Category Archives: column

American Liberals are the real racists

Politically Insurrect.


Americans do look down on Mexicans — but the liberal, “progressive”, and diversity-inclusive Americans. In a race war craze brewing in America for a couple of years, fingerpointing of who hates Mexicans has become a sport for both blue-haired Liberals and dixie Conservatives. For me, as a Mexican, I believe I have the right to think and say who are the ones who really hate us — you can guess which group went ballistic.

Liberals send me to the children’s table while they defend us from the big bad alt-right.

Yes, American Liberals. They believe they are the crusaders of SJW pamphlet ideals, the white knights of the dispossesed, and the mesiahs by having media and Hollywood at their disposal. And however inclusive and diversified they want to present themselves, they have been the only group in the US so adamant in looking down on me or paternalistically dismiss me. I almost feel being sent to the children’s table, as if they “the adults” are defending me from the big bad alt-right.

“You should inform yourself”

I have the theory that for US Liberals we — Mexico — are just a political card for them to play. That card have kept the BLM movement going, the 3rd wave feminism active, and the Welcome Refugees hashtag meaning. I see them in no way actually getting involved in all-things Mexico. This is an irony, since those purple-haired people always shut whatever argument I say with their infamous “you should inform yourself” — and walk away.

I know Mexicans because I am one.

Really? As a Mexican in Mexico I should inform my self more? Being an Anthropologist, at some times a journalist, may even qualify me a bit to give an informed report of what Mexico is and how Mexican society functions (including legal and illegal Mexicans in the US). I know the hardships and pains, also the lazyness and the obession for handouts. I know Mexicans because I am one — I know our strengths and whatever glories we are capable of, just as I know our weaknesses and troubles. What can White Liberals or Black Democrats know about me as a Mexican in order to shoosh me away?

Let him have cake while we discuss this poor creature’s future.

But American Liberals, Democrats, Black Lives Matter and other groups could still believe I still inform just a bit more in order to be accepted into their conversations. It’s almost as if Pharao and High Priests don’t want to talk to us inferior chaste. Funny — they believe (because they’re not) to be left-winged and progressive but have insulted me royally. Let him have cake while we, the high order of the purple-haired pink-hats, discuss the future of this poor creature from the South.

Liberals and Democrats are so visceral to be so into diversity.

When people here in Mexico tell me “Americans hate us” I always answer: “Yes, Liberals”. I understand where Conservatives come from — they believe in protecting their country, their community or their family. When I talk to them, we actually engage in an true conversation. We always surmise that both our governments are at fault — they say they have too much government and I say we have no functional government. But we can agree on stuff! American Liberals and Democrats are so visceral and full of rage, that their diversity conversation stucks at name-calling and deaf ears in benefit of safe space. To me safe space is a first world issue, and they should straighten up and be at least open to hear us the despicable creatures they are trying to save from Trump. Sad.


Why Liberals focus on deportations and not on issues which led to mass migration?

Please Explain to me.


Please explain to me… why liberals focus their attention on deportations rather than the root cause of people leaving Mexico?

After the deportation of undocumented Jorge Garcia, liberal media and people in the US turn their attention against Trump — as if he was the one president who created or implemented migratory laws. For decades, president after president has deported Mexicans back to their home country. Yes — including president Obama. But lately I’ve noted full batteries against Trump.

I can understand the animosity from liberals and so-called Hispanic groups, but I can’t figure out why they don’t want to see the full picture. They refuse it, actually, to learn the root causes of why illegal immigrants ended inside the Unites States as illegals and as immigrants (which by the way, they are two different terms squeezed as one for some reason by celebrities, Hollywood, and CNN).

A society which no longer functions.

Slowly but surely Mexico has become a failed state. This for one should be a dead giveaway. The USA has as a neighbor a failed state? That should be the first thing a common American should think of — many do thankgoodnes.

As a failed state, Mexico has lost its ability to control huge parts of its own territory (now lost to organized crime), to police and enforce the law (because of the ongoing war and mainly due to corruption, agriculture laid in waste, ecocide is rampant, genocide as well, no economic stability (none at all), dangerous spikes on gas and goods, underpaid industry (which generate jobs) from South Korea, USA, Japan, and Europe, Canadians destroying whatever mines are left, and social degeneracy which had downspiraled to open chaos, broken families, teen pregnancy, and murder.

A society which no longer functions. A government which no longer governs. People are pushed away to flee elsewhere by this self-fullfilling prophecy poverty. With poverty, despair, and no future but death, war, prostitution, or crime Mexicans run away. Everyone can understand why people run, either to be a better person or because they are not good enough to change their country. It is only one of those two reasons — period. But they are not at fault, it is Mexico who is at fault.

American liberals don’t care about Mexico?

So I ask again. Why do Liberals in America don’t want to listen to this? Is it because I am a Mexican in Mexico telling them this? Is it because this has not been said at CNN? Is it perhaps because they just want to quarrel with Trump and use the Mexican card in a political way? Is it because they don’t care about Mexico — its issues and current history?

I believe Liberals don’t like Mexico. And I also suspect they don’t care about illegal immigrants as they care for their political allegiance. If not — please do explain.

Hispanic media not challenging source of Illegal Immigrants, Mexico

Jorge Ramos is a great journalist and leading figure of Univision channel, but I’ve never seen anyone (not only him) in the Hispanic media debating so passionately against the government of Mexico and other deeply corrupt and racist state-nations in Latin America. Why is such blunt candor by Ramos so heavy against Donald Trump and not against those like the Mexican leaders, who not only created the conditions of poverty but also advocate for illegal immigration into America.

We all may know now that Jorge Ramos was kicked out by Donald Trump from his own press conference, but afterwards he did have a long and interesting exchange of ideas between the two of them.

Tonight, many feel offended by Trump’s action of “deporting” Jorge Ramos out of his press conference. On the other hand I feel more offended at how the Hispanic media gets touchy with Republican candidate Donald Trump and not with the myriad of corrupt leaders in Mexico. Shouldn’t we be looking first at ourselves? Shouldn’t we Mexicans be more worried about what went wrong in Mexico that created this Illegal Immigration crisis? No one in the Hispanic media cares about pointing fingers south of the border — be that the drug wars, politicians, the racist system, or even economics. For Hispanic and Mexican media it’s all about Trump, like he created the problem.

There is a widespread notion amongst Mexicans that outspoken billionaire Donald Trump is an awful person to lead America. The big reason? Because he’s racist, Mexicans say. And still no Mexican or Hispanic media has ever addressed to diligently the fact that the government of Mexico is racist. Mexican officials, many elected or appointed, are callously racist against natives, Afro-Mexicans (black Mexicans who live in the coasts and Coahuila), and even YES… even against Central American illegal immigrants.

High (very high) officials like Lorenzo Cordova from the National Electoral Institute (INE) was taped in audio mocking indigenous peoples way of talking and their “Lone Ranger” kind of attitude. Did Hispanic Media picked that up the way they’ve done with a still not elected candidate? The Mexican government daily deports illegal immigrants that come mainly from Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras and Nicaragua. And none of the Mexican leaders are called bigots like the Hispanic media and Mexican people is so fascinated in doing so with Donald Trump.

Do you think Donald Trump is racist? Newsflash! Mexican government is far more racists to its own people. He may be loud, and even offensive, but not as racist as Mexican government officials that force people entering from the Southern border to sing the National Anthem to catch undocumented Central Americans.

I’m more scared that Hispanic media and public figures like Jorge Ramos are so focused on Donald Trump instead of the epicenter of all troubles, the overwhelming crooked Mexican government. Mexico is not only a failed state in every sense (I’m a living example after fleeing from the northeastern war-thorn part of Mexico) but leaders and dependencies literally push Mexicans to become illegal immigrants. They paste posters and pay ads that recommend Mexicans what to carry or what to watch out for when traveling up north illegally. Mexico even implemented a group of watchers at some point, who aided migrants with water and food supplies on they way to our northern neighbor… instead of stopping them to care for them here.

Hispanic media should focus more on a government that incites illegal immigration, with all the dangers which it comes with it like rape and murder, instead of the candidate that’s pointing at it. I care for my people, and my heart aches that my brethren have to pass through hell — apparently for Mexico’s leaders their journey may very well be business as usual and good riddance.

Mexico once faced immigration issues. Before Donald Trump, there was Xolotl.

By Miguel Omaña.

800 years before Donald Trump highlighted immigration issues Mexico faced the very same challenges. What solution did the ancient indigenous found? You’d surprised.

In the years 1200’s massive contingents of people migrated from the northern lands which in modern days consist of northern Mexico and Southwestern United States. Back in the day people didn’t migrate northbound but to the south, specifically to the colossal Valley of Mexico and its surrounding valleys.

After the fall of Tula (Tollan Xicocotitlan), the Toltec capital, entire nations of northern and western native nations moved towards to what today is Mexico City and its surrounding states. Most pushed by a phenomenon we now call Climate Change. By the time the migrants arrived to the fertile lands and huge lake areas the Chichimec Domain* was already established ruled by mighty Xolotl.

Every day people kept pouring in.

Xolotl saw the influx of migrants as a major issue in his government. It was a do or break moment for the Huey Tlatoani (High Ruler). There was no time to waste, every day people kept pouring in. Contrary to what the United States is experiencing today, entire nations were moving into his realm — America’s illegal immigration issue according to Donald Trump seems to be primarily with Mexicans. But Xolotl had to deal with multiple nations moving altogether to a rather small place in comparison to the open northern range.

What solution did Xolotl thought about? His 800 year old answer may surprise you.

The all-powerful Xolotl decided to not only welcome all of the huge groups of weary and tired migrants (hmh, hmh, well before the Statue of Liberty ever existed), but under several non-negotiable conditions. Each native nation that arrived accepted his unmoving terms. What were Xolotl’s terms?
We may call them the Xolotl laws.

  • Each immigrant group or nation would receive their own piece of land, and that land would be decided only by Xolotl himself on the basis of availability and land size.
  • Each immigrant group or nation had to supply with men to the Chichimec Domain army should it be needed.
    There had to be no quarrels between groups of immigrants for land or power, all of it derived from the Chichimec capital Tenayuca.
  • But the most important decree Xolotl gave to each and every person who arrived to his nation was… that all had to abide to assimilation into Toltec culture, language, and way of life.

The last and most important precept was the pivotal policy of his rule and of his descendants. There was a genuine need to have immigrants comply to the customs and laws of the land. But I have to stress, these immigrants had nothing asked but to comply to Xolotl’s decrees. Visas, long waiting times, entry permits — those were not part of Xolotl’s true open-arms immigrant nation. Each Chichimec ruler continued this legacy of letting people in as long as they abide to the laws, language, and Toltec traditions of the land.

An open-door policy may be dismissed by any candidate.

America’s immigration issues of today has many differences, mainly an ongoing war in Mexico (hint, hint! War’s not only raging in Syria or Ukraine). This has made the region volatile with the ongoing turf wars, which spills into the USA as what Trump refers as crimes and raping. Americans are afraid of ISIS combatants, and yet they have far more bloodier massacres next door. So an open-door policy may be dismissed by any candidate, while a wall seems a more comforting one.

Are we in for a simplistic solution?

What’s better in the long run, might ask Xolotl? What ideas might a powerful Xolotl give to the powerful Trump? After all, both share the same can-do attitude stemmed from their omnipresent power. At least Xolotl saw an opportunity out of immigrants, maybe thinking as a modern-day businessman. A good businessman can turn into benefit every situation. Is it really that the age of American creativity over? The same nation that once invented the planes, the car, harnessed nuclear energy, and went to the Moon (and even Pluto) can’t come with an out-of-the-box solution for illegal immigration? Or are we in for a simplistic solution? It can’t just be either amnesty or booting everyone out — right?

What is to be a father?

By Miguel Omaña.

Now that the whole Father’s Day upheaval has settled down we can really ponder with clarity of mind what a father is. Not that we are not able of talking about it days before or during our day (me being also a father), I’ve found things become more real and steady after such celebrations, very much like New Year’s.

So what is to be a father?

Perhaps the answer I’ve come up with may be so simplistic and perhaps bland. Still, after my mind has gone over it several times and based on personal experiences (good and bad) this is what I consider it to be. A father is one that’s there, no matter what.

Pretty broad definition, huh? Well, I thought so at first. But you see, when you think of it, we’re all sure what a mother is — one that brings into life her child, feeds him/her, and the such. This applies to adopting moms, or even gay couples — you gotta grant me there’s a mommy figure. Nowadays many moms work or earn money, so that 1950’s idea of mommy at home and daddy at work is not only undoable but preposterous for many out there.

We need good fathers in a time where society has grieved and suffered too much.

But the concept of what is a father can be sketchy at best. In an era of high divorce rates and destroyed families, we better come up with a good idea of what a father should be. We need this, in a society that’s seeing too much grief and pain because of a bad family environment — a problem not only endemic to inner city communities but also to suburban areas.
There are dads that go the extra mile, and those that don’t. Don’t mind the latter.

A father is one that’s there, no matter what. This means that someone (anyone) that stays along their kids, her partner’s needs, and present in family issues is a father. I may be criticized for being to lose on such an important figure of a family, but believe me — for a man to do that is way too much in these days were fathers are prone to split away and never look back. There are dads that go the extra mile, and that’s worthy of note. But… and here’s the ugly but… many dads don’t tend fully commit to a family they formed in the first place, to a partner they chose to begin with, in a life they knew they were getting into.

The just ones pay as sinners.

Here we have a saying that says “Justos pagan por pecadores” roughly translated as “the just ones pay as sinners”. These means just because fathers in general have a bad rap it doesn’t mean all dads are spineless weasels that don’t care about their family well-being. Newsflash, there are good dads out there, more that you can imagine. And still, the bad apples may outweight what we good dads may be trying.

Dad, start from the little details. No biggie.

Being there for your family doesn’t only mean physically but also in state of mind. One that is worried about how your little girl is doing in Math, or when the new movie your wife wanted to see comes out. Details, people! Such details count in a life of a family. Yes, there are also bills to pay, errors to mend, and bad habits to control. But what if we start from details only to build up to the bigger issues?

Common ground on what a father should be.

I’m not religious, I’m not left or right winged, but I have found based on personal experiences there is a common ground on what a father should be. Don’t worry what a father should not be, focus on what a dad can do to make a better life for their kids and wife/partner.

How can a pompous LeBron James be a role model to society?

Please explain to me… how can an egotist still be considered a role model after not delivering his own boastful expectations of himself?

Looking up to someone who doesn’t walk the talk.

Let’s face it, whether we’re talking about a political officeholder, a scientist, or a basketball player, one who doesn’t walk the talk is (or should) not be taken seriously. That’s how incumbent politicians are defeated in elections and researchers deprived of grants. But what to do with public figures like LeBron James who may be more of a role model to kids and society? He sure lost the NBA Championship to Golden State Warriors.

One thing is individualism, and another hollow vainglory.

A boastful, self-centered man (forget his a well-paid athlete, if you can) who considers himself the best in the world (literally) yet constantly failing to achieve his only goal in his line of work. People may come up with tons of stats data about how he’s good (and as his fans say, his teams are not). But no one can explain why groundless individualistic narcissism can be admired over and over. Don’t get me wrong, one thing is the individualistic effort to overcome obstacles — into which for good or ill Western culture has fostered — and another having a hollow vainglory.

One day we will forget what victory or advancement was.

A self-declared historian of basketball, LeBron James has called himself the best in the world while blaming his teammates (or fate) after each loss. Last time I checked, that’s not role model material. Sorry, but there are far better examples of people who have excelled through adversities and still managed to retain a healthy dose of sober composure. It is dangerous for a society to lookup to people like him, or else one day it will be a norm to boast about oneself while not showing it. We will become the “I’m the best but you don’t know it yet” people instead of the “I will work hard to become the best” kind of thing. With faux heroes omnipresent in our daily lives that one day we will become so fake, that advancement and victory will be blurred to mere boastful words.

Let’s just hope real role models don’t become extinct.

So much role models, inside and out of the NBA, and we tend to pick the worst of them all. We as a society need to remember what it takes to be a winner, a victor, an achiever — and if not, there are still very good examples nowadays. Let’s just hope those role models don’t become extinct by the sea of vanity.

The future is based on our past — Op-ed

Photo and text by Miguel Omaña.

The past is about discovering who we may become or accomplish, the good and the bad.

I tend to write, research, paint, and talk about the past — a lot, especially of indigenous Mexican history. Many don’t see the point of bringing to the light about things and people from years past. It may well seem as if I may be stuck in the past, when in fact it is about discovering who we may become and what we can accomplish — the good and the bad as well.

If our ancestors were able to overcome the obstacles of their time way before the Internet, why can’t we?

To glance into the past is to see what we are capable of. We are surprised to see how Sumerian cities were organized, Egyptian pyramids erected, ancient Chinese achievements, otherworldly amazing artistry from India, and the sculptural and writing feats of the Olmecs… well before iPhones, laptops, the internet, or electricity for that matter! If our ancestors were able to overcome the obstacles of their time, why can’t we? It is safe to assume that if they did those things we can do better, and yet we don’t.

Newsflash, the future can actually be more awesome that we imagine.

The key is in our past. People dream of a future with flying cars, floating cities, space rockets coming and going, and magical pills. Reality check, this isn’t the 1950’s anymore. Newsflash, the future can actually be more awesome than we may imagine (literally!). We don’t need magic pills because in Mexico there were ancient remedies for todays maladies, and it is not that much of a secret. We just have to delve into our past.

Before hipster lean meals there was amaranth.

Prickly pear cactus (yes, like the thousands that grow in the Northern Mexican desert) can control diabetes and lowers cholesterol. Aspirin is an artificial ripoff of remedies done with salicylic acid from Mexican Willow trees called Huexotl. Way before over-processed powerbars there was (now called) Spirulina, a rich algae from Lake Texcoco that the Mexica Aztecs considered it gold (than actual gold) for its stunning nourishment effects. Before hipster lean meals there was amaranth, which today’s experts say it has the properties of cereals… plus everything else, without the fat. Our ancestors used to be so cool, that not only they knew how to cure illness or take care of a fit body, but also invented chocolate for dessert (originally it was called xolocolatl and it was a beverage) way before the Belgians added sugar into the frankenstein-ish thing we now know as chocolate.

It’s not about getting stuck in the past.

We need the past in order to have a future. We need to see what worked and what not to “move on” as hip progressive and conservative people tend to say. Many problems that afflict us today were those of our ancestors, how they solved it or not is important to us (or it should be). Climate issues, food shortage, social issues, technological hurdles — our ancestors around the world had the same troubles. It is not about getting stuck in the past, it is about letting our past light our future.

Photo I shot at Tepojaco, Mexico.

If you’re a history buff, you may enjoy my novel Till Stars Shut Their Eyes. Set in Ancient Mexico based in true events, a story of forbidden love.

Tepojaco, Mexico. Copyright 2014 Miguel Omaña.
Tepojaco, Mexico. Copyright 2014 Miguel Omaña.

How can state-sponsored racism in Mexico exist in the 21st century?

Please explain to me…

How can state-sponsored racism in Mexico (and the rest of the world, for that matter) exist in the 21st century?

A few days ago an audio recording emerged showing how a high Mexican official insulted the way of talking of indigenous native Mexica, specifically those from Guanajuato state. Lorenzo Cordova, head of the National Electoral Institute mocked a Chichimec leader and even compared his interview with their leader as a laughable Lone Ranger situation.

Lorenzo Cordova refuses to resign after racist remarks. Lorenzo Cordova refuses to resign after racist remarks.

Lorenzo Cordova is not only a high official within Mexican politics, he’s a key person. The Electoral Institute, INE, is the body that set federal elections nationwide. This institute was created after a much debated presidential election in 1988. To avoid a violent uprise the Mexican government allowed the opposition motion to create an independent-ish body to establish federal elections, oversee political parties, and hence declare winners in an allegedly democratic manner. In the 1990’s the then called IFE worked, so much that after 71 years of the ruling PRI party the opposition won the presidency in 2000.

A person invested to protect plurality is ready to provoke upheaval.

But now the Electoral Institute is under fire. Amid a political crisis in Mexico, these recording of the highest official representing democracy in Mexico insulting natives have spurred heated reactions from the people and obviously from yours truly. How can someone who is supposed to guard democracy and equality in modern-day Mexico operates with such bigotry? It is hurtful that a person invested to protect plurality in a wounded nation that strives to overcome a past of confrontations is ready to provoke such upheaval with such childish remarks.

Like in colonial times, empowered white Mexicans rule with cynicism over the masses.

He’s been called to resign, and naturally he refuses to leave. This white man who rules over the “democratic” body mocks the origin and way of life on millions of Mexicans, and insults whatever little hope remain for democracy in this nation. People are disenchanted — and with good reasons with the racist actions of Mexican ruling class. This sounds exactly as colonial times, where the empowered white Mexicans ruled with cynicism over the masses of natives. Not all white Mexicans should be stigmatized, after all a white priest from the same state Lorenzo Cordova insulted rose to war to declared Mexico an independent nation from gachupines (a name given in colonial times to Hispanics mainly from mainland Spain). Perhaps the gachupines are still amongst us in Mexico, not living an honorable life, but a disgraceful life driven by intolerance. Will such reckless attitude not leave Mexico but take root and eternize into 21st century Mexican social landscape?