Nihilistic Pessimism

Lugubriously lethargic lassitude is the art form the legacy media has perfected on behalf of its masters to keep us from realizing what has happened to the world we hoped to leave as a legacy for our descendants, the world we thought we’d be able to glimpse and, at times enjoy, the world we were promised if we would just work hard and behave.

It is the hopeless state that assails us when we seek to exercise our political duties and go to the polls with no real choice at all, all the available candidates having already been bought and paid for with our money but certainly not for our benefit.

It is the residue we’re left with when those who own and control us abuse us, and we’re left without recourse in the face of their immune impunity.

It is our reaction when we are forced to realize that Jeffrey Epsteins rule our world through their bought and paid for proxies and that we can, at best, sit and watch as children are abused and Palestinians are slaughtered for fun and profit, hoping that the vision of German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemöller’s “First They Came” will not apply to us, at least not in the near future.

It is what being inside a societal black hole’s event horizon feels like for those not among the Chosen.  It is what being aware feels like in the Dystopia we live in, one where we sometimes envy those blissfully unaware among us, those who make it possible.  It is what we feel when we’ve come to realize that the metaphorical sign atop the gates of mythic Hell joyfully proclaiming the death of hope already apply to us.
_____

© 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 An Ethics for Non-State Popular Responsive Violence

I apparently wrote the following in 2012, revisited it on June 1, 2017 for some reason, and am again revisiting it.  Today is the 27th day of August, 2026.  The time spanned is interesting but, perhaps even more, so is the relevance.  The protagonists are, I assume, Citadel classmates, some of whose names have been changed to protect the guilty:

We were supposed to play softball against a group of local VMI alumni but the day which had started out under a bright golden sun set in a field of robin’s egg blue had made a drastic turn about ten minutes before game time and we’d retired to a local Irish pub where we’d had a dart tournament of sorts instead.  After we’d split a few pitchers, a few of us wound up, a bit tipsy in the basement bar at Mike’s house.

We’d shot the shit for quite a while, getting a bit more buzzed as we watched Sunday afternoon football, then finding ourselves in that twilight waiting for the Sunday night game, buzzed enough to take on the world’s problems, … again.  We’d all been political science or history majors but most of us had gravitated towards the business world after a sojourn exploring rice paddies of Southeast Asia.

I hadn’t been paying all that much attention, truth be told, I might have been snoozing, until a bit of acrimony crept into our discussions.

Bill had once explained his theory of legitimized violence to me in the context of what he referred to as our reverse Robin Hood socioeconomic system.  “Since impunity is rampant”, he’d said, “new mechanisms need to evolve to create and police social justice and that, at least in a state of transition, must involve successful challenges to the state monopoly on legitimate use of violence.  The bad guys now own all major states and most if not all minor states so the conditions that led to the implicit decision to surrender personalized use of violence no longer exist.  But unlimited violence won’t work either.”

He was off on a similar vein again, this time, trying to put terrorism into some kind of ethical context.  I think most of us acknowledged the problem but few saw terrorism as the answer.  So Woody, I think, asked Bill if he had any kind of workable solution.

“Terrorism has no boundaries so while in the short term, it provides a kind of superficially reactive sense of justice, it in fact adds to injustice” Bill explained.  “There is no accepted terrorist ethic, if there were, then it wouldn’t really be ‘terrorism’, it would be something else.

“Like what” Woody had asked?  He and Bill, for the time being, seemingly engaged in a somewhat too serious albeit hypothetical soliloquy.  Bill’s vocabulary was a bit too sophisticated for a lot of people but you get used to it after a few decades.

“We’d need to invent a new term I guess” Bill had replied, “but first we’d need to carefully consider what applicable parameters could maximize effectiveness while minimizing harm to the innocent, and in the context of the kind of class-based abuse that we have, determining who is innocent is a fundamental problem.” 

“Suppose”, he’d continued “a financier manipulates the law to cheat a million people of their retirement savings but because he then has so much money, he buys protection, not only from prosecution or even civil legal claims, but buys enough security to assure his personal welfare can’t be threatened.  Then suppose a victim, in order to exact some kind of compensation, kills the man’s brother; an innocent person who did not benefit directly from the financier’s wrongdoing.  Does that involve terrorism?  Does that involve justice?  Or suppose the victims hire someone to bomb a facility owned by the financier, one undoubtedly insured, and a number of employees and customers are injured there.  Does that involve terrorism?  Does that involve justice?  Probably not, in either case.  But what else can victims do?  How can they make the costs of wrongful conduct so high that despite the unwillingness of the state to see justice done, such conduct will be made too risky?”

“That’s the million dollar question” Chuck chimed in (so he wasn’t asleep after all).  Woody poked him, laughing. “Remember when questions were cheaper?  Groucho Marx and the $64,000 question?”

“You mean Karl Marx don’t you” grumbled Frank.  Frank was a completely honest guy but a dyed in the wool Republican for whom the state could do no wrong.

Bill glanced at his friends, worried that perhaps he was being a bit too open.  They’d all studied political science together decades before but the others had wandered into different fields.  He had too but after his divorce he’d returned to academia and a very different world view.  Still, while they frequently disagreed, there was a lot of respect shared so he opened up.  “Cute, guys, if only this wasn’t so serious.  Desperate people take desperate actions, and way too much of the world is full of desperate people.  A bit of ethical guidance could save a lot of lives.

“Ethics?  Terrorist ethics, you’ve got to be kidding” chided Frank.

“Well financiers’ ethics sure aren’t about to make a surprise appearance” responded Bill.  “The fact is, an analogy to ethical and legal norms involving the concept of self-defense might alleviate the collateral damage.  Maybe there is a basis for resort to violence that can at least be tied to standards so that suffering by the innocent can be minimized, but it’s a tough call.  One argument I’ve heard involves concentric zones of responsibility-benefit with the victimizers in the middle, kind of like bulls’ eyes, and the purely innocent on the outside.

Huh (from several of the people present)?

“Well” answered Bill, the innermost circle has those most directly responsible with each next circle including a proximate prioritization of blame or responsibility. It’s a nexus based chain.  Let me give you an example.  The person responsible is in the central circle, following circles might include that person’s accomplices, then that person’s guards, then people who benefit directly from that persons improper actions, then persons who benefit indirectly.  After a series of circles like that you arrive at the mass of people who have no links.  Only action involving the latter would be pure terrorism while only action against the person responsible would be fully justified.  As one gets further away from the center, justification decreases while the label of terrorism becomes more apt.  Of course, defining who merits occupying the center is the rub.

Woody thought for a bit and then asked, “Well; how does that affect tax payers?  Many of us support activities that might be considered culpable while others don’t, but we all have to pay them.

Bill seemed prepared for the question and replied fairly quickly “The problem there involves the ability to implement the ethical paradigm.  How to tell which taxpayers are more blameworthy and which are more innocent, and even harder, how to act separately in such a general context.  Obviously the supporters of the policies that are blameworthy are less innocent than the opponents, but the group is too homogenous to differentiate.”

“Tom, you’re the lawyer” said Chuck.  “I know law and ethics have all too little in common, but what do you think of Bill’s observations?”

Tom kind of grinned.  “That depends on whether he can pay the legal fees.  I’m pretty sure he’ll be needing a lawyer, soon.”

“Fuck all of you” shouted Frank, apparently a bit more buzzed than the rest.  “And God bless America.”

Realizing he may have talked a bit more openly than was healthy in the current climate, Bill glanced at his watch and exclaimed “Where the Hell has the time gone, we need to do this again sometime but as for me, I’m out ‘a here.”

Most of the others agreed, called for their tabs and got up, all except for Frank and Tom, who decided they needed to talk a bit more.

“Shit” Bill whispered to Woody as he left, “I forgot just what Frank has been doing during the past few years”.

“You can’t be serious Bill” Woody whispered back.

“Then why are we whispering” observed Bill?  “Why are we whispering?”
_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2012; 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/.

A Very Brief Reflection on Non-Citizen Impact on Governance in the United States

On August 13 of this year (2026), Sue Seboda published an article on Substack entitled “Will the SAVE Act Save America or is it just more spitballs and sledgehammers…”.  It follows a multipart series of articles Sue has written and published on Substack dealing with the history of immigration and immigration legislation in the United States, a decent fairly objective effort worth reading, as is her latest article which can be accessed at https://sueseboda.substack.com/p/will-the-save-act-save-america?r=lwzkv&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web.  Sue strikes me as being on the conservative side of the political spectrum but objective and open minded.  I like her work.  I, on the other hand, am and have long been a democratic socialist along the lines of Noam Chomsky, Nelson Mandela, Pepe Mujica, Martin Luther King, Jr., etc. (not to be confused with Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin or even Leon Trotsky).

Sue’s article deals with very significant issues, issues that also impact other critical issues not dealt with in the article such as the nature of the federal decennial census used to apportion Congressional representation and distribute federal funds and the issue of birthright citizenship, all of which should probably be dealt with concurrently via a federal constitutional clarifying amendment after robust debate that results in legal requirements that deal with real problems in a manner avoiding discrimination based on race, gender, religious beliefs or  national origins but definitely limits the roles of non-citizens in United States institutions.  The article focuses on the pros and cons of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (SAVE Act), a proposed Congressional bill that would requires individuals to provide documentary proof of United States citizenship (such as a passport or certified birth certificate) when registering to vote in federal elections.

If formal participation in the political process by undocumented migrants is an important issue, an even more critical issue has been ignored and is generally ignored, the role of foreign governments and their agents, advocates and representative in the United States electoral and political system and the role of campaign contributions from sources ineligible to vote in the elections impacted, including political action committees, corporations, labor unions, chambers of commerce and individuals.  That is a real clear and present danger.  The two great villains in the foregoing, albeit not the only ones, are the Israeli American Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and the United States Supreme Court, especially in its Citizens United decision, Citizens United v. FEC; 558 U.S. 310 (2010) and its June 30, 2026 decision in National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission, 609 U.S. ____ (2026).  Of course, the legacy media focuses primarily on imaginary roles by Russia and China, ignoring the reality of United States interference in foreign elections, most recently, along with Israel, throughout Latin America.

For the most part (in the author’s opinion), the least rational political posture with respect to securing the electoral process has been that adopted by the Democratic Party and its activist base which vehemently oppose action to require picture identification and proof of citizenship to vote.  That specifically includes vehement opposition to the SAVE Act which includes concepts that enjoy overwhelming support among the citizenry, opposition to which is likely to cost the Democratic Party a significant number of votes among the independent voter community in upcoming Congressional elections.  The SAVE Act is far from perfect and could certainly use a bit of constitutional and pragmatic polish though its premises seem sound.  However, a rising swell of Republicans, apparently political descendants of the nineteenth century “American Party”[1], are seeking clearly inappropriate actions designed to minimize the rights and even citizenship status of United States citizens, especially naturalized citizens and Islamic Americans, or indeed any United States citizens opposed to Zionist and Israeli control over United States officials, both elected and appointed.  Republican advocates have gone as far as to demand that certain United States citizens be stripped of their citizenship and expelled from the United States for opposing policies such as undeclared wars and support for genocide and ethnic cleansing, or that they at least be imprisoned and deprived of their political rights.  The foregoing is even more ludicrous than Democratic Party and Democratic Party activist opposition to limiting the right to vote and receipt of federal benefits, as a right, to United States citizens.

The reality is that the positions of both the Democratic and Republican parties are based on few moral, ethical, legal or constitutional factors but rather, only on how they benefit their ability to dominate government at all levels: federal, state and local.  That is something that should disgust all decent citizens regardless of their favored political ideologies but, unfortunately, the communications and entertainment industries in the United States, rather than educate and enlighten, manipulate, obfuscate, confuse and deceive, making functional democracy at best highly improbable, inefficient and dysfunctional, i.e., the ludicrous system we have today led by the ludicrous national leaders proffered by both major political parties for the past half century: i.e., William Jefferson Clinton, George W. Bush, Barack H. Obama, Joseph Robinette Biden and Donald J. Trump (with their supporting casts in Congress, the Judiciary and the Bureaucracy, led by their noses by the Military Industrial Complex against which President Dwight David Eisenhower warned as he left office).

It may be that at some level things are changing, ironically, based on dissidents within the Republican Party (such as Tucker Carlson, Marjorie Taylor Green, Thomas Massie, Joe Kent and Candace Owens) seeking a real “Make America First” alternative, and on an evolving democratic socialist wing in the Democratic Party led by recently elected New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani.  I confess to admiring them all, though I’m not always in full agreement with them.  If they could somehow unite and develop a platform based on issues with which they agree, and there are many, many of the worst problems engrained for over a century in United States politics might be minimized.  However, that is a posture their respective followers appear to consider anathema and thus, such a scenario is only a bit more probable than Hell freezing over or the United States electorate finally coming to grips with the Declaration of Independence they claim to revere.

Good article Sue!!!
_____

© 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] Better known as the “Know Nothing Party”.

A Very Brief Observation Concerning the Concept of Treason in a Pluralistic Democracy

The concept that rejecting the political posture of an individual or political movement or party can constitute “treason” in a pluralistic democracy is oxymoronic.  

The allegiance of a citizen in a democracy is to the corporate concept of the “People”, not to any person or political party, and certainly not to any serving government.  Perhaps not even to the “State”.

The principal political duty of individuals in a democracy is to maintain their civic responsibilities by informing and educating themselves, exercising their reason and common sense, and sharing their opinions with other citizens without fear of reprisals, calumnies or ridicule. 

The foregoing is something almost entirely absent from current discourse in purported Western democracies.  Perhaps the “adjective “Western” now changes the nature of the noun modified making it synonymous instead with oligarchical autocracy and dictatorship.
_____

© 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 Palestinian Religious Evolution during the Past Two Millennia

The following is a short primer on Palestinian religious evolution during the past two millennia dedicated to my unfortunately uneducated Christian Zionist friends who buy into the myth that God gave Palestine to Zionists.  All of this material was obtained in a quick, AI assisted search on the Internet and thus is easily verifiable.

Contrary to the claims of Zionists that “they” were promised Palestine, Jewish groups over a millennia following the purported time of Abraham and Moses, at the beginning of the Common Era, were highly varied and fragmented, lacking any single centralized religious authority. Instead, much like modern Christian sects, of which thousands of competing variants exist, many condemning their competitors as heretics, the “Jewish” population was divided into competing sects, political factions, and diaspora communities.

The primary ideological and social groups in first-century Judea included:

  • Pharisees: A group of scholars and laymen who emphasized rigorous adherence to both the written Torah and an extensive oral tradition. They believed in the resurrection of the dead and angels, and their teachings laid the groundwork for modern Rabbinic Judaism.
  • Sadducees: The wealthy, conservative elite, largely comprised of priests, who controlled the Jerusalem Temple and the Sanhedrin. They rejected the oral law, believed only in the literal written Torah, and did not believe in an afterlife or resurrection.
  • Essenes: Ascetic, separatist communities (such as those associated with the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran) who withdrew from mainstream society. They practiced strict purity rituals and communal ownership, believing the Temple establishment in Jerusalem had become corrupt.
  • Zealots and Revolutionaries: Militant, nationalistic factions that fiercely opposed Roman taxation and rule. Groups like the Sicarii (daggermen) resorted to violence and guerrilla warfare against both the Romans and Jewish elites they viewed as collaborators.
  • Herodians: A small, politically motivated group of Jews who supported the royal dynasty of Herod the Great and, by extension, Roman authority.
  • The “Common” Jews: The vast majority of the population who did not officially belong to any sect. They sought to maintain basic Jewish practices like observing Shabbat, keeping kosher, and practicing circumcision while living their daily lives.
  • Diaspora Jews: Communities living outside the Land of Israel in major Hellenistic centers like Alexandria (Egypt) and Rome. These groups adapted significantly to Greco-Roman culture while maintaining their religious and ethnic identity.

Beyond the major factions, the beginning of the Common Era featured numerous minor, highly specialized, and localized Jewish groups. Historians like Josephus and early textual records identify several smaller groups that emerged from specific theological, geographical, or political pressures:

1. Ascetic and Mystical Offshoots

  • Therapeutae: Based in Egypt (especially near Alexandria), this was a communal group of Jewish ascetics described by the Jewish philosopher Philo. Similar to the Essenes, they abandoned their property, lived in isolation, and dedicated their lives to intense prayer, fasting, and the allegorical study of scripture. Notably, unlike the Qumran Essenes, their community included women.
  • Bana’im (The Builders): Mentioned briefly in rabbinic literature, they were an Essene-like group in Palestine. They were obsessively preoccupied with ritual purity, particularly ensuring their clothes remained entirely free of mud stains or contaminants.
  • Hemerobaptists: A minor group whose defining characteristic was daily morning baptism. They believed that immersing themselves in water every single morning was necessary to wash away sins and maintain absolute ritual purity before prayer.

2. Radical and Political Factions

  • The Fourth Philosophy: This is the term Josephus used to describe an ideological movement started by Judas the Galilean. While they agreed with the Pharisees on religious matters, their defining political belief was a radical refusal to call any human “lord” or king, viewing Roman taxation as direct blasphemy against God. This philosophy birthed the later Zealot and Sicarii movements.
  • The Sicarii (Daggermen): A radical, covert splinter group of revolutionaries. They hid small daggers (sicae) under their cloaks to assassinate high-ranking Jewish elites and priests whom they accused of collaborating with the Roman occupiers.

3. Early Messianic and Borderline Groups

  • The Nazarenes / Early Christ-Followers: In the first decades of the Common Era, the followers of Jesus of Nazareth existed strictly as a minor sect within the broader Jewish framework. They continued to worship at the Temple, keep kosher, and follow the Torah, but they held the distinct conviction that the Messiah had already arrived.
  • The Samaritans: Though distinct from mainstream Jews, they shared a common Israelite heritage. They rejected the Jerusalem Temple entirely, holding that Mount Gerizim was the only divinely chosen place of worship, and accepted only their own version of the Torah (the Samaritan Pentateuch).

The reality is that Christianity also emerged as a Jewish group, expanded by Saul of Tarsus to include non-inhabitants of the Levant, and later, Islam emerged as a fusion of Judaism and Christianity with the remnants of inhabitants of the Levant, the ancient “Jews”, converting to Christianity or Islam, or, in some cases, coalescing into an evolving form of orthodox Judaism, albeit unlike modern Reform Liberal or Conservative Judaism and certainly unlike Zionism, founded by European converts to Judaism who rejected its religious aspects in favor of atheism with cultural Jewish trappings.

Modern “Judaism”

Modern Judaism evolved from Rabbinic Judaism which coalesced out of catastrophic historical crises. Practically all major forms of Judaism practiced today, including Orthodox, Conservative, and Reform, share a similar foundational lineage.  The transition from a fractured, temple-based religion to the diverse structures of non-monolithic modern Judaism occurred across two monumental phases:

Phase 1: The Cataclysm and the Blueprint (70 CE – 600 CE)

Before 70 CE, most but not all of Jewish life revolved around the Jerusalem Temple, animal sacrifices, and the priesthood. A major division had already occurred when Samaritan Jews had rejected the centralization of Judaism in Jerusalem with the Temple there as the purported focal point of Judaism.  When the Roman Empire destroyed the Temple in 70 CE, the economic and spiritual heart of Jerusalem centered Judaism was obliterated.  But Judaism survived and coalesced due to a series of radical transformations:

  • The Shift to Yavneh: According to tradition, a Pharisaic leader named Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai was smuggled out of the Roman siege of Jerusalem. He negotiated a deal with the Roman general Vespasian to establish an academy in the coastal town of Yavneh.
  • Ritual Substitution: At Yavneh, the surviving sages detached Judaism from a physical building. They decreed that communal prayer would replace animal sacrifice, the synagogue would replace the Temple, and rabbis (teachers) would replace priests.
  • The Compilation of the Talmud: Over the next several centuries, Jewish scholars debated and codified these laws into written texts: the Mishnah (c. 200 CE) and the Talmud (c. 600 CE). This created a portable, text-centered religion that could survive in the global diaspora.

Phase 2: The Enlightenment and the Modern Denominations (1700s – 1800s)

For over a thousand years, the rabbinic system was the undisputed norm. However, the European Enlightenment and Jewish Emancipation in the 18th and 19th centuries granted Jews civil rights, shattering the walls of the traditional Jewish ghetto and forcing a new question: How do you remain Jewish while integrating into modern Western society? This crisis split Rabbinic Judaism into the modern movements we recognize today:

  • Reform Judaism: Emerging in Germany, this movement aimed to modernize the religion. They translated prayers into local languages, introduced organs into synagogues, and viewed Jewish law (Halakha) as an evolving ethical guide rather than a binding set of divine mandates.
  • Orthodox Judaism: This arose as a direct counter-reaction to Reform Judaism. Leaders like Samson Raphael Hirsch argued that traditional Jewish law was immutable and fully divine. “Modern Orthodoxy” emerged to show that one could strictly observe the Torah while engaging with secular culture and education.
  • Conservative Judaism: Formed as a middle ground, this movement argued that Jewish law is dynamic and must adapt to the times, but its core traditions and historical practices must be conserved and respected.

None of the foregoing have direct links to any form of primitive Judaism with direct interaction with Moses, or Abram or YHWH, any more than do any Christian or Islamic sects, nor, of course, does Zionism.

_____

© 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 Nature of Patriotism

Patriotism is a complex concept almost always presented in simplistic terms, usually erroneous.  

One aspect of course is a willingness to risk your life, health and wealth in protection of what patriotism requires us to defend.  Many of my Citadel classmates have done so.  And anyone involved in the death and destruction of other human beings risks not only his or now her life, health and wealth but also, to the extent they believe in religion, almost any religion, their immortal souls. 

I believe the focus on such willingness or on the observance of national symbols or the taking of oaths or the parroting of official narratives and echoing of a current administration’s policies misses the point.  I believe the point is succinctly, albeit perhaps hypocritically, embodied in the United States’ Declaration of Independence, and in the Preamble to the current Constitution, and in the Bill of Rights and, in other countries, in similar foundational instruments. 

In essence, patriotism is a citizen’s duty not only to protect his or her country, but to hold it to its foundational value’s against all enemies, foreign yes, but more importantly, domestic.  And domestic enemies are not those with whom we disagree, or who criticize our countries’ policies and actions, but those who blindly and unquestionably follow an administration’s policies and actions that contravene foundational values. 

Given the massive peer pressure to conform, especially with respect to what ought to be indefensible policies and actions, that is often more difficult than the willingness to risk life, health and wealth.  Something too many decent and brave people cannot grasp. 

Were it not so, then “We the People” should be pledging our lives and our sacred honor to British King Charles the III as we sing God Save the King.
_____

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; all rights reserved.  Please feel free to share with appropriate attribution.  This article is dedicated to those of my Citadel classmates who I love and respect but who disdain my criticism of the country we all love.

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/.

Un “Duce” para Colombia

Dos errores fundamentales cometió Gustavo Francisco Petro Urrego en su presidencia y fueron graves y muy costoso.  Primero, aunque con buenas intenciones, se rodeó de personas equivocadas: ineptas en algunos casos, desleales en otros y corruptos en otros.  Y segundo, no pudo controlar sus instintos pugnaces lo cual les permitió a quienes le querían causar daño manipularlo en forma constante, primero insultando o calumniándolo y luego criticando su reacción cuando en forma agresiva se defendía; obvia hipocresía pero efectiva. 

En lo último necesitaba algo más de sabiduría y disciplina.  Las políticas que propuso fueron brillantes y nobles (como es el), y son esenciales, pero no se lograron en un sistema tan profundamente corrupto como es el colombiano, y eso en el legislativo, la judicatura y la burocracia.  Es probable que si el presidente hubiese sido perfecto en todo aspecto esa corrupción coordinada para mantener el poder en las manos de los peores entre nosotros aun habría logrado evitar que se lograra un gobierno justo, equitativo y sostenible y la culpa por eso no es del señor Petro sino de un electorado tan inepto y manipulable que imposibilita lo que a ellos más les beneficiaría. 

Esa es la maldición de la democracia y no solo en Colombia, no solo en la América Latina, pero también en Norte América y en Europa y en el mundo Anglosajón.  El que controla la información controla el electorado y el electorado es más fácil engañar y manipular hoy que en cualquier tiempo de la historia.  Y el control de la información se ha vuelto un arte y una ciencia malévola con los nuevos medios y las nuevas tecnologías, un arte y una ciencia controlada por una clase de billonarios hipócritas y depravados, dedicados a una acumulación de poder y riqueza total, creando una enorme clase esclavizada, pero sin que sus miembros se den cuenta. 

Creo que es muy posible que por lo menos en la América Latina, quizás con la excepción del Brasil, ese estatus ya sea permanente, o por lo menos, de largo plazo, y que las ultimas elecciones honestas ya están en el pasado, y eso en casi todas partes del mundo, un cáncer social y cívico metatizado.  Obviamente en Colombia, por ejemplo, ha asumido el poder, irónicamente con ayuda masiva sionista, un aspirante a copiar il Duce, el de Italia hace un siglo pero sin su experiencia o patriotismo (pero si con todos sus aspectos malévolos).  Y esos tipos no rinden el poder, acusando a sus oponentes de todos los pecados y las aspiraciones que ellos mismos poseen.  Un perfecto ejemplo es que el que siempre ha defendido a los más corruptos y de ellos ha acumulado su fortuna y su fama denomine su empalme “empalme anticorrupción.  O que acuse al presidente Pero ante el Congreso de “traición a la patria” cuando el mismo señor de la Espriella juró, hace solo tres años, poner los intereses de los Estados Unidos por encima de los de Colombia y el diciembre pasado prometió poner los de Israel por encima de todo. 

El progresismo colombiano creía hace cuatro años que había, “cesado la horrible noche”. 

Estábamos equivocados.

_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; 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/.

Reflexiones sobre el progresismo colombiano en el amanecer después del solsticio de verano, 2026

No obstante la gran probabilidad (para mí, realidad) de que intervención extranjera por parte de los EE.UU., Israel y sus colonias latinoamericanas (Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, Paraguay, etc.) impactó nuestra elección presidencial en forma importante, la realidad es que el progresismo colombiano, en temas electorales cometió grandes errores durante los últimos cuatro años y no con respecto a las políticas que se propusieron como grandes reformas en el Congreso sino en la manera que se buscó implementarlas, y en las relaciones públicas.  Aún más, peleamos entre nosotros a todo nivel en forma constante y publica y es más fácil organizar gatos que organizarnos a nosotros.  Decisiones importantes sobre candidaturas no se hicieron en forma estratégica sino en forma exageradamente idealista e ideológica ignorando la meritocracia y la percepción pública.  Escoger una mujer noble pero sin experiencia como vicepresidente fue un error mortal.  Y escoger a Iván cepeda como nuestro candidato presidencial sin considerar su impacto unificador con respecto a la derecha, en vez de alguien como Clara López, fue otro.

Si en los escrutinios triunfa de la Espriella, lo cual es probable dado el control sobre la judicatura, el Consejo Nacional Electoral, la Registraduría y la Procuraduría  por la derecha, entonces es probable que la derecha gobernara no por cuatro sino por lo menos por ocho años, teniendo un vicepresidente muy preparado y ambicioso listo para las contiendas del 2028.  Tenemos que mirarnos en un espejo real y pensar bien cómo vamos a seguir.  ¿Existe una figura capaz de liderar una oposición efectiva en el Congreso durante los proximo cuatro años cuando somos minoría aunque con el partido más grande?  ¿Existe alguien con el carisma, la sabiduría y la experiencia para ser serio candidato presidencial serio en el 2028? 

Lamentablemente no lo veo.  Lo que veo es que como en Argentina, volveremos a ser colonia no solo de los EE.UU., pero de Israel, con sionistas comprando valiosas partes de nuestro país.  Y la culpa es nuestra por haber desperdiciado una oportunidad casa única.  Quizas, algún día tendremos otra oportunidad de crear un país progresista justo, equitativo, económicamente y ambientalmente sostenible, meritocratico y en paz pero, por ahora, solo nos queda aprender como funcionar en forma unida sin peleas internas constantes y como triunfar sin dividirnos y sin ser soberbios con respecto a nuestro éxito.

Ojala el señor Abelardo de la Espriella no sea quien parece ser y que su lealtad sea hacia Colombia pero muy posiblemente volvió la horrible noche que por tantos años ha oscurecido la tierra más bella de mundo.

_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; 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/.

A Reflection on D Day, Eighty-Two Years Later

June 6, 2026

Today’s anniversary of the invasion of Normandy on June 6, 1944, primarily by United States and British troops is a bitter day for me because the things we were taught our ancestors fought for and that so many died to attain seem to have been illusory, mere propaganda.  “Never again” has become, “Look away and move on, nothing here to see”.  Genocide and ethnic cleansing have become, if not acceptable, at least easy to ignore while lawyers quibble of their meaning.

Those who died and were maimed and fought on that day expected better from us but we’ve let them down, we’ve let them down completely, and that’s a travesty not worthy of celebration.

Democracy is and perhaps has always been at best dysfunctional, everywhere.  And the United States now has its own Führer, an uber-leader who can do no wrong in the eyes of his followers.  And European countries have coalesced into a sort of Fascist Italy, each country ignoring the will of the vast majority of its population under weak, corrupt and inept leaders, all (perhaps with the exception of Russia and Spain) terrified to abide by the purported signature accomplishment of the Second World War, the decisions of the Nuremburg tribunals and the Charter of the United Nations, lest the Zionist media and financiers (rather than Nazis) destroy them, one by one. 

An image of the see-no-evil-hear-no-evil-criticize-no evil simian caricature comes to mind (my apologies to simians everywhere). 

So many lives lost on and after June 6, 1944, so many promises made and never kept.

That’s what I’ll remember today, a day of mourning rather than celebration.
_____

© 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/.

Reflexiones sobre un desastre inminente

Acabo de pasar un rato charlando con un colega mío.  Fue mi colega durante el tiempo que yo ejercía como docente universitario en Manizales.  Trabajábamos en el mismo departamento y ambos coordinamos, en diferentes tiempos, el mismo programa.  Él es un excelente y muy admirado profesor, un hombre inteligente, destacado y muy bien educado (con doctorado), y él es un hombre honrado.  Un hombre bueno.  Durante nuestra charla él me hizo saber que detesta a Gustavo Petro y, entre otras cosas que me sorprendieron, que él ahora entiende y comparte la postura del sionismo en Palestina.  Eso me decepcionó muchísimo pero él es alguien que respeto y admiro mucho y, entonces, me debo preguntar, ¿cómo llegó a pensar así? 

Entiendo que por Iván Cepeda probablemente mi apreciado y admirado amigo no votara y que por Abelardo de la Espriella, aunque lo considera vulgar, … pues no sé.  Creo que en eso el comportamiento de la Colombia Humana y del Pacto Histórico tuvo impacto pero también el comportamiento de nuestro presidente.  Ambos partidos, ya unificados, han sido incoherentes con duras peleas internas, peleas groseras compartidas públicamente, y eso ha costado muchos votos.  Por ejemplo, la incoherencia, en plena campaña electoral, de buscar una pelea con la Alianza Verde y con Santiago Osorio Marín me fue incomprensible, a no ser que fue sabotaje intencional.  Por cosas como esas, parte del pueblo colombiano no confía que desde la izquierda se pueda gobernar.  Quizás no votaron por De la Espriella o por Paloma Valencia, quizás votaron por Claudia López o por Sergio Fajardo o por Mauricio Lizcano, quien sabe.  Pero no tenemos su confianza.  Ni, dado nuestro comportamiento, la merecemos.  Y, por eso, hay seria posibilidad que un fascismo verdadero gobernará nuestra patria por los próximos cuatro años, y del fascismo no es fácil liberar un país.

En lo personal, conozco y quiero mucho a Gustavo Petro pero sus constantes peleas en nada nos ayudan.  Y, sus enemigos, nuestros opositores, sabiendo eso, buscan atormentarlo en forma constante para que reaccione en forma exagerada.  Y así demasiadas veces lo hace.  Y eso nos cuesta mucho y, más importante, le cuesta mucho a Colombia.  En especial porque, aunque Iván Cepeda en eso es muy diferente, los medios de comunicación y la derecha política lo tratan como si fuera una copia idéntica del presidente Petro.

¿Entonces, qué hacer? 

Desesperarnos y rendirnos en nada nos servirá.  No nos servirá ni a nosotros ni a nuestras familias ni al pueblo colombiano que tanto amamos.  Creo que, uno por uno, tenemos que admitir que no somos perfectos y que acertadamente, colectivamente no fuimos perfectos durante los últimos tres años y medio.  Que, aunque creemos profundamente en las políticas de la administración de Gustavo Petro, del “Gobierno del Cambio”, tenemos que admitir que no fueron ni implementadas ni defendidas en forma adecuada.  Pero también, debemos acertar que de nuestros errores hemos aprendido.  Que reconocemos que la humildad es una virtud y que la arrogancia, aunque sea merecida, de nada positivo sirve.  Y desde esa postura, debemos defender las políticas del petrismo, las diversas reformas que tan necesarias son.  Y que solo Iván Cepeda luchara para implementarlas mientras que el Señor de la Espriella las acabara.

Defendiendo sin reservas al presidente que tanto queremos, pero quien es lejos de ser perfecto, nos cuesta, no nos suma votos.  Y sumar votos es esencial.

_______

© Guillermo Calvo Mahé; Manizales, 2026; 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/.