Menéame: comentarios [4147659]

#9 El discurso de Marco Rubio y la arquitectura racial del nuevo orden occidental: el neocolonialismo del imperio de Estados Unidos

laruladelnorte — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 20:04:33 +0000

Rubio alertó que hoy existen modelos que intentan diluir la identidad nacional y la libertad personal en nombre de proyectos ideológicos modernos.
El llamado es a no intentar "coexistir" con sistemas que ya demostraron su fracaso en el pasado, sino a recordar el daño que causaron para evitar que vuelvan a infiltrarse en las sociedades libres bajo nuevas etiquetas.

Claramente habla de EEUU y de todo su pasado.

» autor: laruladelnorte

#8 El discurso de Marco Rubio y la arquitectura racial del nuevo orden occidental: el neocolonialismo del imperio de Estados Unidos

HeilHynkel — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 20:03:20 +0000

Estos OTANazis está zumbados.

» autor: HeilHynkel

#7 El discurso de Marco Rubio y la arquitectura racial del nuevo orden occidental: el neocolonialismo del imperio de Estados Unidos

malditopendejo — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 20:02:55 +0000

#6 venia a comentar justo eso. Marco Rubio suena a yanki de pura cepa.

» autor: malditopendejo

#6 El discurso de Marco Rubio y la arquitectura racial del nuevo orden occidental: el neocolonialismo del imperio de Estados Unidos

harverto — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 19:55:04 +0000

Un latino defendiendo la supremacía racial, acabará como los judíos que apoyaron a Mussolini, pensando que también luchaban contra el comunismo.

» autor: harverto

#5 El discurso de Marco Rubio y la arquitectura racial del nuevo orden occidental: el neocolonialismo del imperio de Estados Unidos

Tkachenko — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 19:52:47 +0000

#4 y ovacionado por los "líderes" europeos

» autor: Tkachenko

#4 El discurso de Marco Rubio y la arquitectura racial del nuevo orden occidental: el neocolonialismo del imperio de Estados Unidos

alehopio — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 19:48:33 +0000

He leído el discurso completo de Marco Rubio. A continuación, identifico las partes que contienen elementos eminentemente colonialistas, organizadas por temas:

( 1 ) Celebración explícita del colonialismo como expansión civilizatoria

"For five centuries, before the end of the Second World War, the West had been expanding – its missionaries, its pilgrims, its soldiers, its explorers pouring out from its shores to cross oceans, settle new continents, build vast empires extending out across the globe."

Aquí Rubio describe el colonialismo occidental (conquista, expansión territorial, imperios) como algo natural y positivo, usando verbos como "expandirse", "construir", "verterse" sin ninguna crítica a la violencia, explotación o genocidio que implicó.

( 2 ) Lamento por el "declive" de los imperios coloniales

"The great Western empires had entered into terminal decline, accelerated by godless communist revolutions and by anti-colonial uprisings that would transform the world..."

Rubio presenta las "revoluciones anticoloniales" como algo negativo que aceleró el "declive" de los imperios occidentales, calificándolas de "ateas" (godless) para deslegitimarlas moralmente. El término "uprisings" (sublevaciones) minimiza los movimientos de liberación nacional.

( 3 ) Jerarquía civilizatoria y superioridad cultural

"We are part of one civilization – Western civilization... forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry..."

"It was here in Europe where the ideas that planted the seeds of liberty that changed the world were born... gave the world the rule of law, the universities, and the scientific revolution."

Esta narrativa excluye las contribuciones de otras civilizaciones (árabe, china, india, africana, amerindia) y presenta a Occidente como el único motor del progreso humano, una visión típica del colonialismo cultural.

( 4 ) Rechazo de la descolonización como "culpa" injustificada

"We do not want our allies to be shackled by guilt and shame... an alliance that does not exist to operate a global welfare state and atone for the purported sins of past generations."

Rubio rechaza explícitamente cualquier responsabilidad histórica por el colonialismo, calificando los crímenes del pasado como simples "pecados supuestos" (purported sins). Esto niega las consecuencias estructurales actuales del colonialismo.

( 5 ) Visión misionera y providencialista

"Our story began with an Italian explorer whose adventure into the great unknown to discover a new world brought Christianity to the Americas..."

Referirse a Colón como un "explorador" que "descubrió" un "nuevo mundo" y "trajo el cristianismo" reproduce la narrativa colonial de la conquista como misión civilizatoria, ignorando la violencia contra los pueblos originarios, sobre todo el genocidio de pueblos indígenas en norteamérica.

( 6 ) Apropiación de territorios como legítima expansión

"Our first colonies were built by English settlers... Our frontiers were shaped by Scots-Irish... Our great midwestern heartland was built by German farmers... Our expansion into the interior followed the footsteps of French fur traders..."

La palabra "expansión" (expansion) y "colonias" (colonies) se usan sin reconocer que implicaron la expulsión y exterminio de poblaciones indígenas. Es una historia de "asentamiento" que borra el colonialismo interno sobre los nativos americanos.

( 7 ) Superioridad militar y desprecio por el derecho internacional

"It took American leadership and partnership... just to bring the two sides to the table..."

"It required 14 bombs dropped with precision from American B-2 bombers..."

"It took American Special Forces to bring this fugitive to justice."

"We cannot continue to allow those who blatantly and openly threaten our citizens... to shield themselves behind abstractions of international law..."

Rubio celebra la violencia unilateral estadounidense (bombardeos, fuerzas especiales) y rechaza el derecho internacional como "abstracciones" cuando obstaculiza los intereses occidentales, una lógica imperial de excepcionalismo.

( 8 ) Visión del "Sur Global" como espacio de competencia/comercio

"A unified effort to compete for market share in the economies of the Global South."

El Sur Global aparece como un mercado a conquistar ("competir por cuota de mercado"), no como socios iguales. Esto reproduce la lógica colonial de explotación económica.

En síntesis, el discurso de Rubio es colonialista porque:

1. Romantiza la expansión imperial occidental.
2. Lamenta la descolonización como pérdida.
3. Jerarquiza civilizaciones (Occidente como superior).
4. Niega responsabilidad histórica por crímenes coloniales.
5. Reivindica la violencia unilateral como legítima.
6. Trata al Sur Global como objeto de explotación económica.

Es una visión del mundo donde el colonialismo no fue un sistema de dominación violenta, sino una noble empresa civilizatoria interrumpida por "sublevaciones ateas".

» autor: alehopio

#3 El discurso de Marco Rubio y la arquitectura racial del nuevo orden occidental: el neocolonialismo del imperio de Estados Unidos

alehopio — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 19:36:48 +0000

El discurso completo :

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yOjBJ89aeXA

SECRETARY RUBIO: Thank you very much. We gather here today as members of a historic alliance, an alliance that saved and changed the world. When this conference began in 1963, it was in a nation – actually, it was on a continent – that was divided against itself. The line between communism and freedom ran through the heart of Germany. The first barbed fences of the Berlin Wall had gone up just two years prior.

And just months before that first conference, before our predecessors first met here, here in Munich, the Cuban Missile Crisis had brought the world to the brink of nuclear destruction. Even as World War II still burned fresh in the memory of Americans and Europeans alike, we found ourselves staring down the barrel of a new global catastrophe – one with the potential for a new kind of destruction, more apocalyptic and final than anything before in the history of mankind.

At the time of that first gathering, Soviet communism was on the march. Thousands of years of Western civilization hung in the balance. At that time, victory was far from certain. But we were driven by a common purpose. We were unified not just by what we were fighting against; we were unified by what we were fighting for. And together, Europe and America prevailed and a continent was rebuilt. Our people prospered. In time, the East and West blocs were reunited. A civilization was once again made whole.

That infamous wall that had cleaved this nation into two came down, and with it an evil empire, and the East and West became one again. But the euphoria of this triumph led us to a dangerous delusion: that we had entered, quote, “the end of history;” that every nation would now be a liberal democracy; that the ties formed by trade and by commerce alone would now replace nationhood; that the rules-based global order – an overused term – would now replace the national interest; and that we would now live in a world without borders where everyone became a citizen of the world.

This was a foolish idea that ignored both human nature and it ignored the lessons of over 5,000 years of recorded human history. And it has cost us dearly. In this delusion, we embraced a dogmatic vision of free and unfettered trade, even as some nations protected their economies and subsidized their companies to systematically undercut ours – shuttering our plants, resulting in large parts of our societies being deindustrialized, shipping millions of working and middle-class jobs overseas, and handing control of our critical supply chains to both adversaries and rivals.

We increasingly outsourced our sovereignty to international institutions while many nations invested in massive welfare states at the cost of maintaining the ability to defend themselves. This, even as other countries have invested in the most rapid military buildup in all of human history and have not hesitated to use hard power to pursue their own interests. To appease a climate cult, we have imposed energy policies on ourselves that are impoverishing our people, even as our competitors exploit oil and coal and natural gas and anything else – not just to power their economies, but to use as leverage against our own.

And in a pursuit of a world without borders, we opened our doors to an unprecedented wave of mass migration that threatens the cohesion of our societies, the continuity of our culture, and the future of our people. We made these mistakes together, and now, together, we owe it to our people to face those facts and to move forward, to rebuild.

Under President Trump, the United States of America will once again take on the task of renewal and restoration, driven by a vision of a future as proud, as sovereign, and as vital as our civilization’s past. And while we are prepared, if necessary, to do this alone, it is our preference and it is our hope to do this together with you, our friends here in Europe.

For the United States and Europe, we belong together. America was founded 250 years ago, but the roots began here on this continent long before. The man who settled and built the nation of my birth arrived on our shores carrying the memories and the traditions and the Christian faith of their ancestors as a sacred inheritance, an unbreakable link between the old world and the new.

We are part of one civilization – Western civilization. We are bound to one another by the deepest bonds that nations could share, forged by centuries of shared history, Christian faith, culture, heritage, language, ancestry, and the sacrifices our forefathers made together for the common civilization to which we have fallen heir.

And so this is why we Americans may sometimes come off as a little direct and urgent in our counsel. This is why President Trump demands seriousness and reciprocity from our friends here in Europe. The reason why, my friends, is because we care deeply. We care deeply about your future and ours. And if at times we disagree, our disagreements come from our profound sense of concern about a Europe with which we are connected – not just economically, not just militarily. We are connected spiritually and we are connected culturally. We want Europe to be strong. We believe that Europe must survive, because the two great wars of the last century serve for us as history’s constant reminder that ultimately, our destiny is and will always be intertwined with yours, because we know – (applause) – because we know that the fate of Europe will never be irrelevant to our own.

National security, which this conference is largely about, is not merely series of technical questions – how much we spend on defense or where, how we deploy it, these are important questions. They are. But they are not the fundamental one. The fundamental question we must answer at the outset is what exactly are we defending, because armies do not fight for abstractions. Armies fight for a people; armies fight for a nation. Armies fight for a way of life. And that is what we are defending: a great civilization that has every reason to be proud of its history, confident of its future, and aims to always be the master of its own economic and political destiny.

It was here in Europe where the ideas that planted the seeds of liberty that changed the world were born. It was here in Europe where the world – which gave the world the rule of law, the universities, and the scientific revolution. It was this continent that produced the genius of Mozart and Beethoven, of Dante and Shakespeare, of Michelangelo and Da Vinci, of the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. And this is the place where the vaulted ceilings of the Sistine Chapel and the towering spires of the great cathedral in Cologne, they testify not just to the greatness of our past or to a faith in God that inspired these marvels. They foreshadow the wonders that await us in our future. But only if we are unapologetic in our heritage and proud of this common inheritance can we together begin the work of envisioning and shaping our economic and our political future.

Deindustrialization was not inevitable. It was a conscious policy choice, a decades-long economic undertaking that stripped our nations of their wealth, of their productive capacity, and of their independence. And the loss of our supply chain sovereignty was not a function of a prosperous and healthy system of global trade. It was foolish. It was a foolish but voluntary transformation of our economy that left us dependent on others for our needs and dangerously vulnerable to crisis.

Mass migration is not, was not, isn’t some fringe concern of little consequence. It was and continues to be a crisis which is transforming and destabilizing societies all across the West. Together we can reindustrialize our economies and rebuild our capacity to defend our people. But the work of this new alliance should not be focused just on military cooperation and reclaiming the industries of the past. It should also be focused on, together, advancing our mutual interests and new frontiers, unshackling our ingenuity, our creativity, and the dynamic spirit to build a new Western century. Commercial space travel and cutting-edge artificial intelligence; industrial automation and flex manufacturing; creating a Western supply chain for critical minerals not vulnerable to extortion from other powers; and a unified effort to compete for market share in the economies of the Global South. Together we can not only take back control of our own industries and supply chains – we can prosper in the areas that will define the 21st century.

But we must also gain control of our national borders. Controlling who and how many people enter our countries, this is not an expression of xenophobia. It is not hate. It is a fundamental act of national sovereignty. And the failure to do so is not just an abdication of one of our most basic duties owed to our people. It is an urgent threat to the fabric of our societies and the survival of our civilization itself.

And finally, we can no longer place the so-called global order above the vital interests of our people and our nations. We do not need to abandon the system of international cooperation we authored, and we don’t need to dismantle the global institutions of the old order that together we built. But these must be reformed. These must be rebuilt.

For example, the United Nations still has tremendous potential to be a tool for good in the world. But we cannot ignore that today, on the most pressing matters before us, it has no answers and has played virtually no role. It could not solve the war in Gaza. Instead, it was American leadership that freed captives from barbarians and brought about a fragile truce. It had not solved the war in Ukraine. It took American leadership and partnership with many of the countries here today just to bring the two sides to

» autor: alehopio

#2 El discurso de Marco Rubio y la arquitectura racial del nuevo orden occidental: el neocolonialismo del imperio de Estados Unidos

alehopio — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 19:29:40 +0000

¡Guerra al comunismo! El discurso de Marco Rubio en Múnich
www.tvazteca.com/aztecanoticias/marco-rubio-en-munich-advertencia-el-c

La Conferencia de Seguridad de Múnich no solo sirve para hablar de armas, sino también de ideas. Este año, el Secretario de Estado de Estados Unidos, Marco Rubio, se encargó de poner el tema del comunismo sobre la mesa.

"Invertimos en enormes Estados de bienestar a costa de nuestra capacidad de defensa", señaló.

La advertencia desde Múnich fue directa: el comunismo no ha desaparecido, solo ha cambiado de piel. Rubio alertó que hoy existen modelos que intentan diluir la identidad nacional y la libertad personal en nombre de proyectos ideológicos modernos.

El llamado es a no intentar "coexistir" con sistemas que ya demostraron su fracaso en el pasado, sino a recordar el daño que causaron para evitar que vuelvan a infiltrarse en las sociedades libres bajo nuevas etiquetas.

» autor: alehopio

#1 El discurso de Marco Rubio y la arquitectura racial del nuevo orden occidental: el neocolonialismo del imperio de Estados Unidos

alehopio — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 19:23:56 +0000

La restauración prometida no apunta a reconstruir el pasado sino a disputar el futuro: reorganizar alianzas, filtrar poblaciones, blindar tecnologías y convertir la supremacía racial en criterio de jerarquía internacional. En esa arquitectura, el racismo no aparece como exceso retórico sino como tecnología de gobierno global, capaz de ordenar flujos humanos, justificar desigualdades y naturalizar zonas de sacrificio. Para el Sur Global, la pregunta ya no es si el imperio está en declive, sino cuánto daño puede producir mientras intenta administrar esa transición.

» autor: alehopio