Salento

Narco

"The Mexican possibility may seem less likely, but the government, its politicians, police and judicial infrastructure are all under sustained assault and press by criminal gangs and drug cartels. How that internal conflict turns out over the next several years will have a major impact on the stability of the Mexican state. Any descent by Mexico into chaos would demand an American response based on the serious implications for homeland security alone."

The above isn't the half of it. I'd like to be able to write some kind of chart that illustrates all the groups that are "assaulting" Mexico today. But to stick with the narco for a moment, here's a map: The shaded areas show [my own estimate of] territory where power is wielded by the narco or sometimes by the narco/guerrilla, as in the south. Official estimates are that some ten percent of Mexican counties are under narco control, but, as bad as this is, it is surely an underestimate. This just shows the geographical extent of the above phrase, "criminal gangs and drug cartels."

The geopolitics of this is more interesting and dangerous: these regions have never been brought under state control. Never. Ever. [Well…maybe Don Porfirio accomplished this for a while] The phrase is "lawless regions" but this isn't all that accurate: it's more like feudalism, with the feudal lords (called caciques in Mexico) controlling overlapping fiefs, each with its own laws. Like in other areas of the world controlled by insurgencies, these narco/caciques provide social services—as people like to say about Hizbollah and Hamas—that the government can't. They get the loyalty of the people by these means, but violence is their main MO. Nobody would be so stupid as to refuse an offer by the narco, if they wanted their families to survive. They have no other resources. They can't call the cops, like people can in the States. The cops are hundreds of miles away across dirt tracks and they are narcos as well. Today, of course, the government is establishing a presence in these areas in the drug war by the army. It amounts to Mexico invading itself, or a civil war.

Another way to look at it is with these World Bank charts:


Apart from the narco, there are many other groups holding fiefs in Mexico: the various security branches—federal police, army; guerrilla [shown on the map]; "opposition" political groups, both in the government and out of it [these include the different "militant" unions, who disrupt daily life on a daily basis]. It's important to note that all of these groups are violent.

That's just considering the domestic situation. What about the bugbear of foreign intervention? Just as in the Cold War, the drug war is fought through proxies. Our proxy is of course the government of Mexico, under Felipe Calderón. But Hugo Chávez has his proxies here. Chávez is a proxy of Hizbollah and Russia.

It's encouraging—although it is distressing for anyone living in this wonderful country—that the US is dealing with the facts by ranking Mexico as a risk of failure. As the above shows, the drug war intersects with the problem of illegal immigration in important ways. Immigration is caused by the failures of the Mexican economy to provide opportunities for the people. They abandon their land and it's taken over by the narco. The drug war itself is destroying any legitimacy the government has by attacking the livlihoods of Mexico's poorest citizens. Lacking legitimacy, reforming the economy is pretty-much impossible.

It won't do any good to have Obama shaking Calderón's hand and calling him a courageous leader for fighting the drug war. It's not a test of machismo.

The narco is an insurgency, but not quite. It has no interest in taking power. It has an interest in preventing anyone else from doing so. It will prosper most in an anarchy. Mexico will fall off the brink into anarchy instantly if the president is ever assassinated (got forbid). That's because there is no law of succession. There is only a procedure for choosing a new president, which means up to eighteen months of an interim government, elected by congress upon the president's murder (god forbid). One can't even imagine all the armed groups in this country playing the political process to maneuver themselves into power. So if Calderón's futile display of machismo risks his own life, maybe he's "courageous" but since he's risking anarchy, he's reckless.

Antisemitism

Indeed as Beverley Milton-Edwards explains in Islamic Politics in Palestine:

[T]he Hamas view of the Jewish people is not drawn solely from the pages of the Qur’an and hadith. Its myopia is also the product of Western anti-Semitic influences.

All the history I've read about Arab/Muslim politics in the twentieth century shows the influence of European-style antisemitism, specifically German and French. This holds true in secular movements, like Ba'ath and religious ones, like the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda. As far as I know, this didn't exist in the Arab/Muslim world before French and German colonization. Jews had lived under the apartheid-like restrictions of Islamic law, but weren't necessarily persecuted, much less the object of genocidal hatred. So Hamas is typical, not an exception.

Syrian state TV put on a multi-part dramatization of the Protocols some years back. One can find copies of the book for sale. Check out the MEMRI website some day. The image I've posted is a screenshot of the front page today. It shows links to articles published more or less in the past month. Two of them—the "apes and pigs" and the "Judgement Day" articles—draw their inspiration from the Koran. Two are inspired in Protocols-style antisemitism—the JFK assassination article by the Syrian economist and the "Columbus" articles. The Protocols are specifically mentioned here. You can see that articles are drawn from all over the Arab/Muslim world. Of course, as you say, there is no lack of evidence that Europeans commonly hold antisemitic beliefs that would shock most Americans.
/>I wonder why it's so hard for people to see that with this background, European "anti-Zionism" and support in general for the Palestinians—so evident today in the Palestinian flag-waving protests in European capitals—looks like an unfolding threat to Israelis and to Jews worldwide. It shouldn't take all that much imagination or empathy to see this. I wouldn't blame Jews for being even more pessimistic than this because European antisemitism is the direct cause of the Zionist movement in the first place. Jews were liberated from the feudal laws were expected to assimilate into the European culture. This was the first solution to the Jewish problem: they should just stop being Jews and become Frenchmen or whatever. That didn't happen. Jews wanted to keep their identity and it really beats me why. Who would want such a thing as a Jewish identity if he could avoid it? I guess that would have been bad enough, but they began to be successful—even to dominate in some places, like Vienna—in business, the arts, science, the professions, and in the academy, when a wave of Jew-hatred and massacres swept Europe. This was when the Zionist movement was founded. Some people just thought that it was hopeless to count on Europeans to make good on their liberal values when it came to them. If it hadn't been for this, today Jews would be living in Europe as they had been for centuries and the Arabs would still have Palestine, for all the good it would do them. For that matter, there wouldn't be any Jews in the US either, since the Jewish immigration was a much better bet for the many millions who escaped from European antisemitism 1880-1920 or so.

Nacimiento Mexicano

Nacimiento Mexicano

Jesús fue un hongo

Se trata de un libro que dice que Jesús fue un hongo. Literalmente. Según esto, los evangelios fueron una especie de código secreto de una secta de devotos al hongo alucinógeno. Se trata de un estudio filológico de los evangelios que no tengo ni idea cómo criticar. Puedo imaginar que algún estudioso puede desvirtuar mucho del libro—aunque dudo que podría hacerlo en su totalidad por el grado de detalle que tiene. La cuestión de si su tesis es válido o no seguramente queda muy lejos de comprobar. Pero lo interesante es la reacción convencional: la gente creería que el autor está loco. Pero cualquiera diría que la hipótesis tradicional de Jesús está mucho más loco. La gente cree que hace dos mil años, Dios tuvo un hijo que nació milagrosamente y luego fue sacrificado para redimir los pecados de la humanidad entera, para después revivir, etc etc, y luego acusa a otros de perder contacto con la realidad.

Jesus as Mushroom  [Reseña del libro The Sacred Musroom and the Cross, Time
magazine—1970. Liga en inglés] Se trata de un resumen del libro y ofrece un buen retrato de la actitud convencional hacía el libro.

Lo que sigue es para tener alguna experiencia de la polémica:

Council on Spiritual Practices [liga en ingés]
En un libro llamado El Hongo Sagrado y la Cruz, el estudioso John Allegro amplía estas especulaciones con argumentos etimológicos para proponer que el cristianismo se originó como una decepción en la que el rabino Jesús fue investido de las facultades y los nombres del hongo agárico, el verdadero cuerpo de Cristo. En efecto, según Allegro, el cristianismo fue el camuflaje de cultos secretos de hongos cuyo contenido original ha sido perdido. Sus argumentos no son consideradas plausibles por ningún estudioso bíblico, religioso o laico, pero los mencionamos aquí por su interés y audacia.

… el camino de Dios y la vista fugaz de los cielos fue a través de las plantas saturadas de espermas de Dios. Éstas fueron las drogas, cuya ciencia de cultivo y uso se había acumulado a lo largo de siglos de observación y experimento peligroso. ...

Aquellos secretos fueron rara vez plasmados por escrito y sólo con motivos prácticos y urgentes. Normalmente se pasaron del sacerdote al principiante de boca en boca ... Pero si, por alguna razón drástica como la interrupción de sus centros de culto por la guerra o la persecución, se hizo necesario escribir los nombres de las valiosas hierbas y la forma de su utilización y sus encantamentos, sería de alguna forma esotérica, comprensible sólo por los de sus comunidades dispersas.

Tal ocasión, a nuestro juicio, fue la revuelta judía de AD 66. ... El judaísmo se vio perturbada ... Los secretos, si no se había de perder para siempre, tenían que ser plasmados por escrito ...

Los medios de transmitir la información estaban al alcance de la mano, y habían sido durante miles de años. Los cuentos populares de los antiguos habían figurado desde los primeros tiempos—mitos de la personificación de las plantas y árboles. Se investían con facultades y cualidades humanas y sus nombres y características físicas se aplicaban a los héroes y heroínas de las historias. ... Aquí, a continuación, fue el dispositivo literaria para difundir el conocimiento oculto a los fieles. Para contar la historia de un rabino llamado Jesús, y de darle el poder y la magia de los nombres de las drogas. Para que viviera antes de los terribles acontecimientos que habían perturbado la vida, predicara el amor entre hombres, que se extendiera incluso a los odiados romanos. Por lo tanto, al leer este cuento, en caso de que cayera en manos romanas, incluso sus enemigos mortales pudieran ser engañados y no indagarían más en las actividades de las sectas en sus territorios. (páginas XII-XIV)

The Sacred Mushroom and the Cross [Edición pirata del libro en inglés. PDF.]

Si vamos a hacer suposiciones informadas acerca de las ideas del hombre "primitivo" acerca de Dios y el universo, la primera sería que serían sencillos y directamente relacionadas con el mundo de su experiencia. Se puede haber dado a dios numerosos epítetos que describían sus diversas funciones y manifestaciones, pero no hay ninguna razón para dudar de que vislumbraban una la realidad detrás de una deidad omnipotente, dador de vida, creador supremo. El examen etimológico de los principales nombres de dios—que es posible ahora—apoya este punto de vista, que apunta al tema común, de la vida y la fecundidad. Así pues, los principales dioses de los griegos y hebreos, Zeus y Yahvé (Jehová), tienen nombres derivados de sumerio que significa "jugo de la fecundidad", los espermatozoides ", las semillas de la vida". La frase se compone de dos sílabas, IA (ya, o, za), "jugo", literalmente "agua fuerte", y U, tal vez la más importante en todo el fonema de la religión del Cercano Oriente. Se encuentra en los textos representados por muchos diferentes signos cuneiformes, pero en la raíz de todos ellos es la idea de "fertilidad". Así pues, una U significa "copular" o "montar" y "crear;" otro significa "tormenta, como fuente de la esperma celestial; otro "vegetación,"  como la descendencia de los dioses, mientras que otro U es el mismo nombre del dios de la tormenta. Así que, lejos de mostrar la multiplicidad de dioses y nociones de conflicto teológico, nuestros primeros registros nos llevan a una sola idea, inclusive a una sola letra: "U." Detrás de el judaísmo y el cristianismo, y de hecho todas las religiones del Cercano Oriente, se encuentra este fonema único "U."

Sencillamente, el razonamiento de los primeros teólogos parece haber sido la siguiente: ya que la lluvia hace crecer los cultivos, debe contener en su interior la semilla de la vida. En los seres humanos se trata de espermatozoides que se expulsa del pene en el orgasmo. Por lo tanto, sigue la idea de que la lluvia no es más que esperma celestial, del todo poderoso creador, Dios.

Los chorros más enérgicas de esta "semilla" van acompañadas de truenos y el viento. Ésta es la "voz" de Dios en el cielo: un gran pene alcanza un orgasmo que sacude los cielos. El "boca" de la punta del pene, el glande, abierto y la divina semilla brota y en seguida se va por el viento a la tierra. De la mismas manera de que se puede ver la saliva mezclada con la respiración durante el enérgico discurso humano, el "hablar" del divino pene es acompañado por una poderosa ráfaga de viento: el espíritu santo, creativo, que lleva la "saliva" del semen.

Este "saliva" es la parte visible del "discurso" de Dios; es su "Hijo" en el Nuevo Testamento, la "Palabra", que "estaba con Dios y era Dios, y era en el principio con Dios, por medio de las cuales todas las cosas fueron hechas, y sin él no se hizo nada que se hizo. En él estaba la vida. . . "(Juan 1:1-4). En las palabras de los Salmos: "Por la palabra del Señor se hicieron los cielos, y todos sus acogida por el aliento de su boca" (Salmo 33:6), o bien, "cuando se envíe el aliento de su creación, y la faz de la tierra se restaura "(Salmo 104:30).

Esta idea creativa de la Palabra de Dios llegó a tener una profunda importancia filosófica y religiosa y fue, y sigue siendo, objeto de mucho debate metafísico. Pero originalmente no era una noción abstracta: usted podría ver el "Palabra de Dios", se siente como lluvia sobre tu cara, se ve filtrarse en los surcos de la madre tierra, los "labios" de la matriz de la creación. Quemaduras en un fuego eterno que de vez en cuando demuestra su presencia de manera espectacular, por la ruptura de la superficie en un volcán, o de calefacción por agua de manantial a punto de ebullición cuando la corteza terrestre es más delgado. Fue este calor uterino que hizo posible la generación y que más tarde los teólogos identificados con el lugar y medios de castigo eterno.

My personal day of Death

Monday, June 10, 2024
Death Clock

Mexican swearing

Mexicans will typically tell you that they like to curse. I really don't know if they are worse than gringos, but they are more creative about it and have a more diverse cursing vocabulary. But the best part about Mexican cursing traditions for the foreigner is that most of the time the words themselves are never even pronounced. This makes it very funny—and a lot of fun—but extremely difficult for him or her to master swearing. The foreigner who can master the upper levels of cursing is a rarity.

English swear words have been handed down to us from the earliest Anglo-Saxon days. They are used in a literal way and also for cursing. In Spanish these will usually be two or more different words. In Spanish, one must use one word for the literal meaning and another for cursing. English words will thus have equivalents in Spanish, but they will be two or more words, depending on the context. This would be hard enough to understand and even harder to produce appropriately for the foreigner but these words don't even have to be pronounced to be understood precisely and accurately. The Mexican knows how to determine the sub text of an utterance with absolute precision in these cases. From this point of view, the Mexican is a natural minimalist, like Hemingway. On the other hand, since the text that is actually pronounced will be an idiom, the whole experience has a baroque effect on the listener. It involves him or her in an experience that momentarily overwhelms quotidian cursing. It's an interesting synthesis of minimalism with the baroque. The reason for this is that the Mexican aesthetic is naturally baroque so they will translate even the most anti baroque style—minimalism—into the language of the baroque. To the foreigner, this will be vulgar and bloated. It takes some getting-used to.

A common example is what we would call a "piece of shit." No Spanish-speaker would ever say pedazo de mierda and if he or she ever heard it, it would be confusing. The correct expression is una chingada. The meanings of chingar have been explored by Ocavio Paz in the essay "Máscaras Mexicanas" (Mexican Masks), which is part of his book Laberinto de la Soledad (Labyrinth of Solitude). Anyone who wants to understand this must start with this essay. Chingar literally means something like "rape." But it's never even used in this sense. It has lost whatever literal meaning it once had and now only retains its metaphorical ones, which are suitable for cursing. So, for example, to say that something is worthless, you might say that it is una chingada.

The above would be accepted all over Mexico as an appropriate use of the word. The problem with cursing is that situations where it's appropriate are very limited. One is restricted to more formal registers by custom. One usually can't say that something's a piece of shit. In Mexico, one can use the proscribed expression because he or she doesn't actually pronounce it. He or she could say that it's "good for two things," (Sirve para dos cosas) which means that it's a piece of shit. This works through rhyming: Sirve para dos cosas: nada y una chingada. Therefore, one can use the proscribed word in any context—work, school, at home, wherever—and maintain deniability. Nobody can accuse you of anything because the word was pronounced only in the listener's mind. You have only said that something's "good for two things" and thus have established a strange form of complicity with the listener which will cover you everywhere.

More expressions

Cuchillito de palo (wooden knife). This would be translated as "ball breaking" (giving someone a hard time) because the punch line is not pronounced: the wooden knife no corta pero como chinga (it doesn't cut anything, but it really breaks your balls).

¡Esa de rojo! (That woman in red) The final clause is Me la cojo (I wouldn't mind fucking her, i.e., some sexy woman you're ogling). There are different rhyming expressions suitable for ogling, which refer to a whole range of sex acts, using all the basic colors of the Microsoft pallet.

Año de Hidalgo (The year of Hidalgo; Hidalgo was a hero of Mexican independence) It means something like "lame duck"—a politician on the way out—except that one would at least have to insert an explitive to give it the same connotation. The final clause is chinga su madre quien deja algo (anyone who leaves anything behind is fucked).

The hero of Mexican independence is also how we say "Bottoms up!" in Mexico: one says, "Hidalgo," meaning chinga su madre quien deja algo [de tequila] in his or her glass.

Ley de Herodes Herodes is Herod, the Biblical king of Palestine. It means that they've got you by the balls. It works by rhyming: o te chingas o te jodes (you're fucked anyway). Thus one can say that we're all fucked by just saying, Nos tocó la ley de Herodes and the listener supplies the bad language in his or her own mind.