martes, 27 de noviembre de 2012

Conspiracy theories as a detour from real problems


Conspiracy theories as a detour from real problems
by Giancarlo Melini



The Illuminati, The International Banking Cartel, The New World Order, Energy Suppression, Chemtrails, Global Domination, Reptilians, Ancient Civilizations with advanced technology, Genetically Modified Organics, Traceable underskin microchips, etc. All of these theories are constantly being mentioned as the causes of all the world's evils. People devote a lot of time and resources trying to "expose" the ruthless people behind the world domination agendas. Some others say that if we somehow manage to arrest the global elites and remove them from power, humanity will thrive and everything will be fine.Is it true that greedy globalists are constantly holding secret meetings to plan how are they going to enslave humanity and acquire all the earth's resources for themselves? I would say no, not as much as one might think at least. It is obvious that critical thinking is fundamental part of human advancement, and it is healthy to question everything, but we must go beyond mere superficialities into deeper factors that more accurately may be the origin of what we recognize as the root problem of humanity's crisis.

It is normal for people to tend to blame the world's problems on specific groups, persons or entities, but they fail to realize that the root cause of humanity's suffering is the socio-economic system itself. While many lose their time trying to figure out who are the men pulling the strings and what evil plans they might be carrying out, they totally miss that we all are part of a paradigm that makes this world function, and we all benefit and get hindered by the way our civilization is currently conducting its affairs. They also fail to note that people only hold power because everyone surrounding them believes so. If we opened our eyes and refused to participate in this obsolete and destructive system, it would lose its power, and consequently the people whom benefit from it the most.

Those who constantly gain at the expense of others are just behaving in a manner that is rewarded by this obsolete system. If profits can be made at someone else's suffering, It will be done. That's what the system's about. This darwinistic point of view has to be eliminated if we're to survive as a species in the long term. We are all behaving in an aberrant manner and we are not even aware of it. Every time we furiously seek our own advantage regardless of the suffering our actions may cause to others, we are fueling this unstoppable machine that does not have a clear objective, it does not even care about well being, profit is what matters the most. Even the people that are blamed by the conspiracy theorists for humanity’s decay, do what they do driven by the profit incentive. That is what we need to change, our values. The real revolution is an evolution of consciousness.

I believe that conspiracy theories (as accurate they might be) only drag our attention away from the real issues. Once all humanity awakes from this state of ignorance and sees that the way it is conducting its affairs is not sustainable, just and even counter productive for its own survival, we as a species will be able to unite and work together to satisfy every human need without leaving anyone behind. Once we understand that cooperation instead of competition, tolerance instead of discipline, humanism instead of patriotism, and science istead of religion are the way to obtain abundance, sustainability, liberty and hapiness, we will overcome all the problems that are impossible to solve nowadays. Thinking about people who we can blame, only detours us from what really is important: unity and cooperation.

Let us not be kept from obtaining a truly bright future for our species and our whole planet, let us not be held back from prosperity by conspiracy theories that -even if they're real- don't make humanity walk towards a future of fraternity. Instead, let us build our Utopia.

miércoles, 21 de noviembre de 2012

Practical Latin Aphorisms


Practical Latin Aphorisms
By Giancarlo Melini

                                                                                                                                                                         

S.P.Q.R.
Senātus Populusque Rōmānus ("The Senate and People of Rome")

ad captadum vulgus: "to win over the masses." Design decisions and feature creep that do not directly enhance gameplay, yet contribute to the entertainment value of a game, are included ad captadum vulgus.
alea iacta est (also iacta alea est): "the die is cast." A bold and irretrievable decision has been made. When Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon river between Cisalpin Gual (where he was governor) and Itay to march on Rome and establish himself as leader through force of arms, he remarked "Iacta alea est." This event is also where the English expression "Crossing the Rubicon" comes from.
a posteriori: "from what comes after" (or, better stated, "from effect to cause"). This, 'inductive reasoning' (a logical process in which propositions are derived from the observation of facts, or in which principles are established from generalizations based upon facts), is based initially on experience. Thus, arguments to make changes to a game based upon playtesting are made a posteriori. Also see a priori.
apparatus criticus: "critical matter." This is generally used to designate supplementary scholarly information intended to assist the serious reader. Often abbreviated apparatus, explanatory information of this type can even exceed the length of the original text it is supplementing. A game's Designer's Notes, Playtester's Notes, Developer's Notes, Historical Notes, Optional Rules, Scenarios, Variants, Replays, and so forth are all apparatus criticus.
a priori: "from what comes before" (or, better stated, "from cause to effect"). This, 'deductive reasoning' (a logical process in which consequences are deduced from principles that are assumed), is based initially on assumptions that derive from prior knowledge. Thus, arguments to make changes to a game based upon a designer's gut instincts and past experience are made a priori. Also see a posteriori.
arcanum arcanorum: "secret of secrets." An ultimate secret of nature that supposedly underlies the work of the alchemist, astrologer, and magician. When you are asked sign a Non-disclosure Agreement, or learn a Truth about game design, it is often treated as arcanum arcanorum.
argumentum ab auctoritate: a proof derived from authority. When the boss says, "You're going to do it my way because I said so," that is the ultimate argumentum ab auctoritate.
argumentum ab inconvenienti: an appeal based upon the hardship or inconvenience involved. Engineers often plead this at the merest suggestion of another feature for them to implement, but you might resort to an argumentum ab inconvenienti when asked to work overtime or travel when you'd rather not.
ars est celare artem: "it is art to conceal art." That is, true art conceals the means by which it is achieved is a maxim from Ovid's Ars Amatoria. This means that in the best works of art the audience is not distracted by the artist's technique, but responds instead to the power of the work (as the artist intended). True art must appear artless and, thus, ars est celare artem is a high compliment.
ars gratia artis: "art for art's sake." This is the motto found above the lion roaring at the start of all MGM (Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer) movies and is part of the MGM trademark. This is not the motto of the commercial artist, however, who must eat. (A better motto for the starving artist would be ars gratia pecuniae "art for money's sake" because it's being created lucri causa "for the sake of gain," meaning financial reward.)
aut disce aut discede: "either learn or leave." The motto for Mr. Emrich's classes.
consummatum est: "it is completed." What to say after you've finished a step in the process of creating a game, such as a milestone, document, table, routine, and so forth. Also Christ's last words on the cross (John 19:30).
dabit qui dedit: "he who has given will give." A maxim for fund-raising. When a partially completed project is in financial trouble, those who originally funded it are the first ones sought to put more money into it.
damnant quod non intelligunt: "they condemn what they do not understand." This is the lament of those who try to express their original, creative, and/or artistic impulses in a game only to have them shot down by their peers, reviewers, or the masses.
de asini umbra disceptare: "to argue about the shadow of an ass." From Disraeli's novel Sybil, this means to quibble over the trivial. Many design debates (particularly by the Monday morning quarterbacks online) generally devolve into huge discussions over the tiniest matters, at which point you can sigh and declare de asini umbra disceptare.
dis aliter visum: "it seemed otherwise to the gods." Put another way, "man proposes; God disposes." When cruel fate hands you a bad random event (either in a game or in real life) or you ponder the ruins of a failed effort, this expression from Virgil's Aeneid will come in handy.
doctus cum libro: "learned with a book." Having book learning only and no practical knowledge. This is the plight of graduates seeking jobs, but you'll find know-it-alls out there who tell you how to do your job even though they have no practical knowledge doing it themselves.
dramatis personae: "the persons of the drama" or cast of characters. In a game these would be the player characters and non-player characters in it. Also, the game's credits is a listing of the dramatis personae who created it.
dura lex sed lex: "the law is hard, but it is the law." When people complain about the rules to a game being too restrictive in some way they often don't see the design reason for that decision. Rather than explaining it, you can just say, "Dura lex sed lex."
exceptio probat regulam: "the exception establishes the rule." Derived from a legal maxim, it means that the existence of an exception to a rule provides an opportunity to test the validity of a rule. That is, it enables us to define the rule more precisely and confirm its applicability to those items truly covered by that rule. Game designers are well aware that fewer exceptions make for better rules, but the exceptions that must exist need to validate the rule itself.
exegi monumentum aere perennius: "I have raised a monument more durable than bronze." This is the type of game that you're trying to create, one that will stand the test of time and still be played in future ages. Horace started his final ode with these words; hopefully you can finish your next project with them.
exitus acta probat: "the result validates the deeds" or, more accurately, "the ends justify the means." This is the answer to the eternal question of "Why does the game's artificial intelligence cheat?" The answer is that it must in order to challenge and compete with human opponents. Even though 'cheating' is morally wrong, in this case exitus acta probat.
finis coronat opus: "the end crowns the work." This is how you should greet the end of the project when the game ships.
forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit: "perhaps this will be a pleasure to look back on one day." This is the motto of those suffering through 'crunch time' on a project when the hours are long and the tempers are short.
fortiter in re, suaviter in modo: "resolutely in action, gently in manner." This is the credo by which success comes to a member of a project team. Be a person who unhesitatingly does what must be done but accomplishes the deed as inoffensively as possible.
Hannibal ad portas: "Hannibal is at the gates." This is an expression to use when the client comes through the door or a calamity is besieging your project. Hannibal was the tremendously feared Carthaginian general who ravaged Italy during the Second Punic War. Long after he was gone, his named continued to carry a portent of great or imminent danger.
homo doctus in se semper divitias habet: "a learned man always has wealth within himself." And that is why you learn.
ingorantia legis neminem excusat: "ignorance of the law does not excuse." You need to learn the rules of the office place where you'll be working. Many write-ups in personnel files happen because of ignorance of some obscure (but bureaucratic or legalistically important) workplace rule.
ignoti nulla cupido: "no desire (exists) for a thing unknown." For this reason, you never mention publicly about features cut (or features desired but not added) to a game. Leave them unknown.
in bello, parvis momentis magni casus intercedunt: "in war, great events are the results of small causes." Caesar's point from his book Bellum Gallicum (The Galic Wars) is that battles are usually won by the side that blunders least. When making games, it means pay attention to detail; it is often the small things that can make or break it.
in cauda venenum: "in the tail is the poison." A scorpion's sting is in its tail, so this Roman saying warns us to look beyond the obvious in judging potential danger. Usually a project's team members start out innocuously but gather spite and venom as their work climaxes during crunch time.
in loco parentis: "in the place of a parent." Anyone who may be considered to have responsibilities of guardianship, either formal or informal, over minors (such as your teacher in class) stands in loco parentis.
invita Minerva: "Minerva being unwilling." This simply means "uninspired." Minerva is the Roman goddess of wisdom and patroness of all the arts, someone you want on your team at all times. If she deserts you on a given day, your work will be uninspired and your excuse will be invita Minerva. Critics might also use this phrase to describe an artist or work of art lacking inspiration. However, this excuse won't cut a lot of slack at the workplace where, like Alfred Alistair Cooke, they believe "A professional is someone who can do his best work when he doesn’t feel like it.”
lex loci: "the law of the place." These are the school or office rules. Know them! (See ingorantia legis neminem excusat.)
locus in quo: "the place in question." When discussing a particular scene or level in a game, or where a specific passage in its documentation can be found, the subject is a locus in quo.
magister artis ingeniique largitor venter: "the belly is the teacher of art and the bestower of genius." This maxim from Persius we know today as "necessity is the mother of invention."
magni nominis umbra: "the shadow of a great name." An unworthy descendant of an illustrious family, any poor sequel to a major hit title is said to be magni nominis umbra.
magnum opus: "great work." One's crowning achievement, their masterpiece, is their magnum opus. One day, you will make that game.
minima de malis: "of evils, the least." That is, choose the lesser of two evils. Often this means cutting features rather than increasing a budget or lengthening a schedule.
multi sunt vocati, pauci vero electi: "many are called, few are chosen." If you get a job in the game industry, reflect on those who want your job but do not it as you recall these words from Matthew.
mutatis mutandis: "when what must be changed has been changed." Making games is an iterative process, so each new revision of a game exists mutatis mutandis; that is, after making alterations to fit the new circumstances (of additional playtester feedback).
nam et ipsa scientia potestas est: "for knowledge too is itself power." Francis Bacon's much repeated and often borrowed aphorism is better known today as "knowledge is power." (So never stop learning, either at school or at work.)
ne Aesopum quidem trivit: "he has not even thumbed through Aesop." This damning condemnation means that a person doesn't know beans about anything. No doubt you'll encounter critics for whom this epitaph fits.
non nova sed nove: "not new things but in a new way." This is the game designer's creed as most games designs are hybrids of previous game ideas and systems. Many hit games offer nothing really new, but do the old things well in a new way.
non omnia possumus omnes: "we cannot all do everything." This, the motto of all Producers in the game business, is Virgil's lesson from the Aeneid, where he explains that no one can reasonably be expected to become an expert in all things.
nunc est bibendum: "now it's time to drink." Thank God it's Friday and the work day's done. Now, where is the gang meeting tonight?
occasionem cognosce: "recognize opportunity." This is a memo to you: luck is when preparation meets opportunity. No matter how prepared you are, you still need to occasionem cognosce.
olet lucernam: "it smells of the lamp." This condemnation, which can also be given as redolet lucernam, means that one's work appears to have been done late into the night. Creative types should not not be laboring too long over a piece of work lest it 'smell of the lamp.'
omne trinum est perfectum: "everything in threes is perfect." When designing a game and deciding 'how many' of something there should be, always try the number 3 for your answer. This adage reflects the mystical power ascribed to the number three... three Fates; three Graces; three Muses; the Holy Trinity; three days for Christ's resurrection, three minutes without air, three days without water, or three weeks without food will kill you; three primary colors; three cheers; the list is endless.
parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus: "mountains will be in labor, and an absurd mouse will be born." This pungent line comes from Horace's Ars Poetica. It's a metaphor that means when something long awaited, much hyped and expensive (does that sound like some game projects you've heard of?) fails to live up to expectations it can be slammed with this damning review.
pauca sed bona: "few things, but good." This is how a game should be designed. A game is more successful when it has only three (see omne trinum est perfectum) highly polished and tested "A+" features than eight interesting "B+" features.
pecuniae obediunt omnia: "all things yield to money." Which is how games are made. An idea is worthless, it is the money that buys the talent and produces the game that has value.
possunt quia posse videntur: "they can because they seem to be able to." Expressed by Virgil in the Aeneid, this means that the appearance of power bestows power, which is how your team should always make a pitch presentation. Today, we would say, "act as though it were impossible to fail."
profanum vulgus: "the profane multitude." These, the common people, the 'great unwashed' masses, are your potential customers.
quae nocent docent: "things that hurt teach." This is the curriculum offered by the School of Hard Knocks (in which you have a lifetime enrollment).
quaerenda pecunia primum est, virtus post nommos: "money is the first thing to be sought, good reputation after wealth." This practical thought comes from Horace's Epistles and reminds us why this is called the game business. It's all about the bottom line first and reputation second (and always will be).
quid pro quo: "this for that." Something given in return for something. Never give your services away for free (pro bono). Always try to get something for them (even if it's only lunch).
qui scribit bis legit: "he who writes reads twice." This is why you should take notes of important things. It is very effective to write something out that you wish to learn.
quo animo? "with what intention?" Just as it's not what you say, but how you say it that gives the intention, so it is when writing rules to a game. One can state a rule matter-of-factly but sometimes they require a designer's commentary afterward so that those who must follow those rules know the designer's intention and won't misapply or misinterpret that rule.
quod cibus est aliis, aliis est venenum: "what is food to some is poison to others" or better said as, "one man's meat is another man's poison." This is why gaming is not a mass market business. It's a very big hobby, but it is full of subgroups and niches of players who will only play their type of games and no others. Now, you may not always agree with their tastes in games but remember de gustibus non est disputandum ("about tastes there is no disputing"); that is, one's taste in games is a personal matter and no amount of persuasion can succeed in changing a person's tastes (so don't argue about matters of personal tastes).
quod erat demonstrandum: "which was to be demonstrated" abbreviated Q.E.D. In the software business, one is often called upon to do 'proof of concept' work prior to getting the 'go ahead' for a project. Whether it is to demonstrate that some new technology or methodology will really work in practice, or to thoroughly research a market for a particular game, when the results are in, Q.E.D., the project can go ahead.
quos Deus vult perdere prius dementat: "whom God wishes to destroy, he first makes insane." You'll have days like this in the entertainment business, where insanity abounds and one worries that it's infectious. Keep cool, keep calm, and remember that you're in this business because you love it; try to remember that the worst day in show business is better than the best day selling retail.
quot homines, tot sententiae: "so many men, so many opinions." You'll sit in meetings where nothing seems to be agreed upon, particularly design meetings. This apt phrase from Terence's Phormio describes a group as far from consensus as possible.
res in cardine est: "the matter is on a door hinge" or better said as "we are facing a crisis." When the next twenty-four hours will decide a matter of whether a milestone ships or a project fails a green light meeting, it is res in cardine est.
respondeat superior: "let the superior answer." That is, a supervisor must take responsibility for the quality of a subordinate's work. This is why, sometimes, it's good not to be the team leader, director, or boss!
sic volo, sic iubeo: "this I will, thus I command." One day, when you're calling the shots, you can use this as your motto. It's right up there with a parent telling their kid, "because I said so."
si fecisti nega!: "if you did it, deny it!" Stonewalling is usually the right reaction if a player accuses your game's artificial intelligence of cheating.
sine qua non: "without which not." Anything that is absolutely necessary, such as the primary features of a game design, are a sine qua non. Remember this phrase when someone wants to cut a critical feature from your game.
spectatum veniunt, veniunt spectentur ut ipsae: "they come to see, they come that they themselves be seen." Whether 'beautiful people' at their social hot spots or geeks attending conferences and trade shows, people wish as much to be seen attending as to see the event for itself.
summa sedes non capit duos: "the highest seat does not hold two." There is only room for one at the top, whether it's a sole survivor victory condition in a game or at your company.
tacent, satis laudant: "they are silent, they praise enough." If you can get the audience's rapt attention, it can be more flattering than applause.
tarde venientibus ossa: "for latecomers, the bones." When you miss roll call, an exam, or project milestone, this is how you say, "Sorry, too late."
temporibus inserviendum: "one must pay attention to the times." That is, political correctness must be obeyed unless you seek controversy.
tempus fugit: "time flies." Milestones are like images in your car's side-view mirror, always closer than they appear.
tempus omnia revelant: "time reveals all things." So be patient. Don't pry too much; don't press to hard; don't get a reputation as an impatient person. Sometimes the best course is in the short term is to do nothing and let time reveal more to you.
terra incognita: "unknown territory." All of those unrevealed areas on a game map, as well as the pursuit of design, art, and engineering feats that have never been accomplished before, represent terra incognita.
ultima forsan: "perhaps the last." Every milestone is, perhaps, the last. Projects could be cancelled at any time for any number of reasons and every deliverable begets its own Judgment Day. A project is a mortal as we are, so inscribe on your clock, ultima forsan.
uses est optimum magister: "experience is the best teacher." Experience also pays better (just look at entry-level salaries versus those of experienced workers). Books can give you knowledge, analyzing your past deeds secures experience.
velis et remis: "with sails and oars." When making an all-out effort, such as at crunch time or to meet a critical sales effort or make a particular milestone, your team is working velis et remis.
verba volant, scripta manet: "spoken words fly away, written words remain." You cannot be at everyone's office or cubicle to explain things at their beck and call, neither can they put you in every box to leap out and teach players their new game. That's why documentation is written; this is how people in the game industry communicate. Your writing is a time capsule into the future and across the cosmos ― learn to use it if you want to prosper in the game industry!
veritas simplex oratio est: "the language of truth is simple." When others offer you complex excuses, your 'truth detector' should go off. With apologies to Sir Walter Scott, "Oh, what a tangled web we weave, When first we practice to deceive!" If you would speak the truth when writing a critique or explaining thing to your boss, state it simply.
virtutis fortuna comes: "good luck is the companion of courage." Good things don't 'just happen;' you must be prepared to seize opportunities and make your own 'luck.'
vita brefix, ars longa: "life is short, art is long." Remember, you're creating a work of art that can outlive you.
vox calamantis in deserto: "the voice of one crying in the wilderness." This is how you'll feel (like Matthew in the New Testament, where this phrase comes from) whenever you give counsel about your project that is not heeded.
vox populi vox Dei: "the voice of the people is the voice of God." They are your target market and your customers. Listen to them.

lunes, 12 de noviembre de 2012

Máquinas de guerra

Máquinas de Guerra
de Giancarlo Melini

Mientras manejaba, encontré dentro del carro un CD del cantautor italiano Andrea Bocelli, era de mi papá. Emocionado, lo puse en el reproductor de CD y empecé a escuchar la relajante música del ilustre artista. Unos minutos después empezó a sonar una canción que llamó mucho mi atención. No se mucho de música, pero el ritmo y la melodía me fascinaron, aunque lo que realmente me cautivó fue la letra. Aún cuando hablo y entiendo muy poco el italiano, comprendo lo suficiente como para dejarme llevar por las palabras de Bocelli. Esta canción transmite un mensaje verdaderamente trascendente, importante, indispensable, ¡vital! que clama en forma desesperada ser escuchado en este mundo en decadencia en el que vivimos actualmente. 

La humanidad no se da cuenta que el curso que sigue es el de la autodestrucción. Nos llamamos humanidad, pero considero que nunca hemos sido humanos. ¿Qué puede ser más humano que sentir compasión, solidaridad y empatía por nuestro prójimo? ¿Acaso hay algo más importante que la vida misma? ¿Por qué teniendo vías para salir de la miseria que aqueja a la mitad de la población mundial, no lo hacemos? ¿Qué nos detiene? ¿Qué nos deshumaniza? ¿Acaso es nuestra "naturaleza humana"? Entones, ¿somos máquinas de guerra?   

             

Una amiga me tradujo la letra de esta canción al español, y ahora se las comparto. Deténganse, léanla y escuchen la canción -si pueden al mismo tiempo-, que es verdaderamete un llamado de atención para cambiar la forma en que la humanidad actualmente conduce su existencia.

Máquinas de guerra (Macchine da guerra) - Andrea Bocelli.

Si fuese una cosa simple
yo te la diría,
pero hay una confusión adentro
y aquí a mi al rededor,
tú prefieres evitarlo
y tal vez la culpa no es tuya,
podrías intentar una vez más
pero no es a mí a quien debes escuchar.

Con los pies descalzos caminamos
sobre los vidrios rotos y después,
con las manos sucias nos tocamos,
nos herimos entre nosotros,
todas las señales están gastadas,
pálidas, apagadas en la oscuridad.
Podrías intentar una vez más,
pero no es a mí a quien debes escuchar.

Escucha tu corazón latente,
mira por donde corres y para,
escucha el dolor del mundo,
estamos perdidos en el camino,
huérfanos de vida,
máquinas de guerra,
pero ¿Por qué?

No hay más tiempo para ver
una estrella sobre nosotros,
está todo prepagado, impreso.
Está acreditado a nosotros,
¿pero cómo haces para no darte cuenta?
¿que te importe un comino?
irte con pasos falsos de felicidad,
pero la sangre es también tuya.

Escucha tu corazón latente,
mira donde corres y para,
escucha el dolor del mundo,
estamos perdidos en el camino,
huérfanos de vida,
máquinas de guerra
Pero ¿Por qué?

Estamos perdidos en el camino,
Huérfanos de vida,
máquinas de guerra,
pero ¿Por qué?

miércoles, 24 de octubre de 2012

Ironía guatemalteca


Ironía guatemalteca
de Giancarlo Melini

Mi respuesta a las columnas "Me pasé a la derecha", del 17 de octubre de 2012 y "Me pasé a la derecha II" del 24 de octubre de 2012 del autor Mario Roberto Morales en elPeriódico de Guatemala.

La siguiente es una burla a lo que la derecha neoliberal, tradicional y conservadora de mi país constantemente expresa pública y no tan públicamente.

Gracias a que no triunfó el fantasma del comunismo, aquí en Chapinlandia gozamos de los mejores estándares de vida de la región,  con el cuarto índice de desarrollo más alto de Latinoamérica (únicamente después de Chile, Argentina y Uruguay), además tenemos el índice de mortalidad infantil más bajo del continente, superiror al de Estados Unidos y únicamente inferior al de Canadá, y  con un índice virtualmente nulo de analfabetismo. En nuestro flamante modelo de libre mercado cada quien tiene exactamente lo que se merece, y es por eso que personas que no han trabajado ni producido absolutamente nada en toda su vida, jamás disfrutan de una riqueza por la que no han trabajado y no se merecen. Nuestro sistema es enteramente meritocrático y mutualista, cada quien es recompensado según lo que produce, y por supuesto que el pobre es pobre porque así quiere, porque no hay nada que le impida combinar su trabajo con el entorno y así producir su propiedad privada. 

Por otro lado, en lugares como en Cuba, en donde el comunismo logró enraizarse, toda la gente es pobre, y nadie tiene oportunidad de superarse y por lo tanto no tienen acceso a la nutrición,  salud y la educación. En cambio en Guatemala, gracias a que en vez de pelear con los gringos preferimos subyugamos a ellos, tenemos muchos tratados de libre comercio con los que nuestra nación está prosperando económicamente a un ritmo sin precedentes, con índices de crecimiento nunca antes vistos, y por supuesto que siempre hacemos negocios internacionales en condiciones justas y de igualdad con países como Estados Unidos y con regiones como la Unión Europea.

Porque aquí en Guatemala reina la libertad, y esa libertad la hemos utilizado para desarrollamos tanto intelectualmente que ya superamos lo que los comunistas no terminan de entender: que el derecho a la libre locomoción y la libertad de expresión son mucho más importantes que el derecho a la vida, la nutrición y a la salud, ¿Por qué es eso tan difícil de entender? Esos derechos les son negados a más de un millón de niños en condiciones paupérrimas en la marxista Cuba, en donde la panacea de los mercados libres no ha podido hacer su magia por la intromisión de su gobierno autoritario y corrupto. Claro está que aquí en Guatemala no hay desnutrición, la gente tiene tanta libertad y oportunidades de proveerse a sí misma de absolutamente todo lo que necesita que la gran mayoría del país es rica, y que el que no se supera es porque es un holgazán que no quiere trabajar. Además instalaciones esenciales como las escuelas, los hospitales, el transporte público y las estaciones de policía están a la vuelta de la esquina y pueden ser disfrutados por todo el que quiera. Por eso recalco, tenemos todo lo necesario para superarnos. 

Y por supuesto que nuestro derecho a la libre expresión es tan superior, que cuando salimos a las calles a protestar no hay militares disparándole a la gente como en Cuba o Venezuela, sino que aquí todos podemos manifestarnos contra el gobierno sin coacciones ni miedo. Y como somos ciudadanos educados, nunca jamás violamos el derecho a libre locomoción al manifestar, porque sino cometeríamos el pecado -dios guarde- de paralizar la producción. En cambio, en nuestra Tacita de Plata, quien osa violar la ley se tiene que enfrentar a un estricto Estado de Derecho, herencia y legado de la cultura occidental, el cual funciona en forma infalible y castiga fuertemente a todo aquel que transgrede la ley o altera el orden público. En Guatemala, a partir de que vencimos la plaga del comunismo con la ayuda de la CIA en 1954 sacando al leninista Jacobo Arbenz del poder, todo mundo gozó de enorme libertad económica, y por supuesto de expresión. Jamás mataron a alguien por hacer saber sus ideas, y claro está que la prensa era 100% libre de cualquier opresión gubernamental. Lo anterior llevó a Guatemala, de la mano de los ideales clásico-liberales, a convertirse en uno de los países más desarrollados del continente, tal y como se puede apreciar con una corta visita al interior del país, en donde las personas gozan de estándares de vida que ni en 50 años alcanzarían las comunidades rurales de los retrasados países socialistas. Y por supuesto que el conflicto armado interno de 36 años jamás sucedió, es simplemente un complot armado por los izquierdistas resentidos que buscan desacreditar a nuestro ilustre ejército. Si es que hubo alguna matanza en esas épocas, fue por parte de los guerrilleros, quienes fuertemente influenciados por las ideas del asesino Che Guevara se aprovechaban de la debilidad de los indígenas para obligarlos a unirse a su causa, o los masacraban. Eso fue lo que pasó.

En mi Guatelinda, fieles al espíritu del capitalismo y a la escuela austriaca de economía en materia fiscal -la cual se encarga de difundir la universidad privada más prestigiosa del pais-, nuestra tasa impositiva es de las más bajas del mundo con un 11%, que no se compara con la altísima tasa de 17% de Nicaragua, 23% de la retrasada comunista Cuba, o del 30% de los Estados Unidos de América. Así es, somos "conservadores fiscales" y esa baja carga tributaria ha dejado el dinero en las manos de los “job creators”, o sea pues, visionarios emprendedores, por lo que en nuestro país estamos pero nadando en oportunidades laborales, todo mundo tiene el trabajo que desea y con una paga digna, y si no lo encuentra tiene toda la libertad y los medios para fundar su propia empresa.

En cambio en Cuba, los Abogados e Ingenieros que trabajan de taxistas siempre están buscando la primera oportunidad para huir de su país, no como en Guatemala, en donde la gente se pelea por venir, y nadie emigra para buscar mejores oportunidades en el extranjero, ya que aquí son demasiado abundantes. En la Cuba comunista retrógrada, la gente se va en balsas a Miami y después se transforman en grandes triunfadores, pero ojo que no es gracias a todos los beneficios sociales que obtuvieron de su sistema colectivista/marxista/leninista, -nutrición, salud, educación, seguridad-, no, no, no, sino que es porque ellos creen fervientemente en la fuerza del individuo y saben que absolutamente todo lo que tienen es porque se lo procuraron ellos mismos utilizando inteligentemente el sistema de libre mercado -que no es corporativista/cronycapitalista-, de los Estados Unidos. 

Porque aquí en Guatemala, nuestra tierra de la eterna primavera, toda la gente es feliz,  y nunca matan a nadie por un celular, o lo extorsionan por hacer negocios, porque nuestro gobierno hiper Capitalista de corte fascista -como debe ser para luchar contra los vestigios del comunismo- cumple muy bien con sus únicas dos funciones de proporcionar seguridad y certeza jurídica, por eso todos prosperamos. Y las personas que buscan fervientemente encontrar problemas que no existen en Guatemala, solo lo hacen para fastidiarnos a nosotros la gente de bien que nos enfocamos en producir y hacer negocios.

Y no se hable de cuando viene la inversión extranjera a nuestro país, la que trae una enorme cantidad -de unos cuantos miles- de trabajos, y por supuesto que no contaminan absolutamente nada el medio ambiente, lo cuidan más y mejor que las atrasadas e ignorantes comunidades indígenas, que sólo son un montón de resentidos sociales que viven victimizándose por su pasado de opresión, pierden su tiempo en exigir al Estado que los mantenga y no son más que un obstáculo al desarrollo. Y por cierto, las transnacionales dejan muchas regalías al país y pagan muchos pero muchos impuestos, lo cual enriquece a todo el pueblo de Guatemala. Pero claro está que estos grupos desestabilizadores patrocinados por Escandinavia tratan de ahuyentar a los Atlases heroicos inversionistas, para así tratar de deslegitimar nuestro fuerte sistema de libre empresa conformado por ciudadanos libres y responsables, el cual nunca jamás ha estado monopolizado por unas cuantas familias que son dueñas de los medios de producción claves del país, esto debido a que el capitalismo laissez-faire es inherentemente antimonopolios. En cambio en Cuba el corrupto gobierno es el dueño de todo y no deja a la gente superarse, por eso hay que agradecer que vivimos en Guatemala. 

Así que compatriotas chapines, cuando traten de venderles las nocivas, obsoletas y anticuadas ideas del socialismo y comunismo, recuérdense que vivimos en Guatemala, tierra en la que la libre empresa y el capitalismo, herencia de la imposición neoliberal del norte, nos ha dado paz y prosperidad a todos los habitantes como por obra de una mano invisible, y todos los que piensen lo contrario solo son un montón de resentidos sociales -y socialistas- que no han sabido aprovecharse de nuestro exitoso y moral sistema.

lunes, 22 de octubre de 2012

Economía de la Degradación


Economía de la Degradación
de Giancarlo Melini

Desigualdad económica, disminución de los recursos globales, degradación ambiental, pérdida de la biodiversidad, etc. La lista de problemas sociales globales es extensa, y aún cuando hay tanto corporaciones como individuos exacerbando estos síntomas, debería ser entendido que ninguno de ellos es la raíz o causa.

Aún cuando podemos identificar ejemplos de estos problemas/síntomas, es mucho menos entendido que es nuestra economía misma la que está causando y reforzando estos problemas.

Lo primero que deberíamos observar con detenimiento es el término economía, que en sentido estricto significa manejo ahorrativo; frugalidad en el gasto o consumo de dinero, materiales, etc.; evitar el desperdicio y despilfarro. Su origen etimológico se deriva del vocablo griego “oikonomos”, administración de la casa, de oikos: “casa” + nomos: “administración”.

Cuando se entiende el origen la palabra economía y su definición se pude observar que “economía” actualmente es de hecho todo lo contrario, y nuestro actual sistema podría ser mejor considerado como anti-economía. La realidad de nuestro actual paradigma económico es de consumo en aras del consumo para sostener el crecimiento continuo e ilimitado, lo cual se demuestra cuando una “recuperación” económica global es un retorno al crecimiento:

“Estos son pasos importantes hacia el último objetivo: estabilidad duradera y crecimiento, estabilidad compartida y crecimiento. Alcanzar ese objetivo requerirá acción coordinada para romper las cadenas principales de esta crisis: soberanías débiles, bancos débiles y crecimiento débil.”- Christine Legarde, Directora del Fondo Monetario Internacional (el subrayado es nuestro).

La sangre vital del sistema socioeconómico es el dinero, y la principal medida de éxito en todos los confines de este orden social es el lucro, sin importar cómo se genere ese lucro o cual es su costo ambiental/social. Si hay ganancias por hacer, los aspectos ambientales o humanos son marginalizados, si es que son  de alguna manera considerados.

Por ejemplo, la compañía de agroquímicos transnacional Monsanto fue rankeada en el lugar 234 de la lista Fortune de 2011, generando ganancias superiores a los US$ 1.1 millardos (US$1,100,000,000) en 2010, lo anterior sin importar todos los signos de advertencia de las pruebas concretas acerca del daño que causa al suelo el uso de su producto insignia, el herbicida RoundUp, el cual también contamina el agua subterránea con químicos cancerígenos llamados glifosatos, los cuales aún en dosis bajas matan las células de los riñones humanos.

Otra compañia de agroquímicos, Dow Chemical, se embolsó más de US$ 2.3 millardos (US$2,300,000,000) en ganancias en 2010 y se rehúsa a sumos otros US$ 480 millones en compensación a lo pagado en 1989 por el desastre de Bophal, uno de las peores catástrofes industriales en la historia. En 2001, Union Carbide la responsable del desastre, fue comprada por Dow Chemical, que ha hecho poco por mejorar la situación de la zona de desastre. Según estimados,  500,000 personas todavía sufren de enfermedades desarrolladas después de la tragedia, incluyendo cáncer, ceguera y varios defectos de congénitos. La corporación Union Carbide es una subsidiaria completamente propiedad de la compañía Dow Chemical, y estando el caso criminal contra Union Carbide  lejos de resolverse, Dow Chemical tiene la opinión de que no existe ninguna responsabilidad de limpiar las instalaciones de Union Carbide, ya que “La planta de Bophal nunca fue propiedad ni fue operada por Dow Chemical y tampoco heredó las responsabilidades de la corporación Union Carbide.”. Parece ser que se puede comprar un desastre y después desligarse de él, dejándolo como si fuera el problema de alguien más limpiarlo.

Otro nefasto síntoma de la antieconomía que aqueja al medio ambiente es la devastación forestal. Se están perdiendo selvas a un ritmo de 36 campos de fútbol por minuto. La industria ganadera ha sido la principal promotora de la deforestación en la cuenca del Amazonas desde los 1960’s. En Latinoamérica el 65% de la deforestación ha sido a causa de la ganadería. Entre 1990 y 2000, 80% de la deforestación de Sudamérica fue el resultado de despejar áreas verdes para agricultura y ganadería a gran escala, y al mismo tiempo también fueron responsables del 15% en Centroamérica.

Los ganaderos y la industria agrícola tienen una fuerte influencia en Brasil, especialmente a nivel estatal. La mayoría de los políticos más influyentes del país están ligados a esas industrias, lo que se traduce en el debilitamiento de las leyes que protegen el Amazonas de la deforestación, gracias al lobbying que se da en el congreso federal.

Y por si fuera poco, se aúna al ambiental un altísimo costo social. Las compañías privadas de prisión están generando enormes ganancias; los Estados Unidos tienen el índice de encarcelamiento más alto del mundo con casi el 3% de la población -casi 8 millones de personas- que está bajo alguna forma de supervisión o restricción. Ésto, sin embargo, no es solamente un modelo de negocios exitoso en los EEUU, ya que compañías como GEO Group proveen servicios privados de prisión a EEUU, Australia, Sudáfrica y Gran Bretaña. En el año 2011 el lucro total de GEO Group fue de US$1.6 millardos (US$1,600,000,000), siendo el encarcelamiento un negocio tan lucrativo que es muy poco probable que las causas sociales del comportamiento criminal sean seriamente atendidas por cualquier gobierno. no sería una sensata decisión de negocios reducir la criminalidad. Desde este paradigma, reducir la criminalidad simplemente no sería una sensata estrategia de negocios. 

Mientras es sencillo encontrar ejemplos de cualquier tipo de comportamiento aberrante de las corporaciones y los políticos, las soluciones son mucho más complicadas de lo que muchos pueden comprender. No es una simple cuestión de desmantelar las corporaciones dañinas o remover a los políticos corruptos, ya que mientras el sistema económico recompense este tipo de conductas, nuevas compañías y nuevos políticos emergerán de la noche a la mañana para llenar el espacio dejado y continuar con esta misma disposición. No hay cabida para sentimentalismos ni moralidades, hay que hacer lo que funciona, y pragmáticamente degradar a la sociedad y al ambiente resulta ser un negocio bastante lucrativo y recompensado por el paradigma económico-social.

Si cortar acres y acres de árboles es lucrativo, entonces en un sistema económico que promueve el lucro ¿Qué se espera que suceda? En ningún lugar del actual sistema económico hay un espacio que permita el lucro mediante la protección, el cuidado y la salud del medio ambiente, siendo éste el que nos permite vivir en este planeta. Evidentemente los mercados no son infinitamente creativos. Además, si el modus operandi de la maquinaria industrial y comercial es el incentivo  de lucro, no se le dará nunca importancia a las consecuencias de degradar ese medio ambiente a menos que alguien idee una forma de ganar dinero haciendo lo contrario.

Es evidente entonces que la gran cantidad de conductas aberrantes que aquejan a nuestra actual sociedad nunca dejarán de existir mientras el sistema permita recompensarse o lucrar de ellas. Por otro lado, los problemas sociales jamás se resolverán si el paradigma social/económico tampoco permite lucrar de ellos. ¿Por qué que hay tantas personas muriendo de hambre, sin hogar, vestimenta y educación? Nadie ha encontrado todavía la forma de lucrar resolviendo dichos problemas. En el momento que alguien se ingenie un mecanismo para obtener ganancias de alimentar a los pobres y de darles casa a los indigentes, ese problema social desaparecerá. Es extremadamente triste pensar que la sociedad actual sólo actúa en función del dinero y el lucro ¿tan mundana y superficial se ha vuelto la humanidad?

Desafortunadamente es probable que sólo un precipicio social nos haga generar la clase de comunidad global que se preocuparía por entender lo que es necesario investigar para determinar los elementos fundamentales de nuestra actual economía, lo que facilitaría los cambios estructurales para asegurarnos un futuro sostenible como especie. Una posible solución a esta intrincada problemática -que en efecto existe- se abordará en otra ocasión.

viernes, 19 de octubre de 2012

Falacia de la Democracia


Falacia de la Democracia
de Giancarlo Melini 
"La diferencia entre una democracia y una dictadura consiste en que en la democracia puedes votar por la persona cuyas órdenes tienes que obedecer." - Charles Bukowski 
Antes de hablar de democracia es importante que definamos el término y entendamos el contexto histórico y político en el que se origina. La palabra democracia se deriva de las palabras griegas "demos"  que significa pueblo, y "cratos" que significa poder. Democracia es entonces poder del pueblo. En términos muy someros y simplistas, pero tal vez bastante acertados y concisos, la democracia es un sistema en el que las decisiones que se toman en relación a un determinado asunto son producto de la participación de todos los involucrados -idealmente, es decir, todos aquellos que se ven afectados en mayor o menor medida por lo que se discute. Históricamente el término empezó a utilizarse en la antigua Grecia, específicamente en Atenas, donde el pueblo (hombres libres, no esclavos ni mujeres) tenían la facultad de participar en la toma de decisiones que les incumbían en relación a la administración de la polis (ciudad). El sistema griego fue el primer paso a la democracia en la forma que la conocemos ahora.

El objeto principal de la democracia es evitar el abuso de autoridad, la tiranía, y garantizar la libertad de las personas mediante su participación en el proceso de toma de las decisiones que les incumben. En la era moderna, la democracia se reduce generalmente -salvo algunas excepciones- a la toma de decisiones con respecto a la elección de las autoridades públicas, cuya función será tomar decisiones en nombre de todo el pueblo. 

¿Es esto coherente? ¿Tener la "libertad" de elegir a la o las personas que tomarán las decisiones por nosotros y decidirán sobre virtualmente todos los aspectos de nuestra vida?

El sistema democrático está tan enraizado en la idiosincrasia de las personas que son pocos los que tienen el tiempo, el conocimiento y el atrevimiento de cuestionar el disfuncional e inoperante orden social, al que ilusa y orwelianamente se le llama "la voluntad del pueblo". Este concepto ha sido -y sigue siendo- desarrollado religiosamente por juristas, políticos y sociólogos que no reparan en la ingenua y contradictoria falacia de que al final, el famoso proceso democrático, se traduce en elegir a la persona que va a forjar el camino que cuasi ciegamente cruzarán millones de personas. Al final del día siempre es válido preguntarse: ¿Votamos por ir a la guerra? ¿Votamos por nacionalizar o privatizar recursos? ¿Votamos por la institución de organismos estatales que supuestamente responden a nuestras necesidades? En la mayoría de casos no, sin embargo, son asuntos que afectan directamente.

Es inocente pensar que democracia es libertad, cuando la democracia se puede traducir en dos falacias que resultan siendo "antidemocráticas" (en el sentido romántico que le damos a la palabra). Primero, la democracia no es más que el 51% imponiendo sus ideas sobre el 49%. Segundo, democracia es la elección que hace la mayoría para que unos pocos tomen las decisiones por ella, con la esperanza de que éstos estén calificados para determinar cuáles son las necesidades de los que se ven afectados por la toma de decisiones.

Democracia es también la noción de que por alguna incomprensible razón, una idea se vuelve cierta o incierta por consenso de las mayorías que, vale la pena acentuar, rara vez tienen la capacidad técnica, intelectual o académica para determinar con sustento científico la veracidad de una afirmación o negación. Democracia también es la idea de que emitiendo un voto la gente está cumpliendo con un "deber cívico", pero en realidad lo único que hace es perpetuar un sistema disfuncional e inoperante, y darle fuerza a una forma de organización social que en la gran mayoría de los casos sólo responde a los intereses político-económicos de los pocos que están detrás de la cortina. También es darle a la gente la falsa noción de la elección, la engañosa sensación de que realmente son parte de algo mucho más grande que ellos y por eso es importante.

Pero entonces cabe la pregunta: ¿la democracia es inherentemente mala o sólo se ha aplicado mal? A pesar de todo lo anterior, se puede considerar que la democracia no es mala por naturaleza, pero sí tiene que existir condiciones muy especiales para que ésta sea funcional e inclusiva, o mejor dicho, representativa. Para que una democracia en verdad responda a los intereses de los que participan, se tienen que dar por lo menos las siguientes condiciones:

1) Educación: Una población tiene que estar altamente educada para poder decidir qué persona, qué propuesta, qué sistema, qué política va a ser más favorable para sí mismo y a la sociedad en general.

2) Igualdad: La igualdad tiene que ser económica, política, social y de género. Es una tonta ilusión pensar que un sistema democrático responderá en igual forma a las necesidades de un rico que tiene los medios para influenciar las altas esferas estatales, que a una persona humilde que a duras penas tiene acceso a las necesidades más básicas, mucho menos a medios de comunicación para hacerse escuchar. También es iluso pensar que una autoridad que actúa en función de un determinado sector, ya sea por ideología, apoyo económico o por cuestiones raciales, va a tomar decisiones y conducir políticas a favor de grupos que no le son afines. Es por ello que la equidad es esencial, para garantizar que todos serán representados y escuchados en igualdad de condiciones.

3) Libertad: La gente tiene que estar libre de coerciones de cualquier tipo. No debe estar supeditada o subordinada por la voluntad de alguien más -ya sea su gobernante, su empleador, sus padres, profesores, etc.- que tienda a restringir el libre actuar del individuo. De esta cuenta, los votantes tienen que estar libres de cualquier atadura económica, ideológica, racial, o de género, para tomar cualquier tipo de decisiones que afecten a sí mismo y a los demás.

Esas tres condiciones mínimas se cumplen bastante bien -aunque no a la perfección- en los países socialdemócratas, con mercados sociales y una visión en la que el bienestar tiene una mayor importancia que el lucro o el crecimiento económico.

Objetivomanete, los mejores ejemplos de democracia son los países Nórdicos y Suiza. Las poblaciones de estos países gozan de un alto índice de igualdad, un elevado nivel educativo y son sociedades muy libres en cuanto a derechos civiles. Es por ello que la democracia no es inherentemente mala, pero sí muy dañina cuando no se da acompañada de las condiciones anteriores, ya que en ese caso se convierte en una herramienta para darle a la población una falsa sensación de poder, cuando en realidad están siendo controlados y manipulados por fuerzas que ellos no conocen o comprenden, derivsdo de la misma ilusión que el sistema “democrático” les presenta. Además, cumpliéndose las condiciones anteriores, también se crea un candado o restricción mucho más fuerte para evitar que el poder al que se aspira con la democracia se vuelva una mercancía disponible de ser comprada y vendida a la orden del mejor postor, que por supuesto siempre será la élite económica o política.

Así que la democracia en efecto es una falacia, si no se aplica de la manera adecuada y en las condiciones correctas.

"La democracia es el proceso que garantiza que no seamos gobernados mejor de lo que nos merecemos." - George Bernard Shaw

viernes, 12 de octubre de 2012

Las Guerras Monetarias


Las Guerras Monetarias
de Giancarlo Melini 

"Denme el poder sobre la moneda de una nación y no me importará quien hace sus leyes." - Mayer Amschel Rothschild (uno de los creadores del sistema bancario moderno)

¿Alguna vez se han preguntado cómo los Estados Unidos pueden operar con una deuda de 16 billones de dólares (US$16,000,000,000,000) que sigue creciendo? Porque tiene la Moneda de Reserva Global -establecida en el tratado de Bretton Woods después de la segunda guerra mundial-. La moneda es el principal factor macroeconómico que favorece a la dominación occidental del mundo en la actualidad. El Euro y el dólar son utilizados no sólo para la mayoría de las transacciones de petróleo, que en muchos casos sirve como un virtual “respaldo” de estas monedas fiduciarias, sino que también son utilizadas para el intercambio de otros bienes importantes que son justipreciados en Dólares y Euros. Lo anterior requiere que la mayoría de naciones tengan que comprar/cambiar estas monedas para poder ejercer el comercio global, lo que perpetúa la demanda de estas divisas.

De hecho, aproximadamente dos tercios del comercio mundial se hace en dólares, y dos tercios de las reservas de divisas de los bancos centrales son en moneda americana, lo que hace que permanezca siendo la moneda de uso exclusiva de instituciones globales como el Fondo Monetario Internacional. Eso le da a los Estados Unidos una exagerada ventaja económica porque tienen la habilidad de provocar un déficit de comercio constante a los demás países, ya que ellos necesitan dólares para pagar sus propias dudas al FMI, y además seguir comerciando internacionalmente y construir sus propias reservas de moneda. Mientras el dólar siga siendo la moneda internacional principal, los Estados Unidos podrán continuar consumiendo más de lo que producen, como lo han venido haciendo desde la década de los 80’s.

¿Y adivinen qué? Muammar Gaddafi, el “nefasto y despiadado dictador de Libia” -país con el índice de desarrollo humano más alto de África-, había estado abogando constante y públicamente por la creación de una nueva moneda que competiría con el Dólar y el Euro. Él llamó a las naciones musulmanas africanas a unirse en una alianza que crearía su propia moneda, el “Dinar de Oro”. El plan de la Alianza iba a ser vender petróleo y otros recursos a los Estados Unidos y al resto del mundo solo en Dinares de Oro. Si esto hubiera pasado, hubiera tenido un dramático y nefasto efecto en la hegemonía económica de los Estados Unidos. De hecho, algunos tal vez todavía recuerdan que Saddam Hussein -otro “infame dictador opresor de su pueblo”- estaba impulsando un cambio similar en el petrodólar antes de que se diera la invasión a Iraq en el año 2003 por parte de la unión americana. Este es un asunto muy serio que apenas se discute.

Además de eso, no podemos descartar los intereses energéticos aún cuando seguramente son secundarios en importancia. La Corporación Nacional de Petróleo, la compañía Libia nacionalizada, fue rankeada entre las 25 más grandes en el Top 100 del mundo, y aún cuando las reservas petrolíferas de este país africano podrán parecer pequeñas en comparación con las de Arabia Saudí, la liberación contractual de los anteriormente restringidos mercados energéticos de Libia solo se traduce en un enorme beneficio para el occidente.

La deuda es un arma de destrucción masiva, es la esclavitud moderna, y una moneda que se crea a base de deuda como lo son el Dólar y el Euro no pueden significar más que opresión y control sobre el resto del mundo.



jueves, 11 de octubre de 2012

Anarcho-Syndicalism

Anarcho-syndicalism 
by Giancarlo Melini

“There is mutuality, in fact, when in an industry, all the workers, instead of working for an owner who pays them and keeps their product, work for each other and thereby contribute to a common product from which they share the profit."  Pierre-Joseph Proudhon

Some time ago I was watching this show called "Undercover Boss", which basically consists on CEOs, presidents, owners and managers of large corporations that temporarily leave their privileged positions to take the role of an average employee. In this process they also try to relate in a personal level with their co-workers, "being friends with them" if you will, in order to find out their personal and working necessities. At the end, these Atlas-like bosses reveal their true identities to their employees and let them know that they were a part of this experiment. Then a series of over acted drama begins as the "good" bosses give the humble and thankful hard workers a number of gifts to reward their dedicated labor and let them know they are appreciated in the company. The funny thing is that these corporations make dozens of millions of dollars a year, and yet they give each employee an equivalent of a few thousands of dollars in benefits to show how "merciful, thoughtful, kind and emphatic" they are with the people that actually produce the wealth they enjoy. It's sickening how this bosses give some crumbs to "the plebs" as these rejoice in their misery. But that wasn't what caught my attention the most.

I've seen about half a dozen episodes of this show, and I've noticed two things that are common on these so called “successful” entrepreneurs that appear every week, that is actually pathetic:

1) All of them (at least in the episodes I've watched) inherited their businesses. They enjoy their comfortable positions because their fathers or grandfathers (or even great grandfathers) made an enormous effort to create a successful and profitable enterprise from the ground up so their descendants could enjoy a rich and easy life. That might explain why they need to be in this show in order to find out what the necessities of the average people/workers are. They even make "entertainment" out of their trip of empathy to a normal employee's life.  

2) None of them could actually perform the simplest tasks that are the core component of the entire business activity of their companies. They are not able to operate the machinery, to assemble the products, to maintain production standards, to sell the products to the costumer, and many other activities involved in the whole manufacturing and commercialization processes. They basically know nothing about their own businesses. The only thing this "clever" business men do in their normal workday is seat on a meeting room and make decisions that affect thousands of workers (negatively in many cases) so they can put more money into their own pockets, disregarding the social and environmental costs. Profit first, customers second, workers last.

Many capitalism apologists would argue that without the wise leadership of this fine second or third generation entrepreneurs businesses would cease to produce benefit for the owners, for the workers and for the customers. In many cases this isn't true. This bosses have the means -money they inherited- to hire skilled, experienced and ruthless managers and advisers who can run things better than them, more efficiently and for a relatively affordable cost, so this people don't need to take full responsibility for the functioning of their own enterprises, and certainly don't need to have intelligence, skills and work ethics to stay in the privileged positions they undeservingly hold. For many people capitalism -liberalism- means meritocracy, but this is a clear example it isn't.  

These individuals think they are the pillars of society, the heart of the economy, the engines of prosperity, the minds behind progress and the support in which we all rest upon, and without them our way of life would cease to exist. They are the masters of the game, they are the job creators, they are the owners of capital, they possess the means of production, they are the reason we enjoy technological marvels and high standards of living. Without this Atlas-like individuals the average hard working people would be doomed, wouldn't know what to do for themselves in order to achieve a decent life. But the reality is quite the opposite. In most cases these people are nothing but lucky individuals that were privileged with a life they often don't deserve, nothing more than parasites of the labor of their subordinates. Many of them have never lived the stress that the average person/worker -the real producers- have to go thru in order to survive on a daily basis, and the sad part is that the work force, the heart of society, are many times considered second class citizens, people whose rights have to be abolished for the sake of profit and "progress". The bosses never seek to give their employees a fair compensation for the work they perform because it might affect the accumulation of wealth they viciously seek. This is madness!

Just let us think... what would this world be like without the real producers, workers, farmers... the proletarians? Complete scarcity, complete poverty, complete chaos. We have to recognize that our society is powered by the people that get the worse treatment on this system. They produce abundance and yet they live in scarcity, they are granting all of us access to resources, and they are despised by many, they educate the best they can to perform meaningless, mundane task that undermine their intelligence, and yet they are accused of being dumb, lazy, mediocre or simply inferior. If you want to know what real injustice looks like just take a walk on your city and you'll see a considerable amount of unfairness. 

But all of that makes me wonder... What would be a fair system that actually rewards people according to the value of what they produce? What would be a better way to achieve a higher standard of living for everyone, and not privilege the owners over the producers? a system that would consider workers people instead of resources? a system where everyone can fairly enjoy the fruits of their labor? My humble opinion is that anarcho-syndicalism integrated with mutualism and collectivism would be the way to achieve a transition to a post-scarcity society.

“Either Property will overrule the Republic, or the Republic will overrule Property”.  Pierre-Joseph Proudhon 

Definitions

Semantics is often a problem that makes communication difficult between human beings, and conflict surges where there is misunderstanding and misinterpretation of ideas. In order to prevent this to happen, and truly understand exactly how anarcho-syndicalism would work -as I personally envision it-, it's important to define some terms. Note that I will define these terms as I understand them and they're still subject to interpretation due to the deficient design of the languages we use today, as Jacque Fresco and Alfred Korzybski have pointed out in many occasions.

1) Anarchism: Is an ideology or political philosophy that diminishes any form of hierarchical organization because it is considered undesirable, unnecessary and harmful to society. It advocates for complete self governance and voluntary associations. It claims that a stateless society would be a perfect environment for human development, enhancing individual liberties.

Pure anarchism is theoretically and practically unfeasible, mainly because we don't live in a world of our own (meaning the world isn't only for ourselves), and there has to be some limits to the actions of human beings that affect others, and in order to enforce those limits there has to be some sort of institution that holds the authority to prevent abuses to happen. That is why anarchy is associated with chaos, because it may result in that if it is not implemented correctly. There are many other reasons of why anarchism is not a viable model to organize a society, but I will not elaborate on them because it is not the subject of this note. Yet it is important to mention that many branches of anarchism have been developed, and in some degrees they have been successfully implemented in many industrialized countries, as further explained.

2) Syndicalism: Is a type of economic system which uses federations of collectivized trade or industrial unions to control the means of production and guide the economy towards favorable conditions to workers.

In practice, syndicalism on itself doesn't work without the intervention of the state as and equilibrium force between the capitalists and the workers. Regulation is required in order to limit the action of unions and to protect their existence.

3) Anarcho-syndicalism: Is one of the major forms of social anarchism. Anarcho-syndicalism combines the economic methods of syndicalism -workers democratic self management- with the revolutionary politics of anarchism -abolishment of state intervention-. 

It seeks the workers ownership of the means of production and the abolition of the wage system. This means that workers would be the owners of the companies they work for, and they would profit from its success, and lose from their failure. Workers would actually receive a proper and proportional compensation from the product of their labor. Anarcho-syndicalism regards the state as an complete anti-worker institution and it states the primary purpose of the state is the defense of private property (as in capitalist property) and therefore promotes economic, social and political privilege to those who have the power to acquire it. The states protect ownership abuse and profit at any cost, even when such protections deny the citizens the ability to enjoy material independence and the social autonomy which derives from it. The well being of the individual and its harmony with the collectivity are the aims of this radical ideology. It is called "radical" because it goes against the established rules in politics, economics, law and social conventionalities.

4) Mutualism: Is an economic theory and anarchist school of thought that envisions a society based on a labor theory of value. It holds that when labor or its product is sold, in exchange, the worker must receive goods or services equivalent to "the amount of labor necessary to produce it in exactly the similar and equal utility" according to Pierre-Joseph Proudhon.

Mutualism basically states that no one can benefit from something he did not produced or worked for. A landlord who holds property over land and doesn't work to produce something out of it, under no circumstance has the right to obtain a rent or profit out of it. Other examples would be investors, bankers, brokers, loans, heirs, etc. It is logical that no one should accumulate wealth if he didn't work for it, it's justice. Today's economic system works very differently. Wealth is hoarded by taking advantage of the work of others, the labor force gets paid cents for producing goods that are worth millions in the market place, and of course that surplus is the profit that the owner of the means of production perceives, and almost never deserves. In essence, if you don't work in an activity that is relevant to produce wealth, abundance and profit, you should not receive any pay.

5) Collectivism: Is a philosophic, political, economic, or social outlook that emphasizes the interdependence of every human being. It gives more priority to group goals over individual goals and the importance of cohesion within social groups. In practice it could be essentially defined as a group of people working together towards a common objective or goal, which in many cases is the well being of everyone involved.

Collectivism should be partially integrated in any organization that seeks sustainable development and well being for every member. The individual well being can only be achieved if the conditions that surround the person allow it. We are social beings and as long as we live with other people we must behave in a manner that also allows others to be happy. The absurd statement that the individual actions, led by an invisible hand, will benefit the whole society by pursuing personal goals, has been proven false in many occasions in practice, and example of this is that countries that apply this classic-liberal ideas have enormous rates of inequality, social stress and class mobilization. Collectivism cannot be totally implemented into any system, because it would result in repression to the individual and authoritarian will of the masses, so it has to be balanced between the individual aspirations and society's well being.

"Political Freedom without economic equality is a pretense, a fraud, a lie; and the workers want no lying."  Mikhail Bakunin

Anarcho-syndicalism, mutualism and collectivism applied to modern society as a transition to achieve a post-scarcity civilization.



A global society based on a set of truly just values would enable the entire humanity to thrive, and would be based upon cooperation, self and social best interest -equally-, increasing well being instead of profit and total caring of the environment, obtaining abundance of and access to resources, empathy, solidarity, open source knowledge and sustainability of any sort of practices. We know the previous values are totally opposite to competition, profit incentive, best self interest, egoism, resource hoarding, social status and property acquisition, which have forged our civilization for millennia. It is an evident truth that today's values are not sustainable and will eventually lead humanity to its own demise if not changed, mainly because of the destruction/exploitation of precious resources and detriment of the natural environment which supports life. The question is: How would this new civilization be like? How could we implement it? What can we do now?

In my humble opinion, societies based on cooperation, collective objectives, common good, access to resources and abundance already exist and are not only functional, but the most advanced in the world. The Scandinavian countries -Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden- and Germany are good examples of how high levels of unionization -syndicalisation as I like to call it- translate into well being of the entire population. Those countries have the highest standards of living of the whole world and are classified amongst the happiest. Their economies are not oriented on making money exclusively, but also in producing well being and common good. They call this "social markets". German working paradigm is called "Gute Arbeit" in English "good labor", meaning that work must be dignifying activity, oriented to cause benefits to person one executing the labor in the highest measure possible. People have the right to earn a substantial and just portion of the fruit of their labor, not the lowest possible (minimum wage where it exists). Unions -syndicates- in these societies have an enormous impact in the industry, politics, economy, culture and education. Unions have a significant control over the means of production, they have a say on the board of the corporations, and they do function on behalf of the well being of the workforce. This system has proven to be the most stable and productive in the history of humanity, mainly because it guarantees an equal distribution of wealth amongst masses, which provokes more freedom for everyone. As Mikhail Bakunin once stated: "You cannot talk about political freedom without talking about economic equality".

It is my notion that the nations previously cited are not only the most productive in the world, but they also provide all the necessary tools to their citizens in order to become self sufficient by guaranteeing easy access to the means of production to satisfy their needs. In some places of Germany it is a policy that every new building being constructed has to have a built-in alternative energy production system, like solar panels and wind turbines. This will gradually lead the people to an abundant supply of energy and hence power independence. Food production is also starting to be home made, as the advancements of hydroponics, aquaponics and permaculture keeps rising. Manufacturing is also a revolutionary paradigm, as 3D printers keep improving and start producing a more extensive variety of goods. Imagine an individual household being able to generate its own energy, harvest its own food and manufacturing its own products. That would be the true meaning of independence, abundance and well being. A new social order would emerge, basing the economy not in growth, scarcity and consumption, but in sustainability, efficiency, abundance and access.



Now I will analyse the role of anarcho-syndicalism, mutalism and collectivism in the trasition to a post-scarcity economy.

Anarcho-syndicalism is a philosophy that truly enables people to be free. In a system whre people get a proper reward in proportion to what they produce, a certain feeling of justice is felt. Equal reward for equal work is what mutualism is about. People are more likely to be motivated when they are compensated fairly, not necessarily because they are getting wealthier, buy because there is general sentiment of fairness, justice and equality. Anarcho-syndicalist societies tend to be very mutualistic because workers get well compensated for what they do, and they even have a say regarding the direction of the company they work for. In Germany, as said earlier, workers feel they are an important part of the industry, and that is because they actually are. Without them no progress would ever be achieved, that is why a system has to guarantee that the producers -workers- get a substantial portion of the goods they produced with their labor. A clear example of how mutualism works in practice, and how it creates equality -a necessary condition for a person's well being-, is the income difference between CEO's and average workers in USA compared to Germany and the Nordic Countries. In USA, a society in which the workers get rewarded according to the laws of supply and demand, the average CEO earns about 350 times the amount the average worker does. Contrary to the Nordic Countries and Germany, where salaries are not only based on the laws of supply and demand but by union and government intervention, the average CEO's earn only about 15 times the amount the average worker does. The result, everyone enjoys a very high standard of living and the social stress and resentment caused by inequality and hierarchical stratification is nonexistent. People live happier in workers self management societies and mutualistic compensation. Regarding this matter, there is a study by Richard Wilkinson entitled "How economic inequality harms societies". 



This is a clear path to a post-scarcity society because in a more egalitarian society all people enjoy the proper conditions to become productive, hence self sufficient in the long term. Educated, healthy and happy people are more likely to become problem solvers when they don't have to worry about what they are going to be eating the next day, or how to pay the hospital bill, or where their children are going to study. A system that gradually guarantees all these benefits to their population enhances freedom, and keeps people from submission to the will of others. It's a synergistic system, contrary to what Austrian economists such as F.A. Hayek often stated. Today there are clear examples that prove Hayek's theory about the "planners" wrong.

Synergy brings us to collectivism. That is word feared by many because for them it involves the domination of the minority by the majority, the vanishing of the individual inside the mass. That is not the case at all. Collectivism means a common objective, and working cooperatively to achieve it. We humans are social beings, we rely on each other and society for our survival, so it is only logical that we establish common objectives and common strategies to achieve them. People working together for the benefit of the whole is the next level of society. That is the essence of the Scandinavian and German welfare state. Although the administration of resources by a public entity is not the best way to achieve freedom and happiness, a good path is a functional welfare state that gradually delegates more functions to communal and local governments, and these to the communes and individuals. People working toward the same path, the common good.

A post-scarcity society powered by a resource based economy is feasible, and the best way to achieve it is implementing an anarcho-syndicalist-mutalist-collectivist society.

"A federated, decentralized system of free associations incorporating economic as well as social institutions would be what I refer to as Anarcho-syndicalism, and it seems to me that it is the appropriate form of social organization for an advanced technological society in which human beings do not have to be forced into positions of tools, of cogs in a machine, in which the creative urge that I think is intrinsic in human nature will in fact be able to realize itself in whatever way it will." - Noam Chomsky