries is an axiom of political science. What militarism is talked about in Mexico regarding the Black Circle? During the PRIATO, the armed forces constituted a defensive bloc against imperialism that obtained a moderate colonialism. There are many coincidences between the Spanish Francoism and the revolutionary nationalism, but also great differences. With its flats, the colonialist pact of the Mexican Army gained greater independence than many cases in the Iberosphere.

The alternation elections caused a decrease in military power. President Felipe Calderón promoted a militarization of the country that ran aground in US geopolitics. Militarization during neoliberalism made Mexico like Colombia. In both cases, the war on drug trafficking has been lost, to the benefit of North America. Both countries are militarized, the Colombian army is more like a US occupation force; what should not happen in Mexico.

Revolutionary nationalism, the strange doctrine that justified the Army of the Mexican Revolution as the backbone of PRIATO, failed to consolidate after World War II. Over time, the centrality of the armed forces, caciquil corporatist populism, and the pragmatism of the ruling class, deteriorated Mexican nationalism, which with the political transition gave up even more. If Mexico is to be an authoritarian democracy, a justification for revolutionary nationalism is indispensable, so that the black circle preserves the legitimacy of organized violence.

AMLO confirms that the center of the Mexican political system is the Army, although it is also important to reflect under what circumstances. The positioning of the Army is done with the tutelage of the United States, it no longer seems the domain of an independent army.

Still, the United States is in total global decline. Mexico is in a position similar to that of the early nineteenth century when the Spanish empire imploded, orphanhood offered the possibility of autonomy and freedom, but the opportunity was wasted for lack of responsibility and cohesion, for lack of a national objective.

Perhaps it is true that the strengthening of the Mexican army is a necessity, the prince must take care of his weapons before his clothing. However, that the strengthening of the armed forces implies the strengthening of the people and not the occupation of the United States informally as occurs in Colombia.

Puebla. Perpetual political violence

 Puebla. Perpetual political violence

Diego Martín Velázquez Caballero 

What happened in Tecamachalco cannot be evaded as a sign of the radical competition and frontal struggle for power that the entity is experiencing. Times are filled with violence every time a government succession looms and, unfortunately, rudeness is transmitted to society, which is also shattered. Puebla is, each government period, more montuna, peasant, caciquil, poor.

The deceased analyst, Dr. Raymundo García, stated that the conflicts for control of Puebla were led by two types of PRI members: those who were entrusted to the Federal District and those who protected local interests. Ceteris Paribus, the criterion continues to adjust to reality. At the same time, the solution also takes effect: Order! Even if it comes from the center; it is exposed in another work of central importance to understand local politics.

How much disorder are poblanos capable of supporting? Much. Like all Mexicans. So long, until the victims are members of the political class. The disorder does not support the caciques.

The force that the political cliques use to resolve their differences results in the fall of socioeconomic indicators, in the incompetence of public policies, deinstitutionalization and the charismatic horror of the actors who represent the authority.

As a result of morenovallismo, violence in the entity has increased exponentially. But who can say that he was not morenovallista? If the violence were the product of the death throes of Morenovallismo, the state of things would be understood; However, what represents the level of terror that things reach, is a political struggle and factional struggle where Moreno-Valles is no longer the protagonist. They are the historical leaderships that are presumed indispensable, but that have led Puebla down the path of impoverishment. The State continues to lose everything in front of Tlaxcala and Veracruz, the sentence of "die intelligence" remains the core.

As in any struggle, the animosity of the protagonists makes them lose sight of the urgent need to rebuild democratic governance. Political institutions have not been transformed in Puebla, which implies that scenarios such as Zacatecas, Guerrero, Tamaulipas or Sinaloa, will soon become our paradigm.