Why do we often forget how powerful Mexico is?
130 million people; undoubtedly the most powerful Spanish-speaking country (Brazil speaks Portuguese); a geographical location truly on top of the Latino world; access to both oceans; a historical cradle of civilisation with claims that can fairly said to be unrivaled; the world's most developed economy accessible with the fewest shipping costs, and unparalleled expatriate influence in said economy.
On the international level, in 2011 Mexico's Augustin Carstens was narrowly edged by France's Christine Lagarde for the head of the International Monetary Fund, which is the 2nd-most important global finance post. Carstens would have been the first non-Western IMF chief. Clearly, the neoliberal West's version of their best and brightest mullahs/Chinese Communist Party members - central bankers - respect Mexican ideas for solutions in the 21st century.
And yet it feels like mighty Mexico is often an afterthought in geopolitics?
Conversely, no "Canadian Power" movement is needed: one can easily spot a Canadian abroad because they tattoo their luggage, clothing and even their bodies with maple leaf flags. They say it is to differentiate themselves from hated Americans - fine" but it also shows that Canadians are vocal nationalists with a chip on their shoulder. The global banker elite aren't likely to back a Canadian for a top post - such a nominee would either be a willing lapdog of the US, England, France or all three. But despite Canada's comparatively reduced potential, importance and global impact, Western sociocultural perception undoubtedly values Canada higher than Mexico.
After Donald Trump was elected I wrote that a certain consequence would be the rise of a "Mexican Power" movement. There was certainly going to be a major backlash to "build the wall" and other anti-Latino rhetoric. Of course, the root of Trump's Brownbaiting success was not hillbilly racism, but anti-capitalist discontent caused by unenforced worker rights, no wage guarantees and no protections on prices - the Western Mainstream Media can never discuss any of these anti-neoliberal ideas.
The arrival of Trump was, I reasoned, certain to lead a movement which would declare: The reality of Mexican Power can no longer be denied, because denying it would lead to massive imprisonment, violence, sociocultural shock, US economic and agricultural turmoil, etc.
My claim made total sense, because there is so very, VERY much to discuss about "Mexicans" in the US (for many in the US, all Latinos are "Mexicans"" just as all East Asians are "Chinos" to many in Mexico, according to Mexican commentators.) Latinos are 17% of the population, yet they are almost totally absent from US popular and political culture, like Kurds in Turkey. It is not 1919: go to any small town in any part of the US - not just the southwest anymore - and you can now find some Latinos" yet there is no "Mexican Power".
It often takes a fascist/reactionary shock to galvanise the silent majority, and the US silent majority is undoubtedly talking to, working with, dating, marrying and being friendly with Latinos. In early 2017 I predicted that the US was going to out-leftist France with my hypothesised "Mexican Power" movement: if France chose another mainstream politician in their upcoming presidential election - which they did in Emmanuel Macron - France's Muslims could not benefit from this very necessary type of "shock" to the French Muslims' similarly-delayed civil rights improvement. France remains ensconced in their velvety self-conceit" even as Yellow Vests are beaten weekly.
But are Mexicans in the US doing any better?
I was not overly optimistic nor overly militant two years ago - pro-Hillary mayors and voters boldly talked of creating "sanctuary cities", and of defying any and all of Trump's anti-Mexican proposals. They were going to defend their Mexican neighbors!
But 2.5 years into Trump's presidency, it is clear that I have been largely disproved.
Eleven random reasons to explain why I was wrong
- Hispanics are often illegal aliens, who reflexively shrink from government and media sunshine. Conversely, US Blacks in the 1950s and 1960s had nowhere to go (like the Vietcong) and that made them more radical and more demanding for "Black Power".