Ayotzinapa, el CISEN y el PRI – La historia que nunca te contaron

El CISEN

El CISEN (Centor de Investigación y Seguridad Nacional) es la institución de inteligencia mexicana que hace las veces de la CIA en México. El CISEN depende directamente de la Secretaría de Gobernación (SEGOB) y por lo tanto está a la merced del secretario de gobernación (solía ser Osorio Chong hasta hace unos meses cambió a Alfonso Navarrete Prida).

El CISEN emplea a alrededor de 3500 personas y tiene un presupuesto anual de 1800 millones de pesos. Este centro de investigación fue creado en 1989. Sin embargo es el descendiente de varias instituciones de gobierno dedicadas a la inteligencia política y de defensa. Una de éstas instituciones antecedentes del CISEN es el DFS (Dirección Federal de Seguridad).

El DFS fue creado bajo Miguel Alemán con la ayuda de la CIA estadounidense para combatir la proliferación de movimientos comunistas principalmente. La dirección fue fundada en 1947, just cuando empezaba la guerra fría. Desde 1947 hasta 1985 el DFS, parte de la maquinaría de la dictadura partidista del PRI, fue el encargado de documentar y avistar movimientos que podrían desestabilizar al país. Varios de estos movimientos desestabilizadores surgieron en Guerrero, específicamente en la Escuela Normal Rural de Ayotzinapa.

Escuela Normal Rural de Ayotzinapa

La Escuela Normal Rural Raúl Isidro Burgos, mejor conocida como la Escuela Normal Rural de Ayotzinapa, es una institución educativa de nivel superior para varones que se encuentra en la población de Ayotzinapa, una aldea de 84 habitantes en el estado de Guerrero. Forma parte del sistema de escuelas normales rurales concebidas como parte de un ambicioso plan de masificación educativa implementado por el estado mexicano a partir de la década de 1920, cuando Moisés Sáenz (1888-1941) era secretario de Educación Pública. El proyecto de las normales rurales tuvo un fuerte componente de transformación social, por lo que han sido semillero de movimientos sociales.

Salvo entre 1934 y 1940, el período de Lázaro Cárdenas, las normales rurales han enfrentado graves dificultades para su supervivencia. Al inicio, porque el gobierno federal no tenía recursos para sostener financieramente a las escuelas normales regionales. Después del cardenismo, porque la hostilidad contra estas instituciones por parte de los gobiernos federales y estatales ha ido en aumento. Durante el período de Cárdenas, las normales rurales incorporaron la idea de la educación socialista en su currículum académico, que aún sostiene la de Ayotzinapa.

La escuela de Ayotzinapa ha sido el horno de fundición creador de personajes como Lucio Cabañas Barrientos, fudador del Partido de los Pobres, y de Genaro Vázquez Rojas, famoso guerrillero en el estado de Guerrero. Desde 1940 la escuela ha sido centro de atención por parte del gobierno dada su tendencia a generar partidos y movimientos de oposición.

El DFS, Ayotzinapa y la tiranía del PRI

El DFS (antecedente del CISEN) se ha dedicado a investigar y detallar todas las actividades sospechosas en la Escuela Normal Rural de Ayotzinapa. Como lo cuenta en su investigación, Jacinto Rodríguez Munguía detalla sus hallazgos en el Archivo General de la Nación sobre las “tarjetas” generadas por el DFS describiendo todas las actividades de dicha escuela.

Lo que nos deja ver esta investigación es el uso indiscriminado de recursos del gobierno para reprimir movimientos de contra política. En este caso el PRI se ayudó de la gran determinación de EUA para erradicar el comunismo y echar mano de estos recursos para mantener y legitimar su posición como dictadura partídista disfrazada de democracia.

Bajo la bandera de eliminar el comunismo, el PRI ha cometido una serie de violaciones de derechos humanos que habían quedado encubiertos hasta la presidencia de Vicente Fox en el año 2000. Poco a poco han ido saliendo a la luz más y más detalles sobre la ahora llamada Guerra Sucia del PRI contra movimientos estudiantiles.

Después de todo esto, sigues pensando que los 43 desaparecidos de Ayotzinapa fue causa del narcotráfico?

Nota: Aprende más sobre el comunismo aquí The Gulag Archipelago Abridged: An Experiment in Literary Investigation (P.S.)

Ethereum’s massive drops in 2018

Rewind to January 13th. Ethereum was going blockbusters with prices reaching up to 1381 USD. However the first drop came a week later. Back down to $1000 in one week. Jeez, you might have thought, almost $400 worth of losses for every owned ethereum. But nevermind, during that same weekend the price went up again to $1250.

That was also the last time we saw a decent price of ethereum since it has lost 3 times its value of the course of February and March. Currently ticking at $465, if you had bought at the peak and hodl’ed

your ethereums, you would have essentially lost two thirds of your money. Not even Enron managed this kind of volatility.

 

 

The question everyone wants to answer now is what the heck is going on? Since all major cryptocurrencies have seen a similar trend, you probably shouldn’t attribute the price change only to ethereum.

That being said, this drop might have something to do with Vitalik Buterin’s, main programmer and co-founder of Ethereum, threats to the community to stop investing recklessly in cryptocurrencies.

Funny to know that the same person is now assuring his fans through Twitter that he will “not be giving away ETH”. This might even become a new meme

But coming back to the topic, cryptocurrencies have seen huge losses since 2018 began. While it’s impossible to know what could be going on, my humble and honest opinion is that

  1. The fact that a market exchange opened to trade on options and futures means that people will start betting not only on the price gains of the asset but also on the losses. This, by itself, adds a considerable amount of downward pressure.
  2. Cryptocurrency investing was probably the most speculative type of investment people could make. While at the beginning people did put money in because they understood and believed in its intrinsic value and purpose, since the beginning of 2017 that stopped being true. Speculation overtook crypto investments and took the prices up almost 10 times. Of course speculation comes and goes as a feather on the wind

Whether you are a crypto aficionado, or you have had some big losses lately, worry not, for the price never actually goes down. That’s why you should never stop hodling.

Freakonomics and how to end drug trafficking

Freakonomics, a.k.a the book about how you are wrong about incentives, provides a great deal of insight into solving a lot of important issues in society. One of the examples I like the most is the one about crime in New York. From around the 70s till the 90s, New York was a crime ridden city. It had actually built a fame for being insecure and dangerous. Majors had tried everything including increasing police paychecks and increasing police numbers. However nothing seemed to help bring down crime in New York. But then something happened, in 1994 the crime started slowing down. All crime numbers started to turn negative. The murder rate was down, the pickpocket crimes were down and the most astonishing thing is that nobody knew exactly why.

Back then Giuliani was just elected major of NY. One of the things he did is to increase misdemeanor enforcement. However, contrary to what people thought back then, one of the biggest reasons why crime fell back then was, *drum roll*, legalizing abortion in the 1970s. Apparently most of the crime is done by kids from orphanages or kids whose parents didn’t really want to have them. Contrary to what most people would think, abortion is great for reducing crime rates (you should buy the book if you want to know more!).

Drug Cartels

So how does this relate to drug cartels? Well I want to make the case that logical linear thinking has not worked at all in fighting drug trafficking in Mexico. During 2006, Felipe Calderón was elected president in Mexico. Shortly thereafter he decided to wage a nationwide war on drug cartels. He basically threw a big part of Mexico’s army at the cartels to try to stop them. However as we all know that failed miserably. Murder rates went through the roof, which was expected since that’s what a war is about, however the problem is that the murder rates did not go down after a few years. In fact the murder rate has stayed at the same level since then.

The solution

So it seems just fighting fire with fire is not the solution here. However what would be the freakonomics way of dealing with the problem? Well one solution could stem from supply and demand. Let’s imagine a situation, say that Mexico has 5 main drug cartels which manage almost all trafficking. What would happen if the army shutdowns one of them? Well the others would not only have more clients, but due to the scarcity the price would go up and so they would be richer. It’s basic demand and supply. If you cut supply then the price just goes up. If this is true then the army will never win since if you crush one player, the other one grow automatically.

Now let’s think of a possible solution. What if instead we increase supply? One way to increase supply would be to have the government had an undercover agency which actually trafficked drugs and sold them at an artificially low price. Drug cartels would be forced to lower their prices, which in turn would give them less money which in turn would diminish their power. Of course this is not a very ethical solution, and would probably be a diplomatic disaster with the USA. Another such way of increasing supply is to legalize drugs and so add more players. More players means that the cake would be divided in more pieces and so would decrease the power of any single one.

USA

However it maybe even easier to increasing supply, why not just cut the demand? There have been at least two known cases of countries with drug addict population which have solved it without any violence. Portugal and Switzerland already had this problem, and found a way to successfully lower the addiction rate. If only the US government officials would pull their head from their ass, they could save millions of people’s lives on both sides of the border.