Rights in Brazil: the need for a clash of citizenship
Wenceslas Alves de Souza
As the title suggests, "Citizenship in Brazil - the long way, "the book by José Murilo de Carvalho (Citizenship in Brazil - The Long Way. Second edition. RJ. Ed. Brazilian Civilization. 2002. 162 pages) respect to the advancement of citizenship in Brazil, as a historical phenomenon. The author starts his work unfold in three dimensions of citizenship: civil rights (right to liberty, property and equality before the law), political rights (right to participate citizen in corporate governance - voting) and social rights (right to education, work, fair wages, health and retirement). The overall goal of Murilo de Carvalho in Brazil is to demonstrate that there was a linkage of these three political dimensions. The right to this or that right, say the freedom of thought and the vote did not guarantee the right to other rights, for example, segurançae employment. Similarly, the worsening of social problems in India in recent years serves as a support for the author to contrast the dimensions of political rights, through universal suffrage, social rights and civil rights. The denial of these rights now and then in Brazil, is used by Historian to give support to his thesis that has historically generated in this country citizenship unfinished - as in England in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
Based on studies of TA Marshall about the conquest of rights in England, the historian who first introduced the British civil rights in the eighteenth century, and only a century later - after exercise exhaustion of rights - political rights. Social rights, however, had to wait another hundred years until we did to be heard. A simplistic attempt to examine this issue by merely chronological bias would lead us, meanwhile, the erroneous simplifications. According to Murilo de Carvalho, if we did, we would be inclined to think the completeness of citizenship in Brazil as 'a matter of time' when in fact, the gap between our citizens and the British are in fact of the tripod that make citizenship, political rights, civil and social rights has been won by those people and we do it was donated, according to the particular interests of the rulers of duty. In England, the introduction of a law seemed to be linked to the full exercise of another, or was just the exercise of civil rights that made the British claimed political rights and hence social, but not really following a simple chronological order. In Brazil, the exercise of these rights does not seem to be a very frequent practice making them seem distant in its fullness.
The central problem is placed here by Murilo de Carvalho - and that seems to conflict with his attempt to permanently disfigure the chronological order as the core for the organization of a given society - that one does not follow the order English, hardly has the people in charge of their political demands. That responsibility ultimately be left to other institutions. In the Brazilian case, this task has been developed by the state. From this premise, Murilo de Carvalho explains what will be the central idea of his work arguing that the logic sequence described by Marshall was reversed in Brazil, the pyramid of rights was placed upside down. Here, social rights came first in 30 years, implanted in a period of suppression of political rights and civil rights by reducing the Getulio Vargas, a dictator who became popular - which explains in part the origin of state patronage in the country. The author notes that the lack of political freedom has always been offset by the authoritarianism of the post-30 Brazil, with the social paternalism. Performing
a historical exquisite, Murilo de Carvalho observes that the passage of the Brazilian colonial period to independence, the set of civil, social and political factors that could embryonic a state of citizens practically did not exist. The very independence has not been able to introduce radical changes in all of these rights. Although it represents an advance in respect to political rights, independence, made with the maintenance of slavery, brought themselves great limitations civil rights. There were even reverse with respect to political rights, fifty-nine years after independence, for the illiterate was no longer granted the right to vote. Thereafter, only the more affluent and educated would be able to participate in the political process.
The proclamation of the Republic in 1889, in turn, would alter the picture, it would bring little change. The Republican Constitution of 1891, in turn, would have an exclusionary character, she would continue to exclude from voting the illiterate, women, beggars, soldiers, members of religious orders. From the standpoint of the advancement of citizenship, in what regards social rights, the most significant was the movement that ended the First Republic in 1930. From independence until 1930, the only significant change was in the advance of citizenship was exactly the abolition of slavery in 1888 - ignored by the Constitution , Liberal, 1824.
Betting on the theory that only the full exercise a law can result in the acquisition of other rights, Murilo de Carvalho argues that what hindered the achievement of social rights in post-liberation of slaves was exactly the extreme limitations ; the civil rights that would last until 1930. Although the law (civil) freedom, non-slavery, was guaranteed since 1888, the spare other civil rights - and politicians - supposedly secured, were extremely precarious , which would have delayed effectively, the achievement of social rights.
The argument to support the author's thesis is that participation in national politics, including in major events, was limited to small groups, without the presence of the masses . From the earliest colonial times to 1930, there were people politically organized or consolidated national feeling. The vast majority of people had a relationship with the government or distance or antagonism. If there were political actions of the people, these were conducted as reaction to what the authorities will consider. It was a "Negative Citizenship". Until 1930, people had no place in the political system, either in the Empire, whether in the Republic, so there is no place for the introduction of such rights as the social. Therefore, the author argues, the collapse of First Republic would represent an improvement over its proclamation in 1989. Such an advance would be, if not necessary and immediately towards civil and political rights, certainly in the direction of social rights.
Murilo de Carvalho, however, true to its initial position - ignoring therefore the possibility of a certain chronological order in the advancement of rights - defined as being of very low impact the exercise of citizenship in Brazil, in the post-1930. This occurred, according to the historian, because social rights have been released before the expansion of civil rights. Advances labor, far from being conquered, were donated by a government cooptador - and later, dictatorship - whose leaders belonged to the traditional elites, without linking authenticates with popular causes. If on one hand the expansion of labor rights - social - effectively meant an advancement of citizenship in that it brought the masses into politics, however, created a mass hostage Union regional oe of its tentacles. A "grant of rights social "rather than the conquest of them, did the rights being perceived by the population as a favor, putting citizens in a position of dependence before the leaders.
What kind of citizenship would result therefrom? the author wonders, given the pyramid of Marshall did not support base in Brazil. The author's answer is that the least we can hope for is an enhancement of the Executive, to the detriment of the other two Powers. Hence the allure of the population with the use of "strong fist" of the Executive and his disregard for other branches. In addition, the state will earn a certain supremacy over civil society, which is terrible, because this relationship is drawn to the possibility of organizing a free and independent masses, in a vicious spiral, for the conquest of rights. The great dilemma that arises Murilo de Carvalho from this perspective is precisely the kind of cidadãoe company formed when the base of the pyramid described by Marshall is reversed. The conviction democratic, of course, concludes the author, is compromised because between the judiciary and the executive virtually no separation, and therefore no guarantee of the exercise of freedoms. Hence, without the exercise of freedoms, it is difficult to reach the achievement of full political rights. In Brazil, however, was reached - even odd. They were implanted in the second half of the 40s, for a military man, General Eurico Gaspar Dutra, who soon put the Brazilian Communist Party declared illegal. Still, the democratic period between 1945 and 1964 were characterized by opposing the government of Vargas. Here was an expansion of political rights and halt or slow progress of social rights. While civil rights are relegated to the background, an observer would be less careful with the impression that the logic of the pyramid of Marshall began to want to take shape. Murilo de Carvalho, however, clarifies that perception. In the period, a test of citizenship construction takes place, however, "top down" without the participation of a people truly organized. The citizen under construction here has not had time to learn to be citizens, but to treasure for strong leaders, usually the chief executive - whether the assertion is true Murilo de Oak that Vargas was elected senator from two States in that period, and 'back in the arms of the people' in 1951 for the presidency.
Nineteen years after the fall of the Vargas dictatorship in 1964, admitted by the apathy of most popular Brazilian citizens, civil and political rights would be severely stifled by new measures of repression. This time, the example of the Proclamation of the Republic, taken by military leadership. The military governments in interpreting Murilo de Carvalho, would repeat the tactics of the New State: ie, while some civil and political rights, have invested in the expansion of social rights. This time, however, the organs of political representation have been transformed into mere decorative scheme, they, in practice, were not representative of anything or anyone.
In the passage of analysis of the 1964 movement, Murilo de Carvalho arises the question: Why democracy foundered in 1964, if conditions were so favorable to its consolidation , the? The author suggests that the answer may lie in the lack of democratic conviction of the elites of both left and right. According to the author the two sides have engaged in a race for control of the government which left the practice of democracy. Murilo de Carvalho, however, careful with this statement. Not to escape to his thesis, the historian says that the lack of democratic persuasion does not suffice to explain the behavior of leaders. The answer is probably more consistent in the fact that Brazil does not count at the time of the coup, with strong civil organizations and representative that could curb the course of radicalization - throughout the organization, trade union, student, institutional, is just a "sand castle" on the verge of collapse in the lower woodwinds. Here, the author once again confirms its belief that when the rights are not exercised they can fully prevent the advance in direçãoa other rights.
After 1985, when the demise of the military, civil rights established before the military regime, such as freedom of speech, press and organization, were recovered. Still, many civil rights the base sequence of Marshall, remain inaccessible to most people. Still, the crux of the problem remains far from being chronological. The odd shape and the rights - that support the idea of citizenship - have been introduced or abolished in Brazil is what makes the difference. And while political rights have acquired breadth never before achieved, since 1988, political democracy has not solved the problems more urgent, such as inequality and unemployment. Remain the problems of the social area and there was an aggravation of the situation of civil rights in regard to personal safety.
Murilo de Carvalho noted that, probably due to the inversion of the pyramid of Marshall - because of the lack of enjoyment of rights by the people - the cycle of responsible duties ; bodies responsible for acquisition of citizenship in Brazil, if completed, but fail to achieve broad share of the population. If nothing else, at the time that the cycle of rights seem to take shape in Brazil, the rapid changes in the international economy threaten this condition, as they demand the reduction will the size of the state - a promoter of civil rights. The
ConclusionThe arriving Murilo de Carvalho is that the right to this or that right - suppose, freedom of thought and to vote - is not guaranteed right to other rights - let us suppose, safety, and employment - which has historically generated in the case of Brazil, an inconclusive citizenship. The author tries to show that the guarantee of civil or political rights in Brazil were far, and are to represent a resolution of many social problems here - and the converse is true -; they march, the second author in disparate speeds. The intensification of the latter, incidentally, has proved beyond a peg need these three policy dimensions; liable, including, in many cases, reverse or advance one or another, some for the convenience of the condition.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Sunday, April 18, 2010
How Many Calories In A Pop Secret Bag
Crisis future repeats past heroes says Venezuelan historian
(Folha de S. Paulo, April 18, 2010)
Venezuelan historian and anthropologist Fernando Coronil, a professor at City University of New York, is author of "The Magic State: Nature, Money and Modernity in Venezuela "(The University of Chicago Press, 1997), considered a modern classic about the Venezuelan government, the relationship with oil and tradition of strong presidents.
In the interview below, he comments on the bicentennial celebrations of independence of Latin America and its significance for leftist governments in the region, the difficult time of Chavez and direction - or lack thereof - in the project of "21st century socialism."
Coronil preparing a book about the failed coup against Chavez in 2002.
SHEET - Of all the governments "refundacionistas" in the region, mention that the goal of "second and final independence," Chávez's who devotes more time to the operation to link to a picture of Bolivar, leader of a popular rebellion and noo patrician unifier. Bolivar has that strength in the minds of Venezuela to justify much investment?
Fernando Coronil-Bolivar has undoubtedly great force in the imaginary Venezuelan. Just review our history and observe that Bolivar is the model of national leader of all our presidents since Guzmán Blanco in the 19th century to Chavez. But the interesting thing is how it is used and why. Where in the Americas elites used the independence as a foundational moment of naçãoe typically saw their own projects as "second independence."
Now there are two new things. Firstly, governments present themselves as "leftists" too announce a second independence, but the foundational moments are no longer only the wars of independence: for Evo Morales are 500 years of struggle anticolonianista; for Kirchner are the struggles of Peronism progressive, Michelle Bachelet to the contract Allende. For Chavez is fundamentally a war of independence because it allows him to present himself as a "second Bolivar." But Chavez has expanded to the genealogy of the Revolution, yesterday spoke of 200 years of struggle, but also 500 years, has joined with the struggles of Bolivar Guaicaipuro, the chief known for his resistance to the English colonizers.
For the people, Chavez is the mestizo, Bolivar, but Guaicaipuro. Yet, as the question suggests, the Bolivar Bolivar Chavez is not the patrician elites Caracas people, but the Bolivar popular so brilliantly analyzed by Yolanda Salas. It
Bolivar redeemer of the common people that we find in the popular imagination Venezuelan both secular and religious - for example, in the religion of Maria Lionza, where Bolívar is, along with Maria Lionza, the highest spirit [syncretic religion with Bolivian common feature with african-Brazilian religions].
Secondly, this reiteration of past heroes is because there is a crisis in future. Neither system offers a reliable future, viable, or the future of capitalism, because capitalism does not bring welfare to all mankind and planet destroyer, nor the future of socialism, for all real socialism were very far from the promised utopia. Then all the leftist presidents, not future models, it has to deal with capitalism in the present, promising a vague future, and seek solid models in the past. The constant celebration of the heroic past repetiçãoe reveals the need to have a solid foundation for the future when the horizon looks fake.
SHEET - Mr. Chavez has said that "produces" history all the time, that the "verbiage" is important part of the government. With the energy crisis and inflation, there is a risk that this "magic words" and especially the oft-repeated "revolution" is over? How do you rate this moment of Chavez?
Coronil - Of course, Chavez is a great magician. This is a difficult time for Chavez. All the charm has to be based on achievements, not only in words. The growing disenchantment in the gulf between the achievements and promises.
The energy crisis, inflation, insecurity, production crisis, corruption are undermining your project. Against the disenchantment, Chavez proposed intensify the polarization of the country between revolutionaries and "bourgeois pitiyanquis. In my opinion, the only strategy that can succeed now is the delight of efficiency. The words, including the vibrant them, are not sufficient to avoid disappointment. Are now necessary work.
SHEET - Chavez insists is necessary to "forward" and "deepen" socialism. He also said this week that if the drop, there will be anarchy. At the same time, there is - or he does not let exista_ no leadership that stands today in addition to Chavez Chavez. What is your assessment?
Coronil - It is clear that Chavez is concerned - for the life of your project and for their own life. To ensure the life of revolution, socialism proposes to deepen. To prevent the assassination, ameaçaa with the radicalization of the revolution. I think that prevents the death of the revolution by creating conditions that lead to a collective welfare. And it avoids the assassination creating the conditions for its leadership is not indispensable - not threatening the opposition like a punishment. If socialism is participatory entãoo deepening of socialism should mean the participation of all in politics and therefore, the emergence of multiple leaders and the reduction of a climate of polarization Others
SHEET - What to expect from the legislative elections of September?
Coronil - I believe that the September elections will cause a healthy change in the Assembly: it will better represent the situation in the country the existence of a strong sector Chavez, but also a varied opposition. Though Chavez did not think so, good for the country is good for deepening democracy, especially the Socialists.
SHEET - You speak of the "state magic" of Venezuela, the presidents of the personalist tradition of Venezuelan petro-states, which shows that the model of leadership is not Chavez exactly new. What is the place of Chavez in Venezuelan history?
CORONA - Chavez represents the apotheosis of an entire tradition of magical States. All petro earlier promised harmony and wellbeing. The new promise is that Chavez Justice: State is a vigilante. Promises welfare for the excluded majority, the oligarchs punishment for exploiters. I believe that Venezuela is one of the few countries in the world where you could have produced a less polarized state vigilante. But even if we took this as a valid option, I believe his place in history will depend its ability to be effectively avenger: reducing inequalities and social exclusion. Chavez is an achievement to have given a majority belong to the country towards the political system. But his greatest challenge is to transform that feeling into a real participation. You still have until 2012 to meet this challenge. The story is slipping from his hands, but maybe there is still time to improve their way and find his place in history.
To improve your way, but I do not think should shrink it with is doing, but expand it. It should not polarize or militarized, but to integrate. It must include competent people, capable of being critical peace - and listen to them. Venezuela has thousands of very qualified electrical engineers. It's amazing that we are experiencing an energy crisis. It is a time for change. If you do not change the pitch, not find a better way.
SHEET - This week, Chavez made a big demonstration to celebrate the reversal coup in 2002. Led to the Bolivar Avenue in downtown Caracas, 35 000 members of the National Bolivarian Militia. This militarization should be cause for concern?
Coronil - This year seemed more important. In the first years after the coup were more discreet celebrations. This year, Chavez spoke at Bolivar Avenue, and I do not remember him having done it before. Not sure what caused the outbreak. But imagine having to do with the elections, with the decline of popularity of Chavez. As I said before, when talking about 200 years of fighting, 500 years of struggle, it's because you're not sure about the future. There were 30 000 people who were somehow obliged to be there. There was a massive popular demonstration, as there have been others in Chavez. Was restricted - the tone was the olive military, not a civic event.
always had concerns about the militarization of a project that is presented as further democracy, which should cover all sectors and guidelines. When we speak of militarization, there is talk of a single voice.
SHEET - When Chavez speaks of socialism, that is inviting the Venezuelans? Mr.. believes there is a plan? As the economy should be in the hands of the state, and must be cooperative?
Coronil - I have tried to track than would be the "21st century socialism," but there's nothing very clear. The experience of social properties, cooperatives have not had much success in the country and are still marginal. What has happened has much more to do with socialism in the 20th century. The nationalization of companies and private property has been happening arbitrarily, without a larger plan. For all we know the farms that were nationalized, the nationalized industries in the State of Guayana are not yielding as well. Paradoxically, the curious thing is that the heart of the economy - the oil industry - it all happens without much discussion, there, where precisely there should be. Paradoxically, while smaller companies are nationalized, the France building in downtown Caracas, the state oil closes negotiations without debate. It may be that the model of joint ventures to operate is the fairest and best, but not discussed. It is a delicate issue, where there is no consensus. And there should be a national consensus. Discuss what UNCLOS should not the State, the technological issue, the issue of foreign reserves as co-owner of ...
(Folha de S. Paulo, April 18, 2010)
Venezuelan historian and anthropologist Fernando Coronil, a professor at City University of New York, is author of "The Magic State: Nature, Money and Modernity in Venezuela "(The University of Chicago Press, 1997), considered a modern classic about the Venezuelan government, the relationship with oil and tradition of strong presidents.
In the interview below, he comments on the bicentennial celebrations of independence of Latin America and its significance for leftist governments in the region, the difficult time of Chavez and direction - or lack thereof - in the project of "21st century socialism."
Coronil preparing a book about the failed coup against Chavez in 2002.
SHEET - Of all the governments "refundacionistas" in the region, mention that the goal of "second and final independence," Chávez's who devotes more time to the operation to link to a picture of Bolivar, leader of a popular rebellion and noo patrician unifier. Bolivar has that strength in the minds of Venezuela to justify much investment?
Fernando Coronil-Bolivar has undoubtedly great force in the imaginary Venezuelan. Just review our history and observe that Bolivar is the model of national leader of all our presidents since Guzmán Blanco in the 19th century to Chavez. But the interesting thing is how it is used and why. Where in the Americas elites used the independence as a foundational moment of naçãoe typically saw their own projects as "second independence."
Now there are two new things. Firstly, governments present themselves as "leftists" too announce a second independence, but the foundational moments are no longer only the wars of independence: for Evo Morales are 500 years of struggle anticolonianista; for Kirchner are the struggles of Peronism progressive, Michelle Bachelet to the contract Allende. For Chavez is fundamentally a war of independence because it allows him to present himself as a "second Bolivar." But Chavez has expanded to the genealogy of the Revolution, yesterday spoke of 200 years of struggle, but also 500 years, has joined with the struggles of Bolivar Guaicaipuro, the chief known for his resistance to the English colonizers.
For the people, Chavez is the mestizo, Bolivar, but Guaicaipuro. Yet, as the question suggests, the Bolivar Bolivar Chavez is not the patrician elites Caracas people, but the Bolivar popular so brilliantly analyzed by Yolanda Salas. It
Bolivar redeemer of the common people that we find in the popular imagination Venezuelan both secular and religious - for example, in the religion of Maria Lionza, where Bolívar is, along with Maria Lionza, the highest spirit [syncretic religion with Bolivian common feature with african-Brazilian religions].
Secondly, this reiteration of past heroes is because there is a crisis in future. Neither system offers a reliable future, viable, or the future of capitalism, because capitalism does not bring welfare to all mankind and planet destroyer, nor the future of socialism, for all real socialism were very far from the promised utopia. Then all the leftist presidents, not future models, it has to deal with capitalism in the present, promising a vague future, and seek solid models in the past. The constant celebration of the heroic past repetiçãoe reveals the need to have a solid foundation for the future when the horizon looks fake.
SHEET - Mr. Chavez has said that "produces" history all the time, that the "verbiage" is important part of the government. With the energy crisis and inflation, there is a risk that this "magic words" and especially the oft-repeated "revolution" is over? How do you rate this moment of Chavez?
Coronil - Of course, Chavez is a great magician. This is a difficult time for Chavez. All the charm has to be based on achievements, not only in words. The growing disenchantment in the gulf between the achievements and promises.
The energy crisis, inflation, insecurity, production crisis, corruption are undermining your project. Against the disenchantment, Chavez proposed intensify the polarization of the country between revolutionaries and "bourgeois pitiyanquis. In my opinion, the only strategy that can succeed now is the delight of efficiency. The words, including the vibrant them, are not sufficient to avoid disappointment. Are now necessary work.
SHEET - Chavez insists is necessary to "forward" and "deepen" socialism. He also said this week that if the drop, there will be anarchy. At the same time, there is - or he does not let exista_ no leadership that stands today in addition to Chavez Chavez. What is your assessment?
Coronil - It is clear that Chavez is concerned - for the life of your project and for their own life. To ensure the life of revolution, socialism proposes to deepen. To prevent the assassination, ameaçaa with the radicalization of the revolution. I think that prevents the death of the revolution by creating conditions that lead to a collective welfare. And it avoids the assassination creating the conditions for its leadership is not indispensable - not threatening the opposition like a punishment. If socialism is participatory entãoo deepening of socialism should mean the participation of all in politics and therefore, the emergence of multiple leaders and the reduction of a climate of polarization Others
SHEET - What to expect from the legislative elections of September?
Coronil - I believe that the September elections will cause a healthy change in the Assembly: it will better represent the situation in the country the existence of a strong sector Chavez, but also a varied opposition. Though Chavez did not think so, good for the country is good for deepening democracy, especially the Socialists.
SHEET - You speak of the "state magic" of Venezuela, the presidents of the personalist tradition of Venezuelan petro-states, which shows that the model of leadership is not Chavez exactly new. What is the place of Chavez in Venezuelan history?
CORONA - Chavez represents the apotheosis of an entire tradition of magical States. All petro earlier promised harmony and wellbeing. The new promise is that Chavez Justice: State is a vigilante. Promises welfare for the excluded majority, the oligarchs punishment for exploiters. I believe that Venezuela is one of the few countries in the world where you could have produced a less polarized state vigilante. But even if we took this as a valid option, I believe his place in history will depend its ability to be effectively avenger: reducing inequalities and social exclusion. Chavez is an achievement to have given a majority belong to the country towards the political system. But his greatest challenge is to transform that feeling into a real participation. You still have until 2012 to meet this challenge. The story is slipping from his hands, but maybe there is still time to improve their way and find his place in history.
To improve your way, but I do not think should shrink it with is doing, but expand it. It should not polarize or militarized, but to integrate. It must include competent people, capable of being critical peace - and listen to them. Venezuela has thousands of very qualified electrical engineers. It's amazing that we are experiencing an energy crisis. It is a time for change. If you do not change the pitch, not find a better way.
SHEET - This week, Chavez made a big demonstration to celebrate the reversal coup in 2002. Led to the Bolivar Avenue in downtown Caracas, 35 000 members of the National Bolivarian Militia. This militarization should be cause for concern?
Coronil - This year seemed more important. In the first years after the coup were more discreet celebrations. This year, Chavez spoke at Bolivar Avenue, and I do not remember him having done it before. Not sure what caused the outbreak. But imagine having to do with the elections, with the decline of popularity of Chavez. As I said before, when talking about 200 years of fighting, 500 years of struggle, it's because you're not sure about the future. There were 30 000 people who were somehow obliged to be there. There was a massive popular demonstration, as there have been others in Chavez. Was restricted - the tone was the olive military, not a civic event.
always had concerns about the militarization of a project that is presented as further democracy, which should cover all sectors and guidelines. When we speak of militarization, there is talk of a single voice.
SHEET - When Chavez speaks of socialism, that is inviting the Venezuelans? Mr.. believes there is a plan? As the economy should be in the hands of the state, and must be cooperative?
Coronil - I have tried to track than would be the "21st century socialism," but there's nothing very clear. The experience of social properties, cooperatives have not had much success in the country and are still marginal. What has happened has much more to do with socialism in the 20th century. The nationalization of companies and private property has been happening arbitrarily, without a larger plan. For all we know the farms that were nationalized, the nationalized industries in the State of Guayana are not yielding as well. Paradoxically, the curious thing is that the heart of the economy - the oil industry - it all happens without much discussion, there, where precisely there should be. Paradoxically, while smaller companies are nationalized, the France building in downtown Caracas, the state oil closes negotiations without debate. It may be that the model of joint ventures to operate is the fairest and best, but not discussed. It is a delicate issue, where there is no consensus. And there should be a national consensus. Discuss what UNCLOS should not the State, the technological issue, the issue of foreign reserves as co-owner of ...
Double D Ring Belt How To Use
Bicentennial feeds clash in Venezuela
(Folha de S. Paulo, April 18, 2010)
Amid the energy crisis and inflation, Chavez prepares grand birthday celebration of independence and intensifies liaison Bolivar will Celebrations with the government and the National Academy of History exposes cracks in interpreting the ephemeris by the poles of Venezuelans
FLÁVIA Marreira
DE CARACAS
are already 9am in the middle of the night Caracas. Two men without uniforms and work with small cans of paint paint the curb of the avenue Mexico. They are part of the brigade more or less informal thousands of people that the government has put Chavez in the streets to clean statues, gardens and squares to retouch the party of tomorrow: the 200th anniversary the creation of the board of Caracas, 1810, the beginnings of independence.
State media called Chavez and mainly take pains to secure the official reading of the anniversary: it is the beginning of the fight for the sovereignty of Venezuela which is only now being completed by the "Bolivarian Revolution."
Government intensifies the strategy of linking the president to the hero of the independence of several countries in the region, Simon Bolivar (1783-1830), whose centrality in Venezuelan culture will of the academies of history the popular imagination, he is one of the revered spirits of the religion of Maria Lionza, syncretic site similar to african-Brazilian religions. The state newspaper "Vea" brought a poster of the president and other national hero last Sunday.
The commemoration began in clash historians connected with the government and the traditional National Academy of History (ACH). Historian Ines Quintero, speaker of the ACH ceremony on Thursday, asked to reject a vision "providential, heroic, epic, militaristic" process.
"It was a political revolution unprecedented that it will launch after the foundations for the construction of the living Republican, part of the ongoing debate here and in several countries of Latin America, "followed, claiming" the individual freedom "and" division among the Branches "as a legacy.
Days earlier, in the historic chapel, where independence was declared in 1811, met historians convened by the National Center for History, attached to the Ministry of Culture. Approved a document claiming the character indigenous and popular of the independence-not the result of the crisis of European absolutism, and defends the 21st century socialism. "The oligarchy has seized the image of Bolivar. The revolution is making it possible to resume, "said Peter Cazaldilla Leaf, deputy culture minister who heads the CNH.
Historians also maintain a concrete dispute: custody of the archives of Bolivar and the national hero Francisco de Miranda (1750-1816). Government decree stipulates that they be transferred until June for the National Library, and the academy will meet on Tuesday to discuss the matter.
At a time when the country faced severe energy crisis and the popularity of Chavez is also suffering from inflation, the government is preparing a grand feast. Tomorrow will be no military parade, a monument of 48 meters will be installed in the plaza Venezuela, in the center.
is also scheduled to inaugurate a controversial bust of Fidel Castro. For the event, the soldiers rehearsed a gait different from traditional the Chinese, in honor of 60 years of communist revolution, which caused discomfort in some generals according to local newspapers.
(Folha de S. Paulo, April 18, 2010)
Amid the energy crisis and inflation, Chavez prepares grand birthday celebration of independence and intensifies liaison Bolivar will Celebrations with the government and the National Academy of History exposes cracks in interpreting the ephemeris by the poles of Venezuelans
FLÁVIA Marreira
DE CARACAS
are already 9am in the middle of the night Caracas. Two men without uniforms and work with small cans of paint paint the curb of the avenue Mexico. They are part of the brigade more or less informal thousands of people that the government has put Chavez in the streets to clean statues, gardens and squares to retouch the party of tomorrow: the 200th anniversary the creation of the board of Caracas, 1810, the beginnings of independence.
State media called Chavez and mainly take pains to secure the official reading of the anniversary: it is the beginning of the fight for the sovereignty of Venezuela which is only now being completed by the "Bolivarian Revolution."
Government intensifies the strategy of linking the president to the hero of the independence of several countries in the region, Simon Bolivar (1783-1830), whose centrality in Venezuelan culture will of the academies of history the popular imagination, he is one of the revered spirits of the religion of Maria Lionza, syncretic site similar to african-Brazilian religions. The state newspaper "Vea" brought a poster of the president and other national hero last Sunday.
The commemoration began in clash historians connected with the government and the traditional National Academy of History (ACH). Historian Ines Quintero, speaker of the ACH ceremony on Thursday, asked to reject a vision "providential, heroic, epic, militaristic" process.
"It was a political revolution unprecedented that it will launch after the foundations for the construction of the living Republican, part of the ongoing debate here and in several countries of Latin America, "followed, claiming" the individual freedom "and" division among the Branches "as a legacy.
Days earlier, in the historic chapel, where independence was declared in 1811, met historians convened by the National Center for History, attached to the Ministry of Culture. Approved a document claiming the character indigenous and popular of the independence-not the result of the crisis of European absolutism, and defends the 21st century socialism. "The oligarchy has seized the image of Bolivar. The revolution is making it possible to resume, "said Peter Cazaldilla Leaf, deputy culture minister who heads the CNH.
Historians also maintain a concrete dispute: custody of the archives of Bolivar and the national hero Francisco de Miranda (1750-1816). Government decree stipulates that they be transferred until June for the National Library, and the academy will meet on Tuesday to discuss the matter.
At a time when the country faced severe energy crisis and the popularity of Chavez is also suffering from inflation, the government is preparing a grand feast. Tomorrow will be no military parade, a monument of 48 meters will be installed in the plaza Venezuela, in the center.
is also scheduled to inaugurate a controversial bust of Fidel Castro. For the event, the soldiers rehearsed a gait different from traditional the Chinese, in honor of 60 years of communist revolution, which caused discomfort in some generals according to local newspapers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)