THE INTIFADA IN TIMES OF TRUMP

       Trump believes, like the abusive school boys, that by the use of force he can do everything he wants without taking anyone into account. Deceptive theory, then, is initially possible, it cannot be denied that the US. They are the world superpower, and if the armed forces wish, they can start a nuclear war. The issue is not new in this sense, likewise, during the Cold War era in the second half of the twentieth century, the Soviet Union also boasted of possessing weapons of all kinds.

       And what does that mean? That Donald Trump and his advisers (ideologues as radical as the Muslim fundamentalists themselves) do not know, or disregard the warnings about the terrible consequences of their daring and undefinable decisions that take, beyond the evidently military, it is an explosion of social conflicts, and nothing more dangerous than provoking an intifada in the middle east by its declaration of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, because it is not only to excite a terrorist group, but to all the brotherhood of Muslims in the whole world.

       Surrounded by the secret service, Donald feels protected, the rest, does not matter, protected from what? If the same thing has been thought by the tyrants who think they feel safe, while the war reaches them like a cancer, and when they realize the real consequences of the absurdity of their arrogant and delirious decisions, then, it is already late, and after yes, a people, a nation, many nations, and many villages destroyed.

       The insolence and indifference towards the moans of the peoples, that caused so much damage to the old societies, with rulers that before anything, neither for political reasons, nor social, nor for any reason, listened to the screams unbridled by the desperation of the people, of the most vulnerable, have become reality, this time, raised a thousand times in Trump, who not only, to the horror of humanity, represses his own people, but that of all societies in the world.

       When will that be when, as the poets would say, what happens is the delirium of those who voted for an unconscious, and who continue to support it. When will be the day that the ears of the sensitive will hear that such a person is no longer in power, when will hate speeches become a thing of the past.

WHY MEXICO DOES NOT HAVE NEITHER GENERAL PROSECUTOR, NEITHER CONSTITUTIONAL COURT

One of the most controversial political issues in recent months has been the systematic expansion of part of the Congress of the Union for the creation of a Prosecutor General, as it means greater efficiency in terms of the functioning of the judicial system. Social and academic pressures have not been worth demanding the creation of this investigative entity; rather, the excuses of the legislators and the executive have hindered the proper functioning of the institution so that the adequate conditions for this end are given.

       And as for the possibility, or rather, a remote possibility, of creating a Constitutional Court, which implies an effective interpretation and application of the Mexican political constitution, not even official mention has been made on the matter, so forgotten is the proposal, which is only remembered by one or another political analyst, without foreseeing the society of the importance and significance that the establishment of a constituent tribunal means.

       Although it is also true that political and economic interests can ultimately influence government and legislative decisions, it does not seem to have the same interest for civil society as pressure groups do. It does not seem very necessary, then; after all there is the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation, which is the maximum responsible for dictating the final measures on the constitution. It is enough to observe the difficulties and the social distrust towards institutions like the Attorney General's Office, quite slow and innocuous to do justice, and the lack of balance of powers that the Supreme Court itself should have.

       Political or economic reforms have not been sufficient for the protection of the most vulnerable population and for the defense of human rights in terms of greater equality among the different social actors. A change of mentality will suffice, and this can be achieved through a General Constituent Assembly.

       A political constitution that has been in force for 100 years cannot be adapted to the cultural needs of the present, it is not that it is incapable; it is that the multiple reforms have done nothing but mutilate the very essence of the constitution that was drafted for what were the needs of the entire twentieth century.

       The fear of change is the first and great obstacle; some even dare to say that it would be something like opening a Pandora's Box, with the uncertainty of what could happen in the republic. However, those heroes and heroines of the country, who are honored with such respect to highlight their courage, were the ones who changed history by promulgating the Magna Carta in 1917 with the sole purpose of defending the expensive interests of Mexico. Reserve your fears for other occasions, but were aware of a need for structural change.

       So many conflicts of all kinds that Mexican society has had to face, and how they have been able to emerge triumphant in each of the social, political and economic problems, and this has been demonstrated by the great history of the nation. The foregoing indicates that it is possible to carry out a company of transcendental dimensions for the new generations.

        And what is the fear, if we are already used to it, and what is the silence, if we can still shout and demand, and what the lack of knowledge, if there is political sensitivity in the population. Close your eyes, think about the strength of the Mexican people, open them, accept reality, and take the momentum with the necessary and sufficient effort to make such important decisions that are required for this 21st century.

       In conclusion, the creation of a General Prosecutor's Office and a Constitutional Court cannot be delayed for the Mexican State to make more efficient the co-ordination of a better application of justice and of a defense and promotion of Human Rights, in which the citizens understand and assimilate what the Rule of Law really means.

THE REGIONS OF COLOMBIA COULD DECLARE THEIR INDEPENDENCE BY MEANS OF A REFERENDUM

       Where and when did the conception of regionalism emerge in Colombia? From the first political independence in 1810. And the characteristics of that first independence was that each province that at the moment constituted (originally 13), were declared autonomous and independent states.

       That is, the leaders of each province dreamed of following in the footsteps of the United States of America by raising the possibility of making the nascent Colombia a federal government, in which each state should have its own laws and police, with autonomy, this experiment lasted little, because, since the central government in Bogota never saw viable federalism, they preferred a central government.

       The political crises were not expected and this led to conflicts not only against Bogotá, but populations that rebelled against the capitals of some of the main provinces, these happened in cases as Cartagena and Cauca, the reasons? Many of the motives were economic, but also political, of local interests.

       The feeling of local sovereignty remained in spite of the fact that the leaders of Bogotá were victorious in their purpose of turning Colombia into a central government and victorious in a military sense, for provincial, autonomous and sovereign sentiment became a regional feeling, local identity.

       Thus Bogota, like a kind of queen in which the State revolves around her, consolidated its capital status of the Republic of Colombia, thus constituting an identity of national character. 

       And now that the referendums are in fashion, and that independence sentiments are surfacing in all parts of the world, it would not be unreasonable to think of a hypothetical possibility of each region submitting its own independence to referendum, and thus to separate from Colombia.

OLIGARCHS ALSO HAVE THE RIGHT TO GOVERN

       The stigma against the so-called oligarchs (those with high purchasing power) who have led and governed nations for centuries, and still continue to do so, has at times generated a collective mistrust that has been used by populists and demagogues in order to create a negative imaginary against these people.

       While it is true that the oligarchs have failed in many of their economic policies, it has not meant a destruction of society, but rather, in the name of the economy and the very abused term of progress, they have been able to carry out political projects concerning improve trade relations (for their own interests of course) and maintain, to some extent, social stability.

       The opposite has happened to the populist and demagogic leaders who have portrayed themselves as revolutionaries, disguised as the much abused term of socialism, or any other name of an alleged social ideology. These political leaders have led to disaster, in most cases, entire nations, resulting in hunger and humiliation.

       Perhaps because of lack of experience, education, or whatever bankruptcy they have, a poor person, without proper political orientation (ideological if you will), cannot but concentrate social hatred and seize the opportune moment to seize the power and to begin with the revenge, to say of the sociologists, adding to the terrible persecutions and bad propaganda of irrational hatred against the poor oligarchs, the slavery, that generally assume of different forms, and oppression towards the most vulnerable population, the humble, the working people, and the population in general.

       Result? Once the demagogues assume power, they show an almost innate ability not to govern, but to destroy social establishment and democratic institutions in order to maintain the status quo they never had in their lives, too late for the population who see an act of betrayal of those whom they saw as a kind of saviors, we do not know what.

       Then, the manifestations arrive, the deaths also, to ask for a change, hoping to restore that order that made him hate, but that is necessary. Like the monarchs in the middle ages, when they dared to expel certain social sectors, such as bankers and merchants and then call them again, because they realized the need for them, simply so that social groups, around the economy , could work.

       The oligarchs also have rights, as any have, and one of them is the right to govern without being stigmatized by the purchasing power they have. The natural tendency to invent an enemy to attribute the evils of a nation should be to blame the population for raising resentful leaders to power. The reflection then, is to claim the oligarchs as one more among the others.

WHAT YOU CAN DO TO THE DICTATORSHIP OF NICOLAS MADURO

          History shows us the cases of the French Revolution in the eighteenth century, the Russian Revolution in the twentieth century, and the most recent called the Arab Spring. In all of them there is a common denominator, and it has been the determination of the peoples to confront the oppressive regimes, ready to die if necessary, sometimes with the complicity of some military sector that come to share the general malaise of the population.

       Although many analysts predict that the mandate of Maduro will not last beyond six months given the complexity of the administrative corruption and the massive rejection of the Venezuelan citizens. Generally, in a revolution, there is a lot of blood spilled, given the confrontation with the armed forces that support the regime.

       The question is, will the Venezuelan population be willing to shed blood? To confront the armed forces of the country? It all depends on the degree of anger that the citizens have, and a little more than a hundred dead in the different protests throughout the country, is it enough?

       The US government threatens a possible suspension in the importation of Venezuelan oil, and ordinary people will suffer the most from the increased economic crisis, it assumes that if the threat becomes real, then the people's anger It will overflow, and then? There are those who say it could become a kind of Syria, it is unlikely, and therefore, the UN Security Council could take action on the matter.

       What can be done in the face of Maduro's dictatorship is not to faint in street demonstrations, and to stand in front of the government palace, day and night, as the Egyptian population did at some point, until the dictator, tyrant, despotic And oppressor, fall as the dictators have fallen, however much threats he makes, no matter how he tries to stay in power, one day Maduro will fall, if there is a determination of the population as there was in other times.

WHO IS MORE TERRORIST?

Those terrorists who want the death of the terrorists or the terrorists themselves.

Those terrorists who attack the civilian population or the terrorists who attack the public force.

Those terrorists who profess Christianity or the terrorists who profess Islam.

Those terrorists who believe that with terror they end terrorism or those who think that terror must be combated with terrorism.

That terrorist is me or the terrorist is the other.

Those who claim to impose their own truth or those who impose their own will.

Those who accuse terrorism or those who are legally terrorist.

Those terrorists that physically damage the integrity of people or those that morally damage the integrity of people.

The one that generates fear in a person or those that generate fear in a community.

The one who imagines terrorism or who imagines terrorists.

One who invents enemies or those who distrust to invent a terrorist world?

Those who believe that terrorism is a reality or those who believe that it is imagination.

TEACHERS OF COLOMBIA FACE A MONSTER

       

       There is a rumor that former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, when he was a candidate for his first presidential term, the big international companies had forced him to sign a series of compromises that would limit his social programs once he became president. So I was worried that Brazil, being the economic power of Latin America, would be greatly affected by the incidence of holding companies, if this were so, then what could be expected of other countries with much less financial capacity and Political weight as Colombia for example? 

       This situation brings me to the memory of what is happening in Colombia, this is one of the longest teacher stoppages of recent years, and the fundamental reason is not the salary, which should be the reason for national unemployment, but Which has to do with requesting greater contributions to the participatory system in education, and this contemplates addressing other needs such as food for children, arrangement of educational infrastructure such as school improvements, classroom expansion, educational tools, The information and many other resources that are needed.

       That's the problem. The teachers are not facing President Santos or the minister of education, they are facing nothing more and nothing less than the famous International Monetary Fund and, as the cartoonists would say, their cronies, which are the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank. Development.

       Not only do these entities exert pressure on heads of state in Latin America, but also the world's largest investment firms such as Allianz Global Investors or JP Morgan, which, if not controlled by governments, do have decisive influence over time To take economic policy measures.

       So the teachers in Colombia are facing a monster, and although the union organizations have made calls inviting the society to participate in the strike, the response has been as usual warm, not to say cold, against the expectations and results that can be generated from negotiations between teachers and the Colombian government.

       If Santos continues to reiterate that there is no money to meet the demands, it is simply because it follows the guidelines of external entities for the effects of financial risks, or, as an expert economist would say, to avoid a hypothetical quiebracracia, that is, that the State must intervene when financial institutions go into crisis.

       Is it a utopia that the teachers are pursuing? A socialist utopia, the neoliberals would say, a capitalist utopia, the Socialists would say.

IT IS TIME OF THE RUSSIAN SPRING

       I agree that in Russia, like some nations of the Middle East, democracy is more of a political euphemism, since it has never really existed, and as an example, it is worth remembering the long historical tradition of tsars in Mother Russia.

       The transformations that began at the beginning of the twentieth century, with the introduction of a parliament on the part of Nicholas II, as a gesture towards his people, and then with other social transformations, this time violent, such as the Russian Revolution in 1917, And finally, after the dissolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on December 25, 1991, with the official resignation of Mikhail Gorbachev, democracy has not been part of the Russian people's mind.

       Proof of this is the dictatorship, disguised as democracy, with the current president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, who has succeeded in maintaining some economic stability in the country, has lacked the most important thing for a society, namely freedom in social, political and cultural terms.

       Although the repressions have resulted in murders of political leaders and journalists, and people considered enemies of the state, it has also become an exposition of police brutality with the clashes in the different popular marches that have occurred in recent years. In addition, despite the evident wave of corruption in his government, this has not prevented Putin from staying in power, and why this?

       The media have been fundamental to always show the kind face of Putin as an indispensable element for the good functioning of the State, and the Russian spring?

       At times it seems that the youth population motivates a political change, or that society will push for an election without any kind of bias or manipulation by the government in order to achieve a change, but no, everything indicates that the Russian spring will delay a Little more, but sooner than later, those rebellious youth will change their mentality and make themselves felt, and they will act to make that democracy that seems an illusion come true.

BRIEF HISTORY OF FEDERAL ANTIOQUIA

       The plenipotentiary secretary, official spokesman and historical adviser of the Antioquia governments José Manuel Restrepo (accompanied by Juan del Corral), at the beginning of the 19th century, was clear that Antioquia should advocate for a federal and autonomous government, as one political scientist would say, a government Decentralized.

       The reasons used by the different provinces that defended the federation in New Granada were basically to follow the steps of the system of government of the nascent United States of America, adhering to its judicial, military and legislative formula. The idea that it was the best way to defend the American peoples from French troops, and who maintained a supposed fidelity to King Ferdinand VII, were no more than political excuses, the fact is that Antioch was present in political debates, and yet , In the fratricidal wars of the decade of 1810 to defend firmly the longed Federal Antioquia.

       The times changed, historical processes finally conceived the republic of Colombia as a centralized nation, and that was consolidated at the beginning of the 20th century, after so many vicissitudes, warlike conflicts, and especially, after the celebrations of the commemorations of the Centennial of the Independence of Colombia in 1910, taking as a reference what happened in Santafe de Bogota in 1810, although it is true that some provinces continued to long for those moments of federative governments, in the case of Antioquia, sentiment has remained alive in some sectors of the region.

       That sentiment awakens every time that the Antioquia leaders feel attacked, or somehow affected by the policies from Bogota, like what happened with a recklessness on the part of the government during the time of the drug traffic between the decades of 1980 and 1990, in Who excluded Antioquia from the map of tourist destinations, aroused not the Antioquia people, but rather the mafia groups, to generate again the feeling of a federal Antioquia, promoting a possible citizen initiative for such a case, but the Situation did not go to greater social consequences.

       Now, in 2017, the problem in the case of Belén de Bajirá, a hamlet that is disputed in local terms by the municipality of Mutatá, on the Antioqueño side, and the municipality of Riosucio, on the Chocoan side, has again generated the Feeling of a federal Antioquia. The case is more of a political than a social character, because the abandonment of such a village has been historical on the one hand and on the other, and has more demagogic and economic ingredients than real interest in the settlers.

       Terms such as the Antioqueña race, which has been abused by opportunists, or the exaltation of the Antioqueños as a region, only affects the social relations of a nation that although it has a consolidated institutionally, is still under construction, and in The extent to which political discourses are radically affected will seriously affect the economy and culture of both regions, which, in the end, those who actually benefit from the conflicts, have been some political and economic leaders, that is, a few people.

THE VENEZUELAN REVOLUTION HAS BEGUN

       Only one detonator is left, and the revolution will explode. It happened with the independence of the United States with the British taxes, it also happened, prior to World War I, with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria, it happened with the arrival of Lenin prior to the Russian revolution, and in Mexico, the Revolution exploded with farce in the presidential elections - Dictator Porfirio Díaz in 1910.

       For the time being, the Venezuelan narco-dictator regime, led by Nicolás Maduro, tries not to kill Leopoldo López in the dungeon. Also, it is clear that the Venezuelan Armed Forces is not homogeneous in terms of support for the despotic Chavez government, since Chavez leaders, who are against Maduro, or disagree as in the case of the Attorney General of Venezuela, Mrs. Luisa Ortega Diaz, shows a division and nonconformity with the government.

       The marches against Maduro will not stop, it is the only way left for the opposition and the population, as the police increase their coercive actions against the demonstrators (because on the side of the Chavez marches, these are untouchable), In the same way the participation of the social sectors will be increased, as has happened for example with the entry of the main agricultural producers.

       To the extent that images of vulnerable people are shown being mistreated, tortured or murdered by members of the public force, international pressure will increase even more (there are still few ambassadors in Venezuela), and marches will become increasingly radical And reactionary in the face of police abuses ... the result?

       President Maduro will move from threats to action through so-called armed groups, which will increase their killings with the complicity of the army, which in turn will participate in selective killings (as reported by some media), this will still fuel hatred Of the Venezuelans who will see in it a kind of war of extermination, that will force them to take measures not only in the streets through the protests, but also in actions much more reactionary.

       The uncertainty is experienced not only by the Venezuelan people, but also by the political leaders at the head of Maduro, who demonstrate this through their incendiary speeches and their measures of terror against the civilian population. It is clear then, that the true Venezuelan revolution has begun.

GOVERNMENT AND ELN - THE NEGOTIATION NEEDED BY NOBODY

       Someone at one time mentioned that the ELN did not take it into account for a simple reason; historically coca plantations have not been for this group a priority in military and political terms, on the one hand. On the other hand, after the Anorí operation in the 1970s by the Colombian military, it is said that it was substantially reduced.

       So much was his military weakening that Carlos Castaño, the chief of the AUC at the time, referred to this subversive group in a contemptuous way. The same is true for the United States government, or rather, for the presidents who have passed through the White House; this group has not posed a major threat to the region. In fact, some columnist mentioned something like that, within the rare and contradictory political ideology of this guerrilla group, supposed to have as reference the Cuban revolution, is that the ELN wants a revolution without war, something like a war Without war.

       And it seems that this perception is generalized by the general population, which has been indifferent to the negotiations that are carried out in Ecuador except for some academics and columnists (as always happens), say that in the facilities of a Jesuit farm is the Table of negotiations. Because, to finish off, after what happened with the priest Camilo Torres, has had the aura of being a kind of guerrilla Catholic militancy. A rare kind of passive subversive group.

       Now, what does it mean that the negotiations being carried out in Ecuador are minimized in their smallest proportions? The answer can be summarized in two factors, first, the historical ignorance of the terrorist acts of the subversive group in Colombia and the Andean region in general, and second, because it has not been the subject of any political party.

       What would happen if it became a political issue as was done in the case of the FARC or as it is done in the case of the FARC? What do the FARC have that the ELN does not have to move the matter to a second line? It is as if a distinction is made between the terrorist group ISIS and Al Qaeda.

       Generally, when that kind of differentiation occurs for some political party or government, there is an interest or convenience behind everything, such as when US governments ignore arms smugglers or dictators precisely because it serves their Conveniences and political interests, and, in the case of society, indicates that there is a double standard.

THE VIOLENCE OF 1950 HAS RETURNED IN COLOMBIA

       It is pathetic the spectacle offered by the so-called people when confronted in the streets, media or social networks on account of the debates generated by some statement by Uribe or Santos, or some of his friends. And the most terrible thing is that these people echo the speeches, when on one side and the other side, they try to defend the country, that abstract and meaningless thing when at the moment of defining it, and one does not know for sure what concepts to use or in what ways to refer.

       And the defending people of I do not know what, concentrates its attacks on the corruption of the one having as reference to a corrupt or vice versa. That is, there are people who refer to the corrupt Uribe as an intact man, impeccable, defender of the country, and that there are people who refer to the corrupt Santos as a defender of peace, or as a kind of missionary in Defense of freedom and many other things.

       It is pathetic because the speeches become so repetitive that it seems a reggaeton. That the so-called Fibristas want to destroy the peace of the people, who identify with those of the extreme right, or that the so-called farc-santistas want to turn the Colombian people into a more Venezuela, they want to destroy the country, Only makes the people into a kind of trained dog that follow the designs of their respective masters.

       And it was precisely at the end of the 1940s and during the 50s that one of the most bloody fratricidal wars that the country has experienced because of the same speeches that the two corrupt leaders are wielding today, Say, the corrupt president Santos and corrupt ex-president Uribe. At that time, the people split between the Liberal party and the conservative party, led by another pair of corrupt, and initiated by the death of another corrupt.

       Which of them is more corrupt? Who defends whom? Or, who defends what? The most pathetic of all is that it is repeating the same spectacle of the mid-twentieth century. Political leaders surrounded by escorts (even to buy the market in the corner), with all the comforts of medieval princes, with medieval mentality, always protecting interests of economic groups, seeing how the town divides and engages in a war of Words to realize then, that the poor is still poorer and the rich is still richer ... and that with war or without it the establishment will remain the same.

WELCOME TO TOTALITARIAN DEMOCRACY

       Are we repeating the events of the early twentieth century, when the great powers were filled with absurd nationalistic sentiments, in which the great German power, which at that time was the German empire, felt the right to have more colonies than Their peers, in which societies were anxious for economic and military war because their demagogic and populist leaders were sold to them, because everyone believed that the effects of conflict were something temporary, a feeling that began in Europe, and later Move to Asia and America?

       Muammar Gaddafi used to say that Libya was the best democracy in the world, Hugo Chávez Frías insisted time and time again that Venezuelan democracy was a strong democracy, and Fidel Castro was convinced that his regime was a regime Democratic right now to all these democratic concepts, we should ask Mr Dump Trump what he means by democracy, as well as Mrs Angel Merkel and all the leaders of democratic regimes, because the notions seem to change and vary in conception , Depending on who observes it.

       What are the explanations of the political sciences about the concept of democracy; if characters like Trump arrogantly say that I won, hinting that now he can do whatever he wants without paying attention to the social claims of The American citizens themselves?

       Democracy is a gelatin, in which its notions stretch and contract permanently, in which any despotic leader can claim to be democratic without even sharing the Western conception of the term. Journalists should ask world leaders what do you understand about the term democracy. To know with some precision if the notions coincide with what the political sciences and the whole world understands by democracy.

       Now, I think, from now on, democracy should be added to elements that are not so democratic. Hitler came to power in Germany, and by democratic means regimes such as that of Cuba and North Korea were maintained, and by democratic means Chavismo came to power in Venezuela.

       Is democracy to blame? Rather, it is the distortion of democratic virtues. The situation in the US is a tenebrous case, the fact that Trump had ordered the military to complete an oil pipeline to bypass federal administrative agencies, means that it is becoming a country with totalitarian democracy.

       Will the expressions and social manifestations be enough to stop this? The profound reflections of the nascent United Nations Organization were sufficient to make the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The societies in the world, must bring back these reflections, otherwise we will return to the dreaded epoch of anti-democratic democracies.

NEOCONSERVADURISM AND NEOLIBERALISM The global confrontation of economic doctrines

The paradox of neo-conservatism and neoliberalism is based on the fact that the former follows the guidelines of economic protectionism, and the second is based on the free market, and the most surprising is that the former can be considered a kind of neocommunism, the ironies of life.

       And even more ironic is that since the mid-1980s (to say the closest in historical terms), it is precisely the small and medium-sized entrepreneurs who in the long run have been able to benefit from globalization, not only economic, but Also in the cultural aspect given the prevailing hyper connectivity in which the world today is.

       This is a rare competition for large oligopolies, holding companies and major multinationals. It is as if the social and doctrinal conflict between the medieval aristocracy and the group of so-called bourgeoisie survived. The political situation that has been happening in the United States, which is foreseen, will also happen in some European countries such as England, for example, has been rather a kind of civil war expressed at the polls.

       It may be a momentary reaction on the part of conservative societies (because even young people are conservative) in response to successive structural economic changes. It seems as if the history, in which groups of workers burned factories during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries as considered harmful to them and a serious danger to the future, a matter that was overcome at the time, was repeated, returning to the lane, harassing and Ancient concept of nationalism.

       Economic ideological clashes have been so radical that they have resulted in civil wars, revolutions, and conventional wars between nations. Perhaps the recoverable of the political phenomena that have occurred in recent years (we must also remember the so-called Arab Spring), is that in all social sectors has entered into a kind of reflections, what has been done, what is there, and what remains to be done.

       Be that as it may, I prefer that both neo-conservatism and neoliberalism be limited to a world-wide confrontation of economic doctrines, and that society expresses its anxiety and fears in the voting of any political election that is held, I prefer that to return the frightful memories of a war.

TRUMP'S ECONOMIC WAR HAS BEGUN

As a neo-communist, is the qualification that would fit Donald Trump. The closing of borders to a social sector of immigrants, increase of tariffs to imported products, reduction of taxes to big companies and multimillionaires with the hypothetical purpose that these entities and personages will grant a greater increase in the employment to the North Americans, are some Of the characteristics of the new (with dubious legitimacy by the subject of the Russian intervention in the elections) president of the USA.

       The diplomatic confrontation with the Chinese government, then with the Japanese government, and then with the Mexican government, is just the beginning of an economic war initiated by the neo-communist Trump, in addition, because in an unprecedented way, it seeks a certain closeness with the government Russian, historical enemies in the military and economic field. And like all war, there will be victories and defeats, and then the question is, who will be the most harmed?

       Paradoxically, neo-communism seeks to protect the interests of large holdings because simply globalization also benefits, save the proportions, medium and small entrepreneurs. Now, that Trump economic war will generate more employment in the US? Reflection is on the side effects of economic policies.

       Trump's negotiations with entrepreneurs are not such, they are either a kind of threat to business, or a kind of bribe to entrepreneurs. The long-term effect of this neocommunist, who always treats people as if they were the servants of their mansions, is only one. The economic devastation of the United States of America. For the sample a Russia, a North Korea, a Venezuela ... so many horrible things that have authoritarianism, or in the words of Hannah Arendt, when referring to totalitarianisms.