United States president Joseph Robinette Biden was a disaster in his initial 2024 presidential debate against Donald Trump, the truncated affair orchestrated by CNN which, at the demand of the Biden administration, excluded presidential candidates Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Jill Stein and Cornell West, PhD, each of whom would also have trounced the inept Mr. Biden. Mr. Trump performed well, to an extent curbing his impulsive nature and was the clear winner. However, the fear of accountability should Donald Trump return to the Whitehouse will increase rather than decrease abuse of the corporate media and the legal system by the Deep State, possibly leading it to panic and take ever more drastic actions to prevent the American electorate from exercising its political rights.
So, what to expect?
Well, the potential for an assassination of Mr. Trump orchestrated by the Deep State is higher than ever. The potential for adverse judgments against Mr. Trump in the pending wave of “lawfare against him orchestrated by the Deep State, the Biden administration and their supporters at the state level, including private citizens, will increase. And the Supreme Court will experience massive pressure from mortified traditional Republicans, especially on the Chief Justice, to rule in favor of Mr. Trump’s opponents. It seems clear that the law of unanticipated if not unintended consequences is merrily at work.
If Mr. Trump nonetheless survives and prevails, assuming massive electoral fraud is unsuccessful, no sure thing, Deep State moles will once again seek to obstruct not so much Mr. Trump’s policies as his ability to govern. There is really very little difference in the policies of the modern Democratic Party and the GOP, other than with respect to abortion and the Second Amendment. If Mr. Trump is artfully defeated and the electoral fraud is more obvious this time than it was in 2020, then ever increasing civil strife is possible, although the Deep State is so well armed that a civil war would probably prove futile. At any rate, regardless of the results, the electorate, already utterly polarized may fragment from bipolar to multipolar which would be the only positive thing.
The one sure thing seems to be that whoever eventually wins:
• The ensuing administration will continue to support genocide in the Middle East, probably expanded from just the Palestinians to the Lebanese and the Syrians as Nazis in Hell smile and say, we told you so and welcome aboard to their former non-Soviet adversaries in World War II.
• In Europe, confusion may reign. A Trump victory should surely generate much needed introspection and a settlement of the Deep State orchestrated Ukrainian quagmire may result. But it’s also possible that a creeping advance to a third world war, initially conventional but eventually nuclear, will continue. Still, the corruption of the ideal of European unity by NATO may finally be perceived by the electorates in France and Germany and in the flotsam that echoes the posture of those two subservient polities throughout Europe.
• The de facto Sino-Russian alliance is likely to strengthen, as is the growing closeness of Iran, North Korea and Syria with that group, but that would be true regardless of the results of the United States’ election and Global North hegemony will continue its decline as the Global South continues to evolve politically and economically. The demise of the United States dollar will continue as faith in its ability to function as a neutral reserve currency has already been shattered by the abusive United States international economic sanctions regime.
It is unfortunate that with three decent alternative candidates, the Deep State and its corporate media will exclude them from consideration by voters this November but that has been the case since the unexpected Republican victory in 1860, 164 years ago. The echoes of Cassandric warnings are loud and clear but the three monkeys that represent the so-called Western World continue to plug their ears, shut their eyes and cover their mouths.
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. Previously, he chaired the social studies and foreign language departments at the Eastern Military Academy in Huntington, New York. 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 (BA, the Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina), law (JD, St. John’s University, School of Law), international legal studies (LL.M, the Graduate Division of the New York University School of Law) and translation and linguistic studies (GCTS, 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, cosmology 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/.
At long last Julian Assange has been released by the vile government of the United Kingdom after a guilty plea was extorted by the equally vile Biden administration in the United States. It is not only way past time, but the imprisonment and indictments of Julian Assange should never have happened nor should the traitorous actions of Lenin Moreno, then president of Ecuador, or the betrayal of all standards of journalism by what passes for journalism throughout the NATO bloc, ever occurred.
The extorted release of Julian Assange by the ill-named United States Department of Justice highlights the putrid nature of what passes for justice in the United States and the United Kingdom, legal systems that punish the innocent and reward the guilty through “plea bargains”, really a system for extorting the innocent by threatening them with draconian punishment if they do not agree to accept often unfounded prosecutorial accusations while conversely rewarding the guilty through sentences (if that) much more lenient than they deserve for their wrongs. The former is certainly what happened in the case of Julian Assange but it is so obvious that prosecutors just wanted cover for their own crimes of lesse humanidad that it highlights the plight of millions of Americans and others subjected to this ludicrous travesty. Plea bargaining is capitalism imposed on the justice system, a “let’s make a deal or else” concept identical to that used by extortionists in organized crime, an obvious form of state sponsored racketeering.
I’m thrilled that Julian Assange is free but it’s analogous to a situation where after having murdered millions, the Nazis (or Zionists) let one of their victims survive after torturing him or her into confessing that he or she was a traitor to the master race. No punishment could be too severe for those responsible, not only for prosecuting the Assange case but all other plea bargains where innocent people are coerced into admitting guilt in order to escape from continuing torture. Had the Biden administration any trace, any semblance of decency it would have released Julian Assange with profound apologies and just compensation for the torture inflicted upon him for having dared to seek and share the truth concerning terrible state sponsored crimes. But that was not the case and the Biden administration needs to be held accountable rather than given credit.
The governments of the United States and the United Kingdom are not the only villains. The purported profession of journalism finds itself indelibly stained by its conduct throughout the Assange saga, especially media such as the United Kingdom’s Guardian or the United States’ Washington Post, New York Times, CNN, MSNBC and Fox News. Decent people should boycott every enterprise that supports them through advertising or grants or just plain bribes.
It is unlikely that Julian Assange will ever be able to return to the brave brand of real journalism we all so desperately need. Well, all but the very worst among us, our political and military leaders. A decade of torture will have, if not broken him, seriously debilitated him, and worse, set an example for anyone who might otherwise dare to cooperate in exposing inconvenient truths involving the travesties of the NATO bloc of purported libertarian democracies. And that was the goal of the Biden administration. As George W. Bush once falsely proclaimed on the deck of a United States aircraft career, “mission accomplished”. But at least Julian Assange is free and will soon be in the bosom of his wonderful family who will do all they can to make him whole again.
As for us, all we can do is do our best to hold the real villains accountable, those who have totally perverted the concepts of justice, of legality, of ethics and of morality; those for whom perpetual war is the worthiest and most profitable goal and who have politicized and destroyed what pass for legal systems. And to fearlessly emulate Julian’s quest for truth, a torch he has probably now passed to us.
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. Previously, he chaired the social studies and foreign language departments at the Eastern Military Academy in Huntington, New York. 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 (BA, the Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina), law (JD, St. John’s University, School of Law), international legal studies (LL.M, the Graduate Division of the New York University School of Law) and translation and linguistic studies (GCTS, 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, cosmology 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/.
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 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/.
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.
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 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 (“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/.
Zionists and the Holocaust, The One with a Capital H as Well as the One Taking Place Today
A disturbing reflection by Guillermo Calvo Mahé, April 30, 2024
This reflection is long overdue and deals with facts that have been in plain sight for a very long time but which have been obfuscated, distorting the terrible reality in which we find ourselves and thus, making real solutions to the problems we face unattainable. However, the horrible deliberate slaughter we are experiencing in the Middle East, specifically in Palestine (Hedges, 2024, Al Jazeera, 2017), has brought the issue treated in this reflection to the forefront and, if the phrase “never again” is ever to attain the meaning ascribed to it (primarily as a slogan) following the Holocaust, it is essential that the concepts involved be fully and accurately examined. The topic dealt with in this reflection deals with the sociopolitical phenomenon known as Zionism, a widely used term usually devoid of context which, to an extent, this reflection seeks to provide. Not as a mere academic exercise but as a wakeup call and an existential warning, especially to the Jewish community which has been and continues to be used and abused by Zionists for their own nefarious purposes.
Zionism was originally a positive and important defensive reaction to European antisemitism seeking to encourage persecuted Jews worldwide to unite to aggressively defend their rights to equality and eventually, to establish a special refuge under Jewish control (Eichler, 2013). Many places were considered, including Argentina, Brazil and Uganda but eventually, the Palestinian portion of the Ottoman Empire came to be especially coveted, although it had been inhabited for millennia by, among others, the descendants of Jews who had refused to leave Palestine despite Roman persecution, most of whom had first been forcibly converted to Christianity and then to Islam. Those descendants of the original Hebrew population form the core of today’s Palestinians, albeit intermixed with other nationalities and cultures including Arab migrants.
In its quest to wrest Palestine from its inhabitants (Al Jazeera, 2017), Zionism unfortunately morphed into a rabid subgroup within Judaism but which also included Christian fundamentalist. The latter, although inherently anti-Semitic, see the establishment of a dominant Jewish state in Palestine as a prerequisite for Armageddon and then, the second coming of their messiah (Lewis, 2021) whom they refer to as Jesus the Christ, appellations which that individual never used, his name probably having been Yeshua ben Yosef. Problematically, Zionists attempt to speak for all Jews despite being rejected and considered anathema by many (Glass, 1975) and, instead of reducing antisemitism, have increased it, in many cases actively promoting it in an effort to force recalcitrant Jews to come under their umbrella, especially with respect to securing a Jewish majority in Palestine (Dowty, 2008; Nicosia, 2008; Reinharz, 1985). Indeed, Zionist tactics and strategies have come to mimic those of the German Nazis during the second war to end all wars, an irony of epic proportions. In light of the foregoing, it is essential to understand that Zionism and Judaism are extremely far from synonymous.
Unintended consequences are not always bad things; sometimes they make us reexamine past assumptions and beliefs. That is certainly the case with respect to the current genocide perpetrated by Israeli Zionists against Palestinians in the quest for ethnic cleansing (Hedges, 2024; Borrows-Freedman, 2024) and the support of such atrocities by all the major participants in the second war to end all wars, both Allies and Axis powers. Atrocities involving Israeli genocide and ethnic cleansing ongoing for over three quarters of a century (Al Jazeera (2017), in fact, since the end of the second war to end all wars, a war purportedly fought to eliminate state sponsored crimes of lesse humanidad, although, as in the case of most wars, the purported purpose was far from accurate.[1] In light of that reality, it is past time to conduct an objective review of just what happened during the build up to the second war to end all wars, what really happened during that war and what happened immediately following the war, in order to determine why it occurred, who was to blame and just how widespread the evil was. One question that has been asked but never answered with respect to that war’s immediate aftermath is why the atomic bombing of Japan was not considered genocide or the internment of Japanese Americans in concentration camps not considered a crime of lesse humanidad, such as the crimes with which leaders of the countries that lost that war were charged.[2]
The reality is that history has demonstrated that the Nuremburg trials and their Tokyo counterparts (Sellers, 2010; Buruma, 2023) were fraudulent travesties in large part orchestrated to divert attention from massively horrible war crimes committed by the victors, not just violations of human rights during the war but during the preceding centuries. It is therefore no surprise that their high sounding promotion and promises of a better, more just world have proven profoundly empty and that tens of millions died in vain, among them, twenty-seven million Russians, as well as the victims of the Holocaust. We celebrate the victims of that Holocaust, the one with the capital H, but dare not look into why it occurred or the role of Zionism in promoting it and turning Germany from a bastion of opportunity for Jews (Reinharz, 1985, chapters 3 and 4)[3], into their assassin, a question much more than just relevant in analyzing the nature of Zionism and its goals in light of the murderous nature of Zionism today (Rossinow, 2018), always noting that Zionism and Judaism are very far from synonymous. Indeed, during the first half of the twentieth century as it is today, Zionism is the prime promoter of antisemitism.
Very few people realize that during the first war to end all wars, the vast majority of Jews everywhere in the world were pro-German, including those in Germany, Russia and the United States, and that Zionists, betraying the majority of Jews everywhere, were tasked by the British with orchestrating the defeat of the Central Powers (Germany, Austria Hungary and Turkey) by goading the United States into entering the war on behalf of the Triple Entente (the United Kingdom, France and for a time Russia) in exchange for the land occupied for millennia by Palestinians (Cornelius, 2005; Stein, 1961). That was done and was the main reason that Germany, devastated in the post war “peace”, turned on its patriotic Jews, i.e., because Zionists claimed to have acted on behalf of Jews worldwide, without, of course, having the right to make that claim.
That such Zionists actions would lead to a massive increase in antisemitism was not only understood by Zionist leaders but was an important goal as they hoped that the extremely talented and productive Jewish community in Germany would be forced to immigrate to Palestine. That the costs of that massive and vituperous increase in antisemitism would be horrendous was irrelevant as, is the case of today’s genocide in Palestine, the ends, any ends at all, justified the means. However, German Jews were not as easy to manipulate as Zionists hoped so in 1933, well before the Holocaust, the one with the capital H, the World Zionist Organization, again acting in the name of all Jews, formally declared war on Germany, economic war to be sure, and organized a worldwide embargo on trade with Germany much as the United States has done this millennium with numerous countries, including Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and North Korea, and increasingly with Russia and China. The Zionist hope was that Germany would overreact and thus, that its Jewish population would either emigrate to Palestine voluntarily or be expelled. Zionists actually facilitated such emigration in collaboration with Adolf Hitler, on amicable terms, by negotiating what became known as the Transfer Agreement. All of the foregoing is clearly documented for anyone interested in the truth. See for example, “The Transfer Agreement and the Boycott Fever, 1933” (Walensky, 1987), a study published by someone with profound antizionist sentiments, to be sure, and thus attacked as unreliable, although, while its opinions and conclusions may be unsettling, even troubling to many, the facts are impeccable and are also documented by Jewish sources well-disposed towards Zionism (see Weiss, 1998).
The foregoing information is shared, not to justify the Holocaust, or to deny it, but to illustrate the nature of Zionism, an abomination to true Judaism, one willing to sacrifice anyone and anything in order to attain its delusional dreams of power and dominion. Domination not only over all Palestinians (or at least any that survived) but also of all Arabs and all Muslims, all in a sick parody of the Nazis final solution to the Jewish problem, the latter, a solution in large part crafted with the help of hypocritical Zionists themselves. Given that Zionists were willing to risk the death of six million Jews in order to appropriate the Palestinian homeland, their actions today putting the world at risk of nuclear holocaust ought not to shock or surprise us.
Most Zionists have always believed that genocide is an acceptable tool, taking the cue from the numerous instances in Hebrew history where it was used against their opponents, purportedly under divine command (Lemos, 2023). The examples are legion (most contained in the Torah) starting with the exodus from Egypt, the annihilation of Jericho, etc. Many have been cited by current Israeli leaders, including Israel’s prime minister, foreign minister and minister of defense as examples to follow with reference to the Palestinian people, more than 24,000 of whom, as of the date of this reflection (April 30, 2024), have been massacred by the Israeli Defense Forces, the vast majority of them defenseless women and children, many in obvious cold blood with the location of mass graves now a normal occurrence. Events celebrated in festive dancing and songs not only by Israeli soldiers, but more disturbingly, by Israeli children.
The so-called law of unintended consequences all too frequently results in terrible disasters and one might take the position that the horrible experiences involving antisemitism during the last century involved that phenomenon, but that would be a mistake. The consequences of Zionism were foreseen, intentional and lasting, impacting millions of people every day. The crux of this reflection is that today’s Zionist conduct, to the detriment of Jewish interests as well as to that of Zionism’s opponents, is not new. And perhaps, as an aside, to note how ironic it is that the three branches of the Abrahamic religion, Judaism, Christianity and Islam seem to have adopted the fratricide of Abel by Cain as their guiding principle.
A reading of the sources and suggested readings below makes the foregoing absolutely clear and it is the author’s hope that readers, disturbed by what is alleged in this reflection, will read, digest and analyze them. Many are available on line. The author has reached the conclusion that with the help of Zionists leaders, millions of Jews were the victims of genocide during the first half of the twentieth century. Readers may reach other conclusions. Nonetheless, it seems ironically clear that Zionism, which was a reaction to the crimes against many hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of Jews, the victims of antisemitism throughout Europe during the past two millennia, have used the promotion of antisemitism as the most successful tool in their arsenal. An arsenal not really meant to protect the Jewish people but to consolidate power among a select group within Judaism, to steal their neighbor’s land, and to murder millions directly and indirectly through manipulation of Zionist allies in the United States and ironically, in Europe. Europe, where antisemitism was prevalent for millennia while the Islamic world, including Palestine, was the only place where Jews, as people of the book, were provided refuge and a modicum of opportunity.
Lemos, T.M. (2023): “Chapter 6, Genocide in Ancient Israelite and Early Jewish Sources”, pp. 185 – 208, The Cambridge World History of Genocide, Part II – The Ancient World; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
[1] The American Civil War is an obvious example. The claim that it was fought to eliminate the scourge of African slavery is obviously untrue, witness President Abraham Lincoln’s first inaugural address and the fact that slavery continued in numerous Union states throughout that war, but continues to be taught and stressed as a fact. In truth, Abraham Lincoln was a rabid racist who felt Africans were inferior, should never attain political rights in the United States and indeed, should all be shipped out of its jurisdiction, preferably to Liberia or Panama, as he felt that Africans and whites could never, and should never, live together. See, e.g., Adams, 2000.
[2] Those objectives are critical but beyond the scope of this reflection and indeed, as it has been for over three quarters of a century, much of the required research seems impossible given existing legal prohibitions on research and expression, and the relentless classification of essential information as top secret. One wonders why? But even if the information were readily available, the required report would be beyond the scope of even detailed treatise, requiring the free exchange of diverse opinions to untangle the incredible web deliberately woven to obfuscate the truth we need to know. Thus, of course, the scope of this brief reflection is much more limited, but perhaps, nonetheless essential.
[3] Most Russian and German Jews supported the Germans, as did much of the largely anti-British Irish. Indeed, the other principle Central Power, the Ottoman Empire was also supported by most of the Jews and indeed, both David Ben-Gurion and Yitzhak Ben-Tzvi volunteered for the Turkish Army and, when they were rejected, moved to the US and tried to recruit Jews to set up a Jewish unit in the Turkish army, see Teveth, 1985, pp. 25, 26.
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/.
Once more, the ides of March approach, or really, a date in the modern calendar associated with the Roman concepts of ides, calends and nones (the Romans having had no concept of a seven day week until well after the start of the imperial period). And with the approach of the somewhat imprecise ides in the month of March, Martius to the Romans (originally the first month of the Roman year, later relegated to the third month, as it is now for us), one special ides in March comes to mind. The ides of March which since 44 b.c.e., has been associated with the assassination of Gaius Iulius Caesar by a group of Roman senators, to most of whom he had been both kind and forgiving, and which was led by Marcus Junius Brutus, possibly his illegitimate son.
Caesar, as he has become known to history, was never a Roman emperor in the sense we’ve come to associate with that title. At that time, the title was a battlefield honorific granted by Roman soldiers to outstanding military leaders in a given battle and represented by the award of a crown of woven grass. Caesar had indeed been granted such an honor, but at the time of his murder, his title was “dictator”, an honorable elected position rather than the pejorative term it has become in modernity. It was a title originally granted for a brief period during times of existential crisis and combined all aspects of governmental power in one person, but following expiration of that term, the former dictator was held to account for his actions and might well be condemned for them. The Romans had no use for official impunity, as we do today with our various forms of “immunity” for official acts by government officials in the executive, judicial and legislative branches. Unlike prior dictators, which had become more and more common and included older contemporaries of Caesar, including his uncle-in-law Gaius Marius, and Marius’ mortal enemy, Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix, Caesar had been named dictator for life after having rejected the title of Rex (king).
Caesar was a complex and enigmatic figure, a genius on many levels and with respect to a broad range of talents, among them of course, politics and military matters, but also many areas involving non martial pursuits, and he was a populist like Marius, rather than a member of the aristocratic elite of the time, who referred to themselves as the “boni” (the good), much as they do today notwithstanding the reality that they disdained the populace, much as do today’s elites. But born relatively poor, he did not hesitate to abuse his military commands to generate profits through the sale of captured populations into slavery, not an uncommon pursuit in antiquity (and his legal right as a proconsul). Slavery then had nothing to do with one’s race. His charisma was legendary, on a scale with that of Alexander the Great, or of Napoleon, or Charlemagne, and his success was translated, after a series of civil wars, into an empire by his grandnephew Octavius, whom he had adopted as his heir, and whom we know as Augustus. Gaius Octavius Thurinus is considered the first emperor of Rome. His official title, however, was “princepscivitatisand subsequently, prínceps senatus”, meaning first citizen and first senator respectively. And of course, later, by his own request, “augustus”.
Gaius Iulius Caesar, whose father bore the same name, has been gone for 2,068 years. I always wonder on the ides of March what the world might have been like, had he not been murdered by a crowd of cowardly (dozens attacked one man, alone and unarmed) and jealous political adversaries who Caesar had pardoned, jackals who considered themselves (or at least claimed to be) patriots.
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, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador. 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/.
After deep reflection and introspection, he finally concluded that he did not really believe in anyone, not even in himself. As long as interests coincided, loyalty was a possibility albeit not a certainty, but once they clashed, regardless of shared interests, loyalty evaporated into hazy rationalizations. And that made sense.
That was logical. No one was safely reliable. No one could always be counted on. Love made no difference, it was, by its nature, always potentially ephemeral and always frailly ethereal. And when dissipated, love all too frequently morphed into something very negative, something akin to hate or at best, disdain.
Disquieting? Of course. Sad? Terribly. But to expect otherwise was to delude oneself, something most of us did frequently, indeed, almost always. When we find reality discomfiting, we usually ignore it and delve into our own personal fantasies, … and not the fun kind.
There were people he could almost count on but he admitted to himself that “almost” was a positivist way of presenting a negative, and dangerously so. And it applied to himself as much as to anyone, and not just with respect to others, it applied to him in his roles with himself as well. How strange.
It applied to us as individuals but also to us as collectives which explained much of history, not the fake narrative Pablum we’re taught and force fed daily, but the reality of what’s been and why.
He wondered if this day, a day where realism seemed ascendant, was a very good day, or a very bad day, and the answer was a confusingly emphatic: “yes”! _______
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, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador. 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/.
As in the case of Yeshua ben Yosef, or perhaps ben Miriam, Muhammad ibn Abdallah, a Quraysh of the Hashim clan, would, I believe, have been a friend, a respected friend, perhaps a beloved friend, although in neither case would I have been a worshipper of their visions of the Divine.
I would have had profound discussions with both, I would have grieved with them for the follies of those who ruled mankind, both in the name of the Divine or in their own names.
I would gladly have shared their suffering and their sacrifices, but I believe I would have remained true to myself as well, and in that, I sense no contradictions.
The same, of course, would apply to Siddhartha Gautama of the Sakyas clan.
I find it meaningful that each appeared amongst us about half a millennium apart.
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, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador. 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/.
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, a commentator on Radio Guasca FM, and an occasional contributor to the regional magazine, el Observador. 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/.
Guillermo Calvo Mahé 