Monthly Archives: May 2024

Porque Colombia ha requerido un nuevo Constituyente desde el 1991

Posted on by
Reply

Como ocurre en muchos otros países, en Colombia, al parecer, adoramos a nuestra Constitución.  “Adoramos” es la palabra perfecta por que la tratamos como si fuera una reliquia sagrada no obstante que en casi todas sus metas, posiblemente en todas, ha sido un fracaso.  La “adoramos” pero en poco la respetamos y en menos la cumplimos.  Eso se ha notado en diversas ocasiones por la derecha política y también por la izquierda.  Pero el rechazo a su modificación, una modificación seria, ha sido inmenso.  ¿Y, por qué?

Pues en parte, la realidad es que una reforma eficiente de nuestra Constitución actual tendría que ser tan extensa que resultaría en su remplazo.  Nuestra Constitución está llena de palabras lindas y conceptos hermosos, tantos que es la segunda más larga del mundo.  Pero entre las lindas palabras y los hermosos conceptos están las cláusulas que permiten evadir todas sus promesas.  Un laberinto de requisitos técnicos incumplibles.  Sus promesas han sido ignoradas porque su implementación requiere colaboración política en el Congreso y requiere un Ministerio Publico honesto y eficiente, algo que, por la manera en el cual sus miembros son escogidos, ha resultado imposible.

Para evaluar una constitución, cualquiera constitución, se tiene que medir que tanto se ha logrado cumplir con sus metas.  Hagamos el ejercicio: ¿Se estableció la paz?  ¿Se eliminó la corrupción?  ¿Se logró la equidad?  ¿Se logró la igualdad?  ¿Se logró la justicia?  ¿Se ha eliminó la impunidad?  ¿Se ha disminuido la polarización?  ¿Se ha cumplido con los derechos prometidos?  ¿Se ha logrado la democracia? 

Si somos honestos y objetivos, creo que en ninguno de estos casos fundamentales la respuesta sea sí.  Entonces, ¿para qué sirve esta Constitución?  Bonita si es.  Pero es disfuncional.  ¿Y, por qué?

Pues, en gran parte no es justo decir que no sirve.  Si les sirve a algunos.  A los corruptos, a los ladrones.  A los que tienen el dinero para evadir la justicia.  Pero más que todo, les sirve a los partidos políticos.  Los reales sujetos de la Constitución colombiana del 1991 no son los ciudadanos, ellos son meros objetos.  Los sujetos son los partidos políticos y por ende, los que se benefician de la Constitución son los que controlan a esos partidos. 

Para entender lo anterior se requiere entender la diferencia entre un sujeto y un objeto.  Un objeto es una persona jurídica o natural o institucional sobre cual el poder del estado es ejercido.  Eso incluyo humanos, animales y hasta objetos inanimados, como carros, mesas, comida, etc.  Un sujeto es un objeto que tiene derechos de manejo sobre el poder político que lo impacta, pero derecho y poder real, no meras ilusiones.

En Colombia, los legisladores en el Congreso tienen que hacer lo que dice su partido o pierden sus curules.  No elegimos individuos al Congreso sino partidos.  Lo único que podemos hacer, si las listas electorales son abiertas, es cambiar el orden en el cual los candidatos podrían recibir sus curules.  Nada más.  Por lo tanto, no podemos elegir a quienes nos parecen los mejores y los más honestos líderes políticos para nuestro congreso, o para nuestras asambleas departamentales, o para nuestros concejos municipales.  Eso no es democracia.

En Colombia, planes estratégicos parecen imposibles lograr porque un plan estratégico requiere más de un periodo electoral para completarse, sea de derecha o de izquierda.  Tenemos la absurda noción de, no solo prohibir la reelección, sino también prohibir que una persona que ha ocupado un cargo político ejecutivo, o tiene familiares que han ejercido una función ejecutiva, tenga que esperar un año para superar esas limitaciones que actualmente son inhabilitantes.  Por lo tanto, lo normal es que ningún líder político que busca ascender en sus cargos pueda cumplir el periodo total para el cual fue escogido.  O renuncia un año antes del fin de su periodo legal, o, adiós a una nueva elección.  ¡Qué estupidez!  Esas limitaciones no existen en ningún país exitoso del mundo.

Lo que Colombia requiere, lo que cualquier país requiere, es una constitución decente y eficiente sin promesas incumplibles.  Una constitución escrita en manera comprensible por la ciudadanía.  Y, una sin aspectos plenamente legislativos que no tienen por qué estar incluidos en una obra tan permanente como debe ser constitución.  Una constitución real es algo extraordinario que solo debe tener cuatro funciones: 

  • Primero, crear y delimitar las instituciones estatales.  Es decir, las unidades geográficas y las instituciones gubernamentales como son la legislatura, el ejecutivo, la rama judicial, los procesos electorales, y los medios de control político, y, ademas, las instituciones responsables por la estricta interpretación constitucional y por resolver conflictos entre las diversas ramas del estado.
  • Segundo, toda constitución es inherentemente antidemocrática buscando impedir no solo el poder de la mayoría sino el poder de futuras generaciones.  Todo supuesto derecho fundamental o humano es antidemocrático en ese aspecto.  Pero antidemocrático no implica algo negativo o abusivo, ese aspecto es esencial para proteger la libertad, la autonomía personal y al bienestar y a la independencia de las minorías.
  • El tercer aspecto plenamente constitucional es el de establecer prioridades con respecto al ejercicio del poder, más que todo en temas presupuestales.  La realidad de mucho de lo que se define como “derechos fundamentales o humanos” nada tiene que ver con el concepto de un “derecho”.  Un derecho es inherente, nadie lo da, es eterno, no se puede condicionar.  Entonces, por supuesto, hoy en día, ningún derecho existe ya que ninguno cumple con esos requisitos pero si existen o pueden existir prioridades.  No podemos garantizar la paz, como promete nuestra Constitución, ni un medio ambiente sano, ni la educación, ni la salud, ni viviendas dignas, etc., pero una constitución si podría exigir que los primeros gastos estatales trataran con una función específica, luego, si hay suficiente dinero restante, con otra, y lo mismo hasta que se agota el dinero.  Entonces, en vez de derechos incumplidos, tendríamos prioridades incondicionales delimitadas constitucionalmente.
  • El cuarto y último aspecto trata con su permanencia.  Enmendarla debe ser, no solo difícil, sino que debe requerir de la misma formalidad con la cual se adoptó, y en ambos casos, eso debe, al final, incluir la aprobación directa del primer constituyente, del pueblo, o por plebiscito o por referendo (dependiendo en si hay más que una opción presentada).  Y debe haber proceso dentro de la misma constitución no solo para su enmienda, sino para su remplazo total y eso, por medios no solamente convocados por el gobierno, o por una rama del gobierno, sino por iniciativa popular suficientemente amplia par no resultar en propuestas poco serias o poco apoyadas por el pueblo.

Esos cuatro aspectos y ningunos más tratan con temas que se deben incluir en nuestra carta magna, en nuestra carta política, en nuestra constitución.  Lo que se incluye en una constitución se tiene que cumplir.  Si no se cumple, entonces ahí no debía estar y si esta, se debe de eliminar.

Entonces, si vamos a superar todos los problemas antes mencionados: ¿que debe abordar una constitución decente y eficiente para Colombia?  Pues hay modelos que debíamos investigar, pero no copiar.  Lo que funciona en otras partes no necesariamente funcionaria aquí.  Llegamos a donde estamos copiando conceptos constitucionales desde esa potencia del norte que tanto daño nos ha hecho, y copiados en forma incoherentemente descontextualizada ya que Colombia no es una federación y no aspira a ser un imperio. 

Una república que si me parece que tiene un modelo admirable que nos podría, en parte, funcionar, es la de la República Irlandés.  Ellos gozan de un modelo parlamentario pero no idéntico al inglés.  El modelo de gobierno parlamentario es mucho más democrático que el presidencial y mucho más eficiente.  Eso porque tanto la cámara baja del parlamento, la más importante aunque es denominada los comunes, y el ejecutivo son internamente ligados y cuando no están de acuerdo, en vez de congelarse la gobernación, hay nuevas elecciones para la cámara baja (y, por ende, el ejecutivo) y es el pueblo el que resuelve la crisis.  El parlamento escoge el primer ministro, quien es el jefe de gobierno pero no el jefe de estado, y el parlamento y el primer ministro, conjuntamente, escogen los jefes de los diversos ministerios.  La cámara alta, el senado, es muy innovadora ya que no es democrática, como es la cámara de los comunes, sino pluralista.  Sus miembros no son elegidos popularmente sino por diferentes segmentos de la sociedad.  Algunos son nombrados por el presidente (el jefe de estado, diferente siempre que el primer ministro), otros son elegidos por los sindicatos, otros por las universidades, otros por las cámaras de comercio, etc.  Y el presidente es elegido popularmente siendo la única persona elegida a nivel nacional.  El presidente es encargado más que todo con control político, con las fuerzas armadas y con temas diplomáticos.  Eso permite gobernanza por un tiempo indeterminado, un tiempo que podría ser o muy largo o muy corto, dependiendo en la voluntad popular.  El periodo electoral constitucional es de cinco años, pero no hay límites sobre re-elección.  Al mismo tiempo, podría ser más corto si el primer ministro pierde la confianza del parlamento o si el primer ministro, queriendo aumentar su respaldo en el parlamento, disuelve al parlamento y convoca elecciones tempranas. 

Quizás el aspecto que más admiro del sistema estatal de la Republica Irlandesa es el electoral.  Como en Colombia, las elecciones a los comunes se basan en listas, pero las listas no se conforman por los partidos sino por los electores en forma individual.  Por ejemplo, en el sistema colombiano actual, el Departamento de Caldas es representado en la Cámara de Representantes por cinco personas.  Pero los electores solo pueden votar por una y, al votar por esa, su partido y todos sus otros candidatos reciben el apoyo.  En la Republica Irlandesa, cada ciudadano tendría cinco votos, y los colocaría en orden de prioridad sin consideración de diferencias partidistas, creando así su propia lista.  Así se mantiene el concepto de proporcionalidad entre los diversos grupos de candidatos, sean por partido o independientes, pero no se obliga a que el voto sea limitado a un partido.  Ademas, una vez elegidos, los parlamentarios votan su conciencia y no pueden ser destituidos por diferencias entre ellos y sus partidos.

Entonces, tanto la derecha representada por los seguidores del expresidente Álvaro Uribe Vélez y la izquierda representada por el actual presidente de Colombia, Gustavo Francisco Petro Urrego, en parte, tenían la razon cuando decían que Colombia necesitaba un nuevo constituyente constitucional, pero ambos estaban equivocados cuando deseaban limitar los temas constitucionales a los cuales se limitaría esa convocatoria.  Necesitamos iniciar de nuevo porque los cambios esenciales para lograr un país democrático, libertario, equitativo, justo y libre de corrupción e impunidad necesitan un sistema muy diferente al que tenemos y al que siempre hemos tenido.  Un sistema en el cual son los individuos y no los partidos que gobiernan.  Pero por esa razon, los que ahora dominan el poder, tanto los de derecha como los de centro, izquierda y los meramente pragmáticos están totalmente en desacuerdo con un nuevo constituyente ilimitado.  Para ellos, su peor pesadilla es la devolución del poder al pueblo, en especial, si no logran dominar sus decisiones electorales por medio del temor, por medio de las mentiras, por medio de la manipulación o por medio de la corrupción.

Nuestra Constitución actual no es más que un rompecabezas conformado de montones de acuerdos políticos entre personas que buscaron beneficiarse personalmente y beneficiar a sus diversas agrupaciones politicoeconómicas y sociales.  Un rompecabezas incoherente, uno lleno de contradicciones irresolubles.  Por eso ha resultado imposible cumplir con sus numerosas hermosas promesas.  Un cambio de vestido o un poquito de maquillaje no serán adecuados para reformarla.

Una Colombia ideal, una Colombia utópica en temas de su gobernanza es posible, una Colombia mucho más eficiente y realmente honesta.  Una Colombia mucho más equitativa y justa.  Y eso es, no solo posible, sino probable.  Pero necesitamos desamarrarnos de los enlaces maquiavélicos con los cuales nuestros representantes nos enlazaron en 1991.

_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2024; todos derechos reservados.  Permiso para compartir con atribución.

Guillermo Calvo Mahé es escritor, comentarista, analista político y académico residente en la República de Colombia. Aspira ser poeta y a veces se lo cree.  Hasta el 2017 coordinaba los programas de Ciencia Política, Gobierno y Relaciones Internacionales de la Universidad Autónoma de Manizales y, entre las asignaturas que dictaba con relevancia a este artículo estaban Teoría Constitucional, Gobierno y sistemas políticos comparados, y, Derechos Humanos.  En la actualidad, participa en entrevistas radiales y televisadas, foros, seminarios y congresos cívicos y edita y publica la revista virtual The Inannite Review disponible en Substack.com/.  Tiene títulos académicos en ciencias políticas (del Citadel, la universidad militar de la Carolina del Sur), derecho (de la St. John’s University en la ciudad de Nueva York), estudios jurídicos internacionales (de la facultad posgrado de derecho de la New York University) y estudios posgrado de lingüística y traducción (del Centro de Estudios Latinoamericanos de la Universidad de la Florida).  Sin embargo, también es fascinado por la mitología, la religión, la física, la astronomía y las matemáticas, especialmente en lo relacionado con lo cuántico y la cosmogonía.  Puede ser contactado en guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com y gran parte de su escritura está disponible a través de su blog en https://guillermocalvo.com/.

On the Assembly and Attempted Destruction of a Straw Man as a Political Golem: a reality check

Posted on by
Reply

For most of this millennium, candidates for the United States presidency have been absolute horrors, recognized as such by the majority of the voters, but, what passes for democracy in the United States is really a multilevel filtering system that leaves the candidate selection process virtually free of public participation, thus, only candidates acceptable to the oligarchy that actually rules us ever obtain the major party nominations essential for electoral participation.  Indeed, the process has failed only three times during the past century, the election of Richard Millhouse Nixon in 1968, the election of James Earl Carter, Jr. in 1976, and the election of Donald John Trump in 2016.  In each case, the furious traditional political apparatus quickly destroyed the successful candidates.  The latter case is the most interesting however, especially, as it was undone by electoral machinations during the 2020 election, and because a possible replay is in process right now, and it is carefully tied to the concept of a “straw man”.

The concept of “straw men” and, in today’s egalitarian atmosphere, “straw women” is essential in today’s sociopolitical context where manipulation and hypocrisy are the rule and truth an irrelevancy to be avoided at all costs.  In that context, the Democratic Party, a once essential ideologically-leftist political force (now bereft of any ideology except a quest for permanent dictatorial power dedicated to the profits possible in the antithesis of Kant’s “perpetual peace”), crafted the ultimate “straw” man”, a sort of golem, one essential to the modern ill-named Democratic Party (given its vacuity of principles).  That is, given the reality that the principle candidates offered for the highest office by the Democratic Party generate little if any public support on their own and thus, it has become essential for that Deep State pillar to “create” a vilifiable figure against whom to run; a boogey man to frighten voters, one apparently as evil in every way as it is possible to portray so that the even more horrible candidates offered to the electorate by the Democratic Party seem the better option, a concept known as lesser evil politics.  Of course, that also requires that other available options offered by non-traditional political parties and movements such as Jill Stein, Cornel West, PhD, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., etc., be hidden and silenced, but with a subservient mass media, that has never proven difficult.

Thus, enter “Donald John Trump”, a former Democrat and former best friend of the modern Democratic Party’s founders, Bill and Hillary Clinton, the “straw man” extraordinaire, particularly given the shade of his hair which so nearly matches that of Hillary.  The perfect foil for first, Hillary Clinton and then, Joseph Robinette Biden, … at least, so it seemed.  However, despite the best efforts of the Democratic Party and its puppet masters in the Deep State as well as of the mass media, things did not go according to script in 2016 and possibly, during 2020.  2024 remains to be seen.  However, lessons were learned as a result of the 2016 fiasco, and with the elimination of anti-electoral fraud mechanisms through mass mailing of electoral ballots and their collection through indirect means without required verification, the ability of voters to make incorrect electoral decisions has been severely limited.  Additionally, the criminalization of challenges to electoral results, regardless of how suspicious such results seemed, have made unacceptable results improbable.

The Democrat’s “straw man” for 2016, Donald Trump, proved enigmatic.  He apparently started out with all the attributes Democrats had hoped for when Bill Clinton urged him to run for the presidency in opposition to his own wife.  “The Donald” (as he likes to style himself) was and is an arrogant egocentric, egomaniac with a propensity for ludicrous superlatives for purposes of self-promotion, coupled with childish bullying tactics and a proclivity for name calling.  Obviously, at least initially, he was the ideal opponent for the most polarizing and disliked political figure in United States at the time, Mrs. Clinton.  Of course, he’d have to first defeat a host of Republicans eager to go head to head against Mrs. Clinton who, with respect to them, was bound to lose, so, the Donald had to be positioned, with the help of the docile mass media, for maximum exposure.  After all, who, seeing the Donald’s ludicrous posturing, linguistic vulgarity and pomposity would not, in the end, consider Hillary the lesser evil and, holding their noses, covering their eyes, plugging their ears and covering their mouths, vote for her in preference to the Donald?

The first part of the plan worked, albeit perhaps too well.  The Donald steamrolled his Republican opponents and became a darling of the populist segment of the Republican Party.  A strange political bloc which had, in large part, rejected the corruption inherent in all major United States political institutions.  It involved an informal hodgepodge of diverse political groupings ranging from libertarian to extreme conservative but, its largest segment involved a disorganized, leaderless group that described itself as the “Tea Party”.  While not formally organized or led, people who self-identified as members of the Tea Party tended to vote in concert and, to the shocked surprise of the traditional segment of the GOP, they soon constituted a majority of the Republican Party’s electorate.  The Democratic Party experienced a populist wave itself in the form of backers of purportedly independent and progressive Senator Bernie Sanders, but he quickly sold out his Sanderistas, leaving them sucking their thumbs and wondering what happened.  That left only the Donald for those sick of traditional politics as usual, and lightning struck via the law of unintended consequences, leaving both Machiavellian Democrats and traditional Republicans flabbergasted. 

The “Deep State” (an informal alliance of billionaires, intelligence agencies, the mass media and moles planted throughout the federal bureaucracy by the Obama administration), was especially flabbergasted but not totally unprepared.  The Deep State, which had enjoyed an unbreakable grip on both major parties since the Clintons’ victory in 1992, was faced with the ultimate “loose cannon” in the Donald, a billionaire who was beholden to no one and whose megalomania knew no bounds.  Indeed, the Donald seemed a sort of Mussolini who perceived that he was worthy of deification.  Unfortunately for the Deep State, the Democratic Party and traditionalist Republicans, a major segment of the electorate agreed with him and still does, that despite the massive attacks to which he has been subjected since he was surprisingly elected president in 2016 and much more so since he refused to accept the obvious electoral manipulation and possible electoral fraud that led to his defeat in the 2020 re-run.

The Donald’s policies mainly dealt with treating symptoms fairly well, while ignoring underlying causes and his administration did unexpectedly well during its first three years, but John Fauci, MD, the federal Centers for Disease Control and the corporate media came to the Democratic Party’s rescue during the fourth year of the Trump administration, successfully leveraging a global virus into an international economic disaster and blaming it all on the hapless Donald.  It took a major Deep State managed misinformation campaign, a fake foreign political interference scandal and a gullible public, especially among African Americans to undo the 2016 debacle, but, with the help of a mole ridden federal bureaucracy, by January 20, 2021, the Donald was out of the picture, at least temporarily.

But the Clintons had created a political version of the Frankenstein monster, a golem who went on to crush them, and seems ready to do so again despite the Deep State’s new massive campaign against him, one pitting the subverted United States Justice Department and Democratic Party controlled state and local chief legal officers and tame judges and juries bringing deeply flawed legal and criminal actions against him.  The Donald though, like a good golem, just refuses to die.

So, what happens if he wins again?  He’s been leading in most polls, most of the time? 

Well, there is a significant possibility that he would be prevented from assuming his office by a real “insurrection”, you know, like the ones foreseen in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution, not like the limited protests that took place on January 6, 2021 (and which seemed to have been infiltrated by Deep State agents whose goal was to use them as a means of preventing more meaningful protests from taking place, a sort of “straw protest” strategy).  If that takes place, all bets are off.  The Deep State, which would have been responsible for orchestrating the insurrection, would immediately label opponents to that de facto coup d’état as “insurrections and, since it controls the armed forces, intelligence agencies, police forces, prosecutorial agencies and the judiciary, as well as the mass media, the real insurrectionists would continue to govern, and those seeking to defend the Constitution would promptly be imprisoned or, perhaps, even disappeared (as happens in so many countries that experience United States intelligence agency orchestrated coups d’état).  And then what?

Good question.

There are of course, other options.  “Non-straw person” options.  At least three.  There is African American philosopher, Cornel West, PhD, a brilliant civic leader who, unfortunately is running a terrible campaign; there’s traditional Green Party candidate Jill Stein, a brilliant Jewish woman opposed to Israeli genocide and military opportunism in favor of liberal domestic programs; and, then there’s Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. (RFK, Jr.), a courageous liberal anticorruption crusader with a lifetime of real achievements but who, unfortunately, is tied to Israel because a Palestinian assassinated his father in 1968.  Of the three, the Israeli backing Zionists who control so much of the mass media (not Jews, Zionists) and the political bribery process known as campaign contributions will assure that only pro-Israeli RFK, Jr., has any chance, although his opposition to other Deep State military projects like the Ukrainian adventure designed to overthrow Vladimir Putin in the Russian Federation and the series of provocations designed to incite a hot war between the United States (or its proxies) and the Peoples’ Republic of China over the Chinese province of Taiwan make him anathema to the billionaire class that rules us.  However, RFK, Jr.’s poll numbers keep going up, so much so that now, not only the Democratic Party is “dead” set on preventing his candidacy (I use the term dead because, notwithstanding the assassination of his father and uncle, the Biden administration refuses to provide RFK, Jr., with secret service protection), but so is the Trump campaign and a magnificent recently released video narrated by Woody Harrelson presenting the real RFK, Jr., rather than the parody portrayed by the mass media, is making so many waves, that the oligarchs of the Internet have started a campaign to block its distribution (his campaign just filed a related law suit against META).  A campaign identical to the one waged by them against Mr. Trump in 2020.  The link to the video, as of right now, is https://www.kennedy24.com/who-is-bobby-video-donate?utm_campaign=elon_musk&utm_medium=email1&utm_source=joinkennedy.  Who knows how long it will be permitted to function.  Watch it if you can.

Anyway, as we see the United States government, along with that of the United Kingdom, Canada and Australia defend Israeli genocide with all the armaments they can supply, even diverting armaments from the Ukraine, making a sick mockery over the claims made to justify military adventurism since World War I, we can sit by, glued to our television screens (if we’re older) or to our computers and cell phones (if we’re younger), being spoon fed deceptive propaganda and assured that everything is and will continue to be just fine, as long as we vote the way we’re supposed to or even, if we don’t.  It may not make a difference how we vote anymore.

So, how about those Yankees?  Or Dodgers, or whatever will distract us from the issues that will mold our future and that of our children for generations to come.

“Bajigabajiga that’s all folks!!!! (Porky Pig, circa, 1937).
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2024; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen).  Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.  He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review, available at Substack.com, an intermittent commentator on radio and television, and, an occasional contributor to diverse periodicals and publications.  He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies).  However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta and cosmogony.  He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

The Civic Ironies that keep us Politically Caged

Posted on by
Reply

On May 10, 2024, Jonathan Cook published an article on Substack entitled “Biden’s war on Gaza is now a war on truth and the right to protest. The media’s role is to draw attention away from what the students are protesting – complicity in genocide – and engineer a moral panic to leave the genocide undisturbed”.  The topic was timely and essential, but for me, it raised another issue, a political reality that is utterly ignored, one that deals with the fact that the relevant political division today is not between right and left, or between liberals and progressives versus conservatives, but between Deep State minions and tools, and the populists who oppose them.  Two definitions are essential in understanding the foregoing, the definition of what we mean when we use the terms “Deep State” and “populists”.

The Deep State is an informal but profound alliance between the military industrial complex (against which president Dwight David Eisenhower warned us in November of 1960); the intelligence agencies of the United States, the United Kingdom and the State of Israel, plus their counterparts in diverse NATO member states; the traditional mass media in the United States and in US allies; the Democratic Party; and, traditionalist members of the Republican Party such as the Bush Family, the Cheney family, the McCain family and their political allies.  The Deep State has riddled the federal government at all levels with moles, i.e. unelected bureaucrats, especially in the Department of Justice and its state and local level analogues, and throughout the federal judiciary; moles who carry out the orders of their billionaire masters rather than those of the people we elect to run our government, unless, of course, those interests coincide.  Populists, from both the left and the right wings of the political spectrum, are individuals and organizations who believe deeply in democracy and liberty, but believe that the formal governmental institutions responsible for guaranteeing such concepts are inept and corrupt, and thus, they have little faith in the traditional political castes.

The Deep State manages to hold unto dictatorial power (i.e., control of legislative, executive, judicial, police and electoral functions) by keeping the populists divided based on fringe issues, most notably abortion and the right to bear arms, and by focusing attention on polarizing issues such as race, gender, sexual preferences, national origins, religion (and its absence) and the fake war on terror.  Under the Biden administration, the Deep State has criminalized the right to protest, unless, as in the case of the Black Lives Matter rights, the protests serve their domestic political aspirations.

It is obvious that the Deep state profoundly manipulated the 2018 congressional elections and the 2020 presidential elections and that such manipulation had a profound impacts on the results.  It is also at least possible and possibly likely, that the use of mass mail-in ballots without requiring the voters themselves to turn them in facilitated electoral fraud, possibly enough to have impacted the 2020 presidential election.  Many of those who protested those results, whether violently, peacefully or through the legal process have been subjected to the full weight of federal and state penal systems in clear violation of the most fundamental principles of what used to pass for democracy in the United States, and that includes not only Republicans, but independents and members of smaller political parties.  Many people who despised the GOP candidate in that election had no problem with the subversion of the civic rights involved as it helped their “team” to win, despite that such victory proved utterly hollow (where is health care for all, world peace, economic wellbeing, equity, equality, etc.?).  But now, in a sense, the precedents they applauded have come back to haunt at least some of them, actually, the very best among them.  I refer to the current police and legal attacks against students, faculty members and others who dare to protest against Israeli genocide.

As in the case of the Deep State machinations in the 2020 presidential elections, it is clear that the students, faculty members and others protesting against Israeli genocide have an existentially valid point.  Everything they demand involves what the Nuremburg trials following the second war to end all wars prohibited and sought to punish by invoking the death penalty against the leaders involved and forever outlawing their political movements, outlawing them everywhere, but that has not proved to be the case as neo-Nazis rule the Ukraine, with full Deep State support, as well as Israel.  And those who dare to point that out, to protest against it either violently, peacefully or through legal actions, find themselves persecuted, both civically and legally, with their futures placed in serious jeopardy, as is the case in the series of trials against protesters and critics of the results of the 2020 presidentai election.

It is profoundly ironic that the issues involved in both cases are so similar, while those involved feel that the two principle issues are completely different, and that the members of each group have nothing in common, when in reality, they are, in fact, so similar.  Each group is comprised of deeply committed individuals who profoundly believe in truth, justice and equity, and who are willing to risk their “lives, property and sacred honor”, a phrase once attributed to United States founding father Patrick Henry”, to see justice done.  They have a common enemy, the Deep State which adroitly manipulates them and uses each of the groups against the other in order to maintain the dictatorial power that permits it to abuse police at all levels and the penal laws such police and departments of justice are sworn to uphold, in order to continue the very profitable state of perpetual war, to continue to overthrow governments and to keep the truth under wraps, as it does, for example, though the imprisonment of one of the world’s only real journalist, Julian Assange.  All actions which maximize the profits and minimize the risks of the wealthiest and least honorable among us.

How ironic that Trump supporters, to whom it is obvious that he is being persecuted through abuse of power in order to prevent his return to power, and that the corporate media has made a mockery of the truth in order to assist in that process, trust that same media when it calumnies against those who oppose genocide, apartheid and ethnic cleansing, deeming them domestic terrorists, the same label it applies to those who expressed their outrage at what they perceived to be massive electoral fraud, in their protests at the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.  And how ironic that the students, faculty members and their supporters who are being subjected to high handed mass media and police abuse and abuse of legal processes to stifle their protests against obvious genocide, with tactics all too similar to those used against the s called January 6 terrorists, don’t realize that they not only have a commonality of interests in the legal process, but that many of their goals are compatible rather than antagonistic.

It is irony such as this, it is our own civic incoherence, which permits the worst among us to attain and maintain power, while the lives of the best and most courageous among us are destroyed.  Something for all of us to consider as we vote this November and to consider that there are at least five candidates running for president, not just two, and that many political parties and movements are fielding candidates for the Senate and the House of Representatives, not just two.  And that the same is true at the state and local levels.  And that the only wasted votes are those we decline to cast for the things in which we believe and which we instead cast based on induced fears and in support of purportedly lesser evils.
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2024; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen).  Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.  He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review, available at Substack.com, an intermittent commentator on radio and television, and, an occasional contributor to diverse periodicals and publications.  He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies).  However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta and cosmogony.  He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.

Terminally Flummoxed, … or something like that

Posted on by
Reply

“I’m here to disembody you” she’d said.  She was extremely beautiful, in fact, she seemed to embody an ephemerally ethereal beauty, or perhaps, ethereally ephemeral.  They were very different things although, under the circumstances, very strong contradictions seemed essential.

The term “disembody” seemed unpleasant at best, regardless of the fact that she was impossibly beautiful, so he’d said, “disembody seems a rather unpleasant thing, is it anything like death?”  To which she’d answered, predictably, “yes and no”.  Then she’d tried to explain.

“Death is understood, or perhaps, more clearly, misunderstood, as a permanent state.  Something unique as it only occurs once, at least on a personal basis.  Disembodiment is clearly different.  Confusing it with death, it’s understood by most, or more clearly, misunderstood, as something irrevocable.  The mistake is understandable given how poorly ‘time’ is understood.  And not just by mortals (who don’t really exist) but even by most immortals, … who do, … Do exist I mean.  Or perhaps not.”

“So” he’d replied, unable to think of anything else to say, “… disembodied?”

“Yes” she’d replied, seeming happy, an even more beautiful smile on her even more beautiful face, “exactly so”.

“So, are you ready?” she’d asked, we really need to begin the process”.

“Process” he’d asked, again a bit flummoxed?  “And which process exactly would that be?”

She seemed a bit impatient then, what with looking at her watch every couple of seconds, a worried expression on her even more beautiful face, and had replied “well, your disembodiment of course”.  Then she’d smiled, again looking even more beautiful, as if that were possible, and said:  “You needn’t worry, it won’t hurt at all although it’s admittedly a bit tedious at times, … well … usually.”

For some he reason, he’d wondered how the word “flummoxed” was spelled.  For some reason, it had seemed vitally important.  And it was.  Or perhaps it wasn’t.  He usually didn’t have a problem in making up his mind, indeed, if anything, he tended to be too impulsive.  That may have been why he’d found himself in the state he was in, the word “state” seeming much more accurate than the word “place, for some reason.  Then, for some reason, he’d become fascinated with the nature, meaning and use of the term “so”, which they’d both been bantering around.  It seemed quite bereft of meaning albeit not of importance.  At the moment, its importance had seemed transcendental and he’d had a strong impulse to use it again, but he hadn’t wanted to seem inarticulate.

Still, he just hadn’t been able to think of anything else to say, except perhaps, for the word, or perhaps the term, “disembodied”, but that term had (in that particular now) made him quite nervous.

The exquisitely ephemerally, ethereally beautiful, or perhaps, ethereally ephemerally beautiful woman had stood staring at him, tapping her left foot on the ground, definitely impatiently, and had exasperatedly said “well?”  Or perhaps, more accurately, had asked “well”, and he hadn’t had the slightest clue as to how to reply.  Actually, he hadn’t really wanted to reply, he’d just wanted to stare at her.  But he’d known that staring was not polite, regardless of how impossibly beautiful someone might be, so he’d picked up his courage, and in spite of his fear, he’d said, or perhaps asked is a better term: “so, hmmm, disembodied?”

“Yes” she’d said.  Then, kindly, as if she’d grasped the state in which he found himself, she’d continued “let me explain, you seem confused.  Most people are.  About everything.  Almost always, but especially with respect to just what ‘disembodiment’ implies, or perhaps, what the term ‘disembodiment’ expresses would be more accurate”.  Evidently, linguistic accuracy was very important to her, and yes, she’d again become even more impossibly beautiful.

“So, disembodiment” he’d repeated.  “Okay, ‘shoot’!”  Then he’d almost immediately, perhaps immediately, rejected his choice of metaphors (shoot) but it was too late, there was no way he could have taken it back without calling unpleasant attention to his dilemma.  He’d liked metaphors, liked them even better than he’d liked similes, but, he’d always realized he really didn’t understand allegories though he hadn’t a clue as to why allegories had any relevance to what he’d just been thinking.  He’d wondered how and why he’d become sidetracked in that direction, but just for a second.  She’d continued talking and he’d lost his concentration and had no idea what she’d said, but again, she’d been getting more and more beautiful, so much so that he’d been getting dizzy, and in fact, now that he’d thought about it, he’d been feeling a bit faint, quite a bit faint in fact.

“And so” she’d concluded ….  That damned “so” again he’d thought, just what the hell did it mean, then he’d immediately regretted his choice of the metaphor “hell”, even if he’d only thought it, or at least he thought he’d only thought it, he’d certainly hoped so.  …. bodies are temporally permanent vessels” she’d continued, although words hadn’t seemed to matter to him anymore “… vessels which we transients occupy collectively with others, not permanently of course, rather, only for a time, and our departure does not necessarily imply the termination of the vessel.  Others enter it and assume experiential occupation for the time period allotted to them to do so, while those departing move on to other vessels, sometimes in concert, although rarely so, usually becoming parts of different experiential collectives.”

He’d looked puzzled but, amazingly, even though he didn’t seem quite conscious, he’d seemed to understand.  He was not really dying, he was just moving on, his term completed.  Kind of like graduating from elementary school and entering middle school but not quite high school or college, and certainly not graduate school.  Then a flood of questions seemed to have entered his mind, entered it on their own volition, entered his mind or whatever it was, all at the same time, questions such as:  “will I retain my current gender, will I have a gender, will I become one of those transsexuals or non-binary people, whatever that was?  Will I be old, young, rich, poor, Caucasian, indigenous (well, everyone was some sort of indigenous or other), or Asian, or Black.  Will I be human, or even animal he’d wondered, or “what if I enter a plant, or a rock”.

He’d sort of looked around, seeking the … whatever she was, or whatever she’d been, but she was no longer there, and then, he’d realized he was in a sort of dream state, he wasn’t there either, wherever there was or had been.  He wasn’t anywhere.  But he didn’t know if it was because he was in bodily transition or because he was just having a weird dream.  But she’d vanished and strangely, even though he’d recalled the “increasing beauty phenomenon”, he hadn’t, for the life of him, been able to remember what she’d looked like, or was it “for the life of ‘himself’”, then he’d again regretted his choice of metaphors, that time with respect to the phrase, “the life of” (he tended to second guess himself quite a lot as you may have noticed), and he’d wondered just what the “hell” life was and, again upset at his choice of metaphors, and totally, completely and irretrievably flummoxed, he’d ….
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2024; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet) is a writer, political commentator and academic currently residing in the Republic of Colombia (although he has primarily lived in the United States of America of which he is also a citizen).  Until 2017 he chaired the political science, government and international relations programs at the Universidad Autónoma de Manizales.  He is currently the publisher of the Inannite Review, available at Substack.com, an intermittent commentator on radio and television, and, an occasional contributor to diverse periodicals and publications.  He has academic degrees in political science (the Citadel), law (St. John’s University), international legal studies (New York University) and translation and linguistic studies (the University of Florida’s Center for Latin American Studies).  However, he is also fascinated by mythology, religion, physics, astronomy and mathematics, especially with matters related to quanta and cosmogony.  He can be contacted at guillermo.calvo.mahe@gmail.com and much of his writing is available through his blog at https://guillermocalvo.com/.