Twisted Knee No Swelling

The New Worship: the exaltation of Rómulo Betancourt

THE NEW WORSHIP: THE THRILL OF

Betancourt said the extraordinary Mexican historian Carlos Aguirre, the story that occurs today is deeply descriptive and uncritical impoverished, based on the exaltation of the hero. This exaltation in the history of Venezuela has traditionally had its epicenter Bolívar, however currently witnessing a new building-hero story. And that is explained by the fact that the approach advocated to Bolivar away from the exclusive use of the power elites and makes it a popular instrument of the counter, so Bolivar is no longer useful and should be replaced. The substitution has been raised through the analogy of a new hero, an instrument of order considered great: Rómulo Betancourt and representative democracy. Their activities and implementers are a group of university professors, high respect and consideration, but now joined an eminently ideological power that tends to boost democracy or a particular model to contrast with what is built.
not criticize it, criticize what is that doing so will countercurrent what they wrote in their academic career. We remember to read the defense of Betancourt who do, criticism that proposed in several of his texts to the cult of personality. One of those authors said in his Cult of Bolívar - a key work of the new Venezuelan historiography-that the hero had been an excuse to justify repression and domination. With Betancourt is exactly the same. By pretending to be submitted to Romulus as the father of democracy, it seeks to create an anthropological basis of submission, because the children "owe" obedience and respect for their parents. Yes Betancourt is the "father of democracy", we must all obey and accept their actions, even when wrong. When the Foundation Rómulo Betancourt starts a series of publications designed to enhance his figure, his role in Learners Week 1928, their Tracks written and claw, the Plan of Barranquilla, a wish to create - as did Bolivar predestined perspective of illustrious men and thereby erase the fact some of the inhuman repression ahead of the betrayal of the search of a better life in democracy, through a strategic partnership with big business. In short, Betancourt was a man and as such its mistakes are part of his life, but is intended to present him as a demi-god to whom we owe it to democracy and the road traveled is unknown conquest of claims made democracy possible in the twentieth century.
is undoubtedly raise and ignore the long road history that began from the late eighteenth century in the Captaincy General of Venezuela, to advance the recognition of citizenship, in his initial speech recognition access to public space, and later in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the construction of social and political citizenship, understood the 1st as access to education, health, respect for ethnic differences.
The manipulation is obvious: democracy is the grace of Betancourt and the Pact of Punto Fijo - who turned 50 years so we must raise our voice and our pen to expose this strategy. Democracy is an achievement that leaves from the nineteenth century and that has to do 1st with the recognition of participation and self-government, and then enriched in the middle of the nineteenth century with the debate about the social and political rights incorporated in the constitution of 1864, one of the most liberal and which extends throughout the 1st half of the twentieth century, through an anti-positivist thought which held that the Venezuelans were not able to live in democracy, given our racial composition. It all adds up and is building the conditions of historical change, so our indignation when trying to build a new cult: the cult of Betancourt.
This new contemporary hero worship arises naturally as a counter response to Chavez's charismatic personality. There is no doubt that the Bolivarian process itself has its own symbolic references and the opposition has managed to minimize, so she will justify resort to Betancourt figure to contrast the idea and representation charismatic Chavez. However, it has the same similarities with the Cult of Bolívar and so forcefully pointed out that initiative. Today is to plant a new hero, when rather it is an antihero. Betancourt still has outstanding balance with its history and that should not be forgotten. The foundations of bureaucracy, patronage and cronyism that is so critical of this government, were seeded with Betancourt and institutionalized a way of doing politics that led to a progressive loss of democratic life. When the program is to exalt betancuriano as a solution to the crisis makes a historic outburst, since this program became repressions, distortions and setbacks to the democratic process, which still must be analyzed and discussed. The new history, the criticism that shuns the easy analysis builds on the comparative performance and intellectual engagement in her struggle, and in that we move, so as a counterpart to the story of heroes welcome the initiative of the National History Center (NHC ) to make a story of the people. Dr. John E.

Historian

Romero 14/12/2008
Juane1208@gmail.com

Edicate For Cruise Spots

The World Crisis: prelude to a new war?

The World Crisis: prelude to a new war?

The contradictions of late-capitalist system are many, starting with the fact that the dynamics of capital is based on speculation as its highest expression. This means that the economic power of the so called G-8, and particularly the U.S. is divided on the use of financial resources arising from speculative capital "move" freely about the conceptual foundations of the so-called "globalization" or globalization. Precisely because it is so, is that we understand the "urgency" with the acting presidents of large countries and their financial representatives, who after decades of advocating non-interventionism of the nation state in economic affairs of the market, came swift and fast in support of banks and other entities that play under rules of speculation - that govern the world-system-register the financial system to collapse.
This economic crisis has huge similarities with the crisis of 1929 that ushered in the Second World War. How to be remembered, then - as now, there was a speculative rise in market values \u200b\u200bof many different companies on stock exchanges located in major capital the world. The manner in which the hegemonic sectors of the economy, linked to the control of the means of production, managed the performance of capital, coupled with the fact that both the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), USA, France, England and China itself were in a geostrategic game - such as today, which included the use of financial capital to shore up its military strategy was an incentive to evade controls on any system must generate speculative dynamics. However, in the 1st half of the twentieth century, as in the 1st half of this century, those checks were unsuccessful, plunging the world system in a fight for financial control.
From what we talked about is how the great powers, in the logic of development of late-capitalist system, seek to accumulate as much financial and economic capital and thus aiming to shore up its strategic military deterrent device, a dynamic that seeks to neutralize the weapons efforts of its geopolitical rivals through the real or perceived threat of moving the "vital space" of "other." It should be remembered as Hitler's Germany, since the rise to power in the early twentieth century proposed recovery areas or territorial areas considered "vital" to the existence of the German nation, implying This is not only a process of rearmament, but also the use and operation of the means of production to strengthen the military power. That action led to Hitler to expand on the Rhine, taking Austria, invade Poland and Russia signed an agreement with non-aggression that will facilitate strategic move to areas controlled by Britain and France in Western Europe. When we see what drove this situation, we realize that all countries - including the U.S., used the path of military confrontation to revive the economy in crisis since the beginning of the decade of the 30's of last century. In making the comparative analysis, we realize que ayer como hoy, la crisis es producto de la especulación y que la existencia de la misma pone en serio peligro la dinámica de desenvolvimiento de los factores de poder. Ayer como hoy vemos como las potencias comienzan a movilizarse en una acción expansiva hacia “áreas de influencia” del otro: los EEUU se moviliza y actúa sobre Georgia, buscando con ello afectar el flujo de petróleo desde el Cáucaso – vital para la Rusia de Putin- mientras Rusia aumenta su presencia económica y su asesoría militar en Latinoamérica- zona vital por excelencia de los EEUU- como nunca había ocurrido siquiera durante la Guerra Fría.
Lo que planteamos es que la crisis financiera mundial y las escasas posibilidades you have to correct deficiencies and imbalances that generated by the absence of state controls and global world of speculative activity, may become a new great confrontation that can be disastrous, given the significant development of military capability to destroy everything in its path . This confrontation can be taken as "a way out of crisis", to reactivate the productive apparatus being connected to the military and thus generate a new dynamism to produce a rebalancing of capital itself. This hypothesis - crazy in our view, not as you do see the perspective of the huge vested interests and is contextualized in a scenario where energy consumption continues to rise and global reserves are reduced to the maximum. We also have to dress this with the fact that, as happened in the prelude to the Second World War, the hegemonic power then - England was losing deterrence and progressively displaced by emerging powers - the U.S. and Germany, which accelerated the final confrontation that would generate a new world order. Today the situation is similar: the U.S. hegemonic status is in doubt, there are new emerging powers - China, the recovery of Russia, Brazil, India, which felt the brunt of the crisis and building this state of weakness can search speed the U.S. military crisis. On the other hand we must consider that in the U.S. are aware of this situation and handle well the hypothesis of war as a scenario of economic recovery, as happened with the First and Second Gulf War. As we are at a historical juncture which must be seen to care about the implications it may have. Dr. John E.

Romero Universidad del Zulia

17/12/2008

Woodburry Commons Chanel

Venezuela: an assessment after 10 years of Chavez's victory

VENEZUELA: 10 YEARS AFTER THE TRIUMPH OF CHAVEZ (1998-2008)

glimpses analysis compared the development of general indicators (social, political, economic, etc) between two points or historical circumstances. It is perhaps the most complete tool - epistemologically speaking, to study interpretation and construct a critical vision of history.
In Venezuela, where on Saturday marked 10 years after the victory of Chavez, we are given an extraordinary opportunity for comparative analysis. The 1st point must be the political system. When Chavez came to power, the political system had evolved from a two-party system - with 2 AD dominant organizations and one multi-COPEI. The deterioration of historical forces or parties was evident. AD and had gone to get COPEI 93% of the valid votes in the 1988 elections reach just 43% in 1993 and just 6% in 1998. The emergence of organizations of the new momentum - MVR, Proyecto Venezuela, showed signs that something was changing in the Venezuelan political decisions. The political re-articulation is significant, whether we take into account those who support Chavez and those who oppose it. The re-politicization of the Venezuelan people is clear and thus there is an increase of the idea of \u200b\u200bcitizenship beyond mere electoral exercise. At this point the balance must be positive.
The Venezuelan economy, which for the moment of triumph Chávez was affected by the 1994 banking crisis, hit by structural adjustment agenda implemented by Teodoro Venezuela Pettkoff not envisioned with great expectations. A barrel of oil price below U.S. $ 10 per barrel ensured a critical situation. Chavez's initial measures favored the bank capital. Protection through the monitoring of change, the initial maintenance of economic policy belied Caldera big changes. Would be after the re-legitimization of Chávez in 2000 when he began to economic adjustment through a policy designed to diversify the productive nature of the economy. The confrontation with the national capital would be the dominant feature and explains the fact why the political conflict will be led by Pedro Carmona, president of FEDECAMARAS from the strike of December 10, 2001, organized as a reaction to the enabling legislation. The economic indicators speak for themselves. Economic growth rates back to 2003 indicate some success that has allowed Chavez out a social policy that has yielded the fruits election. The increase in the price of a barrel of oil as a result of a foreign policy that gave priority to industry recovery was remarkable. However, in this case we consider that the balance is not all positive.
From the social point of view, Chavez's government brought the issue to the agenda. And she brought not as a compensatory element, as was the case in the Agenda Venezuela, he brought as a priority line of action. The recovery of the indicators that make up the Human Development Index (HDI) such as education, infant mortality, schooling, health care, among others, is evident. At this point the balance is positive without any debate. The figures speak for themselves. In fact they are so effective that we do see the social actions of Manuel Rosales, one realizes how emulate Chavez's policies. The international theme
the status or balance can be ambiguous. On one side is positive in the sense to advance a policy that emphasized the non-aligned foreign policy of Venezuela with the interests and positions of the U.S.. Forward a policy that served the so-called diplomatic fronts (Caribbean, Andean, Amazonian and Atlantic) was a resounding success and catapulted regional leadership level Chavez. The downside is that somehow his action was seen as a kind of imperialism in Latin America, and although it is not, the U.S. has exploited the presence and support of Chavez to other spaces in the Caribbean and Latin America, using this partnership as political propaganda against. The fact that the Chavez government has not been very effective in explaining the meaning foreign aid, has meant that areas not well informed to believe that it is "giving away" money from the Venezuelans.
With respect to the recognition of human and social rights, it should be firm in indicating that the process of integration of traditionally excluded sectors of the social spheres has been a trademark of Chavez. The incorporation and care of children, women and ethnic minorities has resulted in important social supports should be recognized. These sectors have been particularly favored to become social subjects for priority action by state agencies. The balance, positive.
The issue of social conflict must be addressed. Any process of adjustment and / or political transition, defined as a change in social and political conditions generates resistance. Hegemonic political factors, related to the historical political parties were actually displaced from the exercise of power. Social conflict and intolerance of the period 2001-2004 will not be easily forgotten. The deficit of democratic coexistence of the conflicting parties was demonstrated and should be a collective effort to recover the mutual tolerance and respect, "At this point the balance is negative.
The fact that Chavez has proposed a general plan of the country, as was demonstrated in the Development Plan Social economic nation (PDESN) 2001-2007 and 2007-2013 is an achievement. There is a prospect for the future of the country, although not shared by all, according to a reference path that assumes the need for a prospective medium-term about the direction of social, economic and political where it is headed in Venezuelan society. The balance, positive.
There is no doubt that the situation actively and conflict looms again. The proposed constitutional amendment surprised the forces of opposition to Chavez and the mechanism chosen to present it - the initiative of the National Assembly, giving little time for the opposition to prepare for and activated in an attempt to reduce the advantage of close lead of 1,500,000 votes obtained by the PSUV in the election of 23-N. The challenge of the opposition is not to get swept in this circumstance. For Chavez is raising its vote by resorting to the shape and leadership of Chávez. The 2009 appears to us very busy and interesting. Dr. John E.

Historian
Romero
Juane1208@gmail.com
07/12/2008

Metformin Increased Mucus

De Venancio Pulgar Manuel Rosales, the same lie

De Venancio Pulgar Manuel Rosales, the same lie

El Zulia has become the epicenter of a real electoral battle. For a meticulous observer, it is simply a personal confrontation between Chavez and Rosales, but there are elements that show us who attended a discussion policy, defined as the presentation, discussion and advocacy of a political platform with another antagonistic political reference.
For the United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV) the race is looking for two key objectives: 1) to rebound from the defeat of the last 2-D, 2007, when the structure of the party failed in its attempt to pass the constitutional amendment and 2) regain lost political space in the region, the product of internal divisions, civil strife and political disorganization. These tasks are not easy to perform. The behavior of the electorate Zulia is elusive as a serious obstacle. Furthermore, the Manichean management Rosales arises from the Zulia, its links with politics and religion, has not been sufficiently removed by the Campaign Command Di Martino, but the constant visits of President Chavez has sought to remedy this deficiency.
to Rosales, the 23-N process is vital for his political survival. It is undoubtedly a manifestation of political ambition. On the one hand, corresponds to a test of the electoral machinery of Un Nuevo Tiempo (UNT), while that is a catalyst for the existence of an effect Rosales, able to translate their personal support to other candidates placed under its wing action. Los Rosales challenges are manifold: 1) demonstrate the ability of survive a new confrontation with President Chavez, 2) consolidate the national leadership of UNT and 3) prevent the advance of Primero Justicia (PJ) as another option to the core of the opposition.
All these elements allow us to understand the particular strength of the campaign in Zulia. The debate has been diverted from the discussion of a policy agenda to be typecast in the field of defense or attack Zulia. By focusing the debate on this issue, the command Rosales scored an important advantage, which decreased to the extent that the President introduced the prospect of direct confrontation between him and Rosales. There is no doubt that the strategy of political communication command current Governor obeys the logic of generating organic identity between himself as a "candidate" (political figure) and Zulia as a whole, in such a way that an attack leaves raised him (Rosales) is a direct attack Zulia. At this point we note the historical advice. Rosales's strategy is the same used by Venancio Pulgar in 1859-1863, when it was raised - almost the same terms, the policy dilemma. It will be recalled
Zulia showed elusive to accept submission to central government from the moment of separation from the Department of the Republic of Venezuela-Colombia so-called Gran Colombia, in 1830. From that period and even the prelude to the federal War, resources and access to communication of the Andean states Zulia (Trujillo, Tachira and Merida) were key to the Venezuelan economy. This fact was exploited by Venancio Pulgar leadership to build a sense of identity manipulation of Zulia, voluntarism identity used for personal gain and in those moments where personal ambition collided with the interests of the Venezuelan state of Zulia and summoned in defense, with the excuse that it was the region which was under attack and not his political ambition. Result: all the historic space Maracaibo, including Zulia state borders and certain areas bordering the state of Falcon, were the subject of an intervention of the National Executive restoring order and generating the flight of thumb, leaving the entire state and its citizens subjected to the consequences of political adventurism. Yesterday and today, the situation arises in the same terms. We are astonished to hear
Rosales noted that when attacking him attacking the Zulia. With more than 120 years later, we encounter expressions such as those outlined in a national channel in the sense that he hate Chavez expressed his hatred of Zulia. It is certainly an example of the impact of historical and cultural manipulation exerted on the Zulia. Confrontation is two (2) political projects, not against a region and its citizens, but to stand as an attack on identity seeks to raise cultural solidarity can be expressed in the form of votes for candidates of Rosales. Again, we witness and regional history is manipulated for personal political interests. It is up to Zulia decide whether to allow this manipulation or otherwise remains to be articulated within the national project preserving its historical and geographical determinants. As the 23-N will see the results and know that we fulfill our duty as historians to denounce the cultural Manichaeism. John E.

Historian

Romero Juane1208@gmail.com
17/11/2008