Above all

Search in this blog:

domingo, 2 de enero de 2011

THE KAWSAY SUMAQ -Response to Neoliberalism of Vargas Llosa.

THE KAWSAY SUMAQ -Response to Neoliberalism of Vargas Llosa.

The economies of all Andean societies had their search in the fulfillment of human beings in harmony and balance with all elements of life, or everything that exists, quite the contrary, the western development always focused on the individual and which everything that surrounds the human being becomes an object of exploitation and manipulation. In the dominance of the things their arguments to the contrary of its development is based on adjectives rather than the instrumental rationality that shows Horkheimer.

The clearest example we have the term "terrorist" is an adjective and for which there is no definition epistemological theory of law, but nevertheless is used unethically by all courts in contravention of all forms of appropriate processes. Because its sole purpose is to counter the rise of economic liberation movements, political and territorial, many of them in defense of their autonomy and protection of natural resources, to the depredations of transnational protected by the world's policeman and the States are Northern States of America.

They are two different and conflicting views between the neo-liberal thought Vargas Llosa, to be said by his peers awarded the Swedish Academy, and practiced for centuries in the communities of our territory to be specified too, have entrenched the descendants of Hispanics and created their own republic and state, which it called Peru.

In our territory is much higher developed cultures of Western Europe were developed in the fifteenth century onwards, for while the European cultures in search of plunder and destruction of everything that is opposed, so that they can survive, although there to refer to some elements taken from Roman and Greek cultures to try to appear as civilized, but in reality they are not, are the hosts of the Huns who ravaged their territory. At that time was the struggle between two positions with the same identity and ideological essence, Europeans and their civilization, such as the Huns led by Attila civilizations were predatory, predatory and death, Thanatos in Greek mythology. And they fought over the loot they represent many Huns as Europeans. Both were the spoils for the other, and as such were treated, one prevailed over the other or the other to ultimately evicted the other for total extermination of the invaders. What did not happen to us who accept the invaders in a peaceful, that although there was some reluctance, it is precisely because the intentions were shining rapiñescas invaders. Still only sought to cease abuses against the indigenous population. I was free before they came Hispanic and Western. Although we know that some nations were also unhappy with what was introduced by the Incas, who refused to be a confederation, because there was a belief in the decline of his powers to his people did not understand the size of a confederation of nations, which was to be initiated by very quickly Pachakuti benefits, economic and social.

What never happened in Europe, who lived one of its worst economic crisis and production and even health, which killed thousands and thousands of its citizens. All diseases and for having been brought by Westerners.

But what is the Sumaq Kawsay?. Javier Lajo defined as "doing things together and it" everyday, as a result of the balance between thinking well and feeling good or balance and Munay Yachay. But how to apply a republic Kawsay Sumaq Creole is essentially racist and segregationist?. This has to understand the brothers Amazon, which by themselves want to watch the sunset, having no eyes or experience having sailed the centuries of centuries our ancestors did. Leadership, institutions and government are based on principles as stated Javier Lajo: The Kamachiq or obeying the will of the people organized, practiced in each of the communities, on the contrary, for example to our Congress Current republic and his Prime Minister Mr. García Pérez, or inferred as Mr. Vargas Llosa, who believe that government is a minority who are holding military power with which to impose their political and economic interests. We have not seen an official who has been subjected to people's needs, if not the opposite, it was subjected to the interests of big capital, as is the case of his friend Romero has confiscated huge tracts of land to prey and plant oil palm, and say they predated the original forest has been destroyed, with dire consequences to ecosystems. They know but they prefer the personal and group interests to the interests of humanity itself.

The other principle is the confederacy, in which each nationality is autonomous but integrated into a subsidiary authority, which does not exist by the division that made the liberal criollos Bolivar and Sucre, just in case you had not been so prosperous, that had increased the threat to liberalism and ideological conception of the bourgeoisie. Indeed there is a view of the rising bourgeoisie and its ideologues to hinder the social development of peoples, as had been happening for the development of the Andean peoples, was a rising threat to take power by the bourgeoisie in the former colonies in the territory south of the new continent.

The last principle is the parity, which must be applied to other principles, such as a ruler there male and female ruler, an old man and a young man, Javier Lajo what's known as Hanansaya-Hurinsaya ... what summarized in governance apply to the four parities of balance: Balance of parity Society-Individual. Balancing Human-Nature parity. Balance Elite-Periphery parity. Balancing Productive-Reproductive parity.

All of this denies that touts Mr. Vargas Llosa and Western philosophy as we listened to the teacher Antonio Peña Cabrera is monistic and emasculating the human being.

Juan Esteban Villalobos Yupanqui - Tupac Isaac II

Here I am...