Iconos

Iconos
Zapata

miércoles, 31 de enero de 2018

by JOHN W. WHITEHEAD counterpunch.org
JANUARY 31, 2018
A house divided against itself cannot stand. I believe this government cannot endure, permanently, half slave and half free. I do not expect the Union to be dissolved — I do not expect the house to fall — but I do expect it will cease to be divided. It will become all one thing or all the other.”
—Abraham Lincoln
History has a funny way of circling back on itself.
The facts, figures, faces and technology may change from era to era, but the dangers remain the same.
This year is no different, whatever the politicians and talking heads may say to the contrary.
Sure, there’s a new guy in charge with a talent for stirring up mayhem and madness, but for the most part, we’re still recycling the same news stories that have kept us with one eye warily glued to the news for the past 100-odd years: War. Corruption. Brutality. Economic instability. Partisan politics. Militarism. Disease. Hunger. Greed. Violence. Poverty. Ignorance. Hatred.
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Brush up on your history, and you’ll find that we’ve been stuck on repeat for some time now.
Take the United States of America in the year 2018, which is not so far different from the United States of America during the Civil Rights era, or the Cold War era, or even the Depression era.
Go far enough afield, and you’ll find aspects of our troubled history mirrored in the totalitarianism of Nazi Germany, in the fascism of Mussolini’s Italy, and further back in the militarism of the Roman Empire.
We’re like TV weatherman Phil Connors in Harold Ramis’ classic 1993 comedy Groundhog Day, forced to live the same day over and over again.
Here in the American police state, however, we continue to wake up, hoping this new day, new president and new year will somehow be different from what has come before.
Unfortunately, no matter how we change the narrative, change the characters, change the plot lines, we seem to keep ending up in the same place that we started: enslaved, divided and repeating the mistakes of the past.
You want to know about the true State of our Union? Listen up.
The State of the Union: The state of our union is politically polarized, controlled by forces beyond the purview of the average American, and rapidly moving the nation away from its freedom foundation. Over the past year, Americans have found themselves repeatedly subjected to egregious civil liberties violations, invasive surveillance, political correctness, erosions of free speech, strip searches, police shootings of unarmed citizens, government spying, the criminalization of lawful activities, warmongering, etc.
The predators of the police state have wreaked havoc on our freedoms, our communities, and our lives. The government has not listened to the citizenry, refused to abide by the Constitution, and treated the citizenry as the source of funding and little else. Police officers shot unarmed citizens and their household pets. Government agents—including local police—remain armed to the teeth and act like soldiers on a battlefield. Bloated government agencies continue to fleece taxpayers. Government technicians spy on our emails and phone calls. And government contractors make a killing by waging endless wars abroad.
Consequently, the state of our nation has become more bureaucratic, more debt-ridden, more violent, more militarized, more fascist, more lawless, more invasive, more corrupt, more untrustworthy, more mired in war, and more unresponsive to the wishes and needs of the electorate. The policies of the American police state have continued unabated.
The Executive Branch: All of the imperial powers amassed by Barack Obama and George W. Bush—to kill American citizens without due process, to detain suspects indefinitely, to strip Americans of their citizenship rights, to carry out mass surveillance on Americans without probable cause, to suspend laws during wartime, to disregard laws with which he might disagree, to conduct secret wars and convene secret courts, to sanction torture, to sidestep the legislatures and courts with executive orders and signing statements, to direct the military to operate beyond the reach of the law, to act as a dictator and a tyrant, above the law and beyond any real accountability—were inherited by Donald Trump.
Trump has these powers because every successive occupant of the Oval Office has been allowed to expand the reach and power of the presidency through the use of executive orders, decrees, memorandums, proclamations, national security directives and legislative signing statements that can be activated by any sitting president. Those of us who saw this eventuality coming have been warning for years about the growing danger of the Executive Branch with its presidential toolbox of terror that could be used—and abused—by future presidents. The groundwork, we warned, was being laid for a new kind of government where it won’t matter if you’re innocent or guilty, whether you’re a threat to the nation or even if you’re a citizen. What will matter is what the president—or whoever happens to be occupying the Oval Office at the time—thinks. And if he or she thinks you’re a threat to the nation and should be locked up, then you’ll be locked up with no access to the protections our Constitution provides. In effect, you will disappear.
Our warnings went unheeded.
The Legislative Branch:  Congress may well be the most self-serving, semi-corrupt institution in America. Abuses of office runs the gamut from elected representatives neglecting their constituencies to engaging in self-serving practices, including the misuse of eminent domain, earmarking hundreds of millions of dollars in federal contracting in return for personal gain and campaign contributions, having inappropriate ties to lobbyist groups and incorrectly or incompletely disclosing financial information. Pork barrel spending, hastily passed legislation, partisan bickering, a skewed work ethic, graft and moral turpitude have all contributed to the public’s increasing dissatisfaction with congressional leadership. No wonder 84 percent of Americans disapprove of the job Congress is doing.
The Judicial Branch: The Supreme Court was intended to be an institution established to intervene and protect the people against the government and its agents when they overstep their bounds. Yet through their deference to police power, preference for security over freedom, and evisceration of our most basic rights for the sake of order and expediency, the justices of the United States Supreme Court have become the guardians of the American police state in which we now live. As a result, sound judgment and justice have largely taken a back seat to legalism, statism and elitism, while preserving the rights of the people has been deprioritized and made to play second fiddle to both governmental and corporate interests. The courts have empowered the government to wreak havoc on our liberties. Protections for private property continue to be undermined. And Americans can no longer rely on the courts to mete out justice.
Shadow Government: Donald Trump inherited more than a bitterly divided nation teetering on the brink of financial catastrophe when he assumed office. He also inherited a shadow government, one that is fully operational and staffed by unelected officials who are, in essence, running the country. Referred to as the Deep State, this shadow government is comprised of unelected government bureaucrats, corporations, contractors, paper-pushers, and button-pushers who are actually calling the shots behind the scenes right now.
Law Enforcement: By and large the term “law enforcement” encompasses all agents within a militarized police state, including the military, local police, and the various agencies such as the Secret Service, FBI, CIA, NSA, etc. Having been given the green light to probe, poke, pinch, taser, search, seize, strip and generally manhandle anyone they see fit in almost any circumstance, all with the general blessing of the courts, America’s law enforcement officials, no longer mere servants of the people entrusted with keeping the peace but now extensions of the military, are part of an elite ruling class dependent on keeping the masses corralled, under control, and treated like suspects and enemies rather than citizens. As a result, police are becoming even more militarized and weaponized, and police shootings of unarmed individuals continue to increase.
A Suspect Surveillance Society: Every dystopian sci-fi film we’ve ever seen is suddenly converging into this present moment in a dangerous trifecta between science, technology and a government that wants to be all-seeing, all-knowing and all-powerful. By tapping into your phone lines and cell phone communications, the government knows what you say. By uploading all of your emails, opening your mail, and reading your Facebook posts and text messages, the government knows what you write. By monitoring your movements with the use of license plate readers, surveillance cameras and other tracking devices, the government knows where you go. By churning through all of the detritus of your life—what you read, where you go, what you say—the government can predict what you will do. By mapping the synapses in your brain, scientists—and in turn, the government—will soon know what you remember. And by accessing your DNA, the government will soon know everything else about you that they don’t already know: your family chart, your ancestry, what you look like, your health history, your inclination to follow orders or chart your own course, etc. Consequently, in the face of DNA evidence that places us at the scene of a crime, behavior sensing technology that interprets our body temperature and facial tics as suspicious, and government surveillance devices that cross-check our biometricslicense plates and DNA against a growing database of unsolved crimes and potential criminals, we are no longer “innocent until proven guilty.”
Military Empire: America’s endless global wars and burgeoning military empire—funded by taxpayer dollars—have depleted our resources, over-extended our military and increased our similarities to the Roman Empire and its eventual demise. Black budget spending has completely undermined any hope of fiscal transparency, with government contractors padding their pockets at the expense of taxpayers and the nation’s infrastructure—railroads, water pipelines, ports, dams, bridges, airports and roads—taking the hit. The U.S. now operates approximately 800 military bases in foreign countriesaround the globe at an annual cost of at least $156 billion. The consequences of financing a global military presence are dire. In fact, David Walker, former comptroller general of the U.S., believes there are “striking similarities” between America’s current situation and the factors that contributed to the fall of Rome, including “declining moral values and political civility at home, an over-confident and over-extended military in foreign lands and fiscal irresponsibility by the central government.”
I haven’t even touched on the corporate state, the military industrial complex, SWAT team raids, invasive surveillance technology, zero tolerance policies in the schools, overcriminalization, or privatized prisons, to name just a few, but what I have touched on should be enough to show that the landscape of our freedoms has already changed dramatically from what it once was and will no doubt continue to deteriorate unless Americans can find a way to wrest back control of their government and reclaim their freedoms.
So how do we go about reclaiming our freedoms and reining in our runaway government?
Essentially, there are four camps of thought among the citizenry when it comes to holding the government accountable. Which camp you fall into says a lot about your view of government—or, at least, your view of whichever administration happens to be in power at the time.
In the first camp are those who trust the government to do the right thing, despite the government’s repeated failures in this department.
In the second camp are those who not only don’t trust the government but think the government is out to get them.
In the third camp are those who see government neither as an angel nor a devil, but merely as an entity that needs to be controlled, or as Thomas Jefferson phrased it, bound “down from mischief with the chains of the Constitution.”
Then there’s the fourth camp, comprised of individuals who pay little to no attention to the workings of government. Easily entertained, easily distracted, easily led, these are the ones who make the government’s job far easier than it should be.
It is easy to be diverted, distracted and amused by the antics of politicians, the pomp and circumstance of awards shows, athletic events, and entertainment news, and the feel-good evangelism that passes for religion today.
What is far more difficult to face up to is the reality of life in America, where unemployment, poverty, inequality, injustice and violence by government agents are increasingly norms.
The powers-that-be want us to remain divided, alienated from each other based on our politics, our bank accounts, our religion, our race and our value systems. Yet as George Orwell observed, “The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries but between authoritarians and libertarians.”
The only distinction that matters anymore is where you stand in the American police state.
In other words, you’re either part of the problem or part of the solution.
America is at a crossroads.
History may show that from this point forward, we will have left behind any semblance of constitutional government and entered into a militaristic state where all citizens are suspects and security trumps freedom.
Certainly, as I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we have moved beyond the era of representative government and entered a new age: the age of authoritarianism. Even with its constantly shifting terrain, this topsy-turvy travesty of law and government has become America’s new normal.
As long as we continue to put our politics ahead of our principles—moral, legal and constitutional—“we the people” will lose.
And you know who will keep winning by playing on our prejudices, capitalizing on our fears, deepening our distrust of our fellow citizens, and dividing us into polarized, warring camps incapable of finding consensus on the one true menace that is an immediate threat to all of our freedoms? The government.
When we lose sight of the true purpose of government—to protect our rights—and fail to keep the government in its place as our servant, we allow the government to overstep its bounds and become a tyrant that rules by brute force.
Rule by brute force.
That’s about as good a description as you’ll find for the sorry state of our republic.
The list of abuses being perpetrated against the American people by their government is growing rapidly: SWAT teams crashing through doors. Militarized police shooting unarmed citizens. Traffic cops tasering old men and pregnant women for not complying fast enough with an order. Resource officers shackling children for acting like children. Citizens being jailed for growing vegetable gardens in their front yards and holding prayer services in their backyards. Drivers having their cash seized under the pretext that they might have done something wrong.
Brace yourselves. We are approaching critical mas

John W. Whitehead is the president of The Rutherford Institute and author of Battlefield America: The War on the American People.

martes, 30 de enero de 2018

Uncle Sam dumps the Kurds (yet again)
[This article was written for the Unz Review] JANUARY 26, 2018
The drama which is unfolding in northern Syria is truly an almost ideal case to fully assess how weak and totally dysfunctional the AngloZionist Empire has really become. Let’s begin with a quick reminder.
The US-Israeli goals in Syria were really very simple. As I have already mentioned in a past article, the initial AngloZionist plan was to overthrow Assad and replace him with the Takfiri crazies (Daesh, al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, ISIS – call them whatever you want). Doing this would achieve the following goals:
1.    Bring down a strong secular Arab state along with its political structure, armed forces and security services.
2.    Create total chaos and horror in Syria justifying the creation of a “security zone” by Israel not only in the Golan, but further north.
3.    Trigger a civil war in Lebanon by unleashing the Takfiri crazies against Hezbollah.
4.    Let the Takfiris and Hezbollah bleed each other to death, then create a “security zone”, but this time in Lebanon.
5.    Prevent the creation of a Shia axis Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon.
6.    Breakup Syria along ethnic and religious lines.
7.    Create a Kurdistan which could then be used against Turkey, Syria, Iraq and Iran.
8.    Make it possible for Israel to become the uncontested power broker in the Middle-East and forces the KSA, Qatar, Oman, Kuwait and all others to have to go to Israel for any gas or oil pipeline project.
9.    Gradually isolate, threaten, subvert and eventually attack Iran with a wide regional coalition of forces.
10.  Eliminate all center of Shia power in the Middle-East.
With the joint Russian-Iranian military intervention, this plan completely collapsed. For a while, the USA tried to break up Syria under various scenarios, but the way the Russian Aerospace forces hammered all the “good terrorists” eventually convinced the AngloZionists that this would not work.
The single biggest problem for the Empire is that while it has plenty of firepower in the region (and worldwide), it cannot deploy any “boots on the ground”. Being the Empire’s boots on the ground was, in fact, the role the AngloZionists had assigned to the Takfiri crazies (aka Daesh/IS/ISIS/al-Qaeda/al-Nusra/etc/), but that plan failed. The only US allies left in the region are Israel and Saudi Arabia. The problem with them is that, just like the USA themselves, these countries do not have ground forces capable of actually deploying inside Syria and taking on not only the Syrian military, but the much more capable Iranian and Hezbollah forces. Murdering civilians is really the only thing the Israelis and Saudis are expert in, at least on the ground (in the skies the Israeli Air Force is a very good one). Enter the Kurds.
The AngloZionist wanted to use the Kurds just like NATO had used the KLA in Kosovo: as a ground force which could be supported by US/NATO and maybe even Israeli airpower. Unlike the Israelis and Saudis, the Kurds are a relatively competent ground force (albeit not one able to take on, say, Turkey or Iran).
The folks at the Pentagon had already tried something similar last year when they attempted to create a sovereign Kurdistan in Iraq by means of a referendum. The Iraqis, with some likely help from Iran, immediately put an end to this nonsense and the entire exercise was a pathetic “flop”.
Which immediately begs to obvious question: are the Americans even capable of learning from their mistakes? What in the world were they thinking when they announced the creation of 30’000 strong Syrian Border Security Force (BSF) (so called to give the illusion that protecting Syria’s border was the plan, not the partition Syria)? The real goal was, as always, to put pressure on Turkey, Iran, Iraq, Syria and Russia while grabbing a lot of oil. As always with Uncle Shmuel, the entire plan had no UNSC authorization was thus totally illegal under international law (as is the presence of the USA in the Syria’s airspace and territory, but nobody cares any more).
Did Trump and his generals really think that Turkey, Iran, Syria and Russia would accept a US protectorate in Syria masquerading as an “independent Kurdistan” and do nothing about it? Yet again, and I know this sounds hard to believe, but I think that this is yet another strong indication that the Empire is run by stupid and ignorant people whose brain and education simply do not allow them to grasp even the basic dynamics in the region of our planet there are interfering with.
Whatever may be the case the Turks reacted exactly as everybody thought: the Turkish Chief of Staff jumped into an airplane, flew to Moscow, met with top Russian generals (including Minister of Defense Shoigu) and clearly got a “go ahead” from Moscow: not only were the Turkish airplanes flying over Syria’s Afrin province not challenged by Russian air defense systems (which have ample coverage in this region), but the Russians also helpfully withdrew their military personnel from the region lest any Russian get hurt. Sergei Lavrov deplored it all, as he had to, but it was clear to all that Turkey had the Russian backing for this operation. I would add that I am pretty sure that the Iranians were also consulted (maybe at the same meeting in Moscow?) to avoid any misunderstandings as there is little love lost between Ankara and Tehran.
What about the Kurds? Well, how do I say that nicely? Let’s just say that what they did was not very smart. That’s putting it very, very mildly. The Russians gave them a golden deal: accept large autonomy in Syria, come to the National Dialog Congress to take place in Sochi, we will make your case before the (always reluctant) Syrians, Iranians and Turks and we will even give you money to help you develop your oil production. But no, the Kurds chose to believe in the hot air coming from Washington and when the Turks attacked that is all the Kurds got from Washington: hot air.
In fact, it is pretty clear that the US Americans have, yet again, betrayed an ally: Tillerson has now “greenlighted” a 30km safe zone in Syria (as if anybody was asking for his opinion, nevermind permission!). Take a look at this simple map of the Afrin region and look what 50 miles (about 80km) look like. You can immediately see that this 30km “safe zone” means: the end of any Kurdish aspirations to created a little independent Kurdistan in northern Syria.
To say that  all these developments make the Russians really happy is not an exaggeration. It is especially sweet for the Russians to see that they did not even have to do much, that this ugly mess of a disaster for the USA was entirely self-inflicted. What can be sweeter than that?
Let’ look at it all from the Russian point of view:
First, this situation further puts Turkey (a US ally and NATO member) on a collision course with the US/NATO/EU. And Turkey is not ‘just’ a NATO ally, like Denmark or Italy. Turkey is the key to the eastern Mediterranean and the entire Middle-East (well, one of them at least). Also, Turkey has a huge potential to be a painful thorn in the southern ‘belly’ of Russia so it is really crucial for Russia to keep Uncle Sam and the Israelis as far away from Turkey as possible. Having said that, nobody in Russia harbors *any *illusions about Turkey and/or Erdogan. Turkey will always be a problematic neighbor for Russia (the two countries already fought 12 wars!!!). But there is a big difference between “bad” and “worse”. Considering that in a not too distant past Turkey shot down a Russian aircraft over Syria, financed, trained and supported “good terrorists” in Syria, was deeply involved in the Tatar separatist movement in Crimea, and was the main rear base for the Wahabi terrorists in Chechnia for well over a decade, “worse” in the case of Turkey can be much, much worse than “bad” is today.
Second, these developments have clearly brought Turkey into an even closer cooperative dynamic with Russia and Iran, something which Russia very much desires. Turkey by itself is much more of a potential problem than a Turkey which partners up with Russia and Iran (ideally with Syria too, but considering the animosity between the two countries and their leaders that is something for the distant future, at least for the time being). What is shaping up is an informal (but very real) Russian-Turkish-Iranian regional alliance against the Axis of Kindness: USA-Israel-KSA. If that is what happens then the latter does not stand a chance to prevail.
Third, even though the Kurds are outraged and are now whining about the Russian “betrayal” – they will come to realize that they did it to themselves and that their best chance for freedom and prosperity is to work with the Russians. That means that the Russians will be able to achieve with, and for, the Kurds what the USA could not. Yet another very nice side-benefit for Russia.
Fourth, Syria, Iran and Turkey now realize a simple thing: only Russia stands between the crazy US-Israeli plans for the region and them. Absent Russia, there is nothing stopping the AngloZionist from re-igniting the “good terrorists” and the Kurds and use them against every one of them.
Be it as it may, having the USA and Israel shoot themselves in the leg and watch them bleed is not enough. To really capitalize on this situation the Russians need to also achieve a number of goals:
First, they need to stop the Turks before this all turns into a major and protracted conflict. Since Tillerson “greenlighted” a 30km “safe zone”, this is probably what Erdogan told Trump over the phone and that, in turn, is probably what the Russians and the Turks agreed upon. So, hopefully, this should not be too hard to achieve.
Second, the Russians need to talk to the Kurds and offer them the same deal again: large autonomy inside Syria in exchange for peace and prosperity. The Kurds are not exactly the easiest people to talk to, but since there is really no other option, my guess is that as soon as they stop hallucinating about the US going to war with Turkey on their behalf they will have to sit down and negotiate the deal. Likewise, the Russians will have to sell the very same deal to Damascus which, frankly, is in no position to reject it.
Third, Russia has neither the desire nor the means to constantly deal with violent flare-ups in the Middle-East. If the Empire desperately needs wars to survive, Russia desperately needs peace. In practical terms this means that the Russians must work with the Iranians, the Turks, the Syrians to secure a regional security framework which would be guaranteed and, if needed, enforced by all parties. And yes, the next logical step will be to approach Israel and the KSA and give them security guarantees in exchange for their assurances to stop creating chaos and wars on behalf of the USA. I know, I will get a lot of flak for saying this, but there *are* people in Israel and, possibly, Saudi Arabia who also understand the difference between “bad” and “worse”. Heed my words: as soon as the Israelis and the Saudis realize that Uncle Sam can’t do much for them either, they will suddenly become much more open to meaningful negotiations. Still, whether these rational minds will be sufficient to deal with the rabid ideologues I frankly don’t know. But it is worth trying for sure.
Conclusion
The Trump Administration’s “strategy” (I am being very kind here) is to stir up as many conflicts in as many places of our planet as possible. The Empire thrives only on chaos and violence. The Russian response is the exact opposite: to try as best can be to stop wars, defuse conflicts and create, if not peace, at least a situation of non-violence. Simply put: peace anywhere is the biggest danger to the AngloZionist Empire whose entire structure is predicated on eternal wars. The total and abject failure of all US plans for Syria (depending on how you count we are at “plan C” or even “plan D”) is a strong indicator of how weak and totally dysfunctional the AngloZionist Empire has become. But ‘weak’ is a relative term while ‘dysfunctional’ does not imply ‘harmless’. The current lack of brains at the top, while very good in some ways, is also potentially very dangerous. I am in particular worried about what appears to be a total absence of real military men (officers in touch with reality) around the President. Remember how Admiral Fallon once referred to General Petraeus as “an ass-kissing little chickenshit“? This also fully applies to the entire gang of generals around Trump – all of them are the kind of men real officers like Fallon would, in this words, “hate”. As for State, I will just say this: I don’t expect much from a man who could not even handle Nikki Haley, nevermind Erdogan.
Remember how the USA ignited the Ukraine to punish the Russians for their thwarting of the planned US attack on Syria? Well, the very same Ukraine has recently passed a law abolishing the “anti-terrorist operation” in the Donbass and declaring the Donbass “occupied territory”. Under Ukie law, Russia is now officially an “aggressor state”. This means that the Ukronazis have now basically rejected the Minsk Agreements and are in a quasi-open state of war with Russia. The chances of a full-scale Ukronazi attack on the Donbass are now even higher then before, especially before or during the soccer World Cup in Moscow this summer (remember Saakashvili?). Having been ridiculed (again) with their Border Security Force in Syria, the US Americans will now seek a place to take revenge on the evil Russkies and this place will most likely be the Ukraine. And we can always count the Israelis to find a pretext to continue to murder Palestinians and bomb Syria. As for the Saudis, they appear to be temporarily busy fighting each other. So unless the Empire does something really crazy, the only place it can lash out with little to lose (for itself) is the eastern Ukraine. The Novorussians understand that. May God help them.

The Saker

lunes, 29 de enero de 2018

LOS OLIGARCAS Y LOS TECNÓCRATAS MANDAN A SALINAS Y A FERNÁNDEZ DE CEVALLOS A CREAR UN SOLO POLO CONTRA LÓPEZ OBRADOR

Ante la evidencia de que López Obrador sigue sacando enorme ventaja al candidato del sistema, José Antonio Meade (encuesta de Buendía & Laredo para el periódico El Universal)[1]; y todo indica que el joven “Maquiavelo” y clon de Carlos Salinas, el candidato de “Por México al Frente” (PAN-PRD-MC), Ricardo Anaya, parece ser el único que puede presentar batalla al tres veces candidato presidencial; las élites económicas del país, y muy posiblemente la tecnocracia internacional estén pensando en que es mejor evitar la dispersión del voto ”pro sistema” en dos opciones (Meade y Anaya), pues esto facilitaría el triunfo de López Obrador; y sería mejor concentrarlo en una sola opción, en este caso, el candidato panista.
A pesar de que López Obrador ha realizado un corrimiento dramático desde la izquierda hasta la derecha, incorporando a varios representantes del statu quo político y económico a su campaña; y que ha asegurado insistentemente en que no cambiará el modelo económico neoliberal y ni siquiera intentará encarcelar a los anteriores ex presidentes, representantes del régimen corrupto que ha gobernado al país por más de tres décadas; ni así ha podido  convencer a la plutocracia nacional e internacional y a los organismos financieros internacionales, encargados de custodiar al modelo depredador neoliberal en todo el mundo, de que su candidatura no constituye un peligro para sus intereses expoliadores.
De ahí que el pasado fin de semana han lanzado a dos de sus “perros de presa”, el “padrino” del neoliberalismo en México, el ex presidente Carlos Salinas (artículo en el diario El País de España) y al “manager” del candidato Ricardo Anaya, abogado de mil asuntos cuestionables en el país y aliado político de Salinas, el ex candidato presidencial del PAN en 1994, Diego Fernández de Cevallos, a atacar con todo a López Obrador (entrevista a Diego en la revista Proceso); planteando entre líneas que lo mejor es conformar un solo frente neoliberal, para derrotar definitivamente a López Obrador; y que esa opción tiene que ser Anaya (Salinas sólo lo insinúa; pero Diego lo afirma), con lo que se comienza a traslucir que las élites plutocráticas ya están pensando en sacrificar la candidatura de Meade, para concentrar todos los recursos en el apoyo a Anaya.
Sin embargo, esto aún tendría que pasar por una profunda negociación con tres grupos de actores que tendrían que aceptar esta nueva estrategia “anti López Obrador”.
El primero que tendría que aceptar sacrificar a su candidato (ya sea cambiándolo por otro peor; o simplemente retirándole los ilegales apoyos del gobierno federal), sería el propio Peña Nieto, quien tendría que recibir seguridades de que Anaya no iría tras de él y su grupo por los muchísimos casos de corrupción que han corroído al gobierno peñista, ni por los vínculos que hay en distintas áreas del gobierno, con la delincuencia organizada.
En principio, Peña ya no confía en Anaya, quien rompió pactos con su gobierno, sobre todo en relación a los procesos electorales en Coahuila y el Estado de México; y por su parte Anaya, aún está encolerizado por la estrategia del gobierno de Peña en exhibirlo como un corrupto, al dar a conocer la forma grosera en que él y su familia se enriquecieron obscenamente en la última década, utilizando los puestos públicos que ha ocupado.
De ahí que para que pueda funcionar la estrategia de un solo frente contra López Obrador, primero se tendrían que restañar heridas y lograr pactos firmes y con garantías entre Peña y Anaya; de lo contrario, difícilmente el grupo peñista accederá a sacrificar electoralmente a Meade.
La segunda negociación tendría que ser con los grupos “políticos” del PRI, como los de Osorio Chong, Beltrones, Eruviel Avila y la CTM, los cuales si bien no quieren a Meade, el que se les planteara que ahora deben perder la elección en favor de un panista, y todo ello para mantener un sistema económico que ha devastado a las bases sociales del PRI, parece un exceso (“suicídate y después te hago un homenaje”).
¿Qué se les tendría que prometer a estos grupos regionales, sumamente corruptos, para que dejen pasar a Anaya; y, qué garantías exigirían para que Anaya no los persiga y los exhiba como corruptos, una vez que llegue a la presidencia?
El precio de la aceptación de estos grupos para apoyar a Anaya puede ser exorbitantemente alto, pues puede implicar que la supuesta estrategia anticorrupción del “joven Maquiavelo” tenga que ser abandonada, aún antes de que comience.
Y por último, quizás la negociación menos difícil, pero igual habría que hacerla, sería con el grupo de Meade y los tecnócratas que lo apoyan (Nuño y Videgaray), a los que habría que asegurar posiciones en el nuevo gobierno y/o en organismos financieros internacionales; y también impunidad, por sus muchas complicidades y omisiones en materia de corrupción (por ejemplo la llamada “Estafa Maestra”; el caso Odebrecht o el desvío de recursos de la SHCP para campañas del PRI; es decir el “caso Chihuahua”).
Tantas negociaciones; tantas seguridades y garantías para grupos de poder; y tantas rendiciones de promesas llevarían a desnaturalizar por completo las propuestas “innovadoras” del “joven Maquiavelo”, y con ello sería un blanco fácil para exhibirlo como un hipócrita y un vendido.
Veremos si la desesperación de los oligarcas y los tecnócratas los lleva a sacrificar electoralmente a Meade y se arriesgan a ese tipo de negociaciones para tratar de que el “joven Maquiavelo” Anaya pueda llegar a la presidencia.



López Obrador saca una ventaja de 16 puntos a Meade (32 a 16%); mientras que sólo le saca 6 puntos a Anaya (26%).

jueves, 25 de enero de 2018

Morena, entre los principios y el pragmatismo
Octavio Rodríguez Araujo
La Jornada 25 de Enero de 2018
Debe quedar muy claro a mis lectores que no estoy ni puedo estar con las coaliciones que encabezan el PRI y el PAN. Pero tampoco completamente con la que capitanea Morena, dada su alianza con el PES y donde presidentes municipales que nunca debieron serlo están considerados para participar en encuestas definitorias para gobernar un estado de la República.
En el caso de Morena y de su líder indiscutible, yo entiendo que una cierta dosis de pragmatismo (lamentablemente cada vez mayor) sea necesaria para acumular más votos y conservar o aumentar la distancia que en la actualidad los separa de los otros partidos y precandidatos contendientes por la Presidencia. Pero una cosa es que entienda ese pragmatismo y otra que éste, al nivel a que ha llegado, coincida con mi manera de ver a un partido que busca distinguirse de los demás por sus principios y su honestidad. Confieso que estoy más preocupado que antes, aunque ya había advertido desde hace varios meses que no acepto la sentencia que dice que los enemigos de mis enemigos son mis amigos ya que con dicha fórmula se juega con fuego y se puede salir quemado.
Me da gusto, debo confesarlo, que ni Meade ni Anaya levanten en las preferencias de los mexicanos, según las encuestas hasta ahora conocidas. No quisiera para México más de lo mismo, que tan graves consecuencias ha traído a la mayoría de los mexicanos. Como muchos, aparentemente los más (hasta ahora), coincido en la necesidad de ciertos cambios sustanciales que el país necesita, aunque dichos cambios no sean verdaderamente radicales. Y estos cambios son ofrecidos, más bien que mal, por López Obrador y Morena, aunque no estoy seguro de que también los suscriba el PES (me refiero a cambios importantes y no a los que, para el país, serían secundarios).
Es probable, porque no puedo afirmarlo con certidumbre, que el PES se alió con Morena para acoplarse, oportunistamente, con los posibles ganadores y obtener a cambio algunos cargos electorales que aislado no conseguiría ni con la bendición de sus pastores cristianos. Pero también es probable que Morena aceptara la coalición con el PES porque, aunque pocos, le aportará votos que, según la experiencia de 2006, le hubieran beneficiado entonces para demostrar más claramente su triunfo sobre Calderón. Este cálculo, aunque los hubiera no existen, es de simple aritmética y de probabilidades que en política electoral no deben descartarse. Todo lo que sume es ganancia si no se es muy quisquilloso con la compatibilidad de principios, es decir, si se es pragmático en buena medida. Argumentar que Morena es un partido amplio y plural, donde caben todas las personas de buena voluntad (cualquier cosa que esto signifique), es una verdad a medias o una manera de justificar la alianza con dios y con el diablo. Si Morena pretendió desde su origen ser un movimiento y luego un partido de centro-izquierda, la derecha y la ultraderecha no deberían de tener cabida. ¿Ya no es de centro-izquierda o no importa dónde sea ubicado en la geometría político-ideológica?
Celebro, esto sí, que personas identificadas con otros partidos (incluso el PAN) se muden a Morena y apoyen a López Obrador (es buena publicidad). Pero siempre me queda la duda de si esos cambios obedecen a reflexiones profundas y de conciencia o simplemente por despecho porque en su partido de origen no les dieron lo que creyeron merecer y en Morena sí o puede ser que sí (si negocian bien el cambio de camiseta). Me inquieta que pueda ser por oportunismo y que, sin embargo, se les dé la bienvenida como si fueran soldados que desertan de un ejército para sumarse a otro en medio de una guerra. Yo desconfiaría de ellos y más después de la experiencia de Emiliano Zapata con el coronel Guajardo quien, como debe recordarse, fingió pasarse a las filas del Ejército Libertador del Sur para luego asesinar a su jefe en Chinameca. Aun así, debo reconocer que algunos que se han pasado a las filas de Morena han argumentado muy bien sus razones, como René Fujiwara, por ejemplo (véase La Jornada, 23/01/18).
Otra cosa es la propaganda sucia en contra del puntero. Asociar a AMLO con Chávez, Maduro, Putin y con quien que se les ocurra más adelante es una estupidez que sólo las plumas mercenarias pueden suscribir. Quizá los estrategas de la propaganda negativa a un candidato olvidan que, al igual que en 2006, les salió el tiro por la culata y que las simpatías por Andrés Manuel subieron como la espuma. Tanto subieron dichas simpatías que los poderes del Estado, incluyendo el Tribunal Electoral, tuvieron que hacer maroma y teatro para que los números favorecieran al inepto Calderón; y ni así ganaron pues ese dizque presidente convirtió al país en una carnicería y en una de las naciones más inseguras del planeta. Peña, por cierto, tampoco entendió que dándole continuidad a las políticas de Calderón también restaría las simpatías en su favor y sus precandidatos favoritos ya están sufriendo las consecuencias (me refiero tanto a Meade como a Anaya, en este orden).
Así las cosas, sólo me queda la oculta esperanza de que Andrés Manuel pueda controlar el oportunismo de muchos que se le han acercado y que recupere para su partido los principios que sostuvo aquel 20 de noviembre de 2012, en su primer Congreso Nacional (Deportivo Plan Sexenal); entre ellos su propuesta explícita de cuidar a Morena y de hacer el compromiso entre todas y todos para evitar incongruencias y desviaciones.