This is the translation of the Fatal Nation book, published in 2009 in Porto Alegre, Brazil. It presents understanding of the problems of poverty and violence in our capitalism, from the Brazilian reality. The translation from Portuguese to English is of the author; due to lack of fluency in the English, requires willingness to assimilate the errors. Key words = Social aspects - poverty, misery, violence. Economic conditions - development, income and its distribution, equality.
PORTO ALEGRE 2009, Ed. AGE
CIP-BRAZIL. Cataloging at source
NATIONAL UNION OF BOOK PUBLISHERS, RJ
Fatal Nation / Back Jairo. - Porto Alegre, RS: AGE, 2009.
16x23cm. ; 230p.
1. Economic development. 2. Brazil - economic conditions. 3. Poverty - social aspects - Brazil. 4. Violence - social aspects - Brazil. 5. Income - distribution - Brazil. 6. Equality - Brazil. I. Title.
09-0053. CDD: 330981
CDU: 338.1 (81)
For who did not understand my way
writing is the result of 25 years of research on poverty and
violence. Of these, 20 after joining the course of Economics; five
writing; always the same concern. Are reflections of the most
worrying economic and social problems for ordinary citizens and
reflexes of this everything in life the most privileged - and how we
can realize our society and better position ourselves in relation to
daily events. A life that is good or fair (and even if it is bad),
it's can get much worse if we neglect fundamental aspects of life -
that say it young people to waste their lives, many times. Therefore,
we assume this research.
understanding is the result of heated conversations with friends and
teachers, is learning the economics faculty of news, research,
readings and endless reflections on a day-to-day and night. For it
was after an extended discussion with friends about our social
problems inflicted anguish of, again, get the group undisputed
perceptions of our society and seems lost it, since it seems that no
one else realizes this reality; the immediate aim was to not want to
miss again these considerations.
possible solution and to seek remembering, the best possible, and
record these maxims? With the outbreak writing some of these
assertions, the great eruption writing of all apprehensions and
assimilation of our capitalist reality and social problems. Always
with the irreducible and very difficult Descartes's method to
understanding, for over five years of total immersion, writing,
reading, reflecting; and dozens of reviews.
could the most abandoned in society to understand that, among many
riches to see every day, nothing will remain to them? They ask by
themselves if we (the privileged) are so selfish ... "(...)
probably in all periods, as again today, many people wonder if it
really worth defending the little civilization that was thus
acquired. "(Freud). But any help or desirable behavior that we
can, may represent a life less taken.
serious effort (of tens of thousands of hours, lifelong) reflects
total preoccupation with the problem of poverty, by part of someone
who does not conform to see so much suffering among the poor.
Rousseau already pondered, "who better than they can know under
what conditions it's appropriate to live together in the same
society?". Our concern extends to the problems that it causes in
society, and the dislikes and dangers for this situation for the
this in a tireless effort to extend our understanding beyond
practical limits and obvious economic data. But of course, we need
also a systemic view about the socioeconomic organization: production
systems, social organization, capitalist,
labor ... The subject is arduous, hard, but we can mitigate it later
- we anticipate, so that it doesn't show itself impenetrable.
was added to the original title with inspiration by the book of
Klester Cavalcanti, The Name of Death, that is true history of life a
hired killer that killed nearly 500 people - professionally, without
rancor. Could not escape this tragic reality and of need to maintain
this theme: a fatality, to lethality of the events of our society.
appears to treat a melodrama, it might be interesting to know that
this tropic is made with stone soup and newspaper, and there are
child eating clay and that sells few pennies; if this is a dream, or
nightmare, please wake me; well, if it's a novel, and what does not
kill us makes us stronger, as intended to Nietzsche, we want to be
strong both to watch all the chapters, not only the financial
maelstrom. If everything in life goes on, we want everything pass
well, not to have karmas to reprise.
no one has the time or the inclination to the arguments developed in
twenty pages; as the theme (the society and the economy) are too
broad; and as long arguments you lose reasoning; the arguments need
to be self-evident, or easily demonstrated through economic and
social sciences - and usually demonstrable in only one paragraph. And
how you needs of continuity of thought, everyone arguments is
connected, and none are lost or unreasonable to.
ideas are formed by clusters of arguments (or aphorisms) - course for
discussion, grouped otherwise considered under better judgment or
batting (of course there are still many ways to better accommodate
these ideas, but, like life, is -If a dynamic process, which does not
exhaust itself in a few years of dedication to the best presentation
these considerations). The most important even is the search for new
perspectives and ideas - going far, far beyond the abundantly
repeated truisms about the economy over the past decades.
is not socialist defense, much less communist, including the
difficulty of perception these systems of social organization by the
person who was born in a capitalist culture. An attempt was made here
to cling as little as possible to self-interest or social and
political linkages, by impossible it may be (or appear). But how we
only learn to dance, dancing …
it does not follow any indicated way; but it take advantage of quotes
- is not been merely collage. Of course, all availed authors could
not be cited; and how many wonderful quote lacked even include yet -
but thus this charge would not end! (Maybe later, if we can reach a
second edition). And how many must-see works lacked review ... But
what life would have this time?
so, with so many available impressive assertions, also goes to
collect quotes; admiration for the opportunity, for the great
strength and grandeur of the considerations; by unusually strong
support to the maturation of the reflections - that enrich the text
with the possibility of further development and expansion of
perception - to address issues so broad, complex and profound, we
need support and good simplifications.
is a "free view" through social facts, with the intention
that those who follow is packed with new perspectives on their
society. "I desire that here will be outlined a thought that
makes it fly and recognize, as who knows a map, (...) not as history
of ideas ready, but as a method, or method of thinking.", of
thinking the society, we will add to Marcia Tiburi and his
prazerosíssima "Philosophy in common". Thus, these
reflections aren't an unreasonable way, but a provocation to reflect
on a better society.
the book is small [in relation to the magnitude of the social
dynamics], and more than a fatality, also by choice, incomplete: so
you can just, and with emphasis, invite to think, together, to
produce this action the most own philosophy. ". "The text
does not therefore, no pretense of knowledge just do not want to - or
could -. Be the conclusion" - also strive towards this goal with
Marcia Tiburi. "The true thought is always organic, it is born
of the lived life of each.". Not us to affect, so with the
numerous remaining spaces between the "pumpkins".
training as an economist, auditor and an MBA in Business Management,
underlies less than the experience, has been began on as general
assistant; the teams coordinator experience demonstrates the
contradictions of interest between the employee and the employer; the
participation in the business administration shows the weight of that
burden; as auditor you sees himself as judge, in an unusual
perspective and central to understand what is impassibility; as state
economist, the support experience for the development of all sizes
and industries companies demonstrates the limitations and
conditionings of the state; in business consulting, we see the
strength, power (and the poison?) of the capital.
has shown that many social systems have come and gone changed, but
the people who make this society have changed very little in its
deepest essence. So to this understanding, from the economics we
arrive to other social sciences. However, for Jung, the individual
identification with transcendental issues of man is equivalent to
psychic inflation (extrapolation of individuality), exalted in a
other words, the individual could be the happy owner of the great
truth that was waiting to be discovered, the lord of the
eschatological knowledge for the salvation of the nations. Such an
attitude does not necessarily imply the megalomania in its direct
form, but in attenuated form and best known of the reformer, of the
prophets and of the martyrs. Weak minds are at risk of succumbing to
this temptation, since are characterized by a good deal of ambition,
self-esteem and misplaced ingenuity.”
in Civilization in Transition, Jung explains a lot about who we are,
the western, and that talking about ourselves is similar to stand up
by the hair, "Speak something important about the civilized man
of today is one of the most difficult tasks and ungrateful for
imaginable, so anyone planning to do so is limited by the same
assumptions and is blinded by the same prejudices of those on which
should make important statements. "
how can someone just stick to the limits of what is related to their
individuality directly, and indulge in a happy life, with the
nightmare of that one day someone will kill his child in a trivial
assault? ... On second thought, this concern is not only personal,
but also with others, and it's strongly marked in the concern with
other family members.
you have family traumas, you lose the modesty of feeling obliged to
continue a life of "normal citizen", and we can't more
accomplish this; and you realize it absolutely clearly that we have
the right and, more still, an obligation to require a better society
- a civilization in fact, since, in our country, do not have it. The
community is ours, the society is our, of everybody, for our
experience and of all, in the best possible way. Surely, that way
there is not the best possible...
for Ricardo Goldenberg (psychoanalyst), what matters is the constant
attempt. The point of view of an individual is recognized as
important as a single narrative and thus valid for to be a witness,
even if socially conditioned, of the events of a society. And as each
one only remnant pay attention to what else he considers should, and
cling to what most pleases him, in short, try this apprehension. So,
as for Sartre (not comparing myself), "(...) the words I write
are requirements. (...) They appear as potential that have to be
realized. (...) They pull and conduct my hand. (...) The own means
appear as potential that claiming existence. "
wasn't possible to find skilled professional in the mood and time to
review these reflections. Perhaps the most serious errors were
avoided; the others show the originality of the text, and also for
you can meet the author, without aesthetic writing disguises, giving
it authenticity. How much would be useful support for this
perscrutamento and review by relevant professionals of economics,
philosophy, sociology and psychoanalysis, mainly. Better judgment:
like this this commitment wouldn't end!
will go like this, for discussion, improvement and even scorn - but,
in this it's equates to the society, which also improves from the
debate and the public clash; and, many times, also with ridicule.
Therefore, there remains only the continuation of this lonely journey
- until the ultimate! And how long we need so that only the inertia
can force the understandings fitting, worked day by day, and that are
very complex for us ... We can't fail to mention the acquiescence and
support of Editor, Prof. Paul Ledur.
the beginning, looking to present potential problems in any
capitalist society - watching very closely the facts of everyday life
and triggering a widespread perception this situation. The analysis
then search reflections on the causes of so many problems and some
views of understanding. At the end, we present a glimpse of some
paths and feasible and desirable behaviors for those who, day by day,
is an opinion leader or who have influence in this society.
can only try to understand the necessary paths to course to have a
better perspective on society that we accept as the most suitable -
more suitable for every moment, for during this same search and
during that same path. And with cautious for we not to appear too
crazy, or angry, we need to complete this text with simplicity and
How can ordinary
people understand the socioeconomic issues of their society,
increasingly complex, position yourself to see it in their day-to-day
most convenient to him and the company itself? How can it explain
that such an unequal society? To do so, you must start by realizing
this broad and dynamic society, seeking to understand the
difficulties of the population due to the extreme current life
situation. You can not just carry out a macroeconomic analysis with
pressure formed in the society over its individuals, "individual
and social energies" are channeled, and are extreme points of
concentration of flow along the axis of the distribution of wealth.
These energies are all that has economic and social value: wealth,
values, etc.. Therefore, to observe the financial situation of the
population of our country, especially the dynamics of income
distribution between extreme wealth and extreme, the poverty, we find
the polarization of income distribution.
polar, is something that has two ends, or poles. According to the
Concise Oxford Dictionary, is the attraction to the back or toward
the two poles or extremes; for the centralization of thoughts or
energies or forces on two points, contrast, contrast, focus on
opposite ends, which can be groups, interests, attention, activities,
influences, etc.. before aligned with each other.
bipolar disorder, in an extreme situation, the depressive behavior,
are partially or completely psychologically incapacitated to perform
the basic tasks of their lives, for various physiological or
psychological reasons, fears and passions. Sometimes, in opposition
to this situation, all the forces of these individuals come to be
directed towards "out" of this psychological state, to do
so, they cling to any possibility or positive event that might bring
them joy, and so end up valuing and sweeping up and easy with any
overly positive events in the midst of his depression. Thus, reaching
the other end of this polarization behavior: euphoria. In this
neurosis, there are no reasonable behavior, only extreme behaviors
In analogy to
the polarization behavior (or bipolar mood disorder), we also like to
understand the extreme distribution of income in our economy -
involving the difficulties of survival of the poorest, in contrast to
the growing accumulation of wealth by the rich. The population -
individuals or economic - are living polarized between two extremes,
between the extreme poverty and extreme wealth. This polarization
occurs around an axis at one end, much of the population has
extremely economically depressed (and desperately seeking wealth),
and at the other end, a small part of the population living in
economic euphoria (and use all means that have to remain in this
condition). In an intermediate situation between these two poles of
the population, the middle class, under pressure from both poles -
and being proactive of all social reality.
poverty of the nation's 21
and its amoral 31
of the wealthy classes and maintaining the status quo 43
difficulties and constraints
effects of the economic process 62
lost the harmony? 107
and information warfare 115
and demagoguery 126
efforts and their effects 135
evolution of capitalism 174
The nation's poverty
In extreme poverty, we can see a part of the population living in economically depressed and, like individuals in psychological distress, they feel powerless to carry out much of their activities and basic needs - food subsistence, instruction to remain in labor market, transport, health, etc.. On the other hand, as people with psychological disorders with euphoric behavior, the economic lives of individuals economically euphoric - wastefulness unnecessary sponsor, with unreasonable solely to create shows "exciting" in the midst of depressing economic reality, it seems that trying to convince everyone and themselves that are far out of poverty and that it affects them in any way, "even in thought," doing everything to prove it.
At first, the social behaviors are normal, individuals work to evolve into the labor market or economic. Due to the worsening economic crisis and competition in the labor market, it becomes very difficult to gradual evolution of the financial situation of the individual, and the behavior becomes extreme in an attempt to achieve riches. So when living economically depressed, in some cases the whole effort of individual is to pass in time, the economic euphoria, depression and avoiding the constant and very strong difficulties gradual evolution of their financial situation. When in economic euphoria, often the whole effort of individual is to keep you in this situation, then that is not possible due to the high wear generated in any aspect of your life for this kind of behavior exacerbated.
Such conduct (euphoric) has become standard among professionals in the far more competitive labor market, acting "like insects playing in the light," seeking an opportunity. Many do not achieve their purpose, and among those who can, many are not sure whether they have achieved is what they really want. To some extent, this effort of those who have better social and economic conditions to remain on your end of the underprivileged socioeconomic status.
Looking at the situation of the working class (working), reveals the suffering and humiliation. To these, life is very difficult, practically impossible, wages are low, the uncertainty of the work and the difficulties of life are very large, dominant groups maneuver the masses of workers, and many other sufferings "unpublished" there. The quality of work does not guarantee job security. Worker's rights are not respected - fraudulent bankruptcies leave crowds without their labor rights.
As in any social process, often legitimate processes as the business work are used to obtain illegal advantages to unscrupulous. Even serious companies are pressured to actions questionable ethics and even legally to do face competition from companies that reduce their costs of acting illegally - those being pressured to avoid paying social charges and less pay as unfair competitors do.
In the labor market gets to the point of believing that the less qualified employees could have no valid measurement of forces in the capital versus labor. But, assessing the situation only from the standpoint of extreme, where the selfishness of the employer is only what interests you, there is still a serious mistake in the labor market by some employers. Most business leaders are being lax in the situation analysis and not considering the problems (in a selfish sense, for these entrepreneurs) that are generating with your reckless behavior, completely discrediting the less skilled employees, acting like entrepreneurs, these employees can cause you serious harm, the first chance you get - which often is perceived - in addition to decreased productivity and increased turnover in employment.
In business, where the fee is not sufficient to maintain the project, is the depreciation of its assets due to lack of replacement of worn parts (or depreciated). Without that depreciation is taken into account, the business often seems to be making a profit when, in fact, is losing money, leading to the devaluation of the enterprise and often broke. The same happens with people when wages are not sufficient to maintain them in their social class over time - including the rebuilding of its class, with the maintenance and education of their children.
The split capital versus labor occurs when the capitalist seeks capital accumulation as an end in itself, as a symbol of power and wealth, rather than improving its economic and social conditions, yet, often, to the satisfaction of exacerbated pleasures (fully decoupled from economic and financial reality of the individual and the country). Have the employee seeks to satisfy their consumption needs, basic goods and superfluous, and at least maintaining their standard of living over time. In this volume of growing needs, are always looking over both worker and capitalist - some capitalists spend coercion of its employees, trying not to spend too many resources (which would be necessary to motivate workers).
Many factors determine poverty, but the consequences of what is done are multiplied by wealth and power (all kinds), so the great responsibility of the capitalist. And many of these actions are made only by the exercise of taste, making it difficult for the poor. The will of those who have power over the lives of workers acts as a Verdict, Kafka, condemning the individual to relegation.
But to Adam Smith in The Wealth of Nations, "The natural effort we all make to continually improve our own condition is a principle of preservation capable of preventing and correcting, in many respects, the ill effects of economic policy in some level partial and oppressive. " Smith's writings can be inferred ideas in different ways. One of these (and spread) is a capitalist, in pursuit of their interests (selfish), would be taken to produce goods that people want at the price she would like to pay and therefore the individual interest of each may cause the common good.
The same Nietzsche told us, unreservedly - to all situations of life in society: "(...) just as personal as possible into consideration also is found the greatest utility of the set, so that the people act strictly corresponds to the current concept of morality (understood as the overall usefulness?). Make it a whole person, and all that is done aim at your highest good - it takes far more than the agitations and compassionate action for others. "
Yes, both are right in that self-interest can provide a public good, and thus each must pursue their interests - otherwise it is an unnatural aberration of serious psychological and socioeconomic consequences. For the production of a well, how to enjoy a comfort, it is necessary expenditure of wealth, which at that time, will cause a positive effect on the economy because of the availability of this wealth.
Was reached, then the economic understanding that any economic movement, "the end of the day," causes a positive effect on the economy (economic liberalism) and that even the war serves as an example, as well as any expenditure in the economy. In this line also came across the theory that supply creates demand. It is assumed, according to a liberal conception (and see many examples of this is the day to day), when using all their forces (social and individual) to find what you want, you're not putting anything wrong, because it is a right: to seek benefits that are possible legally and ethically - and even that is positive for society.
Yes, the pursuit of individual interest may (but need not) have positive results for society - for this, depends on the consequences of acts. You can live leveraging synergies formed flows of wealth in capitalism without causing greater problems than those who already have capitalism - but since this will not be reached extreme attitudes and inconsequential. If everyone uses all their energies to pursue individual interests all they want, all the time, surely someone will eventually hurt - especially the part with minor conditions for that search, for some reason. Moreover, we have numerous negative consequences of acts committed in this insanity inconsistent - adverse, often, even for those who practiced them often.
The basic problem is that individuals generally have no satisfactory notion of their real interests, just one further case analysis to realize this. This understanding, of what is really basic and important to man, is sought by psychoanalysis, not by the economy (not provided by capitalism). These, if you can only perceive some kind (apparent at first glance) of immediate financial advantage or any possibility of consumption, even if subjective. The really critical question for each individual to know what he is their real interest (and not those of the imaginary vulgaris). One can argue that we all know that is basic and fundamental to have a house, for example. Yes, but what kind of housing? With luxuries unnecessary and unsustainable income for the owner?
In addition to the transitory character of the immediate consumption, it is virtually impossible that there is a series of problems arising from the pursuit of any interest - even if you be careful with these consequences in the pursuit of interest. Just one example among many possible, if an employee explore, with low wages, it serves my immediate financial interest, however, suffer the consequences when, as a lawsuit for breach of labor laws, or have the results of a study performed with neglect, the situation becomes totally uninteresting - at all. Any business manager clearly understands the ominous results for a company that, over time, disrespects its employees.
All because, beyond the immediate interest which in no way should prevail, what really matters, and that is often not taken into account in our country, are the interests of medium-term and especially long term. Did not always succeed, but always have to try to meet in the first place, the long-term interests. With long-term perspective, the interests homogenize themselves - this is the most important in all situations of life (not just the economic aspect). For example, someone in search of any immediate advantage is illegal in violation of justice could not try to join a public university or a public office - which could, with no other possibility, ruining the future of a person.
Even if a person acting illegally do not get caught in theft, for example, or convicted (and certainly would wish the most "clever"), the attitude of an individual to turn to theft and exploitation makes him leave to seek , overwhelmingly, positive attitudes towards life and other subjects. In life, no longer seeking legal advantages, according to the hypnotism of illegal rent-seeking, at work, leave to seek productive solutions for you and for all.
Some nations poorly organized and politically uneducated people with no more than a horde of vandals who destroy their own future - for everyone. It is easy to consider what is best: be a smart looking to take advantage of everything in an uncivilized country or be a conscious citizen of a country of educated people and politically organized. Obviously, everyone will think, but then, that all people do not follow the example that everyone thinks so clear? Simple: they do not want clever take the first step to become conscientious citizens. It may seem a simplistic thing, but want to be the last remaining seeking individual advantage (to the last possibility). And, not to feel stupid or they are not called by the pejoratives used to ridicule those who obey the law and ethics in countries unstructured politically and culturally. Part of the explanation of the causes of our economic and social problems is easy, is hard to change this whole picture.
However, it is often necessary, even to refrain from exercising a right to not cause unwanted effects on other - which would have repercussions on society and, consequently, about yourself. If everyone who xingarem difficulties in traffic (such as small sample), we will also be cursed and beaten. We must act with great responsibility, there is more room for error in society: a simple mistake in our traffic could cause an accident and delay dozens of people, a small flaw in our work we can undermine even thousands of people.
In today's society, there is much dependence between people (and is growing) due to high demand of activity experienced in the day-to-day and due to the speed of the events of daily life. Therefore, we must be increasingly apt to our activities in society without causing inconvenience to others. Ethics is not something imagined by any candidate for holy is the greatest expression of interest. As we live in society, can only seek the most individual interest provided it is kept real interest of the whole society - and therefore ethics: why some do not go that the interest of all.
It is clear that the production of goods has positive effects for the accumulation and circulation of wealth in a country. The maintenance of capitalism, in fact, depends on a flow of resources in the economy. The problem is how this production is carried out, which the previous cost (which was done) to promote the accumulation of wealth, what and how much is left to accomplish at the expense of accumulation, and the consequences of the act of economic (production well), which may have consequences minimized or not. The army is an example of wealth that are applied and that drive the economy, but the means that are destroyed in the process or a war could be used to produce wealth for decades.
Therefore, there can be no decoupling of social reality, and is reasonably necessary in the behavior of individual or economic agent. So a company needs, and suitability for the allocation of productive resources most effectively, also have social and environmental suitability. It is understood by social skills the ability to enter into the community with the least negative impact possible and positive actions to society, to understand the environmental suitability business activity with the lowest environmental impact and compensatory actions such as afforestation, to make up the pollution produced.
There is not enough for the socioeconomic development only individual effort (uncommitted and uncoordinated), each according to interest and acting in one direction. We see in our country the result, even if not everyone is doing it. The pursuit of individual interest is only valid for our society when the individual at the same time to the pursuit of their interest is to promote or allow the interest of others, and this interest does not conflict or surpasses that of the other - for this we need an individual organization and collective constant and increasingly rationalizing the consequences of our actions.
But under capitalism it seems that if you do not enjoy all in one day, it seems then that the time spent and lost the opportunity for something that will not return - a view similar to that of traders who, when they lose a sale, the normal is that this sale is no longer performed by the same trader. Therefore, and perhaps influenced to some extent by these merchants and their business, live the obsession to get all consuming, always, every day, and so much personal debt. We do not take into account that if we fail to consume a well one day, this money can be spent differently in the future, long-term investments for our future, as in personal training.
Increasingly, the commercial start to increase its coercive the final sous of people, increasingly indebted to it. Every day there are modern products "without which the individual can not pass" - and he can no longer spend the whole month with your paycheck. Always works harder to make bids and purchases and the interest due on loans. Thus, further diminishes its availability to other leisure options. The individual enters into a situation of discomfort growing increasingly "attached" to this routine, debt and sedentary, with consequent bad mood, relationship difficulties, loss of culture.
But in capitalism, what are the elements most arduous life of the poorest and therefore also of society? There is a lack of complex production systems, with great economic results. It is the reverse: the inability to maintain the individual against the most frugal life. Examples are the lack of some change for minimal food, transportation to seek work or to buy a painkiller.
Discrimination against blacks also aggravates the problem of poverty. We have new "slave quarters" in business: the supporting industries and cleaning - beyond the "slave quarters" of prisons and Febem that hide in much suffering and violations of their children and detainees who are suffering from a depth unspeakable. This violence "enclosed", pressed, formed on the day-to-day will slowly, preventing the lives of these individuals. It is this pressure that explodes in violence in big cities. Then people do not understand, they think that violence is something free.
Quotas for blacks in universities can be a good way to reduce social differences, but there are many challenges to the system. But see that the share of non-black students who will be outside the university on quotas will be quickly superseded in quality by students from black to join the university in shares (even though such a note in the lower vestibular). This is because these represented the intellectual elite of the black poor, and will perform better than those of Caucasians. These, in part, are only able to enter university with training in good schools, years of prep school support and family structure (and yet to pass in the last settings).
The case of someone who had the first ratings among those who did not have good conditions to prepare, demonstrates that this is high school performance and is a talent that, in addition to everything else already said, can and should even be used by society - with a probable optimum productivity. In some cases, of course, some of which have an exceptional opportunity to show how brilliant and - exponents of their social group and are wasted.
In the case of non-blacks, no one stands up to attack, even if some students in federal universities, sometimes, rather than seize the opportunity and dedicate themselves to study, devote only to enjoy life, to parties and drunkenness, during and after your training, what is observed with some regularity. If it were to continue an evaluation often, it may be argued that these, often, professionals are leaving the profession, are lax and corrupt, a total waste of public resources, which is never mentioned. Incidentally, why do not act affirmatively on this issue by inviting, first, black people for different activities such as participation in interviews, advertisements, novels and TV programs in general and to work and promotions? Of course, other systems may be best, perhaps the best shares to be poor regardless of color.
Labor law and the justice system consistent, the way it is operating, are also factors that aggravate the unemployment problem; damn system that gives the luxury of convictions based on such absurd arguments work for years, twenty hours a day, no vacation, no wages - a hypothesis which prevents any kind of comment. The argument always in similar cases is that the defense failed - but, "as they say," excuses hell is paved. You can not, under any circumstances, accept that outlandish nonsense and logically impossible, and that, instead of the more necessary to combat abuse of the employee by the employer, eventually causing unemployment due to fear of the employer to hire an employee - even employers in the case of more serious and concerned with the worker.
Entrepreneurs prefer to give up contracts to run any risks outlandish. In the field it is also true because, from the 80s, there was an avalanche of absurd causes lost by farmers, arguing he worked and lived on a farm, and then not knowing how to describe the color inside the house where he had lived, and in part of the time, earned the proposed actions. Later there were avalanches of workers going to live in "big cities" due to the decrease in labor supply, since most of the farmers was afraid of any contract. Not coincidentally, at the time, the trend in modern agriculture is by use of large farm equipment, which reduce the need for use of manpower. For the entrepreneur, the employee must be part of solving a problem, not the beginning of a big "headache" by the labor courts.
Those who have a regular job also said they have serious problems, because their life has lost much quality, and much of what the worker learns during life comes only from television. When you get home tired from work, it is your hobby easier. So often becomes "prisoner" of the television he submits, causing him to attend numerous offers "irrefutable" and socially undesirable fashion. He is not able to learn to position themselves facing the situation, even if you want to criticize that watches do not know if that will be detrimental to assist him, then, becomes a "slave" of this process.
In this situation, the poorest people use their instincts and go looking for a way to survive, spending only what is less dispensable. This is, first, going to be spent only for the needs of medium and short term - disregarding the long-term needs. After, they spend only for short-term needs - also going to disregard the needs of medium-term.
These people go through life with a limited, regulated, linear, they lose motivation, sad, no longer corresponds to the expectations of friends and society, languishing over the years, including making - are more susceptible to disease. At work, no longer meet expectations, and it becomes difficult to keep the job or get another. This process, and work itself, becomes a torture. Meanwhile, the matter that even the capitalist who is unscrupulous is to "bring in fuel for the machine" system.
With the current dominance of the masses by capital, is very unlikely to have social justice, because many factors perpetuate poverty, including the inability to bargain on the part of the working poor. Who is used to receive the minimum wage over the years will have serious difficulties in bargaining (or require) a higher salary, even if you do a job with a higher value - and even, in many cases, could succeed in these bargains, but he no longer able to "rise up". Get used to being poor. The opposite is true and also helps to explain the situation of social differences: people accustomed to good yields enough to resist low wages and barganharão enough, even doing some work of questionable value, and in many of these bargains, will succeed. Being rich is addictive.
The situation of the poorest workers became emblematic: members of the economic system (capitalist) take advantage of high wages for unjustified increases in name only of passing on costs. Recent experience in our country showed that the indexation of wages to inflation is not over. This only serves to maintain the privileged classes, categories as wages rise with privileged social position without national discussions, as is the case the minimum wage.
That various people, it takes a lifetime cattle, "of quiet desperation" (Thoreau), those blacks who drag themselves through life being lived and see the distance and pass it off, "leaving no name on earth" - as Sun Tzu said (V century? BC) - have in the absence of family planning a major aggravating their problems. The more people sharing what little food and you have a family, the greater the poverty. Do not take this seriously into account is "swimming against the current." There is no magic in the economy. Economics is not the art of creating wealth indefinitely, there are always unmet needs, and these are increasing. Economics is the science of seeking to apply more efficiently (which generate more development) scarce resources.
Marx had already warned that excessive population growth of the working class favors the capitalist, it creates the "reserve army of labor", workers who are unemployed, whose potential labor supply constant, almost at any price, allows the maintenance wages at the minimum level of subsistence, because if an employee refuses a salary deemed insufficient, there will be ten others ready to replace it.
This is especially important for the poorest, because with the unsustainability of the growth rates of this population there is in any way in our current reality, to generate ways to improve the material conditions of life to so many "citizens" who are all born year. Only if I kept the standard of living (and segregation) in our country, it would be necessary every year, build up, to recreate something like two cities such as Porto Alegre (with infrastructure for more than two million people used) that prospect is terrifying and puts us at first defeated, in a bad light.
If workers' wages increase, they are able to create more children, to the extent that wages decrease as a result of increased supply of skilled labor. On the opposite, low wages could be considered as a disincentive to the reproduction of these workers, the lack of financial resources for the maintenance of children. But the situation of people with high qualifications can not serve as a reference for these workers, who do not have the same conditions to overcome difficulties in classification.
With the level of employee income below the subsistence level, cultural level is not maintained can lead to family planning. Thus, the poorest parts of society, very poor and uneducated, and paradoxically to their income, they start to play up the frightening rates. Experts also point out that, in living beings, is the natural increase in fertility when the difficulties of maintaining a species are too large, as in insects, which have great offspring, but of which few survive.
So it appears, can be said that poverty destabilizes, retracts, discredits, discourages, delegitimizes the miserable. It will so little of the underprivileged and marginalized ... Or why then are marginalized? Why do you want? It would be the understanding of "enlightened"? Can not even an error (any illegal action) in an individual's life ruin your life forever. Certainly, if they could opt for an organized life, socially framed - more viable and comfortable.
Poverty amoral and its results
Seneca, who was tutor and became Director of Nero, had already warned 2,000 years ago, that "A people hungry is not rational, so no equity would know to calm him down, or fold it the prayers." The despotic French aristocrats of the late nineteenth century found that with the flat of their heads - and there are so many examples.
In the Utopia of Thomas More, 1516 (describing the decline in job opportunities at the time), utopias aside, we have the concern and the sentence: "What if resume work the wool, so that an honest industry can usefully occupy the idle mass, poverty those who have become thieves and those who are just lackeys for now inactive. Because for both groups, be assured, sooner or later steal. If you do not remedy these evils, will be in vain to praise your way to curb theft. It is more an illusion than a fair or effective. Indeed, you let swerve and gradually deteriorate the character of people from early childhood, and punish adults for crimes which they carry promise guaranteed since the early years. What else do you do, ask if you do not manufacture the same thieves who then hang? "
"To our surprise, we found that these deprivations are still operating and still form the core of hostility to civilization." Even for Freud, is "(...) was not a culture far beyond the point where the satisfaction of a part of its participants depends on the oppression of another part, perhaps the greatest - and this is the case in all cultures today - it's understandable that people so oppressed develop an intense hostility towards a culture whose existence they make possible for their work , but which have no more rich than a minimum quantity. In such circumstances, it is expected to internalization of cultural prohibitions among the oppressed people. Rather, they are not prepared to recognize these prohibitions, are intent on destroying their own culture and, if possible, even annihilate the assumptions on which it relies. "
Compare our capitalism to the state of war described by Jean-Jacques Rousseau: "Even if all the terrible right to kill, say that a slave made in war, or a conquered people, should only obey the Lord while being forced." "(. ..) it is an unfair exchange to make him buy at the expense of their freedom, the life that you do not have any rights. " Yes, this sounds obvious, but continue: "So far as having acquired some authority about it besides strength, among them remains, as before, the state of war, which their relationship is the effect, and using the law of war does not assume any treaty of peace. "" As soon as you can safely disobey legitimately do (...). "And that's what we have seen in the case of harder oppressed. For Rousseau, when the organized state becomes totally alien to some, preventing their life, they tend to return to the state of nature, ie: every man for himself, against all others.
However, in our capitalism, which expresses all its harshness in underdeveloped countries, which are unable to position itself along the axis of wealth distribution (ie, can not derive richness to some extent, even though the minimum measured), to defeated as a war (it eventually resembles), it must be complete desolation - are not forced to do anything, but can not do anything they want.
"The hostility of these classes to civilization is so obvious, that provoked the latent hostility of the social strata are more likely to be despised. It goes without saying that a civilization which leaves so many dissatisfied of their participants and lead them to revolt, has nor deserves the prospect of a lasting existence "(Freud). Now, as the slaves described by Rousseau, these relate only defeated capitalist interests as required, actively subdued, or conditioned by any principle itself, as religion - since they have no commitment whatsoever with this capitalism. Only part of this capitalist society, but not of capitalism, in any measure - since they are unable excluded.
In this society, such a critical state of war which is agreed, for some reasons and some rules, that part of the population (the underprivileged) only left to starve. Rousseau could repeat: "I with you a convention wholly to my advantage, and totally in your injury, which I will watch as you wish, and thou shalt observe while for my liking."
For Montesquieu (The Spirit of Laws), the highest good of all in a state, and that should be the end of every system of legislation, is summarized in the main objects, liberty and equality. "Freedom, because all particular dependence is another such force drawn from the body of the state, equality, because without it he can not stand freedom. (...) For equality, is not understood by this word that the degrees of wealth and power are absolutely the same, but that's about power, she is saved from all the violence and never exercise, but because the post and the laws, nor to wealth, understand that no citizen is quite opulent that you may buy another, and none so poor to be forced to sell themselves. (...) It is precisely because the force of things tends always to destroy equality (...) "
"You want to give consistency to the state? Come as much as possible the extreme degrees, not opulent media people and beggars, these two states, naturally inseparable, are likewise fatal to the common good; emerging from the upholders of tyranny [those who favor] and the other tyrants and among them are always trafficked public liberty [that we see in our government]; a purchase, the other sells "(Rousseau).
It is nonsense to say that not participating in the labor market because they have no qualification: if all qualifications are no jobs for all. That is, capitalism is the hub of the capital, sparing manpower, and with the fury of the pursuit of wealth for some, becomes exclusive. "If man has no natural right over their equal, if the force does not make right, we are left with the conventions, which are the mainstay of all legitimate authority among men." "The duty and interest require because the two contracting parties to mutually assist it, and the men themselves must excel on getting all the benefits that depend on dual relationship. Now, being the sovereign [or state] formed only by individuals who compose it, has neither may have interests contrary to theirs (...) "(Rousseau).
Of course this is not simply to meet any desire to employees: "There is often great difference between the will and the general will of all, this tape only to the common interest, one sees only private interest, and is nothing more than a sum of individual wills, but when you take these wills the most and least, that they destroy each other, remains to be the sum of the differences the general will "(Rousseau). Therefore, the general will is what everyone wants for everyone, and not simply due to meet the desires of each. Similarly, one can not only contrary to the interests of capitalist society as a whole, for more reasons to find "legal".
However, in those who live slave regime of segregation, only left against the society that oppresses them to rebel, as we have seen - of course that way you get to undesirable consequences for anyone. But "madness creates no right" (Rousseau), and if one person lives in an untenable situation, and does not realize ways to escape from this situation, tend to despair and gradual or total disruption of his life (and more someone) if a community lives in an untenable situation, as in the slums, a part of its population degrades continuously (and many go into this madness, and bring others along.)
This creates insurmountable situations for everyone, because when someone is trapped, without noticing any option (to evade the untenable position) as well as any animal, in his despair, is capable of anything. "(...) Will always be very different things undergo a multitude and ruling a society" (Rousseau). While not consistently change the living conditions of these populations, all else will be remediation. "Few punishments are in a state well governed, not by much to forgive, but there are few offenders: a multitude of crimes [is that] assures defendants impunity when the state is corrupt." Now that we see every day.
In this environment of constant social pressure and profound suffering and injustice begins to emerge is that social violence, which is not only attacks on the most successful (in rounds), but also and mainly to people in poor communities, and also profound violence against their own families, in this case, violence of all kinds imaginable, such as neglect, physical, psychological, sexual, etc.. The violence we see on the news, the assaults, is "just the tip of the iceberg" because the biggest part is that which occurs within the very poor communities - all washed down with too much alcohol and drugs, and trafficking.
But not good for us - to society - "crush" of members of correctional institutions, as may seem to some. Hunting these degenerates will not improve the situation because others continually come to their "jobs". Even though it is fundamental, it only remedy the situation, an attempt that does not worsen. It is not even very educational this punishment, since they are barely perceptible viable options for these offenders. What options feasible, practical, to forward their lives they have, even prior to committing an offense? There are reasonable options for all of them? Therefore, the feathers become just punitive, and not affect behaviors.
Even if necessary or essential also that punitive aspect in this case happens to be the punishment for offenders, perceived as merely a struggle against them by a state that is perceived by them as a representative, socially legitimated, continuity of social elitism - which results in the same frame. That is, a clash that is a focal point for social creates a vicious circle.
But social violence is not caused only by economic and social gap between poorer and wealthier society. Give yourself even more, due to total lack of perspective of improving the social condition of the poor over time, even the most sustained and most hardworking, creating a financial and economic apartheid. Thus, it is just and exact situation of the individuals most honest of the poorest class - even with all honesty, good intentions and hard work, can not ascend socially - which confirms the status of a misdemeanor of some individuals in this class. In extreme situations, those become the paradigm for those who do not accept the continuation of poverty itself and the feeling of holding those who realize and start to seek ways of darkness.
This means that instead of promoting social dynamics, gradually improving the situation, what would a virtuous circle, is always to recreate the same situation or worse. Therefore, you need to change the whole structure of society, that does not result in this scenario without viable alternatives socially. So our interest is, the privileged few who are not segregated in society, changing this situation.
Of course, besides the social problems, there are behavioral problems caused by psychological deviations, and not by social injustice, and it seems unlikely that this problem is the analysis of the violence. Power would refer to Nietzsche's comment when he said that people mentally and physically helpless "perceived to have at least one power still, despite all its weakness: the power to cause pain. (...) Exalts his imagination, it is still important enough to cause pain to the world. "
Power would also mention the instinct that humans have to test limits, especially the young, and that company often do so by acting in a violent way, in robberies and other crimes, as if to test how far you can go your reaction front of his dissatisfaction with the social condition of poverty, or simply for self-assertion. And game theory could seek to understand the use of violence in our society, that participants in a game they want to know, and seek to test, all the reactions to his actions on the part of others who are "playing" . So many times, seem a "game of cat and mouse" some actions against organized crime to the police and the judiciary.
It is not the case of penetrating deeply in psychoanalysis, as in the case of psychic ability to degrade the impossible of satisfaction prohibited; this structure is something the human race, and not focus our investigation on the situation and economic and social structure . What matters is that there are things so that we are affected, conditioned, so that "anyone" suspected.
But about that power would also refer to Freud: "(...) every individual is virtually an enemy of civilization, though in thinking that this is an object of universal human interest. It is noteworthy that, for some men are able to exist alone, feel, nevertheless, as a heavy burden the sacrifices that civilization expects of them, to make communal life possible. "
He continues: "Civilization, therefore, must be defended against the individual, and its regulations, orders and institutions are directed to this task. They aim not only to make a certain distribution of wealth, but also to maintain this distribution [so is the legal system and judiciary], in fact, have to protect against the hostile impulses of men all that contributes to the conquest of nature and production of wealth. "A thorough analysis in this regard would be subject to psychoanalysis: the death instinct to return to the inorganic state or area of cruelty to boost the external environment and for self-preservation, or inability to complete satisfaction ...
But to Freud, even without taking into account the distribution of income, there would be resistance to the tendency of civilization, imagine that when the distribution is highly concentrated. And even if there is any social apparatus to combat violence, she rises and begins to take hold, it is because something else is that the natural resistance to civilization.
So, anyway, much of the social problem of violence is caused by social degeneration - with the new barons refugees in their condominiums called by the Greek letter, practicing the art of ignoring life. It seems that these have to ask, serves you well this little life capitalist, eh? For these, the play go through life, alienated, life goes on. Those who ride in helicopters are presented with commendations, those that creep along the ground, not.
Social exclusion is to let people arrested and thrown into a social system in a ghetto in a company without a basic condition of life. As prisoners are citizens of the poorer classes (lower middle class, poor and mainly miserable) that neither the right to go-and-coming they have. People with good financial conditions have the full right to go and coming with free insight. And the poor? While some are filled in wonderful and constant travel, the poor are like prisoners while having no condition to travel, even to seek employment because they do not have the money for transport, as they are in "ghettos". Injuries and decreased with its ills and pains, they were ashamed and redeem himself to his tiny little world. How are the most helpless, lost in the streets, it's almost primates - or worse, because I have no more and no direction in life or strength to move up or defend themselves, getting played on the sidewalks.
The millions of impoverished and crowded around in endless slums and ghettos of this country become accustomed to think that all who imagine that is legal is out of their reach, and that this prostration and destruction - against a strong, complex and coercive society - even the most desirable things do not depend on your judgment, your will or capacity. Therefore, only depend on your destination - and to rebel against this reality, just have your anger. No, this is not speech; only is the harsh reality (subliminal, but the dusty ghettos).
That life is not sustainable beef, focused on maintaining and material reproduction of a standard of living (like a diet) as an end in itself, and that whoever is not able to repeat rituals socioeconomic (to qualify to amass his share), becomes alienated socially. The social pressure that forces this kind of experience is revealed in disputes over a parking spot in traffic disputes or cynical pleasantries of people who are usually aggressive behaviors. These pleasantries are sometimes exaggerated, sometimes end up quickly, or just show up in some clichés.
The situation of poverty in Brazil is like a bomb ready to explode as a result of high pressure formed in the dispute between the most successful social and between them and the poor. This dispute exists throughout society, not only between employers and their employees, or between large landowners and landless, just as people might think. That maid who works with small gain, and very few rights work, also suffers the same social pressure, or greater, the employee in the industry, and generally have lower wages than a worker in the industry.
When there is no prospect of improvement of working conditions and remuneration, almost nothing can encourage the individual, which makes a person apathetic and cynical, ready to take action contrary to who is responsible for this situation or against society, or even some even against anyone who does not have any responsibility in the situation of that individual.
Often, to derail the path of crime, the individual is hoarded by tragedy - so you can not say that it can be an option (rational) to embark on the path of crime. It is, rather, and much, an outburst of passion: "Since no one cares" and nobody seems responsible for the calamitous situation of life of all these people, "do not feel responsible for the fate of individuals and society; do not care with the terrors caused by violence, since I do not care the fate of every society. "
The lack of incentives and feedback to the efforts of the destitute leads to a void of references to the worker and the citizen, who now have a life with the lack of direct references to be something positive (and director) or negative (and disturbing). For lack of feedback and incentives to the efforts of citizens to seek an ethical life, creates a lack of meaning to their daily lives and their activities and efforts. That is, the references and moral principles and respect for ethics and morality of their society have diminished its meaning and its value in one's life.
For lack of anything that they feel the poorest in their lives, anything that comes to whom almost nothing, it may seem that might be yours. From a certain level of deterioration of the needs, the individual shall not see the difference where you come from something to suit your needs. Thus, in his anger, now have absolutely important attitudes contrary to society, as in crime.
"Certainly, anger is not an instinct or a habit, not a rational calculation. It is a sudden solution of a conflict, a way to cut the Gordian knot. (...) We ourselves who we put ourselves in a state of complete inferiority, because in our very low level requirements are lower; be satisfied with less expenditure. Unable to find, in a state of high tension, the delicate and precise solution to a problem, we act on ourselves, humbling, and we became a being for whom solutions are adapted and less coarse enough (...) "(Sartre) .
"And the conduct of 'anger', less well adapted to the problem that the upper conduit - and impossible - that would solve it, is however precisely and perfectly adapted to the need to break the tension, taking the mantle of lead that weighs on the shoulders . (...). Here it is, so close and threatening a world that expects her to act and the need to reject the same time. "Still enjoying the text of Sartre, it seems that we can use it to explain in part the role that drugs are currently in the crime: "It is 'weakening the barriers between real and unreal,' of 'destroying the differentiated structure that the problem required the field.'" And yet the author tells us Guillaume: the choleric "weakens barriers that separate the deep and superficial layers of the self. "
Parece razoável ao indivíduo, então, apropriar-se de qualquer coisa ou ignorar a pertinência dos meios necessários a isso. O indivíduo passa a não ser mais capaz de identificar a validade prática em sua vida da moral, da ética, do respeito às leis, da religiosidade e, principalmente, do respeito ao status quo. Mesmo que a tudo isso observe, e em grande medida, não percebe reconhecimento, retorno (ou compensação), incentivo por parte da sociedade. Pelo contrário, é desprezado e espezinhado (e muito), mesmo que pesarosamente acordem todos os dias, para um trabalho insuportável, por um salário humilhante (sem nenhum incentivo, num calvário interminável).
It seems that there are many aspects that show that degenerate societies are uncontrollable. According to quantum physics, the eye of the observer influences - or conditions - the behavior of the particle (atom) observed. Company may also be said that the observation of the individual conditioning of the society. And also: "Do you find yourself in line with the course of human development that the human external coercion gradually becomes internalized as a special mental agent, the super-ego of man, and takes it includes among its commandments" (Freud).
And the author continues: "Every child presents this process of transformation, it is only by this means that it becomes a moral and social being. This strengthening of the superego is a very precious cultural asset in the psychological field. Those that held opponents are transformed into vehicles of civilization. The higher the number one cultural unit, the more secure their height and can pass it over without any external coercion. "
But in our society, due to the worsening of social problems, individuals with strong social pressure and financial fail to respond to the social conditioning of all types - because nobody can resist everything all the time. In this society, there is no minimum social conditions to avoid pressure can promote the breakup of the conditioning of the individual to observe the social norms. That is, living under extreme pressure, and without moral reference, it is ready to assimilate and behave contrary to ethics and morality.
Steeped deeply into their problems, the population can no longer emerge from them, as in the consumption and trafficking of drugs and the complete deterioration of a family concern of the poor families. When the perception of this whole picture becomes not only the worker but of a whole society, especially the poorest part of society begins to break up the "social pact". The links that maintain social identity are the threads that hold the social pact.
It is the social pact that individuals behave in the manner required by the functioning of society as "agreed", respecting the norms and established institutions. With the social pact broken, it creates parallel communities with experiences where individuals no longer believe and expect nothing formally constituted society. At this point, the class also does not matter what happens or marginalized what you do to the privileged classes (middle class, upper-middle and high). This creates the "parallel state", as in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro.
For Jung, where the company simply "drag" the individual "(...) makes the same extent free of their individual responsibility." "In the social aspect, this negative principle manifests itself through spectacular crimes (...)." For Jung, "Without freedom there can be no morality." For lack of evolution of this individualistic thinking to apprehend what is the collective, as opposed to (the individual's perception) between the individual and collective (or community).
On the other hand, why would these people helpless to present an active behavior in order to take them forever to the behavior desired by society, as they could with what condition it? The people of the privileged classes are encouraged in their actions, the pleasures of life, while the very poor only respond in their actions, the stimulus to avoid suffering yourself, and this mechanism turns out to tire the helpless individual, who has never a positive incentive in their actions, but only coercion. Work only free these people, and only in part and with much effort, some immediate problems such as hunger largely.
But there is no sufficient coercion to a very unhappy society. We tell them (the "excluded"), through our actions, there is nothing more important than money. "All" we do not to give any penny. "Everything" is made to buy a luxury car, a large building, a yacht, etc.. About "everything" we, including "over" them, the poor.
In this society, trafficking emerges as an opportunity for the slum pass, once the economic and financial euphoria. Traffickers are to do anything to stay in the state of economic euphoria, because they know that leaving the trade, shall fall by the depression of a life without the minimum conditions of prosperity. Given this unconscious sure who "track" the path of traffic always follows the same direction, even though still young will be shot in a clash with other traffickers or the police and even knowing that eventually have to execute many people.
With the economic pressure in order to lower the livelihoods of individuals, they are acting in the opposite direction, with efforts to maintain and raise their living conditions. This "fight" along the axis of the income distribution in society and the deterioration of the maintenance of social class is best perceived in the middle class, individuals who are in the middle - end of the axis of the income distribution, which come to feel high pressure, making it difficult to maintain their social position over time. On the one hand, the high-class individuals pressing the middle class by paying lower wages over time, and other individuals in the lower middle class competing in the labor market by accepting lower wages.
Allied to this, the economic situation, with higher prices and taxes, and reduced quality of public services. Are, therefore, individuals increasingly live as if in a vacuum, in a position affected by forces acting in two directions - the need for better standards of life and reduced maintenance of the standard conditions of life - the conditions and thinning livelihoods available to them.
A group of individuals will become aware of that need being careful to keep their living conditions over time, some of these will be unable to defend themselves from this situation, and their standard of living will fall, others will be able to elevate their way of life, others also will remain in status quo, and continue to do so consciously fighting.
Individuals of another group, such that proactively to their situation, must be convinced that not only maintain but also improve their living conditions, and to this end will "battle" decisively, yet, some of these will not be able even to keep in his social class, some will be able to improve their way of life and will fight strongly to keep it, others just keep themselves on their social status, and are then trying to envision a better way of life.
A final group will not be aware of your situation, and not act resolutely to circumvent the situation, among which some have lowered their living standards over time, others ascend socially, in both cases, their situation clearly does not allocate general conditions of life of their social class, the rest will be kept in their original status, and will continue, while their social situation is not changed by larger forces of society that affects them.
For all the problems mentioned, due to pressure between the two poles of society - the poorest and the richest - is to create a "social vacuum", with the gradual deterioration of the maintenance of the Brazilian middle class, especially lower middle - just that it serves, with the middle class, the path for social movements of the poor. This vacuum is being formed by the pressure they are subjected these classes over time and over generations - and not give them the condition to cope with everyday problems and deteriorate the quality of life of the worker. So these people are constantly pressured to the lowering of their living conditions. Stephen Kanitz (In Defense of the Middle Class) underscores the importance of maintaining the middle class.
"Today, for a country to succeed requires the participation of millions of active citizens, which are distinguished from others by its small leaders, for their small initiatives in their small communities and small businesses.
They are usually those who show the way not by ideas but by their example. Examples of success, discipline, persistence and determination. Are those we call middle-class managers, supervisors, managers, small and medium entrepreneurs, judges, lawyers, doctors, civil servants, professionals and academics.
It is the middle class that creates jobs, which creates value, which is why it is always more taxed by the ruling class. Normally, the middle class accounts for 10% of the population, and may spur each member of the middle class to create 10 jobs, we have the first time in Brazil at full employment. (...)
There are intellectuals and teachers in schools that teach the secrets of success in life. Who teaches the class is average, its 10 to 50 employees, many of whom end up setting up competing businesses. Poor or rich does not learn of the intellectual. Poor emulates the nearest class, middle class, one that still remembers what it was like to be poor, and succeeded in creating value out of it. "
According to the cited author (The Destruction of the Middle Class), "the Russian Revolution ran almost the entire middle class in 1917 and subsequent years. They killed the company managers, division managers and supervisors section considered lackeys of capitalism. Sent to Siberia accountants and auditors, internal and external, considered spies the capitalists. It is no coincidence that now Russia is a country rife with corruption, lack of auditors. It is a country that does not take off because it no longer has that old middle class.
"Contrary to popular belief, the right and left often come together, once in power [is that the political situation of our country at the moment so resembles just by coincidence?], And the middle class is always the real victim. Beginning with the middle class of civil servants, now impoverished after ten years without real increases and increasingly powerless. All decisions are centralized in the hands of a small elite, and is not today that this happens. "
Also according to Kanitz, "A just society would be one where all reach, not wealth as some, but the patterns more modest middle class. A rich country is not ecologically sustainable. Deng Xiaoping, Communist China, said long ago that 'if we want all Chinese have a middle class standard, why not let some achieve this pattern before the other?' (...) Almost no one argues in Brazil middle class, much less their values. I know of no newspaper that consistently defend the ideology and values of the middle class, although its main players. Or defend the values are written from right or left. "
Insensitivity of the wealthy classes
and maintaining the status quo
Balzac described the very pathetic pantomime of his Paris of the early nineteenth century, and it looks exactly the same to our major cities today: "These works serve a lifetime, so the children that this petty bourgeoisie inevitably tends to raise the haute bourgeoisie. Each sphere plays well in all its freshness higher sphere. The son of the rich grocer becomes - if the notary, the son of a timber merchant becomes a magistrate. (...) Now comes the third cycle of this hell, maybe one day will have its Dante. In this third social circle, kind of stomach Paris, where they digest the interests of the city and where they condense in the form of said business, shake - if for a bowel movement and full of bitter gall, the multitude of judicial prosecutors, doctors , notaries, lawyers, businessmen, bankers, big merchants, speculators, magistrates. There are more causes for the physical destruction and moral than anywhere else "(not accentuate resist). If someone thinks that is easy to blame others, certainly this facility is due precisely to belong to that environment ("hat serves").
And for the poor who think it's easy to maintain status, upward social mobility, capital accumulation, we continue to Balzac: "(...) spend the day bent with the weight of business, rising with the sunrise to be always ready, not to leave strip to win everything or nothing to lose, to get a man or his money to start or break a business, to take advantage of a runaway condition, or free to hang a man. Unload the horses [now in cars?] And burst us exhausted us, age us prematurely, but the same goes for your legs. Time is their tyrant, they lack it [always], escapes, or can not stretch it or compress it. "
The problem causing this whole charade is that the feeling or the prospect of the possibility of the possession of wealth in a volume (especially when much) higher than the average community or society causes an irresistible pressure for the individual, which becomes detached from a perception social reality. Only concerns, then the dazzle of wealth, will act excitedly, in a society that has nothing euphoric, without further notice the hardness of the reality of poverty - is what often happens among the richest countries undeveloped.
Erasmus of Rotterdam, playing the role of madness, ironically (already in 1509): "To tell the truth, everything in this world is but a shadow and an appearance, but the fact is that this great and long comedy can not be represented otherwise. " "In a nutshell: two possibilities: either intentionally concealing his fellow men, naively or run the risk of making mistakes with them. And it will not - they ask the wise - another kind of madness? - Who denies it? I grant, however, that this is the only way to make every-where his person appearing in the comedy world. "
But is that still are capable of perceiving the coldness of the streets? These, the streets in them die every hour in the morning, at dawn ... a cold solitude, quiet - almost silent, it was not striking the vehemence of the situation (do nothing for these, but to the screen The Scream, which exposes the utter despair, all available wealth). Does the cold of the streets went from a weather phenomenon to a question of lack of human warmth? Faced with so much poverty and suffering, appears to some, at least, major concerns: how dare we experience great joy in the midst of so much poverty and sadness? It seems that for some it is easy to take a fatalistic view, and seeking to remove any sense of personal responsibility. It's easier to pretend that nothing is perceived.
We shrink from a situation of possible harassment by robbers and we feel relief that we are being abducted this bloody world for our isolated world. But still in the same society, in the same world, the violence continues to lurk in every corner, even down to the armored car (in the war, there is always dead on both sides; not enough armored vehicles). Those who have better financial conditions begin to isolate themselves from their city and society, in gated communities or abroad.
But to isolate themselves in their "little world", less live with the reality of human misery, so fewer understand it. This effort to isolate themselves in a closed little world only aggravates the situation: the removal of these helpless people, away from our midst, culturally and socially detached, the thousands trapped in their ghettos (in areas where few would fit with some comfort), worsening their sociocultural situation every day, increasing the ingredients of violence.
While we live our little life, LIFE happens, and is quite different from what we perceive. "Every belief in the value and dignity of life (...) is possible only because empathy with the universal life and suffering of humanity is poorly developed in the individual. Even those rare men whose thoughts go beyond themselves, do not cast a blind eye to this universal life, but only to limited parts of it. (...) Who makes his appearance as the goal of all evolution of the world and rejoice in your act, you can believe in the value of life (...) "(Nietzsche).
Perhaps the only thing we can, even, is to resign ourselves to our insignificance. Being in favor of social issues is the rule - hardly anyone to say against it. But it's difficult when it comes to "move in the pocket." Hardly our actions and our capital expenditures (financials) accompanying our idealism. For this to be done, what we really care is expensive because we seek to invest our money in these things.
Life can be beautiful, and who has the independence or the capacity to decide about it and live it with the perspective that most interests you - which is not in any simplistic thing - you can enjoy a smooth life. However, only a small part of the population is those who actually live.
Since the hostages are not privileged obstacles and diversions of modern life. For not form this psychological pressure, the worker needs to realize the result of his work, which is improving their life situation and their own, or in some cases, that has at least prospects of improvement. So we need to be proactive, to reverse this situation, so you do not have to say, and how it seems that we are close to also say, "My kingdom for a horse!"
So there is no viability in this life? No. While miserable continue multiplying by five to their offspring, there is no economic and social viability. Of course these are directly responsible for this, but how they are influenced, as herds, and as we are not able to lead a good life, it only remains for society to provide all the support that is no longer so.
But what is the path or process until the economic benefits of the built world for centuries and millennia to arrive a few? Was it ever cool? Where moral? Always ethical? For all? Is not there, between endless answers to these questions, something that justifies imagine that for some reason, the underprivileged also are entitled to benefit from the basics of modern society? For example, will the descendants of slaves are not entitled to benefit from what their ancestors helped build with his blood, literally? And the legislation is not permissive? Lawmakers are historically privileged social class. Coincidentally, the legislation is permissive towards the privileged, who are placed in groups of influence.
There are people who work, yes, very much, and economic progress based on that work. But is it acting with ethics and morals did not benefit from existing infrastructure in their society, built by everyone? And also not benefited by funding, with funds accumulated in the same society? And will they have also benefited from the favorable environment for investments, built a nation for generations? Anyway, even philanthropy favoring the poor, it is not worth it to see and live in a better society and a population under misfortunes and happier?
Meanwhile, there are people who actually survive only the exploitation of workers. Are those that are contrary to the process of evolution of the social system. They want, yes, living only on social exploitation, but we can not say that is the rule in the ruling class, perhaps as some wished.
If at the end of a period, or a work process, a company has great profits, much of that profit is due to employees who have low wages and not participate in the best results. Can it be worse than the added value - understood as the flat part of the normal profits, the employer - because when there is no participation in the final results of the processes, will be leaving to allocate the largest share of the cake hiding large amounts of retained earnings and remitted abroad or spending on squandering.
The problem is that the results of the system often do not return the worker to required volume, as the Minister Delfim Neto proclaimed, in his theory of "sharing the pie" - in which the first would need to grow the "cake" and then divide economic the results with employees. Today, he admits he wanted to build a society with such accuracy of growth (linear, statistical) and posterior division math, but they already learn that society evolves itself, overcoming its synergy (and the calculations of 2 + 2 do not have the exact result in society).
The results of this cake does not even returned to the employee by the difficulties of measuring the individual contributions of workers participants in an economic process - ie the entire socio-economic development. It is measured, for example, sometimes an aid worker and her employer (and that may seem unimportant, and not measurable), can be of great help in this - and this is usually not fully repaid, unless by what is called gratitude, and that is very unfashionable.
Only talk about the crisis management of the companies and crunch wages do not keep a group of workers shaped and motivated for a long time, especially when the financial difficulties of the workers begin to deteriorate. He also states Delfim Neto, and we agree, that something is possible and desirable addition, it is possible that the reverse: only the allocation without developmental effort.
Most of the cases of exploitation of workers occurs not because there is no possibility of improvements to the employee (salary and working conditions), generating surpluses as there used to maintain lifestyles exacerbated by those who own capital and power. When business is bad, ask for support to the worker, who understands the situation squeeze on wages, but when business is good, instead of having workers' compensation by hard times, says that it is necessary to keep reserves for contingencies and invest outside the market. It is thus dependent on the employee to serve the interests of its operator, implicitly.
When there are surpluses results in a company, and that could be used to compensate workers for long periods of wage squeeze the excess funds are used to leverage economic enterprises. In some cases, a portion of these resources will also be used as a reserve for severance likely bulky, very serious problem in some companies.
But with the exception of a portion of companies in which expenditures on manpower and are representative of much of this manpower is low wages, part of the worst cases of exploitation of the worker does not occur even for profit, but rather to subdue the worker. Therefore, some of the worst problems of capitalism are psychological conditioning, and not problems inherent to the capitalist model of production.
In extreme cases, for obtaining and maintaining an advantageous position constant relative to others (as in the case of employees) need individuals (capitalists) constantly make scorched earth of anyone who opposes the force of rage. This happens with employees and claims to improve their living conditions and culture, and consequently their morale in the pursuit of maintaining good working conditions and life - is best to keep people weakened. Even employees with meager wages, ridiculous, do not have representation in the costs of a company, are victims of this rage.
It is a struggle against the capitalist momentum of the worker (not in the interest of capitalist versus worker). The lower wages and workers receive less training, less can it be to find another job and have self-esteem to seek better working conditions. An employee who accepts the subjugation of a salary does not demeaning because it has no longer any alternative. In this situation, the capitalist may refer the employee to whatever you want, including illegal and immoral treatment. Also, it is not worth the worker, when wages are derogatory, fight hard to maintain their purchasing power against inflation, since these values are ridiculous - is quite different when it comes to high salaries.
Nietzsche, in his book, Aurora, in the aphorism 28, the frame of mind as an argument, consider:
What is the cause of a cheerful determination that takes hold of us on the action? - This is an issue that has worried many men. The earliest response, which always remains current, is that one must trace the cause to God that allows us to understand our decision approving it. When questioned if once the oracles, wanted to be there to bring you this happy solution, and all answered the questions they came, when his soul had several possible actions, saying: "I want to perform the action that this is accompanied feeling. "Therefore, men are not decided by the most reasonable solution, but the project whose image became the soul more courageous and hopeful. The willingness weighed in the balance as an argument that the most decisive reason: (...) as the effect of a God who promises success and thus lead to either speak to your reason, the language of higher wisdom.
Well, ponder no longer paying attention to the oracles, often serve our intuition, the feeling, or our unconscious, and we realized the need of this care, not as superstition, but as a caution, or as to things that are not explicit. But, on with the Zarathustra (seer) Nietzsche: "Now, consider the consequences of such bias when crafty men of power and eager to serve him - even when you serve! (...) - With this you can replace all the arguments and overcome all objections! "Now is precisely the so called stingy, and they learned the disposition of mind has always opposed to any disbursement, and any argument against the economic rationality sense of the need for investment prior to return - as if any consideration is hidden and most importantly tell them not disburse anything unless forced.
Moreover, to top it off, there is another factor excruciating: "(...) the despotic makes them miserable for the rule" (Rousseau). The author referred to the kings, but serves the capitalists who act despotically towards their employees or their dependents. He continues: "As much as a political orator as force them to preach the people [or employees], and its, his biggest concern is that the people are flourishing, numerous and formidable, they know very well that this is not true: personal interest is primarily the people to be poor, miserable, and that can never resist them. "
And also reports: "Everything contributes to deprive of reason and justice, a man raised to command others", "(...) this is what Machiavelli has shown, pretending to give lessons to kings, and giving to the great people: Prince of Machiavelli, the book is the Republicans. "Now, how many authors have demonstrated the power, as Nietzsche has (Will Power and others), John Locke (Second Treatise of Government), Rousseau (The Social Contract, Discourse .. . About Inequality ...), Aristotle (The Politics and others), and many more ...
Well they say the popular power go to your head, even when it is least, and it can be seen in detail. So it is in transit, in which one feels armed with the power (the physical impact of your vehicle). Pluck the vehicle when you open the signal when no pedestrians have finished crossing the street; certainly want these pedestrians to the ground, or readily open the way for its folly, or evaporate. But when the signal closes, very ridiculously, some still want to take ownership of a few seconds of time for pedestrians to himself, moving the sign. The streets serve as an example because crazy, insane of all kinds, there are loose - caution is: how many die from it in the streets.
These types are really explorers, because they never will be willing to give credit to anyone with commensurate financial compensation. So capitalism is frowned upon, especially in undeveloped countries, and most workers completely disillusioned - should find grace to hear about the viability of living for workers under capitalism. Call us capitalists, but are not because capitalism is what is aimed at increasing and maintaining their capital, and these do not act with this in mind, but simply want to pay the minimum necessary for the greatest gain from it.
It can not distinguish something basic to capitalism: the investment - expenditure must always be avoided, but investments should always be made as it can, depending on the expected return, because investments are made with a view to a return greater than the value invested. So when it comes to investing for good working conditions, there is neither charity nor charitable. Who else invests in the most consistent with the market and the functional structure (employees), is more capitalist, right within the meaning of the term. At this point, the Americans and their predominant management theory is meritorious, because they are poorly managed companies monopolized, and which invested more dominate the world. As for the "capitalist" Brazilians, most family businesses do not have professional management, based on management science, are a failure, left them complain about the world.
In practice, it is easy to identify a "capitalist" explorer - referred to as the left, which, it seems, think that capitalists are all the same: never seek improvements to their employees (if not forced); decisions involving employees, as a rule are faster and less convenient in order to employees; decisions involving the company's profits are always made promptly and in order to make the best immediate profit; want to spend as little time as possible to the company, just enough for maximum profits (but with which, eventually settling long in this fight), the discourse is always the same, talking about problems rather than restoration of the wages of employees. These stalkers are primarily asserted that raised the most capital versus labor disputes. Of course you can not increase gains or liabilities indefinitely with personnel, but the potential gains for employer and employees accumulate.
The converse is that these are the capitalists (in fact), and have social responsibility. Responsible entrepreneurship (believe it, they do exist, and this can be seen, in the country for recognition awards for the most outstanding and the ABRH PGQP) go beyond discourse and seek to spend your time on solutions and always enjoy opportunities to promote solutions to their employees, even with costs to the company; accept compromise share of profit in favor of harmonization of labor relations, even if it is necessary to plan over the years (no, not naive, because they know that and necessary, it is a solid return on investment), devoted much of his time to the company, which is like your home, no speech ready, but are always ready to work in the best solutions for the enterprise and also to the employees.
Faced with all this rather paltry difficult to know if the relationship can be viable capital versus labor, and to define what would be the ideal solution for labor relations, perhaps you can seek support in a comparison (if even Jesus used parables, why not?). Being on Economic Psychology / household decisions / relationships at home, to define love, Vera Rita Ferreira de Mello, referring to Erich Kirchler text on the subject, seems to infer that defendants definitions for labor relations:
"Love - the more harmonious the relationship Between people, the more each one will act to the feelings of love, regardless of Their choices to take advantage or not." Well, here now are part of a basic rule: not to be a basic rule, but the willingness to Facilitate a more harmonious relationship. He continues: "the same way, the partners in the field, there will be consistency Between feelings, thoughts and actions." Now the word consistency closes all: ethics, openness, honesty, speaking the same practice.
But, goes further: "and the decisions may result in more satisfactory with regard to the mutual well", which is returned to the feeling mutual growth. It seems understandable to all self-employment relationships, "instead of considering only the cost-effectiveness." But sometimes companies fail to bring great benefits to their employees at a minimal extra charge, just because they do not realize how immediate return or any obligation (and had great returns in the medium and long term). And he concludes: "At the same time, people tend to act more creativity, offering more alternatives to the partner, and there will be a sense of responsibility for the mutual satisfaction of needs, under reciprocal billing." This is experienced daily in companies with consistent administration - and highly profitable.
However, this definition is an unbridgeable consistency, it is like a final end to business and life. Nothing more That Can Be expected, in all senses, including That Caused the Maturing relationship. It may sound naive, but see That it is hard to the two extremes. The is the leftist utopia: the relationship must be good for both - not just for the transfer of all Productivity Gains (capital gains) for workers, and the disregard for Difficult Situations companies. The conscious parent who loves his son does not give hin everything, because, well, it spoils, he must learn to win with Their growth. A partner in a balanced relationship, does not seek to give everything to each other, Otherwise it withers, and the relationship Becomes selfish in favor of the (sick).
The for the extreme right, or savage capitalism, nor need to comment on Their issues Avoided Thus, only choices for the advantage and cost-effective extremes, rigid rules and controls, indifference to work in harmony, inconsistencies Between statements / plans / actions, search only for Their Own advantage (ignoring employees, community, government, environment ...), lack of creativity, lack of mutual accountability, mutual Demands constant.
Meanwhile, if in any way, even if there is corporate responsibility, capitalism is still unviable and workers will want your order is much more complex issue. But while capitalism continues, you should seek the most appropriate action possible under capitalist rules. If rules are intended to be socialist, it is necessary to move on to communism, and not try one (monster) capitalism-socialism.
One of the worst problems of capitalism That is, over time, among Often the most exploitative, capitalist life Becomes like an exercise, like a play, the use of power and the search for beneficial Relationships result in the Best Possible personal advantage - and That ultimately, it's just "scoop" the spoils. And Often, more so than he is dedicated to seek to Develop Themselves professionally and your company.
But worse than that, to Max Weber, "the concept of 'discipline' includes the 'practical' mass obedience, uncritically and without resistance," In These terms, is our disciplined society (us) the consumer capitalist routine? Was it something far worse than the process of domination, that 'would still need a "command successful" someone to act for the interest of the others?
The maintenance of any one venture capitalist Can Be beneficial to society, but since it's not just for the aggressive pursuit of advantage to the capitalist. To be profitable, in fact, also the average individual, it is Necessary for capitalist activity is really convenient to Them, not just the result of the discipline of capitalist ownership or consumption (or fads) That add nothing positive to life in society - can hinder, and harm, Often, Their society, with this type of behavior.
One of bias to the detriment of the worker is the case when They Say That One reason for restraining Increases in minimum wage is because indexing (or monitoring in relation to prices), Which Could help in the maintenance of the worker, Causing inflation. Now, all prices go up. Then, When wages rise, They say he is the cause of inflation. In this case, it is only one driver of the inflation process, Which then is underway.
Of course, if wages do not rise, while other prices have already risen, dampen any increase has occurred, and it will contain inflation because someone is paying the price reduction of the inflation process has already started - one more time the worker with his salary. If prices rise in general and as a result, each year, rising wages, then after that high is a high back of the other prices in the economy. That is, only if you are driving a process of inflation and not causing the process, and the villain of this story is not the salary.
On motion of intensification of market competition, the whole society is to assimilate this behavior. The situation of workers who are unable to Safeguard this situation ends up worsening the situation of marginalization in Brazilian society. Interestingly, in the case of price indices and Other Which are therefore "lead" inflation economy, such as fuel, there is at freezing.
The farm is conditioned by natural Also Economic concentration, the factor Inherent in the capitalist industrial production process is a dynamic industrial economies of scale - that lead to the concentration of the production process in large automated industrial structures, Necessary for the viability of many industrial processes . The big benefit social goods That Is That Consumed billions of dollars throughout the development process (which extends for years Beyond the industrial structure is Necessary excellent production) Also are produced by the billions of units, and made available at popular prices, due to dilution of fixed costs by the large volume of units sold. Thus, high technologies are produced and made available for small prices, as in telecommunication and pharmaceuticals. Without That, Could there be mass consumption capitalism.
But, That from concentration problems are formed by the way, Manley They Are Concentrated or handled as a capital and financial results are used in this process. And for someone who has power Economic Their will no longer use this power to raise the many Advantages to you I can and will be convenient for you concentrating so much wealth to the You Can Increase Their Power? Why Can not subdue to Those Who Can's this? Do not use your selfishness in the first place? In addition, of course, Both the concentration of the production process (with economies of scale) and the increments are sparing technological manpower.
On the other, how many government Investments are allocated to the Poorest communities? Very little in streets, sewers, lighting, entertainment, etc. .. And all of These excessive needs in society will generate a higher social cost than the cost of Reducing the problem. Example is the case for Preventive Medicine, Which Is Often cheaper than the state spending That he will in the future to remedy the problems have not Prevented. Another example is Unemployment, Which generate violence and Its costs, and costs of major infrastructure Necessary to the welfare of a society that is not all self-sustaining for Their work. That is, the vicious circle, because the government welfare spending That will That Decrease the Ability of government investment.
Who is a great resource for training and family structure to support you may Appear to be easy to Establish Themselves professionally, provided there is in Lack of interest and claw to get what you want. For Those Who Are Privileged in wealth and power, just use Their power or money to break down Barriers That hinder your life, such as training needs, Which separates the most qualified of underqualified. Money functions as a sort of wildcard, Which Virtually compensates or ameliorates the negative events in the life of an individual or Their weaknesses.
But, as is the situation of Those Who have the option or guard and Can not enter into society, increasingly complex? As the less endowed Can invest reasonable sums in training and have to wait years for return on investment, as is required in the labor market more competitive? Lack of money of the poor to "buy" their integration into society - and Other conditions - will generate the inability to Attain placements in more enhanced levels of work. This, even though the big guy intellectual masterpiece - Perceived Often the situation.
The price paid by the poor (workers) is to move the capitalist machine, but this is not the main problem They have. The worst problem is not HAVING an offset (complete) for it. In this world everything has a limit, including the Strengths of people with unshakable conviction. For some we are outraged, but the theft and the Dignity of These people, how it works? We need you to know That this situation is wrong?
The social system is like a big machine, small and weak in Which parts are crushed with great ease. An individual is very weak Compared to the social system in Which They Live. Just have some force When Participating in some way this system (with some support, usually Arising from the possession of wealth or Influence over them). That the life of the individual takes from excellent insertion in this system, also Affects your vision in this way, we Perceive it and the very strong and powerful When You have some Influence in this socioeconomic system, Otherwise Often When outside and Its spoils system, the citizen is totally jettisoned.
When someone Loses his job very poor, Sometimes it's like to lose everything, because it is not much or anything that Supports Gives Their strength to react to situation, and "bring" to life with minimum conditions. Also location is very serious one of These When people lose Their home, even if rented, and has failed to pay the rent. That the individual to accomplish it "roll" to crush the force with hin Beyond Their limits of physical endurance and psychological Also, and no one Seems to notice or care about Their Suffering or be willing to help.
This roll "Crushes" when the squatter Can not use because it has no birth certificate, address or a training course (cheap) any, or When They Can not afford the drug That costs just a few pennies and nobody Seems to care about this situation . It is "overwhelmed" when she accomplish it That Entire classes are being wellness denigrated, including the family breakup, and That only seem to matter what is Maintaining the status of privileged classes.
Certainly this is not of concern to the privileged classes (which may indeed be relieved of competition in the labor market), because They have the financial Ability to buy packages of courses and trips, Which Will be a major competitive Advantages of the privileged classes and one of the "pillars" of Maintaining a sizeable Proportion of Individuals in privileged social classes - where privileges Also include expensive preparation courses for the exam and for procurement and maintenance of Social Relationships profitable.
Perhaps the smallness (of society) and inability to face life's difficulties is that die in the streets, slay, rob, situations force them on our behalf - such as assuming that we are not able to maintain the standard of living willed otherwise . Solving this problem is not just a matter of social justice, but also a practical matter, adjustment of our economic-social system so that there is "adjustment" of the detailed operation of the "economic engine", not to force their shares beyond their limits, and this point is essential.
The sun does not "born for everyone," as the saying goes, what may seem an alibi for the continuation of things as they are. In social environments of high concentration of people with little ability to maintain, there are no conditions that each individual has his "base" so you can realize your part of the "sun." The Social Community Psychology demonstrates how important it is space itself (the home), the insertion of the individual in society. As a plant that does not have enough space to establish themselves, having little "sunshine", languishes.
With Several complicating factors in the lives of foundlings, You Can not Say That all are Able to grow in life, and just have the will power, some say the. Vulnerable Are the Poorest Citizens without sufficient defenses to the woes of society. Life in society, increasingly, is "task for professionals" - have perspective (or culture) and privileged conditions of life.
However, it is Difficult to imagine a society with a vision of all privileged or decision-making. Thus, the working class and then go to Roland fads - like When selling appliances to run at double or triple the cash value and much of the working class to buy because advertising is cute and friendly, and due to the presentation Seems to be something done for the people, since the service is tiny - and only they, who have good financial condition does not "fall for that."
How is our society, the lives of the poor is a set of marked cards, in Which, Beforehand, we know the future of the "people". People who are like "cattle", so it is Treated, Transported so it is, live well, enclosed in the hills, in the ghettos and the stilts. The Brazilian social reality is forcibly maintained the framework of social exclusion, as in slavery. But slavery ended (to publish).
Until now, the extreme Economic Movements of Brazilian society, has strongly pressed Which part of Population excellent, have ignored Those Who Are outside the "way" of economic development - and are Those Who Can not "move" along this development path and Can not pay, for example, foreign language courses, computer or other. For this force, the individual feels like "crushed" by the Economic Movements of the machine, because "your body" no longer meets the strength to react to Their situation of powerlessness in the face of stressful life and Difficulties of day-to - Day.
The pressure in the social system Comes with the Difficulties of Citizens least Able to protect Themselves from Difficulties, Mainly due to low wages and rising and Declining Unemployment. The problem is Caused by a critical part of business and predators Increasing competition in the market. Of course, the competitive behavior is Inherent to Human Beings, the problem is the worsening of this situation and Encourage such behavior by companies, for example, with advertisements, and even society.
However, worlds, realities or systems created and maintained by force, and are therefore under the pressure every day to repeat itself, to weaken (and begins to leak between the toes). As if it were possible to sustain and recreate this situation indefinitely without taking into account the part involved in the situation that takes the weight of such an arrangement, and that those people are living longer suffered. Being exposed to these social systems that fragility over time, present vulnerabilities as any unhappy may attack it, sabotage it, as has happened with the disrespect for our institutions. And there are no conditions to maintain a social system where members of that system think it more sabotage than to keep it. The difficult to maintain that minimum level of subsistence of the worker can only recreate the situation shaky, unstable and desestruturadora society.
Insensitivity has been, by the growing Until recently privileged to Population Activities such as social and community work - Mainly this by a party of highly competitive, only feel Able to be excellent Concerned about rapid career advancement. And in this job market, people who have never Experienced Serious Difficulties come to control the destinies of people very miserable. How Could Understand well the situation, not HAVING the capacity to Consider the Adverse Consequences That Occur may, for example, with the resignation of an employee unfairly?
Meanwhile, we all got in our seats to afford the moralizing, as well as serve and delight in this life. Not so much a question of existence of problems due to social differences, which are for serious consequences, the problem is the perpetuation of these differences unsustainable due to the existence of barriers that prevent upward mobility from poorer social classes, even by those always very hardworking. The poorer classes are used as the basis for sustaining the status quo of the wealthy.
Everyday example of behavior for the maintenance of status symbols is in the middle or lower middle class, who return with a new car Every year, even though the former in great condition, even without feeling a great need and, many times, jumbo mortgage is this very serious. In a society where it is very ostentatious symbols of wealth, even if disconnected from the situation of the company, eat a citizen, in many cases, the use of illegal means to Maintain lifestyles exacerbated. This Explains in part why the insensitivity to social welfare Activities, Other People and community work.
The show is for those who can. That is, for those not depredate showing off their goods - otherwise, are decadent. To truly aristocratic decadence makes fun of desperate imitators of the bourgeois - rejoice in his disdain. But capitalism (their propaganda over predatory - as opposed to advertising, institutional) intends to extend the maximum sales (market share), for it pushes ("force") their products. How? Targeting (choosing) plots to attack the market with all possible propaganda ploy to subvert the individual psychological weaknesses that can lead to consumption, as in commercial harmful foods targeted at innocent children. The relatively strong is the weakest, weaker in relation to capitalism are those of the median income, which, driven by symbols of wealth and marketing of capitalism, aspiring to patterns of consumption and related behavior. Such harassment should be prohibited.
The search for ostentation also explains, in most cases, why entrepreneurs with great economic power pay lower wages. They do this without a serious analysis of the consequences or the possibility of gains and benefits to employees of this to all. They preemptively, to ensure a good share to you. They begin to treat the employee as an enemy and its claims only as problems, not as workers' rights. This is often because they are unsure of its potential to remain in their social class and consumption, and because they think that if they fall into a depression will not return to its status quo ante - that insecurity is unfounded in most cases.
The better the financial situation of the individual, he can behave this way more often. Most of these individuals do not know why doing so, because often only come with their social group or, much more problematic, try to follow that group that would like to belong, or pretend to belong, but do not have the same financial conditions.
Companies offer us, almost in sight, advertisements, for example, the wife tells the husband that his neighbor bought a new car and that therefore they MUST buy as well. The problem is: do not buy because they liked the car because it is good, but because the neighbor is up and need to put yourself in the same status or social group. Place a 'brand new' side trim and we should all buy the new vehicle, whether or not we will be more of a social group with good visibility.
In all classes there are examples of status symbols, as individuals of the middle class or lower middle who value spending all weekend at the beach, not knowing whether they really are so that (every weekend), or whether only would like to stroll in the park to relax and unwind on some weekends. Another example is that the mere fact of speaking the English language is considered, for a considerable proportion of the population, a status symbol of great cultural gain and strong, professional qualifications - even though there is the slightest chance of using knowledge that language at work and even if that person's knowledge about their own language is ridiculous, which is very common.
The consultant Max Gueringer, with experience in large corporations, and nationally recognized, says, "so the job market is getting split into two factions. One that increases increasingly, is the best job they can not because they have the required qualifications. The other faction, the smaller but growing, it is those who are admitted because they have all the skills required in the ads. But can not use them because, at bottom, the function is not needed them. "Reported case of a vacancy filled by a woman for domestic service Management (general services). The demands were educated, fluent in English, highly knowledgeable in computer science, creativity, leadership and ambition. Later, the author has fun with the adventures of the girl, when asked to make photocopies and she starts to want to use all of their professionalism and attributes, as she volunteered to work in a Hurri! ("Very quickly"), and she was also on Hands ("hands on"). Of course, as the occupation with these virtues, who wanted to take off even copies, reports, among others, the consultant. No, people do not realize the extent of ridicule coming ...
Are also examples of attempts to convince by appearances some cases fixing on international voyages, as the symbol [Auto] to acquire status and culture, regardless of the destination of the trip or so and the ability (or not) of perception and apprehension of those further cultures from some of these individuals. Any trip abroad or crap coming out is something interesting, rather than national options and have minimum culture on the country itself. All of these are flying the world's citizens. World who do not grasp - just what they perceive is the sweet taste of the brilliance that is projected in their lives, do not realize the bitterness of life in society, overcast.
Of course, international travel and knowledge of languages can be positive. The problem is when it is only an end in itself, as a status symbol, not as something beneficial to the individual's life. So is that normal in personnel selection, international travel and foreign language skills are exclusionary criteria, even in the initial analysis of the candidates at the expense of other qualifications and before taking into account the existence (or almost incomplete existence) for enhanced intellectual ability.
Even though this selection later, other qualifications are required, the problem is that it seems to many that demands a priori knowledge of a foreign language (which may be a useful and indispensable) is synonymous with culture, leading to a endless range of existing qualifications. Find themselves, then, the results of the actions of "professionals" impregnated with this kind of "culture" in companies.
The individual who long sought status symbols do not know why not use some of their money for activities such as helping those who are needing a lot and even for many other things that he will. Often, the poorer classes, even if the individual ceases to use their money to their needs and their important as good nutrition or health care. For the psychoanalyst Vera Rita Ferreira de Mello, the money "relates to the most intimate aspects of culture and life in general, and models the relationships between individuals, their feelings and ways of thinking. Can be understood as "an arbitrary sign that is designed and will be replaced by other signs under the most varied forms." According to the author, to Serge Moscovici, "money is much more than money," and becomes "the Ariadne's thread that serves to explore the convolutions of our society and beyond, human subjectivity in general. " The legendary Ariadne had promised that it would have an affair with a man so he could finish spinning a piece of clothing - but where would cancel his work at night, which never forced himself to keep his promise.
"It is impossible to escape the impression that people commonly employ false standards of evaluation - that is, seeking power, success and wealth for themselves and admire them in others, underestimating everything that is truly valuable in life." (Freud .) "(...) There are other cases in which the person attaches to the outside world things that clearly originate in his own ego and, for this should be recognized." Freud still found our conditioning by our unconscious - from which so many serious psychological disorders arise and in some cases, unconscious conditionings from people connected to us, and that affect us in both cases, imperceptibly, but perhaps even worse the second case.
One of the people with better social and financial conditions fail to understand why the need to favor the poorer classes. But is it completely fair division of wealth linearly mathematically only in accordance with the direct participation of everyone in the production process, often paid as little power to demand appraisal of manpower less qualified? Does the issue is the fair distribution of the parties? Or should society have conditions that every citizen can participate in the social process, leading a "life" reasonable, not sacrificing individuals who, by some mishap in their lives, be delayed social or professional?
Either way, you can not get the point of saying that the rich have not done anything in life - how much is cried and igniters in populist crowd, by members of the left - and they are just sucking the workers and society. Very much the opposite - taking exceptions, even if not a small part - because one can even say that we now have wealth, of course not all, were the first to streamline the economy, with its initiatives and efforts.
But the important thing is to let the others grow. In business, it is absolutely clear vision of leaders that grow along with their followers, likewise, is clearly the reverse situation, when a chief (since this can not be called the leader) does not act that way, and instead , seeks to elevate themselves by lowering others. This is not about lucubration’s, since that is the subject of study because of the Administration and liabilities of the business world. Perhaps these people miss the view that by not cluttering the development of a professional (which depend, even if his subordinate) and help you progress to another job better, is making room for a new professional in the old place.
To this there can be no selfishness, including best qualified people available to teach the professionals who are unable to seek qualification, and also always bring new knowledge and experience, this is a matter of citizenship. It would be necessary to that individual (selfish) perceive life as a flux, not static, and get rid of the dependence of wanting to "shore up" and "lean" in their "lower" ranking, because of any way, with the rise of these, "under" when many others will come, and with great talent - a flow that brings "fresh air" to the production process. Also clear that it is not possible exaggerations, if a company qualifies its employees greatly in terms of their functions, as well as incurring costs incoherent, all go away, working in better jobs, leaving the company devastated.
Difficulties of understanding
and psychological conditions
the economic process
"Truth is that the ideas factory
The resembles a loom, each floor
Will move one thousand threads that are interwoven
Hidden in sight. Above, below
Running the shuttle, with each blow
Holds thousand connections. "
Mephistopheles in Faust, Goethe.
We will seek to demonstrate how much we can, the difficulties of understanding the economic and social aspects of our capitalist society - as a way to demonstrate the next need of further research. To whom it become sorry and no use, it is suggested that sautéing of paragraphs until you find something that concerns you.
For John Locke, in a society, "everyone will be bound by the agreement reached by the majority", so it is understood, questions about the society become too complex and serious consequences for all. And of course, nobody wants to accept some complex understanding of their society without many weights - even if the arguments are clear, self-evident, undeniable, logical, acceptable and desirable as essential to survival (so much so that some slaves may disagree with some arguments in favor his release). Consequently, one must rely on numerous considerations, views, fields of knowledge and diversity of respected thinkers, always following up on the razor, not advocating any political passion.
As of this complexity, according to Freud, "the indisputable fact that individuals, different races and nations conduct themselves differently under the same economic conditions alone is enough to show that economic reasons are not the only dominant factors. It is quite incomprehensible how psychological factors can be neglected, there where what is at issue are the reactions of living human beings, not only because these reactions contributed to the establishment of economic conditions, but even just in the realm of these conditions is that men are able to implement their original instinctual impulses - his instinct for self-preservation, his aggressiveness, his need to be loved, his tendency to get pleasure and avoid displeasure. "
For Nietzsche, "(...) empathy with the universal life and suffering of humanity is poorly developed in the individual. Even those rare men whose thoughts go beyond themselves, do not cast a blind eye to this universal life, but only to limited parts of it. (...) Who makes his appearance as the goal of all evolution of the world and is pleased with his act, (...) does not see other men (...) precisely because each one wants and says only himself, and does not leave itself (...) for them, or not noticeable or is at best a fragile shadow. Therefore, for the common man, daily life, the value of life is based solely on the fact he is taking important as the world. The great lack of imagination that causes suffering that can not put yourself in the shoes of other beings, and because it participates in as little as possible of their destinies and disappointments. But who could really participate in them, (...) learn and feel the full consciousness of humanity, would succumb (...). "Knowing the contract, in any way, someone would submit to their yoke - just by naivety.
When you do not have enough knowledge to understand something, it simplifies our understanding, according to our knowledge of what we observe: "(...) in general, people experience their present naively, as it were, without being able to make an estimate of its content "(Freud). Later, with the accumulation of new knowledge, we can better understand the facts of the past.
Generally, we perceive them as normal citizens, socially friendly. But the psychological conditions that affect and are submitted as soon demonstrate our psychological and sociological pathologies (developed socially) in everyday situations. Just as a setback in the case of transit, and show all pressure load retained and hidden prejudices. The lives of people is only a reaction to a greater or lesser extent, the reality of their society, we can not transpose ourselves to the reality of others, even (or hardly) change it profoundly.
For Nietzsche (Beyond Good and Evil), we feel to be the bearers of truth: "The will to truth is still in drag for many adventures, this famous truthfulness that all philosophers have spoken to this day with veneration. (...) That part of ourselves tends 'to the truth'? (...) At this point we ask is that the value of that will. Whereas we want the truth, why could we not prefer untruth? Perhaps the uncertainty? Maybe ignorance? Was it a question of fact that are presented in or on the contrary, we went to introduce ourselves to it? (...) Behold, all this there is a risk to take and that no risk seems greater. 'Could anything be born from its opposite? For example, truth from error? Or will the truth of the will to deception? The altruistic action of selfishness? (...) The things of high value should have another origin, an origin itself - can not derive from this transient world, misleading, deceptive and greedy, this labyrinth of errors and desires! Rather, it is in the depths of being, imperishable, in the divinity hidden in the 'real thing' - that one must find the reason for being, and not anywhere else! '(...) Almost every conscious thought a philosopher is secretly driven by their instincts, and forced to follow certain path. Behind all logic and autonomy of their movements is apparent valuations, or (...) philosophical requirements for maintaining a certain kind of life. (...) It's just a philosophy to dare, to be ready to put it beyond good and evil. "" Between two thoughts are all kinds of passions that clash, but the movements are so fast that we ignoring the them, deny them ... "(Will to Power).
He continues: "What causes us to look at half the philosophers [or liberal economists?] And the other with suspicion ironically not give ourselves continually realize how naive they are, as err and bewilder with ease. I would say that is not, finally, his childishness and naivete, but his little honesty. (...) Basically, they are defending a thesis with arguments later pre-adopted. (...) Because I do not believe that the 'instinct of knowledge' is the father of philosophy [or of the modern economy?], But that another instinct is only served there, as in other fields of knowledge - and ignorance! - As an instrument "(Beyond Good and Evil).
Therefore, we and society are what we are, not that we want from utopian idealizations. The first step to tackle a problem is your understanding. To have value, with real power and need to change (or maintenance of desired realities), everything should be seated in reality, in its most minute detail and deep motivations, and human issues must be realized without any idealization, impossible as seems - why is this so painful burden. Therefore, we must always seek to perceive us, and society as a reality, what problems and how to refer these problems and what is best for us and for this society.
It seems that workers ill-prepared for desired functions, with better wages, and often unwilling to win such positions, do something, denying this reality, and just accusing his boss of exploitation, even if it has regretfully been struggling for life - much more than the employee, and even given him a job. It is the denial of the opposition, repression? (Of course not all such cases).
Parties often cling to a stream of such arguments. The center does not tend to exaggerate this, but, as there are extreme problems in capitalism, it is difficult for people to be content with thinking and centrist solutions. What really matters is what is for us and for society as a result of our actions, our experience as a contribution to our future and our society - our group is the company local, regional, state, national or international.
The psychology and psychoanalysis demonstrate how well we are, "for psychoanalysis, as postulated Lacan, is the only discourse that puts in place to know the truth, that is, dealing with the know about subjective singularity in its nascent state (.. .) "(Marco Antonio Jorge C.). Of course, every truth has its; matter to formulate a knowledge, a knowledge of all realities and truths and their individual motivations in man himself - who is in this fertile soil that produces everything. Since the structure of society is very well described by sociology.
Without strong support in the ultimate reality is lost and there is no reference to the reality leverage to engender a social organization to the satisfaction (or on all issues important details), consistently. As an example: not enough speech and good intentions on the (alleged?) Existence of an innate human virtue. The need is to seek to know whence comes this idea of innate virtue and who are seated psychological and sociological facts. Nor can we deny the downside inherent in man. From the connection with reality, we realize, we measure the real strength of every human characteristic - whether or not virtuosity, but that relates realistically, so as to create opportunities for the viability of social organization more harmonious as possible.
But how to develop a knowledge of the whole multitude of socioeconomic facts occurring in a society in constant change and growing? How do you want to envision desirable behavior in this society? This perspective is very frightening, especially for long time. Something that serves us not lose its validity then, it is necessary to understand perennial as not to lose the validity of economic knowledge faster and faster - in some years, or even a few months. Need to relegate the understanding of current reality, which represents only sociological possibilities - endless possible between and among innumerable that never occur. But, how? We must, then, of understanding that last centuries?
Daily thoughts are light, as the art is sometimes, but social problems are largely the most insoluble. This occurs because points of concentration of social energy, psychological pressure or interest. Therefore, one needs a lot of strength concentration of thought, which is able to delve into these points of concentration, beyond the apparent distance.
Given the hardness of the economy and social life today, do not just refer our attempts to understand our reality things are apparent and disparate information. You need serious analysis of other causes, not apparent at first glance, the problems of our society. What we need is to find the first principle of the events, the effect of root causes is different from that of the secondary and, in extreme situations, becoming the norm in our society, resulting huge differences.
To this end, we should not endeavor to observe facts in each case, but it is necessary to "squeeze" the most of our understanding of social reality to simplify this situation to its essence and to understand the motivations (rules?) Casuistic facts. For this, we need to research the painfulness of what is a priori, prior to possible experiences or facts (what constitutes a precondition for the possibility of experience). Only then is it possible to get independent case series of questions, which should only serve as examples of possibilities (a posteriori) and indications of sociological principles.
From the attempt to understand the reality, we can support - in the John R. Searle, who wrote a book (Mind, Language and Society) by investigating whether or not the reality - or ontology (what exists) compared to epistemology (how we know something), and affirms the reality in the face of skeptics and other representatives various currents of thought that denies the ontology.
The author presents various understandings and knowledge that call into question the existence of reality: set theory and proof of the incompleteness of Kurt Gödel, opposing the rationality of mathematics, quantum mechanics, seems to show that physics is indeterminate in its most fundamental, Ludwig Wittgenstein, showing that the speech is a series of mutually untranslatable language games and immeasurable; anthropology, demonstrating that different cultures have different rationalities; postmodernists, challenging the Enlightenment (which was intended scientific).
Searle takes perspectivism as one of the main arguments that still move the antirrealismo contemporary. "The perspectivism is the idea that our knowledge is never 'unmediated', is always mediated by a point of view, a set of predilections, or worse, for sinister political motives, such as loyalty to a group or political ideology . And since we can never have unmediated knowledge of the world, perhaps there is a real world, or maybe it's useless to even talk about it, or maybe even be interesting. "
He continues: "(...) The arguments take different forms, but the point common to all is that we do not have access, we can not represent and we have no means to deal with the real world except in one particular point of view, starting a set of assumptions, in one aspect, a particular posture. If there is no unmediated access to reality, so the argument goes, there really is reason to speak in reality (...). "
According to the author, Brian Fay, "the epistemological perspectivism is the dominant mode of contemporary intellectual life. Perspectivism is the point of view according to which all knowledge has an essentially perspectival, ie, claims about knowledge and its evaluation always occur within limits which provide the conceptual resources in which and through which the world is described and explained. According to perspectivism, no one ever sees the reality directly as it is in itself, but rather, people stare at their own point of view, with its own assumptions and preconceptions "(preconceptions and understand very well).
It was Kant who imbued the contrast (the idealized) rational analysis of the world (mainly idealization started with Socrates, to shine in positivism), Kant proposed that our process of apprehending reality is something like a process of knowledge we have, as material, the information environment we live in, from what we have our perception, which occurs in accordance with what is already registered in our memory.
Searle considers that "we have evidence of our senses, but our claims are about material objects. (...) The answer is that we do not perceive a material object of independent existence, but rather realize our own perceptions, our own conscious experience. (...) This is called alternately 'sensory information', 'perceived object', or, more recently, 'symbolic description', but the basic idea is that anyone who perceives not really see the real world. (...) If this is correct, then the unique experience, considered alone is not enough to make the distinction between veridical perception and hallucination. "And, really, to each statement always fit many considerations and conflicts.
"However, as the fact that I always see the reality of a particular point of view and in some respects does not mean that I never perceive reality directly, so that I need a vocabulary to say how the facts do not imply that the facts I am describing or identifying not have independent existence. (...) Fay's argument, as presented, is a fallacy. It is a fallacy-use dimension [that consists of confusing features of a word when it is mentioned characteristics of the thing to which the word refers when used] assume that the linguistic and conceptual identification of a fact requires that the very fact identified is linguistic. Facts are true conditions that make statements, but are not identical to their linguistic descriptions. Invented words to state facts and to name things, but that does not mean that the facts or invent things. "Opposes Searle.
And the author continues: "But according to the antirrealista, the relativity of our concepts, if properly understood, shows that external realism is false because we do not have access to external reality except through our concepts. Different conceptual frameworks provide different descriptions of reality, and these descriptions do not agree with each other. (...) There is no fact except in relation to a conceptual scheme, and therefore there is a real world except in relation to a conceptual scheme. "However," the debate and its solution are precisely the arguments for and not against, the existence of the real world, as well as science, as a series of efforts more successful in establishing the truth about this world. "
Despite the abysmal distance, it seems that from the weights and Searle perspectivists we can develop a minimum common denominator. As Searle says there is a real world and that only perspectivists (or maximum) are capable of partial perceptions we can conclude that the maximum (or better) is that we each have a partial perception of the world. So we went to "(...) in a narrow trail through a forest," where we need "(...) point the way and then point out the parts of the forest that we should avoid," Searle continues. But, "since we live in one world, we should be able to explain exactly how the different parts of the world relate to each other, and how to join together to form a coherent whole." "Since everything is integrated." Well, there is the problem of our perspectivism is critical.
So there we have the fundamental importance of avoiding individualism, and seek solutions integration and cooperation between people, between the knowledge (interdisciplinary) and between the organs of the social structure - all and all for a reasonable space to delineate the occurrence and possibility of social facts occur, and points and ways of working to better the society forward.
And so has been the coexistence of modern and educated these days: in modern spoken in work teams, working in partnership (rather than groups of people acting independently) and brainstorming ("rain" of ideas, freely pointed by all staff); between companies, has proved necessary, increasingly, cooperation, science, interdisciplinary, and the state seeks the cooperation between different knowledges. Have so historically developed to structure assemblies, senates, councils, political, parliamentary ...
But then, what is missing? Now, take this position at all times in all. Therefore, to grasp the whole complexity of current socioeconomic, or understand it broadly, we must be attentive to everything, because everything influences us, everyone, to a greater or lesser extent, directly or indirectly, individually or group to which it belongs.
But despite the tireless efforts for understanding socioeconomic, even the most concerned about social issues can not understand and explain, in principle, as they form so many differences in social capitalism. You can not determine exactly what is happening and why, what mechanism and how to solve the problems of large social distortions existing in capitalist society.
However, much of our power or our propensity (will) consumption is not derived from necessity and until not even the will, but the consumerist impulses in other cases, we feel conscious consumer, but is motivated as compensation the unconscious problems or caused by fads, among many examples that can demonstrate. Imagine representing reduce our consumption by 10%: lower inflationary pressure, lower environmental degradation, less pollution, less social pressure and the search for the money, less stress, less violence and traffic fatalities, etc., Etc.. Suppose that the decrease in consumption is less, or no, but only decreases the propensity to consume. However, we also reduced the pressure for social dispute of money ...
Besides these factors, the neurosis by consumption and accumulation of wealth, which can be attributed as an estimate that is certainly greater than 10% of everything that is consumed, this neurosis is responsible for personal and family tragedies, which often express by domestic violence, drug use and by all sorts of consequences of violent behavior, such tragedies in traffic. Well, and why the traffic, but mainly to amass wealth in large quantities?
If you do not want to get to be Buddhist or something similar, and no need to go that far, at least we can open our eyes and see that among those who are different from us, such as Buddhists, none of this happens. Well, at least we are much better, no? After all, we have so many wonders of comforts. But to whom (or to a relative of someone who) is maimed or killed in an accident or an assault, or dying by the thousands, and yet totally silent, due to pollution, this comparison may seem very different - and looks that are already hundreds of thousands of people in these situations, only in recent years, far more than in many wars. Is this better than a life only a little more reflective? There will be better, even though from time to time, seek, preferably with the help of a professional (psychologist or psychiatrist), to grasp what is really important to us and stop being just Mary goes to the other? Ah, how many differences ...
In time, it is important to say what is the Economic Science (or Economy). Yes, certainly important because it seems to many that the economy is the major precursor of capitalism, generating ever greater wealth, to meet any kind of folly decompensated. But is the opposite: the study of the application of scarce resources to the greatest possible satisfaction to unlimited needs. Very different, no? It seems that this change of focus causes us to have an impact.
The understanding of society is also important for individuals, especially the poorer classes (lower middle class, poor and miserable), have a better perspective on the situation of their lives. The problem is the situation of ordinary people who can not afford to an insider's perspective and also can not get rid of the forces that obstruct or influence their ways.
And what is right in society? What is best for people and society? In a glimpse of the city with an insider's perspective, everything seems easier as compared to the difficulties and hardships of day-to-day lives, and it seems like I can give you advice. And until you can even: the poorest as it should mimic the characteristics of cars, which have the suspension system to avoid falling into holes. The poor should be able to avoid falling into "holes" that appear in their lives, as the consumption and trafficking of drugs, alcoholism, unwanted pregnancy and the early abandonment of studies, among many key issues.
Ignorance also for much of the dominant population, the process of socio-economic mechanisms and exploitation - that to happen often in subtle ways, are not perceived - also prevents (Besides the problems inherent in capitalism) effective action for the reduction of problems of poverty and exploitation in capitalism. In capitalism, it seems that with fundamental uncertainty remains quite similar to that demonstrated the Greek Parmenides (V century BC) when he cried: "(...) only grant me a certainty! And she is a board over the sea of uncertainty, just wide enough to stay on it. Take for yourselves all that comes into being, which is lush, multicolored, flourishing, deceptive, exciting and alive, and give me just a single, poor and empty certainty. "
The problem for Noam Chomsky, is that, as a rule, our contacts with the world are brief, personal and limited, ie, the individual suffers from a lack of awareness of its closest approach with its "world" - when more complex. In a society (capitalist) that worth of economic determinism (and just follow the daily life, which determines our reality), the average citizen does not have the desirable reflection (a minimum depth, at least) about almost anything.
Simply, we have become accustomed to the routine, the response to everyday demands: money, work, school ... and in this whirlwind, easily, what initially seems abnormal, over time we accept as normal. Almost never gets to the deep reflection on society, relationships, work, and on capitalism itself. Interesting reflection on Rohden Hubert did in The Road to Happiness. Also Nietzsche: "With the tremendous acceleration of life, the spirit and look accustomed to seeing and judging partially or wrongly, each of which resembles the traveler who knows the land and people by the train window."
Therefore, the foundation is fundamental political, philosophical, in the earliest thinkers in each area, the precursors of knowledge. Before, things were clearer for life, to be less information available on polluting thoughts; there was knowledge and ideas as diverse and abstract and it had more idle time to worry about each question. If we do not have permanent reference in some simple ideas, basic, lose ourselves immediately in the multitude of random data we encounter in everyday life.
In this universe of information, without sufficient rationalization, "physical science, meanwhile, overwhelmed, very, psychic. Dominate the physical mechanism to produce enough goods possible, we had no knowledge of the conditions through which possible values become actual in life, and so we're still at the mercy of habit, chance, and hence of force "(John Dewey .) So never forget what they are social and cultural values, and seek always to them with all our strength.
The growing availability of information (which is now a requirement for inclusion of individuals in society) provides subsidies to individuals for better understanding of their reality. However, with this offer of information exponential (virtually infinite), and little cultural relevance and low quality of most of this information, you end up over-extending the volume of information is transformed into knowledge desirable.
We have volumes of information daily that prevent the ability of the individual perception of its comprehensive and systematic reality. Therefore, it is clear that the citizen, and even the vast majority of thinkers, are "lost" before much information of any kind, without the possibility of the necessary understanding of social reality. At the academy, more knowledge is compartmentalized, always showing us less about the social reality as a whole.
In this process, the large accumulation and the possibility of access to knowledge have served to more competition in search of such information, by the dispute, including the universities, having much to fads or between professionals seeking privileges and power, sometimes much more than for comprehensive and systematic understanding of social reality. This process creates needs to "update" also for pride and satisfaction to establish relations of power and subordination of whom do not have all the information load.
In organizations, this process contaminates even higher hierarchies, which began to accept and even demand this kind of behavior of their subordinates: the central collection of information which endless modern (up to date). Nobody wants a thinker, or at the gym often, where it is very cutting quotes, and often seems that it is shameful to have their own ideas (and many are convinced that it is very embarrassing, pretentious, as the momentum of thought).
What to do, then, to understand the society of which one belongs to it and position ourselves? We must avoid the understanding of society, the economy and the individual's behavior, just as some attempts at limiting knowledge of reality, we should not observe situations and social facts - which are complex - just from one perspective.
The radicalization from a single perspective is useful only to support selfish behavior. This is the case with the utilitarianism of John Stuart Mill, a concept that feels as good rules of conduct for those characterizable usefulness and the pleasure it can provide to an individual. Also considers the need for the extent of usefulness to society, because only if plenifica through its extension to as many people as possible, on the assumption of complementarity between the collective and personal satisfaction. The problem is that often there is no such direct correlation between personal fulfillment and collective (in economics knows that what is good for one may not be good for everyone).
In this context, we must also avoid the prospect of Benthamism (Jeremy Bentham), or behaviorism, which assumes that the selfishness, the action and the utilitarian pursuit of pleasure are able to justify a moral and guide human behavior towards the well. This would be possible if the individuals had understanding of the repercussions of their actions in society, which does not occur to the extent necessary to authorize such conduct. It is also the case of ethics, the same author, in which, rejecting any appeal to the importance of duty and conscience, understand the human tendency to pursue pleasure and avoid pain the foundation of ethically correct action.
Yes, everything that causes pain should seek to avoid, but taking into account physical and emotional aspects, and think not only imediatisticamente, but for long time - and this without depreciation expectation for the future to imagine that's a long time (hyperbolic subjective discount .) Moreover, one must take into account the effects of our actions in society, the effects that affect each other. In other words, if the fashion is to take advantage of everything, it becomes a society of rogues surrupiadores, and everyone ends up losing.
It is also an example of simplification behaviorism - the doctrine first proposed by L. Bloomfield, and then by B. F. Skinner. It is a research method that seeks a more objective look at the behavior of humans and animals, with emphasis on objective facts (stimuli and responses), without recourse to introspection (Concise Oxford). Behaviorism also serves as a basis for knowledge of psychology, but is not sufficient to cover the socioeconomic knowledge. If it's initial investigation, for reasons in the tabulated data, one can not ignore introspective analysis in case economy.
Another example of bias is phenomenology or description of phenomena in nature apparent (and illusory), manifested in the experiment to the human senses and consciousness immediately. In the philosophy of William Hamilton, which is worth describing immediate - prior to any theoretical explanation - the facts and psychic occurrences. Have B. F. Skinner proposed a simplification of that society could be adequately controlled if man were conditioned to behave properly, like rats and pigeons.
We must be careful in relation to positivism ("scientific imperialism") - a system created by Auguste Comte, and founded the Enlightenment - which intends to order the experimental sciences, considering the model par excellence of human knowledge, rather than any other explanation of reality. The "comtismo" is the claim that knowledge must abandon the search (abstract) or the absolute essence of things, restricting itself to finding scientific laws ordering the natural world. It is characterized by scientism - quantitative methodology with hostility to idealism - only what has already been explained scientifically accepted as real.
To Antonio Carlos Olivieri, this philosophical line is characterized by efforts to extend the right to critique and guide to all fields of human experience. Accordingly, she sought to bring the light of reason into the darkness of ignorance and obscurantism (and often took it, but not always, have already discovered). There is no doubt that the Enlightenment is the matrix of our contemporary world - the extent of criticism of any belief and knowledge without exception - mainly by giving impetus to science and secular (non-official religion of the nation - religious preferences apart). But life is not linear (as for positivism) to the administrative capitalists and even as the foundation of Western culture.
The economist Enzo Rullani demonstrated how well the planning failure Fordist globalized world (Social Community Psychology also shows problems). For the author, although in general, mostly scientists and scholars provide contemporary cult of the Enlightenment and considered their "conquests" as indisputable progressive and do not cease to exist currents of thought that argue that assessment. After all, science and technology not only solve many problems of humanity, but also created several other: just remember the weapons of mass destruction, the effects of environmental pollution, climate change, etc.. One can not be regarded as consequences of the Enlightenment of the nineteenth century moral relativism, individualism and hedonism, which may keep the human being on the same obscurity that that movement would illuminate.
But then reality would be overwhelmed by our science? No, the complexity of reality goes beyond our scientific knowledge, which is daily enlarged. Worse than that, to Thomas S. Kuhn, science does not progress in a rational, logical and noble idealized, but in leaps and stumbles that have little to do with their faith in reason. For him, there is no common ground between paradigms formed in this process, only hostilities, and these paradigms are associated with a series of convictions that have been taken as true, were not questioned properly. When the facts do not fit the old paradigm, it follows a crisis, and creates the new paradigm. In this case, if the reality does not go beyond that described by science, there are successive realities.
Can you help us prevent this lot look for scientism, and seek always a little at least of mentalism - the doctrine that the mind is the fundamental reality that pre-exists and exists independently of its manifestation in behavior. This theory considers the conscious processes from introspection and reflection of the actual data that the person makes about what happens in his heart about his experiences, thoughts and feelings.
In the case of understanding the economy, the need for a great capacity for understanding is crucial, because the factors and events are endless possibilities, virtually infinite, and have serious consequences for the conditions of our lives. No one can deny the fact as relevant and potentially influential in economics and in Western society today - up to not be naive.
All have reasons and motivations in the discussions of the economic aspects of their society to a greater or lesser extent - to the limits of reasonableness and common sense, of course. It is essential to understand the company expanded, it is from this understanding that we have the good sense to understand the various implications of the facts, the various misfits and social demands.
For observation and foundation of the social reality we need time and how to use a magnifying glass, which amplifies the field of observation in a thousand times, and then another thousand, several times, as many as needed. We also need empathy to understand the situation of other people, not just describe them. It is also necessary to refer to psychological causes - is due to psychological reasons of society that the economy is not an exact science, but a social and human science. It seems that the economy, are missing many analyzes of social psychology.
How to position itself for accurate perception of social reality and human learning is critical of dispassion: feature similar to the desired behavior of a judge, in the sense of the state of serenity, of tranquility that is not likely to suffer for purposeful attitude towards others; or an attitude of not accepting the unperturbed make us suffer heavily, and did not denote any emotion, feeling or condition which can bring us great damage, or can seriously affect our understanding of others (from the influence of any mood to our looking perspective on a situation).
With this attitude, and better understand the society and people, are avoided, also behaviors like stimulus and response automatically and immediately - perceived bias in the personal and political, in revenge, justice into their own hands. What matters is the unshakable conviction of what is important to us and our society and we need to preserve. So is the foundation of the legal system and judiciary: establishing what is acceptable and what is not (fundamental rights) and avoid bias.
For Descartes, the individuals, "(...) judging are more skilled than they really are, can not stop himself from rushing their judgments, nor have enough patience to conduct orderly all their thoughts: it follows that, if they had taken once the freedom to question the accepted principles and deviate from the common path, could never stick to the path that must be taken to go right, and remained lost throughout all existence. "
And lit the author attempts to understand the reality when he created his method: "(...) and, having considered the same as a man with his own spirit, being created from childhood between France and Germany, becomes would be different than if he lived always among Chinese or cannibals; and how, even in the fashions of our clothes, the same thing that pleased us ten years ago (...), now seems extravagant and ridiculous, so are much more custom and example give us any knowledge of the correct and despite that, the plurality of voices is not worth anything to prove the truth a bit difficult to find because it is much more likely that a single man to have found the an entire people: I could not choose anyone whose opinions seem to me should be preferred to others, and I found myself compelled to try myself driving me.
"But like a man who walks alone and in absolute darkness, dicidi go so slowly, and use as much weight in all things, that even get on very little, at least avoid falling. I did not mean in any way to get completely rejecting any and all of the opinions that had crept by chance once in my confidence, without there being introduced by reason, before spending much time in preparing a draft of the work that would undertake, and to seek the true method to arrive at knowledge of all things that my mind was capable. "
And the author continues: "It is true that we do not see anywhere demolish all the buildings of a city, with the sole purpose of rebuilding - them otherwise, and thus make their streets more beautiful, but to see if in fact many drop their homes to rebuild them, and still sometimes required to do so when they run the risk of falling by themselves, for their foundation they are not very firm. As an example, I became convinced that it is unreasonable that an individual intending to reform a state, changing it in everything from the ground and knocking him to then uphold our it: neither reform the body of the sciences or the established order schools to teach them, but that about all the opinions we then welcomed on my credit, the best thing to do would be to have me, once and forever, to withdraw them that confidence, to replace them then top or other, or the same, after adjusted to have them rate level. And I believed strongly that, by this means, could lead my life so much better than if you just build on old foundations and supported me merely on principles in respect of which left me convinced in my youth, without having ever examined whether were true. "
And consider this need: "For though mister realize that many difficulties were not insurmountable, however, not comparable to those found in the reform of the smallest things relating to the public. These large bodies are too difficult to lift when slaughtered, or even to shore when shaken, and the falls can not but be very violent. Well, as to your imperfections, if they have, as simple diversity there is between them just to ensure that they have in large numbers, using arguably the softened, and even unconsciously avoided and corrected a lot for which no could be remedied by prudence as well. And finally, are almost always more bearable than it would be your change; the same way as the great paths that wind through the mountains, little by little become so beaten and so comfortable to the point of being patronized, which is preferable to follow them trying to go straight, climbing the cliffs and down to the bottom of the cliffs. "
Of course, for most of the population will not be possible or desirable to think of their society with all this complexity, but if you use something of this method will be positive. This is essential for anyone who wants solid position in relation to modern society, so we continue:
"(...) So instead of this great number of precepts that compose the logic, I thought it would be enough the next four, since they take a firm and unalterable resolution not to let one go to watch them .
"The first was never to accept something as true that I did not know clearly as such, that is, carefully to avoid haste and prevention, and nothing to record of my judgments which are not presented as clearly and distinctly to my mind that I did not have any reason to doubt him.
"The second, to divide each of the difficulties in which I analyze as many parcels as possible and be necessary in order to best address them.
"The third, to conduct my thoughts in order, starting with the simplest objects and easiest to know, to raise me, little by little, like climbing stairs, to the knowledge of the compounds, and even assuming an order between those that do not naturally precede each other.
"And the last, making everywhere relationships methodical so complete and reviews so general in which I was certain of omitting nothing.
"These long series of reasons, all simple and easy, which geometers often use to arrive at their most difficult demonstrations, had given me the opportunity to imagine that all things with the possibility of being known by the men to follow each other in the same manner and, since the only refrain from accepting true for any other than than [and how much attention is required in this respect], and to observe when the order required to deduce them from each other, not there can be none so remote that is not reached at the end, or so hidden that is not discovered. And no I was not easy to look for which should begin, because I knew that would be the simplest and the easiest to learn, and considering that, among those previously sought the truth in the sciences, only mathematicians could find some statements, ie, some certain and evident reasons, did not doubt at all that was not the same as they looked, though do not expect it any other purpose, except that my spirit would be used to feed on truths and not be satisfied with false reasons. "And how difficult it is today.
Descartes continues: "But it was not my intention to do so, try to learn all these particular sciences which are usually called mathematical, and saw that despite their objects are different, they nevertheless all agree, because these objects do not give but the various actions or proportions contained in them, I thought more suited to analyze only those proportions in general, and assuming them only in the media that served to make me their knowledge easier, yet without restricting them in any way such supports, in order to apply them as better, then all other objects that would be suitable. "
All this ends up being something with a (intricate?) Construction Kafkaesque. But the results of this insight, even if no sign, just showing up, sooner or later in one's life, as for Descartes, "our non-intellectual influences our beliefs," "going beyond the evidence." Now it seems that people just want to amass great amount of knowledge, preferably doctors becoming the youngest possible - it seems like everything is corroborated in understanding this decorator.
Do not look for before (as it is very necessary for the understanding of society, with the accumulation of knowledge, and given the current complexity of life) have strongly critical view of the major issues with distance and perspective of the observed facts, in order to realize the implications of the facts, not least because, often, seemingly unimportant things have serious consequences in our lives. It is also essential to the accumulation of new information not before we made the ones we have - otherwise we lose the ante so much information that is certainly and increasingly disconnected in our understanding. This happens even with great scientists, and is evident in some stammering.
For existentialism, heavily influenced by the thought of Kierkegaard, we have the inclusion of the concrete reality of the individual (his worldliness, anxiety, durability, etc..) In the center of philosophical speculation, and involves the insertion of man into a social flow - in polemic with the rationalist doctrines.
For Blaise Pascal, simplistic theories of stimulus-response type did not explain, alone, all reality - as is the case of capitalism and its great difficulties in maintaining the whole society. So can we assume, as he also noted the trends can be raised possibilities? For Pascal, as a player, the human need to bet and wait for the result, for a reason prudent, even if not obvious, or come to the attention of the whole from the beginning of things, betting - if yes, on the assumption facts.
The need would be like "look of the mountain" to the plain (according to Socrates) and not look at things in a same plane (as that from the plain), with little vision or one-sided perspective. For Nietzsche, "who one day teach men to fly will destroy all barriers (...)". Of course he does not speak of flight physical but the psychological freedom to walk the roads at will, to the height that you want and give the desired perspective of life. There will be the technical apparatus that will make men free.
We need something like cognition, which is something like the act or process of knowing, involving attention, perception, memory, reasoning, judgment, imagination, thought and language - is the acquisition of knowledge through perception - the set of mental processes also used in the classification, recognition and understanding for trial by reasoning, for learning and problem solving.
We must pay attention to the fact that "the brain mechanisms combine controlled and automatic processes, operating with the use of cognition and affection." And that "the Platonic metaphor of the mind as the charioteer driving twin horses of reason and emotion is on the way - except that cognition is a smart pony, and emotion a big elephant" (Colin Camerer et al. In Economic Psychology, Vera R. M. Ferreira).
But, cognition is more than just the acquisition of knowledge and, therefore, our best adaptation to the - is also a conversion mechanism of which is captured so as to be our procedure. It is a process by which humans interact with their peers and the environment they live in, without losing their existential identity.
This understanding is necessary because, from the increase in social complexity, recognize when it matters most - the contrasts between the situation (which is circumstantial) and social structure (which is its base of more permanent structure) - to know the theories and mount equations. In these terms of discussion and seeking understanding, from the same foundation, the different kinds of conclusion can be reached (all to be discussed, not to want to take them up readily by immovable truths). What you can not stand is looking at some economic indicators, and want, so if you find something valuable for understanding social organization and projection of the last valid consideration.
Most of the West, ideas, or rationalizing perspective, meanwhile, have served more as a limitation to the instincts. Quantitative theories, monetary, macroeconomic, etc.. only in governing economic relations (relational boundaries) - of course the proper administration of these issues can bring positive results for society - but do not grasp the whole complexity of socio-economic relationships and their effects.
Missing in our society a new explanation, the detailed edible offal as the thesis of Carl Marx (Capital), which described the formation of capitalism through the advantage of added value, when shown the initial value of all products (excetos some cases of products valued for its scarcity) from the number of hours of labor (man hours) to their production. For him, roughly, the capitalist appropriates part of the production value of its employees, obtained from the difference between the selling price of the products (obtained by the productivity of the manufacturing process) and the value of work, according to the value of individual production, outside the industrial process, and paid to employees in the industrial process (after deducting the other costs of the process).
These employees do not receive the surplus production from the industrial organization of production, but only on the basis of man hours, not getting that value differential between the production of a craftsman and a production worker in an industry. Today, the business world has changed - in relation to that time, the added value declined relatively due to competition and pressure due to falling prices - but not for the declining profitability of investments that can remain on the market, because it increased the scale of production and sales volume.
Capitalism and communism are paradigms. When under the aegis of one of them, his questioning is very difficult, because it is within the system, and most of the references then have from the system itself. But "at all times discussed the very best form of government without regard to each of them may be the best in some cases and in others worse" (Rousseau).
For the attempt of understanding contrary to current - system - and we do not understand what is convenient, it is necessary to constant questioning this paradox dominant, which is difficult and very stressful, even for professionals in the study of social systems - and is impossible for the general population. But, naively or purposely, from simplifications of reality, some say that the "free" forces (or mechanisms), the market should solve everything in a capitalist economy. The recent financial market events demonstrate this fallacy.
The current capitalist society and economy have left much of the population with poor living conditions - not leading them. Despite the strong desire of the population and intensive efforts in trying to change the current social context by governments, there has been happiness for the solution or to considerable improvement of the socioeconomic problems of our country. If some are lax and do not progress through carelessness itself, is not the reality of all - crowds struggling hard, successive years, and can barely stay stagnant in their living shaky.
Priority problems of capitalism are unemployment and exploitation of manpower and natural resources productive and by the capitalists. Unemployment has been a natural consequence of technological advance and the concentration of the production process, both "sparing" of skilled labor - paths that seem to still be walking for a long time. Technological advances also deepens the social differences in favor of whom is able to monitor this progress qualifiedly.
The problem is the mathematical result - or financial - of capitalism, in which the receipt of benefits from the production process is set by "cold" direct financial calculations of the valuation, at market prices for the results obtained by the production system, the individual participation . This contribution is perceived by the individual capitalist, or that he only admitted. It may thus be the contribution of the individual to be much higher than that perceived or accepted as the immediate result of the capitalist does not admit the value of individual contributions is to increase the added value (or the remaining value of its costs) . "The economic flourishing of mathematics and econometrics has produced two generations of economic theorists with a vast garden of formal and theoretical problems, which have absorbed his energies and postponed meetings with deselegâncias real world" (Herbert A. Simon, by Vera Rita M. Ferreira).
Of course the capitalist activities also generate taxes, but these have not been sufficient to maintain a balanced society. And who says the market has social concerns and attempt to compensate for problems inherent in capitalism and exaggerations, such as environmental degradation? However, these forces act only liberal capitalists in the interests of capital. Often, only act on the basis of short-term capitalist interests and detrimental to their own long-term capitalist interests. How can the market see what happens ("and is not published") - and what is needed serious consideration to his perception - and offset the adverse effects of vested interests, hidden in society?
So we will be naive to believe that people from higher classes did not use or not use, in relevant part of the cases, its influence to keep the status quo - not taking into account the fairness in dividing the value added to the final product? For this system, the capitalists can keep part of the financial problems. Of course, the great capitalists have "headaches", but in the meantime, those who "carry the piano" is the people, because that has no ability to keep clear of financial problems, which often are caused by disturbances are characteristic of the capitalist system, as explained by Marx - due to fluctuations in aggregate investment in the economy, plus the added value.
These problems described by macroeconomics as inherent in capitalism have your solution hampered by constraints psychological components of a society of individuals, and other problems can and are created by psychological conditions. But not arrived yet, or what you have is not enough in economics to accurate descriptions of human behavior that affect capitalism.
All have reasons for their positions, their ideas, their insights. Of course, these perceptions are embedded within a context, and must be relativized to the whole. Thus, as with the stench that is flying the assault, has grounds for believing that his attitude mad, the hard part is the accommodation and the perception of all the ideas in the social context and the scarcity of resources and opportunities. Only from the consideration of the needs of everyone in the measure of reasonableness is that it can promote social justice.
For a more comprehensive understanding in the economic (and social, since it does not dissociate), it is important to consider the priority of things perennial, vis-à-vis the transitory things in people's lives - academic dogmas do not help much. Standing in man is only the transience of their behavior, their way of life - not antecipável uncertain, volatile, fickle, fleeting, fickle, mudadiço in reaction to everyday events.
The need for the knowledge economy is to understand the psychological principles (and resulting sociological) and the directions and limits the possibilities of occurrence of the economic and social facts, as well as the probabilities of these events - and do not want economic formulas or reductionist models and speculative . Everything must be seen from the characteristics of human behavior (rather than maximizing economic agents of individual advantage) - not exactly expecting predictable behavior scientifically.
That is why the Economic Psychology (discipline of new studies in the country) seeks to understand human experience and human behavior in economic contexts (Kirchler and Hölzl, Vera Rita M. F.). And would not be entirely appropriate to this discipline already in training young people? It would be essential to have at least the basics of economic psychology, even for children, due to being good for everyone, from the beginning to understand the physics and mathematics and all kind of masterpiece of calculation, for years in school? We are forming whom and for what? Even in elementary school to become good decorators automata calculations, most of these will not work after this rote. Or is it better to wait for the English preparatory courses harass our children to become citizens of the world to achieve such "unimagined" goal of speaking English (or dreamed as a target for intellectual dromedaries). Formed a pathetic happy spell, go to "the world" often throwing garbage on the floor, and resent being treated only by beings of the galleys.
Behavioral characteristics that influence the economy there is no scientific doubt whatsoever, even in economics and behavioral economics, the theories of games and show that the prisoner. Game theory says, roughly, that economic agents act as a cartel of players, and they want to know, and seek to test, all the reactions to his actions on the part of others who are "playing". One can understand the theory of the prisoner (freely) as saying that individuals act as prisoners, who are offered a reward for betraying the cronies, and so does the first to be asked, trying to anticipate the other, even that if the inform on others, everyone will suffer. Of course, here is seeking to raise the issue to reflect socioeconomic status, and not exhaust the subject - no one has all this ability, since it comes from many branches of knowledge and different specializations, some beginners, as the economic psychology.
In his doctoral thesis in Economic Psychology, 2007, Vera Rita Ferreira de Melo reported on the movement of the Post-Autistic Economics, started in 2000 by students of the French Economy. This is a protest with severe criticism of the way and direction to the teaching of economics in France, especially the lack of consideration for the historical aspects, with proposals to eliminate the History of Economic Thought course curriculum. That would be making "autistic" economics: unable to relate to the social environment and the reality of their time.
According to theory, the protest was against "the lack of realism in economic education, the 'uncontrolled use' of mathematics as 'an end in itself', resulting in a science 'autistic', lost in 'imaginary worlds' ; repressive domination of neoclassical theory and approaches derived in the course curriculum; dogmatic style of teaching in economics, which left no room for critical thinking or reflective. At the same time, claimed: engagement with empirical and concrete economic realities; prioritization of science before the 'scientism', a pluralism of approaches adapted to the complexity of the objects and the economic uncertainty surrounding the major economic issues and the commencement of reforms by their teachers in order to 'save the economy of his state autistic and socially irresponsible' (Fullbrok). "
The movement gained membership of students from various countries, rapidly gaining visibility, according to Vera Rita, because "its authors and first signatories belonged to the 'Grandes Ecoles' in France, prestigious academic institutions. That is, 'no one would dare say that these students, crème de la crème, opposed the formalist approach of mathematical economics because it was very difficult for them' (Fullbrok), which would have filched the defenders of the status of things your favorite argument " .
He continues: "At the same time, French economics professors also wrote his own manifesto, supporting the claims of students and adding their own analysis of the situation, while also lamenting the 'cult of scientism' to which the economy would have deteriorated. They asked also for a public debate on the state of the economy and its teaching, which came about 21.6.2000, when the newspaper Le Monde published an article about the student movement, which soon called Autisméconomie. "The response was wide, including the French Minister of Education and students from other countries.
Later, it was reported during the World Congress of Social Economics, Cambridge, United Kingdom, "(...) that prestigious universities in the U.S. intended to extinguish the area of history of economic thought of their degree programs, even as elective , which would facilitate the "indoctrination" of students within the neoclassical tradition "( cfe. Vera Rita M. F).
There were also joining the movement by scholars: "(...) the leaders of Autismeéconomie, Raveaud Gilles Olivier Vaury, Ioana Marinescu and Emmanuelle Benicourt, organized debates at universities across the country, leading economists supported the students being cited : Paulré Bernard, Olivier Favereau, Yann-Moulier Boutang, Gadrey Jean and André Orléan. " Also according to the author, "in late 2000, the movement has spread through the rest of the world. In June 2001, twenty-seven doctoral students in economics in Cambridge, UK, published its application - "Opening Up Economics", which soon was joined by 500 signatories. "
In 2001, Jean-Paul Fitoussi, after studies and contacts with different groups and universities, published book offering "(...) two major changes in the teaching of economics: the integration of the contemporary debate on economic issues, both in structure and in content of economics courses, in order to eliminate the common practice of 'keeping the ideological content of the neoclassical theory of hidden students'; multidisciplinary approach in the center of the teaching of economics, adding disciplines as sociology, history, law, psychology and others with order to familiarize students with different views and methods of dealing with socio-economic phenomena (Fullbrook). "
Also according to Vera Rita, the movement remains active, and "the description of this movement that aims to 'revolutionary' infects the student of the limitations of the economy. It is as if the comments - almost obvious to a psychologist and perhaps even more for a psychiatrist, trained in a tradition as distinct from abstract postulates, since it feeds primarily from his clinical experience, observed and thought - could gain the streets, so to speak, echoing widely among those who feel these limitations on the skin, everyday lessons that seem to try to conceal those aspects that are essential to reflection and research in the area is vitally important to the economy for us all. "
He concludes: "If after we complain of the myopia of many economists and experts in economic policies, forecasts and assessments, for failing to take into account data from reality as it presents itself (...), we must start our considerations to this respect considering his academic training, where there were apparently 'brainwashed' to format your thoughts so that they fit into existing patterns. "
Not sufficient means, with the literary splendor in the economy - what matters is the communication of ideas and facts, albeit precariously. Now, looking at training in economics in our country, with the base curriculum that has, or had until that time before that (late 90s), is hoarded for what was reported by French students.
From a Herculean perscrutamento, training and practice of psychoanalysis and his doctoral thesis in economic psychology, Vera Rita Ferreira de Mello wrote the book Economic Psychology, pioneering and very relevant to the subject in Brazil, launched in June 2008 (and essential together with his doctoral thesis in social psychology, to end, chronologically, to this writing, grounded in the discipline, adding that topic).
The author contrasts the attempts of formation of economic theories, "caution that must be taken to avoid any attempt at scientific imperialism. This risk arises when a discipline seeks to dominate another, instead of building a framework for debate intersection and that enriches both much worse. "In this case, the contribution of psychology, since reality is always perceived through the mediation of the individual perception .
George Katona, one of the more familiar economic psychologists, as Vera Rita M. F., "although the economic behavior is elicited by the environment and its changes, humans do not react to stimuli like automatons. Their motives and attitudes, even their tastes, hopes and fears, are intervening variables that influence both their perception of the environment and their behavior. To understand the economic, psychological considerations and subjective variables should be incorporated into the analysis. "Vera Rita According to the author," economic research needs: to discover and analyze the forces behind economic processes, responsible for actions, decisions and economic choices ".
The author recounts the major disciplines to interact with the economy, all seeking to expand the Orthodox perspective: Psychological or behavioral economics (individual behavior is fundamental); Behavioral Finance (the behavior of investors); Socieconomia (relation of economics and sociology: social factors , political and cultural), Consumer Psychology ("relations of individuals with products and services they buy"), Research on judgment and decision making (part of all areas who study economic behavior), Experimental Economics (research methodologies empirical) neuroeconomics (perception, attention, consciousness, learning, motivation, emotion, trust, attachment, dependence, behavioral studies from neuroscience that weaken the consumer, target); Anthropological Economics (relations between social and economic aspects); New Institutional Economics (or institutionalism, which analyzes the situation of companies and making decisions for them) and, especially, economic psychology. All describe behaviors that affect individual or aggregate economy.
However, the traditional and Neoclassical Economic Science can counteract, and which has guided the economy is that the rules seek to analyze the economic behavior of individuals in accordance with "the law of large numbers, in the sense of the regularities of large numbers (.. .) - individual behavior may be uncertain, but it does not matter, since the behavior of a large population could be more easily predicted, according to the axioms of economics "(Rita cfe. Vera MF), ie: it reacts most of the population.
Clearly, therefore, the Economic Science has been instrumental in the analysis of economic and social facts, and certainly will remain. Therefore, theories or disciplines as described above is not "dominated" the knowledge economy, as might be supposed to claim, based on amazing discoveries in these areas. The economy will surely continue to describe the economic facts from the large numbers, and certainly will continue hitting the most, however, already have thunderous numerous examples of errors, and hit only the most cases is already very shaky. And even in cases in which the Economic Science can describe the behavior of the most massive, yet we can not ignore the behavior of other economic agents (or decision makers, or individuals).
According to Vera Rita, "to illustrate the differences between traditional approaches and he called behavioral economics, Katona up, initially, a few points. One is how forecasts are made in this sector. The first break data collective, general, about the activities of the recent past, while the second would use, in addition, other types of data on attitudes and expectations of people as well as the transformations experienced by these aspects, because the behavioral theory supposed to be predispositions to future actions. "also reports that, with this kind of research, Katona and his team created in 1952, the Index of Consumer Sentiment, with buying intentions of consumers. With a work of more than 30 years, the author can prove that "attitudes and expectations of individual consumers contributed more to economic fluctuations than would be possible to assume, (...) would provide more accurate preliminary indications about their consumption behavior savings and, in particular, dealing with - is the important moments of change (turning points), compared to spending on durable goods. "
Stephen Lea (and others), according to Vera Rita, "even if it seems impersonal, economic behavior was always a form of social behavior, learned. In this sense, draw attention to the habits (...) ". Even the cognitive approach is not enough, according to the author: "For them, it would reach only the questions about what people know, not what they do (...)". They emphasize the need to understand "how individual behavior influences what happens in the economy, how the economy affects individual behavior, how these two processes interact. And suggest, as a paradigm for economic psychology, recognition of a 'two way' - individuals influencing the economy and being influenced by it. "And again:" Finally, they conclude that the economy and individual are interdependent - one act and react other interacting in multiple ways (...). "
The author states that "the government does not administer the economy alone, which is also influenced by 'other decision makers' such as those involved in the business world and the masses of consumers, acting in 'unison', which may even go against the directions proposed by the government. " This type of approach could help to improve predictions about the presence or absence of waves of optimism and confidence or pessimism and distrust among the population.
Vera Rita let us reason together about globalization: "Given the overwhelming experience of globalization, that left almost no country immune to its effects, plus the transformation of formerly socialist economies into market-oriented economies, the global economic system can be seen today , much more homogeneous, which would put new questions to the economic psychologist. One could be precisely what would have contributed to this referral, the behavioral point of view, the nature of the decisions taken in these new directions, and many behaviors that could be examined from the standpoint of microeconomics. "
The economic psychologist, in defense of the relevance of this knowledge, states that "analytical work almejaria rationality (and not with delusions or hallucinations) and therefore most likely to choose what is truly best for you and the community (because no one can operate individually and under whatever) like 'arrival point', in opposition, so the basic premise of economics. " Opposed this because, in the case of economic theory, according to the author, "this theory is characterized by an emphasis on rationality as 'starting point', which posits the individual to be self-centered, selfish, its utility and optimizer can make the best possible choices, from the information available to it, and learn from experience. "
He continued reporting that, according to the Expected Utility Theory, although there may be personal differences, "this fact is irrelevant, since it would prove sufficient to describe, explain and predict people's behavior in the aggregate, that is on the whole [or dominant behavior]. On the other hand, all phenomena which are beyond this model are considered anomalies and, therefore, not be given more attention by economists. "Reported that, in contrast, the" economic psychology aims to study the economic behavior of individuals [called consumers or decision makers] (...) in order to understand how the economy affects the individual and, in turn, how the individual influences the economy, as variables thoughts, feelings, beliefs, attitudes and expectations. "
Now if you can not assimilate this knowledge to society, you can let your citizens into the world without these notions? Life is so larger than the impractical that you learn in school! ... But meanwhile, what we say (subliminally?) To our youth? Strive as much for higher consumption and ostentation of anything? ... Just what happens, anyway, that the overwhelming majority will not get it, even hypnotized by the "eyes of Medusa" of capitalist consumerism.
This is consumerism, not because we eat when hungry, but because, always, there are advertisements and social behaviors inviting us and reinforcing aspects of our needs. They do not create needs: for example, we need transportation, but we need a huge off-road vehicle with a powerful propulsion system and traction and advanced technologies, "navigation" to walk in a city? To be robbed and we take a shot? Oh, by the spirit of adventure? Well, then there would be any better to buy a jeep, take vacations and adventures actually do? We can not? When we have a heart attack or stroke succeed permanent vacation. Not so? Just ask the doctors ...
The normal, according to our actual needs, take advantage of the information would be advertising (as a sales promotion), allied to our need, the purchase decision (regardless of advertising and prior to it, preferably), feel free to acquisition and also to the financial condition required (without us seriously into debt or missing money for more important things that we discover or already present). This is very different from someone hypnotize us with wonderful and shining vision of a huge "train", and instill in us that we can not live without it (and until that time had no effect one missing, and probably will not feel more if there is no strengthening of propaganda).
Now, anyone who tries to sales that way you know it, so try to keep people a little to reason logically, at least - as they say, want to "hunt for a buyer," leaving him no rational option. Return to complain later when indebted: the sellers come to pay attention to this ex-(duck) consumer? In truth, we are even forced to give up this rage consuming due to environmental unsustainability.
One might ask yourself what has to do all these constraints, these psychological factors, psychoanalytic, sociological, with the economy and the normal life of every citizen. Now, is that individuals are the economic agents, and act according to individual will, and is basic economics that if something is good for one individual, one can not expect that simply extending the same benefit to everyone, we have the same good result for everyone. Therefore, when many of these individuals act according to a same drive (increased consumption, for example), serious problems can occur to the economy.
If an employee has increased by 100% the value of their salary, this will be cause for celebration if the value of all wages of an economy that has increased, the chaos will be installed, because no product available to all wages since were sufficient for half that. And the adverse effects will extend, the purchase price (real) wage return, through inflationary corrosion, which will increase the price to something close to what it was before the rise of wages, but now is the disruption of existing inflation, among other problems.
All individuals form a society as an organism. There can be no excessive differences between these individuals, because, otherwise, do not communicate - which is crucial. To be healthy the body, its parts must work well and relate to, and differences were small. But the question is much more serious than simply a problem of better mathematical division of income. Looking at it another way, what matters most are all the antecedent factors that influence this lag distribution.
It would just capitalism? No, because the economy is tied to economic agents (individuals) and to economic factors, and socioeconomic this cluster is influenced by people that "moves" and "stands" along the axis of the distribution of wealth, making due its dynamic movement, the "pressure" that alienates the less endowed in a better position in the income distribution.
When in a state of nature, as described by Rousseau, each individual seeks only personal satisfaction and retention, with the formation of groups, seeks satisfaction and maintenance of this or clan, and so on, with the formation of communities, fiefdoms, nations ... We live in the moment of accommodation in this sense between countries, ie countries that have most influence or relationship with other countries are discovering that just is not feasible to seek satisfaction and maintenance of its people, to the detriment of others. Wondered countries, such as the U.S., now realize that the exacerbated individualism of a nation is no longer viable to maintain the global geopolitical balance and, consequently, it is advantageous for any country.
Around here, have not yet discovered that our maintenance (individual) depends on the maintenance of our society, they will say with regard to maintenance of the country. In the occupation which resulted in the creation of this country, this land was only intended for the extraction of wealth, and was occupied for that purpose. This process descivilizatório shows its effects until today and, coupled with the intensification of capitalist competition, show up here, partly so the worst socioeconomic existing distortions, as is the case of very unequal income distribution.
The worst problem is not profit capitalist, the worse is the problem that is done to achieve this gain, which can be obtained in different ways. This profit can be the result of a normal economic process, legal and moral, or may be a result of overexploitation, devices based on unfair, unethical and immoral. What matters is whether the profits (including high) may be accruing after covering all costs of labor
Workforce or are ex ante conditions in the production process (condition set out above, necessarily), leaving the question of the price payable to the worker - as the others are fixed costs and profit required is given, even when not feasible under normal conditions production, without any overshoot of the worker.
The more wealth there is also more poverty under capitalism. But then, wealth is bad? No. The material is part of a life much more comfortable as the more we are able to enjoy them without any major mishaps, without being an object of life, but usable for our life goals. If they were not good, not all poor people would be seeking, and the best would be the bucolic life of poor communities - and "wonder" of this bucolic life is opposed by at least part of the community social psychology as not being a perfection.
Meanwhile, the solution comes along with new problem: the more wealth there is much more attracted to these riches (and opportunities to obtain them) are individuals. And when the individual tends to something - "leaning" on "direction" of what search; marshals its forces toward this something - diverts their interests to a greater proximity to that thing. This leads to the channeling of individual and collective resources for use in activities aligned with the pursuit of these riches for those who have more power to do so. By exclusion, these features are no longer used in daily activities to ensure the proper functioning of the community to be used on luxuries or abroad, for those who can. This lack of social resources in some areas leads to immobility and impracticability of life of people who are not positioned competitively in the "axis" distribution of wealth.
When we search something with greed, it often ends up forcing the living conditions of the individual who thus acts and, more problematically, also the lives of other people and affected communities in relation to individuals as well, and often damaging one or different nations. The brightness of wealth and power leads to nothing more we realize, and pass on everything to obtain. Entertainment options, dazzling objects and symbols of wealth and power are so many that lead to so many diversions over a reasonable life.
Alongside the need for consumption and accumulation as a precaution to future adversity, "Shine" that "blind" the accumulation of wealth means that the individual loses the perception of social reality, that often he is helping to worsen. This is because, over generations, man has learned to fight constantly and with all his energies to overcome their difficulties in life. The more a person focuses their attention and efforts in their work and increasing wealth, trying to get rid of increasingly be affected by its environment, the greater also the ability to keep the wealth obtained.
In other words, is not thinking of all new utility that can have wealth that the individual continues to accumulate indefinitely, but is seeking to increase the feeling of comfort achieved with the growing power of maintaining wealth already obtained (status quo) and greater financial stability . This quest for independence from the environment, and the consequent sense of increasing immunity, is how, in good measure, the attraction and enjoyment by the accumulation of ever greater wealth.
It should not be considered because the individual is immeasurably stronger than seek riches, it would just be fun, as if he felt the need, just by knowing their weaknesses, even subconsciously or unconsciously, as the history of man is suffering and it is affected by many factors. Some of the people in the past suffered from very large needs for material goods, have serious difficulties in identifying to what extent they need and depend on the goods, and desprenderem of worry and dependence on material goods. Thus, in most cases, they overestimate the indefinite accumulation of material goods. Certainly, those who can break away from the shackles of psychological addiction unbridled pursuit of wealth are better developed socially and psychologically. It is necessary that the individual knows well their weaknesses and insecurities for not living up avoiding everything and while cautioning against all defensive and hostile attitudes, due to past trauma.
And he who has riches becomes, automatically, the paradigm in their society? Because of the weight of wealth. When there is movement of capital in one direction, it unquestionably affects the lives of people in this society. Therefore, the society becomes direct result of the will of the capitalists. Who has accumulated wealth in all its enforcement actions such holdings, seems to do a favor to people so they can make use of these funds received. So much so that, with economic power, even laughable, since we feel overbearing, just have a small head and small business.
Who does not have accumulated wealth always seems to be depending on favors and good will, even when working hard. This aspect of servility makes, of course, employers (at least part of them) might require more of their employees, even when not maintain the purchasing power of wages paid. The higher the labor supply, and how this work is less specialized, more if the situation worsens. This also increases the competition for qualified, because the most qualified and less in the market reverse this situation, and that capitalists need to "chase them".
The problem of savage capitalism begins exactly when that forms the psychological dependence of the individual capitalist want to become economically stronger every day, and all for doing this, going over all, and channeling all this pressure (resources, energies that hoarding) through its financial power. In capitalism, due to socioeconomic independence of cells, each individual has great freedom to give his interpretation of how should position themselves to act within the system and social sectors. The weak are psychologically within the circle of dependence on capital accumulation. They try to be strong and seem to disguise their weaknesses. Imagine how many types of psychological profile and groups exist in a society and how it is harmful in that direction.
And how can we have an economic system (capitalist) socially just, if it is affected by individuals, the vast majority of these individuals are conditioned by very little socio-economic system? Pre-Socratic thinkers (or prior to the philosopher Socrates, described by Plato, and before the fourth century BC) have reported that the individual perception of reality is limited and is only valid when subjected to social consideration. However, the most savage capitalism, the largest individual targeting is by personal interests, with its inherent psychological deviations and limited knowledge, distorted sensory perception by the individual.
The accumulation of wealth (cash, and culture, including power) may also produce beneficial results (among others as described by Smith), provided that it is used and the product or accumulation result of this, not only a process of accumulate indefinitely - is difficult to measure whether these positive results will be able to compensate for the problems inherent in capitalism. Therefore, the processes of economic regulation (such as regulatory agencies) are essential for survival at least in civilized capitalist countries.
The problem arising from the pleasure afforded by the act of accumulating wealth is to imagine that by seeking to extend the pleasure of this accumulation, forever, forever, to the detriment of other activities, or relegate it can solve every problem in life - moving life according to this, how much you see. To avoid this situation, it is necessary to pro-active attitude of the one who accumulates capital, becoming aware that I should avoid this situation in your life.
The aristocracy can bring, and often has already brought positive results for humanity, for their world view and simplifying abstractions of social reality. As Nietzsche said, is easy to understand that the aristocracy can easily reach a vision of the world's most comprehensive and sophisticated than the poor, since its members are built with better material and cultural conditions, from which is much easier and predictable the creation of works of genius. That would be the paradise of human development, but can not embrace all the social reality, and even the part that can, there is distortion.
Our body knows when there are problems in any part thereof through the pain felt, but the aristocratic governments realize some people's suffering, as it has distanced people's lives. Thus, we see nothing unfair in our actions when there are very large social differences between those who practice and who suffers an act. The financial ability and good social structure form a shield for the individual who fails to see the problems of the weakest in their society. Perhaps our pride does not fit in small crevices in which we have to delve to realize these ills. Our dream, our desire, is a luxury company. And that is already there. But we do not see and dream of a society "only" with basic living conditions. Therefore, we are an infinity away, and yet, maybe we are moving away from it. Meanwhile, there is still so much poverty. "We need to toughen up, but without losing tenderness" ...
And if a part of a system develops disproportionately to optimize the operation of the system, such as force the aristocracy to what happens, ie, to its economic growth, this makes the operation of this system succumbs. There is, thus losing all the great advantage that it can bring the aristocracy for society since it becomes excessive weight. The other parts (other classes) can no longer maintain integrated, well-functioning (of society), the depauperarem to help keep this part overdeveloped (the aristocracy).
Who would make the ideal point of development of this aristocracy? However, the economic and social forces, and who is stronger? However, if people in this class "top" plague "lower" should be for good reason. For example, if someone inside training, mobilizing wealth of society, becomes a judge, it is necessary that this use their condition to seek an ideological stance that favors, compensate, the poor, especially the consistency of his position that involves social issues in its decisions. However, the state of normalcy to the lives of those leads them, usually by corroborate the status quo. Some courts are well known - although a minimum of maintenance of status quo is also necessary to guarantee minimum legal and safe way to indicate and perennial social development.
The study Unequal Opportunities persist for generations in Brazil, World Bank - IBRD (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development), reveals that Brazil is among the four most unequal countries - better than only four African countries (Swaziland, Republic of Central Africa, Botswana and Namibia) - and has mechanisms and almost all the ingredients to perpetuate this situation, the "inequality trap". This trap, the study said, is when the economic and political elite perpetuates itself in power, creating and legislative mechanisms to maintain control and gain advantage.
A classic example of perpetuation in power in Brazil, would be when the Legislature or Judiciary own wage increases more than the minimum wage or refuses to cut welfare gains incompatible with the rest of society. Another classic example is education: children of wealthy families studying in good private schools and end up going to public universities, best and busiest - subsidizing rich people instead of subsidizing the poor. Compared to South Korea (an example of a country that massificou public education of good quality), Brazil spends three to four times more with adults in public universities.
The Bird cites other examples, from weddings listed among the children of the same political and business elite to lack of funding on equal conditions for rich and poor (which has improved in recent years). Inequalities in loans reveal another problem: the lack of a more advanced capitalism. "If a poor person has a great idea, never get a bank loan under the same conditions as someone rich," says the study (due to lack of collateral, for example). There are two "pillars" of the World Bank for development: climate for investment in the country and provision of social and economic power for the poor. "The better the climate for business and social equity, the greater the potential for growth and income distribution." This, it seems, capitalism would be ideal, if that is possible.
In the study, Bird notes that not only the income of the poor is a problem with a shortage of good services like health and education, but there are no conditions in Brazil and mechanisms of interaction between rich and poor. At work, the World Bank considers "fair" as equal chances to all regardless of color, race or social status. The World Bank sees advances in recent years, with some social programs, but notes that they are insufficient to change the picture.
Our society is like a boiler that if further increase its pressure, it explodes. You can not extremar exacerbated situations beyond limits - far below or far above the average level - without creating serious problems for the unbearable pressure. This does not mean the opposite, that everyone must be equal, but there would be an average but a single exact pattern, without departures from the average. If so is wages, which, when very low, generating problems that you can not circumvent all mechanisms of social support due to the complexity of social and economic relations. To offset the extreme pressure, make - if necessary control systems and minimization, compensation and remediation of problems, which in many cases, is not sufficient in our beloved country - even God is Brazilian (surely, if the Brazilians were also a little more of God in their actions, not in speech only, the country would be much better). "Who plants wind reap the whirlwind" - as I explained to Siddhartha Gautama (the Buddha). There is no doubt.
While not to diminish the social pressure exerted on its individuals, may not want to establish individual guilt of the people to its ultimate consequences, is driving the situation when, for example, talks about zero tolerance. How to punish the last consequences when there is social justice to its logical conclusion? The great misfortunes are generated by imbalances of processes or people. Thus we must look, for lack of care for small events can have more than proportional effect on our lives us and generate major problems and ruin the flavor of life (see 11/09/2001, due to lack of "tact" in U.S. foreign policy).
It takes great attention to issues of social equity, as to penalize the poorest social classes with measures that will be felt more in these classes, you are affecting the social balance - already very fragile and usually in very shaky in capitalism, due to efforts for capital accumulation - and that just maintaining the status quo of the wealthy. No more room for improvisation or large maneuvers easy. The current reality is as I said someone: combat and manage perplexities.
We are geniuses! Yes we are brilliant! In fact, without demagogy. We are the result of millennia of evolution - the economy, the law in many specialties. However, there is strong and it is striving to understand the problems of the weak. Can not understand the weaknesses of the underprivileged through the perceptions and references of psychological well-structured and financially. Only someone that has devastated his life can understand that others have their lives destroyed. You must be warmth to the same conditions and frailties, was involved in full of weaknesses similar to those of the underprivileged to understand their situation. We can not as much as those who live these realities, like the Brazilian rappers, and MV Bill, but in this sense, seek help much this proximity (physical disabilities, and financial psychology too, as can be seen historically).
It is empathy that makes us realize the situation that others are experiencing, feeling affected the most, the fatigue they are submitted in the most extreme individuals faced in their lives. Without it, you can not see, so deeply, the pain that is caused to others and the value of certain property to them, because they're used to having many possessions. In most cases, are not riches that are able to satisfy us. But, without knowing it, still insisting it all my life - a quest that may not have satisfactory results.
Life is a social flow - and not scattered and isolated facts together. Isolated acts only are effective flow area in a social dispersion probabilities of occurrence to the flow medium. Most are only antisocial elements with understanding or behavior away from the middle of the social flow, but what matters in society, as the sociological question, is this flow. Could define the dispersion of the whole society of individuals even under a curve of statistical pattern. According to the distribution of the standard curve, most individuals in a population of (any) is arranged close to the average as the various aspects. When observing the number of individuals willing farther from the average, this number decreases rapidly and forever more, until it becomes negligible.
The Economic Science tells us what happens in the economy and presents methods to control and condition these economic facts, the economic psychology tells us how it happens, from the economic behavior of individuals; psychoanalysis shows us why (all) happens in our lives (not just the economy), from how we are structured psychologically. Therefore, it seems essential to base the understanding socioeconomic psychoanalysis.
In his doctoral thesis, the psychoanalyst Rita Vera proposes an explanatory model of psychic functioning occurs as individuals in their decision making consumer. To avoid climbing into a complex specialty, without the necessary knowledge, and not to extend this perscrutamento intrincar and perhaps remains the option of interpretation with great simplification (and with great effort not to be "rough"), and say that individuals " choose "unconsciously (and this is the primary feature), by an easy illusion instead of" face "a difficult reality. For example, choose to consume any badulaque representing a pleasure, a small and fleeting satisfaction (or just a fad), instead of saving (a dislike) to try to buy something more important "someday." Quote only some of the most important parts of his psychoanalytic model for decision making.
"Among the practices adopted when operated under the principle of pleasure-
-Pain, we find the prosecution, would try to segregate the scope of consciousness everything that could trigger displeasure there, including perceptions that did not correspond to the expected or desired. In order to seek pleasure, appeals, if necessary (and often is necessary, since reality is what is and is not usually the realization of our desires) to delusions or hallucinatory satisfactions, in the sense of what is not "confer" with reality, and motor discharges (such as actions aimed at relieving tension without, however, point to consistent transformation of reality, where they, yes, could bring gratification, in fact), both in its external level, as internal or psychic.
"Pressed by the impossibility of waiting, the mind seeks refuge in the comfort that seems closer at hand - although it is not true - which would explain our considerable vulnerability to illusions (...). All that pleases is much more likely to be considered real, while all that it brings discomfort will be easily ignored or, more specifically its mental representation will suffer repression, that is, it will be removed from consciousness, making - if, from then inaccessible to it. "
"The way older, on the other hand, traveled for thousands of years by mankind, is one of the emotions anchored in instincts, able to provide rapid, immediate, even though losing in accuracy. The emotions come first and they have also assured place in our rational mind, "younger". To use the expression of Kahneman, they have provided much greater accessibility to present to the mind as "hits the roads," about which does not seem necessary to consider too, are almost natural, but always take them involves the limit certain areas of analysis and action, with significant loss of other opportunities that remain untapped. "
Already in the final highest bidder:
"The collection of these data also served as the basis for the development of our two proposals:
"1. a model for investigating decision-making, supported by psychoanalytic knowledge - a historical tracing of key concepts to consider that, with Bion (19,793) as a critical decision when choosing between avoiding the frustration that causes displeasure and therefore, important aspects of reality end up neglected or, on the other hand, when ways of acting on this reality are sought, facing, in this case, the discomfort of frustration to try to change it, we got to utilitarianism and marginalism, schools of thought in economics that base their assumptions on the pleasure-pain polarity to explain the behavior of economic agents. Including recent research by the authors of economic psychology that have adopted these proposals, identify points of convergence and difference with the model that we suggest. This was supported by psychoanalytical conceptions about the axis illusion and think, or how the function of allowing access to consciousness, as a first step towards achieving thoughts, when it is subjected to a single criterion to assess perceptions and other mental contents with based solely on their ability to feel pleasure or pain, can provide permanence in the field governed by illusions, detached from the real situation as it presents itself. As a result, the capacity for thinking compromised, the condition to take ownership and take responsibility for choices made (whether economic or not), is restricted. Since it involves the close association between thinking and emotional world (it is the emotional capacity to endure nasty repercussions triggered by the experience of frustration that could pave the way for developing the condition to think), this model supports the need to include, necessarily, the variable of emotion in research on economic decisions, the target of studies of economic psychology (...).
"2. a model for thinking about the construction of economic psychology in Brazil - from a critical examination about the epistemological foundations of the discipline, considered in its broadest dimension, ie, from the perspective that the Critical Theory of Society and authors such as Bourdieu Farr and offer to discuss relations with the historical context, and identifying national problems, along with examples of studies on inflation, which can be considered as early-Economy interface Psychology in Brazil, a proposal was made public enlightenment through the dissemination of information on their economic behavior (which includes both data on the economy, as on the mental functioning), with the aim of contributing to their emancipation. By expanding the knowledge on how to decide in the economic context, would increase the chances of gaining greater access to their own psychological operations, and thus make possible means of defense, resistance and capacity development of the population responding to the pressures imposed by the economic system ( ...). "
For those who follow consumer behavior, even with only minimal notions of psychology or psychoanalysis, show very ridiculous behavior exacerbated consumer, clearly as psychological compensation for frustration, as an accompaniment to fads or as heavy reliance on symbols of power and status . On the other hand, it seems that life has become full of traps, and even those who do not have attitudes based on "bad intentions", can often have very complicated life or end up seriously complicating one's life. Maybe it was a pressing need for legal regulation against these social traps, such as advertising achacantes.
It seems that much of the population have to face the couch to have significant economic and social improvement. It's not about how to produce wealth and spending. Rather, it is in fact know what we seek when we seek wealth and unconsciously we actually is satisfactory without deceiving ourselves. If this seems obvious, is not - quite the contrary, much of sublimation and substitutes for what we really want (unconsciously), and psychoanalysis strives to seek help us in these discoveries. Among the most uneducated, are normal play calling psychiatrists and psychoanalysts crazy. In fact, it is our psychic functioning as it approaches the chaos and madness. It is imperative that we move this understanding, even as basic knowledge for the economy.
Well, from here again this review is not written, because it's more about philosophy itself. Or more other times the text will be revised, except on the issue - since so many (dozens) of revisions have been made and did not end the need for revision. If to be an unfinished work, how they like Marcia Tiburi, and since we now philosophizing, and we intend to be original, so be it. The errors, divirtamo us with them - are another issue for review. If anyone has available, that the hunt.
We live in the world OUR abstract ideas, customs, Postmodern Culture, but na Truth, We live always the same natural conditions, SINCE Semper. "Nature, IstoÉ a meeting of the conditions of existence, colleges and Media, the AIM and the Beings and determining how and Last Degree of Development That they are intended to achieve one" (Aristotle). Contrary Everything and pursued a New Inventions of Modernity, The Nothing Man invents. Nothing! Only discovered. And find out just always SINCE Things Possible, of how the Agreement with Natural conditions of the Agreement with Characteristics of Chemical Elements, paragraph OS which only discovers new arrangements.
"And evident, therefore, that the city is part of the Nature of Things, which naturally hum Human and animal, Politico, a Targeted Living in society, and that he who, by instinct, and not because any circumstance will inhibit, Stop Doing Part A City, OR and hum vile than man. Such an individual deserves, as Homer said, censorship cruel Being without family, without collars, NO HOME. Because elements and eager for fighting, and as birds of prey as, unable to submeter an obedience QUALQUÉR itself. "" In Order of Nature, the state puts itself drops of Family and before EVERY individual POIs That ALL MUST perforce be placed drops of the Party. Raise the ALL, (.. .) FOR EXAMPLE, A separate Corps Hand Over Hand BEYOND will not be making a name "(Aristotle, Politics).
However, EVERY citizen born feeling like an individual. Individual and (Concise Oxford Dictionary For Electronic) Relative OR Self Being just a hum, What and Self hum individual - Among So many adjectives. Something individualized algorithms Alone and Considered as special, exceptional, unique, distinguished, unique, singular. The opposite of the individual and collective, General, the OR That includes covers many things, OR, OR That Says Respect them; What OU belongs to and used by a considerable number of PEOPLE, OR a people, a class OR OR a hum Group, and What It Says Respect and common interests OR to the community; What's That Common. That belongs to a common and Two UO Another Two, the majority of OR a OR Things All Beings, and UO Action Holding Two OR MORE PERSONS OR Things; What exists between the Largest number of PEOPLE. Something policy (OU collective) and algorithms Regarded As Abundant, Ordinary, a general, trivial, vulgar - Other adjectives entrepreneurship.
And nice HUMAN BEING TO BE A notice How to Be an individual, rising social disconnection from reality, and feeling isolated IF A Unit - despite Being inserted and have interests nd Company and not THIS guy. In opposition to the community, AO Group, not the individual perceives interconnection and interdependence with YOUR YOUR Society. By observing them separately, and noting what does not practice any illegal activity, the individual thinks that he can lead a life just a benefit of social media available way you would come from. More: What THINK established contributing to a society and that this temperature debts and ITS members with n elements. However, elements and just ONE particle of The Who in Society, a "cell of society." Do not live individually, But na Integrated Society. The Pursuit of Pleasure by seeking Immediate Interest to individual reveals itself over time, as something irrational, even the interests of that individual paragraph. Part of this dichotomy will come great problems of our society.
Para Marshal Albert, it numa Your Company Human Capital. This is because a company and do a sum ¿Qué AND YOUR EVERY member, together soma WITH THEIR POTENTIAL Das. Speak UP ABOUT Who favors the people and selfless, but elements of this process and beneficiary What contributes to social and just laid fulfilling YOUR obligation, and accumulator ja What hum of wealth resulting from the Economic and Social Process.
Para Aristotle, History and hum a dialectical movement, in That Man and not far Generator, But midwife, and places an HER "Rock Pile in," How did OTHER. WHO HAS A Bliss to put an Ultima "stone" As this process and winner genius and hum How great man. Had THAT As a philanthropist, contributing alongside an improvement in the Company The Who (SUA Society) is actually contributing a pair improve the condition of YOUR life and YOUR - BY this Society are entered.
The correct serious individuals seek to contribute to the improvement of society and perhaps should feel an Integrated IS THIS Society - How Citizen Which Operates in YOUR society and suffer consequences of such acts and YOUR Own Society. Many times, act and hum Your Small Fact consequential, and that seem unimportant, algorithms can be a great representation for the life of individuals and of the Other.
Para Anaximander (sixth century BC), THE Through Time, pay OS opposites, Between them, the price of the injustices of each other. For some, this would mean the universal balance, For the compensation of the excess. The problem is the price an excess BY Payable processes, besides not being able SITUATIONS Reaching a balance, but rather increased Differences - As can be seen any Middle East. Every Time I extremamos A SITUATION OR attitude nd we are about to injure the right of others. In the Spirit of Laws No, Montesquieu he concludes: "I say, and I think what I wrote not only in THIS Work Prove: the Spirit of restraint MUST be the legislator did not; The Politico Well, As Good moral THIS Semper Between Two Limits" .
However, many times processes Reasonable limits are exceeded BY Lack of comprehensive understanding More About Life Itself. How could cite the example of breaking the boundaries of a narrative of Proust, Swann's Way: "The sadistic (...) UNS beings are so purely sentimental, so virtuous course What they ate Sensual Pleasure seems a bad thing, huh privilege of the poor. And when you allow yourself a moment Deliver an element, And The Skin of evil trying to enter and Getting What Your ACCOMPLICE Among the order that he may for a moment you have an illusion of having escaped from YOUR soul scrupulous and tender paragraph inhuman World of Pleasure "and continued telling YOUR Character:" It was not bad which gave him the idea of pleasure, which seemed nice, it was the pleasure that seemed evil .. AND EVERY TIME you in Como Que By not only gave negligible Pleasure HE came together those Que Bad Thoughts For The Rest of the time they were absent from YOUR virtuous soul, BY HER Acar had just not got anything diabolical pleasure, BY BEING here with Evil. "
Well THAT was established that the described Agreement with psychoanalysis, That seems not the case. It seems readily apparent that we have a very hypocritical society, with moral A highly repressive, in What a Piece of Normal Things of Life, Like a Sexuality, are treated as taboo. How Everything dammed hum day and always bursts, extrapolation, you realize very PERSONS IN Experiences That should serve the entertainment Normal, feel a need for extrapolation in behavior "evil" irresponsible carousing, drinking inordinate type and WHOLE Totally Too Much Dangerous . What seems to have a Deny Self and Personality reasonably demonstrate UP BY A bad spirit possessed paragraph could draw something that should be tapped as normal and reasonable - and not as something abnormal and extrapolated in Excess. That is, first deny A Reality of the Agreement with OU a moral religion, then do just that without the Less Care, attending a Minor Degree hum of Reason.
However, even if no OS grave injustices committed excesses of each other, never will be - as the World the Way is opaque - a utopia of a Life Free From Issues and Interests versus individuals in DL. Search progress and a Best of all, unless it is interpreted as reflections of Smith How hum Certificate What the End justify the means. Just What Is Truth fins operating system may provide compensation for AOS Problems caused by Means used Para RESULTS Obtaining the desired - and can not always compensate Wants DiZer. However, you must LeVar Account in Which Society can not have a result not only of the sum of Interest Search Stock nd immediate subjects. At first, you porqué a Question Search and interest, we need to think in long term, in the Second place, we must think in logo nos Term Interests of the Company.
It seems Que TODAY IS Tendency paragraph Validate an affirmation of Nietzsche on the Greeks and especially the season of pre-Socratic philosophers, that "(...) believe properly so na Reality of Men and Gods of Nature Full and considered As in Que just hum disguise, masking and metamorphosis of these men gods. Man was to them the Truth of Things EO core, everything else just look and illusion game. "
THIS Search Interests individuals, with consequent problems of compensation as, may be accepted as reasonable and even necessary as, according to a consensus of the reasonableness of Thought Middle, IN EACH SEASON - DEFINITION OF Opaque a reasonable and can be indefinitely debated BY " learned ", and then only as differences increase, but a popular SE Ask any non-
Demented and-elements readily Sabera point Opaque and reasonable in his social environment. The delay does not make A Home Development Company and a delay na na perception and acceptance of the individual element as being part of their society.
Major problems of the nation are due to contrast individual against society. Ideally, the Heraclitus (540 BC) wrote: the Unity of the hidden harmony of opposite tensions, IN Opaque a multiplicity of opposites, EM All levels of reality, becomes noticeable as unit. Or BE, Our Problem, Our Society, and Greater Good, and More Than Just Economic Facts do transcendental (What disheartening and ate). Major changes will be difficult in a few years. Certainly there will be a hum Political Change Our Construction company.
It appears from the concepts do Geologist Rualdo Menegat That man must be perceived as being biological hum, and not only considered as cultural thinking. And elements MUST avoid having stereotypical vision of social reality. Stop the author, there is not only the World That thought, What the Modern World THIS nd only one Truth and Perception of Western life in big cities. THAT excluding World of Large Cities, we have the Fact That and The World, including ALL cities and also to the field, such as forests, deserts, Nature. SO, get an SE version of this Company City, What conceptual and not organic, How should perceive themselves.
Also an accumulation of wealth must be viewed within the naturalistic understanding um, realistic. Possession of Goods and Materials in good nd Measure That Deliver a person need. We are "stuck" to the Body, we have a connection and Physical Dependence. In this Measure, and good to get rid of NOS sufferings and concerns linked a Physical Needs; THIS carefree Let Our Free Spirit Pará "transcend" the most inclusive material things. And only this Measure E Que serve minimum material goods and they concern.
Oh, also we want luxury? But not luxury Should Be Like a good taste? The Comfort? A sophisticated taste? Often, goods with high added value are used non-subparagraph Let them enjoy the good temperature, as the great comfort and satisfaction; the contrary: by holding UP and using them only consider luxury OR BY status symbols, seek-NOS only function in dissociation, and do not function in selfish enjoyment, not generate lasting satisfaction.
Why, this occasionally, a Collection of many wealth proves to be as frustrating. No, no and luxury of a Simply Everything Equals More expensive and portentous. Not the same. And pathetic (as the newly rich) Search, How to "Dream of Consumption," The only more expensive and why. Very ridiculous and just a show How hum SAME END in itself. Only primary OR Minds Too dazzled not realize it. Luxury and Everything That CAN enjoy superfluous nos provide satisfaction Well Beyond the basic needs of life. Satisfaction only luxury and empty show and frustrating.
As PEOPLE already "born" to work alongside a Collection of goods to the Maintenance of Life. Maybe a bunch SO Opaque, non-capitalist system, seem so normal. From that point, and the trouble begins linked to wealth and possession of material goods, because it passes a hum Haver behavior deviated from the real need, but rather one focused a kind of obsession to possession SAME FOR IT WITHOUT need Direct, many times inclusive, often impairing a person's life - and What You Ate As Seen regular and normal in a capitalist society. Perhaps here is a big difference in a relationship not A capitalist society.
By imposing very act of Force On others, For the "sharpening of the claws," numa self-assertion. Best, seriously avoid these unnecessary things and Que cause discomfort as PEOPLE. Instead predatismo this, we need to constructionism - and how difficult the constructivist position. It is necessary awareness of the individual placement, where you are, Where will you subparagraph, cost what price it, and what we cause SVAS WITH OTHER determined attitude. How serious attitude Which algorithm does not "walk around dragging their feet," Searching for All YOUR Rights and Opportunities "biting" algorithms, WITHOUT LeVar Very useful in an account established Being What do fetched.
Everything happens in OUR LIVES MUST Happen Within the social context, not possible to extrapolate THAT Full Context - the Maximum Possible Being, as times, away from U.S. in some measure of normality is not exaggerated. AS a Greater maturity, a hum of Culture and Ethics individual elements themselves away less normal behavior in the ITS Society - Less commit raptures. One Man "superior" - As Nietzsche wanted - And as more frugal circumstances of your life because has wisdom, it can not control YOUR SINAS because it can decide how to position SE ante and circumstances - being in contact with a reality of His pace and monitoring, influencing and changing (only when possible and convenient) as conditions of YOUR Life - Everything realizing a mutation process.
We lost the harmony?
We who are apes (or macacais or simian or simian) bipedal - differently from others because of our position as a floor, and the consequent adaptation of the sexual instinct cyclic (based on smell) for sexual drive permanent (visually induced) and that from the development of language, we have developed the unconscious structured like a language, conditioning us from our settlements (as Freud and Lacan) - we are light - as some brothers fornicating with our ancestors in the monkey the next - to defend our interests, and reluctantly immovable (like fat hippos) to just admit the rights of others - and talk about our hurts our sadism and cerebellum in these moments, and how easy it is to pretend that nothing is seen, in addition to our navel, leaving only the streets defining the walls and its electrified fences (with our eyes always ahead). (Of course, there are also some living apes stupid, immature, cold and hungry, gaping). We are dedicated to self-reproduction of this creature that we developed, and created holy creatures, who all dedicate so they can benefit even more than we amass many more nuts in the gardens of the world - then do not understand why kill these creatures for nothing in stealth and violence-free day-to-day. We had nightmares scary, very afraid of threats, fear which grew ever; acautelamo us precavemo us much, and in the end, we find that the worst enemy, who haunt our worst, we were ourselves.
People come and just society (humanity) survive, but we want to overwhelm society, be above it (and to feel immortal?). We have to stop and think: what we want for our society? Your chipping, no matter if she survive? No one serves the social exclusion that generates this situation of suffering of the underprivileged - although it may seem otherwise - unless it was as a rite of passage in which the individual could become a more developed spiritually to be going through a case of extreme suffering.
When we are in a privileged position in society in relation to layers unable to enjoy the satisfaction "means" social, it seems worthwhile to continue garnering share this privilege. Disguise the situation and seek to get rid of the problem and move away from poverty and violence "turning away", evading us. However, this advantage will cost if that cost is not paid for much of the socially privileged individuals, will be heavily and very regretfully paid by someone. Do not get rid of the problem. He gets us to peek around the corner.
No one can hide forever the social problems, locked in their coverage. All for one fleeting wealth, we do not know if you can and enjoy it for long, because for that you need health, time, mood and disposition, of all conditions, and being alive. And, if not the individual who is a victim of violence may be a family, a relative or friend, or society itself to which it belongs. The worst nightmare is not knowing how to leave their offspring to life, only that expectation already in the "bush".
Get rid of the social problem is something different from what we see every day - is to attack the problem fairly and accurately in its center. It's good relief it brings. Becoming a citizen of the individual with social responsibility, will be reassuring in the knowledge that has done everything it had fallen to improve their society - apart from demagoguery. Of course, concern and efforts with other efforts and energy demand. But it also requires effort to ignore the misery and suffering.
What is possible is not the individuals act as if the world was a rubbish dump where they behave in any way, playing the world "out there" anything that does not serve them, not their interest, or would be contrary to their interests, and then awaiting some sort of government "correct" and necessarily (much) efficiently straighten all of the company resulting muvuca. The company resulting from this type of behavior only interested in this type of person and that seems to be a model or moralizing.
Meanwhile, not just the socially successful individual entering into the post moralizing citizen, to go on television and profess all his indignation against all those moralizing and everything he sees around and that does not close with his modelinho extremely idealistic, disconnection from reality and social plurality. Now, how can people using their economic power to require such conduct, people who have no notion of the limits of resistance of a very fragile psychologically and economically? It seems they intend to "reward" to their subjects with the rigor of unreasonable demands, like the toast them with the opportunity to excel, to strengthen themselves in great difficulties, then as a consequence, progress. But without the necessary compensation or any incentive to work someday, inevitably, will become that worker apathy.
In fact, we need something like the government control over the economic abuses of business has been done on the capitalists. Also environmental control agencies and the abuse are made against employees in companies, even countries are "guarded" by the UN, but the capitalists can do whatever they want, aggressive attitudes and harmful to those who depend on a job.
Brilliantly, Martha Medeiros, in his article Arrogance: "(...) We must be tolerant of others if we want to be with us (...) But arrogance has no forgiveness. And are not the arrogant few (...) are those who walk upright nose, some of which are the last glass of water in the desert. Those who are rude to underlings who get excited when talking about what they imagine to be unique attributes of them, sticking to the cafeteria line and take personal offense if installed on a table poorly localized. Are the bearing, giving "carteiraço" and they feel a morbid pleasure in humiliating those who know less - or can less. They are bigots and those who view the world from top to bottom. (...) Note well: almost all acts of violence are perpetrated by an arrogant panics with the word no. "While parading around arrogance of this type will be very difficult and an economic model that accommodates up to society .
In all social groups are well-intentioned people. Except - the extremes of extremely hardworking (or able) and, secondly, people lax, the successful people are not so much better (if they are better) than the unsuccessful. And if they were so much better, should therefore help others. In a population, only a small portion of people is exceptionally developed - deemed wonder what they do - and a small portion of people is very limited - that will be considered social problems or bad people. The majority of the population - or any social group - is composed of so-called normal people. Genius helps, and sorry, but 99% of things are built with great sacrifice and sweat, even for geniuses.
Everyone can behave similarly to the group it belongs to, affects the conditions to be similar - and only a minor part not coincide with the mean (as in all the statistical standard curve). Only being between "your" (similar) that is understood. Workers end up behaving like workers. Squatters without the option of working and decent life are pressed psychologically to the illegality, and a part (very small, except the average deviation from the standard curve) ends up spending the life of crime - is the moral part of it. The same applies to public servants such as policemen. We must learn to respect and encourage those who have not had the privilege of being shown them a better way to go - clear that understanding is not opposed to punitive measures when necessary.
You must realize that to others not only as an adversary or enemy, but as someone who is affection to the same frailties, insecurities, problems, limitations and biases that we, and also, perhaps less fortunate in life than we have received worse education opportunities or worse, we are all normal citizens. Exception is the case of suffering from psychological disorders, case for professionals and, perhaps, to have pity. In doing so, our society is improving day by day, a crescendo that will benefit society as a whole, without demagoguery.
In the historical evolution, we have become accustomed to predatismo that occurs, and much, between social groups or "tribes", which are formed between the feelings of rivalry, not of humanity, as would be required. And why? Why should weaken too much to feel positioned in a more privileged. Who does not belong to the group is considered a rival, opponent, enemy. Between individuals and tribes are also beginning to be actions of revenge, to seek to compensate understandings of subjugation, of either party.
To friends, which is good. And who is no friend? There is a feeling of an individual direct competition with each other in society, a "fighting" against each other. In our world it is easier to be strong than weak. Of course there are people and families in processes of social and cultural development at various stages. There is a will and social rule that all are equal (as in the Utopia of Thomas More) - because it generates an extreme disincentive for those who have struggled to put himself in a privileged position. The problem is exaggerations committed to capitalism, were not the hype, there would be no such discussion.
Certainly, if there are extraterrestrial beings, should not be able or should be willing to understand the attitude of the man, who, instead of assisting in the solution of major problems of world society takes action against his. Attitudes that are always reflexive, as in Gaza, in which repeat indefinitely assaults and reprisals from either party. This is an example of parochialism, depressing parochialism, who only see the navel.
We are creating minifeudos away all the forces (people) that can affect the management of our assets - becoming isolated in a reality (a world) itself. Now then we are not all much better at least a minimum interacting with our environment, our community of living, neighbors, that is also of fraternal? Yes, fraternal, why not? There will be good for all the inconvenience we have caused compensarmos in pursuit of our narrow interests? We will act strictly in pursuit of our interest stricter? But not really know exactly what is most important to us.
Does the courtesy (sincere, selfless and desestereotipada, of course) does not contaminate and we are more civilized? Does the action will not have nice pleasant reactions? Even from the point of view of egoism that always want the best to you, do not we all more sociable in a society? Is it a fad beast of capitalism ostracism? Of course, in good measure we need to focus on our routines, but the point of isolating us? This is ridiculous: we are like chickens in an agribusiness, each in its cage to lay eggs. Does the modern isolation is not a denial of us, since we are naturally sociable, just like all monkeys? The ability to socialize is no capacity to experience, the only way possible according to our psycho-social structure?
The dynamism of society should be the basis for the understanding of society and the economy. The people we live with in the world are not our enemy - a perception that can lead to increased competition in society - but companions, and the only companions that we have to solve problems alone do not have the possibility to resolve. Hegel described for us in advance (XIX century) that individualism encouraged and required in periods of adolescence and economic resources to explore new awakening, a later age, the desire for a cooperative community.
Also we learn very little about each situation without the exchange of ideas in groups of common interests. Only after overcoming the extreme individualism and the defense of individual interests (or parochialism?) We learn in practice the culture of cooperation, which is something for which, surely, we are not prepared neither in life nor in school . As I said a thinker: only exists for society collectively perceived reality.
However, only speak in individualistic capitalism, and just live it every day, for life, and forget what we remember Silvia T. M. Lane, professional active in community social psychology: during the dictatorship, "a meeting of five people was considered subversive." How pretenderíamos society other than the current, which was designed at that time, composed of isolated individuals? We were forced ("bullet") exactly the opposite of what advocates Regina H. de Freitas Campos, in the same area of psychology: "the transformation of the individual subject" - subject is active, passive individual is number one in the crowd.
Have cooperation generates changes in all of our own world, knowing that you can no longer think only of themselves and always first and allow the collaboration, and that in addition to cooperation will not be disadvantageous in - not hurt - it will be yes, very advantageous (Stories of a Brazil that works - FGV). First, through learning, and secondly, the good results we obtain, in one way or another, always (Networks business, Think Magazine. ESPM / RS, jan. 2004).
We know different cultures to know how harmful behavior is closed, individualistic, parochial, "nationalist". Very little can alone. Surely, only with the full cooperation, "open chest" unrestricted between all actors involved in each situation can be dealt with current social problems, at any level, national or international. We're all in this together and enemies should be considered exogenous to social systems such as natural disasters.
There is no room for big changes of nations as "national heroes". The most important day in the company of high speed events and changes, is the positioning of the individual, because the social system can be likened to a wheel spinning at high speed and a small balance which is not compensated in the system changes the trajectory this whole system. Instead of trying to work things out on their own, alone, the individual can and should influence all others acting in a way that their behavior destabilize, stabilize or maintain the system neutrally and social situations of their lives, needs, for this, based on good sense.
But the movement of opposition forces in society, common sense has been forgotten. And common sense is becoming increasingly necessary, because we solve or help to accommodate everyone and everything. It is necessary to understand things in life occur within the space of possibilities and you have to know what life is like a game where what counts is to always be able to face the next play, between the extreme limits - the excess or insufficiency.
Donaldo Schüler made us an interesting allusion to the game of life: "Luck plays life up and down." As an example depicted in football, many variables influence the game: the wind, the irregularities of the field, etc.. - The weightless way to the game and tactical skill shines. "It is for anyone who plays avail themselves of the opportunities that fate gives you. Who plays spells. Absolute rigor, that works only in mechanically (...). The decay history of the game freezes. Young leads the exploration of the universe in which we move slowly, inexperienced and feeble. "[However,]" the risk is less game than the cautious timidity of electing long trodden paths. These conformed to settle before daring to defeat the uncertain. Of life, dedicated to the awakening of new, retracts (...). How to avail themselves of pre-designed projects in the exploration of territories that do not know? (...). The bid focuses on life (...). "
The author continues: "Idiots do not play (...). The musician plays with sounds, the artist plays with paint, the sculptor plays with wood (...) the poet plays with words (...) the thinker plays with concepts (...) political? playing with lives. Living is an art. Laws are rules of the game (...) the game laws do not inhibit, stimulate (...). The game combines a game with all the common area, a place of communication exchanges. " Donald says that "the game of life is composed of many games (...) is played when you think, throw them in the laboratory, is played in the Assembly and in court. We went from one area to join another game (...) there is no living without agreement (...). The conflict (...) combines fate and responsibility (...) to form the tissue in which all wires are intertwined. "
We might compare this play to be above or not a wave, representing this (dynamically) the diverse needs and adversities of life - which is running over us, hoarding them. Escaping from being overwritten by the adversities of life (being above this wave), we can handle (play) with its currents and forces, taking advantage of this situation and until this amusing ("swimming" over the difficulties, and even between them). Being below the wave, is at the mercy of being overridden, overthrown by the difficulties - one is controlled by social forces.
And who is above this limit (or wave) of social needs has a twofold advantage - or will free up "a giving way" in their problems and at the same time, get a decisive advantage for your social life, getting a leading position in compared to those who are overwhelmed by socioeconomic forces.
Evolution is, as Hegel explains, a continuous movement of opposition, and reconciliation and fusion of elements, in agreement with Schelling, that there is an underlying identity of opposites, and agreeing also with Fichte, for whom thesis, antithesis and synthesis express a formula description and discovery of this process.
That Hegel's concept of evolution, his understanding is polarized, a chain, right, understand that everything tends to accommodation and supports the status quo, another chain, left, as in Marx's case, suggested mass movements and forces economical as the cause of fundamental changes. In large part, the solution of the problems is simply to be expected to balance the situation by themselves, which saves huge efforts, problems and suffering - but of course not always.
The great difficulty, especially youth, is out of an extreme behavior without falling into the opposite extreme - which is also completely true for our governments and to the Brazilian legislation. One end is easily transformed in the other, because of excessive correction of a problem, either by attempting to prove the opposite of what it is. A similar situation described Socrates: "The vanity of Antisthenes the Cynic, appears through the holes of your cloak."
It is necessary that society evolves in its self (sociological). This is easily seen and accepted as true by anyone. What remains is to print prominence and firmness to the determination of this truth, overlapping the consumerist nonsense.
And all I need is extreme moderation. The greater the force, the greater the care needed to use it sparingly, always within the law, and always great efforts are needed to accommodate this situation. First the problems start (not yet known), then the reaction is necessary to issue and addressing this situation in any social context, so successive times. It takes time, requires learning, effort, cost, large contrasts, great battles, fights (large losses that are caused in this process).
Something that is in harmony in a state of self-preservation, otherwise is in a state of self-destruction. What is needed is the harmonious functioning of the socioeconomic system, not to press excessively individuals, social cells that are infinitesimally small and fragile compared to the burst of economic power of the machine. The "economic factors" cluster form a condensate in the socio-economic privileged corner of the income distribution, which presses the socio-economic system in the sense that it is appropriate to this vertex, pressing together individuals with less power to guard against this situation.
In a world multiple and complex as ours, and that is subject to extreme pressure, if there is total harmony lost parts of the socioeconomic system, the endless vicissitudes of life and its contrasts. These parts are lost and economic losses caused all sorts of individuals, and also are lives that are lost, have routinely - due to problems in health care, poor nutrition, social disintegration, violence.
Even nonsense attitudes of citizens should be treated by the social system, and somehow accommodated. Thus, in case some unsuspecting who commits a thoughtless, there must be social mechanisms of forwarding their life situation. It is possible that an individual (and therefore society) amargue indefinitely for a little mad attitude, that is the case when, for petty theft, relates to an offender, then do not get more jobs. Therefore, the law already predict mechanisms for social reframing.
People worry about the tribulations of modern life, but to fully achieve harmony in life is not easy. It is necessary to accommodate the entire complexity of social relations and, as Nietzsche said, seek the consent of all the inter-relations and their contradictions. When in harmony, all situations are not defined, but all reactions to situations and events are in control - of course with permanent changes in these factors.
Discourse and information warfare
Writing should be trying to communicate something - not to establish a monopoly of learning technical (bureaucratic) to mount any argument (for "learned") in search of particular advantages often seem wildly devoid of intellectual refinement. All knowledge and all economic activity must be directed, "ultimately," the truly productive activities (not merely bureaucratic monopolies of knowledge and wealth).
However, with the speech search is often a distortion of reality in the establishment, generating an "information war" in which the establishment of truth is shaken by the speech of other wills, for training and maintenance class monastically isolated the rest of society by the dynasty of knowledge. Perscrutamento betray the goals of the society about the development of theoretical frameworks to end in themselves, and they become collages of many assertions, many illustrations blistered, which bring us anything new - it's just recap what has already been explained. Less is the perception of facts "and certain liquid" crystalline, undeniable, unassailable, unsurpassed - except in the thesis.
Donaldo Schüler says that "discourse is not the conduit of messages. Living body, organized whole (...). The speaker (...) is a man who runs a poison to quench the virtues of ability to judge and to choose which acts for the benefit or the loss of listeners. Being a powerful potentate (...) the speech penetrates the body and submits it (...). [Therefore, it requires the 'virulent'] (...) verbal attack on walls in search of what they hide (...). "Socrates warned the incorrigible problem of false philosophers who develop speech only defense of any eloquent arguments by verve, by itself, in an attempt to establish any claim to defend personal interests, to feed feelings of superiority, or simply for exercising the imposition of one's own ideas, and that these are false philosophers who demoralize the philosophy, and to base that could direct all human activity to, as Spinoza said, to make perception and action fit the perspective of the whole.
We talked nonsense, pitched great honors, it creates "a circus" - and then did not want there to be clowns in it. The business world and government is largely based on speeches and tributes futile. Thus is created the official future, based on a projection of some possibilities, even remote or even with inherent impossibilities, only projection that matters most to power in a given time and not society. There is also the attempt that the repetition of some theory, even if true, will eventually contribute to their achievement, making, therefore, add to that favorable conditions for realization of the thesis, because as the saying goes, "a lie repeated a thousand times becomes reality. "
What is written is also a powerful potentate, not only because it brings together ideas of the writer, but mostly from other people. The role becomes like a cauldron, in which many ideas merge, seeking answers not only the writer but also the reader. But paper can become like a garbage dump, where everything is played. Anything you write as theories that only serve to fill space or to force the perception of reality the way that most favors the "writer". Writer who can write anything (or nonsense).
Heraclitus said about polimatia (or extensive personal culture): [only] "The fact learn many things does not instruct the intelligence", because no difference that separates the words of thought. To avoid incurring this problem, we need to take the perception of Basarab Nicolescu transdisciplinarity, which says that the union of the knowledge we generate new knowledge, learning to learn. It back to Heraclitus, who has warned about the difference that separates the private intelligence (created based on individual perception) of average intelligence (created based on the perceptions of the majority of a group), and that rises above a lot of knowledge.
But as I said Empedocles (V century BC), what we need is not the revelation of an absolute truth (such as communism and capitalism?), But a true proportional to the "human dimension". Not the truth of pure intellect, but the requirement of rational clarity, but applied to the data supplied by the senses - not because of the monarchy. Knowledge must be democratic: all features of apprehending reality are equally legitimate and should have their part in trying to set up the truth - even, or especially, our unconscious, so that "the fool" with his actions, failures, denials , settlements, repetitions ...
You should be aware of the particularities of each situation and everyone involved know the different paths that lead to the same place, not disdaining accurate and detailed knowledge of all factors that may intervene, and inform themselves of each in particular, does not start any journey it can not finish. Sun Tzu has taught (the V century. C.): if the enemies are stronger, not to be attacked.
Projects, ideas and explanations, especially for complex situations of life, need to be based on a beginning, middle and end, with insight, analysis and findings free to the bitter end - even if unsympathetic - forgetting political passions that do not serve us. There is great need for comprehensive social projects in Brazil, unlike many who, after attacking part of the problem is unfeasible or abandoned. For this, we can not draw on descriptions of linear processes, but we need interdisciplinarity (and, perhaps, transdisciplinarity) and holistic perception.
And Empedocles has advised: "Examine all possible ways so that every thing becomes evident. Do not assign more belief in your sight than your ear (...). Refuse not thy other members of your trust, as they still have a way of knowing, but takes note of every thing the way that makes clear, "a reconciliation between reason and senses. Let's leave aside arguments of capitalism and communism equally coherent and plausible, but they reach opposite conclusions.
For Nietzsche, Freud ever before, "the basis of all belief is the feeling of pleasurable or painful in reference to the subject that feels. (...) We, organic beings, not originally interested in anything except their relationship with us in regard to pleasure and pain. (...) In this first level of logical thinking of causality is found far away: still believe, deep down, that all sensations and actions are acts of free will, when he observes himself, feels that the individual considers every sensation, every change, something isolated, that is, unconditioned, disconnected, which emerges from us without connection with what is earlier or later. We are hungry, but first we do not think that the body would be preserved, this feeling seems to impose no reason and purpose, it isolates and is considered arbitrary (...). "
For Freud (according to Vera Rita Ferreira de Melo), the man just started to think in terms of feeling displeasure with his life. Originally valley, the human being, feel more immediate (selfish?), And if she is nice (as get rid of waste), is perceived by us - not reasoned - as acceptable (the principle of psychic pleasure, and avoidance of unpleasure, or life drive). That's why we go around doing all sorts of arbitrary and we have stock with total irresponsibility, as we throw garbage in the street, among many examples far more harmful.
This kind of behavior seems to immediate good agreement with the power of daily renewal of life in tropical regions and all the exuberance of life in these places. Different is the life and planning needs for long seasons in cold climates. Here is always a great think to come - a world of opportunities to unfold. We do not worry, before setting foot on the floor, and look seriously about actually looking face (now) our big problems.
Because of such perceptions simplified, when the thought of someone not close to the current one will say at once that it was a charlatan, a visionary, to the point that "it is often contradizermos an opinion when, in reality only the tone with which it is exposed to unpleasant "(Nietzsche) - it reminds us of the staff left, which was never happy in presenting their intentions, their claims, often just (even if sometimes exaggerated) society.
People think of theories, based as much as can in reason - and pretend, and even convince themselves that act upon it - but very act from instinct immediacy (or rather drives, according to psychoanalysis). And then came the non-logical actions resulting disastrous. "Humans can not bear very much reality," stated T. S. Eliot. "Humans, we are human too," said Nietzsche. Human nature does not change - and it seems that all advertisers and marketers already know this for a long time, because what else do is to explore human nature and their "gut reactions", gregarious imitative or through their trade. The instincts (drives) are quite strong upon us, there is no way to disregard them; to circumvent them, it is necessary sublimating conscious attitude to them - often serving them (in hours the most timely possible) and often avoiding them (but not denying them, which is useless and counterproductive).
The constant pursuit of immediate pleasure of feeling and lack of range in the individual's perception beyond their personal issues cause the most serious problems of society. "(...) The individual too attentive to his short life and feels no greater incentive to work in institutions durable, designed for ages, he wants to reap the fruit of the tree planting (...)" (Nietzsche) . Regarding perception of present reality, Freud says that people "have to put yourself first at some distance from him: that is, this must become the past in order to produce the observation points from which they may judge the future ". Well, today we are easy to see the burradas society of the past, is difficult to see this, but in a few decades (as well as on slavery), children easily learn in school about the history of what capitalism means used for exploration.
For the economist Eduardo Gianetti da Fonseca, every moment we intertemporal exchanges between the satisfaction that we have at present or our contention in this for the satisfaction of needs in the future (as in the case of a pension fund), there are losses or gains, as choices take into account the present or the future. Choose between a momentary pleasure with future losses, or a sacrifice in the present in exchange for a future well-being, implies costs of all kinds, in a conflict between desires that may be higher or lower depending on the individual's perception of time. There is a parable that says that, when filling a container with stones, gravel and sand, you should do it in this order, or, otherwise, we can not place the larger stones. The parable refers to the most important things in our lives, that priority should be resolved or forwarded.
But in today's society, due to haste and urgency of the situations of the day - to-day immediacy and consequent, we want everything now. Due to the poor perception of the effects of their actions, the impetus of individuals just guiding them. The problem worsens when, instead of maintaining funds in personal investments with returns in the future, spending on consumption, and "prepared
zip-in "for a future" that has already begun, "is all important.
The contrariu sense, which is totally important is not only present, but our whole life. Moreover we have increased life expectancy, higher job demands, and increasingly, we need lifelong assets: for anyone who has spent 60 years (excluding from the calculation the dead still young), the expectation is 80 years. In consequence of all this, we need greater intertemporal exchanges. Precisely because of this lack of temporal perspective that is needed is the authority of the government, as in the case of obligatory state social security payment.
Our perception of time is affected as the individual's culture, individuals with small culture show too much impatience, even when this impatience is not favorable to them - too much heed to this, coming to accept and sponsor situations that give them pleasure in this, even though this event associated with major problems in the future. An example of this situation is to pay high interest rates on loans or installment purchases, lack of investment for retirement and even involvement in conflicts (domestic, traffic, labor and others) - all with serious repercussions and without positive feedback .
If the individual does not have culture and social awareness and, therefore, only responds to individual interests immediacy, is conditioned to economic and social situation (circumstances in a moment) - disregarding, in this case, the structural issues that are submitted. Both in personal matters such as social or economic issues are affected by cyclical (temporary), but what really matters are structural issues. Whose behavior mainly attentive to situational questions is slightly below the discordant economic and social structure (perennial) and occasionally, this structure is totally discordant.
The right thing when, in an environment of economic prosperity, rather than large gastanças, seeks to build savings and make long-term investments (including education). We should always keep long-term perspective. This moralism or idealism may seem to a people without basic culture, like ours, but it is not, is a matter of survival at least a little dignified and satisfactory.
This is the perspective of our situation here (this) for long time (medium and long term) as a continuum, and seek to understand what is most important in this perspective. Not only this, static, not only the future, unreachable - which would make living an abstraction, a folly. But, seeking critical distance perception in relation to this, and seeing life as a continuum, not only as a permanent (and emburrecedor) now.
Sometimes we need to look primarily or only to the short term: the maintenance of life. But, generally, is not the case, or should not be so regarded the situation experienced. Of course everyday matters can not be ignored. Should indeed be adjusted to the comprehensive perspective of our lives and society. The individual must be able to perceive what is good for you and not just follow trends. An entrepreneur must know what is essential to maintaining your company, not just monitor the economic situation.
For example, if a couple realizes the fundamental importance of education for the future of their children, and consequently, as important to the future of the couple, will seek to enroll a child in the best school they can afford; relinquish, for this, other everyday expenses without regard as the most important to them is being ensured. Enrolling in the same school the child of another couple with similar incomes, and not attentive to the value of long-term, and only says that values good education, but only your child enrolls in a school depending on the social status of having the children studying in reputed college.
This couple will not even have the slightest desire to give up their consumption according to the education of children. On the contrary, as we consider superbly, subject to a high standard of living (what else matters to them: the power of appearances), seek to maintain a consumption pattern consistent with that level we (society hit). They seek to demonstrate in detail that they and their children, follow the details of fashion and luxuries of his class.
Obviously the family's role in strengthening the recovery of attention to structural aspects of life (long-term perspective), even if it is a sorry case. On the other, very important are the examples to follow. Also obvious is the value of the diffusion of information is not biased in this regard. But all these aspects of containment of the desire for consumption, are coercive. It is very difficult for a whole society to act thoughtfully, over time, under great pain, only saving - but due to force himself consciously to their survival. So, what really can refuel with energy, motivation and excitement to such initiatives is the ability to perceive the individual (sincerely) the value of the guard for his future, and a pleasure to be your investment for your future.
Who really sees something like his desire for your future has no discomfort in "having" to save (as they do not feel obligated), nor is eager to "can not" consume (as your desire converges to another situation). He is looking forward to having to wait for only then can invest what you save, because what he really wants and I would do as soon as this investment is to realize that dream, and have, or perceive their results. Someone balanced enough or is so eager, as it begins to taste, to realize the pleasure of the future development of your project over time.
Of course, someone who can not meet their basic needs, even just for food, one can not speak in equilibrium, since it is rather a tormented by his own body; this torment, how can you promote your emotional balance? Only if a monk. In contrast, one who can act on your desire, balanced (supported and fostered by education and by example next, or motivated by a desire or great personal conviction), now from when you start saving feels pleasure for having initiated the path of realization of his desire, his aspiration, and that animates it, performs it, let him happy and quiet.
And there was this difference in time perspective our main difference with respect to social behavior prevalent in developed countries? No, there is high consumption differences between these countries - in that sense, only the U.S. set a bad example to the world, with seriíssimas consequences. Contrary to popular shows out there, do we have to make people totally focused on long-term perspective? Not so much of that are successful, even here in our country? We should forget forever the immediacy, but what can not be avoided? We just spend time taking the opportunity to have fun with pleasures that do not affect our future? The antidote to the glamor, for servile dependence on things transient, the fleeting present, which often succumb frankly against our will, and even stronger damage to our physical and mental, is living with the prospect and enjoying our lives and their pleasures over time, and no longer, "hungrily" (who eats hastily, served cold).
We say we had a settlement, but it was not, we had a process of looting that went on for three centuries. Do not come here to design a life, but to indulge themselves with immense natural resources, ready, without an owner. When the most powerful thieves began to structure itself, the other went to a servile condition of seeking favors from the powerful. Raimundo Faoro describes in The Power of the Owners, the vicious process of grooming by the power that we inherited from our "colonization".
And according to what we see every day, it seems that even today we do not have the vast majority of society totally committed to designing a life. No, that much is sought to get the most enjoyment every day, as if the world would end - as they say: "the impohtanti is to take advantage cehto?" Or: "We must be ichpehtos." Or: What do I gain? What I take ($ $ $ $ $) this? It seems that this trickery or that accent still prevail and are represented by major national media, and woe to those who at variance: it's yahoo. We are the country of scoundrels. And everywhere to see the sharks, the "entrepreneurs", fraudsters, bookies, lobbyists, vendors of influence ... Being serious is to be out of fashion, is shameful. (What Credo! speak well of our unethical, but it comforts us, every culture, every people has its problems, his shame.)
What prevails in the world are not the common sense and social regulations are energies that operate in the underground, according to personal interests immediate, unconsciously motivated. And when these forces have already established their will, not worth discussing theories. In the case of poverty, the approach is difficult due to it being something unpleasant - poverty, not poor people - and everyone runs away from unpleasant things. It also runs off of issues relating to social problems because they recognize these problems is to acknowledge debts, which may seem a threat to the integrity of the financial condition of the other (all non-poor).
However, it can take a life so that there are conditions to favor it without ruining the rest of their lives; not need nor should we simply distribute everything we have - these fears are unreasonable or in the case of poor motivation. Educational impact it would only distribute it freely, and would result in chaos, social degeneration and waste.
But when you do not attack a problem "facing", you are in search of half-solutions, in which case, you arrive at the paradox of the distribution of income and food. This is a remedy that, even if it is required by the urgency, does not end the problem of poverty (not just the problem of lack of condition autossustentação). Meanwhile, populism takes over, claiming solutions and fancy, very miraculous. And they are also almost always completely unsuccessful, say by the way, it does not aim at the heart of the problem.
As the saying goes, "or eight or eighty" - an idea foreshadowed by Empedocles (fourth century BC) and described by Aristotle (III century BC) as a "medium-fair" in that the special character can be described in triads, and wherein the first and last are extremes and vices, and the environment, a virtue or excellence. So between cowardice and courage is the courage, between greed and extravagance, freedom, between sloth and greed is ambition, between pride and humility, modesty, between secrecy and loquacity, honesty; between casmurrice and slapstick, humor, between bellicosity and flattery, friendship, between indecision and impulsiveness, self-control.
Continuing the teaching of Aristotle, those who are consciously at one end (a polarization) give the name of virtue does not mean the end of this polarization, but the opposite extreme. The extremists consider the medium-term addiction, so the liberal conservative is called the radical Left and the populist radical right (or conservative) - is not accepted by either extreme. But, we can use it to depreendermos the need for understanding of tolerance, because every human condition, even if extreme and therefore destined to disappear, has a right that belongs to it as a necessary step in evolution.
In Brazil the prevailing culture - or lack of culture - the "eight or eighty." I mean, varies between the extremes, either by excessive, sometimes lack. That have been endless examples: inflation, sometimes without any control, sometimes with absurd paralyzing grip of the economy, labor laws, traffic, taxes, etc.., Sometimes very mild, then inviavelmente arduous, and the educational credit system housing, sometimes with ridiculous rates of monetary correction then rates priceless correction and interest rates, the environment, in which he first did nothing, then you can not even raise crops, and the sociopolitical system, with the condemnation of Communism at a time and, following the condemnation of capitalism, the profit in a time that is totally free, another is totally condemned, the policy only accepts the right for long periods (military), in others only accept the left as "politically correct".
Also the administration of the state (federal and state) is subject to extremes. Currently, there is hardly a public official resign as relapse. Now would be able to dismiss only the very lax, which would be a breakthrough, even if it seems - there is no way to dismiss all those who have not considered optimum performance, because they are deemed to be harmed intentionally contrapartidários . Ensure that some relapses have not reached retirement without ever having done almost nothing is already a huge favor to the public coffers and the other employees. These are discouraged by the behavior of those scoundrels, who often seek to mock those who strive in the workplace. When you worry about performance can not prove a minimum, all seek to have a rhythm of work, even if initially only minimal, but that tends to improve with the new work environment formed. But when it comes to the issue, they want tools to ensure that similar productivity to the private sector - this is absurd, at least until the state administrative system is how it is.
Thus, it is true: when there are times when something is happening in a very uncontrolled, extreme, the next moment, even if it takes, is a control freak; applies to legislation, inflation, politics, etc.. Teenagers seem dazzled and rebels seeking an ideal world, that can not be similar or based on reality, but just the opposite of the situation experienced. It is intended to avoid problems or imagined, without realizing that with such behavior, other problems will be generated, so it seems we are always looking for other realities, who knows what kind. We have not found the middle ground that, apart from philosophical discussions, could bring benefits far outweigh the various situations of life in society - and avoid discussions that often become interminable disputes (whether we should be eight or eighty). Every time we follow such disputes, and each side of this polarization swears that defends the right, and even spend their lives wearing this (unreasonable).
The exaggeration in the conduct of our lives (our vital energy) is like a river, which, if completely blocked, one day the dam overflows - you can not stop a river indefinitely. So are the extreme situations. The important and difficult is to know to what limit can extremar a situation (as in the case of a restrictive economic policy) and how long you can maintain this limit for achieving the necessary results and the inherent risks and calculated. Risks are often obliged to incur, but must be calculated and when it happens, which is due to a greater expected gain.
In general, not eight or eighty fits all situations of life. When you do not know the exact measurement of something, you can opt for the average. "(...) Should prefer the middle ground and not the excess or lack" (Aristotle). In fact, the average is that governs us all and all, of course. Nothing escapes his surroundings for long. Everything we do is walk away from the average for some time, more or less, to a greater or lesser extent - but not forever. Situation reassuring: we will always be supported by the mean, even just in acomodemos, will be affected by the average trend in the medium and long term. This is even more reassuring for those concerned with economic and social problems: any exaggeration, at one point, even if it takes, will be compensated.
Populism and demagoguery
Part of the power of the individual is transferred to the society and its institutions in order to administer and to solve the problems of the community. In this context, all the problems of society we refer to the Government as responsible for solving these problems - and we believe that just are not resolved due to problems of governments. We think, we need a good government that gives us wealth and everything will be solved - and just "enjoy" life.
However, governments do not have the minimum condition to remedy all the problems and situations created by the population and to establish complete social justice, for more efficient and designed to be the government. The function of government (as the economist) is to manage scarce resources and not the generation of unlimited wealth, as it seems it is understood or intended by the company. Government resources are minimal, ridiculous for all the needs of society (which is fair), and still maintaining that state coercion promoted by him and the demands of society - to the extent that hinder the free expansion of all the wills of citizens - are a great burden for citizens:
The decisive question is whether and to what extent it is possible to reduce the burden of the instinctual sacrifices imposed on men, to reconcile
Them with those which must necessarily remain and provide them compensation. It's so hard to do without mass control by a minority, and dispense with coercion in the work of civilization, since the masses (...) have no love for instinctual renunciation and can not be convinced by argument of its inevitability; individuals composing them support each other in giving free rein to their indiscipline. Only through the influence of individuals who can provide an example and whom they recognize as leaders, the masses can be induced to perform the work and support the sacrifices that depends on the existence (Freud).
For the author, "everything will be fine if these leaders are people with a greater understanding of the internal necessities of life, and having been raised to the height of mastering their own instinctual wishes. But there is a danger that, in order not to lose their influence, may yield to mass more than this to them. "Summary of the tragedy: that the universe needs of society and limited options for the Government, there is a of the worst problems of our democracy: populism. "What we want to keep themselves in power flatters the populace, works with the populace, is forced to draw it into your hand." "Result: mediocrity wins spirit, vitriol and genius - makes it nice, seduces .. . "(Nietzsche).
Populism is something like the eloquent speech in defense of the interests of the less privileged in society, even when that speech is rambling of willingness or possibility of realization of what is proposed (Concise Oxford). Often, the actions arising from the paternalistic nature of populism is just to gather around a charismatic leader, popular support. That's because the politicians who claim to be first before the crowds as his supporters - without a more serious reflection on the requirements and interests of the people, just crying eloquent statements - take them to himself, as his led.
But will these same leaders are in fact? No, unfortunately there is not a savior, a great man who will deliver us from the evils that cause ourselves. Do not see miracles around the economy. But as people can not bear very much reality (as shown in psychoanalysis), prefer to believe in promises of miracles. Precisely because of this raging populist loose, causing a lot of nonsense that disrupt people's lives. "Good government" (for people), some bias left, are spending lavishly society's resources - achieved with high taxes - and cry against the capitalists, who, "rightly or wrongly," pay taxes. This party spending and irresponsible governments are assisted by a part of public officials who Reaps high salaries, but do not know exactly what their professional responsibilities - and often gets in the chorus of "sensitized" to cry out against the political system capitalist who gives them such a beautiful lot.
In Brazil, as seems appropriate in Latin America, populism dominates the assertive policies. Any catchphrase which places us as victims in relation to rich countries is accepted at once, with honors. Then a new problem arises, nationalism, which ideally (defined in Houaiss) should be to safeguard the interests of national values and exaltation, the sense of belonging to a racial group for ties, linguistic and historical, and claiming the right to form an autonomous nation, ideology that exalts the nation state as an ideal form of political organization, the preference for what is proper to the nation to which they belong: the exaltation of their characteristics and traditional values.
As a doctrine, nationalism tries to make all the problems of domestic and foreign policy problems of economic development resulting from the domination of the nation for countries with more economic power or military. As the economy is globally hegemonic U.S., this country is to be the primary target of assertive nationalists. Nationalism, combined with the populism becomes xenophobia (dislike of foreigners, perceived threat), with initiatives for economic and cultural isolation.
As we like to feel better than that evil country, and how ridiculous the notion that the U.S. is responsible for all our problems and all the world problems. Its international trade accounts for no more than 20% of their wealth. That is, most of their wealth are produced within that country. In Africa there has always been drought and food shortages, is now fashionable to say that the U.S. is responsible for hunger in that country and the world. But even countries that trade with the U.S. is not traded as much, at least most, so much of their riches were siphoned off, as in our time of colonization. Certainly the preponderance of rich countries exacerbates the problems of poor countries, but they are not responsible for everything.
We must take into account that 80% of Nobel prizes are U.S.. Do things like that are achieved without sacrifice, only exploration of other nations? Does studying at a university in the first line of rich countries is something that does not consume all the energies of those citizens and social resources for large investments with a view to development? Is that in the end, all developmental effort has not resulted in that country, and only the exploitation of other nations produce the result they? Is it only Populist bullshit in a poor country will override the importance of such efforts? There is no speech or populist theory to remain so, only serving as a novel and chat intention politically correct - hardly the practical business world.
When large investments in research, such as the U.S., resulting in a discovery (in a medical treatment, for example), we run to copy the solution discovery. When invented the computerized systems, we run to also use them. Will had no advantage in these processes? Why then acorremos these findings? Only to be exploited? Will the great profit of transnational corporations, and the widespread domination of world markets, is not due to the quality of its products and its vanguard, that only we could be here for decades, if we could?
Rich countries surely affect us, and at least two senses. One, as we overcome by its quality, its competence, which are many. On the merits, yes. And, also, of course, when they use their economic power / military to take advantage or dominance over us. But even so, in most cases, this occurs with our connivance (our rulers). The U.S. has not only power military or economic domination, but also (or even primarily, perhaps) because of its proactive capacity of the economy (as opposed to negotiations), they stimulate the production of wealth in the world with its international trade - and it gives them bargaining power. Because of this bargaining power is that poor countries end up enslaved in international relations with rich countries - which already had many advantages subjugating us, of course. But, while we criticize, sold out theaters to see all the movies that come from the U.S., and the great dream of many people is just one day to go to New York or Disney.
But we also have caused many problems to other countries. We are not perfect and divine how we should imply when we analyze our situation in relation to other countries - we were not divine when we kill almost 90% of the male population of Paraguay, which is hardly hear tell. We should, instead, sentencing us not to defend our interests as best as possible. Perhaps this is a reflection of paternalistic states, notably the duration of our military, we expect everything to be the result of a divine source, any government that is, what creates a veil of illusion over everything we see, and fail to see the real harshness of the current global economic situation.
The difficulties are normal today, even for rich countries, because global competition is very fierce and the recession haunts everyone, especially the U.S., despite having achieved only for now, barely dodging the shadow of recession. No one idealized world of nationalist (Utopia), that just close the borders and turn their backs to the world that the country develops. This is not possible at all under any circumstances and socially desirable. The best we can do is improve our skills in relation to the rich countries to depend less on the goodwill of others, because, in international trade, each country has to learn to defend themselves, showing their strength for it, and how best to show strength is the qualification of products and services.
The changes must start in a country house. We can not sit around waiting for an IMF rescue us. An IMF that comes at a time of failure of our economy to then be blamed for the crisis. One can discuss their policies, but only to a certain extent, for austerity (dictated by the IMF), to some extent, and soup never hurt anyone. As they say, good intentions hell is paved. That is, it's easy to criticize others as much as it is difficult to be better. When you're immersed in problems, we can not see anything right, and everything is looking for someone to claim that affects us. This speech is like a drug that covers and softens the perception of an adverse reality.
Meanwhile, we are making "bunches" of children in our villages and saying that our poverty is the fault of rich countries and also the richest part of society. Scholars say that it is the sacred right to family planning. But what family? What planning? With ten children, some starving, and others already in the crime? This is common in unstructured layers of the population. What is the fate of the new child, but a crime equal to the brothers' already tarnished? This is not the rule, but there is strong pressure to make this happen and will happen with some.
It seems that the poor are the richest, who have only two or three children. The middle-class population undergoes seriíssimas difficult to create and educate two or three children. But it seems that the poorest people do not experience this problem because it is normal to have six to ten children without showing great concern about the situation. One should not start blaming the father and mother? There should be no serious effort to attack government and social this problem (not the people, of course) in a decisive manner?
The subject of family planning (or birth control, YES) became taboo, and when anyone touches on the subject is plagued by the Church and by some pseudodefensores human rights - which are one of the worst plagues of modern society. These initiatives do not respect and serious concerns of some individuals, and start to call them by different adjectives achacantes and demoralizing. Demagogically demoralize any initiative to change the situation as if it were worse than the situation we are experiencing. It seems they think it was stolen the soul and conscience of the poor if they were taken to prevent so many children - pure cheap demagoguery.
These demagogic see themselves everywhere, as in environmental issues. The question is always the same: there is a very serious problem to be faced, such as the destruction of the environment. From there, some allegedly concerned with the problem come to any kind of demagoguery on behalf of advocacy, such as when trying to avoid a major undertaking that will generate much income in the community and many jobs to avoid a little damage, which could be reversed benefits with compensatory measures and monitoring (with taxes paid then generated).
Of course it is best not to provoke any damage to nature, no matter how small. But is this possible? Of course the man is not capable of it. What can be the minimization and compensation of damage. But what's worse, a little damage remedied by compensatory measures, or unemployment and hunger? Who dies or has a child killed by malnutrition does not matter a nature intact. There is no sacred nature - this perception of society is a human construction.
In fact, the demagogic pass the defense of any claim - the exercise of wit, to seek popularity, by interest in acting against the establishment or against the ruling party, or who knows why. The demagoguery is always the same, do not let it attack the problem on behalf of some kind of subjectivity, as when they do not allow the poor deem leftover food from restaurants, in perfect condition, like it was just debris, but it is served to customers and that has not been served to anyone. They say people do not care if they kill the poor with spoiled food (a food for which we were paying to eat).
These good human rights defenders continue to prefer that poor eating garbage and dying in the streets (you will see that this is less inhumane, even). But at least this way, these scholars eloquently demonstrate all his verve, his speech and exercise their public appearance, as enlightened beings against lowly (those who want to feed). What the poor starve in the meantime (or gap).
It seems that in Brazil, nothing is perceived as very serious, however great may be the problem, all seems diluted in the summers, beaches, football, bribery, advantages, bargaining. It seems that nations with tropical countries alleviate their perception, and do not realize the gravity of national problems and certain situations where they are, unlike most countries "grim" as Germany, Ireland, Japan, accustomed to the rigor of their climatic conditions and customs adapted to your climate.
A major difficulty is the election of our rulers appropriate. In the Athenian democracy (VI century BC) was perceived by thinkers lack of appropriate culture of the people to choose the best rulers and the wisest path to the nation. This led the people of democratic Athens to determine the death of Socrates, because the defense of his ideas - which were exactly contrary to that form of democracy, because of the poor people's ability to understand complex realities of society.
If the population does not have to vote for culture and - most importantly - to focus on complex issues and their great interest, will be lost in his own whims and ingenuity, and representatives will not serve well the interests of the people. So, you're at the mercy of obscure strategists and opinion leaders who serve other interests, being dependent on only one who cares about getting votes being more astute and most unscrupulous flatterer of the people.
The set of perceptions of day-to-day, for life, leads to the perception of reality in a certain way, being a citizen led to different conclusions. When the "world" of the individual is around the work (labor), turns out to focus on issues related to work, and to seek solutions for their problems and necessary, that is, is, overwhelmingly, the positioning of the left . When the individual's work is often linked to the administration of capital or productive machine, begins to realize the problems of training and administration of capital, mainly tending their position on the right.
All the possibilities of politics imaginable fall into policies of left and right. Political left argues, first, the interests of the working class. In the extreme (and are called left-wing radicals) do not believe that capitalist growth brings benefits to the worker. Believe that the creation of ideal working conditions, as soon as possible, it is necessary to the working class. Since the right-wing policies advocate economic growth in the first place, reaching the other extreme - the extreme right - one believes that only economic growth, by itself, provides the social betterment.
Center would be those who are in the balance between left and right. The determination of this balance would be impractical. Center-left are those who agree with economic growth, since before, or simultaneously, will the benefits to the worker. Center-
Right are those who think, "first, it is necessary to expand the pie, then divide it" - so said Maluf, but between the discourse and practice, there are many differences.
The left, especially the extreme left are people addicted to their ideals, are fundamentalists - is nonsense succumb to another is a matter of falhabilidade of our human nature - and sacrifice, often, the prosperity of his professional life his political position, which is very see. However, they lack the capacity to implement social and economic feasibility for the realization of utopias, and even to perform routine activities of the State. The right are good performers, good financial condition for better training, because they have more experience in coordinating teams and projects - all this because, historically, have represented the political situation prevailing in the capitalist countries and have affinity with discipline . But they lack reflection on the social condition of the most deprived and lack proximity to such experiences to perceive their life situation.
Any statements that deny the very context are mere populism and demagoguery. The solutions to the problems of society can not only be imagined and demagogically divulged. We can only imagine what we want, but the solutions must be studied, that is. Like "ecochatos," the cries of the radical political left against exploitation by capital only serve as a warning about social problems (and the first, environmental problems). One can not simply meet all requests from the left.
The right and left have reason to be - practical and impractical. Difficult it is for anyone who is completely covered by the work environment and the social environment to realize large, independently, the connotations between labor and capital. As the economic means are limited, you can not simply meet all the demands of capital and labor - even more readily, as they would like both parties.
Therefore, it is necessary perception of this context with different perspective, with a culture capable of accepting the implications of the differences, on both sides, and to reach solutions that seek the middle ground between the expectations of both (or solution demands of both parties in full, if possible). Not so conflicted, unilaterally, but with solutions that take into account the conditions and restrictions of both parties. In the long run, the political ideal appears to be the nearest to the center, sometimes with the center-left, now with the center-right, reflecting the need of the hour - when the greatest need for growth, the right, while in times of need redemption rights of workers, on the left. This definition is important, above all, to analyze the current policy.
As long-term trend seems quite reasonable and defensible, the political position of the center-right, as I understand the direction towards the minimum reserve accumulation and productive assets, or capital - to allow yourself as much care needs continued social. Of course we need is different from desire - are necessary actions that improve society. For example, are needed social programs to reintegrate people, different desires that can only be welfare.
If someone or, especially, many people warn about a danger, because it is consistent and necessary that concern. Constantly, for decades, many intelligent people, and seriously concerned with major socio-economic knowledge alerts us to the problems of capitalism, especially as the problem of unequal distribution of wealth, then there is this problem. Thus, for living in a society with political and economic actions aimed at the care center is required to this concern. Of course this is not to say that the solution is the immediate distribution of all wealth - like so many medrarão Medrado and have, for decades, thus contributing decisively to prevent actions towards better income distribution.
That's right: it is not economically feasible utopia of the distribution of all wealth in the world. It requires the accumulation of the wealth for the formation of productive structure and spending on scientific research, among many needs. Not necessarily this accumulation should be private, state may be only a matter of enabling productive structures necessary, and that not only takes into account the contact maintenance of all the immediate needs of the population - but to accumulate part of the property, for the feasibility a structure able to cope with increased demand for goods of society and improved quality of life.
If all wealth were distributed in a short time, much of this wealth would have been wasted with unreasonable in reckless consumption, by the recipients, a situation that would even be unsustainable, because it exceeded the global environmental sustainability, in which environmental stressors caused by increased consumption no longer have been assimilated by the environment. People need to be prepared to assimilate some things, even when benefits are. The man (in society as a whole) need to be able always to assimilate positively what life brings. Therefore, it is necessary gradual maturation of the population. For example: if it were to distribute all the wealth in the world at once, would be infinitely better if they were distributed in 10 times, by better use.
As the saying goes, is on the floor of the wagon to settle down the potatoes. When starting a process of improving the life situation of a person or group, there are more than one euphoria proportional to this improvement, figuring that most problems were resolved. No: we will always have problems to solve. When we are resolved, there are others, and beyond to solve problems, there is constant improvement of living to be achieved - witness the example of Europe today. Need in society is what everyone wants for all (as Rousseau).
Improvement efforts and their effects
The economy is like a huge ship: you can not take sudden lurches without serious consequences to their structure. Such problem was what happened when sudden equalization of our currency to the dollar - and the artificial freezing of the price for years in a row. As a result, failures were numerous and wastage of the productive sector of export, such as agriculture, was very shameful, farmers were looted - yes, a lot - by the federal government at that time, which was easily noticeable in the populist government propaganda of the time - feeding cheap. Irrefutably a freeze forced the farmers to sell their export products well below cost price, for many years and not demagogically, painful years. Result: depreciation of assets.
Once again benefited to a greater extent the wealthy, who esbaldaram snapping up large imports of luxury goods and thus greatly depleting our reserves of foreign currency, with the unimaginable and very immoral current account deficits of the time. This generated the need for two IMF loans to Brazil, to replenish our reserves. As a result, there was a need for further major increase in interest over a long period as a way of encouraging the entry of foreign capital - mostly short term - to balance the balance of external transactions, the results do not require comments. Then, to our left, the blame for this situation is the IMF, the evil, which recommends raising interest rates.
In Brazil, according to the "law of Gershon," the important thing is to take advantage of everything, and this type of behavior has always been assimilated into society, without any additional charges, and even being admired and praised this kind of behavior. To some extent, probably as a sign of breaking with the harsh morality of past centuries, as happened with the youth movements of the late sixties, passed. But they forgot that, even with freedom, all continue to suffer the effects of our actions, and we have to care about the consequences of what we do - this is not a question of morals.
But according to a perception that everyone should have and use unrestricted freedom (or liberal?) To seek the advantage that you want, it explains many absurdities that happen in our society, disseminadamente as a major epidemic - the that often seems not to be noticed and not be the slightest concern about such facts. Often harvest, and harvest together, the results: debt, addiction, unwanted pregnancy, disease, death (as in traffic) ... Know and learn how to use freedom with responsibility is a major advance individual and social.
The percentage increase in employment and incomes of the poorer classes has been lower than the percentage growth of GDP. The benefits of economic development of Brazil in the last three decades have not been passed on proportionately to all social classes. As the privileged social classes take precedence over the poorest individuals, become necessary affirmative action policies of the state to reverse or minimize the economic and social problems of the poorest population (which has been occurring in recent years).
And what is the positive effect of maintaining at least minimum, the individual within the social system? Absolutely no one can say all the positive repercussions for the individual and for society, but certainly the effect is largely positive for the whole society, as in the case of the Fome Zero - even though this is of little value passed individually. In this case, there is the multiplier effect of income, economic leverage with the local community and throughout society and can be a lifeline for people in social risk - of course, there are problems inherent in the program, like any other. In addition, serve to maintain niche economic sectors, once relegated to their own devices.
Moreover, this type of social program extends the understanding of social justice, can positively influence the reduction of the popular revolt against the status quo and confidence in the economic system can thus influence in decreasing the levels of violence. It is just as certain that, from now on, there will be nobody without income. Separately, the issue is the amount of income - even if the value is almost negligible (and there may be additions to this value).
Thus, we recognize the importance of small part - the citizen - and the prospect of the whole from the part. Important in this case is that it is the maintenance of cell stock, regardless of the social and economic joints complex, bulky and development of capital, as made in the past. On the reverse: relegates to the productive arrangement the effect of maintaining this social cell. Having the social validation of this process and its perpetuation, can create social and political environment encouraging the improvement thereof.
Finally, and most importantly, the program contributes to the consolidation of Brazilian society awareness about social causes - the only form of construction and maturation of our society with social development and economic growth not only cluttered. One should not imagine how deterrent, as some might imagine, is part of the efforts (money) in government social programs are wasted or misused. In the wealthier classes also occur constantly waste of resources (which are also produced in this society). Capitalist society is replete with waste and spent socially unjustified.
Anyway, what matters is if a stock reaches the end result proposed, and not the problems faced in implementation. The existence of some problems can not be an impediment to achieving the final goal, a more relevant question as the reduction of social inequalities, in which case it can not be accepted excuses and justifications. The problems are being solved and refined mechanisms.
If there is constant investment and social programs in large volumes, can also alleviate the problem of weak aggregate demand autonomous from the aggregate investment in our capitalism, a system which already happens with the income of civil servants and the expenses armed forces. Marx had already warned that this is one of the main problems inherent in capitalism: the low demand autonomous under capitalism. That depends, mainly, of the investment, which makes the economy very fragile to fluctuations in the level of investment. This causes large fluctuations in the level of economic output, creating cycles of rising and falling investment. There are several cycles - the best known worldwide are occurring at intervals of fifty years, affecting the entire western economy.
The government must also ensure the business competition, because the decrease in sales prices is a reduction of profit, surplus value. In this case, the productive organizations bring positive return to society due to the scale of production and possibility of large investments, increased productivity and technological innovation. To preserve the social interest, it is necessary to control those companies through legislation and by government or social control and monitoring. Example was the case with regard to gas stations, which were forbidden to install fuel pumps at self-service consumer, avoiding unemployment.
Every moment should be sought to reframe the components that are unbalancing the harmonious functioning of society. But it is necessary that the State is not patronizing, trying everything to everyone, which would have negative social-psychological effect. The state should be encouraging, as the "teaching to fish" and not giving it all ready, even as resources are limitadíssimos in relation to demands. There are several examples to encourage the creation of better conditions of life of citizens, as in the case of government programs to encourage the first employment, microcredit, credit-assisted, job training, among many. These programs should support base broad enough to support those who lose their ability to remain in society and at work.
Social programs contribute to the minimization of the appropriation of value - added by entrepreneurs, for the return of the wealth produced by the people through government programs, supported by taxes paid by entrepreneurs. Sure to be valid it is necessary that the taxes are actually progressive, focusing more on the taxpayers more endowed, which would be theoretically the case of Brazil, but in practice it is not so.
Progressive income tax is also a close ally of social justice within capitalist societies. Of course, since it is progressive and not actually naming, as in our case. Just a progressivity to the income of the middle class. If this tax is actually implemented this way, would provide a significant improvement to society without any kind of social revolution, no deaths or major theories. Of course it is very difficult to get your application, even under the aegis of a government of the left (or center-left). The poor pay more taxes, directly to the products while have more structured ways to avoid taxation - as in the case of expenditure incurred by their companies (purchase of car for use by its owner), slaughtered the profit of it, diminishing its taxation.
The estate tax could also be a good way to improve the level of social equality by redistributing a portion of accumulated wealth, minimizing social differences. However, when attempting to forcibly and demagogically (as befits the left) to implement this high tax rates, generates huge backlash, and you can not implement any taxes. "The great enemy of the good," the saying goes. The clash left is an idealized delay factor for the causes of the left. For example, 10% would be reasonable to start something that taxation and not 30% as the claim of the left, and that approval was not feasible.
The important premise of respecting the social condition of the poorer classes of our society will (problems aside and having significant investments in this direction): first, as rescue and social justice for the poorest classes, and secondly, to improve conditions social advancement of the poorer classes. With the continuation, even minimal, the individual gives to him as a shield, with which it can protect itself from the elements by passing the most thankless - like not having any food or money for transportation to seek employment. Citizens can be seen as a member of the production system through the state and participant of the results. Who feels part of something, like its improvement. As for society, Rousseau told us that:
although they deprive this state of many advantages that nature had given him, others get even bigger, their faculties are exercised and developed, his ideas expand, his feelings are ennobled, his whole soul rises to the point that if the abuse this new condition often degrade not a condition lower than the first, should bless continually the happy moment that forever snatched from the state of nature, and made a dumb animal and limited to be a smart man.
Notice that this is not idealization of the "best of all worlds" (as Leibniz wanted, and imitating the mocked Candide, Voltaire), but we are not more stupid than when apes learn and live according to civility to take advantage of its possibilities.
In large companies and industries can build up, and has started a new company. This occurs mainly through the processes of total quality, ethics and social and environmental responsibility. Total quality directs the activities of the companies also to respect the ecology and the work ethic and the selection of partners. The companies are also positioning themselves in an ethical manner to social work. Of course all this is very far from ideal and a lot of demagoguery happens, but it is a good director. Even the demagogic propaganda, just geared to profit, to encourage social and environmental value.
Failure to Brazilians, a solid sense of national unity. Our federation was and is artificially maintained by force by the Federal Government and it has been necessary to use military several times, as in the Revolution Farrukhabad, still exists, even separatist movement in Rio Grande do Sul. To this feeling of national unity, we lack the strength to have great national symbols, such as Siena and Guga (though Freud warned that the past is that symbols are more effective).
Our symbols, especially the older ones, are mostly military ... The United States is large and lavish unbeatable symbols, even fictional (like Superman), which take forward the banner of the great American values already established, based on freedom and competitiveness. Behold, now, our government is airing ads in just this way, showing great examples of people who are symbols of our determination and strength, seeming to do so selflessly, as if in welcome to the population.
On the other, it seems that, due to extreme conditions of life of our society, such as floods that sweep people's lives or the extreme violence and poverty, it may be possible to create a sense of national uproar leading to social integration. This sense would be able to promote unity and sense of responsibility, can lead individuals to behave more appropriate to the society. In practice, a citizen could ever ask of a neighbor that does not throw garbage on the street, so that there is flooding due to clogged drains.
This would appear next to the behavior of developed countries, especially those who have gone through great tests of survival, such as Germany and Japan, where social commitment is well developed, and that individual behavior is harmful to society is not accepted, broken down. It seems there is a major interference in the lives of citizens in developed society, by society and not just the government.
Fortunately, often coping with crisis situations in a serious manner can generate good results, as in the example of a company in a financial crisis, which, as a reaction, can pass the large profits. In this case, rather than simply squeeze wages, in much of the time, the best return would be for improvements at work, with incentives for productivity and profit sharing for employee engagement at work, excellent results of such procedures exist in everywhere.
As scandalized with numerous social problems of our time, our descendants also complain of problems that do not equate. This picture problem (just future) can only be solved by us (once) if we do not, the problems will be delayed and redirect should be given by our descendants, but already there in a new dynamic, may have very unfavorable the worsening of these problems. Already they are, then, old unresolved problems with high costs for its solution. In this respect, this is strongly in favor for the future. Anything that can not be solved heaped problematically (and perhaps almost inexequivelmente), as major burden to our descendants and ourselves.
We have energy, financial and material wealth and all things technical to perform wonders. But we (we and society) as a spring knit, energetic (contained), held for various reasons, not knowing how to use this force to break so many problems. What is missing is a reference to the application of all these energies. For this, we need a middle ground, supported by "all", all around the focus, clustering, and act.
In Brazil, which has always envisioned the objective is to seek industrial expansion and new agricultural, mineral, demographic ... Comes to mind economic growth as the great mot (booster) of the economy. This displays the increase of wealth like being able to solve most problems of the population. It seems that they envision as lava of a volcano that rises from a hill, gaining the plain, and how to create fertile ground for new crops in the future.
So, we thought that economic growth was equal to the improvement of life in society. We tried to form a modern Brazil by successive initiatives to promote its growth - and, apparently, would be able to improve the lives of all people. But failed. Was different in countries like England and ingrained culture in its universities, and his philosophy of Germany, France and appreciation of culture "cosmopolitan", Japan and the constant, intense and ancient pursuit of spiritual balance of the people and the value of social tradition .
Our dream, as capitalists default, in general, is basically to earn enough money. But it would be better than this for us to structure our lives? Often there are many more important things to our lives than just making money, for example, maintain their own life and health, without which you can not make money you have. Maybe our society as a whole, can only worsen if there is growth and not the economic and social development (which is likely), it can only be encouraging the behavior of the overwhelming arrogance that enrich greatly.
Why, then, the man looking forward to grow in all of life and expected growth of its economy? In search of utilities, this obsession to be a result of the struggle to overcome pre-historic enemies. Because of this dispute (prehistoric) man, comes to mind the idea that to grow and increase our power, we will be able to overcome the other individuals in society - in our social system competitors (enemies, yes).
However, by channeling most of the efforts for economic growth and an individual country, because the pressure is weakening and the individual and the social system - together with all external force obtained. When there is too much strain on components of a system, besides the great need for adjustment between the components, means are required to absorb such pressure. So it is in mechanical systems, in which, besides requiring millimeter or operating micrometricamente adjusted components are lubricated and cooled - to avoid overloads unsurpassed in parts of the system and faults that generate malfunctions or breakdown in the system.
The pressure formed in the dispute between the more endowed and less endowed leads to extreme situations in the lives of individuals - to be avoided. Aside from that, small daily violence committed by those who have more power (or wealth) lead to bursts that explode in cases of extreme violence by the poor.
Even if it greatly enhances the growth, we can not forget to redeem at any time, problems that occurred in this interregnum. We are not only economic growth serves to increase consumption or capital accumulation. What we need is the economic and social development - which can only be driven by economic growth. The accumulation of means of production and capital can only be the basis for economic and social development. This need that just to form the basis for their support.
The desire to develop our economy has failed, and barely has managed its growth. This is largely because the economic plans have not taken into account - as necessary - cultural and behavioral characteristics of the population, as was the Cruzado Plan. Do not think there will be, "Time for another" - or even from one year to another, or even a decade or more - the deployment, ultimately, the finished form of a social system or government saving, ideal - As seems to always imagined possible and is always willing. Likewise, for the maturity of democracy will require decades of continuous improvement of society and painful for a comprehensive development.
Demagoguery aside, are aware of and attitudes necessary proactive steps to avoid clashes of interest and pressure exacerbated the relations between social classes. For this reason, individuals from the wealthier classes is that they must take the initiative (as I do NGOs), with actions to minimize the problems arising from relationships between the poles of the income distribution. To ease - not complete - that kind of pressure on the company, serves good public transportation, efficient health care system and welfare, efficient mechanisms for the protection of unemployment, among many.
No, more endowed are not responsible for all the world's problems, but the most effective way to prevent crime is to prevent the creation of the criminal. For this reason, individuals should be directed to productive activities to him and to society. Need to channel the social energies (wealth) so as not to form points of restricting the flow of social wealth - which inhibits or blocks the possibilities of individual development minimum. This is the case when the wealthy maintain wealth too, not passing a sufficient extent the movement of media in society, necessary for minimal maintenance of the poor. This movement of resources is also essential for the wealthy and the entire society.
But the question is not alleged a tight social justice by distributing all wealth at a given time, as some wish, or dream. Even if he did so, then a good part of the recipients of donations would be poor again. Some would say that even so, it would be better. But we still lack the intellectual growth of the most underprivileged. To do this requires a constant movement of trade between the social classes, so there is a growing number of these, not only improving the conditions of income of the poorest, but also serving the more structured support and support for the maintenance and improvement the structure of the poorest socio-familial (teaching to fish? Or a salad or wash your hands?).
The inclusion of the disadvantaged is not only possible through the work, but also by creating options for inclusion. For it is necessary to modify all the way in which they live and how they create "traps citizenship" in the poorest communities. "Traps" that "bullied" social inclusion. They can be computer centers, libraries, leisure facilities, open school for courses and extracurricular activities - all in your neighborhood or die, so that the transit through their community, they encounter and be "taken" to improve socio-cultural options.
What is required is that the economy and society develop together. We have seen that something different that does not work, neither for society nor for capitalist development, which is limited - largely due to lack of market for mass consumption. Even someone who is highly selfish and narcissistic should realize that the situation of social chaos will eventually hurt you too. Therefore, the population is better for social development with broad cultural freedom, which allows its ideological compromises (yes) with any sociopolitical system, so that citizens can criticize anyone and any situation that bothers you, and can claim their exchange.
For driving the economy is necessary harmony as a conductor, with extreme sensitivity and, paradoxically, the driver must be extremely strong, firm and steadfast. You must be aware of the result of the outbreak or the sum of small events, and always be clear what course is being designed by these events, and, always, the reflection from the short to the long term, what is done. There are many examples of actions taken by leaders who did not know the most elementary consequences of their actions - numerous.
So, it seems impossible to solve our socioeconomic problems? Maybe not, at least to minimize them. In this sense, it seems that the government is treading a virtuous path, within the possibilities of our society and economy. Proclaim measures minimal maintenance - and even very minimal - the livelihoods of the poorest, through the cooperation of the entire society: government, businesses, organizations and population. What is possible is part of the population not having hardly any or no income. Even if everyone has only a small income, it generates movement of resources in the community, promoting economic development.
In the past, gave emphasis to the policies of great impact, as large investments of resources in an industry considered strategic but one case was that of steel. At present, large investments just are not possible by the government and, unfortunately - and indeed - there is no single magic solution, and economic policy. If you want to solve all the problems will not be achieved. There is no perfect world, only seek to the direction of society from an idealized model.
The reality leads to numerous demands by society, on the other hand, there is inability to large investments by the state. Therefore, it only remains to state the possibility of many small investments for partial demands of society. By the sum of small inversions is that they can promote economic activity for the Nation to reach a good level of development, the combined actions of the state and society as a whole.
There are people who, by personal motivation, promote great things, even under extreme conditions, and that without motivation, would not be possible, or by strong compulsion, because even if they charge a small amount of money for every activity necessary for great things would require the payment of huge amounts of money. There is no way the state monitor what is happening at the core of people - hidden.
Even without a large increase in income, with a small benefit to a citizen awarded for sewer installation, coupled with good public transportation, medical care, reasonable public, providing access to information technology, space for recreation, among others, can generate a state of welfare aimed at continuous improvement of social conditions and to generate synergy in society, which is to turn, endogenously, to improve life in this society. Packed with small incentives in various sectors of society, it can be "wrapped" by a feeling that is a direct result of the expectation of constant improvement, even if they are small improvements - but summed.
In some cities there is a "social consensus" that the city is dedicated to the people that he cares, and it is facilitated by local life, especially the quality of public transport, culture, sanitation and the provision of good recreational areas. This welfare is positive due to "pack" the society towards the continual quest for social improvement, in a direction contrary to a social state of despondency, which in the worst of its aspects, leads to too much violence.
Important is that it is for society to determine such a goal, that the positive situation of society is not a fluke, and that, under any circumstances - and even for real - will relapse by the Government, for the care and dedication needed to cope with social problems, even if located and are not able to resolve everything. Thus, society can be taken as a course of increasing social improvements, due to the synergy of results and trust of society. Importantly for what purpose we do things. It is consistent with our goal (our intention) that things settle down.
That is, economic arguments are not enough or just rent increase, but sociological conditions are required to come to the society we want. The poorest need to realize, every day, that their community is receiving social investments, even if not solving all problems at first. With this motivation the poorest have a prospect of improving their situation, and that motivation would lead to constructive behavior in their community, to society - certainly decreasing social and family violence in these communities. You must create a spirit of social unity, commitment of the whole society. When there is unity of effort, an idea of one person, one more idea from someone else, so two ideas for each person, or more, because with the synergy of the exchange and the consequent union of ideas, new ideas may emerge (Will Durant).
Moreover, no more be forced to accept no. There is nothing more constructive to society than the motivation of its people - that motivation more intimate, which is often not perceived. The goodwill is due to the motivation that supports, validates, legitimate situations, taking into account issues of commitment, loyalty, ethics. Motivation brings brightness to life, so for the transformation of our society is necessary to dream as motivation. People need to motivate the intangible - are not machines. People need to dream about a future they want and that envisage as possible to commit to anything that is needed.
Therefore, it is necessary to lead society through positive actions that encourage earlier than repress, because even when repression is socially justified, it causes an effect on who is coerced rejection. A good example is the case in which the schools to reduce violence, instead of repression, began to open its doors on weekends for community activities.
They are all useful things to encourage and strengthen our identification as a nation, such as sports and culture, relaxing our claims only direct personal interests, relationships and facilitate all activities of social interest. "People are always to be included among the predicates of a culture psychic ideals, ie, their estimates as to what accomplishments are higher and for which it should do more to achieve." Although Freud say "(...) the actual course of events seems to indicate that the ideals are based on the early achievements were made possible (...) and that these early accomplishments are then erected by the ideal as something to be taken forward."
"This satisfaction can be shared not only by the privileged classes, who enjoy the benefits of culture, but also for the oppressed, as the right to despise foreign peoples make up for the injustices they suffer within their own unit. (...) This is because on the one hand, the oppressed classes can be emotionally attached to their masters, despite their hostility to them, may see in them their ideal "(Freud).
Thus was the conquest of the moon to the Americans, and so if we look at our football, in time of military rule, a little relieved the gloom of society and the citizen's life transcended his individualistic view of life to a sense of belonging a society, likewise is the case of Olympic sports today - and we need more ideal reference.
And how can the citizen be able to help those in need, as governments are unable to cope with the needs of our society? Firstly, having increased social awareness, and get used to avoid live only to seek and accept that which brings us to the pleasant feeling immediately. We need to change our relationship to pleasure and pain for a thought based on causality.
We strive to understand the situation of the poorer classes as that observed with a large magnifying glass - too big and too powerful - to increase the capacity of perception of the situation of these people. Strictly speaking, due to the intensification of the hardships of life in modern society, the individual should also, in life, stick to what is strictly necessary, not to cling, too, what is extraneous and unnecessary in your life, and power, throughout life, often what you want but can not, how to help others.
We seek satisfaction and happiness with the least possible material, to dedicate ourselves to our fulfillment. Not that one should always be this minimum (which is on the situation of each one) if we have more the better, the easier we can live, also left for us to help others, even if we can help with few resources (and this worth much to the pen). This behavior is also essential to make reservations for periods of financial distress or large resource demands.
But what is not strictly necessary? Are those things that really recognize its usefulness, not only sought as a status symbol for fashion. But there are things so necessary and urgent to justify the infringement of others? Of course, these needs vary according to the pattern of each one, and no one should go on living Jesuit. To a great entrepreneur, having a plane is not preposterous. But, for example, changing car computer, furniture, etc.. every year it takes? For all?
There is a "water divide" between behaviors needs strict or not. This is dramatic for the public sector. Aspects not strictly necessary if we have in any situation. Every time we tested things that we omit due to others. So we should be concentrating on things that are vitally important, regardless of how things might be attractive, interesting, desirable?
Assuming yes, you can search for this type of analysis for all relevant aspects of life, from economic to personal. To be financially able to help those in need, we must accustom ourselves to look to meet our stringent requirements, avoiding the exaggeration of many luxuries and fashions. If we look too much for luxuries, we became collectors for trinkets, to fill the house with them - no more finding its usefulness. Herein, we consume all our resources, sometimes not even to have basic needs.
If we restrict our expenditure is necessary and some "luxuries" without unnecessary squandering, sobrarão resources for what we need in the future and for that we can help people in need. No, this is not demagoguery, but a pressing need for us to do our part in maintaining our society. For long-term life in society to be sustainable, with sufficient domestic savings, and to be able to "nest" to all, protecting them from all kinds of weather, which is what everyone wants in a good society. It is necessary we spend the least in all situations of life: first, to our economic and financial viability: our needs are endless and growing.
We can not spend everything we earn and we can not demand our rights to its ultimate consequences. For example, it would be better for all if we avoid risk behaviors for our health (which, demagogically, we would have the right to do), than after demanding expensive government health care, consuming resources that could be spent on diseases inevitable?
In this line of thought, have we not spent the time to be serious birth control? Control that the poorest, of course, for there is born more children - instead of then being bradados social rights to the offspring lebrina? The responsibility falls on the lap of the Government as Usual? However, for Macy Tiburi, philosopher, is precisely the feeling of responsibility that we need, quite different from guilt (Catholic) and we tried to foist upon impingimos too passionate a reaction (Latin) that helps anyone.
This is one of our greatest problems: we do not measure the consequences of our actions. In each act, the man can generate consequences of improvement of their society, only by their awareness and their subsequent proper positioning in society, seeking always, your balance and social environment. An infinitesimal particle of a system (any) can influence it, even decisive, especially when this system is running evenly. For Peter Senge, managing a business is like riding a bike - I mean, requires balance, strength and flexibility, we can take this advice to our lives.
But this balance does not mean we have to have a life "warm" and that does not go "not much to one side, much to another." "The truth is that if you want to keep control over everything that will happen in your career, you will pay a heavy price for it. After all, many are born learning of the unexpected "(Roberto Shinyashiki). But that means we have to balance our activities and their effects. A very practical example: have fun is good, but we also need work. Work is essential, but we need recreational activities and hobbies. In search of balance in life, we also need to repair or compensate for problems caused by our actions, and also improve our understanding of society and on our actions (improving our culture) to better position ourselves constantly our behavior in society.
The need is socioeconomic concern and constant care, daily, not to causarmos problems to others and ourselves in the pursuit of that wish. This concern necessarily (and is very important, fundamental) should increase with the increase of income and power of the individual and the nation - of course, no paranoia. It takes more concern over the action to be taken to make the awareness of each moment. Opposite example is the new rich, who, tresloucadamente, act without knowing, yet, the consequences of their actions, thereby arriving, acts most ridiculous, that give you that taint.
The "pieces" of socio-economic system (which are the people) need to have awareness of the importance of resisting the charms capitalists, and also know how to act and have the strength to do so, face frustrations without getting flight into consumerism. Knowing wait to act at the right time: the future usually have increasing demands on resources. It will take a proactive society and defensive, which avoids the need for remediation of wrong actions, which often can not cure.
Or acts is taking care to avoid problems and how to take advantage of synergies, or continue sinking in front of so many current needs of capitalist society. You need to have the ability to pursue the course targeted with great precision and act on factors that influence the economic-social, especially due to the expansion (growth) of this system and its improvement. Without harmony, results in collisions and conflicts between economic and social individual agents and the consequent loss of effectiveness of forces and destruction of parts of a system - social or otherwise.
For all that, there is no possibility of social justice in the long run, and the formation of a developed country, that people have no culture to do so. It is this condition which gives the citizen to understand the context of the society to which he belongs, noticing and driving it, the direction you want for themselves and for society and the economy, and to determine which politician has more independence and determination to pursue this course and to place - and is driving it.
For the neutralization of forces that dismember the working harmony of the social system, and everything else you want good in our society, culture is important - a positive attitude to act to avoid the deep "cliff" of modern life, astray with no return, as the vices and diseases. It is culture that leads people to do what is most convenient to themselves and to society or not to do that which is less convenient to you and that company.
But the work in community psychology in the Village World Ends - MG (Deus! This name given by almost destitute mental sums it up, which is expected) in 1988, Elizabeth Bomfim summarizes the work of his group of professionals in psychology (especially ) with community groups saying the close relationship between health and living conditions. Certainly refers mainly to mental health as a consequence of the rest, when he concludes: "the citizen disappears under the sick individual."
The psychologist says that "the conditions and ways of life need to be mastered so that there is autonomy of the subject to exert their health." Yes, but how? As said, he only gets it if living conditions. To improve their living conditions, also depends on the society and government - and forever more, the poorer.
Therefore, only positive actions also counting on the state of society and the mass can poorest families move to a more acceptable level of physical and mental health - reflecting also in social development and the reduction of violence. Enforcement actions should continue to undesirable actions, and in this new context, they may be tightened, as in developed countries, where the law is fulfilled far more certain and austerely.
It is of great importance that the majority of the population has at least basic education to at least know the track that brought us news about our society and to try to prevent the election of unscrupulous politicians. But technical training is different from the culture. The only literate are functionally illiterate, unable to reach a capacity of discernment, something so dear to our society and so little seen - proof of this are advertisements and television programs that only people with very little sense of judgment could appreciate. A college degree does not guarantee culture, only technical training and little knowledge, most of them.
Formal education, schools, guarantees, mainly the technical training and development of intelligence quotient - which also occurs with some of the courses. Of course the trouble of reasoning can help in a more accurate perception of social reality and individual by individual. However, in most cases, leading the development of technical training leads to alienation about the social reality itself - and much to see in this troglodyte trained professionals in higher education highly technical and social recognition (money mainly), ie: beasts with the power of money, and without reasonable direction (and control) itself.
But culture includes education (technical and development of intelligence quotient) and knowledge. Knowledge encompasses the subjective perception of the world, the arts, the interaction with the objective and subjective reality of society (sociology, economics, anthropology ...) and the subjective perception of the individual (psychology, social psychology, psychoanalysis ...). Of course, for lack of knowledge as comprehensive, common sense is a great replacement, as well as attend to the individual unconscious conditioning. But we live up to this time in the West, the development of techniques, mainly, which has led us, forced, just answer the objective questions determined by the technical aspects of what we call culture (which is laughable). Easterners should find us ridiculous. So, now succumbed to the unbearable pressure on the company formed by the lack of subjective knowledge and intellectual refinement.
Of course, most likely, schools have such a high standard of culture (sociological, philosophical, anthropological, political ...) already covered, even if not under this nomenclature. The key is that also the children of public schools, which are not silly, they also have to learn the basics of sociology, politics, anthropology, economics, philosophy ... in short, knowledge that even if grouped in a discipline over school, provide the basic training of a citizen and at least a minimum critical of their reality. It would, perhaps, one of the most important things for "the planet" and even for civilized coexistence and for the reduction of trauma, since the rich are not the majority?
In extreme life that "we", the individual is no longer able to judge the facts of his life from factual findings of your day to day. For this, one needs knowledge with broader considerations and considerations, from sociology, philosophy of law, social psychology, among many. Only strong institutions as centers of postgraduate studies concerning the social sciences in universities, through interdisciplinarity, to study and demonstrate the best social directions.
Of course it takes a Herculean effort for a basic understanding of areas as diverse and complex. But, it is necessary for the accumulation of technical knowledge is counterbalanced by the intellectual development, the knowledge of its reality in your community. And in the case of ordinary people, as not being able to be cultured enough to stand on the most complex issues of their society, culture needs to at least know how to supervise opinion makers, judges and the press. Surely we need not for that of tertiary education for the most people possible, except for a small part of the population, which is a paradigm for others.
Could the judges be the foundations of society, as proclaimed by Socrates, and they only able to reach the level of knowledge, abstraction and free to think the guideposts of our society. Of course we still need culture to assimilate these guideposts and to address various issues of life, as well vote for representatives - but it seems that already in the discourse of Socrates had this apregoamento; how much disappointment it brings!
Moreover, the humanism of the second phase of the Renaissance have sought strongly with Erasmus of Rotterdam (evangelism apart), the awakening to the culture of classical antiquity (mainly Greco-Roman), obscured by distortion in the Middle Ages the Christian postulates, for the insatiable locupletamento individual. It was based on humanism in this light through the ancient knowledge (and its artistic models) to be reborn with a spiritual base - gleaming, well, new ways to man. And yet, we still have in the world society, we have ever seen, every day.
For millennia, we have still failed to reach a good cultural level of the population, and even harder would be to reach a large population, to have a level of culture able to place it consistently in the face of such complex issues of modern life. Very important: when a country moves culturally reinforce political ties integrators, a country not matured, or large anthropological differences, it is essential to the solidification of the cultural identity of the country and its political and institutional maintenance. It's comforting to think as a great scholar of the twentieth century, Will Durant, for whom the development of culture occurs as a natural process resulting from the creation of material wealth in a country, and that also have many examples, especially in Europe - postulated. Maybe so, but for this it is necessary that before, social disintegration will not occur or revolutionary breaks, such as France, with its torment and destruction. Of course, there is no other option, not getting unbearable despite changing times, as the only, is the best option.
The attitude to a question may be the result of a fad, a custom, etc.., Or may be the result of a conscious attitude, which leads the individual to feel the full weight of its decision and the consequences - this is ideal. This is only obtained by means of a mature culture. That is, this is a world rather of persons than of economic agents, and can not wait to obtain social justice compusermos not a society formed by people who sincerely seek justice and equitability in the day-to-day as a result of his awareness.
Doubt that is, meanwhile, will already have evidence of the maturing of the voter, since the population (aided by the press) is increasingly averse to unscrupulous politicians, and our judicial system has evolved greatly? Are we comfortably saved "hands" of the press and the knowledge of judges? Will the Judiciary always guide our actions or reposition our understanding (and yours), constantly, all backed by the press?
Early on we have become accustomed to competition - with brothers, friends, colleagues. We compete at home, at school, in transit, at work, in life. We came to compete in the search or is well-known-than and not knowing if you really need. Life is full of traps and, after a path descambamos after jogamo us with all the energies in search of something, as a profession, business, relationships, it becomes very difficult to circumvent, if goes wrong, and always more we find problems that corner us, ruin our careers, forcing us to submission unbearable; ruin our relationships on the basis of professional projection
To free ourselves from the competition in capitalism, we seek a monopoly, culture, wealth, anything. Competition is initially positive, but capitalism, over time, it is unusual. Have already accumulated enough (capital) and as a game, some win and accumulate almost everything in the end. We need the next step, we can not be held hostage until they die of rage the losers of this game. We need to know the best way to live with what we have and not always look all that we do not have.
There is no division between economy, society and individuals - in capitalism, we have a "war" all-against-all, in which all seek to test the limits of others, while able to abuse a little more of a situation in your favor, continue to rely, as in the case of the wage squeeze. Through it all, capitalism is searing (and consequently unfair) for most workers, because they are subject not only to the fury of the capitalists, but also to the nature of all middle managers of companies. Of course we are not all like that, but the problem is that often shows up as radicalism.
The performance of these managers is subject to all sorts of rage and daily problems they face and, in most cases, interfere with the way you act toward those who are responsible to them. These are subjected to daily exercise in sadism, due to disproportionate whims of all kinds of crazy that has the least power in an organization, proves that even in low wages.
Social concerns aside, according to Martin Seymour-Smith, which Darwin referred to the animal and plant species (evolution by survival of the fittest or best adapted), Herbert Spencer referred to it before (in 1852) - the universe, civilizations, countries, ideas, systems of government, etc.., and this was borrowed the words quoted.
Today's fallacy is known as social Darwinism also the understanding that man and society evolve (devoid of morality) by the natural selection of the best. The emphasis is more on the strength and power than about the ability, especially the moderate ability. The fallacy is that the increasing complexity of society and the man was mistakenly interpreted this case as more complex.
Whether to Nietzsche, higher development would be the removal of man's instinctive pursuit of pleasure and immediate response to the prevailing moral. For Spencer, evolution would be a unifying concept: "An integration of matter (...) during which the matter passes from an indefinite, incoherent homogeneity to a coherent heterogeneity." Progress would be nothing less than "a need charity "- which is laughable.
According to this premise, what's more intelligent to do is to let everything develop naturally. The free competition would be the best policy, and the conditions under which the state does not intervene or not plans are the most natural - something like the economic liberalism. The more able or more able to naturally appear on the front or top, as the fittest would be better in any case - all in the way of progress for all.
According to Spencer thought indulgent, even fatalities of this system were in fact "imbued with charity - the same charity that leads to their early graves the children whose parents are sick and the weak points as victims of an epidemic." Those who did not understand so do not pass the spurious philanthropists.
However, many actions that occur in this process "evolutionary" mechanistic occur for selfish reasons and not for what is a social evolution. Spencer's theory sought the example of nature, but it - except for the man - there is evil and exploitation. Of course evolution is required, but will in this case we can not, promptly, quickly and simply, using the average fair understanding of Aristotle to dismiss the validity of this extreme hypothesis, simply relegate the social evolution of the preponderance of the fittest?
This understanding of Spencer looks like a "pretext for aggression" as in the case of the Holocaust and our savage capitalism. Promotes indulgence for any type of aggression to which, at some point, for some reason, can be said weaker. It is a monument to the worst that is in the right-wing political stance.
The simplification of Spencer is equal to that in which someone deliberately plays on any theory that sounds according to their general way of thinking or when something pressing serves our purposes. It is an example of what Cambridge G. E. Moore calls "naturalistic fallacy", which follows the conclusion of what should be and not what is - as said by David Hume.
Were only the strongest survive, says Seymour, then "there would be no place for delicate butterflies, flowers, plants and other creatures weak, (...) or for the Darwins and the Spencers with their eternal headache. All would be crushed by the most powerful during the struggle for survival. "In this dark space, the unknowable became the incomprehensible power, and was the basis for the thought of Aryan superiority, which was seen in the Holocaust. Certainly, that was not what Spencer sought to society, so they said "the definitive development of the ideal man is logically certain (...)".
According to Seymour, it was reported that Spencer violently opposed to the indiscriminate application of its evolutionary and implacable laws that encouraged philanthropic activities, and that was a serious researcher who depredou their goods to apply to the initial survey of sociology. Even so, Hitler and Mussolini locupletaram with the implications of such thoughts, since they used to "literally" the understanding that the strongest should survive in social terms. Maybe even the prediction of Jung and the fatality of a coming Führer might have been used as a prior validation. Each one makes use of things the way that suits you. Were not so, would not have reached the pearl:
If we do not respect the law of nature, imposing our will as the right of the strongest, the day will come that wild animals will devour us again. Then, the insects eat the wild animals, and finally there will be nothing but microbes. Thanks to the struggle, the elites are continually renewed. The law of selection justifies this incessant struggle, allowing the survival of the fittest. Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature (Hitler - Table Talks).
Cheers! What magnificent! A great summary of the evils of human history. As a beast is able to summarize and unite all the bad, screwed together so simplified, condensed? Why is that? Because Hitler saw the solution at the other end of that situation I imagined problem - the lack of social structure of their country the way you imagined, or just being preached as necessary.
Let him see that the best outcome for the formation of a more evolved (if that was the real interest) could be obtained from the example that is given - an example of ethical conduct that Germany today gives all countries - and looking in the educational process also include those who may be deemed undeveloped. It is a matter of being nice, but we're not stupid, petty. Now is not worth the good sense and marking according to the social interest, is worth what? If it is obvious that the true interests of society, we know a lot that can not be accepted (we prefer not to think about the options of Hitler).
Perhaps the severe Nietzsche was the great social Darwinist, and his philosophy is more acute and culminates in the doctrine of eternal return: "This world is a monster of force without beginning or end, (...) which is not consumed, but only becomes immutable as a whole (...) with no laces and no progress, (...) a choppy sea of forces that cause their own storm, becoming an eternal eternally shuttle, (...) the most simple to complex, ranging from the calmer, more rigid and the colder the most ardent, the wildest, the most contradictory, to himself, (...) saying to yourself, (...) blessing to himself as that which must return eternally (...) ".
He adds: "(...) without end, but the end is the happiness of that circle, unwilling, but a ring that has the willingness to follow their old way, always around itself and nothing else but in around himself, this world, which I conceive - who therefore has the spirit lucid enough to contemplate it without wanting to be blind? (...) With the vote of his own return yourself? With the ring of eternal blessing himself, the eternal self-affirmation? With the will to always and yet again? Want to back, of wanting all the things that have been? To want for the future, wanting to be all things? "(Will to Power).
It is not feasible the desire of the eternal return to man - that would be equal to the eternity of our race, but we are subject to temporality. One is the inverse of the other; time is different from timeless. Therefore, it is not possible for the eternal human: we are subject (involuntarily and uncontrollably) at the time. To claim the eternal return would extrapolate temporality. Something that is eternal is not subject to time - is timeless. Approaching the eternal is to move away from what is temporal, not eternal return of the storm. To get rid of the time we need to rid ourselves of our temporal condition.
Nietzsche might have been rebelling against the reality of his time, denial of life to almejarmos better after it. But if, on the contrary, we want our eternal return, certainly we will want to return always a changing world, as indeed is all life on earth, not the eternal recurrence of all the problems. This seems rather self-indulgence to a release of all acts harmful to society and promoting precisely those problems that do not want. That is, there will desire to ever return to the same problems.
Utopia, published in 1516, socialist island designed by Thomas More, slaves included in its constitution. Now, see that even the greatest of social utopias succumbs to time, the evolution: it's been centuries that no longer accept slave labor. If we wanted the eternal return of what was a utopia, we would have compromised the slave revolt as they did later in non-utopian. Secondly, that the beast would seek to return eternally to chaos?
We can not wish to return to exactly what we have today, but always return to a society mudadiça, a life changing, as the only thing is - the development, adaptation, is the only constant. Thus, we can not but wish to return always, but always for a different life, increasingly adapted to the environment, and contributing to that effect - and, why not also want to return to a better life? Why do we always want to return to the same chaos? We may have the desire to want, always with the same determination to face the problems of our life today, but that does not stop, too, wish future living conditions more comfortable.
And yet, we can not determine what will be the life of our descendants, saying we want the eternal recurrence of the same which we live today. Even if we wanted the highest possible idealization, it would not be sustainable perennially. First, because the consequences of an idealization in practice in society, can be very different than we imagine. Second, because in the future, with developments, many normal things today may no longer be accepted - and, indeed, many are not. Third, because even if you get a good life continued, we would thus limiting the potential for the future - and we have no idea of many developments before we açambarcados for them, this would limit the progress, after a certain point, he could not distance
Greatly from the current reality.
Therefore, the whole truth about the society is the reality checked: society, and all life on earth is an evolutionary process. And just look at it from the past to realize in what direction we are evolving - and this trend did not flee. Once in a while comes a botched mad affectation.
As the rabbit from Alice in Wonderland, we are always walking, our clock is ticking. Just accept the truth of the circle of Nietzsche, of atoms, the terrestrial sphere, orbit, planets ... Circular of our lives. If we were trying to understand the society from the perspective of the circle, we want to (and already realized) signs of bending axis distribution of wealth, no longer a line that retilineamente distance from the beginning (the poorest), and then, turning, returning, from the rich to the most socioeconomically depressed, in a circular flow of wealth.
If the privileged have the perception of society as a chain is no stronger than its weakest link, the resulting significant influx of support and encouragement to the most socioeconomically depressed can always find the equilibrium conditions for maintenance of life, differentiating only the particular conditions, but the viability of maintaining life.
This impulse to the most destitute also promotes improvements in society for the privileged, causing an increased flow of feedback from social energy (wealth), volume and velocity feedback. Are thus the weakest links in the social gear to be constantly fed back by the privileged, such as an interest and all, in a circular direction of wealth. How to see beyond that? Only being out of it, outside the circle of life, outside of time, which only exists for our lives according to our perception. But just because we go beyond our scope ... as Nietzsche said, "Whoever reaches his ideal, going beyond it."
Well said about evolution, it seems obvious, but, so communism can not arrogate to themselves the right to claim to human utopia on earth - the guardian of human morality, citizenship, better life, better living. If you have advantages over capitalism, it also has disadvantages. Neither capitalism nor communism can claim to be free to complete its eruption on earth as an end in itself. But what is the best? There is no best, only adapted according to the situation, with the nation and to the season.
It also reinforces Nietzsche: "The study of society is so precious because the man is much more naive and society than as 'individual'. The "society" never considered otherwise virtue but as a means to achieve the strength, power, order. "" Is that all communities, society, etc.. Are one hundred times more accurate and more instructive about human nature the individual, too weak to have the courage of their desires ... ". "The 'altruism' is entirely a result of the intelligence of the private man: societies are not 'altruistic' towards each other ... The commandment of love of neighbor has not yet been extended by one in command of love of neighbor. "But with globalization is already concern about the need for national action and its repercussions in the global market - in which every action extreme suffering retaliation, as the trade, the war ...
But, he continues: "The lack of scruples in the use of dangerous means; perversity and complexity of the character considered as an advantage and therefore exploited." "I make use of my character, but I do not think or understand it or change it - the calculation of personal virtue not penetrated, a single moment in my mind." He adds: "Show that everything is praised as moral is identical, in essence, everything that is immoral, and only became possible, as any amplification of moral and immoral means for aiming the immoral purposes; - demonstrate, on the other hand, as everything is described as immoral, is the economic angle, superior and essential, and as the evolution to a greater abundance of life has also, as necessary, the progress of immorality ... ". Well, Smith also well intended, but we've seen the results and limitations of this.
"You want a name for this universe, a solution to all the puzzles? (...) This world is the world's will to power and nothing else! And you are also will to power and nothing else ... ". "We can assess the extent of force according to the degree to which we can extricate ourselves of virtue," "(...) forget the shame that he wished to deny and conceal the natural instincts." "It's for morale, a signal progress when it reduces its domain "(Nietzsche).
And always returned to the charge: "What makes the superiority of culture over the lack of culture? (...): A lot of immorality that grant. " "To what extent is desirable that the man becomes more virtuous, or wiser, or happier?". And "because, while purpose was not to the present, in a strict sense, in fact in contradiction with the desire to become happy?". Here we see clearly that it is rebellion against the reality of his time.
"You are not required by another part of the misery, deprivation, mortification, as a natural means? And if the greatest experience was the purpose, there would refuse to increase happiness? And choosing the dangers, adventures, distrust, seduction as roads leading to the experience? ". "(...) The man reaches nature after a long struggle - never does a" return "... Nature: this means daring to be immoral like nature. "" More natural is our position towards nature: not to love more (...), gently 'diabolizamos' and 'embrutecemos'. But rather than dismiss it so, we feel, since then, more and more of it next to our will. "" Do not believe a law that does not rest on the power to enforce, consider all the rights and achievements. "
"The suffering in all its variations, is now interesting to us, but this does not make us more compassionate, we were still deeply shaken by the appearance of suffering, shaken to shed tears: - why we do not have charitable feelings." Well, if not out of charity to the weaker individual, we think, then, only in the maintenance of society, for which the degeneration of its individuals can not be accepted. "For this voluntary contemplation of all kinds of misery and failure, we become braver and stronger than the eighteenth century, is a proof that our strength has grown (...)." It's clear where his outburst towards desvencilhamento the total moral idealist, the one that this is the best of all possible worlds - in fashion before Nietzsche.
But we can not leave a state (social) to another (inverse), or the subjugation of tyranny, already know the result. Of course, with the differences and adversities we develop spiritually, but one must keep society. And this aspect seems to me fundamental: it can be and have we become in our society, deeply wicked capitalist competition, but this is the fundamental point that we can not get a "well" without limitation: the lack of kindness, compassion, which ultimately he says is necessary. If so, then we have the summary of the most sordid capitalism: the senseless suffering, without practical result, without any. The strange thing is that shortly before, contrary to his stance wicked, he had reported: "More natural is our position on morality. (...). But to appreciate the feelings charitable and benevolent (...) ".
"We want strong feelings (...). (It is essential to separate it from the needs expressed by the neurasthenic and decadent: these is the need of the condiment and even cruelty). "When it becomes clear that he intended to assert the power of citizens to assimilate their culture capable of the moral outrage decadence of his time. But how to separate his writings of neurasthenic, as was the case of Hitler, and the decadent, as were the Germans before the Second World War? How to prevent them from using only the interest of a speech like this? Even justify anti-Semitism from these writings, even if they say otherwise?
"The moral man is an inferior species to the immoral man, a weaker species; second type is a moral, but not their own kind, is a copy, a good copy of the accuracy - the measure of its value lies outside him. "(Psychoanalysis is also contrary to moralism deny psychic reality.)" I think the power of a will according to the degree of resistance, pain, torture it supports to convert them in your favor, not to blame existence of evil and painful character, but I hope that nature will one day become worse and more painful still ... "Does he like you just want the pain (and inevitable), not wanting to ever escape from it? And mean it for everyone? "But only do what is according to your tendencies or whatever the need requires of you, or that you find it useful, you should not even have the right to praise you or leave you praise! ..." - Of course, in this case, are no longer the obligation.
"And if you had more strength and more courage in your soul do not you both be humilharíeis nilidades [nullity] virtuous." "The power that men can and will demand of themselves." "We believe in the Olympian, not the crucifix. ". "The rogue takes a genuine advantage over many men, it is mediocre, and the fool has the advantage over us do not suffer from the aspect of mediocrity ... It is desirable that the gap became deeper, to say that the knavery and folly to grow ... Thus human nature to extend ... But, after all, is a necessary thing that happens without waiting for it seems desirable or not. The folly and knavery grow, this is part of 'progress'. "" Yes, part of progress but we must constantly counter this knavery, not foster it, not wanting it, but just accept this situation as the reality - even if all this is part of the enlargement of human nature (and does, since humanity resist). "What does not kill me makes me stronger", yet he would say.
However, the immorality of Nietzsche presents as well as a dialectical argument, in which, for millennia, from Socrates and Plato, from the Dhammapada, the Upanishads, from Buddha or Confucius, we sought something akin to morality or ethics, reaching the extreme idealism at the time of Nietzsche, in Western culture. In this dialectical pendulum swing, from a proposition (a thesis) given (morality), countered by an antithesis (immorality), we conclude from the result of a synthesis - something like the amorality. Yes, because if even Nietzsche equates the moral and immoral, only the amoral left, as he himself says: "The 'objectivity' of the philosopher: the moral indifference about yourself, the indifference with regard to favorable or fatal consequences." This is because the effort to immorality can be understood as a kind of ethics (or morality itself?).
So far so good, but in the next chapter returns to the charge: "The conditions necessary to produce a stronger species, which were held here and there by poverty or by chance, we now can understand them and want them consciously, we can create the conditions under which similar rise is possible. Even today the "education" was to scope the benefit to society then existing. They wanted tools that could serve her. Assuming that wealth is greater strength, power would be to imagine a rebate of that wealth whose aim not meant more the benefit of society, but an advantage for the future. "Yes, it is possible for the development of science, for example .
However, "the degradation of the man must be for a long time considered as a single purpose: it meets beforehand to create a broad foundation on which to build up a stronger sort of men. (In what way to present all manner of strong men built up on the lower level of men? ...) "" We need to make a similar mission to the extent that they understand the extent to which the present form of society is in transformation, transformation so violent that one day society will eventually no longer exist anywhere on its own and will become just a simple means in the hands of a stronger race [what is attempted in World War II?]. The amesquinhamento progressive men and women is the active force that enables believe in creating a stronger race, a race which will have its surplus in the species amesquinhada become weaker (will, responsibility, safety, free to set themselves same goals). "" The honorable title for what is mediocre, is, as we know, the word liberal ... ".
"When the species level is an accomplished fact, it needs a justification, that justification is so that a superior species and sovereign can rely on it and rise as well, to your destination. (...) With a surplus of strength for beauty, courage, culture, manners, and even more intellectual field, a race so you can arrogate to itself all sorts of great luxury. "But for it to be and continues to be an accomplished fact, it is necessary that the species level is not to starve and be able to at least reproduce the same initial pattern of life, otherwise degenerates the whole society.
So far so good, but "- strong enough to no longer require the tyranny of an imperative of virtue; rich enough to ignore the economy and pedantry, being beyond good and evil, a greenhouse for rare and chosen" . And these rare plants destroy the substrate that feeds? Only a few can be so rich to ignore the economy and whoever hates repeatedly individual economy or social ends up suffering the consequences.
And then goes far beyond reasonable and the Jews and the world paid the price, including the German people, to follow a similar thought in Austria - Hitler's War. Because, according to him, "a high culture can only build up on a vast land on mediocrity and a healthy and strongly consolidated." But, certainly did not intend for the entire population of a country to "elevate" to this condition unless it could be a basis for the entire continent (Europe to Hitler?).
"There is still: the growth of civilization necessarily bring with it the increased morbid elements of the crime and psychoneurosis. (...) Number of insane, criminals and "naturalistic" increases: it is the sign of a culture that looms ahead, advancing by leaps and bounds - that is, the residue, the dregs, the excrescences are of major importance - the downdraft snatch the lead. "If all this is normal, we will not use our strength wickedly, increasing the problem, the chaos, but attempt to mitigate these problems.
"There is finally merges social consequence of the Revolution, the establishment of equal rights, the superstition of" equality between men. " It is seen to confuse the representatives of the instincts of decomposition (resentment, discontent, destructive impulse, anarchism, nihilism), such as slavery, cowardice, cunning, baser instincts of the layers for a long time kept under subjection and all this is mixed in the blood of all classes, after two or three generations the breed is unrecognizable - everything is plebizado. From all this follows a general instinct which is directed against choice, against the privileges of every caste, and that instinct comes with such power and security, is so hard and so mean in practice that even the privileged end up decisively to submit. "Well, if this is the depletion of the upper class he did not want, so it's good a lot of concern with the" common people ".
And still, in Why the Weak Are Victorious (VP), because it is difficult to create strong spirit you want: "In short, the sick and the weak are more" human ", have more spirit, are more mutable, more multiple, more fun - more evil, were the patients who invented the malignancy. (A sickly precocity is often among the stunted, the scrupulous and tuberculosis) [but conditions are part of life]. The spirit is typical of late races: Jews, French and Chinese. The anti-Semites can not forgive the Jews that they have spirit - and money. Anti-Semitic - is a name of failures). "And they said he was anti-Semitic. "The sick and the weak have a fascination in his favor, that are more interesting and healthy, the mad and the holy - the two most interesting species of men ... closely related with the "genius". The big "adventurers and criminals" and all men, above all the most healthy, are sick at certain times of his life; the great movements of the soul, the passions of power, love, revenge, are accompanied by profound disturbances .. . (...) For almost half of all human life, man is decaying. "It seems, then, he admits that the decay part of life, not just the superior man.
The problem is that "what he wants to remain in power flatters the populace, works with the populace, is forced to lure her to his side - before the geniuses of all, become the harbingers of the feelings that serve to excite the masses - the tone of compassion, reverence even in the face of all that suffering, all that is vegetated and has been despised, persecuted, that tone rises above all other types (...). Result: mediocrity wins spirit, vitriol and genius - makes it nice, seduces. "This is still, but then to leave the populace to their own misfortune, as it seems the intention, goes a great distance.
Regarding the population, or life lackluster, says that "certify that would remain even so much can be of value in the case of the existence shorter, which means that man, considered together forces, thus win a greater amount of area about things, if events are processed as now sue ... (...) On this first way that we can now cover the eyes, rises the assimilation, the satisfaction of the degradation of the man, a kind of asset level of man. "
He continues: "Once we have reached this overall management and economic land that inevitably survive, humanity as a mechanism, you can find the service that the government its most consistent, because it will then be a large gear, always composed of smaller parts of an 'adaptation' always more subtle, which become increasingly superfluous elements that rule and dominate, making up a set of enormous strength, whose different factors represent minimum strength and minimum values. "Yeah, so, what problem?
"I wish to start by estimating ourselves, the rest would be a result. It is true that as soon cease to exist for others: it is the last thing they forgive you. 'How? A man who estimates himself? '(...) Are guided by second intention that an action always finds his reward. What would happen if someone said, with the Prince at hand: It is precisely these actions that we need to do, so that others do not precede - to put them in a situation of not being able to do in them. "
"We need the great man too synthetic (...). What we have is multiple men, chaos more interesting than might have existed, but this is not the chaos that precedes the creation of the world, is the chaos that follows. "" Opposed to this mitigation, the adaptation of this man, a use more specialized, a contrary motion is required - the production of synthetic man that summarizes and justifies, the man for whom the mechanization of humanity is a condition of existence as it is on this basis that you can invent his higher form of existence ... "Again claims that need.
But "there is need for antagonism of mass, men need to 'flush' and the feeling of distance from them; places - on them, live on them. This higher form of aristocratic is the future. From the perspective of morality, this general mechanism, this solidarity of all the gears represent a maximum in the exploitation of man: but it assumes that there are men for whom this operation has a meaning. Otherwise would effectively just an overall decrease, the decrease in value of the type man - a phenomenon of regression on a large scale. (...) As if, with spending growing of all, the benefit of all you should also grow necessarily. (...) So that we end up no longer knowing what to serve this great process. "" Transmute values - would that be? All spontaneous impulses must exist beforehand, the new and strong impulse, which will in the future (...). ". "I am so, so I - the devil carry you."
And always insists: "The individual has become stronger under opposite conditions (...)". "Perception of increased collective power: calculate how well the decay of individuals, classes of people, times are included in that growth." "The same discipline that strengthens the natures most powerful and makes them capable of large companies, estiola breaks and mediocre natures (...). "So he says you can not enforce this wickedness to the weakest. "Reducing the intermediate formations and restrict their influence; primary means to preserve the distances." But, "to see things from a higher angle, both are needed; also need their antagonism." Well, then everything improves: if the strongest psychologically and socially are aware of the need for maintenance of life also the weakest. But this speech is dangerous, and in a hurry can easily conclude that he wants to tear up all.
"General view of the future of Europe: it regarded as the slave more intelligent, hardworking, very modest in the background, curious to excess, multiple, soft, weak of will - a cosmopolitan chaos of passion and intelligence. How it can result in strong species? A species with classic taste? The classic taste is the desire for simplification, consolidation, visibility welfare, the wishes of astonishment, the courage of nudity psychological (...). To raise this chaos to this organization, it is necessary to constrain it by necessity. It is necessary to choose: to disappear or to impose himself. A dominating race can only have terrible and violent origins. "Well, once again the same problem: how to prevent this violence devastates also the weakest, he agrees that should be kept as a basis for the strongest? Now this is the same great doubt about capitalism: how to keep those who do not follow the flow and are outside the capitalist, etiolated?
What happened when Germany wanted to establish itself as a superior race, the Second World War, and they all wanted to become too strong, as opposed to Germany, it seems that is what he wanted himself, broke out the individualism of nations seeking preponderate and campeando national social energies. From there it was established in disputes individualism: space (going to the moon), politics (Cold War), trade (globalization), scientific (technological contest), sport (Olympics), among others. This also demonstrates the idea that Nietzsche never reaches an equilibrium finalistic, because when you make a move to reinstate it, from this new social arrangement, new dynamic conditions of society are formed, and new venture to restore the balance is required - this is called evolution, which is continuous.
If this "evolution" has occurred under the "merit" of the German madness, and it was therefore necessary to place at the time of Nietzsche, it is now possible need. If in his time was needed unbridled Dionysian force to break the inertia of the moral amesquinhamento not know, but we do not want, not need and this is not the way. How could we want, with Nietzsche, unrestricted lack of kindness as a goal (continuous) behavior, if he himself says is necessary "- a method to gather forces in order to preserve the small-scale production, as opposed to waste-economy ; - conservation of weak, it is necessary that a huge amount of small work done, - the conservation of a mentality that makes life bearable for the weak and the suffering; - solidarity implanted as an instinct against instinct of fear and servility. " But, says someone who knows the aristocracy all moral can choose what works best for you, but points out the "How different is the innovative philosophy, the experimenter, despotic man, compared to the robber, the barbarian, the adventurer!" but the latter are just guys who looks like he really raises.
Meanwhile, says: "Test of an economic justification of virtue. - The problem is to make man as usable as possible to bring it as much as you can, infallible machine: for this it is necessary to equip it with virtues mechanical (...). "" A high culture can only build up on a vast land on mediocrity and a healthy and strongly consolidated. "Here the first stone of scandal is sick, and uniformity that brings all mechanical activity. Learning to endure the hassle - and not just endure it - learn to see it wrapped in charm superior. Learn something that in no way relates to, feel that the 'duty' consists precisely in this activity 'objective': learning to evaluate separately the pleasure and duty - this is priceless burden and action in higher education. (...) The young person learns to 'labor' too: the first condition to fill in later, with excellence, duty mechanic (as an employee of the State, good husband, a slave, bureaucratic, newspaper reader, soldier). Perhaps there is a similar need, more than any other, from a philosophical justification: the pleasant feelings should be devalued in the name of any instance infallible; calls himself the "duty to himself," perhaps even the veneration phatos about all that is unpleasant - and this requirement is beyond any usefulness at all fun, every opportunity, speaking imperatively. The mechanical form of existence regarded as the highest, noblest, adores it herself (...), so that individuals and classes to produce categories of souls incomplete precisely because of this most useful. "Looks like it would be Europe same.
Still speaks to the contrary "(...) in the assessment imaginary preponderance in favor of those who have been ill or poorly shared - for conservation of the weak," and says that "(...) is the herd instinct that manifests itself here - are equal, we treat each other equally, what you make me I do (...). It is impossible that any action can be reciprocated: between real 'people' there is no similar actions, therefore there is no "reprisals" ... Far from me to believe, when I do something that another man can do the same thing: what I do belongs to me. "Yes, but it would be good to combine with those affected not to also submit any other type of reprisal .
"I declared war on anemic ideal of Christianity (...), not with the intent to destroy, but only to destroy his tyranny and desentulhar the ground for a new ideal, an ideal more robust ... (...) This is how we, the immoralists, we need the power of the moral instinct of our wish that our adversaries maintain their strength - he just wants to become master of those opponents. "" (...) With a expression of luxury of first order, the most arrogant, the most expensive and rarest of addiction. "" It is true that this may be just a new allure for men without conscience and without scruples. "
Often conjecture up its efforts to wicked actions, and describe the concern with maintaining social. But Nietzsche was a great thinker, cunning, knowledgeable society "harmed due to chance? ... Nor regarding the anarchists to the princes: only after suffering attacks is that they rely more heavily on the throne ... Because it was always thus and so will always be, one can not be more helpful to a cause that pursuing it and exciting the whole pack against it ... ". So your argument would be dialectical, to form a synthesis of thought from the antithesis to your thesis? It seems that your thinking is this: "Only after having recognized that everything is a lie and look again obtained permission to use this beautiful lie of virtue."
"He did not want to receive a rifle bullet, but the prospect of receiving it, the probability of a bullet, not prevent him from satisfying his honor ... In all our actions are not decent, knowingly, indifferent to what we can come? Avoid an action which may bring adverse consequences, it would generally proscribe all actions ... decent. " And who has all this psychological strength? And one thing is deciding what to do regardless if you take a rifle bullet, the other is someone you want chaos and its eternal return.
And in the chapter The aristocratic ideal, emphasizes "the true goodness, nobility, greatness of soul that is born of plenty: and after that you can not take - you do not want to glorify the good he does, - as a kind of profligacy true goodness, richness of personality as the first condition. " Yes but at what cost? It is possible for society? And he seems to speak of the spirit as strong as an ideal, but he himself fought idealism. The antimoralismo is not a kind of moral and ideal? I told him it's the same thing: "virtue is a form of immorality." It would not be correct according to the context of Nietzschean philosophy to defend themselves rather than the amorality of immorality? That is, in the sense that it does not take into account the moral and act according to the convenience, selfishness, as he wanted, but not against morality - ie not sticking solely to the pursuit of own goals, but in thwarting the goals of the other moral, and looking to go to this cruel utopia? That is so cruel that degrades its philosophy and its possibility.
But, as if he himself says that "the fight against the big men is justified by economic reasons? Great men are dangerous beings, created by chance, exceptions, and storms, are strong enough to jeopardize what has been founded and built up slowly. Not only unload safely UXO, but still prevent, if possible, the discharge: basic instinct of every civilized society. "" (...) That a species hostilize exceptional rule - instead of realizing that the continuity of the rule is a condition for the value of the exception. "Precisely: how to avoid the appearance of a Hitler with these ideas?
We want it? "The elevation of any kind is dangerous for the conservation of the species. Why? The experience of history shows that the strong races to decimate each other: the wars, the desire for power, the adventures, the strong passions, the waste (do not capitalize on the strengths and intellectual disturbances are formed as a result of an exaggerated stress). Its existence is costly, short, they use against each other. Then come the periods of deep depression and corruption, all the great times to pay ... The strong then become weaker, more uncertain, more absurd than the average of the weak. The strong races are rich. The 'life' itself would have no sort of value, would prefer that the species had a lifetime shorter race, but more rich in values. "It seems better to ensure that society has, and not avacalhar life in raptures as these, but as psychological exercises. If over time the opposites pay between themselves and the price of the injustices of each other (as in Anaximander), so we have a society economically developed inferiorly?
We also want to listen to Nietzsche, with his hammer. Do not listen idols, as he wanted, but icons: we want to hear this hammer their immorality to tell us itself, which limits their nefarious - and we saw in World War II. If someone wants to be lord of the world, we must, first, who knows that world is talking. For example, when Germany tried to be "mistress of the world", trying to dominate all of Europe, did not take into account other countries besides those who sought to dominate. And it was just a country outside Europe, the USA, who beat Germany.
Moreover, amorality with irresponsibility and lack of care and "feel" minimum are similar to immorality. And, attending only to immorally desrazoados immediate interests and the power of wealth, comes - to tyranny - particularly operative in relation to those least able to protect itself from this situation. So the big problem with capitalism is not the formation of profit, but this environment conducive to tyrants.
Let us try to go even "higher" than large idols of immorality or amorality and try to see "top" in its full extent, those monuments of amoral and immoral pursuit of self interest, as Nietzsche and Smith, and try these twilight " idols "! - At least what that's done, do not want and do not accept such immoralism overwhelming. Having capitalism enjoyed the best conditions for your locupletamento - amoral, immoral, irresponsible and tyrannical - it is necessary to reverse this situation so that, even if it amoral, irresponsible behavior is not the economic and social actors - to be certain that immorality, or immoral behaviors of economic and social agents (those with economic and social influence).
Since the beginning of evolution, from the primate, the first necessity of living was, and is, the family, and later, and still today, the needs of living in groups in society and a nation. Currently, the necessity demanded by evolution is the socio-economic integration from the globalization process, driven economically. This is the most difficult process of coexistence / integration, given the need for growing relationship between cultures / nations, and each culture has characteristics contrasting with the other, and the major problem, conflicting.
Stubbornness reluctantly repeated the attempt to impose a stronger race demonstrated by Germany (with millions of deaths) the results of a trait exacerbated, the Spanish pride demonstrates a major problem in this country - and, consequently, in Latin America. Following this search, it is possible to demonstrate the main cultural problems or vices of each country. And all these problems generate difficulties and conflicts in the globalization process, which is mainly cultural. Having been the evolution of society from the family, then by groups, communities, cities, states, fiefdoms, kingdoms, empires, nations, groups of nations, certainly the next step, the tendency will be alien.
These serious problems of intercultural relationships demonstrate the absurdity of the impetus of Nietzsche in attempting to make scorched earth of conquered nations, or used. It can be seen very clearly from the globalization process, the only possibility and feasibility of coexistence of relations not only cultural but also economic, is thinning, approach, always greater understanding between cultures - and the larger differences, the greater the need to promote closer.
Accordingly, over the years always surprises those who wish to have social problems solution. For example this case: young people have become accustomed since childhood with cultural integration facilitated by communications (Internet). For them it is very natural that integration, while for Nietzsche, despite the portentous intelligence, could not see it that way, and a country decimated millions of people not taking this in mind. Fortunately, society has always recreates itself over the ruins.
"The power that men can and will demand of themselves also gives the measure of rights that can arrogate to themselves." Only in his day, because today, that ethics is not then taken into account if one can arrogate rights to the other, the thing is a mess (in fact, is what happens in capitalism predator). And he says that "similar nature are the opposite of licentious and depraved natures: although in certain circumstances carry out acts for which a lesser man would be convinced of debauchery and excess."
Now that this fine line! How many more will have this condition to do so, upon the "razor"? And if in his time the problem was the excessive moralism, as we avoid today that "depraved natures, and licentious" take the flag of their immorality and "committing acts for which a lesser man would be convinced of depravity and self-indulgence"? "The confusion goes so far as to stigmatize literally the great virtuosos of life (sovereign whose pride is in violent opposition to what is depraved and licentious)." "Have you noticed that all the interesting men conspicuous by their absence in the sky?" And how many will act immorally by conviction and not by license?
This confirms the fallacy of social Darwinism is that increasing social complexity is not equal to greater social complexity. Seek the fittest implies the best in any circumstance? The strongest dominates and everything is done in the name of progress or whatever? Of course not. If it were up to seek the fittest would be the case the more fit to live in society, and not as a predator of the company with which he lives - the first case is what is needed. Do not just live in society, as it may seem, we live in society: with complete interdependence between all living in it. There is no life divorced from society (except for hermits and hermits). Strictly speaking, the claim is ridiculous for someone to feel dissociated from their society - an idea disconnected from reality (the toils of psychic inflation).
Were it not for the different uses that have self-indulgent to the theory of Spencer (that even fatalities are steeped in charity), nor would it support the ideological positions of today ultradireitistas. This is the right Enrichment that rushes up and says to profess, is the crucial point, and not least, excruciating, a far-right political positioning.
There, in the real world, ideal world that reported by Socrates, of disinterested truth, divorced from human experience, because every theory is subject to the consequences that trigger, such as by asking yourself: how what I believe will work in the real world? Combinemos beforehand that we should not reach conclusions dull, excruciating. We use to avoid this, the pragmatism of William James, that "the ultimate test of truth is what it means to conduct it dictates or inspires us." So based on this assertion, as you can accept the poor results of capitalism in relation to poverty? These results should not be regarded as non-acceptable (as in Example Nazism), from a practical perspective?
Who has been on a flight landing difficulties - depending on strategies and plans that give right before you run out of gas - you know the importance of trust last when necessary to rely on others - a situation that often occurs in society. This know how much we depend on each other for our survival in modern society, and we know that critical situations in which prevails the need for our maintenance and survival, to be attended to as necessary, other interests may not prevail, no one , for any reason - nor is there at a time so no valid excuse for an error, given the catastrophic results.
Of course, over time, some compensation for workers will become compelling business. But, to cause serious problems for the worker to later be offset a portion of these problems is a systematic unfair, stupid and not very productive - with which the economy "does not pack." Of course malicious employees also negatively influence the situation, creating animosity employee versus employee. But regardless, what matters is the tendency of capitalism, this situation worsens steadily, with increasing global competition. Only if there is broad social awareness may be reduced such problems.
Companies have well-structured complex incentive systems to monitor and promote the functional development of their employees, but most companies and that is unstructured, as can well understand and to treat its employees? Without the minimum structural conditions of their work, even if the worker struggling the most and being professionally prepared, do not achieve your best performance, and will then be subjected to sarcastic situations that can commit to for years - subjected due to the growing inability of the worker to find another option to work.
To compound our problem, it seems that, due to our economic formation feudal (or something) and subsequent resulting culture (aristocratic, elitist, paternalistic), we will always put us prominently, and even above the rest of society. From this biased thinking aristocratic, what matters is to stand out from the society, and even when we can all grow economically or culturally, what matters is to overcome the other, separating only to find prominence - even for that all lost, even those who sponsor this initiative.
In this sense, our day to day life is influenced, in various social relations, chiefly always our desire to overthrow the other, not well inserted in a developed society, evenly, enjoying its bounty, which are superior to tupiniquim of our lives. A truly educated person, well resolved psychologically, culturally developed, and seeks to integrate and adapt to the social group to which it belongs. This, in polite society, it takes a citizen to be seen prominently.
The evolution of capitalism
The story of the last century was marked by disputes capitalism versus communism (or socialism). The Cold War is over, but despite this seemingly beyond ideological dispute at the time, the system of strong social connection (like communism) are still opposed to capitalism, even if only ideologically and not with any empirical model. Communism has only gone to the underground (organization or group that operates outside the establishment against a social system).
Today, capitalism is the paradigm, and did not see signs of change that in the short term, since this represents the developmental paradigm. Around here, there is tendency to acceptance of developmentalism, when looking up "look to the future" and new opportunities for growth or development. Therefore, the rightmost position, which is developmental, it seems to be accepted with relative ease.
But the capitalist system is maintained only by inertia. The routine is maintained capitalist only because the capitalist machine is already "in motion" as a car after taking speed. But there is no way to keep this movement of self-sustaining manner, and are degrading parts of the system, especially the poorest of the population. Lucky that remains, for now, if only by inertia (such as inertia is able to maintain its operation) - remains to be seen even when ... The social cost to be paid in capitalism is too large, and that "social debt" is not being repaid - and the way it goes, it will not be repaid. This is the viability of capitalism.
Man's life has been since the dawn of bloody and constant struggle for survival. For those born under the aegis of capitalism, it looks nice the opportunity to grow freely (personal and economically), and may exercise all instinctual energy in search of a better life - that at least while the individual does not have serious problems in capitalism. In this way, many things seduce and provoke a direct membership of the individual to capitalism, as the total freedom of going and coming and be able to search not only sustenance, but also wealth, according to own imagination, unless it is illegal - and often even be illegal.
While there is any possibility of our survival or maintenance of what they perceive as beneficial (or nice enough to be worth it), will struggle to sobrepujação constant, the obstacles to survival or the maintenance, whatever the obstacles. As a part of society has to capitalism itself as something pleasant and viable in some way, especially from those who have more power and those who have more influence on society and the government will continue fighting with all forces for the maintenance of capitalism . But this perception of capitalism as something nice is fading, compared to so many bad news coming out day-to-day.
Freud told us that "at first we were tempted to seek the benefits of civilization and the wealth available for distribution in the regulations. However, with the recognition that civilization rests on a compulsion to work and a renunciation of instinct, causing, therefore, inevitably, the opposition of those affected by these requirements, it became clear that civilization can not consist mainly or solely in own wealth, the means of acquiring it and the provisions for its distribution, since these things are threatened by destructive rebellion and the mania of the participants of civilization. Along with the wealth we are faced now with the means by which civilization can be defended, and other enforcement measures, which aim to reconcile men with it and reward them for their sacrifices. The latter can be described as the mental benefits of civilization. "But we also see the effects and behavior based solely on the pursuit of wealth, during life, in some cases of retirees who are no longer able to find meaning in their lives.
But Nietzsche told us, and Hitler, the executioner of his thought, gave us an example that facts that do not want us in a direction opposite reaction, we grow culturally and spiritually. Obviously, changing how we live, and live in society is no more than describe a path of evolution, as well as history shows, we need not return the ills of the past, as the war approached by Hitler, seeking to learn from this kind of fact. Just sustain us in the current reality in every moment, so clearly we have the prospect of what should be the course of our social evolution.
This life we live is not an end in itself, is a necessity in itself: the need for constant and endless evolution. We can not ignore or neglect the constant effort needed to change the facts in an evolutionary sense components of reality in every moment. I mean, the reality is just a stage for the continued evolution of an experience ever better adapted to the environment, according to constant discoveries about the environment and the man with the purpose of better adaptation. That to get the possibility to opt for a new reality - a fully evolved society, according to the highest inspirations psychologically and spiritually.
What we need is constantly being arranging the component parts of our life so that all of our lives and our society to function more "azeitadamente" - more in line with our need for a life less abrupt, with a more idealizing ( course, never reaching the ideal - which is only a projection of our perspective of ideological positioning and social).
The mind can jump far beyond your reality, the situation of the individual thinking, but nothing beyond that glimpse may steer us - not profoundly change our society (as we desire). Even to this orientation, we must be firmly embedded in our reality, in our socioeconomic dynamic process, to feel the real strength of society, and that our proposition of evolution is a direct result of the forces of social facts.
Society is like a structure in constant training, and support you need to go part by part, chaining them (so that the whole is not desestruture). And every part of this structure that does not want to be more, encadeadamente, undocked and discarded, and not simply pulled out, denied, excluded. Of course there may be simplified to shorten this evolutionary path, but these simplifications should also be a natural result of social evolution, the company should be able to understand these developments and simplifications "accelerated" - but without claiming miracles. We can not present today only conceivable solutions (of course, not idealizantemente) by a company here for many years.
As can be seen (and we have seen) the efforts of the utopia of an instantaneous change, as in the example of when it intends to abolish the consumption of meat at the same instant, from such a decision (decision and want to take some it is true of all). This example is symptomatic: now, if everyone stopped eating meat, what would we do with the animals in creation? Soltaríamos? They would die, most also infested with parasites and starvation. Or pretenderíamos continue feeding them? How? Without that the costs were covered by the sale of meat? With the privilege of the fairy godmother? And the families of farmers, also die of hunger? Cows die and people? Since these animals would die the same, it would be better utilized and which promotes the reduction and gradual replacement of meat consumption and the creation and dissemination of alternative dishes? We can see numerous examples where we need to evolve, and not break with the past.
But, of course, young people, we want everything "for yesterday." Gradual evolution? No way, "we're too good" to endure such a world, which needs a painful evolution in the midst of so many ills. Unfortunately (for our claim that idealist), that is what we need. Fortunately, as a result, what we have is a rate and continued economic growth and cultural practice, not idealizing the theory - we therefore support a practice of life that we perceive as being theoretically the best. And do not think that just take up the necessary improvements for centuries - not because growth is geometric, not linear.
Only that there, the rest is conjecture. And there are many conjectures ... radical left and the right to be told. How many deaths and tragedies have been and there for the defense of idealizations. When major "developments" (or revolutions), and it seems that a country has found the solution to all problems, discover later that things were not that easy (as in Cuba, and the delay of the production system, or as in the U.S. , and the perception that everything is just a matter productive), and that many steps to structure the company no longer made (and await the day of his execution, causing social catastrophes, meanwhile).
And what greater problem (practical) and is far from being solved under capitalism? It is the capital gun possessor, automatically, often irresistible power over those who do not possess; and capital affects even those who have it, a "conversation capital to capital," and their interests. Therefore, it is the distance between the social interests and the interests of capital (which are autonomous, and that associate the unscrupulous, because capitalism creates its own paths, according to particular interests, when morally legitimate and even when not) .
Of course we can not pretend that nothing in capitalism produces social interest. But will we have to review all the possibilities of an extreme capitalism (like the "drag their feet," and destroying everything tripping), and pay the price of wear with the suffering of the population, only to later come to the conclusion - that as we could and should be known a priori - that there are situations in which we must not pass? We need references and values, along with any attempt to explain social or test. But to say that only after they are explained and proved harmful for all manipulations coarse capitalists, only then we can all, to refute such hardships?
In pursuit of finding ways of enabling ethical and moral capitalism, many individual battles (domestic, individual) and between individuals caught up - trying to understand how we can move forward economically, in capitalism, without exploiting others. Therefore, it is necessary to prove the viability of ethical life, morally legitimate and logical within capitalism. Therefore, it is necessary to review all of the major mechanisms of capitalism.
But this has been very uphill task, even for someone who is qualified in the economic and familiar with the issues of poverty versus capitalism - for better and more intended to be dedicated and adamant on the subject (stubborn). For generations, there has been a good result in the attempt to find out how you can enable the capitalist activity without seriíssimos cases of social exclusion and exploitation of the worker. The main problem is the case of unskilled workers and those who work or get disqualified.
Capitalism may be the system that we as social-economic model? Can capitalism be a perfect system, just? Or we are constantly evolving, as Darwin? No, this ideal social model does not exist. In the words of Rousseau: "If Sparta and Rome perished, what State can hope to last forever? If we want to form lasting establishment, do not take care of the eternal. To set, fails to attempt the impossible, nor have the bragging of giving things a human strength that are incapable. "
Or, in popular parlance as well: the great enemy of the good. The great for our country is not good, but reasonable for everyone. The last attempted Constitution, demagogically, many great things, and few of these have been implemented: universal health care for all, minimum wage for all basic needs ... blah, blah, blah, blah blah blah and stayed. If we get a reasonable life (at least, of course) for all the rest can cuddle. The lack of social cancer "good" society as a whole, and the formation of mass consumer market, in all communities through consumption pattern at least reasonable, drives the entire economy, for the production of wealth can increase even over the standard of living for all, toward the optimum. But before we need to get to the good, as all civilized countries have. But ... We always provide the optimum, so instantly, magically, as the great nation deserves ... blablablablá ... politicozinhos these ... and woe to those who speak against! ...
Problems aside, we should not underestimate the role of creativity in capitalism. The freedom that allows the generation of numerous problems in capitalism is that it allows for creativity that constantly shows the improvement of the individual and social - key example is the service sector, introducing new products every day. How can communism offer something minimally satisfactory in comparison? What is the penalty for decades communism, capitalism is routinely produced. Capitalism's problems can be minimized with the performance of the judiciary, regulatory agencies and consumer protection agencies. Capitalism faced man to man, should we ever redeem himself against himself, though not in capitalism. The best would not "shirk that fight", but if we are able to survive it is the question.
We have encountered an impossibility, if not inherent to the capitalist system is what has been observed in practice - in which there is not much difference in results. This situation may determine the inability of the continuity of capitalism as it operates today. One of the problems of capitalism (and, secondly, it also brings benefits) it is everything is based on the arbitrage free price system market, whatever is considered of some value - the monetary consideration of all economic and social activity .
But the contrariu sense, in principle, social systems are not divided into good and evil, nor the current policy, as it seems to many. Perhaps in the past it was easier this Manichean distinction. As a rule, social systems and seek to direct the economy, can not solve all social problems because it is not easy, and these problems are part of the discussions of current policy (as opposed to idealizing assumptions).
The problem of attempts to establish social systems has been that, when trying to devise something to the end, run up against the risk, which confirms the rule, to come to inherent problems and abuses, as in Nazism and Stalinism , and occurs in capitalism. In this case, how can you ensure that no sabotage a crazy extreme social system, which has no significant means of social redemption, but only seeks wantonly some "values" or property?
When it comes to searching for a social system from a perspective idealizing capitalism, a priori, is unfeasible because when tending to their limits, reaches inherent problems, such as exacerbated liberalism which provides actions detrimental to society and the capitalism. Ultimately, communism is also impossible, with its inherent problems - failing to show results as productive of capitalism, mainly.
That is, neither system is bound to overcome through to the other - is a stupid race. Capitalism strives to show up the criticism of seeking a system socially appropriate, and always seems to be stalked by this charge. The Communists strive to provide productive solutions that may never succeed. Capitalism only endures, but no one could establish, definitively, which system is best, only a preference for one or the other.
And why one of the two should be established as an ideal? Well, maybe we should not just follow ("puristicamente") one or another social system. Already see signs that the national and international capitalism, more and more incorporating their social policies bailout programs - that would be socialist flag defense. Perhaps the best thing is to seek the maximum position themselves between a system and another, between capitalism and communism - and not even look to an extreme of this line of ideological polarization, or the other.
Thus, it can be established: not capitalism, because he did not pay the debts that it proposed to pay, nor communism, because he could not be productive as proposed - despite its great and rational planning. Is that also in this case what we would not be something just as the average of Aristotle, among the social systems? It might be supposed, from the pursuit of fair average position: neither pure capitalism, and his liberalism (in which, starting from false premises, or permissive, everything is permitted), nor communism, with the rigor of planning (where everything should be consulted prior to the State to be done - and almost nothing is allowed).
The combination (fusion) of current policies communists and capitalists seem to be impossible. So, maybe you should seek the asymptotic approximation (tendency to approach indefinitely but there is never a merger and the meeting point) of social work and capitalist. It may would get a perpendicular line (which cuts or through) to the polarization axis ideological.
In this sense, the actions (social and capitalists) would be parallel (far more than today). Compete with one another on approach to the average social actions or as a function of capital. All this, as there was a balance of the social and capital. How? Impossible? Maybe not, just does not know how, what not to say impossible.
The state has no business structure or resources to promote this debacle. The companies have no direction in their social actions (in business and industrial processes), as in the case of research into new processes and products, only turned to profit. But it's silly of contrary interests of the state versus company (or capital); contrast in which we are losing.
Our governments have increasingly arrochado companies with increasingly crippling taxes and have failed to provide returns that society needs. These are companies that generate new wealth, so the state is much interested in the development of companies in the country (as long as capitalism endures). The problem is in the direction given to the wealth monopolized by the capitalists and companies. In this sense, does not just find something that we need to harmonize these interests, the State seeks to "ideal" we want?
Just as a practical example: the future (and already present) the development of a country is based on technology. This comes from the study. The state could promote research in areas of social concern and provide the result in bids for Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) for economic exploitation of the findings. Of course the whole idea should be tested by common experience, for all introspective intuition is as fallible as the external sense. But PPPs are already starting (also in other countries), and could leverage the process of technological and economic development, but mainly social. With PPPs, the companies may have reduced spending on research and risk in their investments (with the approval of the State or partnership in research and projects) and also earn advertising as socially responsible companies (as already begun to invest).
For businesses, would be impractical to rally to the state, which has a structure, legitimacy and thinkers centers for the present and the future, with economic and administrative knowledge and philosophical-sociological, among others - into centers of excellence in research and especially in research centers of universities, interdisciplinary viable. The companies are experts in entrepreneurship, efficiency, technology.
Could the companies even have to work with lower rates of return on investment (less profit and lower prices), since these projects would reduce the risk due to the reverence of the State to the project (the profit required to grow or decreases along with the risk inherent in an enterprise). Besides that, for some entrepreneurs, and in the tradition of some companies and their strategic planning, would be attractive to work with projects of social interest, as this would be well regarded by its customers and may enhance the actions of these companies and encourage employees and productivity.
For the state, the advantage of public-private partnerships would be the viability of projects for which lacks resources and capacity for directing the business activities and research. You may also want governments to stop playing entrepreneurs, as in the state, which always have the sink waste. It would be nice, too, governments stop just thinking about sugar companies, which are not enemies of the state (as they are being treated in highly taxed nations), but should be viewed as partners.
The direction of these partnerships in the interest of the State could be a great result for the improvement of working conditions and life for the poor. Several criteria of State interest are likely to be used on these surveys and entrepreneurship: practice areas, geographic regions, sectors of business activity, level of technological development, local production arrangements, the nationality of the company, among many other possibilities.
Suffice it to expand the state already does - the study in areas of social concern. To do so, would not have virtually nothing to increase their spending on research, since these are already made regularly at universities. Often, these studies have been used freely by private companies, virtually no direct return to the state. Could the state also have greater control of the internal dynamics of firms by facilitating, for example, the collection of taxes. This greater control is not an absurdity, as already happens in processes well developed tax incentives.
The state could even offer tax incentives for research and development areas of social concern. This would provide the state a major systemic role in the economy and greatest possible contribution to the future development of the country - but without empresariar, ever. Certainly not the abuses on both sides that often occur in alleged public-private partnerships out there. Of course there would be problems to solve in this process as any other, which does not mean that you can not come up with solutions and a better outcome for society than the current situation.
Another option could be the Government's participation in the financial results of companies in exchange for incentives and facilitations for deployment from companies and partnerships for research. The state could take part in the actions of companies, to obtain the financial results for the integrated development with their companies, participating in the outcome that helps to produce their incentives with the deployment and expansion of companies, without usurping the only companies with some demeaning taxes.
There are endless possibilities for rapprochement between the two extremes (in the interests of capital and social interest), regardless of partnership working, trying to understand life in a space of possibility of occurrence, not just one, not only at the other extreme, but as a dynamic world that is now being placed in a certain way, sometimes another (far right policies at a time, and another to the left).
What matters is always the total availability to seek the best for everyone. For this, great generosity and understanding of natural life are required, without dogmas. Of course, a state that is a paradigm will be arranged against other states. Thus, "all" states will be forced to insert in such a PPP model, and there will be new disputes between countries, as under capitalism. With that not everything would be solved, but it could be the beginning of an important partnership that would show many synergies national dormant.
The talk of cooperation, partnership, it may seem "common place" conversation "hit" obviousness. However, the latest findings, the "plight" rational as well as the most advanced modern physics, the perfection in business administration, has shown himself increasingly "at the end of the day" the grotesque partial views, when the impression simpler, as something obvious.
And why do so is not it? Oh, by the taboo, the paradigm of individualism and blind struggle for power. For the dispute between the companies and risk aversion among social systems - between sincere and concerned (and alleged) communists and capitalists unconcerned. What is missing? Openness to new ideas, new times, new perceptions, it was compromised in the past by disputes individualistic and accept everything that can contribute to society, not just looking for what fits the current paradigm. Lack absolute humility to learn how to learn. Learning to be available independently of the new open chest; whatever. Yes, it is very difficult. But this pain again, the change already impinges on.
Maintaining the viability of society, increasingly, seems expensive, demonstrating the growing need for social protection mechanisms and precaution to avoid problems. Thus, this weight increases exponentially search engine viability of capitalism without seriíssimos problems in relation to the population more fragile.
Sometimes contradictions faced only in the end are discarded. And it seems that the more important is an issue to be resolved, or a referral of a matter in our lives or society, the greater the need to disregard the old tendency to leave until it permanently. The society organizes itself in response to negative events earlier. The ills and problems occurring in a system so much come to an extreme limit the more you need to make sure that no more will want to incur in this direction and its attendant problems. To actually see something valuable, that something must be being lost. That is, for it becomes a collaborative society, it is necessary to feel responsible (and permanently) the problems and pains otherwise (ecce homo: this is the man).
Even the most dedicated remote power and consideration, if at the end of much wear, an individual can not envision a model with mechanisms that prevent exacerbated social pressure - that makes possible, with minimal dignity, the life of parts (not small) population - then such a person feels exhausted and defeated his forces in this mission society's most important right now.
But then, with both individual and collective effort can not understand how capitalism can work without the system inherently strong form is suffering in part of the population? So, is there such a possibility? From this perspective, it seems not. If this loss is always, perhaps because there is not a viable solution - which is one of the hypotheses logically possible. It may be legitimate (especially in the case of someone very well intentioned and dedicated) to report, not a conclusion, but a personal experience, a sense (a fact?) As follows.
A mental model must take into account boundary of likelihood of socioeconomic events in capitalism and the pressure of events in this system (and the consequences of these events and this pressure). You also need to take into account the energy required for maintenance of these events and that system. Thus, there is a model that can plan and monitor everything, always, in a system with indeterminate (or infinite) parties (individuals and organizations) and options of facts (economic and social) and the endless possibilities of inter-relationships between parts of that system.
Since you can not follow a planning and economic - social complete, would require the reading of the factual situation of each cell resulting from the social group and social process - with the unimaginable ability to see how each contributes and enjoys the social system and what difficulties and facilities which present themselves. All of this to make adjustments, corrections and compensations individual and group needed for a better functioning of the system - the total individuation.
But there is always how to measure, all the time, the participation of all economic activity in the outcome of a country, so that each one has its share based on this measure. There is a perception of the inability of the whole. The system no longer reaches the small social cell. It's like a cannon shot to hit a fly. As everyone who is not perceived by the system (which only sees the sum of these economic and financial issues: the "large numbers", or the majority), there is a system that provides the model an accurate assessment of what is empirically. A person (the bad example, the "rotten potato") may, with their bad influence, disrupt the behavior of the people with whom they live, and hardly able to reverse the situation, despite some illusions in this regard. For social regulation have the government, but that's just because he can not reverse all the socioeconomic problems of capitalism.
However, our life and there is empirical individuation - each has their perception of reality and acts accordingly. But the result is not accepted by the social system as a valid result, excluding some that do not fit the model of participation in the socioeconomic system. We should not say that unemployment is due to lack of qualification, since in the scheme, if something is good for an individual, that does not mean it's good for society. If a worker to qualify, will be easier to get a skilled job, but if they all qualify, there will be enough jobs for all qualified (because the modern capitalist system is sparing hand labor), or by wages decrescerão increase in supply.
In capitalism, the main measure is the conversion of currency value, and everything should be transformed into monetary value, paid by salary or income. We live in a theoretical model (capitalism) in which everything is represented by cash and almost only possession of it all depend. What can not be converted into monetary value has no value measurement capitalist. Even if one can follow everything that happens in one economy (something like a big boss or a supercomputer or a superplanificação), based on some criterion or measure of participation of each citizen, would be very bureaucratic - a cumbersome and sorry, costly, inefficient, annoying, truncated, retaliatory, not positive, all-the-bad.
On the contrary, a positive attitude, encouraging those involved, it is usually cheaper, easier, lighter, provides more immediate responsiveness to the facts and better readjustment just in time, so do not lose unresolved issues. Instead of us to stick too much with the negative side (with controls, penalties) is more profitable and more interesting for everyone to constantly promote the compliance of all. Of course, not discussed here, and not meant to help everyone at all costs, because there would be conditions (materials, personnel) for this, but to give a person another chance to rise again, and always choose to for something positive before a negative.
We realized that the economic strength, the structure of a production process is essential, but it is only a first step, a start-up, and that from the simplest process already has the need, increasingly, of engendering consistent with the increasing complexity. But, instead, see the community move forward, would not be until a good hobby? Not pretenderemos it to what we have out there? In the case of civilization, are difficult to definitive answers, but in this case, we can definitively answer to all this so, no utopia.
And now we see clearly, why would not want modernity, increasingly? But, not as an end in itself, the grieving, and tormenting desilusora reiteration of the day-to-day, pronunciadora harshness! If the force does not bond to stratagem, it is destructive. What good gain in wisdom and in luxury, but in comfort, freedom, art, spirit and joy?
And this in turn will also improve our lives. There will be a joy to help sponsor, with the part that is possible in a community even better, happier, and that the day-to-day events elapse with fluids (to much difference in relation to traumatic events experienced) ? We must rid ourselves of the daily terrors and just looming up daily for all new achievements, fleeing the guilt and feeling the light? But why then does not happen?
Our life is (is included in the model) capitalist. So we have our world as a capitalist, that is for us so that we see not only our production system as such. It is the only world for us all in our lives. So imagine the end of capitalism looks like the end of our lives - how we perceive it. But, before we (members) capitalists, we are human beings who are born and grow up dreaming of a good world, a good life. Now this has nothing to do with capitalism, this is only a way of organizing economic and social. We can search our dreams without us feel dependent capitalism - of course this does not mean we abandon everything we have nothing concrete to replace what we have.
Our dream is to live well and entertain us? For this, we need health, nutrition and rational social organization (including modes of production of goods). That is, if we change our mode of production, we continue with our same dreams, which may continue to be made - unless we can not a social organization efficient and productive. The rest remains the same in any system efficient. The final test of the social model should be the observation of how things happen in practice on a day-to-day, the end result, what is the result of the system for each individual, on average - the lowest possible expulsion from this average.
If it was not necessary to determine the facts of reality, then there would be only a theoretical model, unopened, to explain everything, without chance of error, without empiricism, without the possibility of random events (as would be that the Demiurge of Plato) - a model to explain everything, as an end in itself. But no, that is life itself. Thus, from the empirical observation at all times you can work towards improving the situation of individual members of the system, and not continue to strive more and more to fit the model. It is capitalism that must adjust - to solve the problems occurring in the economy (inherent or otherwise) on the day to day, and seek to provide mechanisms for those unsuccessful rescue system. There is the poor who should become capitalists, anyway - because, if the system does not offer this condition the whole society, it is impossible.
This does not mean total distribution of wealth, but minimal, at least. This is not help indefinitely, but "help fish", and it takes reciprocity of employees. If still an employee does not return the proper treatment with their dedication to work, it must be replaced and not treat badly and squeeze the salaries of all, "preventively", thinking I deserve to be treated well or not worth the sorry. This question is crucial - endless differences occur in society is normal behavior from employers, it becomes so. Maybe even not even think in ending capitalism, but if you want always more that way.
For workers, it is also necessary to analyze the situation using a pragmatic approach: it is not difficult for an employer (honest, responsible) to know when an employee is serious and deserves good treatment. But sometimes, even often, we see that much (yes), a businessman, the head of a maid and many other employers, even if well intentioned, sincerely think that they can not "reward" employees ( workers) with good wages due to not being qualified. This, even though over the years of work, demonstrate the ability, fidelity and promptness of its employees. Think it would be a preposterous reward them with good salaries, and educational impact would be even, since they think they should reward those who have more qualifications, such as a form of incentive.
However, these workers do not remain such a scorching work because they are disqualified. On the contrary, are disqualified because only remain working (low wages), and had no financial conditions (mainly), the structuring of life and time available to do so. They sacrifice a lot to help keep the capitalist machine, almost unable to maintain themselves, let alone something superfluous, or a nice vacation. And no matter whether it was discussing the chicken or the egg first, the situation must be resolved.
Looking at the issue more broadly, how they behave employee groups, and not a case, it is clear that the situation is reversed: they ended up disqualified, mostly because the routine of work and the income they had throughout life (not counting the support of a privileged family socioeconomic), failed to study and vocational courses. That did not work with more determination because they could not feed themselves and to have energy. Or, again, for cultural reasons, or because they are persons afflicted by family problems and social - that are embedded in the reality of their poor communities, dysfunctional social and familiarly.
Yes, there are relapses, but we must not think in terms of these, which are not the majority. Most workers are well-intentioned, and work "hard" over the years to provide for their families. How can a parent with earnings provide a bastard child to get out of this lamentable situation of your family? They are demeaning wages that keep the situation unfortunate. For all the hardships they went in life, and continue to pass the day-to - day, deserve, yes, to be awarded with reasonable salaries, employer's gratitude for the faithfulness, nobility.
If the workers in the vast majority do not have good financial conditions and the wealthy have, is because its power of appropriation of wealth is smaller (and not just because his willpower is lower). Who is potentially depressed, without culture, without economic power and social, has become quite so humiliating in front of an employer, can not "face the world head" to demand their share. By using the power, vis-à-vis those who do not have, employers may be taking ownership of rights that would be the worker. There can be such a power struggle with the worker, as is standard between the companies. Employees are not of the opposite team. If you are, because they were poorly promoted.
That is, for the ability to attract wealth, in what is preached that we were taking into account the qualification, is also a function of socioeconomic position privileged. Can not say that the conditions are the same for everyone. At one extreme more competitive labor market, qualifications accepted are given just under the conditions of those who enjoys the blessings (resources and structure) of the privileged classes.
If it is raining in the wet, and everyone knows it, is declared the situation of social injustice, based on economic and social power - what is referred to, but "looked sideways", as one looks at the despicable beings. Thus, what matters is to assume the debt to the capitalist with the poorest and working. And there in a hurry to rescue this situation (social debt) to the social minimum balance and the non-formation and maintenance of social cancers - in health and family structure - and to avoid further loss of cultural references, social, moral, and the would be best for everyone. Is no longer being unable to attend to workers' satisfaction, when it is required to attend only very minimal maintenance of his life and his, at any price or cost.
The categories of employees who "work hard" can not be debased due to the formation of high profit margins, which may not be required a priori, before knowing that situations will the company throughout the year. You must pay wages at least reasonable, not as a way to share profits, but for the sake of justice, honesty to those who contribute to maintaining the capitalist (and also be an incentive). Profits can only be formed after the company comply with all obligations (including environmental), especially with their workers and workers in general, non-degrading paying wages. If a company fails to pay good wages, while earning their high profit is intended in this case because it is impractical. So, as a rule, there must be approximated in a mean, where wages are not crippling and profits are not tempted as much as possible just based on wage squeeze.
Whether with that profit margins are small, in fact, in this case, they would not be small due to the cost of wages. What actually happens is that the rates of profit in this case have never been higher, according to the financial situation of the company, but only if they would obtain higher profits through wage squeeze. Now, that is capitalist exploitation; quite different from case to have good or reasonable profits by paying wages - or precisely because of this incentive.
Workers can not be defiled by someone who monopolized power socioeconomic somehow shady or not. Although not a case of shady grounds, and has progressed through hard work, the fact is that an entrepreneur monopolize, or aggregates, economic and social power. You can not determine demeaning "wages-to-market", which in this case are determined according to free market forces. However, if entrepreneurs possess these free forces with his great power, its forces will have more weight in the wage determination more convenient to them - even though, strictly speaking, workers deserve better wages. Who will defend them? With that de facto power, since the strikes became intolerable, with the dwindling supply of jobs and the rise of "industrial reserve army"?
Certainly the determination of a balance between two unequal (capitalist versus worker) is any point which most favors the strongest. Excessive population growth of the poorest acts very strongly, overwhelmingly in favor of the power of the capitalist, who always has labor supply of unskilled labor left to be able to exercise their power. For all these reasons, there are many problems disqualification of workers (who form the reserve army of labor). They receive low wages because they have no value, but because, over time, are becoming relegated for failing to counter the power of capital and remain professionally valued.
There is no way a troop of helpless rise up and confront the system and overwhelm it, insert it if (as seems to always want from exceptions) - as it would seek, saying that it just does not happen the weakness and unwillingness of the poor. But they are weak compared to the system is that a model is not good enough to reality, they are not weak by nature (usually), except that the system look weaker. Therefore, it is very important for entrepreneurs who seek to act with social responsibility to take account of this approach in time to pay wages, and not just investigating whether there are in the labor market, someone willing to work at any price. The entrepreneur need not feel robbed or losing money by not paying the lowest wages "market", a business that encourages its employees should feel encouraged other entrepreneurs to do the same, over time.
Nor can relegate some (and therefore most probably all their descendants) eternal to disaster. By what measure is apuraria fair share of each one, in view of the difficulties we face in terms of socioeconomic conditions inherent in the system? This measure would be accurate, so you are sure that some people should be condemned to relegation? This would not be profitable to anyone (and it was already possible at all, see that it is not). Only a few (capitalists and workers with high salaries) this situation seems attractive, but only briefly, because it will fail, as fail in our country, and enjoy the financial benefits obtained. Let us use the pragmatism of William James to determine, at once, we do not accept poor results, as we have seen in our capitalism.
As in a game in a professional sport (which is no joke, not because it involves very high figures and millions of viewers) at the end of a cycle of games only to see the result of "collisions", whether positive or negative (or neutral). Each new encounter has its outcome, and scores above only serve to break ties, and, each year, new season. You can not accumulate indefinitely previous results (as in football) Also in life, also in economics.
Almost everyone, including the capitalists have the feeling that something is wrong and needs to be changed in our system (capitalist). Some devote their lives to this struggle. But under capitalism, feeling is not convertible into financial data. You need change or adaptation of the model so that each part is taken as part of the model. We can not continue as the "drag their feet" and go to the last consequences, and only when social problems become seriíssima case of violence is think of some solution (palliative).
In life, sometimes we need forgiveness and also forgive. To forgive, we must try to forget what went negative. This is only possible to sponsor this fact (forget) because we need to forgive to be proactive (acting from our initiative). Even for cultural rapprochement of the poorest to the richest is necessary proactive attitude of the most endowed, it is necessary to "work" to break down cultural barriers and not wait for the underprivileged socioeconomic alone to evolve, only then, they deserve respect. Thus the economy, which is tied to our life, it is necessary to stop to consider why some are unsuccessful in life and seek to help them improve their situation and promote their reintegration into the mass consumer market.
Of course, the citizen-to-pay account and by malicious, but this is not new, and always occurs in society. As hard as it may seem unfair, or, who knows well the company knows that well-intentioned end up paying for malicious; that goes into a club, a school, a condominium, etc.. When associated with delinquent tenants or do not comply with its obligations, the defaulting end up having to cover the losses of the association. This is part of human nature. But over time, those just looking to indulge themselves end up being perceived and ignored, despised - is hurting. Inevitably, the result is great misfortunes in life, just follow the path of life examples of "smart".
However - and sound paradoxical - great sacrifices are for capital accumulation. The accumulation to maintain levels of productive investment, generating jobs, income and foreign exchange, or to maintain research is essential for the maintenance and development of production in capitalism. It is essential that any system that sacrifices we make for the accumulation of resources, even in the communist regime, where large investments are also needed, irrespective that are publicly owned or that there is the objective of generating profits - the fact is the need to build .
The production is not something invented just to generate profits, as leftists can imagine and want. It just exists (yes) because there are increasing needs to be addressed by society. If, in addition, is capitalist exploitation, this need not cease to exist, a priori. And meet modern needs has become extremely complex, and requires heavy investment, the development of sophisticated diagnostic equipment and treatment of diseases in food production technologies in power generation, communications, among many examples that require billions dollars in investments.
These heavy investments are needed for production on large scales, as well there are large cost reductions of scale and scope to meet the ever increasing consumer markets - it is not just a form of exploitation. Major advances in medicine and food production on a large scale were thus achieved. Of course for the very poor should be sure that nothing is doing, and capital accumulation (and this is reality and the consequent perception that must be changed).
However, if a company channeling great resources for years for new investments, the company also needs one day to reward their employees strongly by sacrifice, we can not pretend to maintain a situation of strong wage restraint for decades, as seen below. The results are nonsense, if not inherent, are normal in capitalism (which in practice does not make much difference), as there is great misery.
One can say that accumulation is the opposite of maintaining lifestyles exacerbated, which must be avoided for one to accumulate capital. And great efforts are made by many entrepreneurs to avoid gastanças exacerbated their resources and save part of their income. Moreover, these entrepreneurs do not spend all that a company generates a surplus, are surely the most, because they promote gastanças preposterous, over time, go bankrupt, most certainly. Their companies, the vast majority can not follow the technological development and maintain levels of investment to meet growing needs in order to meet ever more demanding customers - all mainly due to globalization and mergers.
The capitalist rage, his crusade, was not at all preposterous. The profit motive has been a very productive for the formation of economic structure (apart from occurring nonsense), forcing (largely) the balance for savings / investment over consumption. Therefore, one can not simply distribute all the wealth already accumulated. Must be a productive activity that permanently hold not only people, as well intended, but also maintain, increase and improve the production system itself (which is a daunting task, faced before the harsh global competition).
Or the reverse: to maintain not only mainly the production system, as it is today, but also society. To do this, to spend the minimum for capital maintenance and technological development and production. At the same time, it is not possible to also spend the most to society, but the reasonable and necessary for its maintenance, as it evolves its production system, technology and infrastructure, with the necessary investment.
"The real world is much smaller than the world of imagination" (Nietzsche), and is also much more complex, the world of imagination, and much larger than the real world is imagined as much simpler than the real. "It's understandable that people have access only to the effects, which refer to as reality or truth, when everything is appearance, interpretation of the forces with respect, because all creation is subject to interpretation and there is no interpreter, but relations 'phatos', these impulse-forces. Only man, in his 'little reason', is wrong to think themselves more important and subject, and does not realize his own thinking as the effect of relationships made here. And as this illusion, walks and lives and, because it deceives, lives with a sense that he built, and from him, built all others, including religion and meaning in their existence "(Mauro de Souza Araújo .)
If we are away from it (inside), we arrive at the psychoanalysis of Freud and Lacan: "The self is, then, has always been the seat of resistance to the drive [which is a constant force, and what has changed in man the instinct , which was cyclical] and the desire and the illusion of wholeness that it sets will be from there in constant confrontation with the bias of the drive. Therein lies the alienation founder of the self, that to be, draws a picture that, at bottom, is not himself but another, 'the self is an other', Lacan formulated in line with the poet Arthur Rimbaud. "So we need to" include the body as a bearer of history of the species - phylogenetic and body, so pre-historic "(Marco Antonio Jorge Coutinho).
And Jorge Coutinho continues, in Fundamentals of psychoanalysis from Freud to Lacan: "Considering the self as the seat of 'chronic lack' of the subject's desire, Lacan endeavored from the beginning of his seminar [in which he taught his psychoanalysis] to establish the distinction between self and subject, which, failing to be made, led psychoanalysis to be confused with a gradually ego psychology. This distinction was only possible through another distinction, that between the imaginary and the symbolic: if I [designed by us, imagined] is of the order and direction of the imaginary, the guy [who we really are] is among the significant advantage of the symbolic. That is to say that the unit obtained [imagined] in I is not never on the level of the subject [of reality], because this is always divided, contentious, impossible to identify an absolute way. "The core of this system (RSI, for Lacan) is the real (R), from which the subject, divided between the symbolic (S) and imaginary (I) against the real, never getting to know the thing itself. "The order of the imaginary is constituted to deal with the clutter of the real world." So that when we do not deny our reality, "it is what it is" (Nietzsche). (But this is not our topic.)
Thus, our unconscious is something like independent of our conscious will, and often contradict themselves. "Am I other? Stranger to myself? Run away from myself? A fighter who often beat yourself? Which often rose up against their own strength, wounded and arrested by own victory? "(Nietzsche).
As Marcia Tiburi, we always reflect on the basis of the other: "Thinking with the other seems to track this long-range vision. The other is the one who leads me to think my place to deny, to doubt what I am, to put me above myself. What he manages to just be himself, to reflect my ignorance or my knowledge, being on the other side showing me what I am, what I do not know, who am I to not be him, I am nothing without him . "
For Searle, "(...) many people find disgusting that we, with our language, our conscience and our creative powers, be subordinate and dependent on a material world dumb, stupid, inert. Why should we depend on the world? Why not think the "real world" as something we create, and something that depends on us? If all reality is a "social construction", then we who are in power, not the world. The deeper motivation for the denial of realism is not this or that argument, but a will to power, a desire for control and a deep and lasting resentment. This resentment has a long history, and increased in the late twentieth century due to a lot of resentment and hatred towards the natural sciences. Science, with its prestige, its apparent progress, his power, his money and his enormous capacity to do evil, became the target of hatred and resentment. (...) Having said that science does not give us objective knowledge of reality, the next step is to say that there is no such reality. There are only social constructions "(Searle). To Marcia Tiburi, "the thought is only power, in a good way of life born of them, if marriage is between those who think."
But if "change itself has no meaning except in relation to eternity of intelligible forms which is the image" (Socrates) and is capable of intelligible forms perenizarem is depends the very possibility of existence of mankind, if there is such expertise, many models scientifically brilliant and highly capable professionals if there are people very concerned about the path we tread; if humanity has struggled, "twisted" in search of a better world, why has not there like a Demiurge ( Socrates) that, based on the paradigm of the eternal "intelligible forms" (from causes immutable and closed models, finished, perfect), showing a world that should be the ideal?
The engineering and their perfect shapes, physics and the projection of the world since its inception, mathematics and its exact results, statistics and its inferences, all brighten with the plasticity and perfect beauty of form and designed with the precision of the results. But where is such perfection when it comes to social and economic relations? Whence and how it forms both socioeconomic imbalance?
However, in matters economic and social things are not perfectly plastic, as in the exact sciences, because it is in society, beyond just labor relations or economic, there are great "psychological forces" and sociological constraints. But is only in the sciences can develop models that work well, and social relations are bound to get lost in the obscurity inherent subjectivity and the socio-economic relations?
Maybe not, but for a social organization that works well, can not refer only to data (exact). It is not possible to predict the exact results expected in society, there are only limits possibilities for actions of people, one should refer to psychological variables and sociological possibilities.
If we philosophize in earnest, as he said Philolaus of Croton, there is no possibility of error in the nature of which is limited (as the hard sciences - since by definition), but only in the nature of which is unlimited, as the human mind, is there may be error, folly, irrationality, the unusual, the random, falsehood (but "the end of the day", with no need to worry, because everything comes back to that).
For what is limited, everything resolves itself automatically. Only when it is unlimited in nature and is subject to limited conditions constraints (as with the man with dreams unlimited practice and its limitations) is that problems occur - and there are pleasant perception of achievements despite the limitations. That is to us what has more value: value the achievements when we have important limitations.
Multiple conditions is to maintain the viability, sustainability of any system, the existence, otherwise with a single determining factor, we arbitrariness, authoritarianism, determinism: a single condition and a single particular result as possible, regardless of sustainability this situation or casualismo. Therefore, to understand the social dynamics must be taken into account the element of chance, where there is interference in a random situation by an occurrence objective inherent in the processes of nature and events.
Is not that a mere failure to scientific understanding or expression of human ignorance about the true causes of a phenomenon. But if our world is not ideal and there is your chance - if not the existence of the essence - and there are more than two millennia remains the difficulty in the definition of being, the coming-to-be can at least serve as opposed to what should not be. There will always be social problems, but its occurrence can not be the rule rather the exception.
For we know what and how we can get the world we want, first, it is necessary to understand "our world" and ourselves (society), positioning us to know. But for Nietzsche, as the understanding we have of our world takes from fast experience, and "(...) remaining under its charm do not understand"; recommends: "Make your way back, stepping in behind that mankind has done in his long and painful march through the desert of the past: so learn, the safest way, where the future humanity can not or should not return. And you want to see in advance with all forces, as will be tied the knot in the future, his life will get the value of the instrument and medium for the growth. "
The ideal is to seek the knowledge society using abstraction, which can be understood as described by Nietzsche in defining the writings of Thales of Miletus, where, according to the author, "you can learn how to carry the philosophy, at all times when he wanted to raise its target magically attractive, crossing the fences of the experience. On light posts, she leaps forward: the hope and feeling put wings on your feet. Heavily, understanding calculator gasps after her props and search best to also reach that target seductive, to which his partner has reached more divine. Dir would see two walkers on a wild stream, which flows swirling stones: the first, with quick feet, jump over it, using rocks and leaning on them to launch further, even behind him suddenly sink into the depths. The other, at every moment holds helpless, needs first to build foundations to sustain their heavy step and cautious, sometimes it does not result, then there is no god that can help you cross the stream. "
And the author continues: "What, then, takes philosophical inquiry as quickly to your target? Does he is distinct from calculative thinking and mediator for your flight faster through large spaces? No, because your foot is raised by an alien power, logic, fantasy. Promoted by this, it jumps ahead of possibility with the possibility that for a moment be taken for certainty; here and there, he picks up certainties in flight. A great feeling and it shows the far guess that at this point there is demonstrable certainties. But in particular, the fantasy has the power to capture and illuminate the similarities like lightning: later reflection brings its criteria and standards and seeks to replace the similarities by equalities, the contiguities by causalities. But even if it is never possible, even in the case of Thales, the unprovable philosophy still has a value, even if they are broken all the props when the rigidity of logic and empiricism wanted to get to the proposition, (...) is still where, after the scientific edifice wrecked, a rest, and rest in precisely that there is a driving force and as the hope of future fertility. "
Disregarding the plasticity of Lighting Nietzsche, Jung proposed that what happens in these cases messianic inspiration is a link with the collective unconscious (and what is easy or inevitable that the individual succumbs). For Hubert Rhoden, this is the connection that we can and we must have what one is (the universe). For Krishna, "If you love the truth, come to your aid those who know the Truth, favoring your initiation" (Gita Bragavad). In companies, who seek improvements to their employees will be motivated and supported by the synergy around this purpose - the same goes for environmental and community action.
For Aristotle, "the acting follows being"; two thousand years later, Shakespeare, using the style of Sophocles' tragedy, shouted his "To be or not be." In this way, Nietzsche sought a better spirit developed for the man, for his role in a conscious way - and the resulting company, reflecting the behavior of individuals.
This understanding is necessary for the individual's awareness about the trigger of his actions, preventive and acting proactively - not coercively simply by the existence of charges of conduct, legal, moral or social.
Alcibiades to Socrates asserted that "(...) the rivalry of all against all, and the importance each attaches (...) to exceed himself, and always worth more (...) regarding the best performance of his art [or profession], while in relation to what is best for (...) he commits the worst mistakes by trusting (...) in the opinion void of intelligence. " Therefore, for the thinker, not just the technical accuracy and the arts, without which the individual has the knowledge of what is useful, what is good, that is best for him and for society, because:
Without this knowledge, the more favorable is the wind of fortune, as regards the acquisition of wealth, physical strength or any other advantage of the genre, more, it seems, must be errors arising therefrom. (...) This knowledge is an orphan, be guided by any other, you will not see out, as it deserves, in the biggest storms of turmoil, as was risked, as I imagine, to navigate without a pilot on the high seas, in space not too big of a life? In my view, apply to this case the poet's words with reference to some character, "knew things no end, but all of them very badly."
Socrates also conjecture about a poet: "he knew many things, but it was bad for him to know them all," and has described conditions desirable for society, a major, citizens have the ability to get away from their condition exacerbated attachment to material goods and delivers the inordinate passions (love, policies, or symbols of status and power).
For Seneca, "(...) the ideal of the great republic of humanity editing there is someone who is invincible and overlooking the whims of fortune." Fortuna, in the belief of the ancients (Concise Oxford), was the goddess who presided over good and evil force which is attributed the power to influence the success or failure, in fortune or misfortune of the people or its businesses; chance, fate, fate, luck, happiness, happiness, success, misfortune, adversity, calamity, misfortune.
Now we have arrived at a time when so much bad fortune as well require us to survive magnitude of gender - in order to have the wisdom, foresight, to avoid, remedy or resist the evils to which also leads to good fortune. In sport it is undisputed: avoid the "already won", avoid excitement, the "high heels". That means not just hold us in bad times to excite us in the good. In this case, however, because the good fortune is necessary to know is contained at least a minimum (or at least not only), just as the excitement often bad (moralisms apart).
The problem is not the passions, but in them the fascination, the excitement, especially about money, it appears to us as a wildcard, which serves no use to all happiness. Much money is perceived as pleasure by any measure - a fascination for the total satisfaction (the eyes of Medusa). "An unrestricted satisfaction of all our needs presents itself as the most tempting to lead our lives, that, however, means putting enjoyment before caution, soon leading his own punishment" (Freud), that is: tragedy foretold .
For Hubert Rohden, man "(...) looking for every way to forget, for a few hours, for a few days, some nights, his lack of happiness, going hunting of all wild diversions; some are narcotizam with money, business, commerce, industry, and with arts and sciences, others still drunk with sexual lust, alcohol and other drugs, others the wealthy, traveling from country to country, from sea to sea, and meanwhile they forget of his unhappiness, deem to be happy "(The Path of Bliss). Only psychoanalysis to detect the causes of denial (of repression) unconscious. "Surely, those who do not get within itself the resources to live in happiness unspeakable all ages will find life," said Cato, Cicero (Learn Aging).
"I know you, my poor little rich? Get up every morning, tired, full of distracting thoughts, spilled in all directions - and you lie down, exhausted, every night, late, even with a troop of scattered thoughts for all latitudes and longitudes of the outer world. ... " (The end? Similar to The Death of Ivan Ilyich, by Leo Tolstoy). What antidote? For Hubert Rohden, at least half an hour of solitary relaxation, meditation, to enjoy life with what she has to really important to us.
We may also mention the highly skilled professionals, and be açambarcados or cry along with the unmentionable (and horses) Kafka (A Hunger Artist):
"A trapeze artist (...) had organized his life so, the first effort of perfection, later by habit that became tyrannical, that while working in the same company remained day and night on the trapeze. All your needs, which is very tiny, were attended by servants who took turns, and were guarded beneath rise and fall (...) all that was needed up there. (...) When in the public eye when one turned away for him. But forgive the directors so because it was an extraordinary artist and irreplaceable. Aside from that, it was assumed that he naturally did not live well on a whim and could only preserve the perfection of his art while remaining in constant exercise. "
"To travel in the cities used to race cars with which they shoot, if possible at night or at dawn, deserted streets at top speed, which was certainly too slow for the nostalgia of the trapeze artist, the train was set aside an entire room where he spent the trip in the network (...), a regrettable but still possible replacement of their usual way of living, the location of the presentation follows the trapezius was placed in the theater long before the arrival of the artist; ( ...) But the most beautiful moments in the life of the entrepreneur were always those in which the artist placed his foot on the rope ladder and finally, in a moment, was again hanging on top of your trapezius. "
Yes, with certain conditions, and a "circus" well armed, we give a show. Now therefore, this may seem simplistic, but it is very shocking to those who live this reality in a highly competitive company in the highly competitive labor market. And yet, tripudia with vigor:
"And what's more, there was also high in healthy, and when the warmer seasons of the year the side windows were open all along the summit and along with the fresh air the sun poured into space powerful twilight, so there was pretty above. No doubt his human relationships was low, only once or twice a fellow stunt went up to him by the rope ladder, then the two sat on the trapeze, leaned to the left and right over the ropes for support and proseavam. (...) Otherwise the silence around him, sometimes an employee any, that perhaps missed the afternoon the empty theater, lifted his gaze to the height - that almost escaped the sight - where the trapeze artist, unable to guess someone was watching him, exercised his art or rested. "
However, such simple story, fictitious, ignoble, which can hurt so deeply for who is his story - for those who live life like that. Certainly realize that in fact small spaces of time when you can have a window to a sunny place - quick vacation, a few friends. The end of this story? Resounding personal tragedies ...
"Suddenly the trapeze artist began to cry. (...) "Only with this bar in hand, how can I live? 'Now it was easier for the manager console the artist; promised the first telegraph station to the place of the next presentation by asking the second trapezoid; rebuked for having left the trapeze work so long with only a trapeze, thanked him and praised him much for having called his attention to after the error. (...) If such thoughts began to torment him, could cease altogether? Do not continue rising forever? Do not threaten its existence? And in fact the manager thought he saw, asleep apparently calm that crying was over, as the first wrinkles began to draw on the smooth forehead of the child trapeze artist. "When will these come to our first wrinkles forehead? The entrepreneur will be vigilant to this danger? It would be crazy or visionary Kafka this?
"Ultimately, all suffering is nothing more than sensation, exists only insofar as we feel it, and only felt as a consequence of certain ways in which our body is regulated" (Freud). In this sense, Thoreau, better to know "a few things wanting to be rich," according to the taste and ease (and convenience) of obtaining goods, than to be poor compared to the endless desire to possess things. Enjoy property is useful, even positive to calm our spirit as physical suffering - but need to make sure we really need a good, and also that we can buy it without causing more inconvenience in the absence of such well. Otherwise, life becomes (and capitalism has passed) a central collection of goods servíveis (servíveis to whom and in what quantity?). It seems to have lost the meaning of life if we turned off the fight that fixed idea - to live then, ask ourselves, why, then!
"What we call happiness in the strictest sense comes from the satisfaction (preferably sudden) needs high dams, which, by its nature only possible as an episodic event" (Freud). What to do? Seeking fulfillment, which is something much broader and based on more solid foundations.
Of course we are not talking about a life without passion, as opposed to what was both Socrates, the Stoics and others, as did Rotterdam: "It is true that Seneca twice stoic, his wise free of all sorts of passions . Oh! Beautiful masterpiece! Certainly, this is no longer wise man, but a kind of god that never existed. Speak more clearly, what he did was a cold marble statue, deprived of all human sense. "
Jesus himself told us not to kickstart the tares (INCO) of wheat, so psychoanalysis: not deny our unconscious, even if perverse (and, therefore, denied unconsciously). That is, it is not to deny our passions, but to seek the individual always guard instinct of a life driven only for pleasure, above all their beliefs and values of their society. The pursuit of inordinate passions is costly to people's lives - a cost that often is not able to cope, and certainly ends in tragedy.
For all that, we must always be careful not to forget the caution. Once obtained, modern, total freedom, forget the caution - and we have fun playing in our little luck against personal returns. Even though there is freedom, and even if nobody cares about it, the consequences of our actions continue to exist (and this understanding is critical, as long demystifies modern life). Of course, not always "win", but it's good we try to think of calculated risks, and not despise them.
Aristotle toasted us saying that we do not act rightly because we are virtuous, but we have virtue because we act correctly - we are what we repeatedly do. Therefore, excellence is not an act but a habit - and how much we have to strengthen our habits in order not to fall routine and even unhealthy consumismos daily.
This all may seem very ridiculous, but it is not moralism, but of reasonableness. Who has already plunged a lot for the capitalist and human waywardness and today is ill or in financial difficulties due to their excesses knows the consequences of unreasonableness. What is seen in his youth as a fanfare, fun, at maturity, often (and much sooner than they imagine young people) becomes irremediable problems and sorrows - oh, no question, or palliative, long-term.
For Nietzsche, "(...) we must consider how decisive sign of great culture someone has both strength and flexibility to be pure and rigorous in how to meet at other times, let the poetry, religion and metaphysics will one hundred paces front, so to speak, enjoying them the power and beauty. Such a position between two such diverse requirements is very difficult, because science requires absolute mastery of his methods, and this requirement is not satisfied, there is another danger, feebly swinging up and down between different impulses. However, in order to show a way to solve this difficulty, at least with an analogy, remember that dancing is not even a vague balancing between different impulses. High culture semelhará a daring dance: therefore, as has been said it takes a lot of strength and flexibility. "
There's no point changing the technology does not change people, and they just change. Those described by Socrates (2,400 years ago!) Are identical to those of today. Our basic instincts are always the same, and guide us every minute. We have not changed our basic social condition in the last millennia. Major changes in the economy are very difficult because it is not only plans and ideas, but also customs, socio-economic system and instinctive reactions of all kinds, such as possession of insecurity, complacency, skepticism.
And if things do not change society over time, is because there are things permanent, and is permanent should seek, understand, adapt - in, turn. But only initiate important changes in society when the most powerful and influential groups no longer have the world as they have so far, a sense of pleasure in their lives - and how just a supplier of everything they want. An example of change were the attacks of September 2001. From then on, started a change of perception of the world for much of the most influential groups. From then on, began to realize that the world is no longer only synonymous with domination of nations and of pleasure enjoyed recklessly. And see the tragedies that are necessary for people to pay attention to reality a little different.
Again, what's out there is conditioned by what is inside (us). Moreover, between what would be the ideal and reality, there is the intervention of our will. Our will is affected by our desires, of all types, these can be sublimated prevented, delayed or something, but not extinguished. No use an ideal model in idealizing an organization to try to intelligently constrain the actions of our lives without taking into account that it is conditioned by our desires.
It seems that a well-settled forward or exacerbation of channeling our passions (symbolic or material) is the best way to get a superior social dynamics developed. Those who come to doubt as to better their position in society should read The Republic, Plato, who in a completely natural need to raise the vantage point of our life in society, and the dialectical thought, based on the reason (without excesses, course), in keeping with the intelligibility of thought and action - something like everything that is perceived to serenity - and not simply surrender to the passions and desires of all kinds, that the second author is longer serve to generate flatulence and attachment the unimportant things.
Of course we seek to equate (through reasoning) life situations delivered instincts does not mean just the opposite extreme of trying vainly to equate (rationally) all matters of life - and what he was accused ("crucified") Socrates. Of course here we are not talking about moralizing or simply block the passions of life (which, of course, glad life).
For Democritus (III century BC), even if they seek pleasure, should be able to distinguish the value of different pleasures. It seems that for this, we need to be completely "open", and moralism, to perceive things as they are - there are cultures that resemble that kind of openness, as in the case of France (even if there is still excess) or For crops which do not have Oriental our morality. Thus, we can calmly enjoy the pleasures of life, but also make constant criticism about what guides us in life, we are not based on extrapolations, or moralism mystifications that lead to extremes.
The society reflects itself, what are the people who compose it. There is and never will be, an economic-social system that is a perfectly working when composed of individuals who do not behave in a manner consistent with the need for its operation. Even if he managed this feat, just based on the maintenance of society in the power of its economy, the state, the society will not be sustained indefinitely. And anyway, there is no comparison in quality of life among a society that is only an economic power and a fully developed society. The need for sustainability comes the all aspects of life and society, one day.
No! There is no viable social-economic model at all times; a social system is only viable if permanently citizens are aware of what should and can do, constantly adapting to each situation. This is not a shining model of future society that governs everything, but a common individuals in everyday life in simple steps, from considerations about what is reasonable in each small social-economic issue, take actions that improve, daily, our society.
The sum of the positive result of the actions of each one may be sufficient (with leftovers) to solve our social problems. And this alone may be sufficient. With the worsening of any types of problems, come to the point of what is said in business: who does not participate in problem solving is part of the problem. Thus, much less feeble, will be evolutionary. However, we can only take a step toward "utopia" because shortly thereafter we need to revert our attention back to see what the implications of our desired direction. Here is the idealists who sin (such as those on the left), because they think they tread the path of utopia indefinitely (working), without regard to reality.
The average citizen is an infinitesimal particle social society. For this condition, does not have enough influence to change it at your convenience, mainly to influence it. The more balanced society (or any system), will be more sensitive to any interference, and proportionately less to the system must be the power to influence
It. Only citizens can influence your society acting in ways that alter its balance. And this through their work in groups of influence, as in the case of the unions. In a system that would come to an absolute balance, even the will of an individual of this system could influence their actions and others, change the whole.
The greater the aggression, it takes more strength and ability to resist and to revert the unfavorable situation. Fortunately (and paradoxically), are the untold suffering that mankind has been plagued that can lead to our deepest desires and disinterested also lead us to contemplate and sponsoring a better world or a good world to live - and the tears and joy.
But the population in general, is not interested in theories, it spends as little time with them. Therefore, as only a few rigid minds need not utopia or direction, just try not to nod an alleged social system only for "opinion makers". We need something to serve as a director and motivator for most people, you need to "see" a need for direction and motivation. Therefore, for the vast social change that we want really good utopia, to assist us in perceiving the world we want, while we wait for the ills of our way in the past remain.
If we have to go through all possible sufferings, may be so, indefinitely, we are sure that we will want no more, nor accept, even by speculation, things contrary to the generation of a better world, and not seek more tread tortuous paths, painful under any circumstances.
There are only two options: either the world finds its equilibrium, or it will shatter due to the extreme pressure that exists in society today. The social and economic equilibrium will be established in some way, or the citizens will pay, indefinitely and recklessly each other injustices among people and nations. That is, until they realize, in pain and impracticability of the continuity of their lives, they will be required to adopt attitudes that balance and harmonize their lives and their behavior in society.
Before the empire of such concern remains for us only an attitude, trying to balance between the pursuit of immediate satisfaction of material needs and the Chinese concept of ming: all the conditions and forces in the universe. That is, the psychological balance-social-environmental, or a principle of non-causal connection of the I Ching, or Jung's synchronicity and non-apparent connection of Heraclitus, or, as for Schopenhauer, the subjective connection which exists only in relation to the individual experiencing an experience.
In equilibrium, the evolution of this system can still be painful - but not discontinued and impractical, if not as balanced. However, one can not always keep the same balance, it is necessary for growth and development system. So much greater is the need for knowledge to position yourself to know the most convenient way to forward this balance - and there are always many options. For example, in a timely situation, something can be modified, terminated, increased, decreased, diverted, supplemented, divided, added, and countless other options.
Yes, it is necessary that preciousness, yes! Our society sharpened too, being the result of a complex conditioning, and our social system has exceeded its limits with the feasibility of maintaining them. Yes, the grandiloquence is required. But for all this? To avoid problems, to maximize scarce resources and to enhance the results. But who uses great strength to take the others of its inertia must, at the end of the day, to propose how it all fits, it can not simply "throw everything on high." And the best guarantee that all is well is that everything runs smoothly accommodated - that's how everything always ends well. Spinoza said that love is the highest form of intelligence. Perhaps because love always seeks to straighten up quietly, the best accommodation, the balance in any case or situation.
No, this is not about "morality for slaves" (as Nietzsche accused the Socratic moral), but the culture of the middle class well educated (not just well trained). Balance, yes! Always! Social balance is what matters most to answers to pressing problems. And all this for what purpose? To orchestrate the economy with a high tenor harmony of reverb and all the force necessary to achieve the expected results - for society to reach its climax. What is the climax? No matter, and only the facts may show.
People are born tend naturally to glimpse the "world of the future", almost without taking into account or ignoring the past, and says that the people have no memory. But, stopping and looking to the past, gushes blood and horror and disappointment everywhere. For this bias, it is essential not to consider what were very few events of the past, like the unspeakable sufferings of the two. World War II. As Nietzsche said, if we absorb all the sorrows of life, succumb. It would be impossible to ignore, but to some extent, set aside such unimaginable hardships. In researching the past, we can and want to return disappointed to glimpse the world of the future we want.
We wondered: in future we will have a great development, especially technological, and life will be wonderful. However, what we call the world is actually just the western portion of this world, and what has been called the world of the future in the West represents only the technical improvement and the achievement of material and, depending on the alleged need for many goods, we subject us great discomfort and physical and psychological exhaustion.
What we live is very tormenting nightmares, such as terrorism, hunger, environmental imbalance, large contrasts in national and world income, the stress of everyday life, like ants running in a hurry. Will seek comprehensive comfort (in fact) in life, physical and psychological aspects, some more or superfluous luxuries, it is not desirable and better than what we see out there? At least, it seems that is the maximum that the environment allows us to maintain - and perhaps also his sanity. It seems that natural restrictions require us to behave more healthy physically and mentally, each one will have to get "maneirar" slightly extrapolated in some aspects of our lives today.
Only "hunt" some individuals who incur crimes is no longer enough - is half the solution. Socks solutions can work reasonably for some time and then cause more problems than solutions. We must end the space of possibility of the formation of violence within the human intellect. It may not have free will, but we will at least occasionally, enough to undermine this society that is still there, stumbling. We need to stop crime at all levels, beginning with saboteur our behavior in a civilized society that is all. Is there, in secret, that the criminal intent to form in places where nobody goes, even with the best rationality (from the unconscious).
We should not think that our society will remain long in this catastrophic situation. Something need to be made more effective, in terms of socioeconomic development, because there comes a time when half solutions are not enough, and it is necessary and effective solutions. We speak of the new millennium, but do not act with new perspectives, new year and all remain the same. So maybe we're near the beginning of the discussion of the need for a model of the ideal state. This, only as a model as a reference, to realize what not to do and what paths desirable.
In this context, from the evolution (and many involutions) society for centuries (with its recurring demonstrations of barbarism), can not imagine a promising future. We do not have a positive outlook for the national society or world even for a year, and we need to have secular outlook. If you do not know what socio-economic system that best serves us, we can not investigate what and how we want it to be that company, despite not being able to formulate and imagine that this system would be able to answer the many questions and demands often contradictory.
For Aristotle, in Politics, "falter at times to say whether it is helpful or harmful to the States to change their ancient institutions, even if it is to replace them with better ones. (...) Because there are always men who propose the abolition of laws and the Constitution, as an improvement for all citizens. " "The law only has the strength to do comply with the habit, and habit only formed over time, through the years." "So easily change the existing laws with new ones is to weaken their own power."
But "In addition, there is no advantage whatsoever in fact written laws remain unchanged." However, "the political constitution, as in all other arts, it is impossible that all details have been marked with an exact precision, because it is obliged to make use of general expressions, while the actions always assume anything of particular and individual. It is therefore clear that there are certain laws to change, at certain times. "
That is, change the social, political, economic, is necessary but not perfect socioeconomic models are possible, all anticipating and accommodating. The political developments (laws) and economic (market) needs the concomitant maturing society. In this process, only society can autoconstruir, give birth to. The culture of the population must be in accordance with the law. In the country tried to a Constitution far beyond the normal range (demagoguery) at various points of labor rights, and largely still is not respected. Perhaps the most stringent requirements have contributed to the illegality of contracts than for social change.
Our world is not an ideal world, designed to idealism, our world is a practical world. But to say we need practical things does not mean anything goes - it was only valid in prehistory, from what was perceived to need (practice) undisputed (rationally) ethics. Life takes into account many practical and dynamic constraints. In relation to a life idealistic, utopian, practical life differentiates itself by not being a perfect modelinho closed, designed on the basis of (always limited) expectations.
If anyone thinks that just getting enough training to get into a business and succeed, keep studying and ascending, and only interested in join the party (capitalist), can remove your horse from the rain - the party is over, unfortunately. Only companies with little competitive economic sectors still keep quiet about the business competition, or some companies very solid and well structured is that it can keep its employees with a certain functional and financial tranquility.
Of course, outside of any reality they are part of public officials with high-wage, unskilled labor and with consistent tiny or disqualified (explaining that the majority is not of high wages, and many have great responsibilities, such as judges). The reality is people who, even after coming into a great job, face insurmountable problems, ethical dilemmas, resignations, inability to maintain updated training, overwork and their problems with family and with the physical and psychological health.
To escape the problems of the labor market, some (who are just millions) think of doing public tender, are faced with even thousands of candidates per seat, even for low-skilled services such as services Grais, but also to technical levels. Those who enter are faced with the problems inherent in public administration, where things do not always go as desired and bureaucratic routine, often appalling conditions of work, political persecution and the inability of promotion can be assambarcadoras.
The right? You get as much experience and training, always seeking the direction of what is the individual vocation, to have extra capacity for competitiveness (such as the torque of an engine), to tackle the most difficult moments. And this is only possible if we want everything now, a good (stable) task (and, lest we forget: life) only comes with time. But this time, precipitamo us endividamo us as expenses "unexpected", already in adolescence, with pregnancy and disease, or overspending in early life. Then he gets behind the wheel walk the rest of life. And how to assess the current situation of business competitiveness and labor market? By averaging the local market and the market trend GLOBAL - yes, even now. The trend is driven by the most competitive segments, where competition is global.
At present, it seems that we do not have the ability to judge everything and learn what is best for us - among many facts and possibilities of everyday experiences. Because of the twists of events of our lives, and because of the social forces in the "move" - all that we turn - we are not able to form a broad value judgment about the present, even if we have a lot of force will. But, returning us to the past, we have the advantage of being able to judge what we do not want ... We realize as well that perspective, we should seek to use this for a living and to position ourselves into the future.
Only when our past experiences is that we "look" back and realize what was valid. That, in the broadest sense, philosophically, in our lives and in society. Therefore, Nietzsche was considered insane in his time, today it is genius. Your Zarathustra was folklore, but foretold of a society two centuries ahead and major contemporary cultural achievements, such as intellectual freedom and against Manichaeism and moralism (exacerbated, at least), the absolute religion, the humanities clinging to unreasonable and ridiculous among many. "It is therefore evident that not only is very short, but very unhappy life of those who prepared with great labor and that only they can with even greater efforts" (Seneca).
Of course we are not born ready for life, and this is the problem, it is clear that we need to grow, instruct us, "battle" hard to get our space and this gives us another way learning unreachable. However, Nietzsche accused Seneca, by his writings, as double stoic, but, in his epistle (letter-book) On the Brevity of Life, it is evident that he criticizes the hype, and that does not lead to disillusionment and apathy; and does not speak the unemployed, talks about the opposite extreme, "you will get the affection in a letter in which it is difficult to avoid hatred, but nevertheless believes, is more worthwhile to mind of your own life than public supplies." "Most of your life, certainly the best, was dedicated to the Republic." "For work examples and restless, as demonstraste enough to be virtuous. Now, what would you experience in idleness. "
Therefore, in addition to train us grow professionally and technically, at the same time, we must develop ourselves fully. One who, early on, permanently, and almost exclusively dedicated to the growth of their wealth (accumulation) relegates its development, and even if goals are successful in this accumulation can be unhappy - what happens then. Actually, this is a summary of what ends up in a psychiatrist's office. It is even very "boring" life only to grow and, mainly, engage in one activity, the accumulation.
Alone, the accumulation does not compensate for all that it relegates lifelong. Developing, you can go and see life with new perspectives. We tell ourselves in the future world, but not arrived, and the way things will hardly arrive at what is really developing - social and cultural - and that is what really matters. On cultural development, countries of the east give us examples, there are already thousands of years (no, that does not mean that it is utopia, perfect with everything).
If the application of Economic Science seeks only where scarce resources always causes the greatest possible satisfaction, it is necessary that people be psychologically prepared to understand what they will, indeed, the most lasting satisfaction. It will also be essential ally in this sense (and need not be exclusive to the other demands of life), spiritual development, especially by professionals more competitive, which increasingly is almost solely dedicated to work - all making their lives almost solely due work, explains Osvaldo Lopez-Ruiz, in his book on human capital (Executives of the Transnational and the Spirit of Capitalism: Human Capital).
This will contribute to the peace necessary for the individual to perceive, throughout its existence, the really important events, and to have the serenity to, much more than wait for them, reassured, delighted with every stage of your life as you know that is heading in a good direction - very different from the capitalist madness, everyone knows that derroca or perceived tragedy. But the "eyes of Medusa" are irresistible - especially for the most competitive capitalism. Why philosophers warn of this problem for millennia and become folklore.
And that desired future society (developed) is a technological society? No! The technology does not change our life, in essence, making a life "of the future" that would be a great life, can only facilitate the activities and can act to offset the difficulties of living together. Often the result is not, and lose more time and money with the news of that time and money that can be gained from these facilities.
If anyone thinks this is all just talk pretty, idealization, projection of an imagined world, unrealistic, and that each one just to stick to the reality of their day to day, doing their part (ie, seeking their interests and meet the labor market), you're wrong. It may be that this is a projection of expected reality for all, as a tendency for short, and only thus is already a reality for most people. But the situation of corporate competitiveness and the labor market is very sorry.
What we "project to the world of the future", which is the world now than when it is only this, is how we perceive our life, our position before the world. Yes, the society of the future is, without demagoguery, without a company as big and so great tribulations daily social contradictions. But for this to be different we need to change and strive to change the reality, not just deny reality unwanted. We need not only of goods, through the refinement of the technological and economic development, but also of getting rid of the obsession with obtaining material goods. In this, all the social sciences agree. But jellyfish have eyes ...
Perhaps, if the company get rid of this irresistible fascination, will be the end of time - the end of time when this world in which we live. Really, is not imaginable for us, since in this case, we would not be quite the same, and we can not imagine something for being different. Fear can lead us to imagine it as absolutely dangerous, impossible, or destructible. And it seems that we would be in the form of society, destroyed. People and society different, with another perspective of life could only exist. (Or the extermination of the existence of moral linear, based on suffering as a laxative? ...).
Very rarely will create and maintain jobs in our capitalist system at satisfactory levels with the absolutely inevitable and irreversible concentration of capitalist production process. This is due to economies of scale because of the technology is labor-saving labor and the private ownership of all means and processes. This is an example that demonstrates that the pursuit of individual interest by all, even seeking to avoid causing trouble for others with his conduct does not automatically lead to a viable society for all. Therefore, one of the individuals - at least - should go beyond just seeking self-interest, and take proactive actions to minimize problems resulting from economic backwardness-social part of the population compared to the other.
Because of this problem, unemployment, will be in vogue now, the unknown on the socialization and appropriation, for the whole society, part of the results of the production process. That is, if the citizen advance towards obtaining results as if it were a member of the production system (now private) in his country, indirectly, through the state - as directly participating in the production process, working, ordinary people will become less and less able to amass their share.
One option for improvement of the state cope with the needs of their society the government would receive shares of companies that deploy on its territory receiving state subsidies. Executives of large companies already receive stock options to participate in the profits of the companies they work with their work. Governments could reverse these actions to the retirement funds that are already working with stock funds, which could enable these funds, whose terrible situation has been responsible for major problems, such as flattening of the largest, yet the minimum wage (this because some funds can not pay all pensions if the minimum wage rises substantially).
Of course this would only be an option and in that case there would be problems, how good are people at all to counter, however, what matters in any situation, is the direction that you are following, and in that case would be the State participation in the economy as a partner, and especially the social understanding that the economy of a country can not just be in the service of some businessmen, but of the whole society (in moderation, of course, no euphoria). Anyway, this is not the pursuit of idealistic utopia of a paradisiacal state, as some might counter - which would be wanting everything to everyone, free of charge. No, not even something close to it.
If you do not like the cultural (and only the increase of wealth), we continue to digladiar as the Greeks, and their arenas. We fight every day, in traffic, at work, in queues, in disputes over wealth and obtaining any things you understand how rights or advantages in the pursuit of professional and social status, knowledge of anything to impress, the abandonment the weak to luck, chance to bet on "enemies" (other traffic, work ...), the cynicism, selfishness ... everything is a struggle in which it is a brutally digladiar.
The right would balance the needs of the most convenient way possible. Rather, one must seek to avoid the consumption of goods that is possible, as it needs to avoid polluting, destroying the environment, etc.. Hardly an attitude does not cause any effect on someone, in society or the environment, so our attitude should be well thought out. If not at the time of attitude, then the next moment, if not the next moment, then months or years, continuously. Continuously we be looking for us to reframe, to have a smaller impact attitudes possible for society and the environment.
Life "modern" has a ring. But it is not (necessarily). This is what we want. If we are not all-powerful that national, collector of all these social symbols, still living, and even better - not just our world, no. This does not seem to grasp. Certainly, since then, tread other paths, but that we will be good, even though he may make us more successful (even on issues that are status symbols) than those who are struggling due to move to live in part of everyday rivalries, and without wasting so much time with them.
Both the case of a country in which the preponderant concern with growth, as in the case of an individual, predominant and inconsequentially, is concerned with the maximum accumulation of wealth, are cases of simplifications of behavior. Of course it is difficult and expensive to worry about the social and cultural development of an individual. It's a great relief to excuse himself from concern with social responsibility, as is the case of liberal and materialistic.
If we know face the problems that threaten the life in our society in check (and this is the most important issue today), we can build a future much better than that prior to the worldwide catastrophes we have witnessed. If the difficulties, we take a good lesson, then "The reaction we progress" (Nietzsche).
Only speaking, it seems easy, and even normal speech, but to attack all the major problems of society, in every measure necessary, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible. To do so will require great effort and great expense will be well beyond the financial.
Even when a government with strong social action will require the help of all stakeholders to attack the social problems of the day - to-day. Sectors of government and society, isolated, are not able to solve all social problems, such as public safety. Speeches are needed in the areas of government in unison, to companies and supported by the population - all anchored in a social pact of coexistence suitable for extreme reality in almost all aspects of modern life: safety, housing, transportation, development, etc..
As opposed to the current reality, you can help reduce the individual problems of their society from their vision and interaction with the social values rather old: kindness and generosity. This causes a much-needed synergies and avoids many problems when it helps someone affected by momentary problems, avoiding the dismantling of the social structure of cells.
This, rather than having problems, get an operation for oiling and rocking to the lives of its members, preserving them. So when you help someone in trouble, is helping the society in which we live, in which one lives (which, in the first place, we can not forget). You can not just HER live, but live WITH it. Thus we see that direct aid to individuals and to society is not as philanthropic as well as reverses the benefits philanthropist.
If we feel different in society, to have expertise in some knowledge, it is because we have accumulated knowledge that was formed by the sum of efforts over generations. This knowledge is not only ours, but of society, we just appropriated that which was accumulated by the society for centuries. Our genius helps us to put the last stone in the pile of knowledge. Therefore, we are social agents who have an obligation to give back to society (the opposite of this is greed, to some extent) - and not just use the knowledge to increase our consumption conditions, accumulation, pride and arrogance. That we should give back to society should be perceived as trivial act - of course joys generator for someone to sponsor you - not only as our ego massager.
Life can be very motivated by the passions, as the money, but not completely guided by them, as Socrates taught. It is necessary parsimony in finding what you want, avoiding extremes. If we think that everything we use is developed from a society (and society more in need of wealth), we realize that before us, is a good social and be able to realize the exaggeration of consumption and waste social wealth, not as a matter of status.
Avoiding fixation on wealth and consumerism exaggerated, it avoids the need for unbridled wealth (and even greater destruction of nature and the environment). Fortunately, as we see in future generations (and not only these) people quite detached from the preponderance of substantive issues. These people seek social awareness and other forms of life and values to their present and future, being willing to contribute to a better society.
We no longer have close competitor as our archrival. The global problems of modern society are far greater than just the immediate capitalist competition. You should be aware of the need to act the way you should act, regardless of how other people act, what influences us very strongly: the usual fashion, it seems, or is presented to us as modern ... In much of society's problems can be solved with something that has long taught us: do to others what we do not want.
If, for social awareness we can not solve as many problems as we would certainly be much more prepared to seek understandings and other solutions in the future. For the betterment of society, there must be a social conscience that the world is reflective in what we play bad to the world as it was a dump, back to us, reaching us. So when, as a small example, we went out to sweep distributing honking traffic, we are contributing to the traffic becomes chaotic and also receive honking or violence worse. Some already see positive changes in Brazil, as the judiciary arresting corrupt judges, showing some signs of a new social referral.
The Zero Hunger program is an excellent example. The receipt of money is a monthly basis that provides social stability by maintaining a minimum of subsistence for some items. Also, with the Zero Hunger program, you can condition the society for the way you want or if you want the transformation of society, such as requiring the attendance of children at school, meeting the literacy programs and vaccination planning family, among others. So it is an excellent way for a course forced rapid transformation of society, affecting a large proportion of the poorest, and that would be extremely difficult to achieve with a "course" forced these.
Also see big changes in global capitalism, as the administrator says Stephen Kanitz:
Being rich, being famous, powerful being has been the goal of many people out there. But slowly a new approach is emerging, a new definition of success. If Steve Case and Bill Gates were born two thousand years ago, none of them would have the size or genetic competence to become General of the Roman Empire, a prominent position equivalent at the time. Life is not a monopoly. People are born here and there, and want to be happy, regardless of major socio-economic theories to explain the causes of their poverty. Born and ready. They want to be happy and ready, and that is the ultimate goal of all.
Still, at a meeting at the World Economic Forum in Davos, where the neoliberal world gather once a year, Steve Case, founder of America On Line and had just bought Time Warner, had its world view; asked how he felt more like a billionaire, one minute without hesitation, said that money does not belong to him, and that he would donate his entire fortune to charities, and more: "I am simply the result of chance, have the right genes, at the right time in the right industry. Difficult to speak of merit in this situation. I have had a privilege that many will not. The privilege of having made a difference. "
"The world, according to this neo-liberal view, no longer divided between rich and poor, but between those who have made a difference or not. Those who created inventions, created jobs, brought new products to market remunerou to be useful, helped via donations excluded and were not merely in social criticism and speeches to raise taxes, thereby creating more poverty. Therefore, this new generation of entrepreneurs want to donate all its assets to entities that help others. "
According to Kanitz, "approximately 55% of U.S. businesses do not intend to donate their fortunes to their children. Think that would be ruining their lives generating a bunch of playboys and unhappy. Realized that the fun in life is to get there, not there, how much the son of businessman with his BMW and his Rolex, learning alone. We are witnessing a neoliberal solution to the eternal problem of inequality. The competent and successful use the wealth generated by their innovations to make a difference in society, creating the Bill Gates Foundation, Turner and so on, closing the large circle that never believed it would close, with equal freedom. "
Modern society is based on the senses, the perceptions. To make everyone feel comfortable in the modern society, the state that was once as the great father, to provide the financial support of the children should become as it were in a great mother, who also has the capacity to perceive all aspects of the lives of their children, realizing every moment, the factors that affect the lives of citizens. If you can not solve all the problems and work around the world, with sensitivity can at least minimize major problems - as opposed to individualistic behavior, compounded by moralizing positions and behaviors "hygienic", people who want to clear fault relegating them to the suffering.
New times only exist with rescue of social justice. The world we dream and we seek is the result of the desperate search of the solution of the problems that plague us excruciating. The new company is a collection of many initiatives, Self-adjusting a set in all dimensions. Only a succession of generations can bring the redemption of unmet social demands and debts not considered.
This society works? Yes, it works much better than the current. Even if no one can say and prove that so it would be heading to an ideal system. They would have undoubtedly much less problems in this society with the current. If it will arrive, no one knows - or continue in leaps and digladiar. But the ability to autorregeneração of a living being or an organization (social) is capable of surprising us.
The "world" moves between poles, testing limits, in extreme cases that require compensation. In prehistory it was worth, the moral of Socrates (which is to defend slaves and slaves, according to Nietzsche) and preaching (somewhat similar) Jesus sought to offset the bloody excesses hitherto common, ordinary, necessary for survival.
Then, for two millennia, mankind has struggled (even though almost always in vain) to this effect, morality and religion. Nietzsche (late nineteenth century) was an exponent of an attempt to reverse this then already ancient and calloused trend, emphasizing the self-love: "Love always your neighbor as yourself: but be ye outset of that love itself same (...). "
Here too, as is normal to happen, we sought the other end of the matter: as Nietzsche was against "onissatisfeitos," and preached the doctrine that one must "take their lives into their own hands", similar ideas were used as ideological foundation for the Second World War and the anti-Semitism. That's right, on the contrary, he came to ridicule anti-Semitism in his writings. But these extreme positions are becoming less acceptable. Then we will be forever, just trying to discover the middle term of life situations? In this case between morality and individual interest, or what would be ethical in every age?
In major disasters and large errors in our actions and learn the great lessons immutable. If we use well the lesson of the problems of the moment, we can promote major social transformations. Perhaps, having exhausted the possibility of a life devoted to developmentalism (material goods), move society towards socio - economic development.
The world idealist (pragmatic) the right does not exist - in which one day will come, and that all sacrifices are valid occurring in capitalism, the creation of a prodigious and perfect production machine, which automatically rewarding those who work for their functioning endeavor. The world of idealistic left-wing does not exist - that of a great fraternal community in which all live comfortably enjoying all the wealth already produced and those that are produced sparingly and unselfishly for the good of the forwarding community issues.
No one will dictate a perfect model, nor the left nor the right - and neither will this perfect society. Or, for Nietzsche: "I never asked myself the way without countering. I've always been against that. I've always preferred to submit to the test and interrogate their own ways. (...) The way ... the path does not exist. "The goal of life is to develop your own - if, evolutionism.
The social system is the "fine flower" of a nation must be the result of "explosion" of the cultural nation (as a flower that emerges from a plant), arising from the inherent intricacies of society itself, taking into account the wishes and social restrictions. Only generations born with ideological independence in relation to any social system may have intellectual independence to decide what may be a social system free from the obscurantism of vested interests.
It seems that only after the recovery and viability of life of all members of society in the minimum conditions people and society will be ripe to discuss the ideal state wishing and maybe try to implement. This discussion is necessary because there has been no answer to the question which the state fairer, and few think that capitalism is closer to a state fair and, indeed, we can list many, and perhaps insurmountable problems of capitalism. Under the aegis of capitalism ("wild"?) We are unable to realize, with the necessary independence, in which the social system is better.
In an evolved society, every citizen will be easy to understand - and for some it is quite clear today - how valid is, for example, invest a portion of wealth that has been to reduce the problems or improve the society in which we live. In a cruder design: it is better to lose the rings than fingers. That is, it is better to provide a portion of wealth to contribute to the solution of social problems that, besides losing all the riches, losing their lives.
The best, in any way, do you realize how very valuable the role active, positive, constructive in relation to social problems, instead of this second (and rude) design presented. But so is it just when the man feel, in fact, a social being - that is, in fact a member of society, and not living in it just to enjoy it, with no difference endless. Thus, the citizen will be happy when you can implement actions that maintain the viability of their society.
And, as we have in society the sum of actual experiences and their relations (or "pluralistic universe"), one needs factors that drive the subjectivity of people and concrete experiences that motivate socially desirable. Or, as William James said, "trying to figure out continuously, with an open mind, what works in terms of ethics" in a process that never ends and that is always in the process of becoming.
Thus, they would have only the basic conditions for the start of something like a walk, or better yet, a race in search of the equation, at every moment, from the social and historical debts of capitalism. Thus, only if they would be improving the conditions of the state and society conditions propitiate the poorest people seek care for their basic needs. This population would still be going through many difficulties (and this can serve as a great relief to moralizing sadistic), but with the great advantage of your company is constantly evolving in the pursuit of quality of life - in fact, as already occurs in developed countries, and as we have isolated examples in our communities and businesses.
There is no good or bad that does not fail. In this universe, where everything decays one day - both good and, more importantly, evil - matter much what is lasting, what is simpler, lighter, to maintain themselves without support, that does not need nothing to explain or to justify its existence. Since it is not possible to continue the same primary social constraints that impede our life now, instead of "eternal return" of Nietzsche, we are hopelessly conditioned to the last and final return.
And to overcome the "eternal return" of this man primary, we pay homage to Nietzsche and seek the "power" of his Zarathustra: "The knot of causes in which I find myself ensnared makes ... will create me, "and therefore" (...) once again want to go back to the men's side: I disappear into them, and offer them to die, the richest of gifts. " "That is much harder to get along than to accept well, they do well is an art, is the last and most astute mastery of goodness." For he taught us: "(...) the man is a thing that should be overcome, the man should be a bridge and not an end (...). "
The purpose of life is happiness, for Aristotle, because we choose happiness for herself, and never aimed at anything beyond. And happiness is multiplied when it is shared - so there should not be selfish and not shared happiness. We might add the need for personal fulfillment, which is more permanent. But, given the harshness of life - for our weakness before the world - just because we "let go" of life, the world we are "dragged" by the routine day-to-day by the customs, traditions and cultures. So it is important not to lose the reference of what we want.
For Hubert Rohden in The Way of Happiness:
"There are two deadly things: chaos and monotony.
Chaos is variety without unity.
Monotony is unity without variety.
Happiness consists essentially in harmony, which is unity with variety. "
But how to organize, in the sense of happiness and fulfillment, and our all, and that everyone wants, all the diversity of ideas and the whirlwind of information and emotions in society? As everything is originally energy, also our means of life are a result of the action and embodiment of our energies and the energies of others. For optimization of efforts and maintenance of a happy life, over time, it is necessary for our energy, our drive, our affections, have as a result, lead us in the same sense of our own lives.
The thought acts only as an attempt to equate what we want, so chronologically, rather than think, it what we want. The sincere desire and strong determination is leading us to imagine (like) a better world. It follows the theories of Spinoza that the important thing is the unconscious desire - he is the primus motor (first booster) of everything in our lives (in fact, somo totally conditioned by the unconscious, Freud discovered). For Spinoza, every virtue consciously, artificially created, is an effort to correct or hide a secret vice. Schopenhauer says that the world equates to our will. Only the sincere desire that frees us to have actions that go far beyond speech, demagoguery - this invariably leads to inaction or brutal exaggerations or adverse effects.
For all these reasons, we hold the world is the result of our innermost desire, and will only be achieved when this feeling is one voice in society, uncompromising, independent, in which all citizens become aware unconditionally about their social responsibility. The world we want is only possible when the privileged part of the population, directly or indirectly influencing the direction of society (and opinion maker or having economic or political power), definitely have to refer their attitudes a better society.
This is the dream as inspiration for the direct actions for the "intelligent design" that society desired. Therefore, we must seek more our dreams, relegating and despising, ever, anything that contradicts them (young people already do so - society is not so stupid, huh?). Pragmatically, the new generations act in accordance with needs and desires that surpass old interests. It will be very great satisfaction that the person will feel (due to his love of society and maintain it) to feel it as well as his own and totally dependent upon the maintenance of his life.
But if the dreams are so good and important, why society is not governed from our dreams (or desires)? It is because, being free to "fly", the dream comes to situations not possible-at certain times. The dream that is sold at a price people have (as in the aristocracy). For example, the more you dream, if you wish, material goods, more force is inter - socioeconomic relations, more effort is needed in order to amass more wealth. Therefore, one can not simply choose to believe and dreams and utopias as communism, this time in our society. We need to dream "with his feet on the ground" with things achievable (even, or especially, when not at first).
Just wanted to Nietzsche: man with a higher perspective - able to assert their will, but also realize the pettiness of life (like the immediacy and the pursuit of power). No, not about morality, in which "the victory over himself is not required because of the useful consequences it has for the individual but to the customs, tradition appear as dominant (...)".
The man than man can discern if we look beyond ourselves, with a sociological perspective that represents the endless possibilities of social relations, where one realizes that, as of individual victories on itself in search of the best to you, along the life, knowing that this is dialectically lived in society, has been the best for society, the sum of the achievements and social development provided by their subjects.
Nietzsche said God is dead - and that was the play of intellect supplanting the belief in God. Before that, supplanted the primate Homo habilis, and was supplanted by Homo sapiens. Now, we need new evolutionary inflection. Homo spiritus must supplant Homo sapiens. We must die - all mankind, that is no longer socially and environmentally viable. Our will to power, our instinct for adaptation, which kept us thus far, must be abandoned to languish in the final. Within us that beast must die so that our drive takes us, always, now, to other shores.
So far, according to the social-economic relations world, Homo sapiens uses financial calculations to say what the financial constraint (salary or income) to which each is submitted (or no income). From now on, is the preponderance of Homo spiritus we need to say what we expect of the world - a world of increasing representation of our own will, have pretended that it was Schopenhauer. The world and the mind autoconstroem. But no, so everything will not change for another hour, or should, is a matter of adaptation and trends over time. But the trend irrevocable.
Thus, in livrareremos endless problems caused by wisdom or unresolved positivism, mathematical, financial, economic, linear ... limited. The "immutable" scientific limitations (scientistic) are falling for some time, the scientific model does water for decades. You are doing 500 years Rotterdam said that we live in this madness is the only way to "each part in the comedy world." Now, we need to go much further. It's time!
In the searing exhaust philosophical doubt, silent thought. In the bowels of knowledge no longer submerged. Forget the atrocities that were able and the nightmare of the past and seek the light of what we do not need to explain dark ruminations and justify everything. Everything we can imagine a new world, even though the transformation of reality from imagination, desire, go slowly taking place, but it is the first and decisive step - imagine what we want and how we want. Inspiremo us at Benedetto Croce by saying that "in view of that imagination precedes thought and is necessary to him, the artistic activity or forming images of the mind is pre-logical activity, forming concepts."
So, let us "(..) transform all 'what was' the will to say,' But I want it that way! So I will want to! '"(Nietzsche). Certainly there are still many struggles - being alive is to fight (Fernando Pessoa). But God, or nature, and boost life, drives us every day, when we raise again with the sun. Impregnating fields in bloom, such as Goethe or the paths of Proust, inspires us to feel the world we desire, and inspiration of this lighting makes us feel so exuberant. The sun always rise even after all the good and bad, leading us to always go forward in life.
Thus, as yardstick for everything else in life to come, accept "open chest" this slight feeling of our earnest desire, so sincere that our dream is the yardstick that we intend every day - the company is obtained by the sum of our intentions. At the end, and so it was already better than at first, try that perception simplest, a first glance that always confirms over time. "Experience is created. Feeling is thinking out of ideas, and feel is to understand why, since the universe has no ideas "(Fernando Pessoa).
Stefan Zweig, whose reading reaches match the pleasure of reading Nietzsche, reported that in their cold, hard and sullen solitude, "for fifteen years, Nietzsche also comes from the tumult of his room, suffering, suffering, death in death, resurrection resurrection, until it finally pops his overheated brain in all its energies.
"Strange are the ground on the street ... strange man at the time. Strange to lead the fourth-odd Via Carlo Alberto in Turin [sanatorium]. No one is witness to his intellectual death. Around the end of his reign the darkness and the holy isolation. Alone and unknown, the most lucid genius of the spirit rushes on his own night. "Let us take the inspiration of Friedrich Nietzsche and impregnemo us full of light, and with the man was" satisfied its noon and its evening " , transvalorizemos his writings, "as the way to new dawns"
'There are so many dawns that have not yet flashed' - this inscription Indian (...) like this new morning, this new reddening delicate unknown until now, with which a new day - oh, a whole series, a whole world of new day - break? In a revaluation of all values, (...) in a mean-yes and have confidence in everything that was until today (...) despised (...), pours light, his love and tenderness over purely bad things, (...) return them back to the soul, the conscience, the right and privilege to the haughty existence. (...) Ends with an 'or'? '
Another world is possible?
You want to be a new world of Zarathustra?
We use the arguments of Nietzsche as a reference (even some opposition) by the arguments always very strong plus. Nietzsche was a "crazy" thinker, and Will Durant in his book about the story, reports that his philosophy was a direct result of their frustrations, and that he tried to prove the contrary of his personality. And did not spare him: "There was a lot of Plato Nietzsche, he feared that the art would cause men desaprendessem to be severe." It seems that Nietzsche did: threw their arguments to the dialectic. Of course, spoke in the tone needed to be heard in his time - like the shepherds of today speak in the tone of the tragedy of the lives of his followers, and therefore so many listeners. The society is dialectical: develops between movements of opposition forces, or dialectically.
Nietzsche said that man must be overcome, but no one has surpassed. It seems that no one responded to their proposals rough time, no antithesis. For Jung (Present and Future Aspects of Drama and Contemporary), anti-Semitic speech, that even the wicked Nietzsche was flatly contrary (Will Power), was a speech according to the mood across Europe, not only in Germany. But instead of trying to counter the attack Nietzsche's anti-Semitism, used the hardness of his speech, going over their own arguments (which ridiculed the anti-Semitism in Human, All Too Human), to promote anti-Semitism. "Nietzsche had audacity and became the voice that was needed," says Durant. Life is crazier than fiction, as they say ...
Do not know if Nietzsche was right in his speech of wickedness do not intend to, but who knows? Society needs to suffer serious impacts for major changes to be accepted ... Who would have the courage to say that War was necessary to convince society that it was madness? But since Nietzsche proclaimed that he saw terrible realities that no one could bear ... This is not an attempt to justify sudden thoughts, or to justify disasters, but to ascertain the reality of society. Psychoanalysis has been assessed in a similar way.
Yes, society comes to absurdities like: look at slavery, which still exists. If Hitler used propaganda mechanisms studied to date as much cunning to maneuver the population used them because of man's psychic mechanisms that allow this kind of maneuver. Yes, it is this level of unconsciousness that society clutter. Perhaps Nietzsche was a great psychoanalyst, has pointed to the pleasure principle, as reported: While we do not feel any pain because of something that gives us pleasure, we are capable of any absurdity. Religion and morality in trying to put some limits ... And further: "The best can not be achieved, is not born, be nothing. Soon after, it is better to die young "- he anticipated Freud's thesis, the drive to return to the inorganic state.
We, having learned from the historical follies, we must go beyond the debacles of the most unwary. The need for discernment sought here is also well explained by conscientiology: If you do not think you're thinking if you do not decide, there are many to decide for you. In our country, not much thought, so here is easy to distribute anything in the interest of someone motivated. But now realize that you can not advance a model ready and just life in society, that makes everything happen perfectly - like Socrates and sincere idealists intended.
But we found that "(...) an action turns - so it's finished - without delay against those who performed it. Precisely because of having it sent, it shall be weak - it no longer supports its action, no longer looks at her face. (...) And then going to feel it about you! ... It almost crushes ... "(Nietzsche). Well, no longer can coalesce any court added, only left digladiação submission to the public. Breathe deeply and, in the absence of skilled back, forward! Seek the shoot alone! For the pure pain of lonely madness to bear fruit, and be born the son desired, which is pure happiness, and before that madness overpower us, encaremo it:
Ah! Give me at least the madness, the divine powers! The crazy ending to finally believe in myself! Give me delirium and convulsions, hours of daylight and darkness sudden, terrorizing me with chills and ardors that no mortal has ever experienced, surround - I noises and ghosts! Let me howl, whine and crawl like an animal: as long as it takes on the faith in myself! (Nietzsche).
I also want to be one of those fools who try to understand society, just because, as an end in itself, just the enjoyment of this sweet madness, this sweet torture yourself with inspiration in the precursor and the greater fool, even a prohibitive time for originality and also poet. Perhaps because it does not resist to soothe us in knowledge, as the minister of the STF Carmen Lucia.
But what's wrong with that? Life is tragic, how many die or waste their lives tragically every day? Toast also to all of us, we go through this tragic life. Who does not enjoy a piece of text, you find beyond the strictly scientific, it can tear the page, but it's good to keep it, as you may surprise yourself in the future to uncover clues that point to a point beyond the physical organic, as the "absurdities" of quantum physics.
We who are nerds of the world honor the ideas of philosophers, sociologists, who are also crazy: they want a good society. This is crazy, do not have, or envision your chance. Let us welcome the world of crazy - no one ahead or behind, but without comparisons, behold, no one travels the path of madness to win podium. We're crazy for this team if not for talent, for membership - as an end in itself (that is opposed to both). Slow to come, but want to stay.
Therefore, as Erasmus of Rotterdam, also need to bow to the madness - the madness at least necessary to seek to understand society as it, perhaps something akin to novelists and artists that depict freely, and that many of its most hidden aspects can be seen (before psychoanalysis). First, we seek the opposite of Erasmus of Rotterdam, and played in the "hidden cesspool of vices of mankind," reveal "their shame and infamy," look at the "cave of Trophonius," we "leave people disfigured, after consulting the devil which interpreted the oracles "," however, if self-esteem do not fool me, I have praised Folly without being completely crazy. "
"The madman - said Homer - learn at their own expense and only opens his eyes after the fact." Erasmus himself spoke to us of the absurdities of the powerful, giving the example of a king: "If in his insatiable greed, if you never show satisfied with what has not with me is concordais miserabilíssimo? If he fail to carry for their vices and their passions, not become one of the vilest slaves? "But he warned:" And in this way our philosopher was speaking of all things human, I wonder what result he would get of his statements? Would, of course, for everyone, madman. "
He adds: "Actually, we deceive ourselves sadly when we want to distinguish ourselves in the human race, refusing to adapt to the times." "If you live in Rome, live like a Roman" (Cicero). We also agree with Erasmus that at least in his time, "to make his fortune must not be ashamed of nothing and risk everything." But, already knew all these follies and its attendant problems.
Perscrutamento there could be no deeper than draw near to the pain and amigar itself with the madness ... (Yes, this is also the path of delusion ... and we knew it all to Nietzsche). But, from advancing along these paths, the output has to be engendered from the process itself. Fernando Pessoa had warned us that "whoever wants to go beyond the Bojador has to go beyond the pain." Not much and we look at it, too, before that, was asked: "Was it worth it? Everything worth (...) ". Is it? Well, in relation to events that followed, occasionally, still we feel very privileged in relation to them (and avoid the news).
The pain in these times of cold and loneliness? Now, what good can only company in pain? Tragedy forces us to see and discover things that would not be able to take life (in many cases even when running the centuries). Clocks run, see, run the clocks, but also when time passes we do not see happening. Each one can only rely on his own resources, including its follies, since they do not harm anyone - except themselves. What a wonderful descortinamos only sporadically cohabiting madness? The madness is only an artistic companion, revealing to us the aesthetic unconscious!
Life is serious, it is traumatic, but it was always clear that these traumas that broke out our truths embedded - and brought us good things, too. Who wants to establish something convenient, even for all, must go beyond the adversities and adversaries, they always appear. But eventually, we found that we need not concern ourselves only with the preparations, behold, one day the shoot comes unwittingly, is only a matter of waiting time (but not counting the days).
It is a pity that there were no drugs to calm the fury of Nietzsche - but so we can enjoy ourselves and travel indefinitely in its exacerbation (poetic?). He, inflection between the Apollonian world of Socrates and the rescue of his beloved Dionysian world. But what kind of being was he? How is it that still so hard to reach us? Ah, yes, is the mystery of the master Zarathustra:
"We aeronauts of the spirit" (Nietzsche, Aurora - last aphorism)
"All these bold birds flying to distant places, ever more distant - will surely come a time when we can not go further and will land on a mast or on a barren reef - very happy still to find that miserable refuge! But who would have the right to conclude that it does not open before them a great way free and without end, and flew as far as is possible to fly? However, all our major initiators and all our forebears eventually stop and the gesture of fatigue that is not to attitudes of the noblest and most graceful: it will happen for me and for you! But I care and that you care! Other birds will fly farther! This thought, the faith that animates us, take your pulse, rivals with them, always fly farther, higher, is cast directly into the air above our heads and the inability of our head (...)! - Where do we go then? We want to overcome the sea? Where do we drag this powerful passion that counts more for us than any other passion? Why did that flight lost in this direction, to the extent to which all the suns far declined and became extinct? Dir will perhaps one day we, too, addressing
Us always to the west, India hoped to reach an unknown - but it was our destiny aground before the infinite? Or, my brothers, Or? "
The lonely sea birds, they also demonstrate our loneliness
How many endless miles sailing
Like the time that wanders
Only, sailing in their thoughts
In arid and absolute solitude;
In the deep ocean,
In an effort not to succumb in the sea
But, ever, puts his effort into this darkness.
Inda today are less stark, sting hurts us that discipline;
But, behold, one day, along with rain water
We wash all the bad that was that aridity
And the most beautiful flowers
Born next day,
And we will come!
And now we find happiness expressed in the Philosophy Common, Marcia Tiburi, which raises the happiness that comes from the simplicity that we want to share with friends, as in an aromatic wine. We found that we need to integrate in the social reality to understand it - we just really social beings? Results? Now, with this inspiration, we also want to be poets, we like her fragrances in words, overlapping, perhaps, the philosophizing - mastering the mind, and releasing the heart; inteiridade pure joy of simplicity.
We want to "open the prospect of shaping the thinking is by searching for its lightness. (...). Before it is necessary to support the simple. And we need to differentiate it from the banal. (...) When understood makes us more light. "" Achieving a perspective is to seek the freedom of action that always begins with the freedom of vision. "" (...) A thought that makes fly and recognize. "" ( ...) thoughts that may be all. "" (...) whose future is in the hands of the reader. "We present ourselves to peers as the best of ourselves, with cheerful generosity. Like Nietzsche, we would always strength, more power, now we, like Goethe, and Marcia:
Light, more light.