Category Archives: Political

On the GOP’s Save Act and Critical Related Issues

Posted on by
1

Opposition to the so called Save Act (H.R.22 – 119th Congress, 2025-2026) by Democrats based on their current arguments concerning threats to democracy seems stupid, nonsensical and counterproductive (to the glee of the GOP).  The requirement for photo identification verifying citizenship and right to vote as a prerequisite to voting is something common all over the world, something usually accompanied by required signature and fingerprint verification.  In the United States the issue is a bit more complicated because of states’ rights under our federal system and the historical aversion to a national identification card and because of the transient nature of United States society with voting at federal, state and local levels predicated not only on citizenship but on residency.  Thus it would seem that appropriately reliable verification documentation would be required at each such level depending on the election involved.  A problem, true, but not an irresolvable problem given available technology.  However, it could well require implementation of a national identification smart card, centrally updated; not an insurmountable obstacle as credit card companies make clear on a quotidian basis.  Mail in voting, the other serious wedge issue, clearly facilitates electoral fraud and just as clearly, makes voting easier.  But safeguards can be added to minimize its deficiencies.  In addition to the danger of facilitating electoral fraud, mail in voting has been abused in order to “lock in” votes before relevant issues come to light by providing for early voting, but that too can be regulated in order to minimize its abuse, rather than eliminated.  Wise Democrats would be much better off electorally by resolving the deficiencies noted rather than by focusing on hyperbolic platitudes.

Still, constitutional arguments based on federalism and states’ rights do have merit.  The Constitution vests decisions concerning electoral qualifications and related issues in the states but provides Congress a role should it elect to exercise it, something which Congress has done from time to time albeit not coherently, that is because Congress has limited its role to issues involving “federal elections” and the only real federal election is that “virtual” election taken when state departments of state submit the results of state level elections for electors to the Electoral College (which never, in fact, meets) to the United States Congress for tabulation and consideration.  All other elections involving the national government are taken at the state level.  The House of Representatives is elected through state district elections in districts established and supervised by the states, the same being true with respect to the Electoral College and, of course, despite the ill-considered and antidemocratic 17th Amendment to the Constitution, election of Senators is also done on a state basis.  The members of the Supreme Court are not elected at all but rather appointed through agreement between the Senate and the president.  The issue however is, or ought to be, more complex.  The truth is that a constitutional amendment related to a number of electoral issues is desperately required. 

Issues that need to be dealt with constitutionally include:

  • Financing of electoral campaigns which should, in all probability, be limited to eligible voters in the electoral districts involved, excluding thereby corporate and related entities (e.g., unions, political action committees, etc.).  The Supreme Court’s abhorrent Citizens United decision also needs to be obliterated.
  • The use of the national census for purposes of determining state representation in the House of Representatives and the Electoral College needs to be clarified so that for those purposes, only citizens are counted.  Not even permanent residents should be counted although for other purposes the census should include everyone resident in a state, regardless of their nationality or electoral status.
  • The issue of birthright citizenship, poorly dealt with in the 14th amendment, should be clarified.  As interpreted by the Supreme Court, it has been seriously abused and is a goad to illegal immigration.  Mr. Trump is not always wrong.
  • The status of undocumented immigrants for diverse purposes should also be dealt with, perhaps creating national standards in order to avoid forum shopping.

Those issues each require serious consideration involving a much more fundamental issue as well.  The United States Constitution adopted in 1789 and implemented in 1791 envisioned a federal state comprised of purportedly sovereign states.  Really, a fragmentation of sovereignty predicated on the concept of enumerated powers dealt with both in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution and in its 9th and 10th amendments.  However, as I noted quite a while ago in an article entitled Motley Constitutionalism: a Labyrinthine Aphorism, the concept of federalism has been drastically and negatively impacted since shortly after adoption of the Constitution; first, by John Marshall’s usurpation of constitutional control in the case of Marbury v. Madison, then by the usurpation of issues involving secession, supremacy of legislation and related factors by the federal government as a result of the Civil War of 1861-65 and through the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments imposed following the Civil War (justifiable though they were), then, in the series of Wilson administration constitutional amendments that shattered state power, especially the 16th (taxation), 17th (representation through the Senate), 18th (state police power) and 19th (state control of the right to vote) and finally, by Supreme Court decisions ostensibly based on the Commerce Clause of the Constitution during the middle of the 20th century.  The foregoing constitutional proposals would further the trend away from federalism and towards a unitary state, as would consistent proposals to do away with the Electoral College in favor of direct, popular election of the president.

Those damned two sides to every issue can be utterly frustrating.  However, there is also a third side.  The truth is that a broad and serious discussion concerning the federal nature of the Republic is very much past due, a nature that has become largely illusory as chip by chip its federal foundation has become eroded.  The reality is that the original concept, first of a confederation of independent states, sort of like the United Nations, and then of a hybrid between a confederation and a unitary state (a federation) has in practice perhaps become obsolete as the United States has “sort of” become one nation rather than a conglomeration of regions, although, politically, it has become divided between urban and rural areas with totally different voting perspectives and an utterly polarized citizenry.  That discussion should have been undertaken before each and every decision impacting federalism but apparently the topic and its strategic aspects were ignored in favor of the interests of the moment, pretty much in the same manner as the Save Act is being currently considered: ironically, a legislative act proposed by traditional proponents of states’ rights and opposed by traditional proponents of a powerful central government.

Perhaps it’s way past time for a profound discussion concerning the nature and deficiencies of the Constitution adopted in 1789, two-hundred-and-thirty-seven years ago, and so patched up that it resembles the “motley of ill-matched patches” worn by ancient court jesters.  Like the Bible and other sacred treatises, the current Constitution is honored and revered, oaths taken to preserve and defend it, but not really followed.

Perhaps it’s time for a new constitutional convention, one led by serious technocrats and academics rather than politicians, a constitution to then be presented directly for approval or rejection, in whole or in part, by the citizenry it will be meant to govern.  A constitution to effectively, efficiently and equitable harmonize our society in order to really attain the common welfare.  But the sad truth is that neither major political party is interested in the foregoing as it would eliminate too many of the useful wedge issues through which we are each manipulated, divided and controlled.
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) 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/.

On the Reality of Donald Trump’s Recent Animal-Human Hybrid Video

Posted on by
1

There has been a great outcry recently by those who despise Mr. Trump, no matter what, but also by some among those who admire him without reserve, over the post that involved the Obamas with their faces superimposed on the bodies of chimpanzees.  The criticism had been hyperbolically focused on perceived racism.  I do not support Mr. Trump and have admittedly grown to despise him but I try to maintain a sense of objectivity without which discernment of truth is impossible (absent fortuitous coincidence).  So, while I was initially dumfounded and outraged; I watched the video to see for myself what I would be criticizing.  I doubt many others have done the same.  And I was surprised.  Rather than racist, I found the video idiotically juvenile.  It was by no means limited to the Obamas, although that has been the focus of the criticism, but involved numerous political figures both opposed to and supportive of Mr. Trump, all represented with animal bodies, and that included Mr. Trump himself. 

It was obvious to me that in the associational choice of animals Mr. Trump sought to insult his opponents and glamorize himself.  His was the body of a lion.  But my conclusion was that the video demonstrated not Mr. Trump’s racism but his ignorance concerning biology and evolution.  For example, chimpanzees are extremely intelligent and in their bonobo variant, the biological species closest to humans while male lions, such as the one selected by Mr. Trump to represent himself, are lazy and indolent, albeit strong and fierce, but dominated by the females of the species who do most of the work.

Thus, the video was childish and idiotic but instructive as well, and perhaps unintentionally, the portrayal may have been all too accurate. 

Perhaps someone pointed that out to Mr. Trump who has removed the video from his social platforms.
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) 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/.

On the Organic Ancestry of MAGA and of Its Ironic Incoherence

Posted on by
Reply

The “Make America Great Again” (MAGA) Trumpian political movement[1] within the United States Republican Party, is hardly original.  It is merely a reflection of the profound xenophobia that has characterized the United States since well before its founding; at least since descendants of English invaders[2] deemed new German immigrants during the colonial era unworthy of sharing the colonial society the English were in the process of founding.  But MAGA has a more direct historical ancestor: the mid-nineteenth century “American Party” (better known as the Know-Nothing Party).  The latter was a name it proudly applied to itself based on a pledge required of its members to preserve secrecy concerning party activities by answering all queries with the phrase “I know nothing”, a phrase ironically adopted by a comic character in a sitcom set in a German prisoner of war camp over a century later[3], rather than in praise of ignorance (although a pretty good case might be made for the latter).

The American Party was an outgrowth of secretive groups like the Order of the Star-Spangled Banner[4] (which somewhat explains its paranoiac tendencies) and became a major third party political movement during the 1850s (interestingly, a time as polarized as our own) rivaling not only the traditional parties at the time (the Democratic and Whig parties) but also the emerging abolitionist (and industrialist[5]) Republican Party.  It was ideologically characterized by nativist Protestant supremacism and anti-immigrant sentiment particularly targeting Irish and German immigrants and, like MAGA today, advocated for stricter naturalization laws (proposing to extend the residency requirement for citizenship from five to twenty-one years) and seeking to keep the foreign-born, even if they had attained United States citizenship, from voting or holding public office.  They did not address the “birthright” citizenship issue as the 14th amendment to the constitution on which it is based had yet to be adopted, but they would assuredly have agreed with MAGA on that issue as well.  The party gained significant power during the 1854 – 1855 electoral period, capturing several state governments and sending numerous representatives to Congress.  Former President Millard Fillmore was their 1856 candidate securing 21% of the popular vote but winning only Maryland.  However, the party quickly fragmented into northern and southern factions leading to its collapse by the time of the Civil War.

While similar to MAGA in ideology, the American Party was a bit more coherent than MAGA in its xenophobia given the control exerted over MAGA by Israel through its American Israeli Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).  AIPAC finances the political campaigns of all MAGA affiliated members of Congress who are then required to place Israeli interests over those of the United States (which would have been anathema to the American Party); however, that subservience is not limited to MAGA or the GOP given that such phenomenon equally impacts the Democratic Party.  Indeed, using the “wag the dog” analogy, there are international analysts who view the United States as a mercantilist Israeli colony, regardless of which domestic political party attains political power, a hypothesis supported by the immense transfer of United States tax revenue directly to Israel for both domestic and military purposes.

So, not much new with MAGA, just a rehash of old prejudices but this time, ironically, in the service of a foreign, non-Protestant power. 

The foregoing brings to mind the Peter Allen song published in 1974, “Everything Old is New Again”:

When trumpets were mellow and every gal only had one fellow, no need to remember when because everything old is new again.  Dancing at church, Long Island jazzy parties; waiter bring us some more Bacardi.  We’ll order now what they ordered then because everything old is new again. 

Get out your white suit, your tap shoes and tails; let’s go backwards when forward fails and movie stars you thought were alone then are now framed beside your bed.  Don’t throw the past away, you might need it some rainy day; dreams can come true again when everything old is new again

Get out your white suit, your tap shoes and tails; put it on backwards when forward fails.  Better leave Greta Garbo alone, be a movie star on your own and don’t throw the past away; you might need it some other rainy day.  Dreams can come true again when everything old is new again.

When everything old is new again, I might fall in love with you again

Well, at least sort of new.  Perhaps, with an innovation or two. 

An anthem of sorts for MAGA.

_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) 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/.

[1] One wonders whether Donald John Trump (or, “The Donald” as he styles himself) has registered intellectual property rights to the “MAGA” name?  I wouldn’t be surprised; indeed, I’d be surprised if he hasn’t.

[2] They called themselves colonists but the indigenous population of the continent saw them somewhat differently, actually, saw them pretty much in the same way as the invaders saw all subsequent undocumented “immigrants”.

[3] Hogan’s Heroes.

[4] A nativist, anti-Catholic and anti-immigrant secret society founded in New York City in 1849 by Charles B. Allen.

[5] Indeed, despite its abolitionist veneer, the emerging Republican Party was largely a pro-industrial revolution, pro-capitalist political movement that sought to centralize the government in order to facilitate the consolidation of the North American continent and the imperialistic expansion of the United States.

A Very Brief Primer on Policy Related Ideologies

Posted on by
Reply

Political ideologies are not policy specific, rather, they are based on how the decision making process should function:

  • Conservatism in the context of democracy is based on the premise that democracy is not temporally static but has three components, past, present and future, all of which must be considered when engaging in fundamental decisions thus change has to be considered from all three perspectives, respect for tradition, dealing with current needs but considering impact on future generations.
  • Liberalism is more present oriented, problems should be promptly addressed and resolved, notwithstanding tradition, but taking impact on future generations into account.
  • Socialism is based on the realization that we have two distinct and sometimes incompatible natures, the individual and the collective, and that tensions between them should be resolved taking both into account, when possible, but when the conflict cannot be resolved, the interests of the collective should prevail.  A concept illustrated by the fictional Star Trek Vulcan, Spock when he would proclaim that the goof of the many outweighed the good of the few, and as a corollary, of the one.
  • Libertarianism has components similar to socialism but the primacy when conflict is irreconcilable is in favor of the individual rather than the collective, thus, the needs of the one outweigh the needs of the many.  It is the foundational pillar for the antidemocratic concept of “individual rights” such as were championed in the United States’ Bill of Rights.

“Left” and “Right” are incoherently variable terms with reference to the foregoing, as are the concepts of statist (in favor of power vested in the state) and anti-statists, as they tend to change based on what political group controls the state and at what level or the goals of political policies being considered.

These four aspects of decision making need not always be in conflict and wise policy makers should take all three into account.  Unfortunately, most current policy makers are not wise and are dedicated primarily to the perspective that the many exist to serve the few and must be controlled by any means possible, while making it seem that the many, rather than the few, are the decision makers, when the truth is the obverse, and that generalized individual liberty is an impediment to such control.
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) 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/.

“Heil” Rather than “Hail” to the Chief

Posted on by
1

The United States finally has a Führer!

It’s been a long time coming.  At least since the administration of William Jefferson Clinton.  And at each stage it has become seemingly worse but the sad truth is that is has just become a more and more obvious reality.  Donald J. Trump is just a more blatant and more honest version of Joseph Robinette Biden. Then again, perhaps today’s United States Führer is really Benjamin Netanyahu (well, really Mileikowsky, but that’s another story), and he has probably been the Führer since before he even became prime minister of Israel.

The United States Constitution has been illusory since the Civil War, evolving from a confederate structure to today’s unitary state in all but name, and unitary in the dictatorial sense, where the semblance of separation of powers is only a sad delusion.  Today’s system of governance in the United States of North America (as we in South America prefer to call it), both domestically and internationally, has become one that emulates Mussolini’s Italy and Hitler’s Germany, a corporatist state in training with plenty of billionaires surfing happily in the current president’s wake.  I don’t state that as an insult but rather an acknowledgement that all power has become concentrated in the presidency, something that occurred historically in ancient Rome when the Republic morphed into the Empire.  The judiciary has become subsumed at the highest level and although numerous members of the federal judiciary at the District and Circuit levels remain loyal in their decisions to “they who appointed them” now, given the composition of the Supreme Court, that is at best a stalling tactic.

One of the most repulsive aspects of “fascism” (the sociopolitical and economic philosophy common to Nazis, Zionists and today’s United States rather than the meaningless pejorative aphorism used to describe political enemies), in addition to its proclivity for genocide, ethnic cleansing and the quest for lebensraum, is how it turns decent people, moral people, into willing accomplices.  Fascism is democratic, it wouldn’t work if it wasn’t.   Mussolini, Hitler, Netanyahu and Mr. Trump (as well as Messrs. Clinton, Bush, Obama and Biden) all enjoyed broad popular support from the electorates which, for whatever reasons (and the reasons were and are diverse), their members had been led to enthusiastically espouse.  Not that there wasn’t opposition to fascist governments then and now but thuggery by masked agents of the state, masked to assure the anonymity essential for impunity, took care of that in each case, and violently so.  Interestingly, fascism (as well as other related systems) relies heavily on a sense of outraged victimhood and purported moral and xenophobic ethnic superiority as essential unifying elements.  And the foregoing describes todays United States and its idol Israel, to a tee.

Ironically, most of the United States electorate is aware of the internal fascist problem (though they have no idea what fascism is) but they have been successfully polarized so that the principle of “divide and conquer” is effectively used to completely blunt such realization.  At the federal level, the United States political system is not democratic in any sense, it was designed to create the illusion of democracy but without democracy’s impediments to control by political and economic elites.  Moreover, a two party dictatorship was imposed through legislative favoritism so that at the federal level, it is virtually impossible to attain public office unless one is sponsored by either the ill-named Democratic Party or the equally ill-named Republican Party.  In reality, they are two sides of the same coin and the coin is owned by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee which not only funds approximately 90% of all federal elective officials but destroys any candidate who rejects its dominance, in each case, through massive expenditures that in an ethical system would be identified as “bribes”.  Those voters whose allegiance is pledged to the Democratic and Republican parties clearly see the fascist tendencies in the other party but are certain that their own party is pristinely patriotic and dedicated to the ideals pursuant to which the United States was purportedly founded, i.e., democracy, liberty, justice under law, etc., although few have any idea what such ideals mean.  Thus, the fascist cancer has successfully invaded and conquered the United States body politic, … now apparently terminally.

That fascist leaders (e.g., a Führer) behave in a manner that any normally aware person would recognize as insane apparently poses no problem.  Indeed, the insanity of the Führer’s conduct is an asset, at least in the beginning, as opponents, having no idea how to deal with it, initially acquiesce to numerous ludicrous demands, demands that all too often have horrific consequences.  Demands that become incrementally more ludicrous until all aspects of organized civil conduct are replaced by the Führer’s personal morality of the moment, something that Mr. Trump personally clearly and unequivocally specified when faced with challenges based on international, constitutional and ordinary legal impediments.  Had he a bit more historical acuity he probably would have quoted French King Luis XIV by adding “L’État, c’est moi”!

It is amazing to me, and very disturbing, that so many career military officers in the United States who I have known for most of my life and who I respect and admire, men who have taken an oath to “uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States”, now take umbrage at the observation by a retired senior military officer and current member of Congress that members of the United States armed forces “must not obey illegal orders”.  That was the crux of the law imposed by the United States and its allies on the entire world immediately following World War Two through the decisions of the Nuremburg tribunals, decisions against the leaders, civil as well as military, of the defeated Nazi regime.  Hypocritical decisions, that’s true.  The United States and its allies had engaged in conduct at least as evil as had the losers in that conflict and the decisions were based on purportedly prohibited ex post facto “legislation”.  But at any rate, those decisions have proven farcical, especially with respect to the Zionists who were so active as judges and prosecutors in such tribunals but whose descendants today claim that “international law does not apply to them”.   And by extension, it cannot apply to their chief enablers, primarily the United States, but also the United Kingdom, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Fifth French Republic.  Indeed, to any of the member states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

So we now live in the Hobbesian “State of Nature”, one essential for functional Führers where, as enunciated recently by a senior United States official, this time against Denmark, one of the United States own allies, that “only might makes right”.  And the chickens have come home to roost, as they tend to do.  The bullying of other countries is now not only all inclusive but it is now being applied to citizens and nationals of the United States by heavily armed, anonymous, poorly trained uniformed thugs, members of an evolving constitutionally proscribed virtual federal police force, and the states be damned.  After all, states rely on the Constitution first put into effect in 1791 for their authority, and that Constitution is now a zombie….

At best.
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) 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/.

Paradoxical Reflections as 2025 Morphs into 2026

Posted on by
Reply

Dateline, January 4, 2026

For many historians the assassinations of Roman reformers Tiberius Gracchus in 133 BCE and of his brother, Gaius Gracchus, in 121 BCE, both tribunes of the plebs who pushed for agrarian and social reforms against powerful Senate opposition, marked the end of the Roman Republic, at least in constitutional terms.  The rational system of governance represented by the Republic broke down after that with the dictatorships of Marius and Sulla, and then the triumvirates of Julius Caesar, Gnaeus Pompeius (self-denominated Magnus), and Marcus Licinius Crassus until Octavian Caesar initiated the Imperium a century later. 

In the case of the United States of North America (a more accurate name than the United States or the United States of America), constitutional order, at least involving the constitution usurpatively adopted in 1789, first broke down in 1861 with the war between the states (now usually referred to as the Civil War except among conservative Caucasians in the South where it is known as the War of Northern Aggression), being thereafter replaced by a militarily imposed new constitutional order which was, in turn, more legally replaced during the presidency of Woodrow Wilson by a new antifederalist centrist variant through adoption of the 16th, 17th, 18th and 19th amendments, amendments which, because they virtually destroyed the Constitution’s federalist premises, could well be considered unconstitutional constitutional amendments as described by Professor Richard Albert of the University of Texas’ School of Law.  But the end of any semblance of constitutionalism in the United States entered its death throes, as did the concept of international law, during the presidency of William Jefferson Clinton in 1992, culminating in their absolute demise during the second term of the presidency of Donald John Trump.  By that time, most of those who, upon assuming office in the United States, whether civil or military, took an oath to “defend and protect the Constitution of the United States” in truth were dedicated to serving the dictates of the de facto Führer, a more accurate term for the dictatorial presidents of the United States that started with Mr. Clinton and reached a high point (so far) with the presidency of Donald Trump.  They (the de facto führers), in turn, along with most of the bureaucracy and the members of the United States Congress, owed their loyalty to the unelected, secretive, American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) which bought most of them with monetary contributions and “favors” and which in turn owed its fealty to the Hobbesian Zionist Israeli government.

The result, both domestically and internationally, was a return to what philosopher Thomas Hobbes had once described as “the State of Nature”, not a benevolent environmentally friendly status but one where brute power was the only reality that mattered.  In both cases, the Roman and that of the United States, indeed, in that of the entire global state system, the demise of constitutional government, in each case based on superficial principles of liberty and democracy, experienced a gradual, unperceived death which, by the time it had become permanent, was virtually ignored, unmourned by the vast majority of the populations they were meant to serve. 

Unbidden, the ancient Trojan prophetess Cassandra comes to mind as I write this, and the political prophets Aldous Huxley and his former student, Eric Arthur Blair (writing as George Orwell) as well, as do the warnings in the farewell addresses of presidents George Washington and Dwight David Eisenhower.  But all to no avail. 

In this world, evil, greed, impunity and hypocrisy seemingly always triumph.  At least where collectives are involved.  It turns out that collectives, meant to foster collaboration in the quest for mutual benefit instead serve as means for the most ruthless and selfish among us to concentrate power, facilitated by our fatal individual naiveté and immense capacity for self-deception.

As I all too frequently end my reflections nowadays, I again see Elphaba Thropp (albeit in her earlier 1930s incarnation in the film, “The Wizard of Oz”) slowly melting after having been inadvertently doused with water by the ingénue, Dorothy, with Elphaba desperately declaiming: “what a world, what a world”!

Welcome to 2026!

_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) 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/.

Solstice Day, 2025

Posted on by
Reply

Today, December 21st, 2025 we experience a solstice, really two: the Winter Solstice in the Northern Hemisphere, the shortest day and longest night of the year, and the Southern Solstice in the South with the longest day and shortest night.  In Colombia, which straddles the equator, in its southern regions it experiences the Summer Solstice, at the equator, well, perhaps nothing at all, all days being equal, and to the North, the Winter Solstice.  As in so many other things, Colombia has it all.

Like the equinoxes, to me the solstices are days for introspection and reflection and more, so than New Year’s Day, days for refocusing and resolutions.  Our world is in terrible shape, chaos and injustice reign in a replica of what philosopher Thomas Hobbes described many centuries ago as the “State of Nature”, a phrase having nothing to do with sound ecological practices but rather, with chaos, injustice, lawlessness and impunity.  The reality is that our world has seemingly always functioned (dysfunctioned would be more accurate) this way but, we have always been successfully deluded through false and fanciful narratives into believing that there are good guys on one side who believe in truth, justice and equity, and bad guys on the other who believe in nothing at all but power and pleasure for themselves.

Historians should know differently, as should journalists, but they don’t, or they don’t care because they’re an integral part of the problem.  Reflecting on how genocide and ethnic cleansing and the quest for lebensraum have become fashionable in Western and Central Europe and in the Anglo-Saxon world, rather than anathema (as we were told following the Second World War), I’ve come to doubt everything I was taught concerning World War Two and World War One, indeed, about the American Revolution and the American Civil War, and which I then, in turn taught others.  There were no “good guys” in any of those “conflicts”, only evil politicians and sacrificial victims on all sides, sacrificial victims who along with their families provided the fuel to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. 

In what we refer to as the Western World, the purportedly Democratic World, being seen as the good guys seems existentially important despite the hundreds of millions of people who have been slaughtered through our elective wars and through our colonialism, purportedly a “burden” imposed on us in order to raise our cultural inferiors to our intellectual and moral heights.  The Romans of two millennia ago, prior to their conquest by Christianity, were just as selfishly aggressive as are we in the Western World, the purportedly Democratic World, but they were much more honest.  They had no problem at all in being seen as the bad guys but, truth be told, we have easily surpassed them in savagery and in a lack of respect for legal institutions, all the while insisting that we do what we do in the name of justice, liberty, decency and democracy.  In the name of our Abrahamic god. 

We are masters of hypocrisy.  For example, followers of the Christian branch of the Abrahamic triad abhor the economic theses on which their religion is purportedly based, which ironically coincide with the premises underlying communism, i.e., not only political, social and economic equality and equity, but a dedication to lift up the poorest and most humble among us while preventing the accumulation of massive wealth by the few (remember the camel and the eye of the needle).  Among the followers of the Judaic branch of that triad, people who for millennia were victims of intense social and legal injustice, post-eighth-century Eurasian converts today purportedly acting in the name of all Jews have become oppressors and mass murderers in an apparent quest for political and economic hegemony.  The Islamic branch meanwhile looks on: Palestinians (descendants of real Jews) are sacrificed while wealthy Arab leaders pretend to care but at best, do nothing and at worst, secretly collude with Christian and Zionist Islamophobes.  Ironically, the atheists among us are those most inclined to avoidance of state sponsored murder and most supportive of equity, equality and social justice.

Reflecting on the foregoing on this day of solstices, a movie from the late nineteen thirties, the old movie version of the Wizard of Oz, one of the first to use color, comes to mind, specifically with reference to one of its final scenes.  The scene in which its purported villain, Elphaba, the fictional Wicked Witch of the East, exclaims (after she was accidentally soaked with water by the heroine, and began to melt), “what a world, what a world”!  That metaphor was certainly prescient, not only with respect to today’s world, but to our world since significantly before history was first recorded, perhaps since we first evolved as purported Homo Sapiens.

Anyway, … enough reflection and introspection.  What about resolutions?  Is there anything we can do to change the inequity that surrounds us? 

Well, maybe not.  But we can at least try.  The strange thing about we humans is that in large collectives we tend to be horrible while individually, although some of us are indeed horrible, the majority are decent albeit incredibly gullible and all too ignorant.  Thus, perhaps the first thing we need to do is to help each other shed our blinders by realizing that virtually everything we’re taught is false and then, by following our more humane instincts, for example, the so called Golden Rule, “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”, rather than its perverted analog, “do unto others whatever you can get away with before they do it unto you”.  Perhaps then, hopefully blinder free and well intentioned, we can reject leadership by all those who seek dominion through violence and deception, and who follow the creed of perpetual greed and perpetual war, albeit in disguise.

Anyway (again), … these are my reflections after a good deal of introspection on a shortest day and a longest night high in the central range of the Colombian Andes.
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2025; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) 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/.

An Updated Lupine-Related Fable

Posted on by
Reply

Dateline: The Caribbean, Nigeria, Palestine, the Ukraine, Iran, diverse states in the United States of America, etc., November, 2025:

There is a new version of the classic fable of the little shepherd boy who cried wolf. 

In the traditional version, a mischievous young shepherd enjoys agitating the populace with false warnings of an attack by wolves. 

The current version is more complex.

The little boy is replaced by a pompous, egocentric, cranky, cantankerous and unpredictable elder bully who enjoys leading others to believe, on the one hand, that he himself is a very dangerous wolf and thereby tormenting and bullying them into yield to his machinations but, concurrently, he also enjoys playing the role of a harbinger, one warning those who somehow or other believe in him that there’s a distinct probability of impending attacks by other “predators”. 

As in the case of the original little boy, the more recent episodes are, at best, misleading and, to some extent, designed in the hope of creating future realities woven from false narratives.  For a while the incoherently contradictory narratives seem to work. That is, until they no longer do so.  Eventually, they distract from real existential crises in which no one believes, having been habituated by the series of orchestrated fake crises.

Inadvertent self-fulfilling prophecies become fulfilled.

The names have been, while not eliminated, not disclosed in order to protect the guilty, protecting the guilty being the norm in our society. On the other hand, the illustration, well, cartoonish though it may be, it may in fact prove instructive.
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2025; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) 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/.

Clara Eugenia López Obregón – Porque la apoyo para la presidencia de Colombia

Posted on by
Reply

Introducción:

Este comentario, que trata con la precandidatura de la senadora y anterior alcaldesa de Bogotá, Clara Eugenia López Obregón, refleja mi opinión positiva sobre ella, posición que he tenido desde ya muchos años.  La verdad, posición que asumí desde que volví a Colombia en el 2007 después de una vida en los EE.UU.  Desde su participación en los debates presidenciales de 2014 he creído que ella era la mejor opción presidencial para Colombia y por muchas razones, aunque admiro mucho al presidente Petro y también a dos de los otros actuales precandidatos presidenciales del Pacto Histórico, Iván Cepeda y Carolina Corcho.

Clara parece especial por razones complicadas, incluso quizás incoherentes en ciertos aspectos.  De lo que entiendo, de joven, durante los años 70, fue amiga y quizás novia de Álvaro Uribe Vélez, era durante el tiempo cuando él entonces señor Uribe supuestamente era liberal.  El mismo Álvaro Uribe Vélez quien hoy en día es el mayor oponente de lo que ella ahora apoya, pero yo aspiro que, basado en ese pasado, las relaciones de ella con la derecha colombiana (odio las frases ultraderecha y ultra izquierda que solo son peyorativas) podrían ser positivas o por lo menos cordiales, aun habiendo sido ella por ya muchos años definitivamente de izquierda.  Creo que por su experiencia y forma de ser podría lograr una relación política cordial con quienes piensan diferente sin ser media tibia como el señor Fajardo o amarga como el senador Robledo y eso mucho necesitamos en Colombia para minimizar la polarización política, cívica y cultural en la cual nos encontramos.  Ademas, por su extensa trayectoria política, creo que tiene relaciones, si no siempre excelentes, por lo menos adecuadas, con muchos políticos tradicionales que sin denegar su asociación con brechas morales y éticas con respecto al abuso del poder para su propio beneficio, siguen esenciales para lograr reformas importantes, como lastimosamente ha descubierto (o debe haber descubierto) el Presidente Petro.  Lo anterior, en mi opinión, la hace la mejor candidata para lograr el éxito no solo en las próximas elecciones, ampliando en forma importante el anticipado “Frente Amplio”, pero en la gobernanza esencial que necesitaría lograr si su campaña fuera exitosa.  Pero, ademas de esos temas pragmáticos, creo que es la persona más preparada que tenemos en Colombia para enfrentar y resolver en forma positiva los numerosos retos que nos enfrentan.  A diferencia con otros precandidatos nobles y sinceros, Clara es multidimensional en su experiencia, conocimiento y enfoque.

Biografía

Entonces, echémosle una mirada, aunque superficial, a su trayectoria cívica y política.  Datos extensos y específicos al respecto no serán difíciles encontrar.  De acuerdo a Wikipedia, una fuente de poca confianza con respecto a muchas cosas pero, en este caso, pareciéndose neutral, ella quedó huérfana muy joven pero fue “adoptada política y familiarmente” por el líder político liberal Alfonso López Michelsen, presidente de Colombia entre 1974 y 1978 y el primo de su padre.  Ella estudió economía en la Universidad de Harvard y, posteriormente, se licenció en derecho en la Universidad de los Andes.  En la actualidad, es candidata a doctorado en derecho tributario y financiero en la Universidad de Salamanca. 

Durante su estadía en Harvard, se involucró activamente en protestas en contra de la incursión de los Estados Unidos en Vietnam e inicio un cambio filosófico desde sus raíces en el progresismo liberal hacia la izquierda, llegando a entender realidades sobre esa potencia del norte que por tanto tiempo nos ha dominado con desprecio, y que tanto daño nos ha hecho, algo que en los últimos días el señor Trump ha hecho más claro que nunca.  Por eso, a diferencia de mucha de la clase política en la cual nació, ella no ha vendido sus valores y su persona por los beneficios económicos personales con los cuales la oligarquía estadounidense compra la lealtad de tantos líderes en nuestro continente.

Regresó a Colombia en 1974 aceptando un cargo en la Secretaría Económica de la presidencia de Colombia, presidencia ocupada en ese tiempo por su mentor, el liberal Alfonso López Michelsen, movimiento en el cual inicialmente milito pero que abandonó en forma permanente en 1979, al parecer, reaccionando en forma muy inesperada con respecto a una disputa entre los expresidentes López Michelsen y Carlos Lleras Restrepo, irónicamente tomando el lado ideológico a favor de Lleras Restrepo y su pupilo Luis Carlos Galán Sarmiento.  Por lo tanto, se inscribió en el Nuevo Liberalismo, movimiento fundado por Galán y el exalcalde de Neiva, Rodrigo Lara Bonilla.

Como militante en el Nuevo Liberalismo fue elegida concejal y eventualmente presidenta del concejo distrital en Bogotá, eso durante los años 80 y, posteriormente, fue elegida contralora distrital de Bogotá. En el Nuevo Liberalismo apoyó la candidatura presidencial de Carlos Galán en 1982 (no obstante la posición contraria de su anterior benefactor y mentor Alfonso López) pero en 1986 cambio su perspectiva y afiliación política, moviéndose más hacia la izquierda política y salió del Nuevo Liberalismo para afiliarse con la Unión Patriótica desde la cual, en oposición a la candidatura presidencial de Galán en 1986, apoyó a Jaime Pardo Leal quien quedó en tercer lugar en esa contienda antes de ser asesinado en 1987.  En 1988, por primero vez, se lanzó como candidata a la alcaldía de Bogotá bajo la bandera de la Unión Patriótica, elección que fue impactada en forma irónica por el secuestro del candidato que resultó exitoso, quizás por haber sido secuestrado y liberado, el candidato conservador y conocido periodista, Andrés Pastrana Arango, apoyado por su padre, el expresidente Misael Pastrana.

1990 fue un año desastroso para la izquierda colombiana y, en realidad, para toda Colombia.  Bernardo Jaramillo Ossa, el candidato de la Unión Patriótica apoyado por Clara para la presidencia fue asesinado en abril de 1990, después del asesinato de Luis Carlos Galán en agosto de 1989 y antes del asesinato de Carlos Pizarro, también en abril de 1990.  Traumatizada políticamente, como se encontraba gran parte del país, Clara se alejó de la política por casi una década, dedicándose a la academia y respaldando a las ambiciones políticas de su esposo, Carlos Romero, como concejal.  En 2002 volvió a involucrarse en temas de gobernanza cuando fue nombrada Auditora General de Colombia por el entonces presidente, su viejo pretendiente, Álvaro Uribe Vélez, función que ejerció por tres años hasta que se vio obligada a denunciar ante la Corte Suprema de Justicia de Colombia la posible infiltración de organizaciones armadas ilegales de extrema derecha en el Estado Colombiano, eso después de que Salvatore Mancuso, el exjefe máximo de la Autodefensas Unidas de Colombia, dio a conocer que al menos el 35% de los miembros del actual Congreso de la Republica eran aliados suyos. Esa denuncia de Clara dio inicio al proceso investigativo que adelantaría el supremo tribunal, y que derivaría en un proceso judicial que desató un escándalo político en Colombia conocido como la Parapolítica.

Encontrándose ya estigmatizada por el “uribismo” decidió volver a involucrarse en la contienda electoral apoyando la nueva conglomeración política de izquierda, el Polo Democrático Alternativo, partido por el cual aspiró a la Cámara de Representantes en 2006, perdiendo curul por poco más de cien votos.  Por un tiempo después de esa campaña considero una nueva campaña para la alcaldía de Bogotá pero decidió  apoyar la candidatura de Samuel Moreno Rojas quien, como a tantos otros, la engaño por un tiempo con respecto a su falta de ética, algo demostrada por su rol en el denominado Carrusel de la contratación y que resulto en su destitución como alcalde.  Para Clara eso fue una gran decepción pero, a la vez, una gran oportunidad de aprendizaje. 

Como importante asesora en la campaña de Samuel Moreno Rojas Clara fue designada como Secretaria de Gobierno en la nueva administración municipal bogotana lo cual requirió que su esposo, Carlos Romero, renunciara a su escaño en el Concejo de Bogotá.  Como Secretaria de Gobierno, llego a denunciar el caso de “falsos positivos” en la supuesta guerra uribista en contra de las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (las FARC) y otros movimientos insurgentes, caso en el cual, para recibir “comisiones” por cada insurgente “eliminado”, táctica sugerida por los gobiernos de George W. Bush y Barak Obama en los EE.UU., miembros de las fuerzas públicas colombianas capturaban a jóvenes inocentes, disfrazándolos de insurgentes para entregar sus cadáveres en cambio recompensas.  En específico, la investigación en la cual participo Clara trató con 19 jóvenes que figuraban desaparecidos y que fueron ingresados por el ejército a medicina legal en la ciudad de Ocaña, Norte de Santander, como muertos en combate.  El resultante escandalo a nivel nacional e internacional culminó con la destitución de 27 oficiales del ejército por su involucramiento en el asesinato de más de tres mil jóvenes inocentes en diversas regiones de Colombia.

Clara ocupó la Secretaría Distrital de Gobierno hasta el 10 de marzo de 2010, fecha en la que fue escogida como fórmula vicepresidencial de Gustavo Petro para las elecciones presidenciales de 2010 en las que alcanzaron más de un millón trescientos mil votos, pero no resultaron elegidos.  Tras la renuncia de Jaime Dussán Calderón a la presidencia del Polo Democrático, el Comité Ejecutivo del partido la proclamó unánimemente como nueva presidenta de esa colectividad, cargo que asumió en abril de 2010. Renuncio a ese cargo temporalmente en junio de 2011 porque, habiendo brotado el escándalo de la corrupción de la administración municipal y la resultante destitución de Samuel Moreno Rojas como alcalde, ella fue escogida el 8 de junio de 2011 por el entonces presidente de la Republica, Manuel Santos, para remplazar a Moreno como alcaldesa encargada, un reto que parecía desagradable e imposible y con desastrosas implicaciones para un futuro político.  Bogotá se encontraba política y económicamente ahogada, después de tres años, solo el 15% del presupuesto se había ejecutado y la confianza de los bogotanos en su gobierno era solo del 7%.  Pero Clara y su equipo lograron milagros.  Aunque solo se esperaba que mantuviera el cargo por solo tres meses, se amplió su periodo hasta el primero de enero de 2012 y su rendimiento fue inesperadamente excelente, tan productivo como el de Moreno había sido desastroso.  En su discurso de posesión prometió que defendería el patrimonio de los ciudadanos rechazando la privatización de la Empresa de Telecomunicaciones de Bogotá ETB, pero también preservando para los ciudadanos en su conjunto los otros bienes distritales.  Dirigiéndose al escándalo del denominado carrusel de contratación municipal, prometió transparencia en la firma de contratos y licitaciones.​ De acuerdo a la encuesta Gallup, entro a su cargo en un ambiente de desconfianza total con una aprobación minúscula para salió de su cargo apoyada por el 76% de los ciudadanos, la más amplia aprobación registrada hasta entonces para la alcaldía de Bogotá.  Entre sus numerosos logros se destacaron el plan decenal de agua que por primera vez otorgó de manera gratuita el mínimo vital a las familias más pobres de la capital, el subsidio al transporte público para las personas con discapacidad y sus cuidadores y la expedición de decreto de participación incidente de los ciudadanos en la confección de los planes y programas del gobierno de la ciudad.  Cuando entro a su cargo, después de tres años solo se había ejecutado el 15% del presupuesto municipal autorizado, cuando lo entrego, se había ejecutado, en solo ocho meses, el 95%.[1]

Luego de su rol como salvadora de Bogotá, Clara volvió a las contiendas electorales primero, como la candidata del Polo Democrático para la presidencia de Colombia en las elecciones del 2014 donde obtuvo casi dos millones de votos y ocupó la cuarta posición, y luego, como candidata a la Alcaldía de Bogotá en representación del Polo Democrático, la Unión Patriótica y el Movimiento Alternativo Indígena y Social (MAIS).  

No fue exitosa en esa elección pero el 25 de abril de 2016, Clara fue designada por el presidente Juan Manuel Santos, a quien había apoyado en segunda, como Ministra de Trabajo, cargo que ocupó hasta el 5 de mayo de 2017 cuando renuncio para participar en las elecciones presidenciales de 2018.  Desde el 20 de julio de 2022 ha sido senadora de la Republica.  Además de lo anterior, ha sido profesora de la Universidad del Rosario y Universidad de los Andes.

De nuevo, precandidata a la presidencia

En 2025, Clara confirmó su precandidatura presidencial para las elecciones de 2026 postulándose a través de la coalición política “Unitarios” conformado por cerca de 15 partidos que se presenta como un complemento fraterno al Pacto Histórico.  La meta de su campaña es participar en la consulta del “Frente Amplio” en marzo de 2026. En esa consulta se enfrentarían precandidatos como Roy Barreras, Camilo Romero y la figura que finalmente designe el Pacto Histórico (probablemente o Carolina Corcho o Iván Cepeda), su objetivo siendo la continuación de la transformación iniciada por Gustavo Petro.

En lo personal, no soy miembro del partido político Colombia Humana o del nuevo partido unificado, el Pacto Histórico, aunque a ambos los he asesorado y creo en sus ideales.  No soy “petrista” aunque conozco y apoyo a Gustavo Petro porque esa frase huele demasiadamente al caudillismo en el cual ni él ni yo creemos.  Para mí, como analista político, me es importante ser independiente de organizaciones políticas donde la ética insiste que cada miembro debe acatar a las decisiones colectivas.  Estoy muy de acuerdo con las políticas que la administración actual ha propuesto y por las cuales ha luchado, aunque sin el éxito que merecen, pero me ha preocupado la falta de dirección política personal por parte del presidente, algo que me parece esencial en negociaciones directas con la oposición y hasta con aliados, roles que han asumido diversas personas en formas algo incoherentes.  No obstante esa observación, entiendo que dada la histórica corrupción de nuestros líderes políticos, burócratas, empresarios y medios de comunicación, lograr los cambios transcendentales requeridos para crear la sociedad justa, eficiente e igualitaria que merecemos los colombianos es un tema muy complicado y, en última instancia, parece requerir intervención ciudadana por medio de una nueva constituyente, algo con el cual el presidente Petro y Clara están de acuerdo.  Mi perspectiva con respecto a la constitución colombiana es mucho más drástica que la de ellos, algo sobre cual circulé hace un tiempo un artículo “Porque Colombia ha requerido un nuevo Constituyente desde el 1991”.  Yo creo que los defectos constitucionales son tan profundos que requieren una revisión total de la Constitución de 1991, una constitución larguísima, llena de promesas incumplibles e instituciones incoherentes y en la cual, en importantes partes, los sujetos no son los ciudadanos sino los partidos políticos.  Como ejemplo de lo último solo hay que entender que la prohibición a lo doble militancia les prohíbe a los supuestos representantes del Pueblo votar su conciencia, en vez, siendo legalmente forzados a votar como deciden sus partidos.  En base de lo último, las reformas esenciales propuestas por el actual gobierno para eliminar corrupción y lograr sistemas de salud, pensión, medicina, trabajo, tributo, etc., justos y eficientes han sido derrotadas.

No obstante esa perspectiva compartida sobre la necesidad de una reforma constitucional, no estoy de acuerdo con la manera en la cual Clara cree que se debe implementar una constituyente, eso siendo por medio de democracia directa utilizando tecnologías novedosas para coordinar los esfuerzos.  Pero eso es lo único con lo cual no estoy de acuerdo en las propuestas de Clara.  Me encantaria si fuera posible pero coordinar treinta millones de participantes me parece una tarea imposible, en especial cunado trata con temas tan complicados que requieren conocimiento supremamente complejo sobre derecho, teorías constitucionales, economía, política comparada e historia.

Entonces, ¿por qué no los otros dos precandidatos que también mucho admiro?

Carolina Corcho es una brillante y ética persona con experiencia en temas cívicos y profundo conocimiento sobre el disfuncional sistema de salud colombiana pero carece de experiencia electoral y ejecutiva y todavía es algo unidimensional en su experticia.  Ademas, creo que para ella sería difícil interactuar en forma eficiente con fuerzas políticas y económicas opositoras a las reformas en las cuales ella, como Clara, como Iván Cepeda y como el presidente Petro creen.  Iván Cepeda ha sido entre los mejores legisladores de nuestro país con impecable trayectoria en la lucha contra la corrupción y por la paz, lo admiro enormemente y lo quiero.  Pero carece de experiencia administrativa y ejecutiva y el uribismo y sus aliados son sus enemigos mortales, lo odian aún más que odian al presidente Petro, entonces gobernar en forma exitosa sería difícil, quizás imposible.

Eso deja a Clara que lo tiene todo, la experiencia tanto electoral como administrativa habiendo sido ministra, alcaldesa y senadora, ella tiene los ideales que admiro, los cuales comparte con Carolina e Iván y con el presidente y, tiene la posibilidad de interactuar en forma positiva con diversas corrientes políticas para crear una coalición amplia capaz de implementar importantes reformas.  Como Carolina e Iván, es brillante y ética y progresista, pero con mayor capacidad de unirnos y de minimizar la polarización que tan horriblemente nos infecta. 

Por eso la apoyo.[1]

[1] Por la necesidad de circular esta reflexión en forma expedita, no se ha logrado revisarla en temas de estilo, etc., por lo cual se solicita disculpas.

_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2025; 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 filósofo empírico 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. 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/.

[1] Datos obtenidos desde el artículo sobre Clara López disponible en Wikipedia (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clara_L%C3%B3pez) revisado el 18 de octubre de 2015.

Reflections on an Unremittingly Ludicrous Situation

Posted on by
1

Republicans are absolutely correct, the Democratic Party is horrible but, then again, so are Democrats, the Republican Party is awful.  Interestingly, both are subservient to the same master and it is not the United States’ citizenry.

The second Trump administration is a disaster, domestically and internationally, but, in all honesty it’s not a worse disaster than the Biden administration, and, internationally, while terrible, it is no worse than the prior Obama and Clinton administrations which planted the seeds for so many of today’s problems (think of the Ukraine, and Libya and Syria and Yemen, etc.).  And of course, the administration of George W. Bush was as terrible and inept as any of them, although, in each case, “inept” is measured only with respect to how such administrations benefit United States citizens.  Each was highly apt as far as the billionaire class was concerned and with respect to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).

The sad part is that Mr. Trump’s inane behavior, rather than usher in a real independent and pro-United States administration comprised of people like former Congressman Dennis Kucinich or former Senator Jim Webb, real statesmen, it is very likely to usher in a new Democratic Party administration led by the Clintons and the Obamas and Pelosi, etc., also foreign owned, rather than one dedicated to world peace, domestic tranquility, prosperity and freedom from AIPAC domination.  Thus, the more things purportedly change, the more they stay the same and it is our fault, yours and mine, both individually and collectively, for being so consistently gullible.  Of course, things don’t quite stay the same as each subsequent administration becomes more vitriolic and more seriously abuses our civil liberties and constitutional rights, more thoroughly perverting and subverting the institutions and customs meant to preserve and protect us while the previous administration hypocritically laments the sad state of affairs.

For decades public opinion polls have shown that the United States electorate would prefer a political administration other than one controlled by either the Republican or Democratic parties but every election, thanks in large part to the AIPAC controlled corporate media, we are convinced that those are our only two choices and that voting for third parties or independents is merely wasting our votes, and that we thus have to vote for one of the two AIPAC owned political parties so that the other does not attain power.  Thus, rather than voting our conscience and with our intellect, we tend to vote from artificially induced fear.

The stupidity involved is incredible!  Albert Einstein would have described it as insane.  But it is constant and consistent and anyway, it’s probably already too late to change things since, as may well have occurred in the United States already and as is occurring in Europe west of the Caucuses, electoral manipulation through distortive news reporting and, when that is not enough, electoral manipulation through abuse of the judicial system (as recently occurred in Romania) or, as a last resort, through electoral fraud involving destruction of inconvenient ballots (as was apparently again the case today in Moldavia) and through manufacture of necessary ballots, or else, through the hacking of electronic voting equipment will prevent changes opposed by the alliance of Deep States that makes a mockery of even the illusion of democracy.

For decades, especially since Eric Arthur Blair (writing under the pen name George Orwell) in his dystopian epic 1984 (published in 1948) warned us, we have been completely manipulated, duped, and our intellect and ethics have been insulted.  We not only “should” know better, we in fact “do” know better, but somehow, that makes no difference.  The genocide against which we purportedly fought a world war has now become acceptable, although, the reality, when one examines history, is that genocide has always been acceptable, one need only note the celebrated instances of genocide in the Tanakh (Old Testament), e.g., Jericho, or much more recently, the genocide perpetrated against indigenous Americans by European colonists, the genocide in the Congo perpetrated by the Belgians, the genocide in India and Africa perpetrated by the British, the genocide in Armenia perpetrated by the Turks and the bombings of Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki during the second war to end all wars, thus, the genocide engaged in by the Nazis was apparently only horrendous because the Nazis lacked sophisticated public relations such as those employed by Zionists and, of course, the Nazis lost a major war.

So, … we rush towards Armageddon, many Christion Zionists with open arms in the hope that Yešu the Nazarene will deem it prudent to return and reward slaughter and mayhem with his holy presence.  We rush towards Armageddon oblivious, polarized and incoherent but, apparently, blissfully so.  Or, perhaps, we’ll just blissfully remain enslaved to our betters who apparently deserve to use us as they will.
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2025; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.

Guillermo (“Bill”) Calvo Mahé (a sometime poet and aspiring empirical philosopher) 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/.