OLIGARCHS ALSO HAVE THE RIGHT TO GOVERN

       The stigma against the so-called oligarchs (those with high purchasing power) who have led and governed nations for centuries, and still continue to do so, has at times generated a collective mistrust that has been used by populists and demagogues in order to create a negative imaginary against these people.

       While it is true that the oligarchs have failed in many of their economic policies, it has not meant a destruction of society, but rather, in the name of the economy and the very abused term of progress, they have been able to carry out political projects concerning improve trade relations (for their own interests of course) and maintain, to some extent, social stability.

       The opposite has happened to the populist and demagogic leaders who have portrayed themselves as revolutionaries, disguised as the much abused term of socialism, or any other name of an alleged social ideology. These political leaders have led to disaster, in most cases, entire nations, resulting in hunger and humiliation.

       Perhaps because of lack of experience, education, or whatever bankruptcy they have, a poor person, without proper political orientation (ideological if you will), cannot but concentrate social hatred and seize the opportune moment to seize the power and to begin with the revenge, to say of the sociologists, adding to the terrible persecutions and bad propaganda of irrational hatred against the poor oligarchs, the slavery, that generally assume of different forms, and oppression towards the most vulnerable population, the humble, the working people, and the population in general.

       Result? Once the demagogues assume power, they show an almost innate ability not to govern, but to destroy social establishment and democratic institutions in order to maintain the status quo they never had in their lives, too late for the population who see an act of betrayal of those whom they saw as a kind of saviors, we do not know what.

       Then, the manifestations arrive, the deaths also, to ask for a change, hoping to restore that order that made him hate, but that is necessary. Like the monarchs in the middle ages, when they dared to expel certain social sectors, such as bankers and merchants and then call them again, because they realized the need for them, simply so that social groups, around the economy , could work.

       The oligarchs also have rights, as any have, and one of them is the right to govern without being stigmatized by the purchasing power they have. The natural tendency to invent an enemy to attribute the evils of a nation should be to blame the population for raising resentful leaders to power. The reflection then, is to claim the oligarchs as one more among the others.

WHAT YOU CAN DO TO THE DICTATORSHIP OF NICOLAS MADURO

          History shows us the cases of the French Revolution in the eighteenth century, the Russian Revolution in the twentieth century, and the most recent called the Arab Spring. In all of them there is a common denominator, and it has been the determination of the peoples to confront the oppressive regimes, ready to die if necessary, sometimes with the complicity of some military sector that come to share the general malaise of the population.

       Although many analysts predict that the mandate of Maduro will not last beyond six months given the complexity of the administrative corruption and the massive rejection of the Venezuelan citizens. Generally, in a revolution, there is a lot of blood spilled, given the confrontation with the armed forces that support the regime.

       The question is, will the Venezuelan population be willing to shed blood? To confront the armed forces of the country? It all depends on the degree of anger that the citizens have, and a little more than a hundred dead in the different protests throughout the country, is it enough?

       The US government threatens a possible suspension in the importation of Venezuelan oil, and ordinary people will suffer the most from the increased economic crisis, it assumes that if the threat becomes real, then the people's anger It will overflow, and then? There are those who say it could become a kind of Syria, it is unlikely, and therefore, the UN Security Council could take action on the matter.

       What can be done in the face of Maduro's dictatorship is not to faint in street demonstrations, and to stand in front of the government palace, day and night, as the Egyptian population did at some point, until the dictator, tyrant, despotic And oppressor, fall as the dictators have fallen, however much threats he makes, no matter how he tries to stay in power, one day Maduro will fall, if there is a determination of the population as there was in other times.

WHO IS MORE TERRORIST?

Those terrorists who want the death of the terrorists or the terrorists themselves.

Those terrorists who attack the civilian population or the terrorists who attack the public force.

Those terrorists who profess Christianity or the terrorists who profess Islam.

Those terrorists who believe that with terror they end terrorism or those who think that terror must be combated with terrorism.

That terrorist is me or the terrorist is the other.

Those who claim to impose their own truth or those who impose their own will.

Those who accuse terrorism or those who are legally terrorist.

Those terrorists that physically damage the integrity of people or those that morally damage the integrity of people.

The one that generates fear in a person or those that generate fear in a community.

The one who imagines terrorism or who imagines terrorists.

One who invents enemies or those who distrust to invent a terrorist world?

Those who believe that terrorism is a reality or those who believe that it is imagination.

TEACHERS OF COLOMBIA FACE A MONSTER

       

       There is a rumor that former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, when he was a candidate for his first presidential term, the big international companies had forced him to sign a series of compromises that would limit his social programs once he became president. So I was worried that Brazil, being the economic power of Latin America, would be greatly affected by the incidence of holding companies, if this were so, then what could be expected of other countries with much less financial capacity and Political weight as Colombia for example? 

       This situation brings me to the memory of what is happening in Colombia, this is one of the longest teacher stoppages of recent years, and the fundamental reason is not the salary, which should be the reason for national unemployment, but Which has to do with requesting greater contributions to the participatory system in education, and this contemplates addressing other needs such as food for children, arrangement of educational infrastructure such as school improvements, classroom expansion, educational tools, The information and many other resources that are needed.

       That's the problem. The teachers are not facing President Santos or the minister of education, they are facing nothing more and nothing less than the famous International Monetary Fund and, as the cartoonists would say, their cronies, which are the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank. Development.

       Not only do these entities exert pressure on heads of state in Latin America, but also the world's largest investment firms such as Allianz Global Investors or JP Morgan, which, if not controlled by governments, do have decisive influence over time To take economic policy measures.

       So the teachers in Colombia are facing a monster, and although the union organizations have made calls inviting the society to participate in the strike, the response has been as usual warm, not to say cold, against the expectations and results that can be generated from negotiations between teachers and the Colombian government.

       If Santos continues to reiterate that there is no money to meet the demands, it is simply because it follows the guidelines of external entities for the effects of financial risks, or, as an expert economist would say, to avoid a hypothetical quiebracracia, that is, that the State must intervene when financial institutions go into crisis.

       Is it a utopia that the teachers are pursuing? A socialist utopia, the neoliberals would say, a capitalist utopia, the Socialists would say.

IT IS TIME OF THE RUSSIAN SPRING

       I agree that in Russia, like some nations of the Middle East, democracy is more of a political euphemism, since it has never really existed, and as an example, it is worth remembering the long historical tradition of tsars in Mother Russia.

       The transformations that began at the beginning of the twentieth century, with the introduction of a parliament on the part of Nicholas II, as a gesture towards his people, and then with other social transformations, this time violent, such as the Russian Revolution in 1917, And finally, after the dissolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) on December 25, 1991, with the official resignation of Mikhail Gorbachev, democracy has not been part of the Russian people's mind.

       Proof of this is the dictatorship, disguised as democracy, with the current president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, who has succeeded in maintaining some economic stability in the country, has lacked the most important thing for a society, namely freedom in social, political and cultural terms.

       Although the repressions have resulted in murders of political leaders and journalists, and people considered enemies of the state, it has also become an exposition of police brutality with the clashes in the different popular marches that have occurred in recent years. In addition, despite the evident wave of corruption in his government, this has not prevented Putin from staying in power, and why this?

       The media have been fundamental to always show the kind face of Putin as an indispensable element for the good functioning of the State, and the Russian spring?

       At times it seems that the youth population motivates a political change, or that society will push for an election without any kind of bias or manipulation by the government in order to achieve a change, but no, everything indicates that the Russian spring will delay a Little more, but sooner than later, those rebellious youth will change their mentality and make themselves felt, and they will act to make that democracy that seems an illusion come true.

BRIEF HISTORY OF FEDERAL ANTIOQUIA

       The plenipotentiary secretary, official spokesman and historical adviser of the Antioquia governments José Manuel Restrepo (accompanied by Juan del Corral), at the beginning of the 19th century, was clear that Antioquia should advocate for a federal and autonomous government, as one political scientist would say, a government Decentralized.

       The reasons used by the different provinces that defended the federation in New Granada were basically to follow the steps of the system of government of the nascent United States of America, adhering to its judicial, military and legislative formula. The idea that it was the best way to defend the American peoples from French troops, and who maintained a supposed fidelity to King Ferdinand VII, were no more than political excuses, the fact is that Antioch was present in political debates, and yet , In the fratricidal wars of the decade of 1810 to defend firmly the longed Federal Antioquia.

       The times changed, historical processes finally conceived the republic of Colombia as a centralized nation, and that was consolidated at the beginning of the 20th century, after so many vicissitudes, warlike conflicts, and especially, after the celebrations of the commemorations of the Centennial of the Independence of Colombia in 1910, taking as a reference what happened in Santafe de Bogota in 1810, although it is true that some provinces continued to long for those moments of federative governments, in the case of Antioquia, sentiment has remained alive in some sectors of the region.

       That sentiment awakens every time that the Antioquia leaders feel attacked, or somehow affected by the policies from Bogota, like what happened with a recklessness on the part of the government during the time of the drug traffic between the decades of 1980 and 1990, in Who excluded Antioquia from the map of tourist destinations, aroused not the Antioquia people, but rather the mafia groups, to generate again the feeling of a federal Antioquia, promoting a possible citizen initiative for such a case, but the Situation did not go to greater social consequences.

       Now, in 2017, the problem in the case of Belén de Bajirá, a hamlet that is disputed in local terms by the municipality of Mutatá, on the Antioqueño side, and the municipality of Riosucio, on the Chocoan side, has again generated the Feeling of a federal Antioquia. The case is more of a political than a social character, because the abandonment of such a village has been historical on the one hand and on the other, and has more demagogic and economic ingredients than real interest in the settlers.

       Terms such as the Antioqueña race, which has been abused by opportunists, or the exaltation of the Antioqueños as a region, only affects the social relations of a nation that although it has a consolidated institutionally, is still under construction, and in The extent to which political discourses are radically affected will seriously affect the economy and culture of both regions, which, in the end, those who actually benefit from the conflicts, have been some political and economic leaders, that is, a few people.

THE VENEZUELAN REVOLUTION HAS BEGUN

       Only one detonator is left, and the revolution will explode. It happened with the independence of the United States with the British taxes, it also happened, prior to World War I, with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria, it happened with the arrival of Lenin prior to the Russian revolution, and in Mexico, the Revolution exploded with farce in the presidential elections - Dictator Porfirio Díaz in 1910.

       For the time being, the Venezuelan narco-dictator regime, led by Nicolás Maduro, tries not to kill Leopoldo López in the dungeon. Also, it is clear that the Venezuelan Armed Forces is not homogeneous in terms of support for the despotic Chavez government, since Chavez leaders, who are against Maduro, or disagree as in the case of the Attorney General of Venezuela, Mrs. Luisa Ortega Diaz, shows a division and nonconformity with the government.

       The marches against Maduro will not stop, it is the only way left for the opposition and the population, as the police increase their coercive actions against the demonstrators (because on the side of the Chavez marches, these are untouchable), In the same way the participation of the social sectors will be increased, as has happened for example with the entry of the main agricultural producers.

       To the extent that images of vulnerable people are shown being mistreated, tortured or murdered by members of the public force, international pressure will increase even more (there are still few ambassadors in Venezuela), and marches will become increasingly radical And reactionary in the face of police abuses ... the result?

       President Maduro will move from threats to action through so-called armed groups, which will increase their killings with the complicity of the army, which in turn will participate in selective killings (as reported by some media), this will still fuel hatred Of the Venezuelans who will see in it a kind of war of extermination, that will force them to take measures not only in the streets through the protests, but also in actions much more reactionary.

       The uncertainty is experienced not only by the Venezuelan people, but also by the political leaders at the head of Maduro, who demonstrate this through their incendiary speeches and their measures of terror against the civilian population. It is clear then, that the true Venezuelan revolution has begun.