Crossdressers Wearing Skirts

A contract to the Venezuelan



In 1958, arguably the beginning of democracy in Venezuela (although in 1945 he was the model made). To strengthen and reinforce it, the democratic parties decided to create a contract (or compact) state to establish democracy as a fundamental column of support in the country.

At that time signed only three democratic parties had Venezuela (AD, COPEI and URD). The only party not signing was the PCV.
The reasons are obvious. How is it possible to create a state contractor whose base is democracy with a party that follows the lines of the Bolshevik Stalin and bearded on the island?
simply unacceptable and absurd. Although the Communists themselves were victims of having been excluded, more resentment than anything else. Rómulo Betancourt in his inaugural speech very democratic states:

"That pact was excluded the Communist Party, by reasoned decision of the organizations that signed it. (...) Respect the right of that party to act as a community organized in the country, his members would not be called by me to perform administrative positions in which an influence on the directions of national and international politics of Venezuela. (...) The communist philosophy goes against the democratic structure of the Venezuelan State (...) "


Thus begins the game of democracy in Venezuela. Divisions of these parties began to produce other products such as the MIR, the ARS, the MEP, the NRP, the MAS and the PCV camouflaged under the UPA party etc. These were the parties that fought the guerrillas, say the "hot heads". The justification of these is the exclusion of fixed-point agreement and of course, the alleged attacks by Betancourt for telling the truth. Ie express the fact dissatisfaction with these puppets operated by the USSR and its satellite closest: "Cuba." But beyond this is resentment because at one time supported Betancourt, thinking that would establish a Communist dictatorship and instead it went from communist to social democrat, something that never forgave him, but democratic belief that we thank him for be the father of it.


The guerrillas in Venezuela was a lost cause. After the insurrection in Carúpano (Carupanazo), 4 May 1962 and Puerto Cabello (Porteñazo), one month after its slopes were, until total peace with Caldera I. However, there was damage, peace was expensive. In addition to the infiltration of communists in the armed forces, whose primary responsibility is the former guerrilla Douglas Bravo. Breaking myths

bipartisanship does not begin in 1958, as certain sectors indicate. Actually the "Soursop" is from 1973 to 1988 (80% AD and COPEI). Taking account is fifteen years, not forty.


For just one example, during the government of Raul Leoni, establishing the "Broad Base" with the parties of AD, URD and NDF (Uslar Pietri) versus COPEI was the opposition. In this way the power was fairly balanced.


When Rafael Caldera took power for the first time was unprecedented in Venezuela. For the first time the government gives the opposition democratic government. That's something never seen before. That breaks that "Government does not lose elections." Although in this case AD actually had won again, but thanks to its MEP division of votes shall be distributed in 19.34% (MEP) and 28.24% (AD), compared with 29.13% of COPEI pyrrhic . If there had been no such division AD probably would have won with a crushing 47%. At this time, the guerrillas were pacified and virtually disappear as we enter the political game democratic.

end armed forces to institutionalize and become a non-political entity that exists to support all governments to come provided they meet the democratic pact. Therefore Article 132 of the constitution provided:

"National Armed Forces are an apolitical, obedient and not deliberating, organized by the State to secure the national defense, the stability of democratic institutions and respect for the constitution and laws, whose occurrence is always above any obligation. National Armed Forces will be at the service of the Republic, and in no case to a person or political partisanship "

An interesting fact I Caldera government is that there was still a small part of the population wanted the return of Pérez Jiménez to power. When democracy is aware of the potential threat that could looming, intelligently is a constitutional amendment that says: "No person may be elected President, Senator or Representative, or Judge of the Supreme Court, who have been convicted by a final decision, rendered by ordinary courts or prison sentence of imprisonment exceeding three years, for crimes committed in the performance of public functions or during these "The unfortunate thing is that in the second Caldera administration, be given an amnesty to Chavez just before the court give a final decision.

With the government of Carlos Andrés Pérez began the era of bipartisanship, the
patronage, corruption and cronyism, but also the economic boom, which was not known to use. Taking advantage of oil prices were so high, the government took the opportunity to nationalize companies in the iron and oil, thus creating a large employer and bureaucratic state, fitting the center-left governments. Besides that began to borrow to take double the money, despite the taboo that had to indebt the country at that awkward incident we had with "The Little Corporal" and that painful sentence that exalts Chavacano government as "insolent foreign plant ..."

However, there are good things I CAP government and that they respected the country's institutions. Most of the corrupt were imprisoned and were not all corrupt, was a minority that was gradually increasing to its total decline. By that time Ramon Guillermo Aveledo (Congressman) summarizes the Congress must be in these words:

"Congress can not be employed by the opposition. Congress can not serve the government. Congress should support the Venezuelan citizen. This Venezuelan depleted by inflation, threatened by the mob, frightened by the threat of unemployment, troubled by a pension or retirement, skeptical, tired of believing (...) That Venezuelan never lost hope "

In the 80
followed these policies in the state business, but without the economic boom. The government of Herrera Campins noting that government savings were few, establishing RECADI, which retains the flight of capital, that the ark filled again. What this government does not understand is that this inevitably brings two phenomena terrible. The first is inflation, namely the devaluation of money and rising prices. The second consequence of the first shot of the dollar of 4.30 "to infinity and beyond"

The next government of Jaime Lusinchi rather than the wrongs of its predecessor, the continuous, embezzling public money in campaigns and populist measures anything healthy for the country. The hills grew, prices continued to rise, the devaluation in a tailspin, just worsened the situation. Unquestionably needed a change!

Thus we reach the 90s, the people choose to believe that Carlos Andres Perez in this way that would magically "Venezuela Arabia" where the price of oil were plentiful and people lived well. It was impossible that we returned to that time. Oil prices would never be of that magnitude and Carlos Andres Perez promised populist reforms anything but healthy for the country. It enflaqueció the state bureaucracy down, companies were privatized, all measures a government's own center-right (note how in this country there is no consistency between the parties and their ideology ¿¿¿What is that thing? ???).

Finally Carlos Andres took his worst decision and is left to subsidize gasoline and of course on the economy, prices rose bus. This was what brought about the Caracazo, where the entire population movement out unhappy to the streets to steal, desperate for the dismal situation.
addition the media was irresponsible in making such images because it created the phenomenon of self-generated news that made nationwide reproduce this behavior. By having all this trouble armed government's duty to restore order, one of the major tasks of any government. The problem is that brute force was used at that time too, the military has exceeded its procedures which resulted in wrongful death.

At this point is that the government (now) has manipulated the information claiming that this whole problem was caused solely by the actions taken by PAC in its government. This is false, the economy came to be wrong since the time of the first government of Carlos Andres Perez (the left), the economy got worse until Carlos Andres Perez (the right) had to take these measures for reorganizing of the economy that just do not know how to handle the right way. Chavez had also already planned his coup in that pathetic scene of Güere Saman, in the early 80s I think ... There is no way supporting that the coup was coming in defense of "sovereign people"


in 1992 raised a terrible ghost slept since 1958. It is the military coup, a product of communist infiltration in the armed forces. At that time, the institutional military coup able to stop twice. Recall that there were two strikes, not only of Chavez in February, but one in November of that year. Both failed. And this tells us much about the personality of President Chavez Not even a stroke is able to run! But beyond the two strikes is an interesting fact here is that Carlos Andres Perez left the presidency by the democratic path. Perez admitted that he did a trial for all his bad habits and corrupt administration. "I wonder if the president now accept a trial for all the violations that he has made to the constitution? Is not that right? The answer is clear, democracy worked as a truck collided with the hood raised and full of scratches but with the other intact. The democratic nature existed in those days. To complete the CAP II period tentatively enters Ramón José Velazquez and called again for election.


The last Democratic president was in superb Caldera, again, but this time did not win his party he founded (COPEI)
since he was deflated and decaying. To win he had to do with convergence, a very weak game, made by a number of smaller parties. This was called the chiriperos. For that time the Venezuelan people were so disillusioned with politics that abstention results for 1993 indicate about 39.84%. Is an excessive proportion.

We conclude that democracy was a very good intentions when it began. Democratic institutions was always, no politician had dictatorial ambitions remained so for forty years of democracy. It was a perfect democracy, had its setbacks and mistakes is obvious.

After a century of leaders and come the twentieth century two dictatorships, four hits, some attempts at democracy, it is clear that the overnight we were not going to become a Swiss canton. One of his biggest mistakes was to give permission in the constitution of 1961 re-election of a president after 10 years in office. The consequence of this is that it gave rise to a new generation to take power and the parties will eventually deflate and lapse.

Refrigerator Drip Pan Smell

The Venezuelan learns to hit

The paper is patient and democracy is a word that is on everyone's lips. Since the last century, all countries established in their constitutions the word democracy. Proof of this is that the Constitution of the Franco regime in the light of all fascist was called "organic democracy." Moreover the current communist (China, North Korea, Cuba) claim that their country is a democracy is popular because it is written in its Constitution, as Marx himself, who inspired such regimes, spoke of dictatorship "transitory."

This leads us to reflect on what democracy is. By reducing only to vote, universal, direct and secret, then any system that does not respect freedom of expression, to exercise restraint on its citizens, who have a game where there is only one candidate can be considered democratic, no problem. If instead, we define democracy as a system of ethical values, where the State must respect laws that are universal to all countries by international conventions and agreements (Declaration of Human Rights), then things change. Then the dictatorship still exists in certain countries, even to respect the sacred democratic vote.



do believe then that the state must be limited and moderate (John Locke) and it should be tied to morality (Aristotle) \u200b\u200bin which the opposition is a political opponent whom you respect their opinions and not a strategic enemy military to be removed, then we can speak of a "dictatorship of the proletariat" is a "popular democracy", is contradictory and absurd, is ultimately Communist demagoguery. True communist, ie lie. Question of dialectics.

The issue of democracy is very clear today. We can not stay with the concept of democracy in ancient Greece which both Plato criticized for producing "oligarchs and tyrants." Which was right. Democracy is understood today by the mixture of the ideals of the Republic (read Plato) with the ideals of liberalism (read John Locke, Adam Smith, Alexis de Tocequeville, etc.). That's why today a truly democratic system is a "liberal democratic republic."


Venezuela
Fortunately, we have understood through a long process which means a democracy and a shock! Nothing academic classes, but through dictatorships. When in 1936 dies "The tyrant liberal" begins a process of democratization irreversible, with governments increasingly democratic.

General Lopez Contreras burst into a storm between gomecistas, democratic, militaristic and lopecistas own, and takes control of the situation and its peaceful "calm and sane" and was slowly sailing through these murky waters, recognizing the country's democratic freedoms are rightfully theirs, but carefully so that the military did not rise up. In sympathetic


General Medina Angarita, continued these processes of democratization in the right line of thinking, were completed to legalize all political parties, was established a constitutional republic. But this was not enough, something was missing. The General problem was his lack of consensus on enabling universal suffrage, secret, direct and essential foundation for democracy, for being "too left for the country."

Here is a historical problem, Diogenes for the next election was the candidate of Medina, Lopez did not, there was a break. This split between Lopez and Medina served to divide the military, who went to conspire. The Democratic leadership had been terminated in accordance with Diogenes Escalante, future president of Venezuela and unifying civilians (Democratic Front). All had won, except of course the military coup and undemocratic. When you are found disabled Diogenes mental insanity is forged by the blow to Medina because there was no unity candidate representing Diogenes.

The military plot was cooked, the military is preparing for the return of the dictatorship of positivist and although they succeeded, and the country was ready for democracy. What all Venezuelans thought is that the coup was made by López Contreras, who had broken with Medina, but to the surprise of all, who got on the power was
Romulo Betancourt, a man advanced, along with AD match with the intention of establishing a democracy left center. This error came out expensive, since democracy established by Betancourt only lasted three years.

After its revolution, immediately called for elections and AD occupied most of the charges. The reason is obvious, awarded the people who had given them democracy. That way the teacher Rómulo Gallegos
was the first president elected by means of universal, direct and secret. Apparently the model of the democratic project went from strength to strength.

Six months after Gallegos won the presidency by popular vote, the military institutional tired of this democracy's center-left AD, then Llovera Páez Pérez Jiménez and exploit the situation to give a blow to Gallegos. In the meantime beat Delgado Chalboud virtually compel a leading areas coupled with the threat of sending him to jail. Chalboud have a tragic fate. Kill him at 50 ... re-instituted the dictatorship.


is important to emphasize that the actual period of Pérez Jiménez was '50 to '58. Taking account are 8 years of dictatorship. Pérez Jiménez's dictatorship has been shorter than we had in our history! What does this tell us? What conclusion can we draw? Well, since the Venezuelan learned that the last thing he wants is an authoritarian.

Although it was not all bad. There progress. These improvements were due to the dictatorship of Perez Jimenez was autocratic and not totalitarian. In totalitarianism is to destroy everything old, everything old to start building the new that it is good and therefore everyone should think like the leader. The authoritarian leader is not interested in America to think like him, is only interested in do not say anything bad about their government (and tortured or imprisoned if they catch you.) So in an authoritarian government that already is not necessarily bad and is built around the country that already exists, no new men millennial or attitudes. It built the Caracas-La Guaira highway, the Hotel Humboldt, roads, bridges, school buildings, irrigation systems, two lifts, among other things.

Even with all the evil of that dictatorship, the country has made great progress. Perhaps that is why Venezuela has the mistaken idea that military rule is equal to progress, although they are aware that the dictatorship per se is bad. In 1958 the country took to the streets to demand their rights and overthrow the dictator. Who happens to govern during this period went to Wolfgang Larrazabal and Edgar Sanabria for the preparation of the democratic transition.
and is interesting to note a constant and is repeated each time a dictatorial military regime falls, goes a military institutional transition.

Now we arrive at the expected time: DEMOCRACY What about this? Did you progress? Is it true that the civil government was SO bad? Do these last 11 years in office have been better than previous ones? Do not miss the next post ... A Contract for Venezuelan

Christian Group Slogans

Marx

Well I promised, here is the test. WARNING: WHO HAS NOT SEEN THE BEST FILM NOT READ THIS BECAUSE YOU THE STORY ANALYSIS


The Wave is a German film directed by Dennis Gansel warning against the neglect of democracy and the establishment of totalitarianism.


In the film a group of students should choose a theme for a week of projects being prepared by a school.
Professor Rainer, loved by all, strangely is assigned the matter of autocracy as he always has been the chair of anarchy. Seeing
discouraged and apathetic students decide to change the common lines of the project and do something more dynamic curriculum methodology. Professor proposes to think about their living as a country which will establish an autocracy. At that time begins totalitarianism.


Everything happens in one week in the six days represent the three stages that occur in every form of totalitarianism. It stopping to discuss each of these days. In addition each student stars in any position against these totalitarian society.


the beginning of the first class the most skeptical that there can return to a dictatorship are Kevin, Sinan and Bomber. Those who have notions about what is an autocracy are Karo, Mona and Lisa. Mona is that from the beginning has a strong attitude against the skeptics. While Karo and Lisa at this early stage maintained a passive attitude, because so far they do not feel threatened. Finally Marco does not know what to say when the teacher asked about the issue, apathy is widespread.
Setting represents the apathetic. That part of society that does not know anything about politics, but to focus on his personal life dragged through the inertia of the benefits of democracy itself.
These people, when they realize they're in a dictatorship, can not do anything because they are tied hand and without weapons to combat the looming destruction of individual liberty.

totalitarian
The first phase begins with the leader's ascension to power. Discipline and respect are the first points totalitarian, so your first rule is that students should start calling him by his surname Wenger (Respect), as well as ask for the floor and speak up when they go to (military discipline).


This is essential to totalitarianism because the one who gives the lines of the project should have full attention and focus on what the rule says to start using the "Messianism" (I and I alone I will bring bliss).

The byproduct of this is the polarization, the totalitarian makes the country be divided into those who support and those against (Potential enemies
military strategy). When "democratically"-these regimes hold elections, the teacher is chosen as their leader, the first to reveal is Kevin, who is defeated and forced by the teacher to withdraw from class: it is an "enemy." This represents military power forward, who just wants to overthrow the dictator to get the job and can not. That's why when you realize you can not against the system is joined, declining submissively.



This "revolt failed" I still Sinan and Bomber. They represent the "mass man" who is easily manipulated. Change of opinion with the blowing of the wind and simply attach to the surface leaving his temperance regime. The two returned to the room immediately and Kevin in the future will also join the wave.

A fact Interestingly, the insecurity of Lisa to answer questions. You notice that fear becomes terror to power. Lisa is one group that is so afraid of the dictator who dares not confront him. Besides the fear of being rejected by others if not join the movement. His doubts might raise suspicions.


In the second stage, the dictator creates external enemies. The teacher teaches the flaws and evils of anarchy. When encouraged to make noise to disrupt the class of Professor Wieldland (giving Anarchy), presents him as the evil that must be combated. In this respect Francisco Plaza says "The totalitarian spirit rebels against evil sí mismo, por lo cual entiende que corresponde a la política identificar, combatir, destruir y erradicar el gran mal que subyace a todos los males particulares”.

El siguiente punto es el poder a través de la comunidad. El profesor los une en pequeños grupos para así controlarlos mejor. Toda ideología totalitaria parte de que si se establece “un nuevo orden” se vivirá mejor, se alcanzará la felicidad y más utópico aún la perfección.

Después discuten sobre cuál uniforme debe ser usado. Los uniformes son una manera de eliminar la individualidad de los hombres. El uniforme unifica a las personas y hace que sientan que el que no lo tiene es porque no ha seen the benefits of the movement, has not seen what the leader is and therefore must be exterminated.



At this point arouses such opposition was asleep in the character of Karo. All come in white shirts to class except her. Begins to be removed from the class, along with the rest of the activities, thus becomes the leading opposition figure. We could also think of Mona, but for this level and she changed classes. Surrendered, left the "country" is no longer an opposition that can confront totalitarianism. The price we must pay to be the opposition Karo is that anger gradually losing their spaces to run out. At this stage we discuss the symbols and the name of the movement.

The symbols used in schemes to create a myth to last until the end of time. For a symbol, as opposed to an older person and this has a political fanaticism / religious.
In choosing the name of the band (The Wave), the symbol that identifies you (The hand signal) represents everything the dictator wants to represent. Thus Nazism had a swastika and the "sun salutation", communism hammer and sickle and "fist", the English Falange: Arrows and the bow, etc. ... Francisco Plaza

tells us that "The 'truth' of the myth does not depend on what it claims and promises but the answer deep, instinctive which evokes in the population. Hence, instead of texts and arguments, the totalitarian movements rely on symbols to convey its content: a clenched fist, the gesture of hitting, short slogans, etc.. To be effective and move through symbol, myth appeals to the deepest instincts of the people, their traditions, emotions, hatreds, fears and hopes. Always directed against an enemy (eg, Jews, capitalists, imperialists), the myth appeals to nationalism and symbols history, whose real meaning only embodies the messianic leader. "



Arriving at the third and final stage is important to focus on the figure of Tim. He represents the kind that is dissatisfied and has not been taken into account before and that is fully in accordance with this totalitarianism because finally seen by the rest.

This is the kind who blindly believes in the project and is willing to do almost anything for their leader. Such people are fed resentment given the dictator. So Francisco Plaza explains: "Closely related to the totalitarian myth is the will to pass through the political antagonism of the psychological phenomenon of resentment. A key component of totalitarian message is the constant evocation of humiliation, so that the people permanently revive again feel the re-sits, until you configure the personality so deep emotions from spilling into hostile, vindictive and spiteful. "

For this late stage, the leader has complete control of its population (remember that the opposition has been virtually apart) and may impose a reign of terror, the final stage of all totalitarianism. Many people think that this stage is the first and from there totalitarianism begins. What is false, this confusion may be due to the stage of terror is usually the longest until the regime falls. Finally, he said again the words of Francis Place: The literature on totalitarianism is based on historical experience to show that the totalitarian terror regimes appears fully consolidated and becomes more fierce when it has already managed to suppress virtually all dissenting voices. ( ...) totalitarian regimes do not start from the terror, but lead or end it. In light of this reality, even the terms' regime totalitarian vocation 'or' totalitarian impulse regime "have no lot of sense "What

dizzy after analyzing this German film is based on a true story that occurred in a U.S. university where the symbols and representations of the film gave rise to the recreation of the fictional film that cries out the warning of the totalitarian temptations. No one is safe from totalitarianism, democracy must be careful!

Custom Enclosed Blinds Patio Doors

Wave manifests


When Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto, which makes thinking about the excesses and abuses of the industrial revolution. Marx was a bourgeois exploiter that dehumanizes workers, wretchedly paid, with excessive hours of working time no matter who exploit children and women in industry. So writes a manifesto defending the class (proletariat) had so few opportunities.


However, this does not justify the radical methods suggested in its manifesto. Historical determinism (the influence of Hegel) is based on two classes have always existed in a constant struggle between patricians and plebeians in ancient times, the feudal lord and his servants in the Middle Ages, and its present: the bourgeoisie and the proletariat. For Marx, the motor of history is the struggle of these classes: There is no other!


What this means is that you can not exist at any moment in history because it is determined, reconciliation or negotiation between the bourgeois and the proletarian struggle only, only war.
Marx says in his manifesto "In outlining the general stages of development of the proletariat, we followed the course of the civil war more or less hidden to be developed within existing society, up to the time of transformed into open revolution, and the proletariat by the forcible overthrow of the bourgeoisie lays the foundation domination. "
Then
How does this proletariat to impose its domination? First instance must create a new man free from concepts like private property (the bourgeois) or family (also bourgeois), in addition to the opium of the people as referred to religion. This should be implemented

a revolution for the proletariat comes to power and then a dictatorship. This must have more or less the following characteristics:

"1) Abolition of property in land and application of the rent of land for state spending.
2) Strong progressive tax.
3) Abolition of inheritance rights.
4) Confiscation of property of all emigrants and rebels.
5) Centralization credit in the hands of the state through a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6) centralization in the hands of the State of all means of transport.
7) Multiplication of manufacturing firms belonging to the State and instruments of production, reclamation of waste lands and improvement of land, according to a general plan.
8) Obligation to work for all; Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9) Combination of agriculture and industry measures to gradually do away with the opposition between town and countryside.
10) Public education and free all children, abolition of child labor in their factories as practiced today, the education system combined with material wealth. "

When these objectives are achieved in this dictatorship, then the state will disappear in an anarchist conception of the political system, because society will be perfect and happy. That is, strangely disappear dialectical synthesis to reach perfection: communism. We have therefore a Candido who travels the world dreaming of utopias and perfect worlds.


short, Karl Marx saw the imperfection of the world was that there an oppressive class and its thesis is based on that if it is eliminated, all the world's ills will disappear. Communism is therefore a Utopia which fantasized over Thomas More and laughed Voltaire.
Man as a person clearly person can point to perfection, but the perfect world can not refuse to his "other" or turning his ideological opponent in strategic enemy. It is impossible. It's inhumane.

recognize the good intentions of these "Candide" but you can not roam the world with a Utopia in the mind that is not consistent with reality. Dreams turn into nightmares and these, as in the etchings of Goya, monsters. Still less to impose a single way of thinking man. And Locke had said, the state may not be getting into the inner life of the individual. The individual is sovereign for their actions and free will.