Leshombresdepacoepisode

The other day, during business hours, the deputy culture Tlalpan phoned me to ask for help with what he said was the top priority of his agency, "the defense of the vote." He said even he had spoken with Claudia Sheinbaum (do not forget who is the wife of former CEO at the same office and his resignation by appearing in videos with political prisoner Carlos Ahumada) thereon, and that he had been commissioned to organize a grand festival of the arts and music. I declined the invitation, an overwhelming cynicism. But I still missing the following lesson in democracy.

Last Sunday, without my knowing it until later, my name appeared in a political deployed against the IFE. When I found out that the charge was a scholar and renowned poet, winner of the National Poetry Award, phoned him to see how he could read my mind and get my signature without to mediate any movement or desire on my part. I said someone else, a third had sent my name to authorize the publication of my signature, without being able to remember the name of that person, and without having any importance that I have my own mail and my own phone, which the poet has used repeatedly.

I wanted to explain why the ideas of deployed seemed silly, but he did not need to discuss political issues with me. That is, one serves the intellectual left when she communes with, not whether he discussed ideas. He said that in addition, my name was not important in the deployed (as I had to Monsivais, a Poniatowska, etc.). Not to mention that adding an insult to what was already an offense, my name had been useful only to fill the space. Why not use invented names? Instead, why not simply use invented names?

is a deployed in the same paragraph "requires respect for the law" and only a few sentences later proclaims, "enough legaloides argument." Hundreds of intellectuals, supposedly useful to think, they could not see the contradiction, not realizing that we want to cure the same disease that they have strengthened (distrust).

Later she reconsidered and decided to send a poet a letter to the editor of La Jornada Semanal, explaining that it is very easy mistake to collect signatures and gives me the right (he to me, as if he could give me anything) to disagree with the whole ball of intellectuals who themselves are reasonable.

We addressed the following letter to the editor of La Jornada Semanal: Hugo Gutierrez Vega


La Jornada Semanal


Present Sir,

When we were kids, a friend said he always voted for the party most effective, regaled us door to door service: we did not go to vote for our vote counted.

Anyone would have thought that time behind us, and that no one can offer a service so complete. With amazement I see that it is not, as the supplement that you so rightly directed, magically makes me support causes that do not support.

As my doubts, let alone my opinions (which in electoral matters have always been different from Núñez and Camacho), would have no place in a paper like that compels me to this service, let me tell you at least the last time I wrote complaining about a cultural supplement was to Babelia, El Pais, that some years ago published the following headline: "The poet Hugo Gutierrez Lopez gets the prize." Too bad

now just need to complain to the poet that much respect.

Sincerely, Paul Boulton



PD Contrary to the claims Eduardo Hurtado, who now treats me "sir", to which I object categorically is to sign papers that I have not read, and the curious gather democratic method firms without rhyme or reason, to give a lesson in democracy.