Today – Shipyard

The presidential iteration of not going to the Summit of the Americas if not all of the continent’s nations were invited, provided some entertainment and rhetoric for battered opponents of the so-called Fourth Transformation (4T) who had yet to recover from the lack of control over the conspiracy that plagued them this Sunday’s 4T-2 electoral campaign.

As in other controversial episodes, opponents of Lopez Obrador resorted to exaggeration and planning of catastrophic scenarios “for the audacity” in not attending a factional invitation from Washington.

In particular, they focus their criticism on the supposed complicit bias with Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua, without understanding that, yesterday and today, in the political history of Mexico besieged by the neighborhood with the highest global power, the defense of continental pluralism, in which countries have been harassed or Boycott by the United States, is a form of defense of Mexican interests.

Declining an invitation to the meeting, to be held in Los Angeles, California, is a means of rejecting unilateral decisions that the White House intends to issue certification of good conduct in matters of democracy and respect for human rights (as if the government were a host). Truly a shining example of accuracy in these matters).

Accepting that the United States decides which countries can attend a formal continental meeting is not something that would honor any Latin American president, even though each one made their own decisions. The president of Mexico has been consistent with his position, as have his counterparts in Bolivia and Honduras. In any case, the Argentine Alberto Fernandez, who will attend, is expected to include in his speech next Friday some references to absentee positions.

However, the position of Mexican President does not mean absolute absence, but rather the use of a convenience generally accepted by the American authorities due to his dignified condition, Secretary of State Marcelo Ebrard. It should be noted that this country’s interests are well presented here in terms of immigration and foreign investment, including Mexico’s national and strategic security projects, in the south of the country, with Governor Ken Salazar as the operator with a stern outlook. Attentive and continuous dialogue in the National Palace.

On the other hand: an explanation of the current course in these hours following the incomplete collapse of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) suggests, in fact, that this organization was born in 1929 (in the name of the National Revolutionary Party, after Mexico). revolution) in Morena.

In this regard, historian and academic Lorenzo Mayer said yesterday that at this stage it is almost impossible to repeat the characteristics of the PRI. In addition, he described part of the current crisis of the Three Colors Party, which has “a quality of leadership that also reflects its weakness as a party.” He added that recently tricolor “He had terrible qualities of leaders, and it was no coincidence: It’s not ‘Oh, what misfortune the PRI members have had with these leaders.’ No: these leaders are the core of the PRI today; it’s not Bad luck, it’s structural.” The Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) no longer has social norms. Yes, it has unions, but not as before (…) It is a relatively small party ”(https://bit.ly/3tjCKBr).

shrapnel

A different appearance might say, in fact, that Morena won her opponents only in Tamaulipas, because in Oaxaca, Quintana Roo and Hidalgo, the respective rulers paved the way for freezing the cake waiting for the palace prizes that are on the way…, in fact, Acción Nacional won itself only in Aguascalientes , with Governor Orozco committed to supporting Tere Jiménez, while in Durango an in-house team from PRI, with PAN President Aispuro Torres (former PRI member) accused on both sides of treason or duplicity of the deal… See you tomorrow!

Twitter: Tweet embed

Facebook: july shipyard