Harris vs Trump

Por

El Heraldo de México

Compartir

Publicado: 28/10/2024 · 9:33 a.m. MX | Actualizado: 28/10/2024 · 9:33 a.m. MX

Whoever wins the November 5 US election will likely keep this neo-banana republic on a destructive path.

Many US observers are unclear whether what has been described as one of the most momentous elections of a generation lives up to expectations.

The importance of the election is undeniable: it is the richest and most powerful nation in the world. But for much of the rest of the world it is unclear whether the two leading candidates, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, represent different visions.

Sigue leyendo:

Reapertura del comercio ganadero con México; el Departamento de agricultura de EEUU anunció que inician el intercambio en julio

La USDA compartió que la reapertura ganadera será gradual y con distintas fechas a partir de julio

In reality, with greater or lesser vehemence, an aspect that does distinguish them, on immigration issues, both candidates promote the closing of certain border crossings, the reinforcement of the “wall” and the militarization of the dividing line with Mexico; on asylum and refugee issues, Mexico will be “forced” to house thousands of people while their “cases are resolved on the other side of the border.” This is in line with a deeply xenophobic tradition that was founded on the extermination of the indigenous American population and that became prosperous thanks to the slavery of thousands of Africans.

Both candidates have promised to end illegal immigration, and even though the United States is a nation of immigrants, today these workers are frowned upon, many without permits to live and work, and who face difficulties, exploitation and harassment by a racist majority.

On international issues, both campaigns have spoken out in maintaining the United States’ refusal to adhere to international agreements such as the Treaty of Rome, which establishes the International Criminal Court; the Landmine Ban Treaty, and the Nuclear Weapons Prohibition Treaty.

On the other hand, despite the global consensus on the need to reduce fossil fuel use to combat climate change, both candidates support fracking, and are reluctant to take a position on the empire’s adherence to international agreements to limit carbon emissions.

The joke tells itself, the irony is in the tendency of both campaigns to present the country as a “moral guide”, a world leader of democracy... of course, this works well for them with their audiences who have little interest in outside news sources, in a population with limited knowledge of geography and world affairs.

Whatever the outcome, there are obvious reasons to worry about the impact the election will have, which could encourage the implementation of extreme policies, not only in our neighbor, but in old and disabled Europe; encourage greater environmental disregard and degradation, and exacerbate regional conflicts that can lead to open wars, forcing the rest of the world to intervene. The coin is flipped.

Nota publicada originalmente en el Heraldo de México

El Heraldo de México