Region Help Sony Sr200p

Comba March 24

The recovery of historical memory is important, but it would be interesting to remember that it is in the measure by which to understand the present reality. So the Power is determined to erase it, distort it and twist it, the more the closer it is. The power of the media devoted itself to distort the present, which is also history.

After a while, say 30 years, we will regain power scraps of memory about events conveniently away from today, we will establish certain observances, dropped into the jail some of his torturers more disgusting (in the background, the ruling classes do not stop looking with some disgust at a Turkish Julian, more so often see in the mirror), and admit that yes, there was something that went wrong, apportion blame between "all Argentines "and try to reconcile with electric shocks, or with the hand that grasped, or head who ran, or the private security company, or that politician as dapper proposed" growth. "

Meanwhile, those who have still not having less and less, so that those who are still taking more and more.

Let a parenthetical criticism usual "reduction, simplification can not you see that reality is more complex?" Go out and see the kid who - with eminent practicality - you sleep on the street just stuck to the vent facing the kitchen of the pizzeria: heating. And of course, the reality is very complex, full of subtle details. What they forget the lovers of the details is the difference between - precisely - the details and the urgent, dramatic, and the main thing. The details and complexity is an excellent refuge for those who want to stop your damn conscience. Let's shift gears.

iron to the militant who - honestly - no one is in position to demand anything and not me, yield to the charms of the symbolic and declares that "there is an enemy in the Casa Rosada." As if it really matters who's in the famous Casa Rosada. As if that were a cause rather than what it is: a mere consequence.

Hand in hand with good times and a government that does more than I ever dreamed, Argentina has another primaverita. Oscillate between spring and hells surprising end. Nobody dares to make predictions because we know deep down that our country is not ours. Incredulous and naive at the same time, we pull.

March 24 saying "never again" in the moment in which the hairs are smaller in Las Heras and torture in police stations. At the same time that burst to beat a kid in a villa.

declare March 24 - the proud and long-suffering people of the middle class - our commitment to the democratic order, when we know that there is an order to us, another order for the Villa 31, and another order for owners of the handle. Notions such as "country" and "law" are fetishes for the middle classes who cling to them desperately seeking normality. The Homeless and the owners of all know very well that is a lie that can and should do without.

March 24 shall be observed. And that's fine. Who wants to go to the disco to go, total ... being an idiot is both an irrevocable choice and destiny. And after all where do you go? The disk mass, the committee, the assembly of the neighborhood, the club or the court. To see the Bersuit or U2 or Pastor Giménez. Go to belong somewhere and say: "I am this."

But on March 24 is there to teach us that we are nothing compared to power, we treat our children have a better heating of the boy sleeping next to the pizzeria, which we desperately loopholes to catch the handle to maneuver within the range that leave us less and less.

One day the boy who sleeps next to the pizzeria will raise his fist. That fist hard not to convene or to church, or assembly, or the committee or the club, or the court.

That fist is the only one who can crush the March 24, to burst once and forever.

Olympus E 500 Objectives

The World Social Forum and economic paralysis

I received (thanks Child Baroque, Lejaim) this interesting note Le Monde (le Diplo for cheats) on the World Social Forum .

I - Presentation

For those who do not want to read the entire note: speaking of the emerging conflict that begins to speak in FSM about whether or not to generate some form of organization, or at least thematic agenda therein. The exponential growth of FSM is turning into a mass of many debates, but this difficult decision. The note states that there are basically two positions:

a) To those who argue the need for some kind of organization or agenda whose contents are based on some form of internal democracy, arguing that the FSM risks becoming a simple meeting folk or best a venue to express good wishes, peace and love for everyone.

b) those who detest this, arguing that the experiences of "democratic centralism" in the Communist bloc make it clear that any form of attack on the horizontal organization, diversity and multiplicity that enrich the FSM . It warns against the danger of "takeover" of the FSM by any political organization "down line".

II - The real problem, according to gil view of writing this

Consider the general tone: I think this is a debate that is constantly repeated. I think they are part of ideological error of assuming that a match making clear for the proletariat or socialism will inevitably lead to bureaucracy, authoritarianism, down the line or "takeover."

If by "takeover" means that the FSM (or any organization) to adopt a clear policy line, then I would say: y. .. yes, once it takes a clear position on a problem, it also takes a political line that "cup" the organization. This kind of "takeover" is not terrible, should not so, it is simply to say: "go there" or "we're going somewhere" , which seems to cause more than a horror.

Indeed, what is ignored is that the FSM already somehow "cornered." What in the article is expressed as a fear is rather a sad reality: the FSM already a harmless folk find mired in inaction.

III - The trends and their origins or what the hell we are discussing?

is perfectly understandable that a political organization anyone has trends, but the political trends not come from an egg. Expressed interest trends, pressures and bids from ... Whence may come? A political organization is embedded in society, and can not but express conflicting interests in the same: the competing societal interests, this can not be saved or the most revolutionary party.

public opinion, media, the commitments of social actors can not fail to express a political organization of any kind, or the FSM any political organization or live in isolation from social conflict in which they are embedded, their internal bids represent specific interests, no political idea is neutral.

Now if all sides cancel each other, if we wish - under the pretext of a horizontal impossible in any organization (as the sense of the word "organization" implies diversity of tasks) - the FSM failure to take any course of action for fear of "takeover" then yes it is taking an objective one: do nothing, of being just a meeting folk.

is applying the most basic common sense: if there are any organization trends, and if these trends expressed irreconcilable positions, and foundational issues that touch (what system we want, what interests stand for and what we fight) what to do to contain them within the organization? It is best to simply vote and decide what to do. The bases have to send.

The alternative of not taking a decision (to avoid "takeover") is actually make a decision: stay there. But "getting there" is not free nor neutral if it is an organization that aims to change something.

IV - Management & Control Solutions Democratic or
The Bright
Dialectics address / democratic control exists in any organization that claims to such. Clear that democratic control can fail (all may fail), but what direction will have democratic control? If the organization does not decide where to go, then we saved the terrible problem of control ... Brilliant solution, horizontal fantastic!

And when I say "leadership" I do not mean so and so in power, I mean to decide the basics: what do we do? What is our position on social conflict? What we propose? The address does not have another job to meet those targets decided democratically.

V - Do not propose anything = not have problems

is very difficult today to understand what the FSM proposed on many issues, but inevitably there are trends: the neglected classes demanding a more radical position against capitalism and / or some form of socialism, and representatives co-opted by the bourgeois discourse famous I'd rather focus on gender policy , ecology, multiculturalism, quaint handicrafts ... In short: the folk who like the middle classes (which is not too urgent problems) and not disturb the great capital.

So behind the organizational debate what lies (increasingly less) is the ideological debate. As soon as someone in the FSM says "Well, hey, what if we decide what we do? I do not know ... we discuss, we vote, but comprometámosnos to go somewhere, "then skip posmerío to say " Horror! Stalinism is coming! Better follow each in any and let things be decided ... That's never democracy and horizontality! "

Result: leftist organizations are fading profile and ending with variants of the type " more of the same ". Then we will complain bitterly thought.

VI - Philosophy of inaction

philosophical variants concomitant with this (no) and political action are old acquaintances of postmodernism and lead to the absurd extreme, but it fit perfectly: "The reality is unknowable / undecidable / construction of discourse" .

The "diversity" is understood as a brutal homogenization in which nothing can be decided and the most elementary common sense is called into question, not to further any analysis but simply to avoid it. The lower activity aimed at ensuring scientific or knowledge to man are denounced as "authoritarianism" and "The Enlightenment project that led us to Auschwitz" . General yawns.

VII - The awful Centralism Democratic

The ideological error of democratic centralism automatically identify Stalinism. It is an error induced by the bourgeoisie ideological pressure exerted on the move constantly from left to drive them into paralysis (with great success so far). Stalinism is not the result of democratic centralism, but the triumph of socialism in a backward and isolated state. The dreaded democratic centralism was just the first victim of Stalinism.

Democratic centralism is nothing more than democracy applied to the working class party. Even the liberal democracy involves elementary democratic centralism: a government is voted then all abide, and added control mechanisms, but no one abhors the address as if it were a horror. Is not fully explain why the existence of an address is accepted as a blessing when the bourgeoisie is the ruling class and the devil when it comes to a leftist organization.

The difference is simply the class character of the party or organization is Who? What interest advocates?. When deciding the position it takes against capitalism, against which system you want, then you start talking about class interests, and the bid of that interest is what is now stirred at organizations like the FSM under the cuckoo horror to make decisions.

VIII - said class interests?

Yes, I know: wishful thinking. Tinelli continue to see better and hopefully get things fixed. Alone.