What happened to the Mass Llorens family was part of the hunger and humanitarian crisis that engulfed much of Puerto Rico after Maria. It would take nearly a year for power to be restored to all residents, the longest blackout in U.S. history. The sheer destruction of the storm resulted in bottlenecks of emergency aid distribution, including issues like a shortage of truckers, the loss of virtually all cell communication, and extensive infrastructure damage. The government response to Maria was horribly unequal when compared to similar situations.

At the same time, the food and water shortages experienced by millions of Puerto Ricans were also linked to the island’s staggering rate of food insecurity that preceded the hurricane — and that still persist today. Roughly 41 percent of the population currently lives below the poverty line, and up to one-third is believed to be food-insecure — which is nearly four times the average throughout the continental U.S.

In the wake of Maria, many residents of Puerto Rico, especially those working to improve the archipelago’s local food system, began to think about hurricane preparedness differently. Because they weren’t able to rely on federal assistance, they decided to build their own prototypes of resilience, which didn’t just set them up to be ready for the next storm, but also set them up to live better everyday lives. Cooperatives, gardens, and school-based agricultural programs emerged to fill the gaps left by the government. Barter networks and local farmers markets have become increasingly popular. Mutual-aid kitchens and community-led supermarkets have also expanded their work, ramping up donations, surplus food, and partnerships with nearby producers. These projects aren’t just temporary disaster responses. They are models of long-term resilience and food independence. They are living blueprints of what food sovereignty could look like in Puerto Rico — and elsewhere.

Full Article

The Caribbean region is a clearly militarized zone with the United States at the helm. Today’s militarization in the region is reminiscent of the kinds of earlier iterations, also led by the US, from the 1970s to the early 2000s.[1] The US Trump administration reportedly carried out a missile strike in the Caribbean on September 2nd under the pretense of combatting drug trafficking in the region. Based on video released by the US, the military strike utilized a drone and/or aerial bomb to target a boat that allegedly departed from Venezuela – which the US State Department accuses of being a “narco-trafficking organization” and not a state[2] – and purportedly contained non-specified drugs and 11 unidentified human beings (so-called “narco-traffickers.”)[3] The US did not provide any evidence for the allegations justifying these extrajudicial murders. The silence of Caribbean governments, their lack of condemnation and investigation of the attack, speaks for itself.

However, when discussing US militarization in the Caribbean – both past and present – we must recognize and acknowledge the complicity of Caribbean governments, as they have played a significant role in providing justifications and cover for US imperial machinations.

The Caribbean region has a long history of producing reactionary neocolonial governments with leaders who actively align themselves with US militarism – suiting the imperialist, capitalist, and racist demands of US global militarization. This history in the Caribbean is often overlooked in favor of the celebratory histories of revolutions against Indigenous genocide, African enslavement, Asian indentureship, as well as anti-colonial struggles for political independence. While the illustrious histories of struggle and revolution in the region are important, the unsavory histories of reactionary/co-conspirator Caribbean governments that align with US imperialism help us better understand the current political moment.

Full Article

Pointed cartoon regarding Mexican diplomacy today in the context of the Zionist genocide and the (mis)use of history by the current administration

Tweet

Colombian President Gustavo Petro released a draft statement on X/Twitter today condemning “extra-regional military deployment in the region”, approved by the majority of countries in Comunidad de Estados Latinoamericanos y Caribeños (CELAC), but revealed that a minority held up adoption of the statement. CELAC, which was founded in Playa del Carmen, Mexico in 2011 to provide an alternative forum for countries of the Americas to discuss and deal with regional issues outside of the Organization of American States (referred to as “The Yankee Ministry of Colonies” by Fidel Castro and headquartered in Washington, DC), does not include the USA nor Canada, and operates on a consensus principle. The lack of a consensus decision means that the draft statement may be reflective of the positions of the signatory countries, but does not represent CELAC as an organization.

Although the draft statement condemns “extra-regional military deployment,” an obvious reference to the USA’s deployment of advanced warships and long-range aircraft in the Caribbean near Venezuelan waters and the recent air strike carried out against a boat which reportedly murdered 11 people, the statement does not identify the United States of America as being responsible for that deployment, possibly indicating further divisions within even the majority CELAC countries over how to confront (or not confront) US imperialism.

Full Article

The US naval buildup off Venezuela's coast is not about drug interdiction, but imperial pressure. Caracas's response, grounded in asymmetric defense and bolstered by key Eurasian alliances, has transformed a lopsided showdown into a contest of global powers.

The US has entered a new phase in its long war on Venezuela. Having exhausted economic and diplomatic tools, it has now turned to the military lever, dispatching warships to the Caribbean in a naked display of force.

This escalation caps years of imperial targeting of the Bolivarian government in Caracas – beginning with sweeping sanctions under former US President Barack Obama, tightened to unprecedented levels under President Donald Trump, and sustained through bipartisan consensus.

Officially, Washington frames this as part of a broad “counter narcotics” campaign targeting so-called terrorist organizations. But that story collapses under scrutiny. What the US really seeks is regime change and regional control, thinly veiled behind drug war rhetoric.

Full Article

cross-posted from: https://ibbit.at/post/38388

The first thing to understand is that the Fourth Transformation represents a change in political regime, that is, a modification of the ways in which the state and society interact. Based on this premise, it is pertinent to ask whether we are moving toward a more democratic relationship and the type of quality assumed by the terms of the dominant political equation. This premise must be broken down into two major areas of operation: one that responds to truly internal dynamics and another that unfolds amidst the variations of capitalism as a whole.

The external dynamic is understood through the crisis of neoliberalism as a way of organizing capital accumulation processes. The depletion of this model is generating a transitional phenomenon on a global scale, and especially on the continent, with the modification of the coordinates within which capital is reproduced. Faced with four decades of offshoring of production and the predominance of semi open border policies, the global economy is changing, tending to give states the prerogative to once again command certain processes of economic organization. Of course, not all countries are experiencing this transition in the same way: Argentina and Ecuador are going in the opposite direction, while the United States and Mexico appear to invoke—effectively or discursively—the role of the state as an articulating and regulating center of capital accumulation processes.

In this sense, the political project embodied by the Fourth Transformation is an economic necessity: while it is not possible to build toward scenarios of absolute economic determination, there are important opportunities where this will happen with greater emphasis. Moreover, the prerogative to regulate capital or protect it from competition will become urgent as processes of economic deglobalization begin or deepen.

It is in this need, driven by integration into a possible new economic order, that the internal question in which the Fourth Transformation expresses itself intersects. Neoliberalism, as a global process, reformed states, shackling them and stripping them of regulatory and management capacities; in Mexico, the battered and aging post-revolutionary state found its functions precarious. In fact, the PRI-PAN regime tended to build a parallel state, where many functions were transferred to private consultancies or “autonomous organizations,” all of them outside of popular oversight. For its part, presidentialism—a legacy of [Mexico’s] revolutionary process—was eroded in its functions and eroded in its fetishistic character.

Of course, neoliberal spokespeople and intellectuals did not proclaim this reality, but rather responded to the acute demand for democracy that Mexican society had been experiencing since the 1960s. Furthermore, the political-ideological operation called the “transition to democracy” tended to confuse the terms state, presidentialism, or sovereignty with authoritarianism, anti-democracy, and verticalism.

What Mexico has witnessed since 2018 is the rehabilitatation of presidentialism under the auspices of a majority popular will, something not seen since the Lázaro Cárdenas era.

Indeed, Mexico experienced an authoritarian regime with a strong presidential system in the 20th century, but one was not a consequence of the other: there can be repressive regimes without a presidential system, for example. Likewise, the post-revolutionary state tended to organize society, and it did so authoritarianly, which does not mean that all state leadership functions are, by definition, authoritarian. The so-called “transition regime” left us a precarious state and a weakened presidential system, but not greater democratization. What was promoted was a set of agreements between elites that overflowed under a limited democracy, restrained by the rules of neoliberalism. In this equation, the state was weak in organizing the economy, society fragmented, and capital tended to expand freely, without limits or borders, taking full advantage of the parallel state mentioned above and the systematic corruption of the judicial and legislative branches.

The Fourth Transformation (4T) destroyed this way of organizing the relationship between the state and society. Partly due to the external situation of a shifting paradigm and, to a greater extent, due to social discontent with rising corruption. What we’ve witnessed since 2018 is the need to rehabilitate presidentialism under the auspices of a majority popular will, something not seen since the [Lázaro] Cárdenas era. In other words, it’s a presidentialism determined by the majority and democratically. This is because what enables the relaunch of the presidential institution in the face of private interests that easily infiltrate the other branches of government is popular sovereignty. Until now, regaining the capacity to exercise the greatest national sovereignty has required strengthening the executive branch of the state, and this is done because this institution relies on popular protagonism, whose expression has been electoral.

As in any political scenario, this one will tend to change, with the elements that manage to crystallize over the long term being important. There is always the risk that presidentialism will overshadow and displace popular protagonism, or that the executive branch will be embodied by a figure who lacks the legitimacy it has enjoyed since 2018. But, rather than focusing on the decline of this institution, what we must focus on and encourage is the capacity of the Mexican people to maintain their protagonism in a time of global changes that endow the state with a democratic sense. That is, their ability to permanently build democratic elements, that is the task of the present and the future.

Jaime Ortega is the Director of Memoria, the Magazine of Militant Criticism.

Analysis

The 4th Transformation: Political Regime Change & Popular Protagonism

August 27, 2025August 27, 2025

The task of the Fourth Transformation and the Mexican people is to maintain popular protagonism, permanently building democratic elements to organize the economy as processes of economic deglobalization begin or deepen.

Analysis

The CIA & Corrupt Mexican Agents Created the Big Capos Era

August 27, 2025August 27, 2025

The origins of organized crime and drug trafficking in Mexico begin with a CIA project of anti-communism, political repression, and right wing death squads deployed throughout Latin America.

Soberanía

Soberanía 73: A Traitor In Our Midst

August 27, 2025August 27, 2025

Ultra-right wing (& unelected) Senator Lilly Téllez calls for U.S. intervention in Mexico during a Fox News appearance, false claims from the DEA, Ken Klippenstein’s reporting on US invasion plans, & the Baker Institute’s flawed report.

The post The 4th Transformation: Political Regime Change & Popular Protagonism appeared first on Mexico Solidarity Media.

From Mexico Solidarity Media via this RSS feed

“If the world allows Palestine to be erased, then it was never meant for everyone, only for some. If the law can’t protect Palestinians, it can’t protect anyone,” said Nadya Rasheed, the Palestinian ambassador to Mexico. She added that in two years of genocide, more than 62,000 Palestinians have been murdered in Gaza at the hands of the Israeli army. Among them, more than 20,000 children.

In a keynote address, wearing a traditional Palestinian keffiyeh on her shoulder, the diplomat demanded “a permanent ceasefire to stop the genocide. We demand unrestricted humanitarian aid for Gaza; we demand the release of all [prisoners in Israeli cells].” In this regard, she asserted that “anything less than this is not peace; it is preparation for the next massacre.”

Full Article

The Mexican state’s third recent food product, after Bienestar Coffee and Bienestar Chocolate, has arrived. Pure, multifloral honey produced as part of the Alimentación para el Bienestar program. The aim of the program is to make quality, nutritious food available to the population at affordable prices, while supporting small agroecological collectives and producers across the country and the overall goal of Mexican food sovereignty.

The Bienestar Honey will be available in two formats: the first, a squeezable plastic container of 350g retailing for 45 pesos, and the second, a glass jar of 370g which will sell for 93 pesos.

The first batch of the honey has been produced by beekeepers from Chocholá, Yucatán, and they will soon be joined by producers from Calakmul, Campeche.

Full Article

You'd think literally everyone would do this, it's such an easy low effort thing to say it's not even really that controversial among Israelis since they love making him their sin eater

Mexico’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs (SRE) made it clear yesterday that the government of President Claudia Sheinbaum Pardo will not allow the participation of U.S. armed forces in operations within Mexican territory, emphasizing that bilateral collaboration on security matters will always be carried out with unrestricted respect for national sovereignty.

The Foreign Ministry’s position was issued in response to statements made hours earlier by the United States ambassador to Mexico, retired Colonel Ronald Johnson, who affirmed that both countries are united as sovereign allies in confronting criminal cartels.

In its seven-point statement, the Foreign Ministry maintained that collaboration with the United States is based on principles such as mutual trust, shared responsibility, sovereign equality, respect for territorial integrity, and cooperation without subordination.

He rejects Trump’s ultimatum as U.S. tariff hike on Brazil looms On Wednesday, The New York Times published an interview with President Lula da Silva, in which he stated that Brazil “will never negotiate as if it were a small country against a big one,” just two days before a 50% retaliatory tariff on Brazilian imports is set to take effect.

“We are aware of the United States’ economic power. We recognize its military might and technological size… But that doesn’t scare us. It concerns us,” the Brazilian leader said.

On Friday, U.S. President Donald Trump will impose an additional 50% tariff on Brazilian imports. The Republican president has tied the implementation of this decision to the dismissal of charges against former President Jair Bolsonaro, who is currently being prosecuted by Brazil’s Supreme Court for a coup attempt in 2023.

The Brazilian government has stated it will not negotiate matters of national sovereignty or judicial responsibilities. It also urged the United States to engage in dialogue to resolve the trade dispute. Lula stressed that Brazil treats everyone “with great respect,” and demands the same in return.

“Lula, referring to Bolsonaro, says: ‘He tried to stage a coup to prevent me from taking office. He had no courage. He ran away like a rat. He sent his son to Washington to ask Trump to intervene in Brazil. It’s a lack of character. Pay for the shit you did and respect the Brazilian people’.”

“Democracy is sacred,” he said, showing no indication of yielding to the U.S. President’s pressure regarding Bolsonaro’s criminal cases.

“Brazil has already lived through dictatorships… We don’t want that again,” Lula said, reaffirming the importance of respecting the separation of powers and the rule of law.

Two days earlier, Lula had said that Brazil has no conflict with any country and that his intent is to negotiate peacefully with the U.S. “What’s preventing that is that no one wants to talk. We have requested that contact,” he said, referring to communications with the Trump administration.

In statements to the press on July 11, Trump said of Lula, “Maybe at some point I’ll talk to him. Right now, no.” The Brazilian president called it “shameful” that Trump threatened him via Truth Social.

“Trump’s behavior departed from all standards of negotiation and diplomacy… When there is a commercial or political disagreement, you make a phone call, you schedule a meeting, you talk, and you try to resolve the issue. What you don’t do is impose tariffs and issue an ultimatum,” Lula said.

The Brazilian president also lamented the shift “from a 201-year diplomatic relationship where everyone wins to a political relationship where everyone loses,” noting that as a result of Trump’s actions, Americans will now face higher prices on coffee, beef, orange juice and other Brazilian products.

In the meeting held at United Nations headquarters on July 28-30, Cuba reiterated its firm commitment to the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. It denounced the systematic violations and atrocities committed by Israel as the occupying power.

Ambassador Yuri Gala, Charge d’Affaires a.i. of the Permanent Mission of Cuba to the United Nations, affirmed in his speech at the forum that his country “has joined the call of the most international community for decisive action to end one of the longest-standing injustices of our time.”

He said injustice has worsened in these last two years, during which “Israel has perpetrated crimes against humanity, collective punishment, Apartheid, and genocide against the Palestinian people with impunity.”

Ambassador Gala recalled on Wednesday the high number of dead, injured, and displaced persons, as well as the destruction of hospitals, schools, mosques, and other civilian infrastructure, in clear violation of International Humanitarian Law, which “places us before a painful reality that lacerates the conscience of humanity.”

Gala emphasized that concrete actions are urgently needed in the UN Security Council to stop the ongoing genocide, allow for the delivery of sufficient and unrestricted humanitarian aid, and guarantee the vital work of UNRWA (the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East).

The Cuban representative also recalled that more than 145 countries already recognize the State of Palestine and emphasized that its admission as a full member of the UN cannot be delayed further.

Justice for Palestine cannot wait any longer. “Let us act with the urgency that humanity demands, that the Palestinian people need, as an unavoidable condition for achieving a just, lasting, and permanent peace in the Middle East,” he concluded.

The island nation of Cuba will now allow transgender people to change the gender markers on their government-issued identity cards without having to undergo “bottom surgery,” a legal change long sought by the country’s trans and nonbinary communities.

On July 18, the country’s National Assembly of People’s Power (NAPP) approved a law allowing people to change their gender markers without first requiring a court-approved document proving that applicants had undergone genital affirming surgeries.

This new law is one of several recently approved by the NAPP to update the technology and policies of the nation’s record-keeping system. Cuba’s new Civil Registry code will now recognize unmarried couples’ emotional unions or cohabitation agreements, providing some legal recognition of various domestic partnerships.

Full Article

Tweet

The Supreme Court of Justice of Mexico (SCJN) has issued a groundbreaking ruling: works generated exclusively by artificial intelligence (AI) cannot be considered copyrightable in Mexico. Therefore, such content is considered public domain, as it is not human-made.

This was the ruling of the Second Chamber of the Court, denying the injunction requested by Gerald García Báez, who attempted to register an AI-generated avatar with the National Copyright Institute (Indautor).

García Báez filed a request with Indautor to protect the work entitled "Virtual Avatar: Gerald García Báez." The piece, a graphic representation of himself for augmented and virtual reality environments, was created using the generative artificial intelligence system Leonardo AI, to which García provided photographs and instructions.

In his application to Indautor, he also requested that moral rights be recognized in favor of the AI ​​system, while he, as a user and contributor of creative input, claimed property rights.

The Public Copyright Registry Office rejected the application, arguing that the work was not derived from a human creation, but rather an artificial one. It noted that, under the Federal Copyright Law (LFDA), only original works that are expressions of the individuality and personality of a natural person can be protected. Thus, any content generated completely automatically by AI is excluded from this protection.

Amparo

García Báez first filed a nullity action before the Federal Administrative Justice Tribunal (TFJA), and subsequently a direct amparo action. He then asked the Supreme Court to hear the case due to its "importance for the Mexican State," which was accepted by the Second Chamber in January 2025.

The SCJN's unanimous ruling was resounding: "The justice system of the Union does not protect Gerald García Báez," the Second Chamber ruled. The reporting judge, Lenia Batres Guadarrama, led the constitutional review of the case, based on the legality of the Indautor resolution and the TFJA ruling.

In its analysis, the Court held that Articles 3 and 12 of the LFDA are clear in establishing that only natural persons can be considered authors.

"The author must be a natural person. It cannot be a synthetic or artificial entity," the ruling reiterated.

In its view, the creativity, originality, and individuality required by law can only arise from human experience, emotions, and intellect. Consequently, no artificial intelligence system, no matter how advanced, can meet these requirements.

The Court cited previous jurisprudence and pronouncements from international organizations such as the UN Human Rights Council, which define authorship as an exclusively human right. It also ruled out the possibility of applying foreign legal criteria, such as those of the United Kingdom, Australia, or South Africa, as they are incompatible with the principle of territoriality in force in Mexican law.