Thursday, August 17, 2017

NAFTA and the Wars of Petropolis - North America as the Master's "Big House"


#ColonizationMatters It is ongoing....

The Wars of Petropolis: From the beginning of World War II on October 12, 1492 to the renegotiation of NAFTA going on TODAY in full view of the Public and the "Movement", the corporate regimes that control the political processes of the states - from Mexico, across the US and including Canada, continue to move forward their agenda of corporate exploitation and expropriation of labor and resources from Standing Rock to Rio Yaqui, from Ayotzinapa to Charlottesville.

Supra-national Corporate Colonization: Under the mantle of "modernizing" the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement, the Trump administration opens the door to the plans for the final annihilation of the Original Nations of North America.

Constructed upon the cultural infrastructure of the insidious, nefarious, and intrinsically racist Doctrine of Discovery of "White" Christendom (AKA KKK) and the Doctrine of Manifest Destiny (AKA AZ-SB1070), which continue to normalize the blatant pogrom of colonization and genocide against the Original Nations of Indigenous Peoples of Abya Yala, the American Imperial Project lurches into the abyss of Climate Chaos fueled by the social pathology of "White Supremacy" in its full form as an international and global phenomena.

The call to "modernize" NAFTA conveniently does not mention the right of Free, Prior, and Informed Consent of Indigenous Peoples which became an international standard for economic development projects impacting Indigenous Peoples and their territories on September the 13, 2007 upon adoption of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples by the United Nations General Assembly.

What is being modernized is the financial and international corporate regimes of "White Power" which includes the LatinoHispanic Elites in Mexico that continue to control the reins of power of that country, now operating in both competition and collusion simultaneously just like they have been all along since their arrive on the continent as invaders from Spain, Portugal, Holland, England, and France 525 years ago.
 

What is being modernized is today's vision and version of the "Big House", the "Rancho Grande", the North American corporate hacienda-plantation of the global Empire of Petropolis, with D.Trump as its Clown King stooge.

The Empire is naked. It has no clothes. It has vestments, and investments.
Nothing else is left.

Tuesday, August 15, 2017

The Master's Narrative: Memes of Caste and the Anomaly of Histories


The Master's Narrative: Memes of Caste and the Anomaly of Histories

When the Adivasi, Indigenous Peoples of the Indian subcontinent, relate their experiences under the colonizing regimes that have swept their homelands, even references to Alexander the Great are preceded by the invasions of the Aryans and the introduction of the “white” concept of human cultural identity and superiority as the determinant for the caste systems that continue to plague the cultural landscape of India even after five thousand years.







PROSECUTION

Opening Argument
Anchor Babies of 1492

The acceptance of the Doctrine of Discovery into United States law held profound implications for future relations between the federal government and the Indians. The Doctrine of Discovery’s discourse of conquest was now available to legitimate, energize, and constrain as needed white society’s will to empire over the North American continent.

The doctrine confirmed the superior rights of a European-derived nation to the lands occupied by “infidels, heathens, and savages,” encouraged further efforts by white society to acquire the Indians’ “waste” lands, and vested authority in a centralized sovereign to regulate the Indian’ dispossession according to national interest, security, and sometimes even honor.



Perhaps most important, Johnson’s acceptance of the Doctrine of Discovery into United States law preserved the legacy of 1,000 years of European racism and colonialism directed against non-Western peoples.

White society’s exercise of power over Indian tribes received the sanction of the Rule of Law in Johnson v. McIntosh. The Doctrine of Discovery’s underlying medievally derived ideology – that normatively divergent “savage” peoples could be denied rights and status equal to those accorded to the civilized nations of Europe – had become an integral part of the fabric of United States federal Indian law.  The architects of an idealized European vision of life in the Indians’ New World had successfully transplanted an Old World form of legal discourse denying all respect to the Indians’ fundamental human rights.

While the tasks of conquest and colonization had not yet been fully actualized on the entire American continent, the originary legal rules and principles of federal Indian law set down by Marshall in Johnson v. McIntosh and its discourse of conquest ensured that future acts of genocide would proceed on a rationalized, legal basis.
The American Indian in Western Legal Thought, Robert Williams (p. 316-317)


*******
Origins of Racial Profiling in the State of Arizona
Precedents of the policy of preferential racial profiling fundamental to the establishment of “white” political power systems, illegal and discriminatory practices of affirmative action institutionalizing colonization to the benefit of European American constituencies, in violation of Civil Rights, Human Rights, and Indigenous Rights in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo Territories.


VIOLATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS in the TREATY OF GUADALUPE HIDALGO TERRITORIES
(US-Mexico 1848)
The International Personality of the Mexicano Peoples
and the Law of Exceptions
ARTICLE IX
The Mexicans who, in the territories aforesaid, shall not preserve the character of citizens of the Mexican Republic, conformably with what is stipulated in the preceding article, shall be incorporated into the Union of the United States. and be admitted at the proper time (to be judged of by the Congress of the United States) to the enjoyment of all the rights of citizens of the United States, according to the principles of the Constitution; and in the mean time, shall be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty and property, and secured in the free exercise of their religion without restriction.
Article XI
Considering that a great part of the territories, which, by the present treaty, are to be comprehended for the future within the limits of the United States, is now occupied by savage tribes, who will hereafter be under the exclusive control of the Government of the United States, and whose incursions within the territory of Mexico would be prejudicial in the extreme, it is solemnly agreed that all such incursions shall be forcibly restrained by the Government of the United States whensoever this may be necessary; and that when they cannot be prevented, they shall be punished by the said Government, and satisfaction for the same shall be exacted all in the same way, and with equal diligence and energy, as if the same incursions were meditated or committed within its own territory, against its own citizens.
*******

31st US Congress, Chapter 49
September 9, 1850
US Territorial Act for the formation of the Territorial Government of New Mexico, through which the State of Arizona became admitted into the jurisdiction of the United States of America.

Sec. 6.  And be it further enacted, That every free white male inhabitant, above the age of twenty-one years, who shall have been a resident of said Territory at the time of passage of this act, shall be entitled to vote at the first election, and shall be eligible to any office within the said Territory; but the qualifications of voters and of holding office, at all subsequent elections, shall be such as be prescribed by the legislative assembly: Provided, That the right of suffrage, and of holding office, shall be exercised only by citizens of the United States, including those recognized as citizens by the treaty with the republic of Mexico, concluded February second, eighteen hundred and forty-eight.

ORDER TO APPEAR
Before the
Human Rights Commission of the Comités de Defensa del Barrio
TONATIERRA
The Spirit of Justice, the True Light of Law


*******
"They would have us submit to the rule of law, when all they have is the law of the rulers." 




The Master's Narrative:
Memes of Caste and the Anomaly of Histories
When the Adivasi, Indigenous Peoples of the Indian subcontinent, relate their experiences under the colonizing regimes that have swept their homelands, even references to Alexander the Great are preceded by the invasions of the Aryans and the introduction of the “white” concept of human cultural identity and superiority as the determinant for the caste systems that continue to plague the cultural landscape of India even after five thousand years.

To fast forward to the current dialogue on race and institutionalized racism in US society that was intensified by the 2008 presidential campaign, everyday we see and HEAR echoes of the memes of caste that are reinforced every time the phrase “white people” or “white” is used to describe the European American populations of the United States.  That perpetuation of a caste based society would be completely antithetical to the precepts of the “American Experiment of Democracy,” yet remain embedded in the vernacular of public and private discourse regarding social relationships has roots in the Indo-European histories, but is codified in the US Civil Rights statutes as follows:

United States Code
TITLE 42, CHAPTER 21, SUBCHAPTER I, § 1981.
Equal rights under the law
(a) Statement of equal rights
All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory to make and enforce contracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, penalties, taxes, licenses, and exactions of every kind, and to no other.

The term WHITE CITIZEN is contextualized further by the language of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution which states:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.

Thus the connection is made institutionally and culturally via the jurisprudence of the Master's Narrative, between concepts of white citizen and WHITE PERSON, establishing legal personality within the US social construct as a function of relationship to the dominant “white” power structures of rights and obligations.  The anomaly being the Nican Tlacah Indigenous Peoples who supercede the US jurisdiction as sovereign confederations of nations holding treaty relationships with the US and other government states of the world.

Proposal:
The historical moment of crisis and transformation which is evident nationally and globally, provides the opportunity to suggest a clarification in terms:

Specifically, TO EXCHANGE use of the term “WHITE”, “white citizen”, and “white person” with the term European-American in the public discourse on race and racism, citizenship and immigration. If the term “Black” can be correlated with African-American, why cannot the same principle apply for the “whites”?

What prevents us from clarifying one of the terms of the social discourse involved in the experiment in American Democracy and let’s see what happens. After all, the first victims of racism are the racists themselves, for what have they done to their own families and innocent children to produce such a culturally twisted and dehumanized constituency such as "white people" generation after generation?

Shall we collectively continue the experiment in democracy in this hemisphere, without perpetuating the institutionalizing of a continental affirmative action program of racism and superiority for one sector of society, the descendants of the European colonizers of the 15th century?

Tupac Enrique Acosta
Huehuecoyotl




Sunday, August 6, 2017

Aucan Huilcaman: Venezuela and the Right of Self Determination

2 August 2017



Recently, over the past two decades, two National Constituent Assemblies have been held in Venezuela. Both have taken place in a context of high tensions and controversies among Venezuelans. The first in 1999 was not exempt from opposing positions and resistance to change, where obviously economic interests underlie and especially due to the fundamental nature and characteristics of the constitutional acts.

Regarding the impression that the convocation of a National Constituent Assembly on the part of the government of Nicolás Maduro would have been an considered an arbitrary act, unlawful and unconstitutional, it should be noted that under the Constitution of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela in the provisions that specify the institutions which have the competency and powers to convene an event of this political nature, which may call for a reform, a plebiscite or a National Constituent Assembly, include the President of the Republic together with his ministers. Definitely, at this time the president of the Republic exercised a constitutional power provided for in the constitutional norm.

Likewise, to make it seem that the National Electoral Council CNE operated in collusion with the current government in the context of the National Constituent Assembly is totally absurd, because like all electoral bodies in a "state of law" the functions of the CNE are stipulated in the law.  This would be like thinking and accepting that in Chile the SERVEL Electoral Service would take a position of rebellion in order to satisfy a sector of society and enter into actions as an institution of disrespect and contempt for the law, situations which are also addressed in the legal system of a State.

In short, the National Electoral Council fulfilled its institutional function and organized the elections, including informing all citizens and receiving, in due time, the names of the candidates who exercised their right to compete and without political discrimination or of any kind. However, in the case of the Indigenous Peoples, a procedural distinction was recognized and exercised due to the fact that the Indigenous Peoples enjoy a special juridical status and that will be discussed next.

The Venezuelan voting system, "is the best in the world," said former United States President Jimmy Carter in 2012 after many verifications and in addition, in order “to see to believe”, this situation I could confirm personally, taking into account my participation in other electoral processes such as when I served as an observer of the Peace Agreements for the United Nations Mission in Guatemala MINUGUA.

To give credibility and transparency in the elections the Bolivarian government has instituted the highest technology, establishing a biometric system that, based on my experience "in situ", I could elaborate in four consecutive steps and explain this situation because it not only constitutes a novelty for my own experience as an international observer, but because this system does not exist in other countries.

The first step is the presentation of a national identity card previously established in a registry with the electoral commission and if it coincides and is good, the next step to check the information on the card with the technological systems of record. All the data provided by whoever is voting must match, and then if the system matches the name, the fingerprint and a photograph then the same person must recognize and verify his or her identity. 

Then the individual completes the third step and goes to cast his vote secretly and once the voter has cast his vote, the voting machine gives him a printed vote that the voter must confirm his preference and then deposit his vote in a ballot box and finally before leaving the voting station, the voter must sign a book as proof that he or she issued their vote independently, free of outside interference. These four passages also highlight a familiarization with the biometric system.

In the eight electoral stations where I was assigned in order to verify the election processes, I verified that the performance of each person was not subject to coercion or threats in the independent exercise of the issuance of their vote.  I followed several people who were in the voting ranks until the manifestation of their vote and I did not observe the interference of another person.

During the week that I stayed in Caracas, I was able to appreciate that the tensions and controversies that are experienced in Venezuela have their origin largely in the institutional changes that have been established since the arrival of the late President Hugo Chavez, which produced not only a counterbalance in power relations, but, historically excluded sectors of the Venezuelan people were successful in moving into positions of administration of the Venezuelan State.  For example, the Supreme Court of Justice is composed preferably by people of humble extraction, that is, their fulfillment of duty to justice in the Court is determined more by their merits and competencies and not their social extraction as commonly happens with the power structures in Latin America and the Caribbean.

The international media in Venezuela have displayed in a very clear and effective way the true nature of the fourth power, and the national media have mostly done nothing more than to accommodate and reproduce the messages and images of the international media industry. By way of example, Air Fance and Avianca suspended their flights to Caracas, however other airlines continued to operate with total normality. However, the normality was not news, and instead the story of Air France and Avianca contributed to create unnecessary uncertainties.

If you were to make a comparison, Venezuela is today's North Africa, because of the fact that it has the world's largest energy reserve of petroleum, and the business boycott has similar characteristics with the situation in Chile from ‘70 to ‘73.

It is extremely important to bear in mind that the realization of the National Constituent Assembly in Venezuela is an act of self-determination of the Peoples of Venezuela and is not subject to the approval of another State. Although other international entities have the right to express their opinion, the Right of Self-determination is a Principle of International Law which is fully consistent with the Charter of the United Nations, and based on these fundamental principles governing the multilateral relations of States, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights has called for international respect for the results of the National Constituent Assembly in Venezuela.

The right to protest in Venezuela is guaranteed as in any state where the "rule of law" is recognized, and this is the context for all the manifestations that have been realized before and during the development of the election of the national constituent assembly.  That there are prisoners, there definitely are, and for this reason I personally invited the wife of Leopoldo López to visit the Mapuche political prisoners in Chile, although there is a great difference in the character of the rights that have been violated against the Mapuche People, from the military coercive acts called "Pacification of the Araucanía" until today.

On the other hand, the election of a number of eight constituents to the national assembly from different Indigenous Peoples of Venezuela constitutes an event of high political significance, being that as is stipulated in the Bolivarian Political Constitution of Venezuela, the rights as Indigenous Peoples ranging from tangible and intangible rights to land, territories, resources, intellectual property, biodiversity and development, culture, language and others are recognized.

Two facts distinguish this new political situation. First, the procedure respects the Indigenous Peoples right of self-determination fully consistent with international law regarding indigenous self-determination as established in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. However, the Indigenous Peoples of Abya Yala [America and the Caribbean], presently are only conceded the right to consultation regarding development projects that impact their peoples and territories. 


Now, in the case of the National Constituent Assembly of Venezuela, the enormous difference is made evident between consultation and the right to self-determination, and it should be to take into account that every such consultation carried out in the different countries from Mexico to the south must be to be questioned for the bad faith under which they are manipulated and manufactured, and Chile is the best example.

Secondly, the eight Indigenous Constituents of the National Assembly of Venezuela have as mandate the mission to protect their collective rights which have been achieved with the struggle of all Indigenous Peoples and to move forward to advance these rights, indicating that they are creating their own destiny with the intent of achieving harmony with the rest of society.

By: Aucan Huilcaman

Caracas, August 2, 2017
Crónica Digital

###
Translation:


Links:

Cacique Guaicaipuro:

héroe venezolano de los pueblos indígenas 

 ********

Mapuche Nation calls for International Meeting to Revoke the Doctrine of Discovery

Wednesday, August 2, 2017

Sin Consulta Indígena, no habrá renegociación del TLC

La Jornada

Por Jaime Martínez Veloz
Ciudad de México 8 de Julio del 2017


(Artículo que puede ser distribuido y difundido por quien así desee hacerlo)


El día de ayer el Señor Donald Trump volvió a la carga, haciendo gala de su estilo pendenciero y amenazante, señalando que si no hay renegociación total del Tratado de Libre Comercio, Estados Unidos se retirará para siempre.

Frente a esta nueva bravuconería revisemos los impactos en México del tan famoso y llevado Tratado de Libre Comercio.

Es cierto que el TLC permitió a México colocarse como un país relevante en las cadenas productivas globales de valor, como el primer exportador de manufactura de América Latina.

La entrada en vigor del TLC hace más de dos décadas fue la plataforma para convertir a la economía de México en la decimosexta potencia exportadora del mundo, pero no ayudo a abatir la pobreza que se vive actualmente en el país. 

"Estábamos mejor, cuando estábamos peor" 
(Refrán Popular)

Sin embargo, a pesar de que se citan los miles de millones de dólares netos en comercio binacional como prueba del éxito del acuerdo, gran parte de la actividad comercial es intra-firma e intra-industria, con un monto realmente reducido de comercio real en bienes y servicios producidos por medianas y pequeñas empresas, las cuales generan la mayor parte del empleo.

Es decir las supuestas ganancias no ingresan a la economía mexicana y no han tenido ningún resultado positivo en elevar los índices de Desarrollo Humano.

México sigue siendo teniendo la misma cantidad de personas en Pobreza que antes de la entrada del TLC en vigor, con otros componentes graves que no existían en 1994 en los niveles y las dimensiones con que se presentan en la actualidad.



La inseguridad, la proliferación de grupos del crimen organizado, el deterioro del tejido social, la contaminación del medio ambiente por la utilización masiva de químicos en la industrias extractivas y un Estado Mexicano con menos recursos financieros, jurídicos, políticos y sociales, para cumplir con sus responsabilidades que le asignan las leyes para garantizar los compromisos republicanos a los que está obligado. 
 
¿Quiénes fueron los ganadores del TLC? 
 
Los grandes corporativos han sabido utilizar el marco comercial del TLC para integrar sus cadenas productivas, pero las pequeñas y medianas empresas continúan en desventaja porque no cuentan con la flexibilidad de desplazamiento, la capacidad financiera, las redes productivas integradas, o los incentivos comerciales rentables con una envergadura continental.
 
Tal es el caso del sector hortofrutícola, especialmente con el jitomate, al aprovechar las ventanas agrícolas, así como el aguacate.
 
En 1995 no podíamos exportar aguacate al mercado de Estados Unidos, al cierre de noviembre 2016 México alcanzó la cifra de 319 millones de dólares en la exportación de este fruto de acuerdo a las cifras de Banco de México en Balanza de Pagos.
 
Otros productos ganadores a 20 años de dicho acuerdo son la cerveza, tequila, café sin descafeinar, frambuesas, pepinos, pimientos, productos de panadería, galletas dulces, cebollas, sandías, alimentos para bebés, espárragos y cigarrillos.
El sector automotriz con la entrada en vigor del acuerdo comercial entre los tres países, fue de los ganadores más representativos.
 
Sin embargo por cada empleo que se creó en la industria automotriz o maquiladora, perdimos 2 o 3 en el campo. 
 
Indígenas y Campesinos, los Perdedores del TLC 
 
No obstante, el paraíso prometido de mejores salarios y elevación de los niveles de vida para los trabajadores nunca llego y los más afectados fueron los campesinos e indígenas de México, ante un escenario donde se le retiraron los apoyos a ejidatarios y comuneros y se liberaron de aranceles a los productos agrícolas provenientes de Estados Unidos, precarizando aún más la economía campesina de mediana y pequeña escala.
 
Los campesinos y los indígenas mexicanos fueron desplazados, en algunos casos se generó una migración importante hacia el norte debido omisiones del tratado de libre comercio que generaron integración laboral sin provisiones para administrarla de manera legal y ordenada. De tal manera se generó una situación paradójica en que hay una migración masiva, caótica desordenada provocada sin embargo por el mismo mercado laboral pero sin ninguna previsión para los migrantes, que terminan por ser criminalizados. 
 
¿Qué pasó con los salarios? 
 
En términos salariales, después de una fuerte y prolongada caída asociada a la crisis de 1994 y 1995, para 2012 los salarios promedio eran solo 6.6% más altos de lo que eran en 1993, lo que implica una tasa de crecimiento promedio anual de solo 0.34%.
 
El salario promedio de 2012 era prácticamente idéntico al que prevalecía en México 30 años atrás.
 
Estas diferencias son mayores cuando comparamos los niveles salariales reales por hora, que en Estados Unidos son 5 o 6 veces mayores al salario real ofrecido en México:

México cuenta con el salario mínimo más bajo dentro de los países miembros de la Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económicos (OCDE), la remuneración en el país es de apenas 1.01 dólares por hora, cifra inferior a los niveles de países como Chile (2.2 dólares) y Turquía (3.49 dólares), economías similares a la mexicana.  El salario mínimo de un trabajador australiano es nueve veces mayor al de un mexicano, ya que el del empleado del continente de Oceanía es de 9.54 dólares por hora. 
 
Los Pueblos Indígenas y el Tratado de Libre Comercio 
 
Quien planteo originalmente, los efectos negativos que traería el TLC para el campo mexicano, fue el EZLN, cuyo levantamiento armado se produjo el día de la entrada de México a dicho acuerdo.
 
La historia y el tiempo les han dado la razón.



En el proceso de negociación de TLC que se aprobó en 1993, los campesinos e indígenas, principales afectados por los efectos de este tratado estuvieron ausentes, a pesar de que el Convenio 169 de la OIT, había sido aprobado y aceptado por nuestro país en 1991. Cuestión que no puede ni debe volver a suceder. 
 
Sin Consulta Indígena no hay Tratado 
 
Hoy desde el punto de vista jurídico se puede afirmar categóricamente que si no hay Consulta Indígena en México no habrá renegociación total o parcial del TLC, que sea válida.
 
Existen un conjunto de normas nacionales e internacionales que hacen legalmente imposible, que se pueda producir la renegociación total o parcial del TLC, sin la participación de los Pueblos y las Comunidades Indígenas.
 
México está obligado constitucionalmente a consultar a los Pueblos Indígenas, sobre todo aquello que los afecte. 

Si el Gobierno Mexicano no lo hace, la SCJN o los Tribunales Internacionales declararan ilegal a cualquier Tratado que firme México y no consulte a sus Pueblos Originarios.  Así se establece en el Artículo Primero Constitucional y en el Convenio 169 de la OIT.
 
La falta de Consulta a las Comunidades Indígenas fue el argumento central de que utilizó la PGR para interponer el recurso de inconstitucionalidad en contra de la Constitución de la Ciudad de México, por lo que el Gobierno Mexicano no podrá tener una postura diferente si no se Consulta a los Pueblos Indígenas, en cualquier renegociación del TLC. 


Para quien tenga duda sobre este tema, le dejo el Link para que comprueben lo que le comento. (Consulte de la Página 278 a la 286)





ONU, Derechos Indígenas y Acuerdos Comerciales 
 
Por otro lado en el Informe de la Relatora Especial del Consejo de Derechos Humanos sobre los derechos de los pueblos indígenas, Victoria Tauli Corpuz, relativo a las repercusiones de las inversiones internacionales y el libre comercio sobre los derechos humanos de los pueblos indígenas, presentado a la Asamblea General de la ONU el 29 de Julio del año 2016, se establecen una serie de recomendaciones en relación con las prácticas en materia de inversión y de libre comercio en favor de los pueblos indígenas, que se suman al marco jurídico nacional y a las normas internacionales, vigentes y aplicables en este tipo acuerdos comerciales.
 
En dicho Informe la relatora señala "que las inversiones no son, en sí mismas, destructivas, pero pone de relieve los aspectos injustos del actual sistema de gobernanza económica y financiera mundial y sobre la limitada capacidad de protección de los Estados y los sistemas de gobernanza local".
 
"Analiza el modo en que los pueblos indígenas, que se encuentran entre los más marginados del mundo, sufren de manera desproporcionada las consecuencias de un sistema que contiene desequilibrios sistémicos entre el ejercicio de los derechos de las sociedades inversoras y el ejercicio de los derechos humanos".
 
Hace una serie de recomendaciones a los Estados "de cómo actuar colectivamente para encontrar formas de lograr un mayor equilibrio entre los derechos de los inversores y las empresas y los derechos humanos de todos los ciudadanos en los regímenes de inversión y de libre comercio". 
 
Comparto el Link de dicho Informe, para que pueda ser consultado cabalmente. 

ONU: Informe de la Relatora Especial del Consejo de Derechos Humanos sobre los derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas

Repercusiones de las inversiones internacionales y el librecomercio sobre los derechos humanos de los pueblos indígenas, Informe a la Asamblea General, 2015


Sin el TLC los Agricultores Norteamericanos pierden
El principal defensor del TLC es el Secretario de Agricultura de Estados Unidos.
 
En México quienes se benefician con el TLC en el campo es solo un pequeño grupo de grandes y medianos agricultores.
La inmensa mayoría de campesinos e indígenas no pueden producir porque no hay financiamiento y porque las condiciones de competencia en materia agrícola son muy desiguales e injustas para México en materia de producción de granos, lo que le facilita a los norteamericanos vendernos millones de toneladas de maíz, trigo y otros granos al precio que les da la gana.
 
México puede y debe plantearse ser autosuficiente en materia de producción de granos en unos cuantos años, lo que nos daría autosuficiencia alimentaria, fortalecería al campo y le brindaría esperanza de vida a los Ejidos y Pueblos Indígenas de México.
 
Si se cancela el TLC, miles de agricultores gringos se van a quedar sin chamba.
 
Trump lo sabe, solo que su forma de negociar es la que ya es pública y predecible, lloriqueos, pataletas y parafernalia. 
 
La diplomacia no está reñida con la firmeza
 
El día de ayer también nos dice Trump que "naciones extranjeras se han enriquecido a expensas de Estados Unidos".
 
¿En realidad alguien en el mundo se puede creer tamaña mentira?
 
Si en verdad cree eso podríamos proponer que cancele los "Tratados de Guadalupe Hidalgo", nos devuelva a los mexicanos nuestro territorio arrebatado y le regresamos el equivalente a los mugrosos pesos que le entregaron al Gobierno Mexicano de ese tiempo.
 
¿Lo hará? Claro que no lo hará.
 
Antigua Residencia de los Aztecas

El Muro y los trastornos mentales de Trump

Cuando los medios cuestionaron a Trump sobre si seguía queriendo que México pagara el anunciado Muro, contesto con un "Absolutamente", que expresa lo majadero y pendenciero que trae en la sangre, su absoluta falta de respeto por todos, y su manifiesto desprecio por las formas, convergente con su cinismo, su arrogancia y odio por nuestra raza.

Pero México no puede permitir que, cada vez que se le antoje, Trump nos agreda, nos insulte, nos amenace y la respuesta de nuestras autoridades sea que "queremos tener una relación constructiva", "vemos avances positivos", "queremos una relación que sea la de ganar, ganar" o cualquier otra equivalencia a poner la otra mejilla. Ese comedimiento, que podría funcionar para otros escenarios y en otras circunstancias, es inútil y contraproducente con un personaje estrafalario como Trump.

Una personalidad como la de Trump tiende a burlarse de las actitudes comedidas. A cada agresión hay que responder enfrentándolo cara a cara.

Podemos convertir nuestra debilidad en fortaleza si actuamos con inteligencia y firmeza. No hay que dejar pasar ni una sola agresión.


Esto no lo aprendí en los libros, sino en los barrios donde crecí: así combatíamos a los gandallas de la cuadra para anularlos. Sé que no es lo mismo, se no hay recetas para enfrentar estos casos, pero sí hay patrones de conducta a los cuales hay que enfrentar, conociendo su fortaleza pero también sus debilidades.

Es ilustrativa de la personalidad de Trump la actitud que adopta frente a Putin, con quien llega con la cola entre las patas.

Somos una Nación Soberana, podremos tener todas las carencias del mundo y muchísimos problemas internos, pero no podemos permitir que una autoridad extranjera, por más poderosa que sea, nos humille y nos falte el respeto.

No se trata de faltarle al respeto a él, ni a nadie, pero si el señor dice frente a los medios que México va a pagar el muro, ahí mismo hay que contestarle que bajo ninguna circunstancia lo haremos.

El solo hecho de que se mencione un tema de esa naturaleza, expresa que estamos frente a una persona que, o es muy abusiva, o padece un severo daño neuronal.

Incluso sin agresión, se le podía haber invitado a que, frente a los propios medios presentes, expusiera las razones, los fundamentos legales, los artículos de los acuerdos, normas y tratados internacionales, que sustenten legal y racionalmente una propuesta tan absurda, producto de una mente con graves trastornos, según el diagnóstico de los Psiquiatras de las Universidades más prestigiadas de Estados Unidos.

Por ello, reiteramos nuestro respeto para el Pueblo Norteamericano, pero no para el Sr. Trump, porque no solo es embustero, sino que le encanta presumirlo.
 
 

Y sobre el TLC: si no quiere continuar, pues que se lleve sus triques a otro lado, que deje de estar jorobando y quitando el tiempo. México era y seguirá siendo México, con o sin TLC, y mucho ayuda el que no estorba.

Si sabemos aprovechar esta coyuntura, será una oportunidad para redefinir nuestro futuro, para establecer nuevas normas y reglas del juego, que le permitan a México ser un país más equitativo, justo y democrático.


Ciudad de México 8 de Julio del 2017

 
 ************
La Ley de Excepciones: Carta Abierta a los Ministros de Estado y a las Constituyentes Públicas de Canadá, Estados Unidos, y México

CONCLUSIÓN

Hacemos un llamado a los ministros de gobierno en todos los niveles de Canadá, Estados Unidos, y México, y los constituyentes públicos de sus respectivas sociedades para hacer frente sin prejuicios ni discriminación de las aclaraciones anteriores.  Afirmamos que estas aclaraciones obligan la rectificación del crimen del colonialismo y una moratoria sobre todos los proyectos de desarrollo económico dentro del TLCAN que afectan los territorios de las Naciones y Pueblos Indígenas hasta que el Consentimiento Libre, Previo, e Informado de los pueblos indígenas es plenamente reconocido, respetado, y protegido en el espíritu de la Declaración de la ONU sobre los Derechos de los Pueblos Indígenas, de la siguiente manera:

"Afirmando que los pueblos indígenas son iguales a todos los demás pueblos, …."