Things fall apart, the center cannot hold
Must have been gremlins. I had completely rewritten my draft (which got sidetracked into another issue) and somehow THAT was posted this morning, instead of the revised version below).
Having set a new — and unwanted — record for “drug war deaths” here in Sinaloa last month (the cartoon is from El Debate) and reeling from a sudden uptick in mass murder (16 in Juarez, ten or so in a shootout in Torreon today), Congress has finally started to ask what it’s all about.
Porfiro Muñoz Ledo, the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, today called the Merida Plan a “foreign war by the United States against narcotics traffickers.” He adds that the highest narcotics consumption in the world is on U.S. soil, and has resulted in no deaths, while Mexico has seen 15,000 casualties.
Of course, there are the occasional shootouts between U.S. narcotics dealers and police, and sometimes people get killed, but the thrust of Muñoz Ledo’s argument is correct. The only “winners” so far in the “war on drugs” have been the U.S. arms industry, which supplies both the Mexican police and military (the presumed good guys) and the narcos (the black hats).
Muñoz Ledo, being a PRD Senator might be dismissed as just an anti-Calderonista, but the highly respected “mainstream” El Universal notes that “Merida Plan” funding went, not to Mexico (as I’ve noted time and time again) but to U.S. military contractors: Bell Helicopter, Dyncorp, Harris, Northrup-Grumman receiving the bulk of the funds. And, to a Washington “training institutute”, “Culture of Lawfulness” which seems to have spent it’s Merida Funding on middle-school classroom material. There isn’t enough public information available to say what it was for, and — like Northrup-Gumman — don’t appear to be particularly forthcoming.
Meanwhile, although the Calderón Administration continues to defend its “war on drugs” (most recently in the Japan Times, of all places), the sense is growing that this “war” serves one of four purposes:
- To benefit the United States (as Senator Muñoz Ledo says).
- By accident or design, to strengthen the Sinaloa Cartel (as many — especially in Sinaloa — tend to believe without firm proof, though some intriguing suggestions of influence).
- To provide political legitimacy to the Calderón Administration.
- Some or all of the above.
None of these have anything to do with stamping out narcotics, and — assuming that is the pend purpose, Congress’ question (even among those who susprect one of the four goals listed above) is what “strategy” the government is employing, or if it even has a strategy.
Paved with good intentions
While I’m more than slightly dubious about the motives of Idaho-based “Haitian Orphan Rescue Mission” led by personalshopper.com CEO Laura Silsby, I don’t think the group, from the Central Valley Baptist Church of Meridian, Idaho, had any peculiarly perverse plans in mind.
This Church, is traditionalist and ultra-conservative — as far as I can tell, it is part of the Southern Baptist Convention and lists the usual “Faith and Purpose” beliefs you’d expect to find — wives must submit to the husbands, life begins at conception, homosexuality is a sin and “academic freedom” doesn’t preclude Biblical inerrancy.
At first, I thought this might be a Christian Dominionist Church — a Protestant version of Taliban. If anything, the Church’s Faith and Purpose statement strongly supports separation of Church and State:
The state owes to every church protection and full freedom in the pursuit of its spiritual ends. In providing for such freedom no ecclesiastical group or denomination should be favored by the state more than others. Civil government being ordained of God, it is the duty of Christians to render loyal obedience thereto in all things not contrary to the revealed will of God. The church should not resort to the civil power to carry on its work…
Nor do I see simple racial supremacist thinking at work here, something we also often associate with Idaho. In the same place where homosexuality is condemned as a sin, so is racism. War is considered “unChristian” (“It is the duty of Christians to seek peace with all men on principles of righteousness. In accordance with the spirit and teachings of Christ they should do all in their power to put an end to war.”
In short, the missionaries sound like fairly ordinary people from “the heartland” — which is, in some ways, more troubling than if they were baby-stealers secretly worshipping Baal.
Not to defame Baal — or Tlaloc for that matter — but human sacrifice is no longer an option for parents with too many children to feed, nor — as the Romans and Greeks did — is leaving newborns in the city dump when times are hard exactly in keeping with human values. Poor Haitians, and the poor everywhere, have popped their kids into orphanages, or sold them, or given them away when it is the only best of several bad options for family survival.
But, that said, what’s bothersome is that the conditions that make a sort of kinder, gentler human sacrifice seem necessary to families in places like Haiti are not questioned. There is plenty to be said (and has been said) about that elsewhere. From what I can tell, the Church was already planning to build an orphanage in the Dominican Republic, part of hits Evangelical mission. That alone is enough to strike some as interference and arrogant. Max Beauvoir, head of Haiti’s Voodoo Priest’s Association is quoted in the Idaho Statesman as saying:
There are many who come [to Haiti] with religious ideas that belong more in the time of the inquisition. These types of people believe they need to save our souls and our bodies from ourselves. We need compassion, not proselytizing now, and we need aid – not just aid going to people of the Christian faith.
The overwhelming majority of Haitians are Roman Catholics (who also resent this “soul snatching”), which has its theological differences with the Southern Baptists to be sure, but perhaps none of the Church’s spokespeople were available. Or — subconsciously or by design — quoting the Voodoo priest is less troubling than suggesting the Baptists were poaching their fellow Christians.
And, it’s the need for aid and compassion, not “saving our souls from ourselves” that is missing. What the Idaho Baptists did was no different from what the U.S. government has done. It attempted to take advantage of a natural disaster in order to shock others into acquiescence with control by powerful outsiders with their own preconceived notions of how the world works. And to harness the poor for their own ends.
Basically, what the Idahovians did was decide they’re rich, they have the power, and they can… therefore, they should be masters of others. They are, in the end, no different from an oil company or cruise line or the arrogant tourist who presumes their “right” to do what they want rests on their economic power and that others exist to preserve their dominance.
The latest in accessorizing
One of the most interesting things about the few news articles that have trickled out so far about the US Americans from Idaho who are currently under arrest in Port au Prince for trying to kidnap 33 Haitian children is that none of them mention the terrible irony in the occupation of the leader of the bunch, Laura Silsby. Silsby, according to her own website, is the “founder and CEO of [Boise, Idaho based] PersonalShopper.com, a leader in the evolution of personalizing the e-commerce experience for women.”
I guess this is the “Shop Doctrine”.
More protectionist measures?
In all, there are an estimated 1 to 3 million [marijuana] growers in the United States, with 100,000 to 200,000 commercial growers, according to Eric Schlosser, author of Reefer Madness. These figures don’t include those involved in clipping, dealing, tending and guarding, nor the scores of real-estate agents, carpenters, diggers, electricians and investors. These networks overlay each other, providing an alternate safety net in a state that has been in an almost continual budget-cutting crisis since the dot-com and technology bust in 2001.
(Michael Polson, “Tending ‘the Grow'” In These Times, 25 Jan. 2010)
Let’s see… the United States population is about three and a half times that of Mexico. We’re supposed to be alarmed and outraged by the fact that 400,000 Mexicans said to be involved in the narcotics trade (including the real estate agents, carpenters, diggers, electricians and investors). There would have to be 1.4 MILLLION marijuana growers alone just to catch up with the Colossus of the North in this industry.
Makes me wonder if all those attempts to legalize the trade in the United States aren’t just another protectionist measure for their own agriculture, or whether the Mexican government shouldn’t encourage the marijuana farmers to switch to something more profitable, like opium poppies.
Oh, what a tangled web we weave
When SME, the independent electrical workers union, was dissolved by the forced merger (at gunpoint) of LyFC (Luz y Fuerzo del Centro) and the CFE (Comision Federal de Electricidad), no one quite believed Don Porfirio Felipe’s rationale about union “corruption” with SME and LyFC, although most appreciated (for now) the better service offered by CFE.
The hoo-haw centered on the forced liquidation of the independent union (as opposed to the corrupt, but pro-Administration teacher’s union or the PEMEX workers union) and on the consumer benefits of lowered prices and presumably better service offered by CFE (and having had both companies at various times, I admit CFE has better customer service, though that may just be that my LyFC service was in central Mexico City, and my CFE service is in a much smaller community with a much newer infrastructure).
The union issue — workers rights versus consumer convenience — has dominated the conversation, with the consumers, so far, winning. But that could change. Overlooked in the whole dust-up was, as Pablo Trejo Pérez, a PRD Delegate from working class Itzacalco (within the Federal District), another issue:
Behind the government’s onslaught against [LyFC] lies the dispute of what to do with a 1,100-kilometer long fiber optic network that belongs to the liquidated company. We are talking about a system that makes the transmission of voice and data over any domestic power line or low-voltage source possible, which made the company a major competitor with two more economically powerful companies: Televisa and Telmex.
The internet is, of course, the “road to the 21st century” and the present Federal Administration, like those since the 1990s, have been of the mindset that roads should be privatized. Roads and bridges have — under the baleful influence of “neo-liberalism” — been built, not by the state, but by granting private companies “concessions” (and creating some of the most expensive toll roads on the planet in the process).
Within Mexico, this has not created more than grumbling and some wonkish discussions about the high cost of transporting goods, but has become the standard operating process for road building here. I suppose, given that the toll-road craze took off during the economic crisis of the 1990s, it was another example of the “Shock Doctrine” — Naomi Klein’s theory that during a crisis, private wealth takes advantage of the situation to increase their power over the economy and the state. There is some evidence of this, in that when Texas — which for all its weirdness was not in the midst of a hug crisis — attempted to build a major highway though concessions, there was a populist backlash.
With little outside notice, the Federal Administration announced plans to build their “highway to the 21st century” system based on the same “concession” model.
MEXICO CITY – The Mexican government announced the launch of a bidding process for 21,208 kilometers (13,178 miles) of state electric utility CFE’s fiber optic network.
The deputy head of the Communications and Transportation Secretariat, or SCT, Gabriela Hernandez, told Efe this network is a trunk structure that will allow cable television companies to deliver “triple play” (Internet, television and telephone) services and complementary technologies to the consumers.
The SCT on Tuesday published the rules for the auction of a pair of unused fiber-optic, or dark fiber, strands. Companies will be able to use the capacity for 20 years, with an option to later extend their lease for another 10 years.
And, where is the hub of most Mexican data traffic (and commerce and media production and…)?
As Pablo Trejo Pérez forecast, Televisa and Telmex are the most likely concessionares. And, it nicely illustrates the theory that the shocks in the “shock doctrine” are often created by the government FOR the benefit of existing enterprises.
What is going to make this interesting to watch is that data transmission lines are not a pressing issue. It can be spun as a populist measure (“cable TV in every chozo!”) but there could be a backlash. In Texas, the opposition that killed the “Trans-Texas Corridor” included environmentalists, rural landowners, conspiracy theorists (who saw it as some plot to replace the dollar with the “Amero” or give the Alamo back to Mexico or some such) and conservatives who suddenly decided “libertarianism” wasn’t so hot when they actually had to pony up for their public services. In Mexico, besides the unionists, expect the TV viewers who hate Televisa and the phone users who hate Telmex (or who just hate rich people) and the left who oppose anything the right proposes, to join in some combination or another.
And, under the radar — or rather, on the existing data lines — there is a growing political movement — “los tuitteros” and groups like “Internet Necessario” which — after defeating a proposed tax change — have discovered they are a constituency to be reckoned with.
This is gonna be fun.
The stalled donkey: a Friday Night video
The problems of Mexican are many and complex and there is a tendency to over-react. But, as Elena Poniatowska tells us, sometimes the solution is is simple: dialog and direct action.
Another “Constitutional Coup”
Shutting down the legislature to avoid legal challenges to legitimacy, shut up the opposition, extend a conservative minority’s hold on power, and to cover up military malfeasance… giving the people no choice but to take to the streets in protest … shouldn’t the OAS and the United States and the United Nations be intervening to stop this latest assault on democracy in the Americas?
Never explain, never complain
Ariel Gómez León, a PRD federal deputy for Chiapas and radio talk show host made a complete ass of himself (as both politicians are radio talk show hosts are wont to do) with a racist “joke” about Haitians. The “joke” isn’t worth repeating, but what is interesting, coming from the U.S., is the reaction.
No one in his own party is going to defend Gómez León… or try to spin a narrative that a comment was taken out of context, or that it was misunderstood, or that Gómez León “misspoke”. No apologies are necessary, because none are going to be accepted. Gómez León may claim he was just making a bad joke and didn’t know the microphone was on, but that doesn’t matter here. and nobody cares if he “anger management” or rehab or anything else are going to save him. The party chair held a press conference this morning to announce party disciplinary actions, and openly mentioning expelling Gómez León from the party.
When I hear claims that Mexicans are virulent racists, the person telling me that is usually confusing Mexican-Americans with Mexicans, many Mexican-Americans often “buying” into the racial preoccupations of the United States and into the economic system that pits “them” against “us”.
I don’t deny that Mexicans often do think of people in terms of physical stereotypes, which is a different thing than actively seeking to insult the person. As an example, I like to point out that while Denzel Washington was touted in Mexican women’s magazines as a sex god, Colin Powell — at the time the U.S. Secretary of State — was lampooned in the leftist press as a Stepin Fetchit caracature. Both the Rachel Smith incident and the dustup over Meme Pingüino were milked in the United States as “proof” of Mexican racism, by the U.S. Republican Party (which has had a series of problems with “misunderstood” or “taken out of context” or “I didn’t know the microphone was on” racist incidents. Interestingly, a domestic postage stamp in Mexico became an issue for right-wing talk shows and Republican Party concern just as a coalition of African-Americans and Latino interests was beginning to coalesce into a serious political pressure group.
The PRD has no reason to care what the U.S. government thinks, and the U.S. government hasn’t said anything about this incident, since it doesn’t play into any particular domestic agenda. And the PRD certainly doesn’t need Haitian support. And, there isn’t any “black constituency” in Mexico to speak of, and certainly none in Chiapas. It’s hard to put a cynical spin on the honorable reaction of the party.
It’s disappointing that there are people in this world who still make racist “jokes”, but it is a reason to celebrate — and for Mexicans to congratulate themselves over — when racists are publicly condemned and treated as they should be — as dickheads.
The state of the nations
The Presidential speech that never happened continues to make yakking class rounds… this time in an article by some guy named Daniel Drezner, writing in Foreign Policy Magazine. I guess he meant to be funny, attributing to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez some bone-headed comment on a blog (check the “update”)that has some vague connection to the Venezuelan government.
The U.S. President’s speech included exactly 38 words on immigration, which led to several thousand words of commentary (Nezua provides the highlights) and — in a glancing blow — supported more “free trade” agreements with U.S. partners Panama — known mostly these days mostly for money laundering and Colombia — with it’s unique ways of dealing with dissent. Must have been the Colombian concept of free speech that kept everyone in line. Nobody booed, though reportedly one Supreme Court Justice mouthed something or the other.
Argentine President Christina Fernandez de Kirschner gave a speech to her nations meat industry producers… about the joys of getting porked. Speaking of a weekend spent with her husband after eating the meat, Fernandez said, “We were in high spirits the whole weekend… I’m a pork fanatic.”
And in Honduras, as real former president, Mel Zelaya, was given a rousing sendoff by hundreds of supporters before flying off to the Dominican Republic before taking up political asylum in Mexico, and fake ex-president, Roberto Micheletti, was rewarded with prosecutorial immunity as a senator for life, the new sorta-real, sorta-fake President, Pepe Lobo, figured it was a good time to give a speech. His mention of the United States, the OAS and Costa Rica President Óscar Arias were met with resounding “boos!”
See you in court!
On rather specious grounds — that Art. 4° of the Mexican Constitution justifies sexual equality on the grounds that equality protects the organization and development of families — the Federal Prosecutor’s office is considering a challenge to Mexico City’s same sex marriage bill.
However, Raúl Plascencia, the Human Rights Commissioner says this is nonsense and there is no legal basis for a challenge. The Human Rights Commission is an unusual legal body: as a federal court, it issues opinons and rulings… but has no way to enforce them, and has to go to other courts to do so.
Marcelo Ebrard, the Federal District’s Jefe de Gobierno, who signed the bill making same-sex marriage legal (it doesn’t take effect for a couple of weeks yet) also points out that this is the Federal Government attempting to just to limit civil rights, but to override the local legislature. A sort of “states rights” issue, and the one that brought the ill-advised challenges to the Federal District’s abortion law liberalization to a grinding halt.
In the abortion ruling, the Supremes affirmed the rights of states (and the Federal District) to control their own health and safety codes, and — as a constitutional matter — also depended on Art. 4°, which also gives families the right to practice birth control among many other things.
Art. 4° mentions equal rights for men and women, but is sort of a grabbag of the rights the state owes the citizens. The right to access to birth control, health care, a clean environment, cultural activities and “a clean and decent home” (ok, sometimes the Mexican Constitution is a wish list… still…). Children are specifically given the right to be provided with food, health and a safe home.
Presumably, the persons included in Art. 4° includes everyone mentioned in Art. 1° — which broadly prohibits discrimination “motivated by ethnic or national origin, gender, age, incapacity, social condition, state of health, religion, opinions, sexual preference, marital status, or any other attribute which is used to annul or depreciate the rights and liberties of the person” (my translation).
Two of the Ministers of the Court have been replaced since the abortion ruling, by presumably more conservative Ministers, which could — conceivably — lead to a ruling against the Federal District. I think its unlikely that the Federal Prosecutor will ever bring the case, and is just attempt to override a legislative decision that doesn’t sit well with PAN (and, create a social issue for the coming elections). For one thing, it’s expected it will take at least a year for this to get to court, by the time same-sex marriages will have been legally performed and — one presumes — some legal adoptions (which, going by the experiences of other countries are overwhelmingly children from one or both partners’ previous relationships, or where one partner is already the adoptive parent).
AND… should the Federal Prosecutor go ahead, there is likely to be a rush to the Civil Registrars’ office in anticipation of a negative ruling, which can’t be undone, and sort of undercuts the value of the challenge.
Happy countries are all alike; unhappy countries…
Esther (From Xico) writes about the (un)Happy Planet Index:
This index is actually based on pretty serious research … It correlates environmental impact (ecological footprint), life expectancy and life satisfaction and ranks countries accordingly. …
The HPI, the Happy Planet Index (pdf file) is a score of one to 100, not based on purely economic data or levels of consumption– not entirely, anyway:
… we should not lose sight of the fact that economic growth is just one strategy to achieve well-being and, in terms of natural resources, a demonstrably inefficient one. Rather than pursuing growth at all costs, even if detrimental to well-being or sustainability, leaders should be striving to foster well-being and pursue sustainability, even if detrimental to growth. The horse and the cart need to be returned to their rightful places.
Working from first principles, the report identified health and a positive experience of life as universal human goals, and the natural resources that our human systems depend upon as fundamental inputs. A successful society is one that can support good lives that don’t cost the Earth. The HPI measures progress towards this target – the ecological efficiency with which happy and healthy lives are supported.
By those scores, Latin Americas are the planet’s happiest (and Costa Ricans the happiest of the happy), Sub-Saharan Africans the least happy.
Sub-Saharan Africa, like Latin America is not known for its political or economic stability, but the HPI researchers offer an intriguing look at what makes Latin America tick — and happy as ticks:
The region has had, and continues to have, its fair share of misery: decades of civil wars and coups, the destruction of the Amazon, sharp inequality, and the favelas and slums of metropolises from Mexico City to Sao Paulo. For some, the region represents a sad tale of lost opportunity…
And yet, the top two sub-regions in terms of the HPI are those of Latin America. What sense can we make of this success? Are Latin Americans as happy as they say they are? And what, if anything, can the rest of the world learn from Latin America?
Survey data reveals two key features of Latin American culture. One is the presence of relatively unmaterialistic aspirations and values, compared to countries with similar economic conditions. Latin Americans report being much less concerned with material issues than, for example, they are with their friends and family. Secondly, social capital is particularly strong in the region. Civil society is very active, from religious groups to workers’ groups to environmental groups. The data on ‘formal’ social capital is reflected in anecdotal evidence of informal social capital in terms of strong family and community ties.
Mexico — despite political stability, a moderately healthy economy and strong social capital — is not among the top ten (nearly all in Latin America). The relatively (for Latin America) large “ecological footprint” of 3.2 (where a score lower than 2.1 is considered the threshold for sustainable living) knocks us down to #23 of 143. Mexico, does, however, earn its high ranking for both achieving a life expectancy over 75 years (75.6) and a high level of life satisfaction (7.6 out of a theoretically possible 10).
By comparison, the United States, with a higher life expectancy (77.9 years) and similar life satisfaction numbers (7.9) ranks only at #114, mostly because of its alarmingly high ecological footprint (9.4). Canada (#89) is also an ecological bigfoot (#7.1), as are most “wealthy” nations. If everyone on the planet consumed at the level of the United States or even ecologically conscious (but still consumption heavy) Germany (ecological footprint (4.2), it would require four earths to sustain that lifestyle. A Mexican lifestyle might be sustained by one planet, but it would be a strain.
Mexico can be happier (as can we all) if it did nothing but reduce it’s ecological footprint. I don’t see that any radical changes would be required. More tree planting, a bit more attention to water and energy conservation (all things being done now, but not in any systematic way), perhaps a few changes in our transportation system (going back to trains instead of inter-urban buses might bring down the footprint a notch), maybe a little less dependence on petroleum-based disposable products might get us there.
The rest — bringing down the murder rate, more rural heath and nutrition programs, better telecommunications (with its implications both for energy savings, better health and other issues) — is gravy.
Don’t worry… be happy.
Howard Zinn, D.E.P.
Howard Zinn died Wednesday at the age of 87.
The embodiment of the “American Dream”, Zinn — a first generation American from the humblest of backgrounds (his father was a waiter) — obtained a privileged position in American society, as a tenured professor of history at Boston University, by dint of American virtues like hard work and determination … and fulfilling his patriotic duty:
…Zinn joined the Army Air Corps in 1943 and even persuaded the local draft board to let him mail his own induction notice. He flew missions throughout Europe, receiving an Air Medal, but he found himself questioning what it all meant. Back home, he gathered his medals and papers, put them in a folder and wrote on top: ”Never again.”
The quintessential American success story, Zinn was vilified throughout his long and fruitful career for standing up for the American people… and their right to assembly and to seek the redress of grievances. And for sticking up for old-fashioned traditional values like anti-authoritarianism and seeking “liberty and justice for all.”
From an initial printing of five thousand copies in 1980, and with almost no marketing campaign, Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States” would sell a million copies by 2003, and serving as a healthy tonic to those who seek to rescue history from premature burial in the graves of academe. Not for nothin’ is God, Gachupines and Gringos (also with an initial printing of five thousand) subtitled “A People’s History of Mexico.”
mexfiles.net 