In the midst of postmodernity, economic globalization, cultural, religious, and even political plurality, Claudia Sheinbaum once again appeals to the anachronistic Hispanophobia that we Mexicans are incapable of overcoming.

She used a video that "demonstrates" that other countries are “nice” because they apologize... That's the level...

It's strange that she resorts to this kind of immature tricks, being a scientist and constantly proclaiming herself as a leader of the avant-garde and in tune with the times, but no. Instead of adopting a position of integration, of brotherhood among peoples, and fostering greater interdependence and interaction between nations, she does not. Once again, she turns to childhood traumas as a way of engaging in banana republic politics.

Hispanophobia is natural among Mexicans, and it's not rooted by chance. It's no coincidence that two emperors were executed. Agustín de Iturbide was shot in 1824, and Maximilian in 1867.

This Hispanophobic sentiment has been reinforced by school textbooks. The Mexican History book for 5th grade, whose first version was published in 1962, was already highly critical of Spain’s colonial rule over Mexico, and the more recent editions have not changed the tone.

The seed of hatred towards Spaniards dates back much further.

When Mexico had just gained independence from Spain, there was always the fear that the "motherland" would attempt a reconquest. And these fears were confirmed not once, but twice.

It was well-known that King Ferdinand VII had every intention of reclaiming Mexico for his monarchy, and perhaps he did not succeed thanks to José Bonaparte, Napoleon’s brother, standing in his way. But the truth is that there was an expedition financed by the King to reconquer Mexico, led by Brigadier Isidro Barradas. He departed from Cuba and arrived on the coasts of Tamaulipas with three thousand Spanish soldiers, who were defeated by Antonio López de Santa Anna. Santa Anna, in turn, used this incident as propaganda to establish himself as the savior of Mexico, who had prevented the country from becoming a colony again.

Ironically, it was Antonio López de Santa Anna, the very same fool who ended up losing more than half of Mexican territory, so this 'heroic feat' is not remembered. However, after that incident, Hispanophobia became fully embedded in the Mexican DNA.

Curiously, it was Porfirio Díaz who refined Mexican Hispanophobia, thanks to his obsessive Europeanization as a synonym of national development—something that the writers of history later used against him.

Great thinkers like Octavio Paz and Samuel Ramos pointed out with precise accuracy the absurdity of Mexico’s rejection of its Hispanic father and the dogmatic embrace of its Indigenous mother. The intellectual circles that favored the Revolution defined Hispanophobia as something revolutionary and new, and Hispanism as reactionary and conservative. They disguised the Indigenous roots as emancipation and decolonization, attributing to it a non-existent cultural and historical maturity, and identified the right-wing perspective as a shameless group of defenders of Spain’s efforts to civilize the Americas.

All this serves to illustrate the ridiculousness we face today: we are in conflict with our second-largest trading partner over a few paragraphs in a 5th-grade textbook.

This is the 'caliber' of our Presidency, which continues to insist on a stupid and anachronistic demand: an apology from a country that no longer exists to another country that no longer exists.

Like it or not, we are the children of miscegenation, we are entirely different citizens. But still, we remain victims of an absurd narrative exploited politically to keep the "chairiza," the "solovinos," and the addicts of the 4T entertained in an endless and boring episode of *Siempre en Domingo*.