SO WILL THE WAR IN COLOMBIA AFTER BEING REJECTED THE PEACE AGREEMENT

  As it was unthinkable to foresee that the option did not win the plebiscite as evidently happened, basically there is no plan b as would a government official. In other words, plain and simply there is no possibility of backtracking on the agreement, in political terms, four years of negotiations were repealed with the vote on October 2, and as everyone the million dollar question is ... and what will happen now?

       It is clear, and that constantly remind members of the FARC, they will never accept a prison and any kind of subjugation. It is also clear, and that constantly remind leaders of Uribe, who in their demands to approach the peace process is the fact that you must modify some points of the agreements, including a submission to the ordinary courts, that is, prison is required for members of the FARC secretariat. And finally, it is clear that the national government cannot do anything about it to amend agreements because, as they say engaged couples to discuss and agree something needs two partners, that the FARC would be those They decide, ultimately, to amend the agreements, and that, for now, will never happen.

       Under this scenario dialectical logic (and political logic) is as follows: The national government, led by President Santos, what he is doing, it is to give long a dead process, ie, will be dedicated to serving the opposition then go out and tell the public that the alternatives, etc., etc., knowing full well that nothing can be done, it will be a kind of slow death will be evaluated. The FARC know they have little time for the deadline, although the defense minister calm tempers saying it could be extended within the bilateral cease.

       Noting the delegates of the FARC that there is nothing to do, that any attempt to talks mean losing time because, unlike the situation that was before the final signing, in this case, since everything is agreed. Then be removed from the table in Havana a few days of October finalized. Santos may grant an extension of the ceasefire, but wear four years of talks and disappointment of the plebiscite will only motivate the FARC intern in their camps and then decide to resume the dynamics of war.

       In the same way that the political movement Democratic Centre has always sought to accuse guilty of anything to any organization or person, this, head of former President Uribe, who has had a history of accused terrorists to anyone who contradicts them. In the same way, the FARC will seek blame for the political catastrophe they suffered, that is, hate, and this time with more strength, that entire democratic center is called, this movement will be designated as war aim, and the first in the list it is of course the president Uribe.

       At some point Santos warned of the possibility that the war would move to the cities, and this is possible because the FARC have committed two separate terrorist acts in cities like Cali, Medellin and Bogota. Now, the difficulty of an armed confrontation on the streets of major cities is an unlikely option, unless they decide to take control of some peripheral territories.

       But historically the fact of war in Colombia in the cities has resulted in terrorist attacks using car bombs and attacks hired assassins. Then, it would not be far from reality consider repeating these facts as retaliation FARC, something that was not supposed to happen when the agreement came into force. A bomb attack on an office of the Democratic Center or against one of its leaders could destabilize public order to the extent that the resurgence of paramilitary groups would be just around the corner, repeating the awful history of civil war that took place in Colombia during the 1980s and 1990s.

THE DISAPPEARANCE OF COMMUNISM AND CAPITALISM PARADIGMAS

 Communism and capitalism as concepts and ideologies served as geopolitical paradigm in the twentieth century. Such concepts notoriously influenced the evolution of political, economic, social and cultural thought, to the point of transforming certain both Western and Eastern customs, but, what will be the paradigm of reference for the XXI century?

       Is totally anachronistic consider communism and capitalism as ideological, as doctrines, it is out of the new realities, and insist on this, would become a fundamentalist over both religious followers ultra-Orthodox who fill the world of hatred and rancor, destroying a large extent, creativity, development of thought and so many things that basically what it does is generate economic and institutional crisis.

       Communism as anachronistic ideology, because politicians and academics as reference what was the USSR and the writings of Marx at the time have been destroyed and past history as a kind of myth, simply the USSR does not exist as a political entity and Marxist thoughts have no basis to support their economic theories, it has simply been replaced by new paradigms.

       About capitalism, it is anachronistic in terms of its industrial design. It was the great road map during the twentieth century and faced other ideologies, translated into the political and economic liberalism. Also insist it is foolish and also tends to ideological fundamentalism. The major developed countries that both boasted of capitalism as England, USA, Japan, among many others, have transformed their systems and economic doctrines according to changing realities, as information technologies, the emergence of new consumer trends in addition, new social relations that have nothing to do with the conceptions of the past, have made one more myth of capitalism in societies.

       You need to change the paradigm; aspects like market have given rise to new political elements which in turn have been transformed thinking, what are these new concepts? Perhaps talks of postmodernity contribute something, but the same development of societies changing conceptions of reality, but it is necessary to reflect on it, and not fall into the ambiguity and anachronism of communism and capitalism.