According to Joherdi Hernandez and Ottilia Roberts, authors of the book, History of the Future that Belongs to Us, a poten is anyone who uses societal power (28). The orios, say Hernandez and Roberts, are those who live in societies manipulated by potens (29). Anyone who is not a poten, is an orio, thus, the entire human population is comprised of potens and orios, the powerful and the powerless (Hernandez 29). Potens decide how orios experience the economic, social, political, cultural, and religious systems that shape their lives (Hernandez 28). Potens can be identified through their ownership or control of "national or international communication and media corporations, sources of energy and mineral resources, military industries, utility services, financial markets, banks, international trade, and the production and international distribution of prescriptive drugs and legal non-prescriptive drugs." (Hernandez 29). In Mexico, potens have used government institutions and mass media corporations to maintain control for the sake of development.

A compilation of documents by Kate Doyle, the director of the Mexico Documentation Project for the National Security Archive, entitled, "Tlatelolco Massacre: Declassified Documents on Mexico and the Events of 1968" reveal a heavily poten-influenced government operating in Mexico in the late 1960’s. According to the declassified information, in 1968, students in Mexico City were engaging in a series of demonstrations that lasted for most of the year (Doyle). On October 2, student unrest combined with constant social disturbance led the military to massacre hundreds in Tlatelolco, at La Plaza de las Tres Culturas (Plaza of the Three Cultures) (Doyle). Although the government has yet to claim responsibility for the Tlatelolco Massacre, such action was probably initiated to ensure that the Olympic events scheduled in October would not be jeopardized by student protests. The documents reveal a direct connection between the leftist intellectuals of the National Polytechnic Institute (IPN) and the National Autonomous University of Mexico (NAUM) and their activities, with the interests of potens and their use of the Mexican government to successfully end such activities. This connection is evident in the potential profit made by media corporations, advertising agencies, and other organizations involved with Olympic events. Such events, if they had been disturbed or postponed by the orios (leftist university intellectuals), could have lead to unrealized profit for poten controlled industries. Ideologies established by the international poten-controlled community placed a great deal of importance on the Olympic games, which in turn, had put pressure on the Mexican government to ensure that they would go on as scheduled. Thus, poten profit was secured and orio activity was quelled, through the institutions of the Mexican government, for and by potens.

An article entitled, "Myths of Cultural Imperialism and Nationalism in Golden Age Mexican Cinema", written by Seth Fein, brings to light evidence of a poten-dominated cinematic media environment in Mexico between the 1930’s and 1950’s. According to the article, the U.S. government directly intervened in Mexican film production via the Office of the Coodinator of Inter-American Affairs (OCIAA). Supposedly, this organization, in corroboration with the Motion Picture Society of the Americas (MPSA), injected "Good Neighbor" themes into popular Mexican cinema, actively encouraging propaganda, as a strategy for shaping the general Mexican perception regarding Latin American-U.S. relations (Fein 164). Both of these organizations were created and used, for and by a poten, namely, Nelson Rockefeller (Fein 164). A short online biography of Nelson Rockefeller, composed by Robert J. Huckshorn, and found at, http://gi.grolier.com/presidents/ea/vp/vprock.html, paints him as a prominent U.S. government official who had invested in a standard oil subsidiary in Venezuela and became deeply concerned with Latin America as a result. As an experienced politician and businessman, Rockefeller had the opportunity to utilize government power in coordination with the power of the media, to shape societal perception. His standard oil subsidiary in Venezuela was probably a key element considered when steeped in the decision making process that determined the cinematic content of popular Mexican culture. Therefore, Mexican cinema between the 1930’s and 1950’s not only inadvertently shaped the minds of Mexican citizens through entertainment, but was ultimately a preordained indoctrination of poten-adjusted information concerning the affairs of international relations.

Potens are using government institutions and media corporations to sustain control for the purpose of transforming Mexico into a developed nation. An online article entitled, "Plan Puebla Panama (PPP)" at, www.globalexchange.org, presents information exposing such development. The article is about the Plan Puebla Panama, a current effort initiated through the collaboration of private investors backed by institutions such as the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, and the International Monetary Fund, to generate foreign investment in the southern half of Mexico and Central America (www.globalexchange.org). Primarily, foreign investment comes in the form of development corridors consisting mainly of Maquiladoras, factories focused on the assembly of import component parts for re-export, where workers are underpaid and subjected to horrible working conditions (www.globalexchange.org). Advocates of the PPP claim that it will create employment opportunities for a nation in economic turmoil. Critics claim that it will displace indigenous communities and further degrade the environment (www.globalexchange.org). The PPP will usher in a time period characterized by incredible export-profits, severe working conditions, and displacement of communities, with the prospect of possibly ruining the environment, rather than eliminating poverty. Obviously, the potens responsible for implementing the PPP in the name of development are doing so for their own benefit and not for the benefit of the orios that will directly experience it’s after-effects. As long as potens are using government institutions and media corporations to manipulate the people of Mexico, with the intent to profit despite warnings of disaster, and the orios are powerless to stop them, humankind will continue to suffer, and we will effectively postpone the evolution of our souls.

Potens use government institutions and media corporations to control societies of orios. They do this in order to achieve what they are calling development. In Mexico, this so-called development is the transformation of the Latin American landscape into an industrialized society, complete with seaports, highways, airports, and railroads, focused on the export of imported manufactured goods. This structure has the potential of displacing indigenous communities while destroying the natural environment. However, an industrialized society also has the potential to bring about positive economic change, with the promise of an increase in living standards through the creation of unions and civil rights organizations. Of course, such improvement does not justify the destruction of Mexico’s indigenous culture. Regardless, this development, whether it serves to benefit humanity or not, is the blueprint drawn for all of us by people with extraordinary power, and by those merits, should not be trusted.

According to Joherdi Hernandez and Ottilia Roberts, in their book, History of the Future that Belongs to Us, a poten is anyone who possesses societal power. A societa is an alliance of potens established for the purpose of maintaining control over the rest of society. During the 19^th century, the interplay of four contemporary societas precipitated what has historically become known as the Mexican-American War, dismantling the movement to create a unified democratic Mexican nation in the process, and ultimately, disabling the future of Mexican independence in the years to come.

The first societa to consider in the developments that led to the war between Latin America and the U.S. is the triumvirate of the Catholic Church, the Spanish Crown, and the reigning aristocracy of Mexico. This societa is characterized mainly by their collaborative support of a system known as La Encomienda. According to, History of the Future that Belongs to Us, a legislative document known as La Encomienda was adopted by the Spanish Crown; formally relinquishing slavery, yet condoning a system of informal slave labor based on religio-centric values (Hernandez 87). Apparently, La Encomienda was Spain’s solution to a dispute within the ranks of their societa over the ethics of slavery. On the one hand, neither the Church nor the Crown supported slavery; on the other hand, slave labor was almost indispensable to the wealthy aristocrats and conquistadors who oversaw the economic activities of New Spain (Hernandez 87). What La Encomienda installed was a disturbing system whereby the original inhabitants of the land were required to neutralize their cultural identities and accept a second-hand perspective on life, the one offered to them by the Catholic Church. Any indigenous person who rejected such a perspective qualified for slavery (Hernandez 87). Of course, those that did succumb to La Encomienda were expected to serve under an Encomendero; a Spanish land owner who supported the Crown. Thus, the relationship that existed between the triumvirate of power that supported La Encomienda and the indigenous tribes that they dominated, is evidence of the existence of a societa working within the boundaries of Mexico in the years before its so-called independence and eventual war with the United States. The establishment of this societa and their formalized system of La Encomienda set the stage not only for the uprising of a new class of citizens called criollos, but also for a revolutionary effort to create a unified Latin American nation based on equal rights for everyone. However, many of the criollos inherited their oppressor’s ideals, and thus, dissension within the movement dissolved any possibility of the formulation of a truly unified nation within the confines of Latin America.

After Spanish colonialism had taken root in Mexico, a criollo oligarchy managed to declare independence from Spain, secure economic support from Great Britain, and emerge as the next dominating societa to take control of Latin America. Criollos were descendants of Spaniards who settled in New Spain (Hernandez 91). Although they enjoyed a considerable amount of wealth, criollos were considered second class citizens, and furthermore, could not hold an office in the government (Hernandez 91). Perhaps this situation was inevitable, after all, the triumvirate of power that supported La Encomienda thrived on a definitive caste system, one that easily incorporated the criollos into its’ structure as necessary. From a certain standpoint, Criollos were below the Spaniards and above the indigenous tribes of the land. However, their curious position within the societal order did afford them the opportunity to learn and acquire knowledge. Many young criollo students took part in political and philosophical discussions that served to sever whatever loyalty they might have had to the Spanish crown (Hernandez 92). Such discussions, combined with the instability of Spanish rule in Europe, inspired a criollo revolution and the eventual removal of the vice-royalty to Spain (Hernandez 94). However, North America Divided, written by Seymour V. Connor and Odie B. Faulk, maintains that the forces of the criollo revolution were, in reality, two opposing factions that allied temporarily under the Plan de Iguala to expel Spain from Mexico (7). After this goal was accomplished, the temporary alliance split and two important entities evolved, the Centralists, who supported an authoritarian government, and the Federalists, who desired a democratic government (Connor 9). These two factions are probably identical to the two opposing groups mentioned by Hernandez and Roberts in, History of the Future that Belongs to Us, when they distinguish between the criollo oligarchy and those inspired by the words of Simon Bolivar, Miguel Hidalgo, and others liberals like them. Unfortunately, as Hernandez and Roberts explain, the criollo oligarchy, in pursuit of their own interests, took control of the government, and forged economic relations with another societa, the British monarchy, successfully diverting the efforts of Bolivar’s greatest aspiration: the political unification of Latin America. Hence, the criollo oligarchy became the next societa to rule in place of the triumvirate of power in Spain.

As the criollo oligarchy entered into cahoots with the British monarchy, quashing a genuine movement for true independence, they found themselves embroiled in a national boundary dispute with the societa of institutions of the United States; the two societas then battled for control in the Mexican-American War. The national boundary dispute is largely due to the political instability of Mexico as their government was replaced by the criollo oligarchy. According to "War and Peace with the United States", written by Josefina Zoraida Vazquez, during the reign of the Crown, various land grants were given out but were later disputed when Spain no longer dominated Mexico. Furthermore, Mexico’s willingness to sell land inexpensively to Americans with the promise that they remain loyal proved to be a disaster (Vazquez 342). Many of the American settlers did not respect or obey Mexican laws, while some advocated the annexation of Texas to the Republic of the United States, which was the disputed territory in question. According to North America Divided, later, Texas declared independence and was recognized by France, Great Britain, Holland, Belgium, and other European countries, and eventually annexed into the union of the United States, which was regarded as an act of hostility by Mexico (Connor 15). Indeed, the union of these two forces was a blow to Mexican pride. On April 24, 1846, General Torrejon led a Mexican cavalry unit across the Rio Grande and captured Captain William Thornton and sixty American dragoons; thus began the Mexican-American War, and the rest is history (Connor 30).

So, the events that lead up to the war between Mexico and the United States were generated from the interplay of four contemporary societas, the triumvirate of power in Spain, the criollo oligarchy, the British monarchy, and the institutions of the United States. Although the war itself was over territorial boundaries, such disputes would not have existed had the criollo oligarchy strove from the beginning to support Simon Bolivar and his revolutionary political ideas. If the united centralist and federalist factions persevered through a grisly effort to work it out, then land grants to foreigners might not have been realized. The chances of this happening within the context of the collective criollo oligarchic psyche were very low, however, because criollos were descended from the Spanish and were influenced by the triumvirate of power responsible for their existence. Their refusal to work towards a unified nation impacted the movement to achieve real independence so much that it had dissipated along with the death of Bolivar in 1830. Instead, the relations formed between the criollo oligarchy and the British Monarchy ensured Mexico’s dependence on Great Britain for economic support. Finally, since the unification of Mexico did not take place, land grants to Americans whose goal it was to incite a separation of Texas from Mexico were approved and turmoil ensued between the Mexicans and Americans living there. Texas eventually declared independence from Mexico and accepted the offer of annexation by the United States, precipitating the Mexican American War.

It can be discerned from the book, History of the Future that Belongs to Us, written by Joherdi Hernandez and Ottilia Roberts, that potens manipulate the course of societal development in order to maintain control over the rest of the population, mainly, the orios. Without the orios to rule over, potens would not exist. They would reside in an egalitarian society. Thus, potens need orios. Likewise, destroy the notion of a poten, and orios seem like regular people. The two concepts are inherently linked, without one the other fades into extinction. It seems, then, that orios are as important to potens as are the very resources that potens manipulate. Does this value of importance, perhaps, stretch beyond the limits of the intrinsic relationship between potens and orios? Do orios, in fact, play a larger role in society than most would admit? In Mexico, during the post-revolutionary period after 1920, contemporary orios (indigenous peoples for the most part) may have toiled like all the rest, though they inadvertently provided more than just their efforts and pliability. Potens selectively used indigenous culture, a culture derived from contemporary post-revolutionary orios, as a lure to attract foreigners, for the purpose of growth and development.

During World War II, the Office of the Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs (OCIAA), a branch of the U.S. state department, produced a series of films that combined past indigenous and modern day cultures, for the purpose of attracting foreign travelers. An article entitled, "Discovering a Land ‘Mysterious and Obvious’: The Renarrativizing of Postrevolutionary Mexico", written by Eric Zolov, talks about two such films, Mexican Moods and Mexico City (238). According to Zolov, the film, Mexican Moods, integrated elements of indigenous culture with modern day advances in industry (238). The film highlights the construction of the Pan-American highway, emphasizing easy access for Americans who wished to visit Mexico (Zolov 238). Later, the film paints a picture of Mexico’s rich cultural heritage, featuring folklore dances and ancient Aztec artifacts (Zolov 239). The second film, Mexico City, introduces an indigenous atmosphere with luxuries that support a tourist mentality (Zolov 239). Travelers could visit exotic places, such as the mysterious pyramids of Teotihuacan, and then return to a hotel complete with modern day conveniences consistent with familiar comforts (Zolov 239). These films, created under the direction of the OCIAA, a poten controlled government institution, compiled a selection of indigenous cultural elements with modern day facilities, to attract foreign investment in the form of tourism. The indigenous cultural elements in question were derived from the ancestral roots of Latin-American orios. Without the rich cultural heritage of the orios, to attract foreigners, Mexico may not have had the potential to substantiate a profitable tourist industry.

In the 1960’s, the Ballet Folklorico, started by Amalia Hernandez, itself an articulation of the history, customs, and legends of Mexico, was presented in order to facilitate people with an idea of what Mexico was all about. Zolov, in his article, presents the notion that the ballet was a tool to attract foreign travelers. He writes, "The dances offered by the Ballet Folklorico provided an accessible, living image of the nation’s indigenous and mestizo cultures. Removed from their original contexts and packaged for touristic consumption, what audiences witnessed was a distanced and conflated staging of local cultural traditions marketed as national folklore." (242). Indeed, this depiction of the Ballet Folklorico points out an effort on the part of it’s promoters to attract foreigners, using indigenous culture as the magnet. Moreover, the ballet was sponsored by Emilio Azcarraga Milmo, a mass media mogul, and later by the Instituto Nacional de Bellas Artes, a state institution created by president Miguel Aleman, both of whom were local Mexican potens of their time. Contemporary post-revolutionary orios were the modern day link to the indigenous culture of Mexico. Potens exploited the indigenous past for profit in the face of orio repression. Without the indigenous culture, the ballet would have no basis and might not have happened.

It appears that orios offer potens something beyond work and effort; orios can provide potens with a cultural grab bag filled with raw material that can be revised to fit into a preconceived framework. Mexican policy that concerns issues of societal development illustrates this dynamic. Both, the OCIAA films, and the Ballet Folklorico, themselves selective compilations of predominantly Latin American orio culture, were used by potens to bring foreigners, specifically North Americans, into Mexico in order to generate income. Thus, orios extend more to potens than just their role as inferior subjects of powerful world taskmasters. They are the stock from which potens themselves extract their own version of culture. Without orios as a reference to draw from, potens would be faced with creating a culture based purely on the art of domination. Such a culture would unfold before the dominated in an obvious pattern of injustice and inequality, indirectly encouraging the orios to dismantle the system. Potens are wise to sell orio culture to other orios (and other potens) while keeping the culture of domination under wraps, because it further blurs the reality of the pain and suffering induced in the global orio society by the potens themselves. If only the orios, especially those who know that they are orios, would look past the controversy that they are preoccupied with, and renounce the system entirely, for no other reason but to extinguish poten control forever, than maybe the Earth (Gaia), our planet, and all of her children, will live to see a better tomorrow.

The concept of "type" seeks to distinguish shared traits amongst any group of anything. The variable in question is typical if it displays qualities that can be found in the majority of other closely related variables, closely related enough to even be considered a group of common variables in the first place. For example, it is typical that U.S. citizens live in the U.S.. Beyond that, it is difficult to determine other typical traits amongst U.S. citizens, largely because the United States is made up of many types of people, types based on local culture and individual personalities. The same goes for Mexico. Typical Mexicans live in Mexico. Attempting to differentiate between any other traits shared by Mexicans and label some "typical" and others not, is a difficult task, because Mexico is made up of many types of people, types, as mentioned before, based on local culture and individual personalities. Yet, there exists a discourse that seeks to discover what a typical Mexican is. Such a discourse has come about because intelligent people have begun to perceive poten propaganda which is focused on precipitating "type" out of diversity. In Mexico, potens use mass media institutions and cultural icons, to establish what is typical of ordinary Mexicans, for the purpose of reducing the unknown.

In the 20^th century, potens used mass media to display an evolution of the typical Mexican from lazy to active. An article written by Eric Zolov, entitled, "Discovering a Land ‘Mysterious and Obvious’: The Renarrativizing of Postrevolutionary Mexico", provides an excellent example of such a progression. Zolov considers the role of "Senor Droopy", a cartoon character in 1949 who preferred to rest under a tree or out of the sun, to escape overexertion (239). By 1959 however, the prevalent Mexican cartoon character became Speedy Gonzalez, an extraordinarily fast moving mouse with sound morals and the ability to always elude his pursuers (Zolov 240). Though these two cartoon characters may not have been characteristic of anything typical of Mexican people, they influenced the children who saw them and changed the way they were beginning to see themselves. By reaching Mexican children, potens hoped to develop within them a sense of what they ought to be. If their methods were successful, then the future of Mexican citizenry would have a cultural icon to emulate, perhaps unconsciously. Mass emulation can bring about a typical trait. The typical Mexican would then stand out from the strangeness that surrounds him, strangeness in the form of cultural practices not wholly agreeable with poten ideals. If potens become more familiar with orios, then the risk of losing control is lessened. And since potens can influence what orios think, they can decide what is typical and what is not.

In the 20^th century, potens also used cultural icons to create an idea of what typical Mexicans should be like. An article written by Anne Rubenstein, entitled, "Bodies, Cities, Cinema: Pedro Infante’s Death as Political Spectacle", presents us with a picture of an extremely important Mexican cultural icon, Pedro Infante. According to Rubenstein, Pedro Infante, a Mexican singer and actor, after his death, came to personify "several masculine ideals at once: the charro (cowboy) who is also a modern urban man, the macho [man] with a tender heart, the working stiff and the rich guy too…Infante represents a living vision of what it might mean to be Mexican." (200). Such a vision undoubtedly took up residence in the minds of the Mexican public, after all, Infante’s popularity skyrocketed in the wake of his death (200). Fans flock to his grave and hometown in outfits similar to those worn by Infante in his movies; they eagerly consume products such as Infante videos, books, records, and digitally re-mastered CD’s of old songs and performances; and continue to watch reruns of his movies on the television and listen to Infante songs on the radio (Rubenstein 200). Infante as a cultural icon spreads his wings of influence, ironically in his death, over a great number of people in Mexico. As they are willing to emulate his character they increase the chance of cementing together a body of traits that can be considered typical of the Mexican people. This conflation of qualities reduces unknown attributes that might be hiding in the ever-changing phantasm of what it means to be a Mexican, familiarizing potens with the orios they wish to dominate, in order to tighten the leash on society.

True Democracy, according to Ottilia Roberts and Joherdi Hernandez, in their book, History of the Future that Belongs to Us, is dependent upon the democratization of societal power (130). Ideally, societal power should be accessible to everyone. The more people with societal power, say Hernandez and Roberts, the more probable that the concupiscence of the people will be democratically represented (131). Moreover, democracy does not contain within itself the notion of second-class citizenship; all people are equal in the eyes of each other despite race, ethnicity, religion, gender, or socioeconomic status (Roberts 131). Furthermore, true democracy facilitates an atmosphere where people can regulate their own development (Roberts 131). Currently, models of development in Mexico, specifically, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Plan Puebla Panama (PPP), undermines the concept of a true democracy, and prolongs the oppression of orios throughout the Mexican landscape.

NAFTA, a policy designed to open borders and promote free trade between Canada, the United States, and Mexico, was undemocratically decided upon by the Mexican government. The Zapatista rebellion in 1994, and why they rebelled, is linked to this undemocratic process (www.earlham.edu). The Zapatistas, a powerhouse of indigenous people who rose up against centuries of oppression, corruption, and poverty, vehemently opposed the creation NAFTA (www.earlham.edu). The Zapatistas had no desire to muddle their land with foreign entrepreneurial organizations and business enterprises bent on profit and personal gain (www.earlham.edu). What they represented was a large majority of indigenous people who wanted to feed starving children, reduce illiteracy, establish more health clinics, build better roads, etc., without becoming dependent on foreign investment as a way of survival (www.earlham.edu). Even though the indigenous people of Mexico made up 30% of it’s population and had no desire to implement NAFTA, it was put into effect anyway. This act is indicative of the undemocratic process persisting in Mexico. As Roberts and Hernandez point out, a true democracy cannot exist without the democratization of societal power. The Zapatistas had no societal power and no choice but to accept NAFTA, or start a revolution. In a true democracy, the desires of the Zapatistas and the indigenous people that they represented would have been considered along with the rest of the populations’, and the fact that they were not symbolizes a false democratic system.

The PPP is yet another policy enabled within Mexico’s borders that ultimately removes societal power from the people and places it in the hands of powerful international corporations, which is akin to the dissolution of true democracy. The PPP is a project designed to open up the southern half of Mexico to private foreign investment. The goal of the PPP is to develop an infrastructure of ports, highways, airports, and railways that will connect the petroleum, energy, maquiladora, and agricultural industries (www.globalexchange.org). However, under the PPP, the ejido system, an agreement on the part of the Mexican government to ensure communal land holdings for indigenous and peasant communities, under article 27 of the Mexican constitution, has been modified (www.globalexchange.org). This modification has allowed foreign corporations to overlook the ejido system, dissolve communal land holdings via the government, displace communities, and finally, develop land for their own benefit regardless of what the indigenous and peasant communities have to say about it. Surely, such a chain of events will lead to the displacement of societal power. Once again, the wisdom of Roberts and Hernandez illuminates the faulty democratic system in place through their proposal that true democracy is approached through the equal distribution of societal power. If indigenous and peasant communities are unwillingly walking off their land to make way for the development of money making institutions, then they do not possess societal power. This being the case, the democratic process in Mexico becomes a farce.

Politics, or the art of the installation of policy, in Mexico, claims to follow a democratic process. Essentially, this claim is based on so-called elections that determine who runs the country. Is it possible that this claim is a false one, although these elections are held in the spirit of democracy, and include such democratic elements as country wide campaigns to convince the public that one candidate is better than the other, invigorating speeches that promise to promote the welfare of the general public, as well as a day at the polls? Do such acts determine the political nature of a country, or does something else? Apparently, the political culture of Mexico depends on the imbalance of power and the covert discrimination of the lower classes, to sustain itself.

An imbalance of power allows certain candidates to be assured of their success. The book, History of the Future that Belongs to Us, written by Ottilia Roberts and Joherdi Hernandez, provides a picture of such a situation. Hernandez and Roberts explain that the Mexican public is faced with little choice when voting in elections, that potens ultimately decide who runs for office, manipulating the polls and the voters to achieve their own ends (129). The people who vote in Mexico do so despite their unfamiliarity with the candidate in question, candidates who have no real agenda and make promises that rarely come to fruition (Roberts 129). When a candidate does appear with the interest of the disenfranchised, he usually does not possess the necessary funds to lead a successful campaign (Roberts 129). In cases where such a candidate seems to be winning, propaganda is generated to convince the public that he or she is a communist, a socialist, a terrorist, or a dictator (Roberts 129). If, despite propaganda, the candidate is elected anyway, and attempts to bring about real change, potens can impose sanctions and embargoes that deteriorate the local economy and produce political instability; food disappears from the markets and the devaluation of currency goes into effect (Roberts 129). Such events do not characterize a democracy. Rather, they are the result of an imbalance of power. The power to affect change is not in the general publics arena, it resides in the private activities of potens.

The covert discrimination of the lower classes makes it nearly impossible for ordinary people to take part in the political culture. Once again, the information provided by Roberts and Hernandez proves almost indispensable when confronting this topic. Although Mexican orios are not openly turned away from the governing process, the lifestyles imposed on them by potens does not allow orios the same opportunities (Roberts 130). Orios do not have the time, money, or social connections to run a successful campaign (Roberts 130). They are busy working, raising families, maintaining their homes, running poten businesses, and purchasing poten products. Some orios work for potens directly, usually as low paid servants who care for poten property, including their children, the future potens (Roberts 130). Potens are free to do whatever they want, using their time, their minds, and their money, to secure their power in the long run (Roberts 130). This may not be the same form of discrimination confronted by African Americans early in the course of U.S. history, in which people of African descent had a severely limited scope of freedom (i.e. they couldn’t even use the same toilet as a white man), though it is discrimination in the sense that it excludes certain people from certain practices. The mechanism by which it does so, whether overt or covert, is not important. The fact is, orios are discriminated against within the political culture of Mexico simply due to their severely debilitated list of options, despite the fact that no formal process can be pointed to suggesting such a case.

Mexican society is dominated by potens. Potens have facilitated the creation of docile Mexican citizens through mass media institutions that have sought to create an ideal typical Mexican with which to associate with. What is typical is safer and easily manageable as opposed to what is mysterious and unknown. Potens have fabricated an imposed sense of development on the impressionable minds of the orios they have influenced. Through such activity, potens have been able to obtain whatever resources they wish to, and further manipulate the flow of societal power. They have made a joke of democracy within a nation that desperately needs political reform. Such a fiasco has created a political culture that is empty, fake, and offensive. They secretly discriminate against those in lower socioeconomic positions while propping up government institutions that promise to cure Mexico of her ills and save the nation. Potens are masters of domination. They have sunk their fangs into every aspect of orio life, disabling them from achieving their true potential, and it seems that they do not plan to let go. The global frontier has been reached, and those who got to it first have become the potens of our modern day world. Orios have the power to take that frontier back simply through their union, though any act of rebellion can stir within them the same power hungry spirit that has infested potens, leading to constant war and unending agony.