"..un fantasma recorre el mundo: el poder del pueblo: Mark Almond.
El TEPJF tiene dos caminos: “el de actuar con rectitud, decoro y patriotismo o el camino de la traición”: AMLO.
AMLO ha dejado claro que no aceptará la resolución del TEPJF y luchará por cualquier vía para impedir la imposición y transformar las instituciones nacionales.
AMLO ha dejado claro que no aceptará la resolución del TEPJF y luchará por cualquier vía para impedir la imposición y transformar las instituciones nacionales.
Y es que para él, el poder número uno es del pueblo.
Demetrio Sodi escribió hoy un artículo en El Universal haciendo analogías entre AMLO y El Subcomandante insurgente Marcos. Y tiene lógica, empero, creo que AMLO tienen como teórico de cabecera no al Subcomandante sino a Mark Almond, catedrático de historia moderna en Oriel College, Oxford y quien ha escrito sobre el caso de Ucrania.
Ahh y sus seguidores pues también llaman, como el jefe de Gobierno electo del DF, Marcelo Ebrard, llaman a que no se acepte la resolución del Tribunal, en caso de que éste ratifique a Felipe Calderón como Presidente electo. "¿Por qué vamos a reconocer a un individuo espurio que está usurpando una función tan importante. “No debemos de acatar y aceptar esa resolución”, dijo.
¡Y la respuesta del Presidente Fox es contundente! Durante la ceremonia -hoy en Los Pinos-, de Inauguración del III Congreso Nacional e Internacional de Magistrados, dijo:
"Las leyes son expresión de la voluntad popular, y la obediencia a la ley y el respeto a las instituciones son fundamentales para el fortalecimiento de toda Nación democrática (...) Por ello, autoridades y gobernados estamos obligados a acatar sus decisiones. Desconocer la autoridad de un tribunal es ignorar el mandato ciudadano de vivir en un Estado de Derecho, de vivir en un país de leyes, en un país de instituciones; es desconocer el contrato social en el que se funda la unidad nacional."
Rescato sólo una parte del discurso de ayer del AMLO en el Zócalo y comparto un texto de Mark Almond publicado en The Guardian.
Dijo AMLO ayer:
"Tenemos que dejar muy en claro el por qué de nuestro movimiento...Queremos que se respete la voluntad de los ciudadanos, queremos que en México haya democracia. Que sea el pueblo el que elija libremente a sus autoridades, por eso estamos luchando, pero no sólo vemos la democracia como un sistema político, vemos la democracia como una forma de vida, así se establece en la Constitución, en el Artículo Tercero.
¿Por qué tenemos que hacer esta aclaración? Porque sí nos importa el que haya elecciones y que el pueblo decida quien debe de gobernar, pero nos importa (mas) también que la democracia tenga una dimensión social, nos importa que la democracia se convierta en mejores condiciones de vida y de trabajo para el pueblo. La democracia, lo he dicho en otras ocasiones y lo repito ahora, en un país como el nuestro, con tanta pobreza, con tanta desigualdad social, se convierte en la única vía para que la gente pueda tener quién nos represente y cuide, vele, apoye, proteja a la mayoría humilde, a la mayoría pobres de nuestro país.
"El poder no son los palacios, el poder no son las oficinas lujosas, el poder no son los asesores, no son los guaruras, no son los helicópteros, no son los que están al servicio de los que tienen cargos públicos, no. No, el poder es el pueblo. Ese es el poder.
Veo en estos últimos días apurados a nuestros adversarios, a toda esa sociedad delictuosa, muy apurados queriendo aparentar de que ya todo está resuelto, que ya nada más están esperando que el Tribunal decida y que ya la situación está resuelta, según ellos, y para eso se apoyan, hasta de manera ridícula, con toda la parafernalia del poder de siempre. Ahí veo al candidato de la derecha, a ese pelele, visitando a algunos estados del país, rodeado de guaruras, ya utilizando todo el aparato del Estado Mayor Presidencial y, desde luego, ya en los medios, no en todos, desde luego, porque repito, hay honrosas excepciones, haciéndole ya la caravana, quemándole incienso, haciéndole la barba, como lambiscones....,
Vamos a seguir esperando la decisión del Tribunal, creo que hay todos los elementos, saben ustedes que para fortuna de nosotros, de la mayoría de los ciudadanos del país, al final se logró documentar muy bien el fraude electoral....
¿Qué van a hacer los magistrados con todas esas evidencias? Tienen dos caminos: el de actuar con rectitud, decoro y patriotismo o el camino de la traición e irse a la historia, pero al basurero de la historia.
(Pero) El pueblo tiene el derecho a estar informado, a recibir información de todas las corrientes de pensamiento...Dicen que no hay un cerco informativo, pero los temas, si ustedes ven la prensa hoy, lo que se dice en los medios de nosotros, aunque sea para atacarnos, parte de noticias de periódicos del extranjero....
Me hicieron una entrevista, en un periódico francés y comenté algunas cosas y ese el tema ahora, el día de hoy. Es una vergüenza que sean los periodistas extranjeros, de algunos medios lo que nos estén entrevistando y estén hablando o mejor dicho, nos estén dando la oportunidad de dar a conocer nuestro punto de vista, mientras que aquí, en nuestro país, en nuestra Patria, hay una cerrazón de los medios de comunicación.
"Y lo segundo que hay que hacer no decir apagué la radio, apagué la televisión, hay que ver si hay programas que todavía conservan y si van a mantener programas de esos con teléfonos abiertos, donde reciben correos o donde se les pueda escribir, donde se pueda hablar y hay que estar ahí, hablándoles y hablándoles y hablándoles, porque la libertad como la democracia y la justicia no se imploran, se conquistan, vamos a hacer valer el derecho a la información ...
"Vamos hacia adelante, tenemos que seguir preparando la Convención Nacional Democrática, no olvidemos que el poder dimana del pueblo y se instituye para su beneficio, que el poder es el pueblo, la democracia en esencia es eso, la democracia se compone de dos palabras: demos es pueblo y kratos es poder. Es el poder del pueblo, eso es la democracia. Vamos a seguir organizando la Convención Nacional Democrática, inviten a amigos, a familiares, porque el domingo vamos a dar a conocer un informe con mayor profundidad.
Muchas gracias de todo corazón a todos ustedes, tengan también la seguridad absoluta que yo no voy a traicionar al pueblo de México. Muchas gracias, amigos y amigas.
People power’ is a global brand owned by America/Mark Almond, catedrático de historia moderna en Oriel College, Oxford
In The Guardian, 15/08/06
A couple of years ago television, radio and print media in the west just couldn’t get enough of “people power”. In quick succession, from Georgia’s rose revolution in November 2003, via Ukraine’s orange revolution a year later, to the tulip revolution in Kyrgyzstan and the cedar revolution in Lebanon, 24-hour news channels kept us up to date with democracy on a roll.
Triggered by allegations of election fraud, the dominoes toppled. The US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, was happy with the trend: “They’re doing it in many different corners of the world, places as varied as Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan and, on the other hand, Lebanon … And so this is a hopeful time.”
But when a million Mexicans try to jump on the people-power bandwagon, crying foul about the July 2 presidential elections, when protesters stage a vigil in the centre of the capital that continues to this day, they meet a deafening silence in the global media. Despite Mexico’s long tradition of electoral fraud and polls suggesting that Andrés Manuel López Obrador - a critic of the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) - was ahead, the media accepted the wafer-thin majority gained by the ruling party nominee, Harvard graduate Felipe Calderón.
Although Mexico’s election authorities rejected López Obrador’s demand for all 42m ballots to be recounted, the partial recount of 9% indicated numerous irregularities. But no echo of indignation has wafted to the streets of Mexico City from western capitals.
Maybe Israel’s intervention in Lebanon grabbed all the attention and required every hack and videophone. Back in 2004 CNN and the BBC were perfectly able to cover the battle for Falluja and the orange revolution in the same bulletins. Today, however, even a news junkie like me cannot remember a mainstream BBC bulletin live from among the massive crowds in Mexico City. Faced by CNN’s indifference to the growing crisis in Mexico, only a retread of an old saying will do: “Pity poor Mexico, so far from Israel, so close to the United States.”
Castro’s failing health gets more airtime than the constitutional crisis gripping America’s southern neighbour, which is one of its major oil suppliers. Apparently, crowds of protesters squatting in Mexico City for weeks protesting against alleged vote-rigging don’t make a good news story. Occasionally commentators who celebrated Ukrainians blocking the main thoroughfares of Kiev condescend to jeer at Mexico’s sore losers and complain that businessmen are missing deadlines because dead-enders with nothing better to do are holding up the traffic. Ukraine’s Viktor Yushchenko was decisive when he declared himself president, but isn’t López Obrador a demagogue for doing the same?
The colour-coded revolutionaries of the former Soviet Union had a pro-western agenda - such as bringing Georgia and Ukraine into Nato and the EU - but in Latin America radicals question the wisdom of membership of US-led bodies such as Nafta and the WTO. The crude truth is that Washington cannot afford to let Mexico’s vast oil reserves fall into hands of a president even half as radical as Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez.
But didn’t the western observers certify the Mexican polls as “fair”, while they condemned the Ukrainian elections? True, but election observers are not objective scientists. The EU relies on politicians, not automatons, to evaluate polls. Take the head of its observer mission, the MEP José Ignacio Salafranca: as a Spanish speaker in Mexico, Salafranca had a huge advantage over many of the MEPs in Ukraine who draped themselves in orange even while en mission - but he is hardly neutral. His rightwing Popular party is an ally of Calderón’s Pan party, which is in power in Mexico. Calderón was immediately congratulated by Salafranca’s colleague Antonio López-Istúriz on the “great news”.
The days of leftwing fraternalism may be over, but the globalist right has its own network, linking the Spanish conservatives, American Republicans and Calderón’s Pan party - and they provided the key observer. To paraphrase Stalin: “It doesn’t matter who votes, it matters who observes the vote.”
Salafranca has a track record as an election observer. In Lebanon’s general elections in 2005 he had no problem with the pro-western faction sweeping the board around Beirut with fewer than a quarter of voters taking part and nine of its seats gained without even a token alternative candidate. “It is a feast of democracy,” he declared. His mood changed when the democratic banquet moved to areas dominated by Hizbullah or the Christian maverick General Aoun. Suddenly, “vote-buying” and the need for “fundamental reform” popped up in the EU observation reports.
Unanimity on the scale seen across Lebanon suggests that the cedar revolution - despite the hype - did nothing to promote real democratic pluralism. Hizbullah’s hold on the south is the most controversial aspect of the sectarian segmentation of Lebanese society, but everywhere local bosses dominate their fiefdoms as before. Similarly, more scepticism about Ukraine’s revolution would have left people better informed than the orange boosterism that passed for commentary 18 months ago.
But Mexico is different because it is so under-reported. The cruel reality is that “people power” has become a global brand. But like so many global brands it is owned by Americans. Mexicans and any other “populists” who try to copy it should beware that they’re infringing a copyright. No matter how many protesters swarm through Mexico City or how long they protest, it is George Bush and co who decide which people truly represent The People. People power turns out to be about politics, not arithmetic.
In The Guardian, 15/08/06
A couple of years ago television, radio and print media in the west just couldn’t get enough of “people power”. In quick succession, from Georgia’s rose revolution in November 2003, via Ukraine’s orange revolution a year later, to the tulip revolution in Kyrgyzstan and the cedar revolution in Lebanon, 24-hour news channels kept us up to date with democracy on a roll.
Triggered by allegations of election fraud, the dominoes toppled. The US secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, was happy with the trend: “They’re doing it in many different corners of the world, places as varied as Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan and, on the other hand, Lebanon … And so this is a hopeful time.”
But when a million Mexicans try to jump on the people-power bandwagon, crying foul about the July 2 presidential elections, when protesters stage a vigil in the centre of the capital that continues to this day, they meet a deafening silence in the global media. Despite Mexico’s long tradition of electoral fraud and polls suggesting that Andrés Manuel López Obrador - a critic of the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta) - was ahead, the media accepted the wafer-thin majority gained by the ruling party nominee, Harvard graduate Felipe Calderón.
Although Mexico’s election authorities rejected López Obrador’s demand for all 42m ballots to be recounted, the partial recount of 9% indicated numerous irregularities. But no echo of indignation has wafted to the streets of Mexico City from western capitals.
Maybe Israel’s intervention in Lebanon grabbed all the attention and required every hack and videophone. Back in 2004 CNN and the BBC were perfectly able to cover the battle for Falluja and the orange revolution in the same bulletins. Today, however, even a news junkie like me cannot remember a mainstream BBC bulletin live from among the massive crowds in Mexico City. Faced by CNN’s indifference to the growing crisis in Mexico, only a retread of an old saying will do: “Pity poor Mexico, so far from Israel, so close to the United States.”
Castro’s failing health gets more airtime than the constitutional crisis gripping America’s southern neighbour, which is one of its major oil suppliers. Apparently, crowds of protesters squatting in Mexico City for weeks protesting against alleged vote-rigging don’t make a good news story. Occasionally commentators who celebrated Ukrainians blocking the main thoroughfares of Kiev condescend to jeer at Mexico’s sore losers and complain that businessmen are missing deadlines because dead-enders with nothing better to do are holding up the traffic. Ukraine’s Viktor Yushchenko was decisive when he declared himself president, but isn’t López Obrador a demagogue for doing the same?
The colour-coded revolutionaries of the former Soviet Union had a pro-western agenda - such as bringing Georgia and Ukraine into Nato and the EU - but in Latin America radicals question the wisdom of membership of US-led bodies such as Nafta and the WTO. The crude truth is that Washington cannot afford to let Mexico’s vast oil reserves fall into hands of a president even half as radical as Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez.
But didn’t the western observers certify the Mexican polls as “fair”, while they condemned the Ukrainian elections? True, but election observers are not objective scientists. The EU relies on politicians, not automatons, to evaluate polls. Take the head of its observer mission, the MEP José Ignacio Salafranca: as a Spanish speaker in Mexico, Salafranca had a huge advantage over many of the MEPs in Ukraine who draped themselves in orange even while en mission - but he is hardly neutral. His rightwing Popular party is an ally of Calderón’s Pan party, which is in power in Mexico. Calderón was immediately congratulated by Salafranca’s colleague Antonio López-Istúriz on the “great news”.
The days of leftwing fraternalism may be over, but the globalist right has its own network, linking the Spanish conservatives, American Republicans and Calderón’s Pan party - and they provided the key observer. To paraphrase Stalin: “It doesn’t matter who votes, it matters who observes the vote.”
Salafranca has a track record as an election observer. In Lebanon’s general elections in 2005 he had no problem with the pro-western faction sweeping the board around Beirut with fewer than a quarter of voters taking part and nine of its seats gained without even a token alternative candidate. “It is a feast of democracy,” he declared. His mood changed when the democratic banquet moved to areas dominated by Hizbullah or the Christian maverick General Aoun. Suddenly, “vote-buying” and the need for “fundamental reform” popped up in the EU observation reports.
Unanimity on the scale seen across Lebanon suggests that the cedar revolution - despite the hype - did nothing to promote real democratic pluralism. Hizbullah’s hold on the south is the most controversial aspect of the sectarian segmentation of Lebanese society, but everywhere local bosses dominate their fiefdoms as before. Similarly, more scepticism about Ukraine’s revolution would have left people better informed than the orange boosterism that passed for commentary 18 months ago.
But Mexico is different because it is so under-reported. The cruel reality is that “people power” has become a global brand. But like so many global brands it is owned by Americans. Mexicans and any other “populists” who try to copy it should beware that they’re infringing a copyright. No matter how many protesters swarm through Mexico City or how long they protest, it is George Bush and co who decide which people truly represent The People. People power turns out to be about politics, not arithmetic.
%203.20.53%E2%80%AFp.m..png)
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario