I titled this entry in this way by trying to share that, I think, with those who visit my blog. As I will not write more until after Easter, I have allowed to abuse a little with this comprehensive text. Obviously do not pick up all the corollary of my ideas and reasons for lack of space, but this "microarray", which continues to be challenging for reading, is the exposure of a summary of my view of the situation. I do not know whether you will be able to reach the final. If you arrive I congratulate you, and if not, nothing happens. At the end of the day I wrote it for clarification. I think writing, writing me clarify. I let the ideas flow freely, driven by reason of my logic, based on my background of life, and got no objections to anything, let alone devise thought to share with my friends. You know: "A friend is someone with whom you can think out loud ..." and continues to be your friend, of course.
In view of my previous post, I think it would be more useful to clarify my ideas and position on the holistic human being, especially considering my near vision perception systemic life. That is, all part of a macro that consists of different levels of system and subsystems that make up the whole.
try to explain more specifically. Each of us can, themselves, as a system, itself made up of subsystems, from the standpoint of functional and physiological. But also, we are part of other systems of higher order. We are integrated into a comprehensive nuclear family in a neighboring community, a municipality, a group of friends at a company in the nation in a state, in a number of other systems that would not exist if not for the interaction of elements in it.
From the standpoint of social and political, are also subject to this dynamic interaction. Let us focus on the social focus, organizational or political. The human being, as I argued and argued in the past, has a basic objective, which is the improvement and perpetuation of the species, without entering into disquisitions otherwise, because the subject is to long and I avoid as a matter of time and space, that is, its development and evolution over who would lead the way to go. Each, in its interior, is the bearer of a message by assuming, in a very unique and individual, the reproductive and developmental the species. Thus, selfishness could be an engine to defend or justify this idea of \u200b\u200bevolution, a guarantor of survival, since the first function would be to sustain and preserve the body, which serves as a support or continent of the mind, intelligence and capabilities cognitive make the subject a being capable of facing the development process holistically. Therefore, we are dual beings in this regard. On the one hand would our body and the other our ability, intelligence, mind, psyche, or as we call it fancy, but always speak of a higher order question that differs from the material and tangible, from the dimension of spirituality or rational knowledge
things ... But man alone can not carry out that function. Needs of others. There is a hermaphrodite, you need to nourish, defend against aggression and protect, requires others to achieve their key objectives ... From here the three basic instincts of nutrition, socialization and play. Nourish your body involves providing everything needed to survive, stay alive, and facilitate the chronological development of his person and mind, so it will be necessary to drink, eat, breathe, eliminate waste, etc. It is also necessary to associate with others to establish an organization to defend against attacks allowed of other species and groups of their own, to build and develop tools and appliances, housing and infrastructure, ie, you need to socialize, to integrate into a society with its laws and regulations that allow a relatively quiet life and to engage in partnership Personal and social development. Of course, if there is no transcendence, if we do not relay, the species disappears, so we have to reproduce, and here is the key to another instinct, such as reproduction and sexuality as a means to do so.
Now, we are presented with the dilemma of how to organize or try to meet these three needs: Nourishing, partner and reproduce. In most species have established some forms, rules and laws that allows them to endure. In the case of humans as well. Another thing would be to question whether these that we found, are appropriate for the purposes I described. But clearly we need a system of coexistence can facilitate this evolution and development.
The first social conflict or confrontation should arise from a discussion of whether the block, which is in the tree we're collecting, it was me or you. In the end it took more force had and learned things by force, you can get without working, especially when alone with the threat, intimidation the other to do what we want. Also had to learn that if another and you need something you can talk with him on business plan, but also means you have a power over him to subdue him. If you do what you say, do not you give him what he needs and if this is a basic necessity of survival, you are guaranteed your submission and will have no chance to raise their intellectual quality, since they must focus all their energy to achieving assets that cover the basic survival needs ... That sounds a little, because throughout history, have been controlled if the resources and knowledge, the subject is controlled by hunger, the need and manipulation of knowledge.
I think, and I am not an anthropologist, states must arise from a social group setting, an intragroup imposition of the strongest over the weakest, making them see that it was important to work for the group and were allowed to protect and manage for the controls, which were admirable, to the point of being sometimes identified with gods incarnate in them. I conclude that states do not arise primarily to protect humans, but as a form of organization to take advantage of for the benefit of the powerful who run them. And, frankly, it seems that man, along history, has not changed much in their basic motivations, except to the greater ability to manipulate and make use relationship.
The main problem that occurs in humans, in my humble and uneducated opinion would be to get the nutrients to your body, which Herzberg called sanitize the situation to go to play and apply the real motivation to bring him integral development, once basic needs are met. Every effort would be focused on this need, because if there is no living body, no human being to move forward, and there is no possibility of mental evolution. Therefore, the first thing is to ensure the existence and then comes else. The smart, powerful, always knew that controlling these nutrients had controlled the people, if they employed in those duties, not evolve to higher demands and challenge their power.
Finally, create intergroup conflicts, international wars loot and plunder, power to the other submissive producers, taxpayers benefit of the king and his immediate servers, which make up the functional structure of the system, read army ideologues, religious, hierarchical classes, etc. was a way of promoting fear, paranoia and alienation between the peoples of the public to further brutalized more.
And now I come and say that shit, I laugh of nations and states designed for these purposes, they should only make sense as part of a larger system, where synergies are to come together for a development of all human beings would not need an army, since the philosophy of life did not arise from the paranoia, mistrust and confrontation, but from the cooperation and the meeting.
Once again, I become delusional. But I like the idea, I like to think that one day human beings are able to see clearly where our true interests, and where they are those of others, those who want, from greed, avarice and selfishness, continue with the idea of \u200b\u200bconfrontation and exploitation of others to enrich themselves.
therefore advocate a global supra-state that puts human beings on the subject, will precede the BE TAKEN, directed by brave people who are not afraid to knowledge of others, get involved in the goals the human collective, which pacified and coordinate the flows of both money and knowledge and culture so that we all benefit and not a few.
But this how it fits? Not me who to give lessons to anyone, but to present my ideas and in this sense, I believe in the taxonomic levels in the hierarchical structure of competences, at different levels of involvement of humans based on where they are, who live together and your interests local or proximal, within the general.
Clarifying: I participate with my neighbors in my community management, and no one else, the citizens of my city participated in the election of the mayor, and nobody else, residents in Andalucía vote our self-government and anyone else , the central government chose him among all the English and anyone else, the European (but not too much content) we choose the set of European citizens of the EU, and thus, in this hierarchical structure we are going. Note that stopped me in Europe because there is no longer superior being democratically elected to represent us. The result is that each country defends its interests without being subject to greater weight criteria, although it seems otherwise. It would be logical that the representation of the UN was democratically elected by all citizens in the world, makes decisions that affect everyone, and take binding decisions of government. But it is an instrument in the hands of the most powerful nations that manipulate and direct at will and benefit.
So who better than the person to make decisions that affect their immediate environment or to its level of involvement in a larger system? The problem or conflict when they fill with content, competencies, authorities have to make decisions. What is responsible to the State, the Community, the City ...
If we defend democracy, popular sovereignty, above all else and give the subject the prominence it deserves, as determined, colleagues, we deduce that is sovereign, master of his vote, to determine what best suits you, within a convivial order. Thus a greater autonomy ability to exercise that sovereignty, but without forgetting its involvement in other organizational levels, even universal, which require responsibility and commitment. But if the aim is to have a strong, centralized, with subjects to serve the decisions they make a few from the epicenter, there is no need for autonomy and decentralization, one is nothing to decide, we are not sovereign, but submissive subjects abide from their incompetence, what they say the Founding Fathers.
This is the dilemma that we have at this time. Centralist vision "for the Empire to God" that underlies minds yearning for bygone anachronistic continuously in the recent history of national Catholicism, against a modern, sovereign state as servant of the people understood, as a unifying element and catalyst of that popular sovereignty, protected by decentralizing responsibility and solidarity. States are not held together by force and imposition, it has been so far, where the conquest and war, the agreements between feudal lords, etc. were marking the boundaries that framed his subjects, but by the sovereign will of the people, by the attitudes and behaviors that benefit everyone. I ask then: "A state is all the lands which fall within its borders, or rather is composed of people who live there? "In any case, what is more important? For me, undoubtedly, people, human beings who are above the spurious interests of the powerful or power groups.
And this how it is resolved? It is extremely difficult to modify an existing structure like. It is difficult as the class interests and were forged and these structures, policies and administrative, were created to defend and consolidate. A setting from the perversion, from injustice, war, theft, looting, and the imposition rascals, do not change easily, because no one leaves their power to lower levels of influence for his holy will. These systems are supported by the culture that was established, over time, in the villages. The principles and values, socially accepted norms and behaviors, heroes and myths, are the guarantor of the continuity, solidity approaches sheltered by religious, political and social, behavioral modeling that will form the subject through the process of socialization, established since a long time.
However, as is well known, the world is dynamic, changing and modifying to suit new situations, new scenarios, which determine a new situation from the standpoint of political, social and economic development. The question would be how he'll adapt and who benefits from it. This dynamic process is constant. It's like a platform that the system homeostatic set to absorb change, integrating them into the same, under the idea cyclical and not structural. But the news should not always be absorbed without trauma, without structural changes. Quite the contrary. Major changes require structural changes that redefine the modes of interaction of the system.
However, structural changes may be planned or forced by circumstances hauled in a process of adaptation to the environment. In any case always directed to the benefit of the actors or drivers them. Logically, who can make the changes are those in the "power" directly or indirectly, that is, those with the capacity to provoke.
The nineteenth and twentieth centuries have been crucial in these changes, both technological change as awareness of the classes in Europe and America, mostly. The industrial revolution and Marxism were two turning points in both directions described, technology and class struggle, without forgetting other milestones such as the French Revolution and the independence of EE. UU. There was thus a clear attempt to internationalize the demands of the working class, creating the international socialist and communist anthem himself alluded to this idea. Their failure or neutralization has been evident, because capitalism has imposed its line and has demonized, assisted by the managers of so-called socialist countries, the spirit of this internationalization. The market has been the universal idea of \u200b\u200bequality. Instead of working to improve it, replacing it have been destroyed by the alienation of mass consumption, differing just for workers, another emerging middle class pancha sofa and half with their material needs met, even with the creation of a welfare state that traps us. Emerges, then, the selfishness that fog holistic view and close borders, returning to create insurmountable barriers for people in the third world, which he continues to steal their resources by governments traitors to their people, who sold the system in the exercise of dictatorial power that subjects its people poor and miserable to facilitate the rich, good value, the raw material.
The funny thing is that once the international scene removed the lower social classes, has gone on the attack. The market has established its international group creating its power through economic control of the situation. Globalization has been instrumental in allowing them to travel on a track without supranational control, except your own, read IMF (International Monetary Fund), the risk rating agencies, international banks, multinationals, clubs and gatherings of the wealthy who hide behind racks, manipulation of the media that create and modulate subjects at will and especially the control of politics, and politicians who practice it, by purchasing and submission of the same, apart from some others who also ensure the path of success.
All this is covered by so-called democratic constitutions, but they only have it's called free choice, and as and how. The rest is not democratic, they are not subject to social welfare and material goods are produced, but that protect private property as opposed to general interests. Not preserved and the will power of popular sovereignty over other interests and are still subject to state ambitions, or minority group, the vast majority of citizens.
So What's the tirade in which we find ourselves? From my point of view, globalization is unstoppable, so it is necessary to attack it from the justice and public interest and not the few. We can not, given the situation, avoid economic flows taking place towards the developing countries, is neither appropriate nor desirable. China produces a very low price and traders sold at market prices in Europe. Who earns more, those who produce or trade? Obviously those who trade. Multinational corporations more than anyone, regardless of the strike that generated in Western countries. They are behind the benefits not the spirit of development of their own country.
To an example. Suppose we have a reservoir of 1000 cubic meter of water containing 500. Next door is another of the same dimensions but containing 50 cubic meters only. In both maintain an inflow that is filling, that is still occurring wealth, but at different rates. Now connect with communicating vessels. It is evident that the water will tend to go first to second to catch up with it. However, liberalization of markets has produced this phenomenon, which in my point of view is not bad as it will, in essence, to balance global economies. The trouble is that the communication pipe and valves have been controlled by a few detours to get the water they want at another tank, or refer to their pockets taking it to another store itself. This would be the gains that this trade makes the purchase price of developing country production and sell in developed countries prices in those markets. Are ready, fucking.
course now comes the fear. The Chinese will own the world in decades. What should be asked is that the Chinese live like the rest of the civilized world in a few decades, but what happens is that companies with interests in China will be the masters of the world soon, it will have grown and donated money to baskets with this system, while the Chinese, Indians, etc. have been the architects of this economic growth without receiving the benefits they are entitled, as it will be subtracted the unequal distribution of benefits by the company.
Well, this globalization enhances the interests of capital and goes directly against the interests of citizens, of all human beings. Seeks an unfettered free market and fastenings, from a neoliberal conception in which the self-regulating market itself, while governments can not get a word in these regulatory standards or, in any case would be the big states that these rules define according to their interests. Are the instruments of the new empire, the new world order that was planned some time at the tables of neoconservatives and free market advocates. Socialism is frowned upon, the traditional left has lost its way and has been under the system, the idea of \u200b\u200bsolidarity and justice has been trampled and manipulated, it has made a human being who is happy with consumerism and market integration, but does not think his personal self.
So Who defends the real interests of ordinary people? No one except the citizens themselves. Therefore it is necessary to unite, develop joint strategies to assert the prominence and prevalence of the person on the market, the sovereign people over the interests of powerful groups. We have seen how it has saved the bank and plunged into misery to millions of human beings. In recent years there have been 200 million poor and have considerably increased the number of billionaires.
Therefore, organizations should break boundaries, leaving the myopia of the political parties of local content and engage in an international project to consider the common interest and to defend them. Let us not be deceived by siren songs that long for the past, what was my country, what I did, to not let me be, but we must be from this point where we are. If we are not savvy meanders us bent. They, meanwhile, will boost the confrontation of peoples, intergroup conflict, to split forces. Divide and conquer is their motto, we to play their game ... or not ... it depends on how we see things, if we are capable of putting one's ideas and developing critical of the view coming to a real analysis that we can understand and manage to combat looming interest. So I defend the game, not clash with those who have my same ideas and my own interests in the development of life and human. So I think you have to integrate forces and not disperse.
THIS SYSTEM ... JUST Jose Luis Sampedro by hordashispanicas
0 comments:
Post a Comment