domingo, 17 de junio de 2012

Globalización bajo Estado de Sitio.

Greece riots: 100,000 fight against harsh cuts in Athens protests





 Dramatic video as thousands clash with Egypt riot police in Cairo






 Mikis Theodorakis - État de Siège (Κατάσταση Πολιορκίας 1968)





Fernando De La Rúa - Declaración del estado de sitio - 19/12/2001


Cuestión para la Argentina, ¿en que andan las Usinas, considerando las Masas Críticas disponibles para Operar?




El crischavismo y Lunadei 2.0; la Comedia Musical de Protesta.


El crischavismo ya asoma entre nosotros
Por Fernando Laborda; hacer clic aquí.


Lanata es malo-malo, y es el jefe de la oposición
Por Jorge Fernández Díaz, hacer clic aquí.


Plantean, si se los toma en serio, que nos esta sucediendo lo siguiente.








En fin, uno ya esta acostumbrado a los excesos retóricos; si se despoja de los ditirambos queda solo esto.





Amo este Sillón, del Sr. De la Nata.






Parece que en materia política los argentinos necesitan aprender que la letra con sangre entra.


Me valgo de tu hospitalidad para recordar a los compatriotas caídos el 16 de junio de 1955 a causa del Bombardeo de la Plaza de Mayo.

AQUÍ una imagen del monumento que los conmemora desde 2009, obra de la escultora Nora Patrich, emplazado en Casa Rosada sobre la avenida Paseo Colón e Hipólito Yrigoyen.

Un abrazo

Rogelio.


“En pocas horas se ha derramado mucha sangre de argentinos.

El ex dictador, en su criminal intento para que otros le abran la puerta definitivamente cerrada con su fuga, ha llevado a la muerte a muchos de sus corifeos y ha provocado episodios de lucha civil.

Los que pretendieron de tomar de sorpresa al gobierno para maniatar otra vez al país carecían de fuerza física para cumplir su cometido y, además, no tenían razón para luchar contra la revolución democrática, ni defendían propósitos e ideales de validez moral.

Pensando en los muertos y en los vivos, en los sacrificados y en los que ahora lloran, el país recobra su tranquilidad al comprobar que se ha producido el reencuentro de los hombres de la Revolución y el reencuentro del pueblo con el rumbo cierto del proceso libertador.

Los hechos de la noche del sábado 9 y domingo 10, dentro de su inmensa tragedia, definen circunstancias y posiciones sobre las cuáles parece necesario detenerse a pensar hondamente.

En primer lugar, es dato fundamental de los hechos acaecidos, la absoluta y total determinación del gobierno de reprimir con energía todo intento de volver al pasado.

Se acabó la leche de la clemencia.

Ahora todos saben que nadie intentará sin riesgo de vida alterar el orden porque es impedir la vuelta a la democracia.

Parece que en materia política los argentinos necesitan aprender que la letra con sangre entra.

Los socialistas y la Revolución Libertadora.
La Vanguardia y los fusilamientos de junio de 1956
Claudio Panella, hacer clic aquí.
Publicado en Anuario del Instituto de Historia Argentina Nº 7, 2008.

¿Hasta cuando vamos a recordar?, hasta que sus discípulos y herederos asuman la Responsabilidad que les corresponde, dejando de hacerse los “boludos”.

Porque aun hoy, los Maestros de Juventud, siguen planteando lo mismo; pero en “off de record”.




El Video; mas que una excusa, es una denuncia contra los propios; a casi 60 años no se a producido ni una misero film que recree la Resistencia Vieja.

Mucha Batalla Cultural, mucha corografía discursiva; pero aun se sigue siendo “sujetos sujetados” de la mirada pequeñoburguesa que fue cómplice hasta la Noche de los Bastones Largos.

Si hasta nos tiran en la cara el fracaso “modernizador” de Frondizi, el proto Menem; o el “Fin de la Primavera Democrática” de Illia-Balbín; los proto de la Rua y proto Alfonsín.

Cuando los “Negros” se les hacia “Guardar su Lugar”, en base a Proscripciones y Muertes Civiles.

En fin; ya no tienen al Partido Militar, ni los Golpes de Mercado, para que los salven de su propia ineptitud.





La Tortuga del Economista Serial Crónico y el perro de Diógenes.


Hace días que le doy vueltas al post “No sos vos, soy yo”, hacer clic aquí.  

Como es su costumbre, esta solidamente argumentado, utilizando montañas de datos; que ha triturado, utilizando con virtuosismo, las herramientas de su profesión.

Sin embargo los resultados me provocan perplejidad, es como si estuviera frente a un objeto Epsilon, hacer clic aquí.

Para entender desde donde parte mi extrañeza, ver esa obra maestra de calambur producido por Artemio.



Me gano el pan en esa zona ambigua del Mercado, que incluye “Pobres por Ingresos” y “Medios en Riesgo”; donde un resfriado en la superestructura económica implica una pulmonía.

O sea, las “señales” económicas no son sutiles precisamente, sino brutales y desordenadas; una “caída” importante de la actividad económica es la diferencia entre el “asadito” del domingo, y fideos con ajo y aceite todos los días.

Ojo, es cierto que el Mercado sin Estado tiene una actividad “pesada”; pero el humo del domingo sigue omnipresente, mientras en las veredas de tierra se ven los montoncitos de arena y ladrillos, clásicos de la autoconstrucción de Barrios y Asentamientos durante los fines de semana.

No solo son provincianos; sino inmigrantes de economías que, según Luciano, crecen mucho mas que la Argentina.

Quizás ahí, se encuentre la razón que vea a su post como un Epsilon; el flujo inmigratorio por razones económicas, “quienes votan con los pies”, arriesgándose al todo o nada; porque la habitabilidad es imposible donde están.

Por mas que los “números” sean brillantes, marcando una “recuperación”, la Tortuga de Zenón; el Movimiento Económico se demuestra andando, la respuesta de Diógenes el cínico.

Y los inmigrantes del Atlántico Norte, no solo dejan de ir, sino que regresan a sus países de origen; u otros lugares de alternativa, como la Argentina.

Que debería, según los datos, estar expulsando a uruguayos, paraguayos, brasileños, chilenos, bolivianos y peruanos; y ese fenómeno, que debería existir, no se ve.

Ahora bien, en una Globalización de flujos de Capitales y Mercaderías; como lo planteo Obama con los “dreamers”, hacer clic aquí y también aquí.






No es un problema moral o ético; sino un factor de sustentabilidad económica a mediano plazo.

Sin remplazo generacional de la “mano de obra”, en especial del sector no transable, hasta las economías mas brillantes colapsan.

“Un Día sin mexicanos”, pero en rueda de prensa de la Casa Blanca, o en los cuchicheos de Wall Street.

Donde el CEO de la Multinacional no puede ir al despacho, porque debe ayudar a su esposa, brillante Analista de Bloomberg; a realizar las tareas de los “espaldas mojadas”.

Resumiendo; no digo que “No sos vos, soy yo”, sea erróneo; sino que es insuficiente para explicar lo que esta sucediendo.

Como se dice que le dijo Ongania a Krieger Vasena, antes de despedirlo como Ministro de Economía; “Nadie esta dispuesto a morir por el aumento del PBI”, y estallo el Cordobazo.

Ni a quedarse, por mas que crezcan los “Fundamentals”, si no los puede aprovechar.


PD sobre Calambur, hacer clic aquí.

Ella esclava y él esclavo que quiere hincársele en medio. ;-()

Republica Desigual y los 3/5; Súbditos y Ciudadanos.





The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise between Southern and Northern states reached during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 in which three-fifths of the enumerated population of slaves would be counted for representation purposes regarding both the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the United States House of Representatives. It was proposed by delegates James Wilson and Roger Sherman.

Delegates opposed to slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state. Delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, generally wanted to count slaves in their actual numbers. Since slaves could not vote, slaveholders would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College. The final compromise of counting "all other persons" as only three-fifths of their actual numbers reduced the power of the slave states relative to the original southern proposals, but increased it over the northern position.

The Three-Fifths Compromise is found in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3 of the United States Constitution:

“Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons”.





"One man, one vote" (or "one person, one vote") is a slogan that has been used in many parts of the world where campaigns have arisen for universal suffrage. It became particularly prevalent in less developed countries, during the period of decolonisation and the struggles for national sovereignty from the late 1940s onwards. It was used in this form in an important legal authority in the United States, the Supreme Court majority opinion in Reynolds v. Sims, issued in 1964.


United Kingdom

This phrase was traditionally used in the context of demands for suffrage reform. Historically the emphasis within the House of Commons was on representing areas: counties, boroughs and, later on, universities. The entitlement to vote for the Members of Parliament representing the constituencies varied widely, with different qualifications such as owning property of a certain value, holding an apprenticeship, qualifying for paying the local-government rates, or holding a degree from the university in question. Those who qualified for the vote in more than one constituency were entitled to vote in each constituency, whilst many adults did not qualify for the vote at all. Plural voting was also present in local government, whereby the owners of business property qualified for votes in the relevant wards.


Over time reformers argued that Members of Parliament and other elected officials should represent citizens equally, and that each voter should only be entitled to exercise the vote once in an election. Successive Reform Acts both extended the franchise eventually to almost all adult citizens (barring convicts, lunatics and members of the House of Lords) and also reduced and finally eliminated most of the plural voting by 1950 for both Westminster and local-government elections. However there were two significant exceptions.


The City of London had never expanded its boundaries and with many residential dwellings being replaced by businesses and the impact of The Blitz there were barely five thousand residents in the entirety of the country's financial district after the Second World War. The system of plural voting was retained for electing the City of London Corporation with some modifications.


Northern Ireland

When Northern Ireland came into being, it adopted the same political system which was in place at that time for the Westminster Parliament and British local government. However, the Parliament of Northern Ireland did not follow Westminster in changes to the franchise, with the result that into the 1960s property plural voting still existed for both Parliament and local government. There has been much debate as to what extent the franchise for local government contributed to unionist electoral success in controlling councils in nationalist majority areas. When the Northern Ireland Civil Rights Association came into being in 1967, it had five primary demands. An additional demand which became just as important was that every citizen in Northern Ireland be afforded the same number of votes for elections. The slogan "one man, one vote" became a rallying cry for the campaign.


Along with four of the five primary demands, the voting system was updated by the Parliament of Northern Ireland and came into effect for the next election which, strikingly, took place after the suspension of the Northern Ireland government.



United States

Historical background

The US Constitution requires a decennial census for the purpose of assuring a fair distribution of seats in the US House of Representatives, and this has generally occurred without incident, with the exception of the 1920 Census. However, once the practice developed of electing said representatives from districts drawn from within the state, rather than electing them at-large, the question arose as to whether or not the state legislature (which had responsibility for drawing these congressional districts) was required to see that said districts were equal in population.

Some states redrew their US House districts every ten years; many did not. Some never redrew them, except when it was mandated by a change in the number of seats to which that state was entitled in the House of Representatives. This led to a disproportionality in the influence of voters across the states. For example, if the 2nd congressional district eventually had a population of 1.5 million, but the 3rd had only 500,000, then, in effect—since each district elected the same number of congressmen—a voter in the 3rd district had three times the voting "power" of a 2nd-district voter.


Additionally, in most US states, electoral districts for seats in the upper house or Senate were ostensibly created at least partially on the basis of geography, rather than population. Whereas lower house seats might or might not be reapportioned on a decennial basis, such as those of the US House of Representatives, in most states, state senate district boundaries were never redrawn. As the United States became more urban, this led to the dilution of the votes of urban voters when casting ballots for state senate seats. A city dweller's vote had less influence on the make-up of the state legislature than did a rural inhabitant's.


Warren Court decisions

In various reapportionment cases decided by the Supreme Court in the 1960s, notably Wesberry v. Sanders, Reynolds v. Sims and Baker v. Carr, the court ruled that districts for the United States House of Representatives and for the legislative districts of both houses of state legislatures had to contain roughly equal populations.

(The US Senate was not affected by these rulings, as its makeup was explicitly established in the US Constitution.). The cases concerning malapportionment ended the pattern of gross rural overrepresentation and urban underrepresentation in the US House and state legislatures. Eventually the rulings were extended over local (city) districts as well, as in Board of Estimate of City of New York v. Morris.



Polisemia.




Hacer clic aquí y también aquí; pero…como están absortos en sus iPod, ni siquiera se dan cuenta de cómo son las tendencias.